After sitting empty for the past six months, the Berks County Residential Center will soon house asylum seekers once again.
The Berks County commissioners voted Thursday to approve modifications to their existing contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that would shift the Bern Township center from one that houses families seeking asylum to one that only houses migrant women.
Commissioners Christian Leinbach and Michael Rivera approved the proposal following comments from about a dozen residents who spoke out against the plan, arguing that the county instead should get out of the inhumane business of incarcerating immigrants.
Commissioner Kevin Barnhardt, who was not at the board meeting, had said earlier this week that he would have voted against the change had he been there.
The center was first opened in 2001, one of three facilities in the nation where ICE had detained families with children seeking asylum. Berks manages the facility and is reimbursed by the federal government.
In return, ICE leases office space and provides about $1.3 million in annual revenue to the county.
The opposition
Celine Schrier, a Reading resident and director of the advocacy organization Berks Stands Up, told commissioners Thursday that entering into the original agreement with ICE was one of the worst mistakes the county has made and signing onto this new proposal would be just as disastrous.
“Having a detention facility in my hometown is heartbreaking,” she said. “It does not reflect our community values of caring for our neighbors and supporting one another when help is needed. Any form of detention goes against the very idea that we are a loving, welcoming and compassionate community.”
Schrier said the center is a stain on the community.
Bridget Cambria, an immigration lawyer based in Reading, urged the commissioners to finally end its contract with ICE over the operation of the facility. She said this new proposal offers the board a chance to take a stand against the further detention of individuals whose only offense is fleeing violence.
“This is a huge opportunity to do the right thing,” she said.
Adriana Zambrano seconded that sentiment. The Reading resident said the board should take this chance to break from its longstanding relationship with ICE.
“We have the opportunity to say, ‘Enough,’ ” she said. “We have a massive opportunity to repurpose this facility for the good of the people of Berks County.”
Zambrano said the detention of women is just as wrong, unnecessary and dangerous as the detention of families. She said detention in any form – no matter what the conditions – is an inhumane policy.
“Detention separates individuals from their families who are willing and able to take them into their homes while the legal process goes along,” she said. “Detention means the separation of people from communities like ours which are made better by the presence of immigrants. And, detention means the separation of people from critical resources.”
Zambrano told the commissioners they have a chance to be part of the problem or part of the solution.
Julia Minotto said the decision to detain women is not only a moral concern but also potential legal liability. The Reading resident cited the investigation of several women being sexually assaulted at a female detention center in Texas.
“These cases are just the tip of the iceberg,” she said. “So you have a moral decision to make: Does Berks County really want to be responsible for the kind of violence inherent in ICE detention? But this is also a financial decision. How will you make sure that taxpayers will not foot the bill for these abuses?”
Minotto urged the commissioners to choose a different path. She encouraged them to find a way to use the facility to deliver human services to county residents in need.
Many other residents echoed those comments and criticized the board for moving forward with a vote only two days after the proposal was made public. Some were submitted by online viewers of the meeting and read to the commissioners, while others were made at a rally held outside the Berks County Services Center.
Not swayed
Despite the appeals to change course, Leinbach and Rivera voted to support the detention of women at the facility contingent on the final review of the terms and conditions of the contract by county solicitor Christine Sadler.
Leinbach said that if the claims of mistreatment at the facility, which were made by some who spoke in opposition to the change, were accurate at all the center would have been shut down long ago.
“I’m proud of the staff and leadership at our facility and the way we have treated families,” he said, adding he would support moving forward with the changes proposed by ICE.
Leinbach’s comment was interrupted by a small outburst from the crowd.
Andrew Palamara loudly booed and shouted, “Shame on you.”
“This is wildly unpopular,” Palamara said. “Not a single comment in favor. Listen to your constituency and follow through with what they say.”
Leinbach asked Palamara to leave the boardroom.
“Listen, I’m fine with debate and discussion, but the reality is we gave the opportunity for individuals to speak,” Leinbach said.
Palamara eventually did leave, continuing to deride the vote as he left.
Rivera said he understands the passion of the people who spoke out against the county continuing its contract with ICE but acknowledged he disagrees with much of what was said about the conditions at the facility.
He pointed out that a state agency conducts monthly inspections of the center and that there have been no outstanding violations that need to be addressed.
“We listen, but listening doesn’t mean agreeing,” he said. “Also we don’t represent a group of Berks Countians, we represent the county as a whole and look at what is in the best interest of the county as a whole.”
The particulars
Who would be detained?
David O’Neil, an ICE deputy field office director, told the board at an operations meeting Tuesday that women with no known serious criminal backgrounds would be housed at the center.
He said women would not be held at the center because they committed a crime, but rather for a few weeks while waiting for their asylum cases to be decided. O’Neil said the turnover rate on these cases is fairly quick, although a small number of cases can take quite some time.
O’Neil acknowledged that sometimes women would be placed in the center before ICE is able to conduct a review of their criminal backgrounds in other countries. But if those reviews reveal that serious crimes were committed, the woman would be moved to a facility with more security.
Diane Edwards, executive director of the center, said the contract with ICE would guarantee a minimum population of 78 women.
While that number could potentially rise to as many as 100 women, she said efforts to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within the facility will likely mean keeping the population at that base level for quite some time.
Would there be changes?
O’Neil told the commissioners earlier that ICE would like to maintain the current set up of the facility, allowing the women to move freely within the center.
“It would be operated the same way it was as a family facility,” he said. “The administration that we have now is looking for detention that is less restrictive and more like a residential setting.”
That would mean the women would be assigned to a bedroom and have access to several common spaces within the facility. They would also be able to participate in educational programs, have access to an exercise room, spend time outdoors in a recreation area, have access to the internet in the library, meet with local chaplains who visit the facility and receive medical care.
“Essentially, the program is going to remain the same,” Edwards said.
As for the security measures at the facility, O’Neil said they have no intention of installing locks on the doors or bars on the windows.
The only modification to the facility, he said, would be the installation of a fence around the perimeter of the building.
While the design of the fence has not yet been decided, he assured the commissioners that there would be no razor wire resembling what one might see surrounding a prison.
What is the financial impact?
Edwards told the commissioners Tuesday the reimbursement rate the county receives from ICE will change only slightly.
Edwards said the county will receive about a dollar a day less than it did when the facility housed families.
She said the rate will remain the same in large part because the center is going to maintain the same services and requirements it has in the past.
The next step
Sadler said there will need to be some further discussion with the federal government regarding the language in the contract. She did not provide a timetable for when the paperwork would be finalized or when the center might begin operations.
However, O’Neil said Tuesday that ICE would like to start as soon as possible.
