WatchSonoma Watch

Carrillo cites ‘principle’ in opposing Arizona contract


Sonoma County Supervisor Efren Carrillo said his vote this week opposing the award of a contract to an Arizona company because of the state’s new illegal immigration law was an act of conscience and protest.

Efren Carrillo.“It's borderline harassment and discriminatory,” he said of the Arizona statute, which makes it a state crime to lack proper immigration paperwork. “I can only imagine the fear people are living with down there.”

Carrillo’s vote, cast on Tuesday on a closely-watched item deciding contracts related to the short- and long-term reopening of the county’s central landfill, appears to be the first official act opposing the Arizona law by a local elected leader.

“As a matter of principle, I didn’t feel comfortable with the county approving a contract with a company whose headquarters are in a state that has allowed this to happen,” Carrillo said in an interview Thursday.

He added that his vote was not meant as a judgment against the Phoenix-based waste contractor Republic Services Inc., who he described as a “great, reputable company.”

Carrillo seemed to surprise many people in a nearly-packed board room Tuesday, when, after two hours of contentious public comment and discussion of the more than $50 million in waste contracts, he announced his stance with several clipped sentences.

Minutes later supervisors voted 3-2 to award the Arizona firm two contracts related to the landfill, with one deal requiring a final sign-off in August.

Supervisor Shirlee Zane, who had initially expressed some concern about awarding one of those deals to Republic on fiscal grounds, cast the other dissenting vote while expressing support for Carrillo’s stance.

“It was a very emotional moment for me,” Zane said Thursday. She cited her earlier teaching and social work in Latino communities in the United States and her marriage to a British immigrant as driving her position. “I think elected officials need to make a stand and say what Arizona is doing is wrong.”

For Carrillo, the issue has even closer personal ties. The supervisor’s parents, who are natives of Mexico, were undocumented immigrants this country until 1986, when a reformed federal immigration law offered amnesty to thousands without legal U.S.residency. Carrillo was born in 1981 while his parents were working and living in North Hollywood.

“The decisions my folks made were decisions before I was born,” the supervisor said.

Still, his family’s history did figure into his stance Tuesday, Carrillo acknowledged.

While a supporter of increased security along the U.S. border, he said he also supports “a path to amnesty” for undocumented immigrants as part of “fair and equitable immigration reform.”

“The Arizona law does exactly the opposite,” he said. “It allows for the potential for discrimination, for racial profiling.”

The law, enacted in April, is the subject of an increasing number of lawsuits and has drawn either condemnation or outright boycotts from a number of California cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose.

Carrillo, who has been critical of the Arizona law on several social media sites, said he has considered bringing up a resolution before the Board of Supervisors in favor of immigration reform.

The Arizona law would not necessarily be a part of any such resolution, though it might “come up as part of the discussion,” he said.

He added that while no call for a boycott is envisioned at this point, “I feel very strongly that the county should not be engaging or doing business with Arizona until they find something that is more just and fair.”

Any other future county business involving Arizona or Arizona firms Carrillo said he would consider “on a case-by-case basis.”

“I didn’t intend for this discussion to come up in the waste hauling contracts,” he said. “(But) immigration reform has to come nationally. I don’t see (the Arizona law) as an adequate solution.”

93 Responses to “Carrillo cites ‘principle’ in opposing Arizona contract”

  1. Alejandra says:

    It’s amazing reading all these posts. Everyone turns to racism because what is going on in Arizona IS racism, regardless. No one can have a “reasonable suspicion” of when an individual is here illegally with out judging them by their skin color or the way they look. Breaking up families is not the solution to the immigration issue that there is here. It is damaging those children more than anyone else. Get out of the box and take a look at the overall picture and look at the future lives of those children.
    Back to another issue that has been going around in circles, they are not taking YOUR jobs! why is that so hard to understand??! They are doing the jobs not wanting to be done by anyone else. You don’t see them working in the office sipping on coffee in their seats every morning, instead they are out in the 90 degree weather picking the fruits and vegetables that are going to be on your dinner table tonight. If the American Citizens want that job then go out there and get it! I’m sure they won’t even last a day!

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  2. Todd johnson says:

    Just another “COOKIE CUTTER” sonoma county liberal idiot. Did you EVEN READ the law?
    No you DID NOT! BTW its ARIZONA LAW….get it? …….So do the freaking job you were elected for!!

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5

  3. Supervisor Carrillo should be applauded for taking a principled stand, especially over such a misunderstood and emotionally-charged issue as immigration.

    Even after it was modified to quell public outrage, the Arizona law gives law enforcement authority to question and even detain “reasonably suspicious” persons. Vague standards lead to abuses in power. That is the problem. That’s why the U.F.W. is calling for a protest on July 29th: http://michaelaparicio.wordpress.com/2010/06/04/ufw/

    Thanks for taking a principled stand Supervisor Carrillo!

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 12

  4. chuck becker says:

    My Father was an immigrant, both of my grandparents on my Mother’s side were immigrants. The Arizona law (SB 1070?) isn’t about immigration, it’s about people who are breaking the law. It mirrors the federal law, even toned down somewhat from what I hear, although I’ve not read the federal law. If the Feds had been doing their job and enforcing the law, AZ never would have been pushed to resort to this.

    Anticipating and projecting racial profiling or discrimination is very much premature. Law enforcement make very few mistakes in this realm (although the ones they do make are wildly sensationalized). Even President Obama, when he jumped to a similar conclusion about a police officer, had to retrace his steps when the police officer was proved to have acted properly. I think it’s a flagrant act of anticipatory disrespect to law enforcement to assume, with no evidence, that they are going to discriminate.

    I wish the conversation could get back to the real issue, which is “Why isn’t the Federal government doing its job and enforcing the Federal laws that are on the books?”.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 11

  5. Johnson says:

    Cynthia, don’t forget the hyphen in your website URL.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6

  6. Noah says:

    Cynthia, you claim the links you posted “…indicate that neither crime nor economy (jobs) justifies the Arizona law.” This claim is not factual.

