Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 287g Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident presents petition urging transparency on sheriff’s 287(g) contract; commissioners ask sheriff to explain
Summary
Richard Primrose told the Sumner County commission a petition approaching 700 signatures demands transparency from the sheriff’s office about a 287(g) agreement with ICE; commissioners said the sheriff, an elected official, controls program operations and agreed to invite him to explain but did not take formal action.
Richard Primrose, of 432 Triple Crown Circle in Gallatin, told the Sumner County Board of County Commissioners on July 6 that he had submitted a petition that grew from nearly 600 to nearly 700 signatures asking the commission to demand transparency from the sheriff’s office about a 287(g) agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
"By the next month, that petition had reached nearly 700 signatures and, it still really hasn't been formally addressed by this body," Primrose said, and urged commissioners to "be transparent on who was being arrested and for what offenses" and to provide a direct message from the sheriff's office about how the office is partnering with ICE. "I urge you to live at this partnership before we bury our budget in lawsuits," he said.
The chair acknowledged the petition and moved the meeting on to scheduled reports. Commissioners later returned to the subject and said operational control of the 287(g) program rests with Sheriff Craddock, an elected constitutional officer. One commissioner said the sheriff has explained the program before but that public answers have not satisfied petitioners.
"We do participate in the 287(g)," an agency official said, adding that the county defers to the sheriff on the mechanics of how the program is operated and that there is little discretion to deviate from the federal agreement. The official suggested inviting Sheriff Craddock to appear and explain the program at a future meeting.
Commissioners noted a procedural constraint: because the topic was not on the agenda, they could not deliberate or take formal action on it at this meeting. The exchange closed without a formal resolution, and commissioners agreed to seek a presentation from the sheriff at a subsequent meeting so the public can hear operational details directly from the elected official.
Next steps: the commission agreed to request that Sheriff Craddock appear to explain the 287(g) agreement; no formal vote, amendment or staff directive was taken at the July 6 meeting.
