Thread: Mesa mayor calls immigration law 'unfunded mandate'

Mesa mayor calls immigration law 'unfunded mandate'

by Gary Nelson - May. 20, 2010 11:13 AM
The Arizona Republic
.

Mesa Mayor Scott Smith criticized the Legislature on Thursday for saddling cities and towns with the full cost of implementing Arizona's tough new immigration law.

His comments came as the City Council weighed the impact of the 2010 legislative session on Mesa's quality of life and bottom line. The verdict: some wins, some losses.


But regarding Senate Bill 1070, Smith said Mesa's taxpayers are likely to lose big.

"We're not making a political statement on immigration per se," Smith said. "But I think we need to understand that this is a bill the Legislature passed that will have a potentially huge impact on cities."

The law, he said, is an unfunded mandate on cities and towns that must carry almost the full cost of enforcement, which is why he knows of very few cities that support it.

"We don't know yet what that impact will be," he said, "but this is not a cost-free endeavor. And depending on how it plays out, it could create significant financial costs to the city."

One possible way the bill could slam Mesa's budget is that some violations of SB 1070 are misdemeanors. Cities and towns are required to pay all booking and jail fees for misdemeanor suspects and convicts, and Mesa's budget already has been strained in that department by tougher penalties imposed on DUI offenders.

Smith tried to draw a line between his criticism of the bill's fiscal impact and the debate over illegal immigration itself, but he said it's difficult for anyone to offer a nuanced opinion on anything related to the topic.

"It's almost impossible to have a discussion without being either a complete, total racist or a complete, total open-border (advocate)," he said. His comments, he said, "have nothing to do with that. This has to do with the impact on our citizens at the city and town level."

Immigration was hardly the only legislative topic that Mesa monitored this year, however.

Scott Butler, Mesa's chief lobbyist at the Capitol, said of the 1,233 bills introduced, the city tracked more than 400 closely.

One of Mesa's biggest losses in the Legislature this year was the failure of a bill to fund Cactus League stadiums and, most specifically, help the city's efforts to keep the Chicago Cubs from moving their training operations to Florida.

That bill drew fierce opposition from Major League Baseball, other Cactus League teams and cities, and other interests. It passed the House but died when Senate President Bob Burns refused to bring it up for debate.

The Cubs effort is still alive, however; the council had an executive session Thursday morning to discuss new proposals aimed at keeping the team in town.

Mesa did dodge one bullet when the Legislature changed a law that allows cities to hold property and lease it to private interests for less money than those entities normally would have to pay in property taxes.

That mechanism, a Government Property Lease Excise Tax, or GPLET, was used to attract Gaylord Entertainment Co. to southeast Mesa, where it hopes to build a huge resort and conference center.

Legislation proposed last year would have killed the Gaylord project, Butler said. The bill that passed this year "grandfathered" in the Gaylord.

Smith said the GPLET bill was one example of why Mesa needs lobbyists to fight for its interests at the Capitol.



Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa ... z0ogOQ1Jdq

Mesa is the 3rd largest city in Arizona. They are known as a sanctuary city, especially when the former Chief of Police Gasca was running the poloce department. He is now the Chief of Police in San Fransico.

The west side of Mesa has a very high population of Hispanics and host many illegal aliens. This is why I believe the Mayor is concerned because yes, the enforcement part of the new law will no doubt cost the city money. I would recommend the city consider raising the rental tax rate by a half percent to help cover the cost. Would only be right since most of the illegals live in rental units such as apartment buildings so in effect they can help pay for their deportation fees. The current rental tax rate is 1.5% so if they raise it to 2% then there's some additional funds.

Change their laws where misdemeanors are paid by the criminals. They can not tell me it is cheaper for them to leave illegal aliens in this country then it is to deport them. Oh,thats right,majority of those costs come from federal funding which is paid by all tax payers.


I have heard In Pennsylvania to help cover costs they are going to start charging a fee for accidents and fires, depending how many law enforcement and emergency vehicles are called out to the scene.

http://www.accidenttax.com/

http://www.yorkdispatch.com/viewpoints/ci_15086562

http://www.accidenttax.com/site/page/in_the_media

The law basically means that the police can ask the immigration status of people. I dont see how that needs "funding." The police are out doing their job anyway and that is already being paid for. So they ask an extra question and that needs funding? Most of the people that they will be asking immigration status are people that they are arresting anyway.

Good grief, the savings in social services alone will make up for any loss to cities, how bout all the Arizona mayors give the law a chance to work?