Sheriff Bill Brown was the featured speaker at a forum sponsored by social justice group PUEBLO Thursday evening, talking about the controversial federal Secure Communities program — designed to deport the most serious criminal illegal immigrants — and its implementation and effect in Santa Barbara County.
“It’s very important we have this kind of dialogue,” Brown told the crowd of about 75 people before taking time to explain the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) program. The Sheriff’s Department had nothing to do with its development, Brown said, adding ICE didn’t do itself any favors with the way it was rolled out and explained — or not explained — to the public. His hope, he told the crowd, is that “it’s a program that does what it’s designed to do,” that is, take criminal illegal immigrants off the streets.
Paul Wellman
Sheriff Bill Brown speaks to and takes questions from the crowd with the help of the meeting’s translator
The forum came just a day after ICE announced the arrests of 2,901 criminal immigrants across all 50 states. According to some reports, nine of those arrests took place in Santa Barbara County.
Brown explained the Sheriff’s Department takes the fingerprints of everyone booked into Santa Barbara County Jail. Historically, those fingerprints were automatically sent to the FBI and, after Secure Communities began, are now sent to ICE. Those fingerprints are checked against criminal databases and ICE databases. If ICE officials ask the department to hold an inmate, they do, Brown said. ICE officials visit the jail two to three times a week, and take it from there.
The issue opponents have with the program, however, is that it doesn’t really get rid of the most violent criminals, and they point to statistics which seem to show a large number of low level offenders — or non-offenders — being snagged.
According to ICE, nearly 48,000 convicted criminal aliens have been identified in California as a result of the program, and nearly 24,000 deported. Of those, however, only 10,000 were serious or violent offenders. Recent statistics show Santa Barbara County has one of the highest deportation rates of noncriminals at 58 percent, based on data beginning January 2010 — when Secure Communities was enacted — through July 2010. And according to data obtained from ICE by a coalition of groups that includes the Center for Constitutional Rights, 79 percent of the people deported were noncriminals or had lower-level offenses, such as traffic infractions or petty juvenile mischief convictions.
Paul Wellman
PUEBLO director Mark Alvarado (center) speaks with Chief Deputy Don Patterson and Undersheriff Jim Peterson before the meeting
The sheriff said he has heard anecdotal stories, but couldn’t point to any specific case where a person not guilty of a crime had actually been deported. He also said “noncriminal” can often be a misnomer. A person could have very well committed a crime, he said, but for one reason or another, their case wasn’t adjudicated. He also noted that ICE has a revamped strategy to go after Level 1 offenders — the worst of the worst.
After Brown faced a series of questions, he listened to testimonials from two people in the crowd. They spoke not about Secure Communities, but about interactions between area law enforcement and the Latino community. One man brought up the impounding policies in place when a person is found not to have a license while driving a car. Brown said that giving someone a 20 to 30 minute window to come pick up the car to avoid impounding could lead to people speeding to get there on time. The man also addressed DUI checkpoints. They often end up towing more cars of people without licenses than for driving under the influence, he said. Brown noted there was legislation on the governor’s desk which could possibly address both those issues — it was just a matter of the bills being signed into law.
While only two people spoke publicly, PUEBLO director Mark Alvarado pointed out that the majority of unasked questions and testimonials written on note cards were geared toward police treatment of Latinos. “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” he said.
Afterword, Alvarado said the meeting was a positive start, but, “We’re still not where we need to be in trying to convince elected officials [Secure Communities] is not a good program for our community.” Still, he said, the forum was a good opening dialogue, and one he hopes to emulate in the future, providing the opportunity for a community, often underrepresented, to make its voice heard.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
"Where there's smoke, there's fire" stated Alvarado? Apparently he does not understand due process and his supposed collection of anecdotes does not prove the police treat Latino's unfairly simply because some illegal aliens may make this claim. Alvarado is proving to be no better than the last nitwit that headed this illegal alien advocacy group.
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 7:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I fail to comprehend the notion of "noncriminal" illegal aliens. If you're in the country illegally, you ARE a criminal by definition.
winddancer1562 (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Did an editor look at this story before it was posted? Winddancer is correct. If you're in the country illegally, you are a criminal.