    One link is to Change.Org, with an article by Charlotte Hill, “a UC Berkeley graduate with a degree in Peace and Conflict Studies. She has worked for Nourish America and volunteered with low-income Bay Area youth.” Ok, that’s good academic and progressive cred which indicates to me she is a highly qualified person in the area of peace, justice, and social change. Given her background, she is a good person to reference from one side of this discussion, that of protecting illegal immigrants. In her article, she references the Annenberg Public Policy center, from which I have heard much that I like, being that I listen to progressive media a lot (NPR, KQED, Thom Hatmann, Robert Kennedy Jr, etc.). I have seen Kathleen Hall Jamieson (Annenberg’s director) in extended interviews and she is very good.

    Charlotte Hill’s article also references the Migration Policy Institute. This appears to be an organization whose purpose is to help immigrants integrate into our country, which I support. But I find this statement in Hill’s article incredible: “According to Madeleine Sumption, a policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, immigrant workers “often create the jobs they work in,” causing relatively little impact on the job market for native-born Americans. Furthermore, they “create almost as many” jobs as the ones they take — “and maybe more.”

    She is saying that immigrants create as many or more jobs than they take. What? You gotta be kidding me. And who we’re talking about is ILLEGAL immigrants, not legal ones. Her statement, and its implied premise, are untrue. Neither she nor you have proven that we are economically better off because of ILLEGAL immigration.

    The other link, the Cato Institute, is a Libertarian think tank. Just because you say you’re non-partisan doesn’t mean you’re smart or have good ideas. It just means you’re not a Republican or a Democrat. If you tried to tell me the Cato Institute is balanced and doesn’t have an ax to grind, I’d laugh. But I don’t think you would. I respect you more than that.

    The links you posted do not prove that Carillo is right or the Arizona law is wrong. They don’t prove it because they contain no information except from sources opposed to the AZ law. I respect those sources, but your argument is fruitless because excludes some relevant information, and it only engages those who already feel the way you do, while alienating others.

    In the interest of being effective, perhaps a better way to advance your argument is to understand the feelings of those who oppose you, and include those points of view in your thinking so that they might listen. Maybe the people of Arizona have a good point to make, one that is not simply “racist.”

    Is the AZ law racist? My answer is no. It allows law enforcement to check the immigration status of people who are engaged in some activity which appears either criminal or against some statute of law. It prohibits racial profiling. Yeah, there will be some a-holes and yahoos just like there always are, but they don’t own the place. You can’t just point to the crazies and say all of AZ is racist. Some of them may be trying to address the problem in as pragmatic a manner as they know how.

    This should be about immigration policies and laws. I am not against any color of skin. I am against bad actors, bullies, and criminals. I think the AZ law did what it set out to do; raise a ruckus and get the feds to act.

    I can’t stand that the people on my side of politics are intent on making this a racial issue. Doing so will not advance the cause of the poorest people from any country, it only further divides us Americans and enrages some. Just as far-right crazies are apt to go over the edge, so can us lefties too. If we are not willing to hold ourselves accountable for that, how can we ever hold them accountable?

    We need an intelligent, lawful approach to immigration, and we need it yesterday. The sad thing is, we could have been very close to having that agreement before this AZ thing started, and now everyone is digging in deeper and deeper. All we need to do is to adopt a reachable naturalization process for the people who are here illegally, and deport any violent criminals. Fine them for their civil misconduct, require they go to the end of the line for citizenship, adjust any economic support equitably (human rights must be recognized), and give them the freedom to come out of the shadows. Let our illegal employers suffer their own consequences. And this applies to all illegal immigrants.

    As far as awarding the garbage contracts goes, I think we need to go as local as possible. But I would not award it to Ratto & friends until they are cleared in court (they have been subpoenaed regarding Carinalli and the SSU Foundation financial imbroglio).

    I think my own liberals have had a knee-jerk reaction when calling this simply racist. In Arizona, it is mostly about illegal Mexicans coming across the border. But where they’re from is not the point. The numbers of them are crushing. Wanting protection from such an onslaught doesn’t make you a racist. Saying you don’t want brown-skinned people in this country does. The AZ law does not say that. It says they don’t want illegal immigration to continue. Neither do I.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4

  7. Maria Canas says:

    As a voter I want representatives who stands for justice and today Mr. Carrillo and Ms. Zane did it. Eventhought, I did not vote for Mr. Efren Carrillo back then,I will vote for you next time. The constitutional racism is here in Sonoma County.

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 13

  8. Clinton says feds will sue Arizona over immigration law

    Published: Friday, June 18, 2010 at 7:36 a.m.

    PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said Thursday she’s angry over comments by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the Obama administration will sue the state over its new immigration law.

    Brewer, a Republican, said in a statement that “this is no way to treat the people of Arizona.”

    Isn’t that what the outrage is about?

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4

  9. less politics more sense says:

    Beef King says: June 14, 2010 at 8:27 pm he broad impact of the decision by Mr. Efren Carrillo to punish a garbage company because they are headquartered in a U.S. state should give everyone pause…

    Is it possible that he is too young and unseasoned for the office?
    Does he support the violence and goals of La Raza?
    Are the progressive extremists putting the pressure on?

    Good points

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10

  10. Jim Stewart says:

    Interesting posts. There is a reverse. A racist would look at a situation and see that people are breaking the law, coming here illegally, and say, “Don’t enforce the laws on those criminals”, simply because of the color of their skin. How is that not a racist view? Was the law not broken and should it or should it not be enforced? The Arizona law specifically prohibits profiling.
    Why no outcry when the Sonoma County Sheriffs Dept checks the legal status of everyone booked? Is that not profiling because they check everyone?
    Arizona got upset when a rancher was murdered on his own land near a place he put out water for illegal trespassers so they can cross the desert without dying of thirst. That upset a lot of people in Arizona and this is the result.

    Personally, just go after the employers and landlords and the problem will solve itself.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4

  11. Sidewinder says:

    If they don’t believe in what they’re saying, they wouldn’t be saying it. Let us all not pretend we can read the minds of others.

    There have been many accusations of racism within the comments of the two Arizona articles and I didn’t point my finger at who was making them.

    I’m not making any assumptions and I would hope that those who don’t like them are not making assumptions themselves.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5

  12. Cynthia Boaz says:

    To the contrary, Sidewinder, when someone refuses to put their name on their words, you know they don’t believe in what they’re saying.

    Have you read the posts or are you just making sweeping assumptions?

    I believe this law is absolutely racist and I have no problem in saying so. I have not, however, called any person on this board a “racist.” Please read more carefully. It’s an important distinction.

