Requests records from Planning Commission
By ACLU San Diego-Imperial Counties
SAN DIEGO – Concerned that the City of Escondido may once again be undermining the rights of immigrants in its community and possibly violating the law, the San Diego ACLU requested a number of records related to the Escondido Planning Commission’s decision Tuesday evening to reject a proposed shelter for unaccompanied immigrant children.
In an official California Public Records Act (CPRA) request, the legal director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties, David Loy, requested copies of all reports and records submitted to the commission relating to the proposed facility, the permit for the construction and operation of the intermediate care facility, and any video, audio, or written record of the Planning Commission meeting on June 24, 2014.
To comply with the CPRA, the City of Escondido has ten days to respond to the request.
The San Diego ACLU has been monitoring Escondido closely since 2006, when the city attempted to pass a ban on rentals to undocumented immigrants. Escondido has demonstrated a long history of trampling on the civil and human rights of immigrants in the United States.
The ACLU will be monitoring future actions by the Escondido City Council and other city entities on this proposed shelter for unaccompanied immigrant children, ages 6 – 17, many of whom are seeking refugee status after fleeing from increasing violence and insecurity in their homelands.
In the last year alone, almost twice as many asylum seekers expressing fear of returning to their home countries have arrived at our borders. Political analysts attribute this sharp increase to dramatic rises in the numbers of murders, rape, violence against women, kidnappings, extortion, and other conditions fueled by political instability and economic insecurity, and the growing dominance of transnational gangs.
Looks like Escondido could use a neighborhood house.
Today in 2014,Logan Heights could use a NH.
The question remains – did the City do everything in its power to inform the citizens of the proposed safe-house (for want of a better term), and what was the intent of the City’s planning commission?
I doubt there was malice on the part of the planning commission, and, at best, you can rack up ignorance on the part of the City council majority. Not sure of the City Manager’s agenda.