By KHALIL SPENCER

I was out of town for a week but managed to read Pete Sheehey’s proposed resolution (link) while sitting in a Washington, D.C. area hotel and thought it was interesting but not anything to set off anyone’s blood pressure.

Therefore, I am a little amazed at the hyperbole in Mr. Antos (link) and Ms.Shin’s (link) letters. Nothing in the resolution says anything about being a “sanctuary city” but it does reaffirm our commitment to treat everyone here with “respect, justice, and compassion”. So what exactly is wrong with that?

As far as Lisa Shin’s comment regarding “our County’s immigration laws”, correct me if I am wrong but immigration laws are Federal, not state or county.

As far as state or local declarations that Federal laws will be ignored, both sides of the political aisle have pounded their shoe on the table with regards to this topic, whether it be those on the left defying
Federal immigration laws or those on the right defying Federal gun laws.

Both sides occasionally act childish and that does nothing to solve the problems inherent in these sorts of issues, which become more intractable as we become more polarized.

I am not sure we need to state the ideals in this resolution at the county level, but neither does it do us any harm. Furthermore, the resolution does nothing to suggest that the County, which would not even
be on the map as more than the home of a few cattle ranchers and a private boy’s school if not for Federal dollars, will thumb its nose at Federal law.

Stop hyperventilating.