ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ice-foia-10-26740005187-0005206 1/20

CHRONOLOGY OF EFFORTS TO ACTIVATE COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS(Abstracted for the legal and “opt out” issues)

06/03/2009An internal pre-deployment briefing is held in Chicago. ICE SC headquarters (HQ) personnel

meet with CHI Detention and Removal Office (DRO) field office staff, as well as with Office of

Public Affairs (OPA) and Office of the Chief Counsel (OCC) officials. Representatives from

Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Office of Field Operations, also attend. At this initialmeeting, DRO field office participants express concern that both the Chicago Police Department

(CPD) and the Cook County Sheriff’s Office (CCSO) might be unwilling to cooperate because of

the atmosphere existing in the metropolitan area, where pro-immigrant nongovernmental

organizations (NGOs) have a strong voice and presence.

07/31/2009ICE schedules an interoperability deployment briefing for LEA representatives in metropolitan

Chicago. Significantly, neither CPD nor CCSO attend, although 24 police departments (PDs)from various municipalities within Cook County send representatives.

11/02/2009A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is signed by the Chief of the ISP, acting as the Illinois

SIB. The MOA is thereafter signed on November 20 by Marc Rapp, acting Executive Director

of SC, on behalf of ICE, providing the basis for proceeding with Secure Communities

interoperability within the state.

March 4, 2010David Venturella, Executive Director, ICE SC; Field Office Director, Chicago

DRO; and various field office staff meet with Chief of Staff (CoS), CCSO and

Legal Counsel, CCSO. Mr. Venturella takes the lead for the government inexplaining the premises of the program and the biometric basis of interoperability. A tour of the

ICE facilities including the detention center is conducted and the use of biometrics isdemonstrated. CoS indicates that CCSO is interested in participating in the SC

program because it is grounded in biometrics and not on individual case decisions that could be

viewed as profiling. However, expresses concern that the political dynamics of

the community it serves would be opposed—the bottom line is that CCSO is favorable to

interoperability as a law enforcement tool, but wants to maintain a public position that theirparticipation was required by the federal government.

04/01/2010

Internal emails are exchanged among and between CHI, DRO HQ, and SC HQ regardingreadiness to activate in several Illinois jurisdictions, including Cook County. At the time, it is

expected that Cook County, with the exception of CPD ORIs, will go live on April 13 along withthe other scheduled counties. (Attachment 1 to this chronology is a copy of the email chain.)

04/04/2010

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206


Chronology of Efforts to Activate Cook County, Illinois

DRAFTPrepared Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Revised Monday, June 07, 2010

Emails are exchanged between SC HQ and CJIS with relation to activating Cook County minus

CPD. The CJIS team lead expresses doubts and concern over this plan and requests a three-way

teleconference involving them, ICE and the SIB. (Attachment 2 to this chronology is a copy of

the email chain.)

04/14/2010A preliminary teleconference is held between ICE and CJIS, in order to ensure that CJIS is fully

aware of the political sensitivities surrounding immigration enforcement in Cook County. The

CJIS team lead insists that these matters be aired in the three-way teleconference. A three-wayteleconference is then held between CJIS, ICE, and ISP BOI to discuss activation in Cook

County. At the beginning of the teleconference, the concept of activating all of Cook County

minus the Chicago Police Department’s ORIs (as the Chicago PD had not attended any briefings

to date and are considered a large agency) is discussed. The ISP BOI stated that they were not

concerned with how we activated as long as we kept them informed. As asserted in the

preliminary teleconference, the CJIS team lead repeatedly makes reference to the sensitivitiesand the need to re-validate the list of ORIs without the Chicago PD ORIs included. During the

course of the conference call, the ISP representative becomes increasingly reticent to make acommitment to moving forward in Cook County and indicates that he must consult his superiors

before any further steps are taken toward activation.

