Conversation over ICE facility offers community an opportunity

The Portland Rose room at the Roundhouse saw a marathon meeting of the Uinta County Commissioners on Monday, December 2, 2019. For the most part, the capacity crowd consisted of Uinta County residents from all walks of life. There were, however, a few others. I spotted a reporter from Laramie, two lawyers from Salt Lake City, and two professional lobbyists—to name a few.

It has been a while since so many people attended a commissioners meeting. That alone is reason to commend the good people of Uinta County. Lately, America has been so focused on national politics that local involvement suffers. If Monday’s meeting helps to reinvigorate everything from the school board to the city council, that would be its greatest benefit.

ICE regional map

The crowd gathered for an informational meeting concerning a proposed Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. ICE has two dozen regional offices scattered around the United States. None of these regional offices operate any detention facilities of their own. All our detainees are housed in state- and county-run jails that contract with ICE.

Since the early days of the Obama administration, ICE has been working a plan to improve this housing situation. It has both raised the humanitarian standards of our detention facilities and contracted with private companies to build and operate new ones to meet these standards. Nearly half of ICE’s regions now have such contracted facilities. A new, centralized detention facility for the Salt Lake region would bring us to the halfway mark.

The Salt Lake region serves Utah, Nevada, Idaho and Montana. Currently, we hold over 500 detainees who are housed in six county jails and four state-run detention centers scattered through the region. ICE is expected to put out a Request for Proposal (RFP) in the very near future. It will contract with a private company to build and operate a 1,000-bed facility within a specified radius of Salt Lake City.

Management Training Corporation (MTC) originally contacted city and county leaders to inquire whether there were any suitable sites around Evanston. After identifying one possible site east of Bear River State Park, it decided to bow out of the process.

More recently, CoreCivic has begun looking into the project. It recently filed an environmental plan with the federal government. While awaiting an answer, it sent a team of managers to talk with the people of Evanston. After presenting some drawings and discussing what such a facility would likely entail, they and the commissioners answered questions and heard comments.

Proposed facility, night rendering

Almost immediately, the plan to distinguish the question period from the comment period went out the window. That was not a bad thing. It allowed a genuine dialog so that the comments could be informed by factual answers to clarifying questions. County Attorney, Loretta Howieson, should be commended for moderating a meeting that allowed people to speak their minds, while also allowing room to correct misinformation.

Comments were divided into two basic concerns. Many were concerned with the impact of the proposed facility on the ICE detainees, while others were concerned about its impact on the citizens of Evanston. While the comments were divided along these lines, it would be unfair to assume that the people commenting were divided in this way.

I don’t believe that those who expressed concern for the people detained by ICE are uncaring about the welfare of Evanston and her citizens. Nor do I believe that the people who spoke about Evanston’s future are uncaring about the people who could be housed in the proposed facility.

A just and decent society never pits one people-group against another. Human beings are created by God to be in community. Therefore, what is truly good for one is truly good for all. The key to building community lies in the phrase “truly good.” Truth itself is both the unifying force and the liberating principle that knits people into communities.

Sadly, there are very strong currents in our culture that deny the existence of truth, at all. To the extent that we fall under the spell of such nihilism, we lose hope of either unity or freedom. This is poison to community.

For several days, I have been talking with people on both sides of the issue and reflecting on Monday’s conversation. The most distressing pattern that I have noticed is a widespread cynicism and distrust of everybody and every institution from the federal government to townspeople that some have known all their lives.

In such an environment, there is no statement of ICE, CoreCivic, the County Commission—or anyone else for that matter—that can serve to build community. Rather than statements being verified as factual or discarded as lies, statements are either accepted or denied based on which side of the debate we want to believe. Personal will substitutes for objective truth and community is replaced by one group imposing power on another.

Perhaps that’s why many have told me that they are reluctant to voice their opinion. They are unwilling to be bullied into submission or silence. Alternately, they are afraid that long-time friends will interpret their own opinions as mere bullying in return.

Uinta County Commission

There is no simple answer to this problem. Surely, every single reader of this column has experienced enough lies and broken promises to justify a cynical view of the world. No government agency, news source or person—myself included—can be the final arbiter of trustworthiness. So-called “fact checkers” are just as biased and unreliable those they label as “fake news.”

But that does not mean we are without hope. Community starts with a personal confidence that the truth exists and that it is knowable. Such confidence overcomes the despair of nihilism. It sets our feet on the path of a mutual and hopeful search for common truth.

Once we have rejected the poisonous notion that nothing is true, we are freed from the tyranny of pure power. Life is not about one person exerting force over others. Life together is made possible by both people gladly acknowledging the authority of truth.

In turn, mutual respect for the truth makes room for mutual respect of persons. The most unkind statements made at Monday’s meeting were personal attacks on the integrity and intelligence of those on the other side of the issue. Such comments were like hammer blows that insulted people and shattered community.

Respect of persons allows people to speak freely about what they truly believe without bludgeoning them as “immoral” or “ignorant.” It removes the walls of our own self-defense while avoiding words that cause reflexive defensiveness in others.

This may seem like a pipe dream, but it was not very long ago that America enjoyed much more of it than she does now. To return there is not an impossible dream. Nor does it require us to remove offending speakers from the debate by force. Rather, the return of civility lies within the power of every citizen.

By committing to learn the truth and eschew every lie, half-truth and exaggeration, you become a force for rebuilding communal confidence in the knowability of truth. By committing to respect your fellow citizen as a fellow seeker of the truth, you tear down barriers and repair the bonds of community.