More than $2 million in federal law enforcement grants are up in the air while the state and federal government dispute the state’s eligibility related to immigration enforcement policies.
Vermont hasn’t yet received money under two different federal grant programs because of what the Department of Justice says is a compliance issue related to fair and impartial policing policies, according to Vermont State Police spokesperson Adam Silverman.
The DOJ is reviewing whether the state is in compliance with a law requiring communication between local and state law enforcement and federal authorities concerning immigration status. Seven Days first reported last week that lawmakers plan to take testimony about the state’s efforts to access the funding.
But Vermont officials disagree with the DOJ’s stance. The Department of Public Safety is working with the DOJ to “address their questions and assure them that Vermont is in compliance with federal law,” Silverman said.
One grant, the COPS Anti-Heroin Task Force Grant, totals $1.3 million. The money has been awarded to Vermont, but the DOJ is withholding it, according to Silverman.
The state has also applied for annual grants for fiscal years 2017 and 2018 through the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants (JAG) program but the grants have not yet been awarded. Vermont applied for $476,496 in the first year, and $482,496 in the second year.
The DOJ’s concerns are related to the Vermont State Police fair and impartial policing policy and the state’s model policy, according to Silverman. The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment Monday.
In November 2017, the DOJ notified 29 jurisdictions across the country that they could lose some federal grant funding because of policies that restrict local and state enforcement of federal civil immigration laws. Both the state of Vermont and Burlington were told at that time that their Byrne JAG funding was in jeopardy.
In April, the DOJ asked for more documentation about the state’s policies, threatening to use subpoena power. Public Safety Commissioner Tom Anderson said last year he was confident that the state’s policies are in compliance with the federal law.
Meanwhile, the Burlington Police Department is in the process of accepting a $38,845 JAG grant from the federal government after a court issued an injunction blocking the DOJ from withholding the money over so-called “sanctuary” policies.
The injunction came after the U.S. Conference of Mayors filed a suit in federal court last August challenging the withholding of Byrne JAG funding.
Burlington has been awarded the money, but is still completing the process necessary to accept it under the terms of the injunction, according to Chief Brandon del Pozo.
Del Pozo said the grant has historically made up a large part of the city’s restorative and parallel justice programs. After the grant money appeared to be under threat, they secured more permanent funding for those programs. Now the grant goes into the department’s overall budget, so the restorative justice programs would be left intact, he said.
“We were hoping to buffer some of the effects if we couldn’t get it,” he said.
At the state level, lawmakers are hoping to learn more about the grants. House Judiciary Chair Maxine Grad said Monday that the committee will hear more from Anderson about the withholding of funding and its impact.
Grad said it’s not clear that the state is in violation of federal policies, noting the state recently transitioned to a new fair and impartial policing policy.
“I’m not sure we’re not compliant,” she said.
Grad said the committee’s priority is on evaluating whether Vermont’s policies on policing are functioning on the ground. The panel has been taking testimony about the policies.
The Vermont attorney general’s office is involved in separate efforts contesting the constitutionality of a federal law that blocks jurisdictions from restricting the sharing of information on individuals’ immigration status.
House Judiciary Vice Chair Rep. Tom Burditt, R-West Rutland, said his impression from committee testimony is that many in the state expect the finances will be resolved.
Burditt said he does not expect that Vermont would change its fair and impartial policing policy if the funds continue to be withheld. To many in Montpelier, he said he thinks it would be “worth the money.”
“People in Vermont are pretty serious about being fair and impartial,” he said.
But, Burditt said it would be a difficult decision to make, noting that the funds go to support opioid enforcement.
Lia Ernst, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont, said the DOJ is “dead wrong” that the state’s fair and impartial policing policy violates federal law. Ernst said that revisions to the state policy over the last several years have weakened it in the face of federal pressure. The ACLU-VT supports taking steps to make protections in the policy stronger, she said.