04/22/2010of the ISP BOI, sends an email to the former SC Regional Coordinator (RC)

expressing their concern over Cook County’s willingness to move forward with activation,

indicating the need to move the matter further up the ISP organization for review, and suggesting

that ISP might require a written consent from CCSO before they will be willing to activate. The

new RC responds to the Captain’s comments including the suggestion that not activating CookCounty is a disservice to the many independent municipal PDs within the county that wish to

move forward. (Attachment 3 to this chronology is a copy of the email chain.)

04/28/2010The RC initiates telephonic and email communication with and subordinate

of the ISP, to ensure they are in receipt of the

communication of 4/22 referenced above; responds reiterating that the subject is

under higher-level and legal review within the state police. (Attachment 4 to this chronology is a

copy of the email chain.)

04/28/2010CHI Field Office Director (FOD) initiates email communication with CCSO CoS

soliciting official recognition of the agency’s intent to activate Cook County on

May 5. The following day, CoS responds acknowledging that although countyordinance forbids the signing of any agreement, federal statute prohibits infringing on ICE’s

ability to obtain information necessary to determine the immigration status of any individual.The email exchange is forwarded to of the ISP, soliciting their acknowledgement

that the CoS communication constitutes a “go” message sufficient to move forward with

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





activation on May 5 or soon thereafter. (Attachment 5 to this chronology is a copy of the email

chain.)

05/17/2010initiates an inquiry with a CHI Field Office agent asking under what conditions

local jurisdictions may obtain immigration fingerprint information via the FBI’s Special

Handling Unit. The inquiry is forwarded to the RC, who responds by email.1(Attachment 6 to

this chronology is a copy of the email, which was also forwarded to SC HQ.)

05/18/2010CoS sends an email to FOD asking about the status of interoperability

activation in Cook County. The following day, a copy of the inquiry from CoS is

relayed to ISP, by the RC who again asks whether the matter has been reviewed

by ISP’s legal officer and what the outcome has been. (Attachment 7 to this chronology is acopy of the email chain.)

05/27/2010sends the RC an email indicating that legal review has been completed, and the

ISP finds the CCSO communication inadequate to consider it as agreement to activate CookCounty. The RC immediately forwards the email to SC HQ for review and consideration.

(Attachment 8 to this chronology is a copy of the email chain.)

# # # # #

1This inquiry may or may not have been an attempt to determine whether there are ways, short of participating in

interoperability, and without the need to initiate direct contact with ICE or DHS, for Cook County to obtain

biometric data when it so chooses. However, such an interpretation of the query is speculative.

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 1

From:

Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 4:29 PMTo:

Subject: Cook County Activation

Please see attached Cook County ORI list, which only includes eight that will be activated. Ninety-nineare listed on the “removed by state” tab. Presumably, the CHI FO has reviewed the list, but we may wantto double-check.

Please let me know what else I can do to help ensure the deployment goes smoothly.

Thanks,

(Office)

(Mobile)

From:Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 4:18 PMTo:

Subject: FW: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

Please confirm with all partners that this date will be acceptable to all. My chief concern is that I

have not yet seen any traffic regarding which if any ORIs will be excluded from activation – my

understanding was that the Chicago DRO team was hashing this out. Let’s not have any

surprises. We need to ensure that CJIS, USVISIT and the LESC are all onboard. This will be a

huge accomplishment so we all need to ensure that when we activate, it goes off without a hitch.

Thanks,

Secure Communities

- Desk

– Mobile

From:

Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 4:11 PMTo: Penney, Susan E

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Cc: Rapp, Marc ASubject: FW: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

FYI

Detention and Deportation OfficerHQDRO/CAP-Operations

-office-bb-fax

From:Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 4:09 PMTo:

Subject: RE: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

Good Afternoon Gentlemen,

Cook County will be activated on April 13th

.

Thanks

From:

Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 9:01 AM

To: Subject: Re: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

Thanks. Please let me know when (a date) we will be able to activate Cook County, even if it is partially. Ifit is partially, I will need the ORIs that we will activate until we can speak with CPD.