Moonrunner (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So now I'm reading elsewhere that being in the country illegally is a "civil" offense and not criminal. Could the Indy explain for us, please?
Moonrunner (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I too have a question--it's one I keep asking that gets no response but here I go again: Why is it that the people who run are immigration policy pretend to be consistent? Italiansurg had to wait in line, go through the process, learn the language and obey our laws while other people who--according to their support by special interest pressure groups-- can walk into the U.S., commit non-related-to-immigration status crimes, and not be deported? Either let's enforce our laws in a consistent manner, or take them off the books.
Really, the heart of the matter is the Mexico will not make itself livable for its people; that is the core of this issue, something which also doesn't get addressed.
Either let's enforce our laws in a consistent manner, or take them off the books.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I submit this quote from the recent ACLU report: "Consequences: the High Price of Policing Immigrant Communities" Many cities and counties in northern California and beyond have recognized the social and fiscal costs borne by community members and LLEAs (Local Law Enforcement Agencies) due to our nation’s failure to reform the immigration system. They have adopted policies and practices limiting officers from inquiring into immigration status, impounding vehicles, and holding individuals on federal immigration detainers without reimbursement. These policies preserve public safety resources for real crime fighting, and they reflect the following understanding, shared by law enforcement leaders throughout the country: when immigrant community members feel safe reporting crime, local police and sheriffs will be more effective, and this makes all of us safer.
Sheriff Brown, you could save a lot of money being spent to harass the Hispanic community in Santa Barbara by adopting those same policies. Non-Hispanic people are not safe in the current practices you employ because when Hispanic people are afraid to call the police for a white person needing help, then the whole community is not safe.
Dotio (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 8:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Italiansurge:
This article is about the "Secure Communities program — designed to deport the MOST SERIOUS CRIMINAL IMMIGRANTS ".
The article says ICE statistics show that SB has one of the highest rates of exporting noncriminals at 58%.
A coalition of groups using ICE data says that if you include low-level crimes like traffic infractions, then 79% of the people deported from Santa Barbara county shouldn't be deported under this FEDERAL LAW that Brown says he had "nothing to do with."
This federal law is about making us safer, not whiter, and Brown is misusing it on the feds' tab.
14noscams (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2011 at 8:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
if they are here illegally, they should be deported. Period.
They got arrested for SOMETHING... I really don't care what, they got caught. Wake up people, ILLEGAL means just that.
Just because some activist group makes noise does not justify ignoring the law, which is actually very clear. This intentional policy of "selective non-enforcement" is complete nonsense.
cartoonz (anonymous profile)
October 2, 2011 at 12:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Would someone please tell me why the Sheriff thinks he needs to appease this activist group in the first place? Does the Sheriff make the laws for impounding cars of those who have no driver's license? No he doesn't. So quit barking up the wrong tree. The Sheriff enforces the laws and that is what we should all expect him to do, end of story. Quit dancing between the raindrops and just tell us that you intend to do your job and enforce laws to the best of your abilities without giving radical activist groups like PUEBLO any legitimacy in the first place.
rukidding (anonymous profile)
October 2, 2011 at 2:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I live on the East side where the census says it's 100% latino. People here do not cooperate with the cops. I have been asked by little kids why I talk to the cops. No point really. The woman next door sells meth and the Mex/Amer across from me sell kilos of cocaine. Well done SBPD...
tireater (anonymous profile)
October 2, 2011 at 10:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Illegal is just that - ILLEGAL. What's the greatest population in our jails? Who are the gang members? Who is causing the schools to come 'down' to their level? Who get's the 'special attention' at the Wake Center? Who gets subsidized housing? Who gets all the food stamps? Who gets FREE medical? I am TIRED of paying taxes to support Mexico. Every 'under the table' monies they earn, they ship out of the country without paying taxes! Wake up Citizens!!!
Spring (anonymous profile)
October 2, 2011 at 2:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"non-offenders"??? WTF?
They are here ILLEGALLY.
That's an offense right there.
cartoonz (anonymous profile)
October 2, 2011 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
They call it an Immigration Insurgency Policy and it is the New World Orders (yes NWO's) global policy to undermine Nation States for the purpose installing a global government.
