.png)
Commissioners clarify BIDEN agenda item has ‘nothing to do with detention centers’
Commissioners voted last week to apply for a federal grant to purchase protective equipment for the Bastrop County Sheriff’s Office, over objections from residents who feared the funding could draw the county into immigration enforcement.
The application discussed July 13 targets Category 2 of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bridging Immigration-Related Deficits Experienced Nationwide (BIDEN) program, which funds law enforcement technology and equipment. County officials said the application does not seek funding for detention facilities and has no connection to immigration enforcement.
Applications for the DOJ’s $3 billion grant program opened June 15 after it was authorized under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The DOJ has not released a list of applicants, making it unclear how many Texas counties have applied.
The grant would provide ballistic helmets, armor plates, tasers, trauma kits and other protective equipment for the Sheriff’s Office Special Response Team, which investigates violent crime, drug trafficking and human trafficking, according to Assistant Auditor Nicole Moore.
“Funding can be used to purchase and support multi-year implementation, ongoing subscriptions, training and maintenance of equipment … to address critical resource gaps and enhance capacity to support criminal justice operations,” Moore said.
The county clarified it is only applying for equipment funding and not for the grant category that allows construction of temporary detention centers.
Much of the public opposition centered on concerns the grant’s overall language referencing immigration enforcement could eventually pull the county deeper into federal immigration efforts.
Edie Clark, speaking on behalf of Central Texas Interfaith, asked commissioners to postpone the vote until residents could learn more about the program.
“We have many questions about this, but few answers,” Clark said. “Will accepting federal funding mean that our county law enforcement will have to prioritize immigration enforcement over the other important work they do to keep us all safe?”
Other residents said they feared the grant could increase surveillance technology or pave the way for detention facilities. Critics were sharp with commissioners for moving forward without additional public discussion.
County officials repeatedly rejected those claims.
Moore reiterated the county is only seeking funds for safety equipment and the Sheriff’s Office is due for updated protective gear.
County Auditor Jennifer Pacheco added her office would ensure funds are spent only as approved.
“I can guarantee that these funds will not be spent for a detention center,” Pacheco said. “This is only for equipment for our sheriff’s deputies to keep them safe.”
Sheriff Maurice Cook said the grant would allow the county to replace equipment it already purchases at a lower cost to taxpayers.
“Anytime we can save the county money, we’re looking for ways of doing that,” Cook said. “I would say this would be a benefit to the county, our office and the safety of our people.”
Commissioners acknowledged that listing all three grant categories on the agenda item contributed to public confusion, since the county ultimately chose to pursue only equipment funding — Category 2.
“We’ve clearly stated what we’re planning on doing here,” Commissioner Butch Carmack said. “It’s got nothing to do with detention centers, flock cameras, whatever … We’re using this for safety equipment for our sheriff’s office — period.”
“I would say this would be a benefit to the county, our office and the safety of our people.”
— Sheriff Maurice Cook
