Flush with cash, CBP plans more Border Patrol stations, expanded checkpoints in AZ

People in and around Tucson could soon see a major expansion of federal immigration infrastructure across Southern Arizona, including a new Border Patrol station planned on 87 acres near Three Points and a larger checkpoint on Interstate 19 near Amado. The projects are part of a broader package of planned stations and checkpoint upgrades that could cost more than $500 million in Arizona, funded by billions provided to federal immigration agencies through the One Big Beautiful Bill. Local officials, landowners, conservationists and tribal leaders say Customs and Border Protection has offered too little information about why the projects are needed or how they could affect nearby communities.

The Department of Homeland Security’s Acquisition Planning Forecast System lists three proposed Border Patrol stations, in Three Points, Sonoita and Casa Grande, along with checkpoint expansions on I 19 near Amado and on I 8 east of Dateland. The Arizona Daily Star also identified a separate, previously unannounced plan involving the checkpoint on West Arivaca Road, west of I 19. CBP has contacted some county officials and other stakeholders, but residents have not yet been given a formal opportunity to comment on the projects.

That lack of public notice has drawn criticism from Russ McSpadden, a Southwest conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. He said CBP appears to be moving ahead without following the public engagement process generally associated with the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. The Center submitted comments on four of the projects even though, McSpadden said, the agency had not broadly announced the comment periods. He called for CBP and the Bureau of Land Management to restart public scoping for the Three Points station, with clear project information and broad notice to affected communities.

The Three Points proposal would place a new station on BLM land along State Route 86, just east of the Tohono O’odham Nation. A letter from CBP to Pima County said the agency is preparing an environmental assessment for the 87 acre site. Federal planning documents describe a facility with room for 500 agents and a projected cost exceeding $100 million. CBP says the station would strengthen security in the Tucson Area of Responsibility and increase the likelihood of apprehending people who enter the country unlawfully.

Pima County Supervisor Jen Allen questioned whether another large facility is necessary given the infrastructure already operating or under consideration in Southern Arizona. She described the combined projects as a massive buildout and said she could not understand the need beyond what she characterized as a show of force. The proposed Three Points site also concerns conservation advocates because it falls within the ranges of the threatened cactus ferruginous pygmy owl and the endangered Pima pineapple cactus. McSpadden said any review should examine not only construction on the site, but also the effects of expanded patrol activity on surrounding habitat.

Tohono O’odham Nation Chairman Verlon Jose said tribal leaders have been informed about the Three Points plan but have not had meaningful consultation with CBP. In a statement, he said the Nation considers the project wasteful and unnecessary, arguing that existing joint security measures have made the border secure in the Nation’s area. Jose also criticized the planned spending at a time when families are struggling with the cost of groceries and gasoline. His comments come as the Nation continues to oppose federal plans for a double border wall along its southern boundary with Mexico, a dispute that includes a pending federal lawsuit.

The Sonoita proposal has raised a different set of concerns because one possible location is near Elgin Elementary School, which serves kindergarten through eighth grade. CBP has told Santa Cruz County officials that its preferred site is an undeveloped 40 acre parcel near the school. A second option covers 75 acres along State Routes 82 and 83, close to the existing, smaller Sonoita station. The new facility is estimated to cost more than $100 million. Dan Erickson, the school’s principal and district superintendent, said the district supports Border Patrol and considers the agency a strong partner, but wants to ensure that a station next to the school would not interfere with education or student safety. He compared the idea to placing a prison near a school.

Residents near the I 19 checkpoint north of Tubac have already opposed a separate expansion proposal. CBP wants to move the checkpoint onto a 17 acre parcel east of the highway and Santa Cruz County officials have said the agency intends to use eminent domain if necessary. Laurinda Oswald, the property owner approached by CBP, said she plans to fight any attempt to take her land and does not believe the expansion is needed. The Arizona Land and Water Trust also rejected a request to sell its property near the West Arivaca Road checkpoint. Executive Director Cameron Becker said the trust purchased the land for conservation and not for subdivision or development. Local residents have said that checkpoint is frequently unmanned.

CBP did not answer detailed questions about the projects, including requests for evidence supporting the checkpoint expansions and new stations. After questions were submitted on Aug. 19 and again on Sept. 15, spokesman John Mennell provided a general statement saying funding from the federal law would pay for long overdue improvements, replace aging facilities, strengthen operations and help agents stop human and drug smugglers. He said the projects remain in their early planning stages and that CBP will seek community input as potential locations are evaluated. That promise has not satisfied critics, who say public involvement should happen before land is acquired and project plans are advanced. For Tucson area residents, the proposals could mean new construction, increased federal activity and lasting changes to rural communities and public lands, even as the agency has yet to publicly explain the full need or timeline.