Thanks

Field Office Director101 W. Congress Parkway

Suite Chicago, IL 60605(office)(fax)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6)...

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





From: To:Sent: Thu Apr 01 07:26:21 2010Subject: RE: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

Yes we are as we have been preparing for their activation.

Thanks

From:Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 3:59 PMTo:

Subject: Fw: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

Are we ready to go on these counties?

Field Office Director101 W. Congress ParkwaySuite Chicago, IL 60605

(office)(fax)

From:To: ICE Secure Communities Deployment;

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6)...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Cc: 'Penney, Susan E' < >; 'Moore, Marc J' <

>; 'Rapp, Marc A' << >; 'Palmatier, David' << >;

'Rocha, Richard A' <<

Sent: Wed Mar 31 15:55:47 2010Subject: Interoperability Go / No-Go Decision for Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair, Will andWinnebago, IL Go-live on 4-13-10

To All Vested Parties:

This email constitutes a solicitation for a response on a Go / No-Go decision to activate Interoperability onTuesday, April 13, 2010 for the following county:

1. Lake, IL- Estimated Number of Submissions to Interoperability Per Year: 22,400- Estimated Number of IAQs Per Year: 2,240- Estimated Number of Level 1 IARs Per Year: 336

2. Madison, IL- Estimated Number of Submissions to Interoperability Per Year: 14,413- Estimated Number of IAQs Per Year: 1,441- Estimated Number of Level 1 IARs Per Year: 216

3. McHenry, IL- Estimated Number of Submissions to Interoperability Per Year: 9,745- Estimated Number of IAQs Per Year: 975- Estimated Number of Level 1 IARs Per Year: 146

4. St. Clair, IL- Estimated Number of Submissions to Interoperability Per Year: 7,236- Estimated Number of IAQs Per Year: 724- Estimated Number of Level 1 IARs Per Year: 109

5. Will, IL- Estimated Number of Submissions to Interoperability Per Year: 40,403

- Estimated Number of IAQs Per Year: 4,040- Estimated Number of Level 1 IARs Per Year: 606

6. Winnebago, IL- Estimated Number of Submissions to Interoperability Per Year: 11,891- Estimated Number of IAQs Per Year: 1,189- Estimated Number of Level 1 IARs Per Year: 178

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





To activate Interoperability, a “Go” decision is required from the following participants:1. FBI CJIS Division2. US-VISIT3. OI4. LESC5. DRO Field Office(s) covering the deployment locations6. State

Please provide a single email response on behalf of your organization by 5 PM EDT, Friday, April 2,2010.

If your decision is No-Go, provide your concern in an email along with a suggested alternate date. Ifneeded, a conference call will be set up by Secure Communities to discuss next steps.

On Monday, April 5, 2010 Secure Communities will send out an email communicating the final decision.The Go Live date and time is currently scheduled for Tuesday, April 13, 2010 at 9AM EDT. Please donot reply all to this e-mail.

Regards,ICE Secure Communities Program Management Office (PMO)

Secure Communities Main Number: http://www.ice.gov/secure_communities

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

http://www.ice.gov/secure_communities

http://www.ice.gov/secure_communities

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 2

Fro

To: 'Cc: ' '

< '< >; Penney, Susan E; Rapp, Marc ASent: Thu Apr 08 09:39:44 2010Subject: Re: Cook County

Our request to partially deploy in Cook County is based on political sensitivities in that jurisdiction. Wewere able to leverage a personal/professional relationship that exists with the Sheriff that has cleared theway for us to proceed, albeit partially at first. We continue to work toward full activation of Cook bycontinuing our outreach activities. We feel strongly that once we activate as requested, this will aid us inremoving the remaining obstacles to full activation.

I am checking on your question about SIB support, but I see no reason that they would not support this

"way forward".

