A 39-word Minneapolis ordinance may cost the city millions of dollars if President-elect Donald Trump follows through with a campaign threat.
The 13-year-old ordinance (Title 2, Chapter 19) states: “Public safety officials shall not undertake any law enforcement action for the purpose of detecting the presence of undocumented persons, or to verify immigration status, including but not limited to questioning any person or persons about their immigration status.”
In an August speech in Phoenix, AZ, Donald Trump said, “No more sanctuary cities. We will block the funding to sanctuary cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.”
In the 1980s, the “sanctuary movement,” as it was called then, grew out of communities of faith, especially near the U.S.-Mexico border. It took its name from the medieval tradition of churches providing havens for people accused of crimes. In the modern version, congregations provided assistance to Central Americans fleeing to the United States from civil wars and dictatorships in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. As many as 500 churches joined the movement, asserting that the people they were helping were not immigrants, but refugees.
Some of these arrangements were in clear violation of federal law, and a number of church members were prosecuted. Currently, more than a dozen Minnesota churches have offered a safe haven to immigrants, documented or otherwise.
Although neither Minneapolis nor St. Paul has made formal declarations as sanctuary cities, both have “separation ordinances” that specify the limits of local law enforcement regarding immigration matters. Cities, counties, and states cannot prevent federal officials from enforcing immigration laws, however.
Senator Al Franken said, “Any policy that discourages immigrants from reporting crimes because they fear responding officers will also be checking their papers will not make our communities safer. As the debate over immigration policy moves forward, there should be significant input from local officials and law enforcement.” He noted that requiring local police enforce immigration laws would make their jobs more difficult.
Nationwide, more than 500 municipal entities have passed ordinances that prevent local police from requesting information about immigration status during routine encounters.
Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges said the separation ordinance makes for a safer city, and Representative Keith Ellison said he opposes the president-elect’s suggestion and has voted against past Republican efforts to strip funding from sanctuary cities.
On Trump’s threat to withhold funds, Carol Becker, president of the Minneapolis Board of Estimate and Taxation wrote, “Trump runs the machinery of the federal government and could absolutely tell the bureaucrats who work with him to not pay out grants. Legally, however, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 says that the President can’t do this for more than 45 days without Congress’s approval. But given the Republicans control all the machinery of the federal government, they could provide this approval and stop providing funding to grants. So, although Trump can’t act unilaterally, he could, along with Congress, stop federal funding from coming to Minneapolis.”
She said the city will get about $26.5 million in federal grants in 2017, about 2% of the total budget. $4.6 million is slated for the Health Department, and $16 million will go for Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), including funds for affordable housing, vacant and boarded housing, and workforce development. Another $2 million will go to administrative costs and scattered small grants. Becker said that lost administrative costs would have to be made up with property taxes.
She added, “We’re not going to be the immigration cops; we will not harass the residents of this city. I will not be a part of it.”
On December 13, the Minneapolis School Board passed a resolution which reads, in part, “… unless specifically required by law, District employees, contractors, volunteers and representatives will not use District resources solely for the purposes of detecting or assisting in the apprehension of persons whose only violation of law is or may be being an undocumented resident in the United States, or failing to produce documents authorizing residency in the United States.”
Bob Laney, St. Anthony-New Brighton School District superintendent said simply, “We do not use local police for illegal immigrants.” Mark Casey, St. Anthony city manager said the city had “no policy” regarding immigration enforcement. Casey Mahon, Director of Communications for the Columbia Heights School District said the subject had not been discussed, calling it a “city thing.”
Minneapolis 1st Ward City Council member Kevin Reich said the city’s policy has two components: practicality and a separation of powers. He noted “The Police Department has clearly expressed how important it is to maintain a relationship of trust with the community, and a libertarian notion that we don’t want to be deputized by federal officials.”
John Quincy, 11th Ward City Council member and head of the council’s Ways and Means Committee, agreed with Becker’s numbers and noted that some of the grants require matching state funding. He said that the city council is “very aware” of the dollars at risk.
He said that the block grant funding comes from the Department of Housing and Urban Development with restrictions on its uses. “That money is the backbone of affordable housing funding and is vital to AIDs patients and homeless residents, as well as help for public safety and domestic abuse issues.”
Quincy suggested that the funding threat might just wither away through congressional inertia, but added that, should money be withheld as a way to force compliance with federal immigration policing, “We can go three ways: legislate, litigate, or negotiate, and we will take the path of least resistance. But this issue has nothing to do with how effectively we do our jobs. Protecting our residents is part of our DNA, and we are never going to give way on the values of our city.”