ADVERTISEMENT

Emails: Iowa Public safety leaders were uneasy over border deployment

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
78,289
60,307
113
As Gov. Kim Reynolds prepared in June to announce she was sending Iowa State Patrol employees to the nation’s border with Mexico, the state’s top public safety leaders raised concerns whether her commitment would leave enough staff for “law enforcement obligations in Iowa” and run up a “significant cost for sending personnel out of state,” according to records obtained by The Gazette.


Further, the records reveal, the Republican governor and other top officials knew sending troopers to Texas could cost the state nearly $400,000 — but they didn’t share that information with legislators or the public for weeks.


On June 24 when Reynolds announced the deployment — which she said was in response to pleas from Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas and Doug Ducey of Arizona — she asserted in a public statement she had been assured the move would not jeopardize public safety in Iowa.


“My first responsibility is to the health and safety of Iowans and the humanitarian crisis at our nation’s southern border is affecting all 50 states,” she said in the statement “The rise in drugs, human trafficking and violent crime has become unsustainable. Iowa has no choice but to act, and it’s why I am honoring Texas’ Emergency Management Assistance Compact following assurances from the Iowa Department of Public Safety that it will not compromise our ability to provide all necessary public safety services to Iowans.”


After the announcement, Democratic state Sen. Joe Bolkcom of Iowa City wrote emails June 29 and 30 to Sarah Jennings, legislative liaison for the Iowa Department of Public Safety, asking for answers about the deployment. But he did not receive specifics about the timing of the trip, the number of officers it would involve or the estimated cost.


“This is just the latest example of the Reynolds administration keeping Iowans in the dark,” Bolkcom told The Gazette. “The bigger issue for me is (Reynolds) using these state resources and Iowa State Patrol in an ongoing effort to build her far-right political resume.”


The Gazette requested documents under the Open Records Law about what officials believe to be the first out-of-state deployment of state troopers in Iowa’s roughly quarter century of being in the Emergency Management Assistance Compact — an agreement between states that sets the protocols for mutual aid. To learn more about the decisions behind the unprecedented deployment, the newspaper reviewed more than 3,500 pages of emails from Iowa Public Safety and Iowa Homeland Security officials surrounding the July 8-23 trek of 28 Iowa State Patrol employees to Texas.


Among the findings:


  • The State Patrol estimated June 17 the 16-day deployment could cost the public $383,700, but wouldn’t provide those estimates to reporters or lawmakers.
  • Iowa signed an agreement July 2 to waive reimbursement from Texas for the cost of deployment, but four days later told Iowans that reimbursement terms were still being worked out.
  • Iowa didn’t lend law enforcement officers when neighboring Minnesota requested aid under the same Emergency Management Assistance Compact for “civil unrest” after the murder of George Floyd. But Reynolds’ office “had considerable interest” in requests for aid from states along the Mexican border.
  • State Patrol leaders expressed concerns among themselves, to their supervisors and to a counterpart in another state about the deployment.

“This request creates staffing and logistical concerns regarding our current position based on the 16-day deployment request for personnel/resources,” Col. Nathan Fulk, who leads the Iowa State Patrol, wrote June 16 to Stephan Bayens, who as Reynolds’ appointee leads the Department of Public Safety.


The concern came after a June 10 letter from Govs. Abbott and Ducey asking other states to send “all available law-enforcement resources” to help with a surge of illegal border crossings. Although the Emergency Management Assistance Compact allows for reimbursement of costs when states help each other out in times of disaster or unrest, Texas and Arizona — which have spent millions on border enforcement — wanted states to foot the bill.


Bayens and a counterpart in Alabama expressed doubt about the cost.


“What’s your governor thinking?” Hal Taylor, secretary of law enforcement at the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, asked Bayens June 16 after Bayens forwarded Taylor a copy of the detailed request that came into Iowa’s Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management.


“Speaking with her at 2:30 p.m.,” Bayens replied of Reynolds. “The cost waiver request may be a dealbreaker in my opinion.”


“That’s what did it for my Governor. We just can’t afford it,” Taylor wrote.


