Posted on 09/30/2006 9:14:20 AM PDT by radar101
ESCONDIDO – A proposed ordinance that would penalize landlords for renting to illegal immigrants was released by the city yesterday, and it is “entirely consistent with federal law,” City Attorney Jeffrey Epp said.
The controversial ordinance, which will come up for a City Council vote Wednesday, would allow the city to suspend the business licenses of landlords found to be housing illegal immigrants. It also would fine landlords who don't comply, and allow misdemeanor charges for subsequent violations.
The six-page ordinance says “the state and federal government lack the resources to properly protect the citizens of the city of Escondido from the adverse effects of the harboring of illegal aliens, and the criminal activities of some illegal aliens.”
Under its provisions, an action against a landlord would begin when a written complaint is submitted to the city by a resident, an official or a business. A valid complaint would include an allegation that “describes the alleged violators,” as well as the actions constituting the violation, and the date and location where such actions are happening.
“A complaint which alleges a violation solely or primarily on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, or race shall be deemed invalid and shall not be enforced,” the ordinance says.
After a valid complaint, a landlord would have to provide documentation of a tenant's immigration status. The city would then submit the paperwork to the federal government to verify the status of the person or persons in question.
If renters were found to be in the country illegally, a property owner would be notified of the violation. If the owner fails to “correct a violation of this section” – in other words remove the renters – within five days, the city would revoke or suspend the business license allowing the property to be rented.
During the suspension, the owner will not be permitted to collect any rent, payment, fee or any other form of compensation from the tenant or occupant of the unit in question. For each day the illegal immigrants are allowed to stay, unspecified fines would accrue.
Epp and other city lawyers have been working on the wording of the amendment to the city's municipal code since the council directed him to do so Aug. 16, following an emotional public hearing.
If the ordinance passes Wednesday – from previous comments by council members it appears that it will be adopted on a 3 to 2 vote – Escondido will become the first California city to enact such a law. It will also be by far the largest city in the United States to do so, Epp said.
The city is also likely to become a defendant in a number of lawsuits. Critics of the ordinance say it could end up costing the city hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in legal fees.
In Epp's explanation of the ordinance to the council, he says it will be the business license division of the city that enforces the requirements of the code. The approach taken by Escondido would be similar to an ordinance enacted in Hazleton, Penn., earlier this year that is being challenged in court.
“We mostly looked at existing federal law, some Supreme Court and 9th Circuit cases,” Epp said in an interview, referring to the U.S. Court of Appeals that covers California. “We focused on ones that overturned Proposition 187 and tried to avoid those pitfalls.”
In 1994, California voters passed Proposition 187 by a vote of 59 percent to 41 percent. The measure attempted to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving benefits or public services. But after two rounds of litigation in the federal courts, nearly all of its provisions were invalidated.
In his report, however, Epp says the courts have left “considerable room for states and municipalities to act in the field” and that Escondido's ordinance “is consistent with federal law on the subject of harboring illegal aliens.”
On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union wrote a letter to the city urging it not to enact the ordinance, saying it was prepared to launch an immediate legal challenge:
“Such an ordinance is likely to put landlords between a rock and a hard place – on the one hand subjecting them to penalties if they misinterpret a renter's immigration status, and on the other hand exposing them to the risk of violating state and federal fair housing laws by profiling persons of certain racial or ethnic groups as more or less likely to be citizens or documented immigrants.”
Numerous immigrants-rights groups and individuals have said they also would be taking legal action if the ordinance passes.
J. Harry Jones: (760) 737-7579; jharry.jones@uniontrib.com
Escondido illegal immigration ordinance Provisions:
Action begins when a resident, an official or business files a valid complaint with the city.
Landlord is then required to produce proof of a tenant's legal status.
City verifies documents with the federal government.
Property owner would be notified of a violation.
Business license suspended if illegal tenants not removed within five days.
I support the efforts of the city to combat the influx of illegal aliens, but the burden should be on the government, not private citizens.
Here's how it works: City official responds to a complaint of multiple families living in a single family dwelling. Illegals respond that they are family members. Officials not allowed to check identity. Case closed.