Thanks,

Branch Chief, DeploymentSecure Communities, ICE

- desk- mobile

Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO). It containsinformation that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).It is to be controlled, stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHSpolicy relating to FOUO information and is not to be released to the public or other personnel who do nothave a valid "need-to-know" without prior approval of an authorized DHS official. No portion of this reportshould be furnished to the media, either in written or verbal form.

From >To:Cc: < >; >Sent: Thu Apr 08 08:45:44 2010Subject: RE: Cook County

I apologize but I will not be available until later today. However, I have a few questions regarding therequest.

Is the SIB aware of this request? CJIS should be involved with the discussions with the SIB. I would liketo suggest a teleconference between all parties to discuss. For CJIS, this creates additional tracking ofORIs to ensure the entire county eventually goes on line for Interoperability as well as Secure

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Communities. How long would it be before the entire county is activated? Is this an ICE resource issueor somehow related to the local law enforcement readiness?

As you can see, lots of questions……. Please cc Marie and Christina on this request.

Thanks

FBI CJIS DivisionInteroperability InitiativesUnit

From: mailto: ]Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 8:06 AM

To:Subject: Cook County

Good morning

I left you a message yesterday afternoon regarding activation in Cook county. I'm still in training, but would like to

call you during a break. How does your schedule look today?

Thanks,

Branch Chief, Deployment

Secure Communities, ICE

- desk

- mobile

Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO). It contains information

that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be controlled,

stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS policy relating to FOUO

information and is not to be released to the public or other personnel who do not have a valid "need-to-know"

without prior approval of an authorized DHS official. No portion of this report should be furnished to the

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 3

From:

Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 11:25 AMTo:

Subject: FW: ICE

Hi, -

I wanted to let you know that I am taking over Mark's responsibilities as the Secure

Communities coordinator relative to Illinois and a few other states. I apologize for the delay in

responding to / acknowledging your message below.

Let me if I may make a couple of quick observations re Cook County. My first comment is that

it was our understanding 'neutral' in their case meant, because of political and other sensitivities,they were unwilling to make any public endorsements of the program or acknowledge their

participation, not that they were opposed to interoperable connectivity.

My second thought is that if activation of Cook County doesn't go forward, it may constitute an

impediment to a fairly sizable number of police departments within the County, other thanChicago PD, which have evinced an interest in going forward but which rely on CCSO for their

booking and jailing. Am I wrong in this supposition?

But I recognize that the State wants to be certain about this, and certainly understand the internal

discussions being held. We will be doing the same on our end, and trying to clarify the situation

as well. Thank you very much for the heads-up; we are grateful for it.

V/R,

Regional Coordinator

ICE Secure Communities Program Management Office

-----Original Message-----

From [mailto: ]

Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 10:38 AMTo

Cc: Subject: FW: ICE

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





FYI - from Mark's e-mail account

-----Original Message-----From:

[mailto: ]

Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 6:21 PM

To:

Cc:Subject: ICE

Hi

I just wanted to send you a quick note to let you know ISP is having

internal discussions regarding Cook County. We have concerns about theORI list sent to us and Cook County's request to be involved in the program.

spoke to Cook County and they say they areneutral on the program. I am fairly certain that my command will not approve

activation of those ORI's without written notification from Cook County.

I will be talking with command in the next few days on this issue and will

let you know but thought I should give you a heads up because of the

scheduled activation date of May 4th.

Bureau of Identification260 North Chicago Street

Joliet, IL 60432

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 4

From:

Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:15 PMTo:

Cc: ; ;

;

Subject: Re: A quick follow-up

I am forwarding your question up the chain of command here at the Illinois State Police and our

legal office for consideration. I will let you know what I find out regarding this issue.

