60 Minnesota-Based Organizations Call for De-Escalation of Tensions
After the separate fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens in Minnesota by federal agents, more than 60 CEOs and leaders from companies headquartered in the city issued a letter calling for a de-escalation of tensions and for authorities to work towards “real solutions.”
The letter was published by the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, with company leaders signing at the bottom. The companies represented included 3M, BlueCross and BlueShield, General Mills, Target, and 73 other national and local organizations. Minnesota’s professional sports teams were also among the signatories, including the Vikings, Timberwolves, Twins, Lynx, Wild, and Minnesota United.
The letter was published on 25 January, one day after the killing of Alex Pretti, 37, an intensive care nurse for Veterans Affairs. According to detailed analysis of several videos of the shooting, The New York Times concluded that Pretti had been holding a cell phone, presumably filming, while standing between a federal agent and a woman who had been pushed to the ground. After Pretti was pepper-sprayed and beat on the head with the pepper spray cannister as he was being forced onto the ground by several U.S. Border Patrol agents, agents discovered he had a firearm on his belt, and shouted "gun." One agent disarmed him while Pretti's arms were pinned above his head, still holding a phone in one hand and his glasses in another. An instant after Pretti was disarmed, an agent shot Pretti in the back. That same agent and another fired multiple additional shots as the agents who had been wrestling Pretti to the ground dispersed and Pretti lay on the ground motionless.
Pretti’s death occurred only weeks after the fatal shooting of Renee Macklin Good by a U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer. Two days before Pretti’s death, hundreds of smaller businesses in Minnesota intentionally shuttered their doors for an entire day—part of a statewide protest against the aggressive immigration enforcement efforts.
While smaller organizations have voiced their opposition to ICE efforts in the city, leaders of larger companies have abstained from addressing the charged issue until the letter, according to The New York Times. The Times noted that the letter did not call for a specific action, did not condemn Pretti’s shooting, did not call on federal authorities to curb their tactics, nor ask protesters to change their behavior.
The decidedly neutral letter also comes after groups of employees from several organizations have called on leaders to cancel contracts with ICE. In the Minnesota-St. Paul area, Target workers called out of work, many out of fear of workplace violence linked to the occasional appearance of ICE agents in stores and parking lots, as well as the arrest of two employees who were U.S. citizens on company property.
“Since the ICE operations began, employees, community members, and activists have called on Target, Delta, Home Depot, Hilton, Enterprise, and other U.S. businesses to denounce the operations publicly, cut contracts with the Department of Homeland Security, and ban ICE officials from using their corporate spaces,” Axios reported.
As for the companies who signed the letter, there’s likely an understanding that the current administration is very pro-business and aware that ICE and Border Patrol operations are significantly impacting the city’s economy, according to Fred Burton, executive director of protective intelligence at Ontic, who spoke with Security Management.
The state of Minnesota and Minneapolis filed a lawsuit earlier in January, claiming immigration operations have had “devastating economic impacts” and asked a judge to halt the operations, PBS reported. “The lawsuit asserted that some businesses have reported sales drops up to 80 percent.”
Beyond economic impacts, business and security leaders have other potential threats to consider, Burton adds. With the publication of the letter, Burton says that internal CSOs for any of the signatories should be searching for any adverse intelligence that may impact an organization’s CEO, family, or company. “I would have a close watch on the living threat assessment that hopefully I have in place to monitor the various threats that ebb and flow in today’s world,” Burton says.
Those threats could also be internal, especially given how large some of the companies are. “You’ve got to think about it from an employee perspective, as well,” Burton says. “You have to make sure that HR is reaching out to see how staff are coping with the events that have taken place.”
Security teams should also remain abreast of local protests and the impact they have on local branches, employees, and the community. “You have to worry about notification processes for staff, what kind of emergency alerts are you pushing out. Are you telling everybody to work from home? And then, obviously, if you’re one of these corporations, enhance physical security of those buildings and locations,” Burton says.
Companies with the advantage of a GSOC will likely be able to keep tabs on any developing incidents that may impact businesses, although notifications from local law enforcement will also be of help. ”These companies have been, no doubt, ramping up their intelligence collection of localized events and incidents that take place in and around their locations,” Burton says. Other tactics, like geofencing store branches or other facilities can help with monitoring for events that can impact employees.
“You have to think about how you’re going to message that [information] and push that out to your staff and executives,” he adds.
He would also be on the lookout for any doxxing of a CEO or his or her family, which could result in harassment, swatting, or other attacks. “Now that your CEO has put their name on this letter, you’re going to be very attuned. You’re going to elevate your threat intelligence capture during this heightened threat environment,” Burton says. “The one benefit, if there is one in this case, is that there’s 60 CEOs that have signed on to this. There’s almost a benefit by having that many versus just one CEO getting out there, saying whatever, that kind of draws the hate specifically towards that person.”