Say what you may about "conspiracies" but the same thing is happening everywhere, and it is designed to neutralize ethnic resistance to global government.
contactjohn (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2011 at 1:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"His hope, he told the crowd, is that “it’s a program that does what it’s designed to do,” that is, take criminal illegal immigrants off the streets."
Criminal illegal immigrants? As opposed to what? Non-criminal illegal immigrants? They all become criminals the second they sneak over our border! That's all there is to it! And, what is all of this apologist garbage that Brown is spewing to PUEBLO? The agencies that enforce our immigration laws, or as is the case lately, fail to enforce our immigration laws, owe absolutely no explanation to a pro-criminal organization like PUEBLO. That's like the FBI explaining to the mob why and how they do what they do. Brown shouldn't even waste his time talking to those idiots.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2011 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And, contactjohn? Wow! Thanks for that little peek into the amusement park that is your cranium. Get back on those meds!
waz (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2011 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
contactjohn actually makes more sense with that comment than you know.
cartoonz (anonymous profile)
October 3, 2011 at 10:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So why are there immigration laws?...
billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 3:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, cartoonz. Maybe you and contactjohn can dig out your tin foil hats and get together to figure out who killed JFK and what is really going on at Area 51. Wow! You guys are both nuttier than squirrel feces. Let's keep it simple. We have immigration laws. Those laws are in place for our national security. We cannot allow ANYONE to break those laws.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
waz, you're not making much sense. This has nothing to do with tinfoil hats or nonsense like that.
What contactjohn was commenting is that there is a movement afoot by the government(s) to not enforce those same laws. If you've read any of my comments on this at all, you'd see that I find that trend completely unacceptable. I agree that immigration laws should be ENFORCED and that all this ridiculous pandering to special interest activist groups trying to redefine "illegal" is absurd. Illegal is illegal. period.
cartoonz (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nuttier than squirrel feces...hahaha, that is good! what I find nutty is "According to ICE, nearly 48,000 convicted criminal aliens have been identified in California as a result of the program, and nearly 24,000 deported. Of those, however, only 10,000 were serious or violent offenders. " Gee, sounds like pretty good odds to me, a little better than 1 in 5 are serious or violent? Why would anyone disagree with this policy? The rest of the 24,000, yes are breaking the law just by being here. If I went down to good old Mexico, and called my mostly white "social justice group" let’s say "White people for justice"?, I would be labeled a white supremist and probably be shot by either local corrupt authorities, or a drug gang. I am not sure why our Sherriff is taking time to appease this group. It is called enforcing the law.
bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
cartoonz: My main objection to contactjohn's ranting is that it clouds the issue. Many pro-illegal alien groups (not just the government) look at theories like that, then point at people like me who are stronly opposed to illegal aliens, and just laugh. It's not about a "New World Order". It's about pandering. Do you really thing that the subjects of that "Marching For Migrants" story are part of that conspiracy? Those kind of people are the biggest part of the problem.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Billclausen: You guys really need to focus that hate!
The federal government is paying Sheriff Brown to do a job. He's misused around 58% of that money (58% of SB deportees don't qualify for the program).
ICE isn't paying Brown to buy another helicopter or for time pent illegally lobbying against cannabis dispensaries, or for deporting anyone who isn't a serious criminal. ICE lists murder, rape and kidnapping as serious crimes.
Pueblo is concerned that Brown is not doing the job the feds are paying him to do, and using their money mostly as a means of deporting people.
Misuse of federal funds obviously isn't a problem for you.
14noscams (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 5:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Billclausen et al: You guys really need to focus that hate!.
The federal government is paying Sheriff Brown to do a job. He's not using the money to do the job they're paying for.
Around 58% (58% of people deported aren't serious criminals. ICE uses murder, rape, kidnapping as examples) of the money has been spent on something that isn't included in the job.
PUEBLO is calling Brown on misusing federal funds.
This program has nothing to do with deporting illegal aliens.
If Brown wants to deport illegal aliens, he should find a legal way to do it.
If the feds were funding deportation of bigots who are serious criminals, the funds shouldn't be spent on deporting just any old bigot.
14noscams (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 5:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
14noscams: Is that all you have? You say that I "hate" but you don't answer the question.
