Supervisor awaits LaLota response on Latino activist proposal

East End town and village officials received notice from Congressman Nick LaLota (R-Amityville) this week indicating he would “not support CPF [Community Project Funding] for municipalities that adopt” provisions creating so-called “sanctuary” protections. CPF, also known as earmarks, allows members of Congress to direct federal funds to specific local and nonprofit projects in their district.

Following a luncheon meeting of the East End officials on Shelter Island Aug. 12, Shelter Island Supervisor Amber Brach-Williams asked if he would oppose policies that protect residents but make no mention of sanctuary cities. 

“I did not get the impression that the Congressman has seen the most recent draft” of a law circulated by Organización Latino Americana (OLA of Eastern Long Island), Ms. Brach-Williams said. 

Mr. LaLota told the supervisor he is “willing to look at it and get back to me about whether he feels that it is in conflict with his concerns about interference with Federal immigration enforcement by local municipalities,” the supervisor said.

Shelter Island is still considering the OLA law, but is inclined to adopt policies dealing with protecting public safety rather than legislation. The policies are in line with what OLA Executive Directer Minerva Perez said has always been in its proposed law — aimed at protecting public safety, not dealing with immigration.

The organization doesn’t endorse confrontation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) but seeks to implement steps to promote public safety, Ms. Perez said.

In his latest communication with East End municipalities, Mr. LaLota took East Hampton Town and Village to task for what he said is their stance on “sanctuary cities.” The adoption of laws by East Hampton Town and Village added to Gov. Kathy Hochul’s (D) legislation. Under new State laws, New York prohibits local law enforcement agencies and sheriffs from maintaining formal 287(g) agreements, or partnering with ICE for civil immigration enforcement.

The governor’s stance would:

• Ban municipal governments maintaining partnerships with ICE, limiting law enforcement officers’ focus to be strictly on local crimes.

• Ban law enforcement officers from wearing masks.

• Hold Federal Law Enforcement accountable for Constitutional violations.

• Safeguard interactions with public employees.

• Keep Immigration authorities out of sensitive locations, including schools and polling places.

No matter what individual municipalities enact, the State law would take precedence.

“In my review of the various drafts, East Hampton Town and East Hampton Village adopted an earlier version that has since been revised,” Supervisor Brach-Williams said. “In the interim, Shelter Island is looking at policy changes, which address immigration enforcement activity response and communication that need to be adopted with or without a legislative change.”  

Ms. Perez said nothing in the OLA proposed law speaks to banning any kind of cooperation with ICE, she said. In any of its revisions, it never spoke to any bans, she said. The law was drafted by former Assemblyman Fred Thiele, who has worked closely with OLA.

In a letter from Ms. Perez to municipal government leaders, she questioned specific provisions of the OLA law that Mr. LaLota opposes. “The Public Safety Law that we are urging — and will continue to urge — all Towns and Villages to adopt, is a logical next step to safeguarding our towns and villages from chaos and panic that run through our shared communities during random immigration raids,” Ms. Perez said. “Where does our law stop local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement when required by law? Neither of these concerns exist within the Public Safety Law. Our congressman is creating mis-truths and confusion for his personal gain.” 

“It is a shame that our congressman is continuing to sow disunity among East End residents and municipalities. He is not interested in facts or the public safety of our beautiful region,” she continued. “By the use of name calling, threats, misinformation and other immature and damaging tactics, he is making it clear that his only interest is in creating false talking points for an election. This is a dangerous use of his platform.”