August 13, 2010

Mr. Matt Marshman

Acting Assistant Director
Office of Acquisition Management
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Department of Homeland Security
801 I Street NW
Washington DC 20536

RE: NOTICE OF INTENT TO TERMINATE INTERGOVERNMENTAL

SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR HOUSING FEDERAL DETAINEES
WITH THE SUFFOLK COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

Dear Mr. Marshman:

Pursuant to Article VIII of the above agreement,1 executed by the parties on July 16,
2003, please accept this correspondence of as written notice of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s
Department’s intention to terminate the agreement sixty (60) days from now. The
termination of the contract will therefore be effective on October 12, 2010.

Notwithstanding the consistent efforts this Department has made to work with ICE
officials concerning the detention of federal detainees at the Suffolk County House of
Correction since 2003, we have encountered a staggering lack of communication and respect
from representatives of your agency. A longstanding point of contention has been the refusal
of ICE officials to provide us with documentation directly relating to our facility. These
requests have included results of audits conducted at the Suffolk County House of
Correction. One would think that we would automatically receive the results of an audit into
our facility and practices. We receive them from the Commonwealth’s Department of
Correction at the conclusion of every audit. With ICE however, not only do we not receive
them as a matter of course, but it has gotten to the point where we need to beg and plead with
representatives in the Boston Field Office for this very basic information. This is completely
unacceptable.

1
Agreement No. ACB-3-H-0007
Mr. Matt Marshman
Acting Assistant Director
Office of Acquisition Management
August 13, 2010
Page 2 of 3

Even more concerning, however, has been the chronic resistance we encounter when a
detainee has lodged some type of complaint about an aspect of his incarceration. It this
Department’s policy and practice to respond promptly to such complaints, regardless of where
the inmate or detainee is housed, investigate the complaint and if it is credible, address it. Not
only has ICE generally refused to provide us with copies of complaints they receive, but they
have also inexplicably failed to provide us with copies of completed investigations into those
complaints despite our repeated requests for such documents.

The federal investigation into detainee Pedro Tavarez’ October 2009 death at a Boston
hospital is the most recent example of your agency’s baffling disregard for this Department and
its work. As is our practice, we worked cooperatively with your investigators as they looked into
the circumstances of Mr. Tavares’ death. We allowed the investigators full access to our facility,
staff, documents, and surveillance tapes. We asked only one thing in return: that they provide us
a copy of the completed investigation. The investigation was apparently completed more than a
month ago. Although a copy was apparently provided to local Boston media, we were never
even notified that the investigation had concluded, let alone given a copy of the report.

This Department prides itself on its productive partnerships; with other law enforcement
agencies, community-based agencies, not-for-profit organizations and even individual
volunteers. We treat our partners as we expect to be treated. Our review of your report’s
conclusions, the evidence on which those conclusions were based and ICE’s failure to share the
report in a timely manner2 raises troubling questions regarding the accuracy, objectivity and true
purpose of your investigation.

ICE’s responses to our requests for information are consistent with its approach to our
request for an increase in the daily rate pursuant to contract terms first agreed to in 2003.
Although the agreement specifically allows for a request to modify the daily rate of
compensation after twelve months, and then annually thereafter, the Sheriff’s Department did not
seek to increase this rate until January 22, 2009. The process of negotiating a modification to
this daily rate has been exasperating in the extreme. Senior Department staff has expended
countless hours compiling information in support of its request; discussing proposed changes in
contract language internally and with your office on multiple occasions; and compiling and
supplying additional documentation requested by your office during these discussions. After
numerous inquiries into the status of negotiations and a wait of several months, we were told that
the federal government had unilaterally decided to suspended discussions in all cases where
contracts were being re-negotiated. To this day, while both the fixed and variable costs of
operating Building 8 have risen significantly, you continue to reimburse at a rate that is more
than seven years old.

Mr. Matt Marshman

2
We finally received a copy of the report on Friday, August 6th. At that point, it had been in the possession of local
media for at least 10 days.
Acting Assistant Director
Office of Acquisition Management
August 13, 2010
Page 3 of 3

On August 4th, I received an email from you acknowledging receipt of the SCSD rate
increase proposal, dated March 2009. You indicate that ICE would now like to re-open
negotiations, but ask that we resubmit our proposal because the one you have is “somewhat
outdated” and ICE now requires that proposals be submitted through its new automated
application. The fact that our proposal is only outdated because ICE declined to deal with it in a
timely manner and that re-submission under the new system will require many more hours of
staff time is apparently irrelevant to you. It is not, especially given the entire context of our
experience with your agency, irrelevant to us.

We are aware that your agency considers this facility and the way it is operated to be a
model for others across the country. As a review of your own audits reveals, that is because we
meet or exceed all of your required standards and have implemented procedures and provided
services you do not require, but that we think are appropriate to humane treatment of detainees.
Our countless accommodations to your many requests over the years have yielded little or no
reciprocity. Please know that we think Bruce Chadbourne does his job well and we have a good
relationship with him. He can only work with the information he is provided. The fact that
neither he nor Jim Martin was aware of the completion or dissemination of the aforementioned
report is quite telling.

Please make arrangements to have all federal detainees removed from the Suffolk County
House of Correction by October 12, 2010. If ICE requires that notification of this Intent to
Terminate the Intergovernmental Service Agreement be provided to persons not listed on this
letter, please notify me in writing immediately.

Sincerely,

James M. Davin
General Counsel

cc: Andrea J. Cabral, Sheriff

Gerard Horgan, Superintendent
Bruce Chadbourne, Field Operations Director, ICE
Jisun “Sunny” Kim, Contract Specialist, ICE