Let me ask the question again, and maybe you can answer it without injecting your emotions: If we have immigration laws, why aren't they applied consistantly instead of being applied according to the vested interests of special interests?
Is it fair to tell one group of people that they have to learn the language and obey the law while others can cut in line in front of them? Wouldn't it make more sense to simply eliminate all immigration laws? This is what I'm asking, and doing so does not make me a hater regardless of what you say.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 4, 2011 at 9:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Apparently I am supposed to take the view of the ACLU and "a coalition of groups" as objective. Right. That's as bizarre as if I quoted Fox news as being objective. I wouldn't.
With regards to those of us that went through the process, did not cry "victim", and learned the language, this entire situation is pathetic.
I challenge anyone to find a predicate example in the world of a non third world country that has given up on protecting their borders. Good luck because there aren't any...
Now that progressives cannot point to Europe as the shining star of diversity and socialism due to (necessary) crack downs on Muslims in France and Denmark and Gypsy's in Italy for example, what is the next societal utopia they're going to tell us is better than our current system?
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
October 5, 2011 at 6:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nice one Italiansburg. Regarding the statement: "ICE isn't paying Brown to buy another helicopter or for time pent illegally lobbying against cannabis dispensaries, or for deporting anyone who isn't a serious criminal. ICE lists murder, rape and kidnapping as serious crimes."
In light of us finding Mexican nationals lying on the side of the 154 shot dead in a sleeping bag, I would say that any drug related offenses should be added to the ICE list. It is a matter of time before these cartel's start setting up shop in our local areas and forests and then the drug war will be here. That is if they already haven't. We aren't supposed to be a third world country. Maybe we should start acting like it.
bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 5, 2011 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There *is* one thing I hate: inconsistency.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 5, 2011 at 2:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"It is a matter of time before these cartel's start setting up shop in our local areas and forests and then the drug war will be here. That is if they already haven't."
- bimboteskie
Unfortunately, yes, they already have set up shop here. And, it's not just a bunch of innocent little illegals with mad gardening skills. Those scumbags are out in Los Padres and on private land (unbeknownst to the owners of the land) growing tons of marijuana. And, they're not just up there with shovels and hoes; they're supplementing their usual gardening equipment with rifles and shotguns, and it's only a matter of time before a hiker gets his/her head blown off after stumbling upon one of these illegal grows.
As a side note, I love your name.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 6, 2011 at 7:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Agreed Waz. This stuff is already here, and hopefully it doesn't take them riding down the street with automatic weapons a blazing to get the point across to some people who don't get it. I would also venture to say that when a person has a propensity to break the law (cross a border illegally and repeatedly) and while on the other side, BREAK the laws of the land that they are in illegally, they generally do not have a ton of respect for the law or consequences of breaking it in general. So why are we (more importantly our sheriff!) coddling a special interest group that turns a blind eye to this? If you don't break the law here, I don't know that ICE would even know of your existence.
bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 6, 2011 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And, he's not just coddling any old special interest group. PUEBLO encourages and fosters illegal alien activity. For the life of me, I cannot figure out why Brown bothers with these people for even one second.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 6, 2011 at 12:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And note in the news yesterday, IRAN tries to use a MEXICAN drug cartel to assasinate a Saudi Ambassador. Can you imagine the implications if it had gone thru? This just further illustrates that this problem needs to be handled. I say ICE away!
bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 12, 2011 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"bimboteskie," how do the actions of Iranians, in apparent collusion with Mexican criminal cartels, apply to Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy, except in the most tangential way?
(Other than it gives you the opportunity to scare us all by capitalizing IRAN.)
Chester_Arthur_Burnett (anonymous profile)
October 12, 2011 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CAS, I wasn't trying to scare anyone..but I don't think ICE and Cartels are all that tangential. From what I know of ICE, they usually go after criminals or people with records, warrants, etc..it would seem if you are in a cartel, you would be a criminal. If you were in a cartel, a criminal and here in the US on some shady buisness, hopefully ICE is another agency that could cut back/deter this activity.
bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2011 at 4:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
police have illegitimate power.
professorcuddlecore (anonymous profile)
November 7, 2011 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)