If the private citizen is the one profiting from the business transaction, why shouldn't the private citizen be responsible for making sure the transaction is legal?
It's not any more difficult than doing the rest of the due dilligence in renting to someone - you are just adding in another step.
Yeah, illegals are really hard to spot. (sarc)
There's still a safety factor that the city has the right to limit the number of people in a building, why is housing different?
I just sent you a freep mail regarding this.
I'm with you. I view this as a government generated problem. All they have to do is turn off the magnet.
They can find ways to go over a fence and under it. The reason WHY they want to come here will not change with the fence.
"Build a fence and you don't have to worry about enacting the other policies, as they wouldn't be here in the first place. Duh..."
===
Exactly! Makes much more sense than to keep trying to pass and enforce unenfoceable laws inside the US, trying to make very citizen into an immigration agent, and threaten them with jail, instead of keeping out the illegals in the first place.
"It is an attempt to shift the burden of enforcement from the government to someone else, complete with penalties.
The government is not doing its job and is trying to dump its responsibility onto property owners."
===
I agree completely. What is surprising that people who say they are conservatives are enthusiastically endorsing this government control of private enterprise.
As someone else said, why don't they build a fence instead.
"If they pass this ordinance then the city needs to provide an office for landlords to come to vet their tennants. Otherwise this ordinance shifts an unfair burden on the landlord. Is it really the landlord's duty to enforce the immigration laws?"
===
My sentiments exactly.
"Yeah, illegals are really hard to spot. (sarc)"
===
As a matter of fact they are.
Note that in CA you can't even ask for ID when voting, so if someone renting is going to start asking for citizenship papers, he'll be sued for discrimination.
And considering that there are millions of legal Hispanic residents, and many illegals also work, it IS hard to spot them.
Suppose the landlord rents to legal residents, he checked out, who, then bring it illegals to live there. What is the landlord supposed to do, go to the house every night, count noses and demand papers?!
"They can find ways to go over a fence and under it. The reason WHY they want to come here will not change with the fence."
No single thing will stop illegal immigration entirely (including a fence). But, a fence will make it much more difficult and reduce the number significantly.
"Proposition 187 .... But after two rounds of litigation in the federal courts, nearly all of its provisions were invalidated."
===
I guess you are not supposed to prevent illegals from getting benefits, but landlords will be thrown in jail, if they rent knowingly or unknowingly to illegals.
Make the fine stiff enough that it wipes out any profits made by hiring illegals and cheating the system. Al Capone went to jail for tax evasion, not for any of the other stuff he did - good precedent.
The tatics you outline would go a long way towards keeping out the illegals who only come here for the benefits, but they will not do anything to stop terrorist and drug runners from crossing over. A fence would go a long way in helping to stop terrorist and drug dealers from crossing, plus we need to enforce our existing laws on immigration to the max and stop our catch and release policies.
agreed..a fence would help, but for how long and how effectively? People can go around, under and through fences, unless we have guardsmen every 100 yards to watch it..my point is to take away the incentive for them to come here..
terrorists and drug runners will certainly try and come in with or without a fence..they'll come in boats, planes etc..
The ordinance provides for the city to vet tennants upon request of the landlord. It can be found online by going to:
http://www.ci.escondido.ca.us/government/agendas/PublishedMeetings.htm
Choose the 10/4/2006 meeting, scroll down to the 7pm session, then click on the link for the ordinance. It'll pop up on the right in the form of a large .tif file.
The local 'open borders' crowd have been going all out to defeat the measure, including death threats to Council members, boycotts of Council member's businesses, and imported professional agitators. Council meetings are usually polite affairs, attended by staff and a few interested citizens. That's all changed. This week's routine meeting featured half a dozen plain clothed police officers acting as bodyguards for the Council members. Typical leftist tactics, when your position has no rational merit, threaten those who don't agree.
Those in northern San Diego county who wish to attend the meeting at 7pm on Wednesday night should plan to come early, since the illegals generally try to pack the chambers. The meeting will also be streamed to the net at: http://escondido.12milesout.com/Escondido/Default.aspx
I urge anyone who has the slightest doubt about the need to control our borders to tune in.
Probably but a lack of a fence did not create this problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.