gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648
DURHAM -- City Council members voted 6-1 Monday night to suspend any city-funded travel by Durham officials to Arizona, reserving the right to approve exceptions proposed by their top aides.
The vote came in protest of recent moves by Arizona's government to crack down on illegal immigrants, and answered a request from Durham's Human Relations Commission.
The vote Monday, though, came on a compromise resolution sponsored by Mayor Bill Bell.
Bell's draft left open the possibility that council members might OK trips suggested by City Manager Tom Bonfield, City Attorney Patrick Baker or City Clerk Ann Gray.
It also embraced language submitted by Councilman Eugene Brown that called on federal officials to get on with a comprehensive reform of U.S. immigration laws.
It should, members agreed, simultaneously tighten border controls, establish "a path to earned legalization, citizenship and social integration" for immigrants already here and help other countries secure the economic development they need to "reduce the flow of immigrants in the first place."
Bell said he thought the travel limits would have little effect on city operations or on Arizona's economy.
City officials' travel to the western state is infrequent. The most recent business trip there by council member was by Councilwoman Cora Cole-McFadden to a National League of Cities meeting in 2008.
More recently, two Durham Police Department officers attended a late-May symposium in Tucson, Ariz., for law-enforcement professionals who specialize in using explosives to blast their way into buildings.
Bell singled out police as the main example of city employees who might have reason to travel to Arizona, immigration dispute or no, for extraditions or other necessary tasks.
He acknowledged that the Human Relations request had stirred up a lot of people, many of whom e-mailed council members to register their opinions. "I have not been [under] a rock, and I understand it's a concern for quite a few people in this community," he said.
Human Relations Commission members sided with boycott proponents who argued that Arizona's recently passed crackdown law is likely to trigger racial profiling aimed at Hispanics.
Bell indicated that he too wasn't happy about the possibility of forcing people to "carry documents at all times verifying their immigration status." He likened that to "a step back into the past of segregation."
But Brown voted against the resolution, in essence to oppose any travel limitation.
He noted that legislators in Arizona had narrowed the new law's scope, allowing police to inquire about immigration status after making "a lawful stop" for other purposes and then only when they have a "reasonable suspicion" someone is in the country illegally.
Brown also made it plain he regarded the issue as a distraction. "My constituents did note vote for me to be here to discuss or vote on national issues," he said.
But Bell underscored the local significance, noting that the Hispanic population has grown from constituting little more than 1 percent of Durham's residents in 1990 to about 12.4 percent as of last year.
