If President Trump does mobilize the country to deport all immigrants who crossed the border illegally or stayed longer than their visa allowed, you may have an image in your head of who that could affect.
Today, our Mario Koran offers another one: Meet Jose, a successful businessman with properties around San Diego. He has kids in school, pays taxes and has a view to the sea. He’s been married for 10 years to a U.S. citizen. But now the couple is afraid to drive to Los Angeles or get on a fishing boat.
Due to his past encounters with border patrol, Jose and his wife worry there is no path for him to gain legal status — not because of Trump but because of previous laws passed under President Bill Clinton. “Someone could be married to the president and they would still be ineligible” to gain legal status, according to one immigration attorney.
He is right in the center of the argument about what to do with people who don’t have legal status. The president has changed policies removing formal declarations that Jose and people like him are not priorities for removal. Advocates for no tolerance say it will depress demand for people to come here illegally. But the disruption it would cause Jose and his family were he to be deported would be immense.
• It’s not totally clear yet what is changing from previous presidencies. Neither San Diego, nor California has been a true sanctuary for immigrants who don’t commit any crime beyond coming to the country illegally or outstaying a valid visa. Last year, the San Diego Field Office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported 12,857 people who had not committed any crime while here. More than 10,000 others, who had committed a crime, were deported.
Mayor Offers No Plan for Homeless Tax Hike as Feature, Not Bug
Mayor Faulconer’s proposal to fund a convention center expansion will go to voters in November, but riding along with it will be efforts to invest in streets and programs to address our exploding homeless population. It’s a plan that would result in around $10 million annually freeing up for homeless causes, but as Lisa Halverstadt points out, that dollar figure is where the planning ends.
We Stand Up for You. Will You Stand Up for Us?
Wow there is an awful lot in your posting Seth!
I have a question..Why when someone already wons the lease to the convention center are we voting on anything? To force these 2 partners out of the property? And then do what we have planned as a city- whatever that is- do we actually have plans? And why do we feel we need to strong arm these legitimate lease holders?
On this same measure... homelessness if there is no plan dowe at least have a monetary commitment? If not then do not vote yes this entire bill is a scam. If there is a commitment not of action perhaps but of funding and how much...then I do feel sorry for the 2 partners who currently hold the lease but homelessness is only going to get worse and frankly our city council has not addressed it in any real financial terms for over 2 councils- probably more
Street maintenance should be an entirely different budget and issue and not included on this bill at ALL!
Something doesn't smell right here...