Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Fiscal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council and staff grapple with legal guidance and potential costs of ICE MOA
Summary
Council members pressed staff on whether municipalities are required by state guidance to sign 287(g)-style agreements, who pays for training and how liability and use-of-force policies would apply if officers operated under ICE certification.
Council members used the meeting’s question period to press staff for clarity on whether Florida law requires municipalities to enter 287(g)‑style agreements and who would bear program costs. City staff and the city attorney said statutory obligations are clearer for county correctional facilities and sheriffs than for municipalities, but they also noted that the attorney general has issued letters urging compliance and that court challenges over interpretation exist.
Deputy Chief Victor Medico told council that the number of officers to be trained is not yet set and that officers who complete ICE certification would return to regular assignments but could act in immigration‑related situations when ICE agents are unavailable. City Attorney Allen summarized the legal guidance in the packet and advised the council; when asked directly for counsel, the attorney stated: "I think that you should support the agreement and the cooperation with [ICE]." Council members repeatedly asked for written clarifications about officer selection criteria, differences between ICE and city use‑of‑force policies, and how the city would account for related costs and potential lawsuits.
