For months, ever since other Orange County cities began taking stands
against California’s new “sanctuary law,” Tustin has faced pressure to do the
same.
In contrast to what is typically a staid affair, Tustin council
meetings increasingly have been dominated by passionate opponents of SB 54 –
which, under certain circumstances, limits interaction between local police
forces and immigration officials.
Finally, city staff decided to reach some sort of closure by putting
the issue on the agenda. Last week, council members voted 3-2 to send a
resolution to state leaders reaffirming the city’s 2017 letter expressing
opposition to the bill, which then was still a work in progress.
Dated March 22, 2017, the city’s original letter was signed by all five
council members. But amendments to SB 54 before it became law addressed many of
the concerns stated, City Manager Jeff Parker explained.
The original version of the law was drastically bad. It forbade all communications with ICE.
All of them,
As it is now written, Parker said, “SB 54 does not prohibit our police
department from exchanging information with ICE regarding Part I offenses” –
among them, murder, rape, burglary, child abuse and felony drug possession.
Yes, but as I and many others had shared during the public comment, many of those Part I offenses often get reduced to misdemeanors, and those illegal alien criminals end up released back onto our streets.
That is wrong!
So far, SB 54 has shown no correlation with the city’s crime rate,
Parker said, adding that Part I offenses have decreased by 12 percent since the
law went into effect in January.
How many criminals announce that they are illegal aliens? How many times have the Tustin police officers looked into the immigration status of suspects? Almost never. That fact is not a meaningful statistic to gauge whether the SB 54 has had a significant effect for better or for worse on the crime wave going through Orange County and throughout the state of California.
But much of Parker’s information got lost in the emotional immigration
debate that followed.
The debate at the public podium by and large was respectful. I don't recall a lot of emotion from our side, but I do recall hearing a lot of misinformation from the other side.
Speakers repeatedly claimed that “the U.S. Constitution trumps the
state constitution” – with an emphasis on “trumps” – despite Parker’s earlier
assertion that “it’s our obligation to follow the state constitution just as
much as the federal constitution, until a law is determined to be unconstitutional.”
Amen to that! We are not ashamed of our President. We support his consistent efforts to uphold the rule of law and to ensure that immigration laws are followed and enforced to their fullest extent in every state, including the state of California.
Torrance activist Arthur Schaper – now a familiar presence at city
council meetings throughout Southern California – chastised not only SB-54 but
also the “perverse agenda” of the LGBTQ community.
You will be seeing more of me, no doubt about that!
Ultimately, some 50 people took the podium, some from other counties.
About half of the speakers condemned SB 54. But around three-fourths of the 25
who identified themselves as Tustin residents voiced support for the bill.
This statistic is so misleading. The report forgets to mention that two former city councilmembers arrived, and they spoke on behalf of a number of residents in the city who oppose SB 54, too.
Using language that has become common in Orange County city council
meetings, one person claimed that immigrants “come across the border with the
intent to lazily get on welfare and use that to buy drugs.”
Those who break into this country are not immigrants, but illegal aliens. Still the local press insists on violating this norm of language accuracy. Very troubling.
Lauren Austin, a native of Tustin — where Hispanics make up 40 percent
of the population — called the visitors “angry instigators who have been up and
down the state of California spouting the same hateful rhetoric.”
What difference does it make what the Hispanic population may be in the city of Tustin? Are they suggesting that the vast majority of illegal aliens in any city are Hispanic? That is racist!
“They don’t have a vested interest in Tustin and their presence here is
fleeting,” Austin said. “Your decision, however, will have a lasting impact. I
hope you consider the message you are sending Tustin’s youngest citizens.”
Their decision does have a lasting impact, and my presence is not fleeting. Orange County is going to see a lot more of me in the days and weeks to come.
But Tustin resident Darlene Savord argued that those from other places
“are concerned that your vote will affect their cities.” A failure to reject SB
54, she said, could make Tustin a “magnet city for illegal criminal aliens.”
Darlene organized the pressure and activism against the city of Tustin. I didn't come to the city council meeting until that very day when the city council voted to affirm their opposition to SB 54.
Mayor Al Murray and councilmen Alan Bernstein and Chuck Puckett voted
in favor of the resolution, recommended by city staff. Councilwomen Letitia
Clark and Becky Gomez opposed it.
Good for them. This is excellent that the leadership of the city did the right thing and affirmed their commitment to the rule of law and to ensure that American citizens are protected at all costs.
Gomez wiped away tears as she spoke about the “injustices” her parents
faced when forced to attend segregated schools in California. Worried about
anti-immigrant politics, Gomez said, she carried her passport while traveling
around the country this summer.
What does illegal immigration have to do with race? What, exactly? The fact that Ms. Gomez gets all teary-eyed about the race issue shows how racist she is. Illegal immigration is not about targeting any one group of people. It's about removing from our country people who entered illegally. This is about legal status, not skin color.
Shame on Councilwoman Gomez for making it about race. She wants to cry tears? She should shed tears for the mothers and fathers who have buried their children, murdered by illegal aliens.
“People think they should be able to come here and disrupt our
meetings,” Gomez said, telling the audience, “You have no idea of the impact of
your words.”
What disruptions? Incredible. Too much fake news, not enough reality.
Even council members voting in favor of the resolution noted the
uncomfortable discourse.
“I have sat on the dais for over 20 years,” Puckett said. “This is
probably the most divisive issue to come before us.”
Discussions on serious issues are going to bring in upset and conflict. City politics cannot rest merely on the idea that everyone should come together and agree on everything all the time. There is no excuse for running away from tough issues just because the elected officials fear the conflicts which may result. Give me a break.
Final Reflection
The city of Tustin, as an elected body, did the right thing, and it is good news for all considered that they took a stand with the rule of law instead of the lawlessness which has become all too commonplace in California.
I am so proud of Darlene Savord for spearheading the effort to get Tustin on record opposing SB 54. This kind of activism makes a difference!
No comments:
Post a Comment