Woo Seeks a Compromise on Sanctuary Designation

Los Angeles City Councilman Michael Woo, author of a controversial resolution on political refugees, said Wednesday that he is trying to fashion a compromise that could remove the largely symbolic designation of Los Angeles as a “city of sanctuary” for international refugees.

Hoping to head off a ballot initiative over the sanctuary issue, Woo said he has been conferring with Councilman Ernani Bernardi in an attempt to modify the city resolution and present it for a council vote on Friday.

Bernardi, who opposed the measure when it narrowly passed the council more than two months ago, has been busy collecting signatures in a petition drive to place the issue on the November ballot and ask voters whether they approve or reject the resolution.

Woo said the prospects of an emotional and “racially divisive” campaign focusing on the sanctuary question persuaded him to try to persuade Bernardi to drop his initiative plan in exchange for a newly worded resolution.

“It would be disastrous for the city to have an initiative go on the ballot which would pit one ethnic group against another ethnic group and would exacerbate the tensions that are already out there in the community,” Woo said, although he told reporters that he was not accusing Bernardi of racism.

Bernardi said he launched his initiative because he thought local governments should not be involved in providing sanctuary, but should leave the activity to organizations or individuals who know they could be subject to criminal prosecution for harboring illegal immigrants.

In order to qualify his initiative, Bernardi would need 69,516 valid voter signatures or 15% of the total number of signatures cast for all candidates in the last mayoral election.

Bernardi, who said Wednesday that his petition drive is “proceeding beautifully, full bore ahead,” refused to say whether he had conferred with Woo or whether he plans to abandon the initiative if an agreement is reached.

Woo, in turn, would not provide details on what his compromise plan would entail, but he noted that opponents have objected strenuously to the reference to Los Angeles as a sanctuary--a criticism echoed by federal officials claiming it would open the floodgates to illegal aliens.

The resolution, which passed last November on an 8-6 vote, formally established a policy empowering city employees to disregard the legality or illegality of a person’s presence in the country in providing public services. It also called upon the federal government to halt the deportation of Salvadorans until civil war in that country ends.

Although the resolution affects political refugees from all countries, it was passed primarily in response to the plight of Central Americans, including Salvadorans and Guatemalans, fleeing violence in their homelands.

Woo and other council supporters stressed that the resolution basically reaffirms the city’s existing practice and that the designation of the city as a sanctuary does not preclude federal Immigration and Naturalization Service officials from arresting and deporting illegal aliens.

But the prospect of a ballot issue has distressed Woo and his supporters.

Councilman Howard Finn, who voted for the sanctuary resolution, said he now favors a compromise because the initiative drive “is providing fuel for hate groups.”