AURORA, CO - On Monday, April 20, the Aurora City Council voted on a proposed agreement that would govern how local police respond to emergencies at the city's federal immigration detention facility.
City Council voted against the proposed policy, reflecting issues of broader tensions in the city over public safety, immigration enforcement and community trust.
The proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU), between the Aurora Police Department (APD) and the privately operated ICE detention center, run by Florida-based GEO Group, would clarify when and how officers respond to incidents, including detainee escapes, disturbances and serious crimes like sexual assault allegations.
The vote was delayed earlier this month over concerns about public safety, immigration enforcement and community trust of police, according to the Sentinel Colorado. At the April 6 meeting, city lawmakers voted 10-1 to postpone the measure for at least two weeks, citing the need for more public input and possibly policy changes.
Councilmember Stephanie Hancock was the lone vote against postponing the measure. The updated agreement stems from a 2025 incident in which two detainees escaped the Aurora ICE Processing Center during a power outage, sparking a public dispute between federal officials and local police.
At the time, officials ICE blamed APD for failing to respond quickly to the escape of the two detainees. APD leaders pushed back, saying they were not notified until hours after the escape and therefore the report did not meet the criteria for an urgent response under the existing agreement.
The updated agreement would outline local police's options for responding to the facility and would allow police supervisors to assess the level of risk rather than relying on rigid definitions like "hot" or "cold" escapes.
Police officials have said the revised agreement is intended to eliminate confusion. Under the proposed MOU, Aurora police would respond to criminal incidents at the detention center similarly to how they respond anywhere else in the city, but with explicit guardrails to ensure officers are not engaging in federal immigration enforcement, authorities said.
Those against the MOU claim that it deepens ties between the police and federal immigration agents. They called out the use of local resources, including drones, canine units, and patrol officers to respond to incidents at the facility, saying that many detainees are held on civil immigration violations, not criminal charges.
Some activists questioned whether the agreement would erode trust between immigrant communities and local police. Authorities at APD have stressed that the agreement explicitly prohibits officers from enforcing civil immigration law.
City Council voted against the proposed policy, reflecting issues of broader tensions in the city over public safety, immigration enforcement and community trust.
The proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU), between the Aurora Police Department (APD) and the privately operated ICE detention center, run by Florida-based GEO Group, would clarify when and how officers respond to incidents, including detainee escapes, disturbances and serious crimes like sexual assault allegations.
The vote was delayed earlier this month over concerns about public safety, immigration enforcement and community trust of police, according to the Sentinel Colorado. At the April 6 meeting, city lawmakers voted 10-1 to postpone the measure for at least two weeks, citing the need for more public input and possibly policy changes.
Councilmember Stephanie Hancock was the lone vote against postponing the measure. The updated agreement stems from a 2025 incident in which two detainees escaped the Aurora ICE Processing Center during a power outage, sparking a public dispute between federal officials and local police.
At the time, officials ICE blamed APD for failing to respond quickly to the escape of the two detainees. APD leaders pushed back, saying they were not notified until hours after the escape and therefore the report did not meet the criteria for an urgent response under the existing agreement.
The updated agreement would outline local police's options for responding to the facility and would allow police supervisors to assess the level of risk rather than relying on rigid definitions like "hot" or "cold" escapes.
Police officials have said the revised agreement is intended to eliminate confusion. Under the proposed MOU, Aurora police would respond to criminal incidents at the detention center similarly to how they respond anywhere else in the city, but with explicit guardrails to ensure officers are not engaging in federal immigration enforcement, authorities said.
Those against the MOU claim that it deepens ties between the police and federal immigration agents. They called out the use of local resources, including drones, canine units, and patrol officers to respond to incidents at the facility, saying that many detainees are held on civil immigration violations, not criminal charges.
Some activists questioned whether the agreement would erode trust between immigrant communities and local police. Authorities at APD have stressed that the agreement explicitly prohibits officers from enforcing civil immigration law.
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments