READERS RESPOND

AT ISSUE: Will people honor a planned boycott of Costa Mesa businesses over police enforcement of immigration laws?First and foremost, what are people who don’t even live in our city doing trying to dictate how it should be run? Instead of trying to punish business owners, why doesn’t Nativo Lopez just take hostages to force his beliefs on our city. The bottom line is illegal -- yes illegal -- immigrants are becoming more and more of an issue by placing a huge burden on public and even private aid.

No one is going to start doing immigration sweeps, but if Lopez wants to force his beliefs on us, then I would be more than happy to support an initiative in this direction. Does this also mean the illegal immigrants are also going to boycott the public services they use? Not likely. Lopez should take his rhetoric elsewhere. It is not welcome in Costa Mesa.

DON MARSHALL

Costa Mesa

No, we will not boycott businesses that do not post signs opposing the immigration plan. Intimidation is not the way to resolve the issue. The threat may actually work to strengthen support for the plan it is trying to defeat.

KATHY HOFFMAN

Corona del Mar

I will boycott any local merchant that puts a sign in its window opposing the city of Costa Mesa’s immigration enforcement. It is about time someone stepped up to the plate and started doing something about all the illegal immigrants. I would also think the people that got here legally would be upset with all the people that are here illegally. And since when does a Santa Ana organization have anything to say about what goes on in Costa Mesa?

MARY ALLYN DEXTER

Newport Beach

I would boycott any store that gives in to the illegal immigrants in this country. It is time to stand up and be counted. Let them leave and come back in legally.

MARTHA LYDICK

Laguna Beach

Boycott Costa Mesa businesses? Then I should also boycott businesses from the states of Florida, Arizona and Alabama. In addition, I’ll stop shopping in Los Angeles County and anywhere in Orange County because these counties have also signed a similar Memorandum of Understanding with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to the one adopted in Costa Mesa.

A little phone calling and Internet research resulted in these facts about homeland security:

A formal Memorandum of Understanding with the federal government under the Immigration and Nationality Act section 287(g) effectively deputizes members of state or local law enforcement agencies to perform the “function[s] of an immigration officer.” This broad enforcement authority can only be delegated to state and local law enforcement agencies through a memorandum with immigration officials.

To date, three states -- Florida, in July 2002; Alabama, in October 2003; and Arizona in September 2005 -- have signed section 287(g) agreements with the federal government. Homeland security experts at congressional hearings about section 287(g) have encouraged even more states to enter into an agreement.

Section 287(g) authority can be particularly useful in dealing with illegal immigrant street gangs. Another need that section 287(g) agreements can address is the problem of massive numbers of removable felons incarcerated in state prison systems across the country. Training state law enforcement officers to screen incarcerated felons and ensure that criminals who are not entitled to remain in the United States are, in fact, removed is part of this authority. The agreement signed in February of 2005 in Los Angeles County is an example of an deal that addresses this need. The Orange County Sheriff’s Department also signed a similar agreement in October of last year.

It has become a cliche since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to say that enhanced state-federal cooperation is essential if we are to improve our homeland security.

When we realize that three states have already signed a Memorandum of Understanding, and as many as 13 are considering similar action this year, Costa Mesa is only innovative because it is a municipality.

JILL MONEY

Newport Beach