Bayens and Catherine Lucas, the state Public Safety Department lawyer, emailed several times June 14 with the subject line “Fwd: Emergency Management Assistance Compact.” But the department censored the text of those emails, saying it was exempt from Iowa’s public records law.


Ten days later, Reynolds announced Iowa would send troopers to the border. At that time, Iowa was one of seven states with Republican governors to indicate plans to send officers to assist with border security.


On July 2, Iowa Homeland Security officials signed a contract saying the deployment would be “at no cost” to Texas. Yet on July 6, public safety officials still weren’t telling the public who would pay for the deployment. The contract remained secret until the Associated Press reported on it July 12.


Redacted EMAC Contract by Gazetteonline on Scribd


“Expenses for this mission will not be calculated until it has fully concluded and discussions regarding payment structures are ongoing,” Public Safety spokeswoman Debbie McClung had told reporters. “The reimbursement process and travel/logistics are not solidified at the present time.”


In fact, emails show State Patrol leaders had put together a cost estimate for the deployment by June 17 that showed it could be up to $383,700. The estimate was considered “likely high, rather than low,” emails said, and included $14,000 for airfare. The employees ultimately drove, however, taking a combination of state and rented vehicles.


Actual costs ended up being $294,853, including regular salaries, overtime, lodging, meals, fuel and rentals, according to a July 27 email. That money will come from the State Patrol’s general fund.


At a news conference July 28, officials said that total should be marked down by about $100,000 because the state would have been spending that on the troopers’ regular salaries anyway. But Iowans did not get services from those troopers during that time, and the department did not call in off-duty officers to backfill for the openings, McClung confirmed.


The mission​


Iowa State Patrol troopers were scheduled to leave July 8 for a two-day drive to Del Rio, a border city in western Texas, where they stayed at a Ramada Inn.


Of the 28 officers who went to Texas, 12 were to be paired with Texas troopers for public safety services including “traffic enforcement, criminal interdiction, crime prevention and provide assistance to other area agencies,” records show. Another 13 were paired with Texas Rangers, a division that investigates “major violent crime, public corruption, cold case and officer-involved shooting investigations and oversee(s) the department’s border security and tactical and crisis negotiation programs,” according to its website.


Iowa committed to sending two supervisors and one Spanish-speaking investigator to help with sex abuse investigations, records show.


At the post-deployment news conference July 28, Patrol Capt. Mark Miller said troopers made arrests, seized illegal drugs, firearms and money while helping people with food, water and other necessities as they attempted to cross into the United States.


No numbers have been released about how many people Iowa troopers, specifically, arrested during the deployment. But during the 12 days Iowa officers were working in Texas, the operation resulted in 240 arrests, 51 vehicle pursuits and the seizure of 948 pounds of marijuana, 37 pounds of methamphetamine and cocaine, 18 firearms and $1.7 million from criminal activities, the Iowa State Patrol reported.



 

Why this deployment?


Reynolds has spoken extensively about her concerns illegal immigrants are bringing drugs into the country and increasing COVID-19 rates. Coupled with her criticism of Democratic President Joe Biden’s border policy, some Republicans have speculated she may be interested in higher office.


On June 10, the same day Abbott and Ducey sent their letter requesting help, Reynolds issued a news release saying she and Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee demanded Congressional hearings on the border crisis.


Bayens forwarded that release to Paul Feddersen, assistant director in charge of the department’s Division of Narcotics Enforcement, with the note “FYSA,” which likely means “for your situational awareness.” Feddersen replied, “Interesting.”


Interim Iowa Homeland Security Director John Benson wrote an email June 11 to Blake DeRouchey, the Homeland Security legislative liaison. “There is considerable interest in possible EMAC requests from states along the southern border. Please keep a close eye out for any and all EMAC requests. If we do receive some through the system let me know as soon as possible so I can inform the Governor's Office.


DeRouchey replied June 14 that he had looked that morning and had seen a new posting from Texas, but no formal request providing details.


“Can you pull that down for me?” Benson replied. “I would like to see it and possibly forward to IGOV so they can see the event but also that no requests have been created thus far.”


On July 23, while preparing for the post-deployment news conference, Public Safety lawyer Lucas wrote to Benson asking whether Minnesota had used the assistance agreement to call for help during protests that turned violent following George Floyd’s May 25, 2020, murder in Minneapolis.


