Cochise County Clarion

Local Newsletter

published BI-MONTHLY

Web Page: http://www.cochisecountyclarion.org/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cochisecountyclarion.org
Email: iclarion@cox.net
March 2015 Issue 26

Senator Jeff Sessions timeline of Obama

Administrations dismantling of Immigration Law
Obama has said numerous times that it could not be done legally by them (Obama administration); then they
went ahead and did it as follows:
January, 2009: Obama Administration Ends Worksite Enforcement Actions.
January 29, 2009: Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) Delays E-Verify Deadline.
April 16, 2009: Secretary Napolitano, Delays E-Verify Deadline a Second time.
June 3, 2009: Secretary Napolitano, Delays E-Verify Deadline a third time.
March 8, 2010: Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Inflates Deportation Statistics (LIES)
March 16, 2010: DHS Announces Termination of Cooperation with Arizona Law Enforcement.
The following dates denote the continuation of unlawful actions taken: 5/27/2010, 6/18/2010, 6/25/2010,
7/14/2010, 7/30/2013, 8/20/2010, 8/24/2010, 9/8/2010, 9/16/2010, 10/17/2010, and December 2010.
In 2011, there were 23 illegal changes regarding immigration. In 2012, there were 20 illegal changes regarding
immigration. In 2013, there were 12. In 2014 there were 95! So far this year there have been 17 yes, as of
this writing, which is in six weeks. All total, there have been some 178 (and counting) illegal changes to our
immigration law.
In summary, America is not only inviting in anyone who wants to come to our shores, we are paying for them to
do so. Remember they come to better themselves, their lives, and their children. Exactly who is looking out for
you and yours?
To read the entire 58 page article go to http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/16/sen-sessionsreleases-lengthy-timeline-of-obama-administrations-dismantling-of-immigration-law/
Editors Note: The reader is reminded as to the purpose of Government: governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.
Article 2 section 2 Arizona State Constitution. We the people need to demand these unlawful changes made by
the executive branch be deemed to be null and void. Changes are only valid if made by the legislative branch.
Call your congressional representative and your senators.
Rep. McSally 202 225 2542
(D.C.)
Only Az. Republican to vote FOR Amnesty
Sen. Flake
520 575 8633
(Tucson)
Gang of 8 support amnesty
Sen. McCain 520 670 6637
(Tucson)
Gang of 8 support amnesty

Sierra Vista Budget Crisis 101

Yvonne Mayer

In recent weeks much has been said (and printed) about the Citizens Advisory Council (CAC) and the work
they are doing to provide recommendations to the City Council in regard to the budget crisis. Yes, there is a
budget crisis. Not that you heard about it during the election cycle when you were asked to Dream Your City.
Even now, the Sierra Vista city page has this to say about the budget: The City implemented budget
reduction measures before adoption of the FY14 Budget. These measures included a hard hiring freeze,
reorganizations, and a reduction in capital expenditures. As a result, the FY15 budget reflects improved
fiscal stability. (http://www.sierravistaaz.gov/department/division.php?fDD=8-99)
A June 30, 2014 report by Gabriel, Roeder, Smith and Co. addresses a shortfall in public employee pension
benefits and explains the deficit and the percentages needed for employers to pay back the deficit.
http://www.psprs.com/Admin_Investments_and_Finance/2014_actuarial_reports_by_employer/PSPRS
%20Individual%20Reports%202014/036_Sierra%20Vista%20Police%20Dept._2014.pdf . The deficit was
caused by poor investments in the pension fund as far back the .com bubble, followed by the recession in 2008.
Although the city had no part in making the investments, they, along with other municipalities must make up the
deficit. In the October 7, 2014 work session the City Council was briefed on the deficit.
Today we have the CAC struggling with how to raise revenue or cut expenses. As a wage-earner, how would
you meet an unexpected expense? Would you first determine what your priority expenses are? Would you
then look at costs that could be cut? Would you cut back on entertainment, eating out and other nice-to-haves?
Perhaps this is the approach the CAC should take.
Instead we hear rumblings of a sales tax increase. This fix is being proposed in neighboring Benson. The
Benson Chamber of Commerce, the Southeast Arizona Economic Development Group Director and business
owners have expressed dismay citing the local economy, already depressed, would not benefit from the
additional burden of increased sales tax.
The CAC recently heard a presentation on increasing tourism. Really? Questioning the benefits of tourism is
akin to bashing Motherhood and Apple Pie. However, tourism benefits mainly lodging and restaurants, which is
good, but wages in these industries are low. Tourists do not buy houses, cars or other purchases to support a
thriving economy. Better to recruit new businesses to build our economy.
Visit the City webpage http://www.sierravistaaz.gov/ or call City Hall at (520) 458-3315 to attend the next CAC
meeting. Agendas may be found at:
http://www.sierravistaaz.gov/egov/apps/document/center.egov?
eGov_searchDepartment=11&eGov_searchType=145

Editors Comment: In Thursdays March 5th Herald, Our Readers Views, Mr. Dane Hall wrote a wonderful
article about the CAC process. Mr. Hall wrote, If the CAC limits itself to the apparent revenue focus the
council will miss finding opportunities for controlling costs. Controlling costs is an essential responsibility that
will be dodged if we focus everyone on revenue issues only. Mr. Hall continues, The Herald/ Reviews
writing about revenues so far seems to paint the State Legislature, which we elected, as the enemy of Sierra
Vista revenues. In this way, we can easily box out thinking into a revenue (only) box.
In Defense of Freedom
Governor Scott Walker, Moments ago I signed historic landmark legislation making Wisconsin a "Right to
Work" state. Most of all, it's about "freedom." If an employee, in the public or private sector, doesn't want to
join a union, he or she shouldn't be forced to. That's why I refer to it as "Freedom to Work."