Bureau of Identification

260 North Chicago StreetJoliet, IL 60432

To < >

Cc

04/28/2010 08:45AMSubject A quick follow-up

I wanted to thank you and for taking the time to discuss Cook County with me theother day. (I would have copied him on this email but didn’t have his electronic address.) As an

FYI, it’s my understanding that ICE’s Chicago Field Office Director, will bereaching out to the SO today (I’m not sure if it will be the Chief of Staff, Undersheriff,

or whom) to continue the dialogue with them as well. I’ll let you know

what feedback I get from that, when it occurs.

And I wanted to be sure that I understood the ISP Bureau of Identification position to be sure Istate it accurately within my organization. Am I correct that if CCSO responds positively to a go

/ no-go message, that would be sufficient for activation to move forward?

Thanks so much in advance, and regards,

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(...

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 5

From: Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:53 PM

To:

Subject: FW: Deployment of Secure Communities to Cook CountyHey,

I wanted you to see this email chain and am forwarding it about as quickly as I have received it. Noteparticularly the message from Cook County Sheriff’s Office Chief of Staff Cunningham.

We interpret this as a carefully worded “go” but are mindful that you will wish to have it reviewed withinyour organization. Please also note that should ISP Bureau of Identification prefer to slip the scheduledactivation date, commensurate with your internal processes and deliberations, we are amenable to that.And of course, I’d be grateful if you keep me posted on the outcome of ISP deliberations.

Many thanks and, as always, best regards,

Respectfully submitted,

ICE Secure CommunitiesRegional Coordinator

From: ailto: ]Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:26 PMTo: Penney, Susan E;Cc: Canty, Rachel E;Subject: FW: Deployment of Secure Communities to Cook County

We need to get this to the SIB. See below. The statement by the COS was approved by their

legal department.

Thanks,

Secure Communities

- Desk

– Mobile

From: ]

Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:19 PMTo: Subject: Fw: Deployment of Secure Communities to Cook County

Good Afternoon Gentlemen,

Please see the response from Bill Cunningham, Chief of Staff for the Cook County Sheriff. Please let me

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





know if I can be of any further assistance.

Thanks

Field Office Director101 W. Congress ParkwaySuiteChicago, IL 60605

(office)(fax)

From: >To: >Sent: Thu Apr 29 14:33:07 2010Subject: RE: Deployment of Secure Communities to Cook County

Director

This e-mail is intended to serve as acknowledgment by the Cook County Sheriff’s Office that we

are aware of your agency’s plan to activate the IDENT/IAFIS on May 5, 2010.

As I have indicated to you in previous discussions, the Cook County Sheriff’s Office believes a

local ordinance may forbid us from signing any official agreement with ICE related to the

IDENT/IAFIS system. However, we are also mindful of federal law (8 USCS 1373) which, inpart, prohibits local and state governments from blocking ICE’s ability to obtain information

regarding the immigration status of any individual, and as such, the system can be activated

without our approval.

The Sheriff’s Office remains committed to cooperating with ICE, as required by law, while at thesame time respecting the civil rights of all individuals arrested and detained in Cook County.

Thank you for providing us with notification.

Sincerely,

Chief of Staff

Cook County Sheriff’s Office

Subject: Deployment of Secure Communities to Cook CountyDate: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:22:34 -0500From:

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





To: ; ; CC: ;

Good Afternoon Sheriff

This email is to notify you that your agency will be activated for the federal data sharingcapability known as IDENT/IAFIS Interoperability on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 at 9AMCST. This capability automatically forwards fingerprints of subjects booked into localcustody to check biometric records in FBI and DHS databases. ICE will be notified ifthe subject is determined to be removable from the country under the Immigration andNationality Act. ICE will prioritize action against removable aliens who have beenconvicted of or are currently charged with an aggravated felony offense.

Please provide a single email response on behalf of your organization by NOON CST,Friday, April 30, 2010 as an acknowledgment of your awareness that SecureCommunities will activate Interoperability on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 for CookCounty, IL. I attempted to make contact with and left a message to

return my call to advise him of this message prior to it being sent. I look forward to yourresponse and to answer any questions or concerns you may have.