“Do you know if Minnesota used EMAC last summer? (we are anticipating question of whey sending to TX but not MN last summer),” Lucas wrote.


Benson said Minnesota had requested 19 people, including 15 law enforcement, for “civil unrest” and 123 law enforcement officers during April’s trial of Derek Chauvin, the police officer who was convicted of killing Floyd.


“We did not support either of those — however for background, we were prepared to support a National Guard helicopter for the George Floyd funeral, which was cancelled by Minnesota the day prior,” Benson wrote.


Iowa National Guard members did go to California last year to help with wild fires, Benson said.


Timeline​


June 10: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey send letter to 48 other states asking them to send “all available law enforcement resources” to the border to deal with "illegal border crossing“ and state crimes, such as drug smuggling and human trafficking.


June 16: Homeland Security Interim Director John Benson forwards to Public Safety officials details of the Emergency Management Assistance Compact request, stating “please note that Texas has requested that any state providing resources waive cost recovery.


June 16: Iowa State Patrol Col. Nathan Fulk writes to Public Safety Director Stephan Bayens of his concerns about the deployment. Bayens has an exchange with an Alabama counterpart about the cost being a “dealbreaker.”


June 17: Public Safety staff prepare an estimate of costs of sending 29 employees on a 16-day deployment to Texas. The estimate of $383,700 was considered “likely high, rather than low” and included $14,000 for airfare. The troopers ultimately drove, taking a combination of state and rented vehicles.


June 24: Gov. Kim Reynolds announces she will send 25 to 30 Iowa state troopers to Texas to help with law enforcement at the U.S. border with Mexico. Cost estimates not provided.


July 2: Iowa Homeland Security signs EMAC contract committing Iowa troopers to the border deployment “at no cost to Texas.” Contract says Iowa troopers, while in Texas, will be granted “the same arrest and law enforcement powers, rights and privileges” as Texas officers.


July 6: Public Safety spokeswoman Debbie McClung declines to provide cost estimates for the deployment, telling reporters “payment structures are ongoing” and “the reimbursement process and travel/logistics are not solidified at the present time.”


July 8-9: Iowa State Patrol employees leave Des Moines on two-day drive to Texas.


July 10: Deployment starts in Del Rio, a Texas border city, about 150 miles west of San Antonio.


July 12: Homeland Security releases to Associated Press EMAC contract showing Iowa agreed July 2 to pay for the deployment.


July 21: Iowa State Patrol employees complete deployment.


July 22-23: Troopers drive back to Iowa.


July 27: State Patrol staff computes final cost of the deployment: $294,853. Of that, $97,717 was regular wages that would have been paid even if troopers were working in Iowa.


July 28: Reynolds and Public Safety officials hold news conference to talk about deployment. Bayens says the deployment cost about $300,000, but $100,000 of that would have been spent on regular salary anyway if the troopers were in Iowa.
 
"Iowa didn’t lend law enforcement officers when neighboring Minnesota requested aid under the same Emergency Management Assistance Compact for “civil unrest” after the murder of George Floyd. But Reynolds’ office “had considerable interest” in requests for aid from states along the Mexican border."

So is this an argument for sending these people into hostile situations? I don't see the border thing as necessarily hostile, compared to where police were sealed into their building with the intent to burn them alive.
 
Who cares what they think? Do you care what the border agents think about Biden's lack of leadership on the border? That's what I thought.
 
Who cares what they think? Do you care what the border agents think about Biden's lack of leadership on the border? That's what I thought.
If nothing else, sending state trooper is and was a publicity stunt by every governor who did so, done expressly to score cheap political points while accomplishing little.

the border issue isn’t going anywhere until we can legit immigration reform.
 
If nothing else, sending state trooper is and was a publicity stunt by every governor who did so, done expressly to score cheap political points while accomplishing little.

the border issue isn’t going anywhere until we can legit immigration reform.
Or, you could just build a wall and enforce the current immigration laws. That might work, ya think?
 