    Plenty of “American laws” turned out to be quite racist and unconstitutional, so just because something claims to be one thing does not mean it’s true. Until the 1850s, it was legal in the US to OWN another person and the defenders of that law at that time did not consider themselves racist.

    I do give you credit, however, for acknowledging that racism is undesirable.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12

  13. Sidewinder says:

    Being labeled a racist for not liking illegal immigration is a GREAT reason to remain anonymous.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8

  14. Sidewinder says:

    When someone starts criticizing for posting anonymously, that is the point when it’s clear they know that they can’t win the argument.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7

  15. Cynthia Boaz says:

    You know you’re pushing the racism envelope when South Africa wants to boycott you, Arizona.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 14

  16. Cynthia Boaz says:

    p.s. King and Queen-

    South Africans (who, I think it’s safe to say, have experienced one of the worst forms of systematic racism in human history) are calling for a boycott of Arizona because of the new law.

    Do you think all of them are idiots?

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10

  17. Cynthia Boaz says:

    Windsor Queen and Beef King (are you coupled?)-

    There is a concept known as “covert racism.” It is when the holder of the racist views is unwilling to express them overtly, either because of shame or fear of retribution. The thing that make covert racism more insidious than overt racism is that it is intentionally hidden in ostensibly pragmatic laws and policies (such as private country clubs that are whites-only.)

    I just provided two links from highly credible sources that indicate that neither crime nor economy (jobs) justifies the Arizona law. So, what’s left to rationalize it? If the presence of illegal immigrants does NOT make life worse/more unsafe (and in fact, according to empirical data, makes life better) for Arizona residents, what exactly is the motive behind the racial profiling and discrimination?

    I understand that talking about race makes people uncomfortable, Windsor Queen. But ignoring the reality, which is that (regardless of what I personally think) this law has stirred racist sentiment along the border, is not going to make it go away. Do you REALLY think people on the receiving end of this policy enforcement won’t perceive it as racially motivated?

    Talking openly about something unpleasant diminishes its impact. Ignoring it makes it fester.

    Beef, some of the countries are Canada, Japan, Spain, Germany and Norway.

    And in response to your other post, one of the first of the Nuremburg laws was to allow/require German SS to ask anyone suspected of Jewish descent for their identification papers (which they were ordered to carry at all times.) That led to a series of subsequent legislation, starting with forbidding Jewish children from attending German schools…

    What’s your last name, Tracy?

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13

  18. WndsrQueen says:

    Susan, just because I’m currently not in his district, doesn’t mean I won’t be in the future. I’m sure he doesn’t aspire to be a Bd of Sup for the rest of his life. AND, my point was that “historically” the county DOES choose the low bidder…I said nothing about that being the case now, just that their way of choosing a contractor isn’t the best practice. You say take the low bidder? Well, let me tell you how that worked out for the jail. They took the low bidder and it ended up costing us taxpayers nearly twice the the original bid price. Do you really want to go with the low bidder or the contractor that has the best resume?

    My point to the posting was: Eliminating a contractor from the bidding process based on location is MORONIC!

    As far as Ms. Boaz goes, I’m just tired of your racially motivated posts and will not respond to you. BTW, my name is Tracy

    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 7

  19. Cynthia Boaz says:

    I could understand the desire to be anonymous if this were an authoritarian state without first amendment protections.

    But there is no reason for someone in a democratic society who truly believes in the veracity of their views to hide behind a pseudonym.

    You really have to wonder why anonymous posters are ashamed to sign their name to their views. People who have genuine conviction in their views *want* it to be known.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 11

  20. Beef King says:

    Since Ms. Boaz nor any other poster in opposition to the ‘Arizona’ law can offer any reason beyond their unsubstantiated claims of rascism I can only conclude the law must have merit.
    I am ready to read and consider any reason for our county supervisor to interject his personal fears into his judgements for Sonomans if it has some merit beyond an individuals personal outlook on rascism.
    I have noted with interest that other elected officials have posted their thoughts on this comment section, yet Carrillo has remained mute.
    Where is your voice Efren? Tell us more about your personal politics, please.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5

  21. Sidewinder says:

    Susan, AGAIN, he cited principles.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

  22. Beef King says:

    From the fertile mind of Ms. Boaz…
    …… .’And every system of apartheid (separation of citizens into levels of entitlement by race) started with something similar to the Arizona law.
    Plenty of countries have effective immigration policies that don’t ask their security forces or public to marginalize people on the basis of race or skin color.”…..

    Really? These are statements best supported by verifiable sources, otherwise it appears you are making stuff up that you wish were true.
    Name some of the countries, please.
    And also, give an example of how the US immigration law that Arizona has adopted at a state level is similar to Socialist Nazi Germany. The problem is, you can’t because there is no link.
    Ms. Boaz, it appears you are spiraling out of control with your statements. To salvage the integrity of your opinion you should provide some proof to support your wild accusations.
    And please remember to link your statement to the point at hand, which is the unusual act of our county supervisor voting his conscience on a garbage contract.

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5

  23. Cynthia Boaz says:


    Just because something is popular does not mean it’s right. Look at the invasion of Iraq, for example. Through duplicity and fear-mongering, the Bush administration managed to get nearly 80% of Americans firmly behind the idea of invading a sovereign country that had never attacked us. Seven years later, it is the biggest foreign policy disaster in history.

    The support for the Arizona law comes largely from a misrepresentation/framing of the issue. It is not about crime or criminal activity- the crime rate in Arizona has declined significantly as the number of immigrants has increased. It’s not about freedom (how can you promote freedom while rescinding rights?) and it’s not about protecting American jobs, since illegal immigrants are not taking our jobs.

    See the links below for studies supporting these claims:



    It is absolutely possible to be fiscally responsible while also being socially conscious. Isn’t that what you want from your representatives?

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 15

  24. Susan says:

    ummm…Windsor Queen…you’re not in District 5, so therefore never did vote for Efren Carrillo. And to clarify, Republic, the Arizona company, was not the low bidder for the contract awarded…a local Sonoma County engineering firm was! Keep jobs local…keep money ratepayers pay local…take the lowest bid…

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12

  25. WndsrQueen says:

    Wow! How did I miss this? Mr. Carrillo, you will never get my vote again for this moronic way to run our County. Historically, the County has gone with the low-bidder which I never agreed with but a vote against a company primarily on the basis of their location indicates to me that spending OUR money has no meaning. His OWN political spin is more important. Efron, if you payed attention to the polling of the american citizens on this issue, you’d find you’re way out numbered.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6

  26. Noah says:

    Cynthia, you claim that our immigration policies are marginalizing groups of people, and that we are asking our security forces to “to marginalize people on the basis of race or skin color.” They are not being marginalized.

    I think Mexico needs our help. We need to prosecute the illegal employers and not the workers if we really want to secure our borders. We need to penalize corporations that operate Maquiladoras, and completely revise our trade policies to protect both workers and the environment.

    In calling for the following of our laws, I am supporting what it is to be American. We are a nation of laws. It is what gives us our freedoms-if we were governed by despots, we would not have freedom. If we were governed by a religion, we would not have freedom. If we were governed by corporations, we would not…oops.

    There is only apartheid if one group of people, wrongly identified as a “race” (for which there is no anthropological support), is being separated and oppressed. This is not the case here! Anyone is welcome here, and we have a procedure for it. There are a lot of folks from a lot of countries who follow our procedures (laws).

    The face of our culture is changing and causing great distress among those who are used to our country being a certain way. Change is both inevitable and hard to take. It will likely take a new generation of Americans to let this change filter through the zeitgeist. I myself would like it to slow down a little. But, que sera sera.

    We need to continue to be a nation of laws. Otherwise, it will be anarchy. To say we need to upgrade our immigration policy is like…DUH! Of course we need to; but we need a coherent conversation about it, one including all sides, and just because things are bad south of the border and they see more money and a better life for themselves by coming here doesn’t mean they should be able to circumvent our laws and customs for their convenience. If all it took to obviate our immigration laws was extreme economic hardship, what about all the other countries in the world who suffer immense tragedy? We need to help them too, but they can’t all come here. It just wouldn’t work.

    As far as non-American Hispanics go, we need to make naturalization achievable for those that want to be Americans. But they have to do their share of changing too. This isn’t a one-way street. I only ask that those who come here do so because they want to be here. They deserve a better life if they can make one. But if all they want to do is get it for free, I won’t support that. And I feel the large majority of them are honest and decent people.

    I get just as irate at white folks who flout the law. I am not marginalizing anyone because of their “race.” I do however, marginalize criminals. I assert civilized controls on behavior, not skin color. Like Martin Luther King Jr. said, don’t judge people on the color of their skin, judge them on the content of their character. If you willfully and knowingly break the law, you are a criminal. Does this behavior extend only to one specific act (crossing the border illegally), or might it extend further? Why do some take the time to naturalize legally, and some don’t? Who should be punished, and who should be rewarded?

    Let’s change the laws. Go after employers who hire a lot of illegal immigrants. Repeal corporate charters of criminal corporations. Get rid of Maquiladoras. Help Mexico reorganize away from a corrupt system and corrupt government by excising the secret deals we’ve had with their crooked regimes (sorry, CIA).

    It is neither marginalizing a race nor an act of prejudice for me to say we should have good laws and follow them. And if we don’t follow them, there should be consequences. There are consequences for me, why not them as well?

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4

  27. Cynthia Boaz says:

    Sorry for the redundant posts. My iPhone was having issues.

    I want to note two things: 1) there is some seriously racist-sounding rhetoric in many of these posts- rhetoric that basically says because Carrillo voted his conscience, he’s complicit in criminal activity in Mexico, and 2) that many folks are making a silly assumption that opposing the Arizona law equates to approving of criminal behavior. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and marginalizing a group of people so you can feel (falsely) safer feeds into the fear-mongering rhetoric of those who have anything but your interests at heart.

    When will people figure out that denying dignity to others does not make their own lives better?

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12

  28. Cynthia Boaz says:

    There’s more to leadership than a single-minded pursuit of the bottom line. Sometimes human interests conflict with what is most financially profitable.

    Fiscal responsibility can be compatible with social responsibility, and it is the job of a good leader to see and act on that.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12

  29. Cynthia Boaz says:

    There is more to leadership than keeping an eye on the bottom line. There’s also the notion of doing right by people.

    How far would some of you go in protecting the fiscal interests of the county above all else? Should we contract with the Iranian or North Korean governments if they offer the best deal?

    It is possible to be fiscally responsible AND socially conscious at the same time, and in my view, the county’s residents should accept no less.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 13

  30. Cynthia Boaz says:


    You might be surprised to learn that apartheid- like Nazi Socialism- and its component policies like discrimination and segregation were perfectly legal. In fact, genocide wasn’t illegal in Germany or in international law until Nuremburg. Just because something is law does not, by extension, mean it’s just. And every system of apartheid (separation of citizens into levels of entitlement by race) started with something similar to the Arizona law.

    Plenty of countries have effective immigration policies that don’t ask their security forces or public to marginalize people on the basis of race or skin color. Folks can keep trying to frame this as an issue of rule of law, of security, and of “freedom,” but where specific ethnic or racial groups are vulnerable to being singled out and denied liberties, you have none of the above.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12

  31. Noah says:

    To Cynthia Boaz:
    While I am in support of better conditions for third-world and developing countries, and while I think the USA is a big culprit in the matter (along with the World Bank, IMF, etc), you are advancing a false premise.

    You say, “On the other hand, there is no system of injustice that has been able to maintain itself without the complicity of the masses, most of whom convince themselves it has “nothing to with them.” In so saying, you equate apartheid with the recognized sovereignty of nations. System of injustice? Every nation has an immigration policy. We are not denying anyone access to our country and its attributes. We are simply decreeing what our immigration policy is and how to avail yourself of our naturalization process. Naturalization is not the same thing as apartheid. That’s fuzzy thinking.

    If all it takes to be a just cause is gather enough people together to flout a law, as it appears is happening, then what would you say if drunk drivers revolted? There are certainly plenty of them.

    Either we need an immigration policy, or we don’t. Either we need borders, or we don’t. Being a nation of laws means we obey them, whether we like some of them or not. Otherwise, the laws would be meaningless. The exception is for basic human rights, and coming here from Mexico is not a basic human right.

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

  32. Cynthia Boaz says:

    No, Beef, I was comparing him to the many small-town community leaders who took brave steps against a system of injustice.

    Apartheid didn’t fall because of Nelson Mandela, it fell because of the actions of regular people.

    And to be precise, the example was to highlight how injustice can be addressed effectively by symbolic – and principled- gestures. Hopefully the Arizona law won’t snowball into our own system of apartheid, but with complicity like yours, I’m not so sure.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9

  33. Beef King says:

    Is Ms. Boaz comparing Efren Carrillo to Nelson Mandela?
    Wow! That’s quite a stretch Ms. Boaz.
    Maybe we should refrain from adoration until he votes on another budget matter.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10

  34. Cynthia Boaz says:

    Good for Carrillo and Zane.

    For those who think the vote was “silly”, recall that the beginning of the end of apartheid was when a handful of citizens in Port Elisabeth decided to boycott local white-owned businesses. Many said they were only hurting themselves, but their actions had a huge symbolic effect, and eventually became the impetus for a nationwide series of strikes, boycotts, and other mass civil nonviolent actions that made the entire apartheid system unsustainable.

    On the other hand, there is no system of injustice that has been able to maintain itself without the complicity of the masses, most of whom convince themselves it has “nothing to with them.” I’m glad at least two of our supervisors are able to understand that.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 14

  35. Ken says:

    Principle has something to do with laws too! The freebies and giveaways supported by taxpayers going to illegal aliens must stop. And our hapless pols pandering to illegals must stop — at all levels, from the White House right down to the county courthouse. Principle my foot.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10

  36. Lisa Maldonado says:

    I very much appreciate Supervisors Carrillo and Zane’s principled stand on behalf of the US Constitution and its people. I am sure they will be vindicated legally when the law is tested, but they have my respect and thanks for caring about all the people they represent as well as the high ideals and principles that this country stands for. Thanks for making me proud to be from Sonoma County!

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 16

  37. Beef King says:

    The broad impact of the decision by Mr. Carrillo to punish a garbage company because they are headquartered in a U.S. state should give everyone pause.
    He says it is principle. If that is true, and he is principled and honest with himself, we can expect a mea culpa soon, before the damage sticks to his young political career. Because if he stands on principle, then he must stand behind Arizona, and not criminals. If he is principled, then he cannot just waggle his finger of blame, he must lead those in opposition back to the table to negotiate solutions, right here in Sonoma county.

    Is it possible that he is too young and unseasoned for the office?
    Does he support the violence and goals of La Raza?
    Are the progressive extremists putting the pressure on?
    Who is Efren Carrillo?

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 10

  38. omedina says:

    As a county resident and voter, it is good to know that I am represented. I do not want any of the tax dollars I pay here in Sonoma County to support Arizona and their ridiculous laws! I applaud Mr. Carrillo for his vote, and thank Ms. Zane for her vote and support of Mr. Carrillo’s stance.

    While fiscal responsibility is important, principle is just as important, if not more so! When I vote, I want politicians that have well defined principles, not ones that are easily swayed by money and other means of corruption.

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 17

  39. Anonymous says:

    I appreciate the LEGAL Mexican-American immigrants who spoke out against ILLEGAL immigrants in the “Why we should boycott Arizona” guest opinion comments. Thank you.

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 11

  40. Latina-Connection Consulting says:

    Supervisor Carrillo, thank you for doing the right thing! If more politicians and people in our community would do that, we would all be in a better place. Thank you!

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 20

  41. Michelle Morales says:

    Good for Efren Carrillo and Shirley Zane!
    These are the kind of Supervisors I want representing Sonoma County.

    Michaele Morales

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 20

  42. Ron Lopez says:

    I applaud Supervisor Carillo for his principled stand! We need more elected officials like Efren Carillo! I will certainly vote for him again!

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 19

  43. Laura Gonzalez says:

    @Laura:) Did you see the letter I received? Did you send it? It wasn’t just that I didn’t agree with it, it was creepy. CREEPY. C-R-E-E-P-Y.

    @Laura:) & @Nick & other cognomens: Name calling? Which? Psycho? Refer to my comment above. Racist? A few people have thrown that term around, but I see you didn’t take *them* to task for it. Perhaps because they used it against Mr. Carrillo and you agree?

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11

  44. My Goodness says:

    If sending a Facebook message is stalking, I think that makes every one who has signed up is a stalker.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5

  45. Law abiding citizen says:

    Mr. Carillo has been elected to serve in the best interest of the citizens of Sonoma County.

    If the Arizona based company is the best fiscal choice for Sonoma County, then shame on you for bringing yourself serving personal agenda to the voting table.

    You are abusing the power for which we, the citizens, have entrusted in you. You are not making decisions on our behalf. This type of bigotry against the citizens of Sonoma County will not be tolerated. Do not forget who you are working for Mr. Carillo.

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8

  46. Jim Stewart says:

    David Johnson has a great point. The USA should mirror Mexico for their immigration policy.

    They never will because they would have to contend with drug cartels assassinating politicians who are not on the take or move to arrest them.

    They don’t want to take the good with the bad.

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6

  47. billy blanco says:

    Why, because he is also of MEXICAN heritage? Quit whining! These people are ILLEGAL! What do you not understand. We really need to be careful who we elect into office. We need individuals that will look out for the COMMUNITY! It is estimated that already over 100,000 ILLEGAL immigrants have left Arizona. Just imagine if CA enacted a similar law, how many jobs that would open up to LEGAL American citizens. Probably never happen here, we elected too many Hispanics in office. I’ll wait for the “racist” comments now. Even though my grandparents were born in El Salvador.

    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 11

  48. @Laura :) says:

    Wow, Laura is doing more name-calling because she received a message she didn’t like? “Check your facts and figures” is never a good argument without providing facts and figures in return. Just because SO many people disagree with you, that doesn’t mean they’re phony.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9

  49. George says:

    The immigration issue certainly brings out racist know-nothings. Laura Gonzalez is right. These boards are becoming as hateful and racist as the forum. Allowing people to spout off without signing their name leads to irresponsible and inflammatory accusations (i.e Carrillo is racist and should be impeached) and adds nothing to the debate. Why do the editors continue to allow it? The answer must be because this kind of Jerry Springer like behavior sells more ads. Another reason why real journalism is dying.

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7

  50. David Johnson says:

    I am so tired of local politicians worrying about things they have no control over. This company is not the AZ government your no vote does nothing to change the AZ law. You represent the west county stick to that. Is that the vote they want? I doubt it. Worry about SOCO not AZ. While your at it take a look at Mexico’s immigration law. Illegal entry is a felony. Those who aid illegals charged with felonies. No citizens can’t own property and on and on and on. How come Mexico is never racist?

    Thumb up 15 Thumb down 7

  51. @ Laura Gonzalez says:

    “Journalism” is the news that the reporters write, not the comments from the public. I thought you were a teacher?

    So basically you’re advocating for a “papers, please” policy for discussion boards like this. Tell me, how does a free, non-government web site verify someone’s identity? Compare them to the phone book? Maybe Empire Report could do it because they had time to track down and verify their whopping five readers in person.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6

  52. Nick says:

    Laura, perhaps name-calling isn’t the best way to set the example of being an adult. Nobody on here has criticized any race, just the illegal entry into the country.

    And we aren’t journalists–we’re the readership.

    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7

  53. MouseMan says:

    Efren – - I expect you to vote on issues as you see fit. However, in this case, your actions give the appearance that you are lending support to illegal aliens based on their ethnicity. Is this not bigotry? You seem to be uncomfortable knowing that illegal Mexican aliens are living in fear. They should be living in fear. And you should be giving stronger support to the laws of the USA.

    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6

  54. Laura Gonzalez says:

    @Watch Sonoma

    How come the Empire Report was able to make people use their real name and a real address, but the PD can’t seem to achieve such a high standard of journalism?

    This forum is going the same was as the regular forums, a playground of racists and stalkers and no longer worth as much of my time.

    I’m happy to hear (read) anyone’s thoughts, but let them be adult enough to use their real name when they spout off.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8

  55. Laura Gonzalez says:

    @Rob Lee, aka Jenny Perez/Karla Gonzalez, ad nauseum, whoever you are,

    Please try not go PSYCHO by contacting me through my facebook page with your phony name and then block me so I can’t respond. I could care LESS how many thumbs up or thumbs down I have, they are my opinions, and they’re not based on how popular they might be to the masses.

    Check your figures and facts, use your real name, try and act like an adult, and maybe then we can play.

    But please STOP STALKING me.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5

  56. Alicia Roman says:

    Thank you Mr. Carrillo and Ms. Zane, you did the right thing.

    Alicia Roman

    Thumb up 15 Thumb down 16

  57. john says:

    impeach carrillo

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 16

  58. Beef King says:

    Noah, thanks for the nod. I feel the time is upon us to make REAL changes in America, and it is likely that real change won’t be sponsored by christian and progressive extremists who inhabit the Republican and Democrat parties, it will have to happen by way of moderates taking elected office, and actually working with the political opposition to achieve solutions to problems.
    This has actually happened in our political past, and in large part is the reason we became a great nation in the first place. We can do it again, but it has to start in our own backyard.
    I will vote for the candidate who insists on reaching across the aisle, who insists on sticking to the business of the people rather than the business of the party.
    I still have hope for change.
    ps- the thing you have to type in to submit the post reads…’purifies washington’

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

  59. filthyswit says:

    It seems that we are at a point in our nation’s history that it is more important to save people’s feelings (asking to see ID) than it is to save lives.

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 6

  60. Tess says:

    Carrillo took an oath to uphold the Constitution – he should be removed from office immediately.

    Thumb up 25 Thumb down 16

  61. 8andSkate says:

    So nice that Carillo and Zane freely admit that their decisions were based on emotion and circumstances having nothing to do with this county. And that those decision were made with no objectivity and certainly not in the best interest of the county that they serve. Spare us. You know, I just have know idea how Carillo gets his hair gel all the way up there on his high horse. Maybe a helicopter.

    Thumb up 22 Thumb down 11

  62. less politics more sense says:

    Efren CArillo you have shown your true colors. This has nothing to do with what is best for SOCO but everything to do with what is best for you.

    You will NOT get my vote next time…..

    I noticed you tweeted about Mexico’s World Cup finesse, but interestingly enough not one word on the US tie.

    That is very telling indeed.

    Thumb up 28 Thumb down 10

  63. Jim Stewart says:

    I fully expect this from a sanctuary county. Next, who knows. With racists in office using their powers to subvert American companies, anything is possible.

    If a drug dealer is working on a corner in your neighborhood, he is not a crimianl, he is only breaking the law to provide a better life for his family. Laws were meant to be broken, and there should be no concequinces for breaking laws, so some would think.

    What is the difference between a drug dealer, thief or illegal alien? The sentence on the books for the severity of their crime. But they are criminals, simple as that. If you don’t think illegal immigration is about crime, then you are the racist for assigning skin color to the problem, Not the law.

    Thumb up 23 Thumb down 7

  64. Noah says:

    Beef King, I re-read your post of 6-12. You were right on. Perhaps I read something more into it than you said, or I was responding to earlier posts about protecting our borders. I think you know how I feel about the borders.

    I wanted you to know that your post responding to Raymond, about enforcing our laws, was very good. We are a nation of laws, because it is that very thing which allows for all our other freedoms, especially freedom of religion.

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

  65. stew says:

    Just two days ago 19 men at a rehab center were laid down in the hallway of their bldg. and summarily executed in northern Mexico, while this and other Liberal papers wrung their hands over a punk who chose to attack border guards. That’s 19 in one incident and we in Az. simply don’t want that violence flowing over the border, and it will if we permit it. Well were not going to permit it, were going to stop it and them at the border as the Swiss, a known 3rd world country, do. Don’t give us your “Knowledge” Calif. instead let us give you all of your “Precious” just want to workers. Good riddance..

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7

  66. Jalama says:

    And to think I voted for this principled punk for his business background. Effan no way next time.

    Thumb up 29 Thumb down 10

  67. Tom says:

    When you came to my door looking for my vote you appeared to be an intelligent young man who would be good for Sonoma County & represent it’s citizens fairly. Now you’re showing your \True Colors\; using your position to benefit your own self interests & in the process causing racial tension! You were elected to represent the people of Sonoma County not Mexico!

    Thumb up 32 Thumb down 12

  68. Peeps says:

    Everyone is breaking their contracts with Arizona. That’s right, punish those of us who live in AZ. Guess what folks, WE DIDN’T PUT THIS LAW INTO EFFECT. Jan Brewer did. Punish her, not ME.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 19

  69. Rob Lee says:

    Ha. Laura Gonzalez thinks she has the answers for everyone. If you feel the need to argue with EVERYONE, you should take a hint.

    AZ is enforcing their own laws for their own state. EC is taking actions in SoCo for AZ–not the same.

    My great great grandfather was born in the U.S., thank you. And his ancestors didn’t sneak into the country either, thank you very much.

    Are you a criminal defense lawyer or just a criminal defender?

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4

  70. Jim V. says:

    Raymond, just because we follow the law, don’t call us racists and bigots. That’s more narrow-minded than someone who simply abides by laws.

    Thumb up 27 Thumb down 4

  71. Noah says:

    @Beef King: the best way to protect our borders is to stop our “employers” from hiring illegal aliens. There is no way to physically “close the borders.” WE simply will not be able to stop people from wanting to come here, unless we lower ourselves to third-world conditions, which we are on the way to doing by building fences.

    Repeal our current trade policies. Revoke the corporate charters of those companies who go after an illegal labor force. Cease our covert relationships with despotic fascist governments and corrupt regimes.

    Take care of all our citizens instead of the very few at the top, and we will have new shops to work in, money to spend again, and borders that work.

    Thumb up 23 Thumb down 5

  72. john says:

    fire this traitor

    Thumb up 30 Thumb down 14

  73. Beef King says:

    From Raymond…
    “We support them because while their deed was wrong their cause to support and build a better life, to give their a families a better future, to bring them out of poverty and make them productive in the world, this cause is noble.”
    It is important to remember WHY America is great compared to the homelands of immigrants.
    We are a nation of laws, and we have become the greatest nation in history because we ENFORCE THE LAW. Because we have not enforced border protections we are suffering economically, politically, and culturally due to the conflicts that arise as the pressures of immigration must be dealt with.
    We will not be the land you and your loved ones dreamed of if we become just like the land you fled.

    Wake up Raymond, if you want to have a great America for your friends and loved ones, you should condemn illegal immigration no matter the nationality of the immigrant, and instead DEMAND REAL REFORM from our Congress and President, because if this does not happen we will be just like every other corrupt and dysfunctional nation faster than you may realize.

    Freedom is not free.

    Thumb up 26 Thumb down 8

  74. Robert James says:

    What does he think he is doing? We thought he was Representing Americans in Sonoma County for their best Interest. Instead he seems to support the illegal Invaders as his Parents were.His Citizenship was given as a Anchor Baby.It should be taken away as he is in effect supporting La Raza a group that wants to overthrow our Goverment.He is also using our Tax Dollars to do it.How many Traitors support this Man.

    Thumb up 35 Thumb down 17

  75. hbc says:

    Carrillo is probably (as I am) in favor of gay marriage. Will he vote to boycott states that are not?

    Thumb up 23 Thumb down 6

  76. Laura Gonzalez says:

    @American Citizen “…if an officer of the law has a reasonable suspicion to think someone is in the country illegally…”//Which could very well lead to profiling. We don’t even ask this of businesses who hire these people.

    @Paul “Punishing unknown (white)people for harms done by someone else to Latinos is racism.” It’s called a boycott, and due to its’ broad nature, it can indeed inadvertently punish the innocent. We were willing to take that chance with Iraq.

    @Rob Lee Comparing ourselves to Mexico seems ridiculous; talk about keeping the bar low…

    @Zuma Have you seen Sarah Palin wear her US/Israeli flag pin? Did you hear the Repub senatorial candidates arguing about who’s a better friend of Israel? Did you read where the Israeli foreign prime minister gloated the US does nothing without consulting Israel first? Um, which foreigners have too much influence in our domestic affairs?

    @Karla From Wikipedia (lest you accuse me of plagiarism): “Racism is the belief that race is a primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.[1] As a practice, it means the same thing as racial discrimination. In the case of institutional racism, certain racial groups may be denied rights or benefits, or receive preferential treatment.”

    “Racial discrimination typically points out taxonomic differences between different groups of people, although anyone may be discriminated against on an ethnic or cultural basis, independently of their somatic differences. According to the United Nations conventions, there is no distinction between the term racial discrimination and ethnic discrimination.”

    @Jim F What did your great-great grandfather do to get here legally? In that day and age (beginning of last century or before), they simply bought their ticket and passed the tests at Ellis Island. I’m pretty sure he didn’t fill out papers and apply.

    @Ryan Vice “He’s a local politician wasting our money on a federal issue.” //So is AZ.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 23

  77. Beef King says:

    Efren is quoted as saying… “I can only imagine the fear people are living with down there.”
    Who does he mean? Whose fear is he referencing?
    The U.S. citizen of hispanic ancestry living in Arizona?
    The legal hispanic immigrant living in Arizona?
    The citizens of all races and colors from Arizona who are terrorized by gangs and murderous criminals who have crossed the border illegally?
    Or the illegal immigrants living in Arizona?
    Or is it all of them or something else?
    Which group is Supervisor Carrillo concerned with enough to possibly subject the county to legal action for promoting a discriminatory bidding process?

    This was an important mistake on the part of Carrillo, and he should admit his error and offer an apology to every supporter of law and order that he has offended with his action.

    Thumb up 34 Thumb down 10

  78. Andrew says:

    I’m not voting for him next term

    Thumb up 33 Thumb down 10

  79. Raymond says:

    As a Latino, I must agree illegal aliens are here illegally and the law states that they should be deported. But when there is millions of illegal aliens, to round them up and send them back….well it is never going to happen.

    Because as many illegals as there are, their is 10 times more of legal Latinos that support them. We support them because while their deed was wrong their cause to support and build a better life, to give their a families a better future, to bring them out of poverty and make them productive in the world, this cause is noble.

    And while many of those who want to kick out illegals because they state the laws, well from all the postings and talk, I cannot feel but to think that there true intentions might have to do more with racism and bigotry.

    So I would rather stand with the noble cause and use Reason to solve the immigration issue, rather then join the party of hate.

    Thumb up 15 Thumb down 31

  80. Jim V. says:

    Well, Susan, he cited principle.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7

  81. Beef King says:

    Now that Mr. Carrillo has demonstrated that he will use his elected seat to forward his personal ideological agenda, he should explain fully his stance on illegal immigration and how he intends to mitigate the impact of illegal immigrants on Sonoma County. Also, he must now produce recommendations on how to solve this problem so that county business isn’t hamstrung by his emotional judgements.
    I followed the campaign of Carrillo, and I don’t recall him making any statements to the effect that he would run county business as his own personal business.
    Bad move Efren. This is just the beginning of the public scrutiny of your core ideals so that we can understand what to expect from you.
    I suggest you consider that what is best for Sonomans be your guide.

    Thumb up 38 Thumb down 17

  82. Susan says:

    It should be noted that Republic (the Arizona company in question) was NOT the low bidder for the contract that they were awarded. The low bid was an engineering firm in Sonoma County…and keeping the business inside the community was also a factor in the two no votes from Supes Carrillo and Zane.

    Thumb up 20 Thumb down 13

  83. Ryan Vice says:

    Efren Carillo needs to remember he was elected to serve in the best interests of Sonoma County and not to uphold some political idealogy of what he believes to be right or wrong. He should be recalled and voted out of office. He’s a local politician wasting our money on a federal issue.

    Thumb up 39 Thumb down 19

  84. Noah says:

    The only thing “wrong” with the Arizona law is that it may allow legal U.S. citizens to be jailed because they do not immediately have proof of their citizenship. For that reason only, it should be struck down.

    The furor it has created should be used to cobble together a workable federal immigration policy, something which is eminently possible. All stakeholders (Americans) could be satisfied by recognizing and asserting the illegality of the act of coming here as an undocumented person. We could make appropriate penance for it, in which only crimes other than being undocumented would result in deportation and/or imprisonment.

    An oppressed people (economically disadvantaged Hispanics) should have the chance to come out of the shadows to join and participate in our democracy. We “natives” will need to adapt; our country stands for something greater than simply the culture we have been used to. Change has always been difficult, but we have always survived it. Though am white and have my own nativist reactions, moral principles are more important than my immediate comfort. A more understanding (and less in-your-face) Latino community would certainly help me with that.

    Carrillo & Zane’s actions are not helping the greater effort of this struggle by taking one side. They are supposed to be governing THIS community.

    Both white and brown racists (I do not mean Carrillo/Zane) need to be quiet and listen for something better in themselves than their first, base emotions. The leftists need to quit yelling racism, just as the quasi-skinheads need to quit yelling about closing the borders. Not that I think either will actually happen.

    How are we going to close all our borders? Impossible. And pure amnesty would bring open violence into the streets across the country.

    This is a teachable moment. We can do something rare, something truly American, something that once again will have us be recognized and celebrated around the world. We can understand the strong feelings on both sides, and provide a good solution. We can teach ourselves how to absorb the shock of democracy and live together. It is close to happening.

    Or we can be stupid.

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 22

  85. Jim F says:

    I thought politicians took an oath to uphold the laws of this country?

    I am tired of being told my ansestors were immigrants, too. Yes, my great-great grandfather was, and when he came here he did so legally and learned English. Come to this country the legal way, and I’ll welcome you with open arms.

    We should take a lesson from Mexico and enforce our southern border like Mexico secures theirs.

    Thumb up 42 Thumb down 10

  86. Karla Gonzalez says:

    The principle here is that Carillo is a racist. He’s making this statement to appeal to race.

    Thumb up 37 Thumb down 15

  87. Zuma says:

    Someone inform Carrillo he represents the American citizens of this countty not the illegal Mexicans!

    If he cant support our laws and Constitution tell him to leave the country!

    The only one being harrassed is the American people who have to put up with illegals here to take our wealth and use our resourses!@

    Thumb up 46 Thumb down 17

  88. Rob Lee says:

    Not only is the Arizona law comparable to the US federal law, but it is actually significantly less harsh than the immigration law and penalties for illegal entry of Mexico! If only people actually read the laws instead of relying on complaints by unhappy people in Arizona.

    Thumb up 40 Thumb down 11

  89. nonesense says:

    Efren you are an embarassment to Sonoma County. You and your mini-me Zane really have got to go. I cannot wait for the next 2 years and your elections.

    eFREN, You need to do whats right for SoCo not what is right for you. You rpresent the People of Sonoma County not you or your family.

    IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTELY SHAMEFUL if you awarded a contract on a higher price just because of a “principle” that the contractor had NOTHING to do with. The citizens of Sonoma County would have suffered for years just so you could have your feel good moment and your notice to someone in the Obama Administration.

    Give us a break, we all know the true politician you wish to be. And of course the PD won’t say ANYTHING negative about you because you are their poster boy.


    they are they same person anyway,what one does so does the other.

    And by the way if you recall one that idiot Zane won’t know what to do so she might just leave. we would all be better off.

    Thumb up 37 Thumb down 26

  90. paul says:

    Racism hiding behind propriety. The company in Arizona didn’t vote for the law, campaign for the law, or support it in any known way. Punishing unknown (white)people for harms done by someone else to Latinos is racism. Whatever Arizona did, the company can’t control. It’s blaming all whites in AZ for something that wasn’t even done to the supervisor. Proactive racism outside his job venue should be considered questionable.

    Thumb up 39 Thumb down 11

  91. Thank you, Efren. Because of individuals like you I’m proud to be living in this community again…it’s been a dark period. Arizona and its compatriots can secede. And, there’s always Idaho.

    Thumb up 18 Thumb down 43

  92. American citizen says:

    I don’t believe that supervisor Carillo has read the actual Arizona statute. If he did then he would surely know that there is nothing in the statute which calls for the indiscriminent singling out of latinos based on racial profiling. What the statute does say in essence is that if an officer of the law has a reasonable suspicion to think someone is in the country illegally and without proper paper to show either citizenship or is here as a visiting foreign national then and only then can they assume they are here illegally. Essentially, it is the same federal law that the U.S. has had in place for decades. As far as I know, people who show up on U.S. shores illegally and who are detained and or deported need to understand the laws of the U.S. immigration policy before they enter the country and respect those laws.

    Thumb up 45 Thumb down 13

  93. Steele says:

    Efren really………?

    I would expect this nonsense from Zane but until now Efern was demonstrating his intelligence.

    Thumb up 28 Thumb down 31

Leave a Reply