Thanks

Field Office DirectorChicago Field Office101 W. Congress Parkway Suite Chicago, IL. 60605Office:Fax:Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO). It contains information

that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be

controlled, stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS policy relating

to FOUO information and is not to be released to the public or other personnel who do not have a valid "need-

to-know" without prior approval of an authorized DHS official. No portion of this report should be furnished

to the media, either in written or verbal form.

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), ...

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (...

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 6

From:Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 9:04 AM

To: Cc:

Subject: Fingerprint query

forwarded your recent fingerprint inquiry. I am copying him on this response.

Only CAR tenprints from interoperability-activated jurisdictions are electronically compared against theIDENT database. Submissions to the FBI Special Processing Unit are not checked in IDENT, which isDHS-owned and maintained. Requests by state or local law enforcement agencies to check other formsof prints against IDENT (e.g. CAR tenprints from non-activated jurisdictions; latents; prints from anunidentified body believed to be an alien; suspect prints; etc., etc.) are handled by special arrangementon a case-by-case basis. The LEA should be encouraged to submit such a request to the closest ICEoffice.

The same is true of photos. You may or may not be aware that the suspect in the recent NYC TimesSquare SUV bomb case was positively identified by means of a photographic line-up. The photo used inthat line-up came from the IDENT database and was supplied courtesy of ICE.

ICE Secure CommunitiesRegional Coordinator

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 7

>To

>

05/19/2010 07:51AM

Subject Cook County activation status review by ISP

Please see the below, most recent exchange between Cook County SO’s Chief of Staff and ICE’s

Chicago Field Office Director. I have been asked to check in with the State Police and find out

where this matter stands. As you know, FBI CJIS will not go forward with interoperability

activation in Cook County until the ISP, acting as the designated SIB, confirms. What may I tell

them about the status of the review by ISP’s legal officer?

Thanks in advance,

ICE Secure Communities


From >

To: W >

Sent: Tue May 18 17:21:20 2010Subject: RE: Deployment of Secure Communities to Cook County Director Wong:

Just thought I would touch base with you and follow up on our last e-mail exchange. Has theSecure Community system been deployed?

Hope all is well.

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





Attachment 8

From:Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:08 AM

To: Penney, Susan E;

Cc:

Subject: URGENT! FW: Cook County activation status review by ISP

This is not good, not good at all. Time perhaps for a full-court press? If you / Marc / Dave have

not had a chance to deal with this, perhaps it can be moved up the priority chain in light of this

negative opinion.

I also suggest that when the dialogue takes place, perhaps their legal officer needs to see the

CAL A.G. letter. He (the legal officer) is clearly taking a narrow view of the subject.

ICE Secure Communities


-----Original Message-----

From: [mailto: ]Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:05 AM

To:;

Subject: Re: Cook County activation status review by ISP

ISP Legal office has reviewed the attached emails and responded with the

following:

I have reviewed all pertinent emails and information on the issue, and in my opinion the e-mailof April 29, 2010, from Cook County Sheriff's Office COS does not constitute a

request to be included or to participate in the Secure Communities program. Chief

acknowledges that the participation of Cook County Sheriff's Office may be prohibited by local

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C) (b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.00

8/7/2019 ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206





ordinance. Chief further acknowledgement that "the system can be activated

without our approval" evidences CCSO's position that they have in fact not given approval.

In the absence of written documentation from CCSO requesting to activate the program and toparticipate in the program, my recommendation is that the ISP not take part in the activation of

Cook County. I agree with your position as previously expressed, that the ISP does not authorize

activation on behalf of local agencies, as we are merely the conduit for the exchange of

information between the local agency and the FBI/ICE.

Interim Chief Legal Counsel

Illinois State Police

If you have further questions don't hesitate to contact me.

Bureau of Identification

260 North Chicago Street

Joliet, IL 60432

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

(b)(6), (b)(7)(C)

ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206

Documents

Transcript of ICE FOIA 10-2674.0005187-0005206