"Iowa didn’t lend law enforcement officers when neighboring Minnesota requested aid under the same Emergency Management Assistance Compact for “civil unrest” after the murder of George Floyd. But Reynolds’ office “had considerable interest” in requests for aid from states along the Mexican border."

So is this an argument for sending these people into hostile situations? I don't see the border thing as necessarily hostile, compared to where police were sealed into their building with the intent to burn them alive.
Are you kidding? With all the drug smuggling, covid spreading. rapists, and murderers crossing the border in caravans every minute of the day?
 
Or, you could just build a wall and enforce the current immigration laws. That might work, ya think?
Considering they’re not all coming by land, not really. Also considering we are barred by treaty from building too close to the Rio Grande, the privately owned areas that would need to be purchased or seized (I’m sure that will go over well)…

I am all for enforcing the existing immigration laws, which…they actually are, it’s not like we’re just waving them right on in. I also however, am in favor of a major overhaul of those same laws, which have not been updated on any major level in decades.

i simply do not understand, in a nation of immigrants, the anti-immigrant turn by the GOP.
 
Sounds like a check mark in the “defund” column If the need wasnt here to have the law enforcement at home and to send them to texas on the taxpayer dime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Considering they’re not all coming by land, not really. Also considering we are barred by treaty from building too close to the Rio Grande, the privately owned areas that would need to be purchased or seized (I’m sure that will go over well)…

I am all for enforcing the existing immigration laws, which…they actually are, it’s not like we’re just waving them right on in. I also however, am in favor of a major overhaul of those same laws, which have not been updated on any major level in decades.

i simply do not understand, in a nation of immigrants, the anti-immigrant turn by the GOP.
When you say the GOP is anti immigrant you are simply parroting the left's narrative. Most of the GOP is not anti immigrant, they are anti illegal immigration. I have no problem allowing anyone in who wants to contribute to America and enjoy our freedom to come and enter legally. But the U.S needs to have the ability to vet these immigrants and determine what type of skills and talents we need. We don't need millions of Central Americans and who knows who else pouring into our southern border for whatever reason they claim. Not to mention drugs, criminals, terrorists, Covid, etc. entering unchecked.
 
When you say the GOP is anti immigrant you are simply parroting the left's narrative. Most of the GOP is not anti immigrant, they are anti illegal immigration. I have no problem allowing anyone in who wants to contribute to America and enjoy our freedom to come and enter legally. But the U.S needs to have the ability to vet these immigrants and determine what type of skills and talents we need. We don't need millions of Central Americans and who knows who else pouring into our southern border for whatever reason they claim. Not to mention drugs, criminals, terrorists, Covid, etc. entering unchecked.
So what immigration reform bills has the GOP proposed? Why did Trump and co want to make it harder for people to emigrate, lower the cap, etc?

im totally onboard with deporting illegal immigrants as they are caught. And most of the ones who apply for asylum get rejected. I do think that simple deportation isn’t the best option however, - there are too many who have gotten in over the years.

here’s my proposal:
1) any illegal immigrants who entered the US as adults may apply for a permanent green card/resident status. They may NEVER receive full citizenship, and if they commit anything worse than a traffic violation, they’re gone. No appeals, nothing.
2) those who came here as minors, if they, again have no criminal record beyond what I mentioned before, may apply for citizenship through the established processes - the Dream Act
3) Invest in Central America to help the domestic situations there to reduce the need for them to come here. tackle the gangs, corruption,etc. improve the situations there so that coming here doesn’t seem like their only option
4) investigate and penalize any US company that recruited illegal immigrants
5) general overhaul of the immigration/refugee system overall. Find ways to speed up the process, build better and more human holding facilities while they go through the application process, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
"Iowa didn’t lend law enforcement officers when neighboring Minnesota requested aid under the same Emergency Management Assistance Compact for “civil unrest” after the murder of George Floyd. But Reynolds’ office “had considerable interest” in requests for aid from states along the Mexican border."

So is this an argument for sending these people into hostile situations? I don't see the border thing as necessarily hostile, compared to where police were sealed into their building with the intent to burn them alive.
A request was made and ignored, question the reason why instead of performing a gymnastics routine and sticking the hyperbolic burning cops alive landing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT