Marana advocates say town can still block ICE detention center despite signed deal

For Marana residents, a proposed immigration detention center on West Silverbell Road is not settled simply because Management and Training Corporation has signed a contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Local advocates argue that the town still controls key approvals, including business licensing, building permits, zoning decisions and enforcement of nuisance laws. About three dozen people gathered Tuesday outside the Ed Honea Marana Municipal Complex to urge town officials to use those powers to prevent the former prison from reopening or impose strict accountability on its operator.

The group, Pima Resists ICE, said Marana should not treat the federal contract as a reason to step aside. Daniela Ugaz, an attorney and member of the group, argued that the town is not a party to the agreement between ICE and MTC, which means federal officials cannot issue the local approvals needed to operate the facility. PRICE members said they want the Town Council to deny MTC a business license. They planned to raise the issue during the council’s call to the public Tuesday night.

The proposed facility would be a significant expansion from the property’s former use as a state prison. Rep. Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona, said the contract could be worth more than $355 million and could authorize as many as 775 beds. The prison previously held 513 people when it operated for the state. MTC has said the site could reopen within 60 days, although questions remain about what work may be needed before it is ready to receive detainees.

MTC operated the prison for Arizona for almost three decades before the state closed it in 2023. The company purchased the property from the state last year for $15 million. The facility has remained vacant since then, and Grijalva questioned whether a building that has sat unused for years is prepared to resume operations. She also criticized the federal government for leaving local governments to handle oversight concerns connected to an immigration detention contract. If the center opens, she said she intends to conduct oversight visits, in part because its location would make more frequent visits possible.

The debate also includes conflicting claims about conditions at the former prison. Alex Randall, who worked there for MTC from 2021 to 2022, said Arizona Department of Corrections investigators recorded at least three allegations of staff sexual abuse during the period examined by a 2023 federal review. Randall’s account was previously reported by LOOKOUT and The Intercept, and he has filed a complaint with the criminal division of the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. He said he came forward after learning that the facility might reopen as an ICE center because he did not want to remain silent about what he believed were serious incidents.

A 120 page Prison Rape Elimination Act audit reviewed by KGUN presents a different official record. The audit, conducted October 16 through 18, 2023, and certified December 1 of that year, reported no allegations of sexual abuse or sexual harassment at the facility during the previous 24 months. It also found the prison fully compliant with all 45 federal PREA standards. The competing accounts have added to calls for transparency and independent oversight before any detainees are brought to Marana.

PRICE is also challenging whether the proposed operation is allowed by the property’s zoning. Ugaz said the group’s attorneys sent a letter to Marana’s development services department questioning whether a for profit detention center fits within the permitted uses. She said the applicable code lists homes, businesses, factories and nonprofits, with other uses presumed to be prohibited. Based on that interpretation, the group contends a privately operated detention center does not qualify and should require additional scrutiny or be rejected.

The advocates are asking Marana, the Pima County Attorney’s Office and the Arizona Attorney General’s Office to examine whether the facility could constitute a public nuisance. Their concerns include possible effects from lighting, water consumption, wastewater, traffic and demands on emergency services. Bennett Burke, a Marana resident and PRICE member, also cited town rules allowing a business license to be denied or revoked for fraud, misrepresentation or violations of law. He pointed to previous comments by Town Manager Terry Rozema that the town’s goal would be appropriate oversight and humane treatment if people were detained in Marana, arguing that those statements raise questions about what authority the town believes it has.

MTC has said it will meet or exceed ICE’s national detention standards, treat detainees compassionately and restore local jobs when the center reopens. Marana has described its past relationship with MTC as professional and cooperative. The town and the company had not responded to KGUN’s requests for comment on the advocates’ claims at the time of the report. For residents, the next decisions will likely center on the town’s interpretation of its zoning and licensing rules, along with whether local officials act before MTC’s proposed 60 day reopening window.