AURORA | The Aurora City Council is slated to vote at its Monday meeting on an agreement governing how local police respond to emergencies at the city’s federal immigration detention facility.
The vote was delayed earlier this month over concerns about public safety, immigration enforcement and community trust of police.
The proposed memorandum of understanding, or MOU, between the Aurora Police Department and the privately operated ICE detention center, run by Florida-based GEO Group, would clarify when and how officers respond to incidents ranging from detainee escapes to sexual assault allegations at the facility.
The GEO ICE facility has been the center of controversy and allegations of mistreatment of prisoners for years. Scrutiny by members of Congress and local activists has accelerated since the re-election of President Donald Trump and his mass-deportation policies.
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 possible 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 with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement blamed Aurora police for failing to respond quickly to the escape of two detainees. Aurora police 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, police and city legal officials said.
Public speakers at the April 6 meeting criticized the agreement for deepening 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.
Others brought up numerous recent reports of poor conditions inside the detention center, including allegations of inadequate medical care, food and limited oversight.
Some activists questioned whether the agreement would erode trust between immigrant communities and local police.
Police have stressed that the agreement explicitly prohibits officers from enforcing civil immigration law.
You will enjoy this story. Many years ago, there was an INS facility run by Wackenhut near where this newer facility sits. As a SWAT supervisor, I was aware of some disturbances at the facility. I asked my supervisors for a diagram of the facility because I anticipated that APD would have to help them in any major riot. My bosses told me that it wasn’t my concern. They said that the Federal Marshalls would handle any disturbance. I said “No one waits 24 hours for the Federal Marshalls in a riot”. They said “It’s not your problem, Sergeant…butt out”.
A few weeks later, I was patrolling at night when I heard a disturbance called out at the INS facility. They called for the K9 and a Sergeant. Then they called for all of the K9s. A few minutes later, the Division Chief called me on the radio from his home in Littleton. He told me to go take charge. So much for “not your problem”. So… without the benefit of prior planning and a floorpan, I was stuck with the problem. Upon arrival, I found that the staff were in a panic. In the one pod, the most violent individuals had barricaded the door with beds and were trying to break through the reinforced windows. Luckily, I had prepared myself in advance by paying my own way to a Koga Crowd Control class that had been denied by the Department. I had a great team of SWAT guys and a good bunch of patrol guys and we went to work. They were throwing pieces of the toilets at us, but my guys formed a line and pulled out all of the beds that were blocking us. We used our ballistic shields to protect us and moved in. With a few carefully thrown sting ball grenades and a skirmish line, we were able to push them out of the pod into a small fenced area outside. I was lucky enough to have a place to push them without the benefit of a floorplan. We got them down on the ground and had them crawl to us to be cuffed. As soon as they were cuffed, the INS staff got brave and started to beat them. I stopped that immediately. Throughout the riot, the Division Chief sat outside in a command post and would occasionally ask sheepishly how it was going. There were virtually no injuries.
Years later, when I was a lieutenant, I found a floorplan of the INS facility in a desk at District 1. So, I have little faith in the bloated judgement of those who run APD. Realistic training, equipment, and proper tactics have always been a mystery to those at the top.