Other articles by Howard Fischer:

$170M in state road work halted Photo-radar firm stays, despite lack of legality Worker comp ruling a blow to Arizona caregivers 2 bishops urge OK of ballot ban on gay marriages Lawsuit could void photo-radar tickets Judge to keep hands off election-fund law, for nowBiz finances survived AZ smoking ban Phx. TV station wants to ease cameras' access to courtrooms Judge scraps part of Ariz. public-election law Affirmative-action foes give up on 2008 ballot

General
CHULA VISTA LANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPE CREW LEADER Office and Clerical
Carf International
Clerical Office Assitant Trades/Construction
Best Paving
Asphalt Finish Roller Operators Driver/Transportation
Pioneer Landscaping
Dieel Fleet Mechanic Administrative & Professional
Buffalo Exchange
Bookkeeper/Office Asst. Health Care
Sonora Behavioral Health
CD Therapist Driver/Transportation
Western Emulsions
Class A CDL Drivers w/hazmat & tanker

PHOENIX — Arizona businesses that hired undocumented workers last year would no longer face prosecution under the terms of legislation approved Tuesday by the House Government Committee.

But anyone in this country illegally could be charged with trespass under another bill approved by the same panel. The bill also would bar police departments from blocking their officers from inquiring about the legal status of people with whom they come in contact.

Separately, the full House gave preliminary approval to a bill allowing police officers to charge people with trespass if they stand on public or private property looking for work and, as a result, disrupt vehicle or pedestrian traffic. HB 2412 is specifically aimed at areas in some communities where day laborers gather.

All three votes come as lawmakers attempt to find new ways to deal with people in this country illegally. Various estimates have put the state's population of illegal entrants at about 500,000, or more than one out of every seven residents.

The first measure approved by the Government Committee makes a series of changes in the state's new employer-sanctions law, which took effect Jan. 1. Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, the architect of the law, said the alterations not only clear up some ambiguities in that statute, but also help put the focus on those who are purposely breaking the law.

Perhaps the biggest change in HB 2475 would be to make the law apply to future hires only.

As adopted last year, the law made it illegal for a company to knowingly "employ" someone not in this country legally. That was interpreted by both attorneys and, at least informally by a federal judge, to mean anyone on the payroll beginning Jan. 1.

That brought objections from some employers who said they did not have an opportunity before then to check the legal status of new workers through the federal government's E-Verify database. The law gives virtual immunity from prosecution to any company that uses that program.

HB 2745 redefines "employ" to include only those hired on or after Jan. 1. That means if an undocumented worker already was on the payroll, a company faces no penalty.

That is a significant change, as a single violation allows a judge to suspend any firm's state licenses or permits for up to 10 days. A second violation within three years puts the company out of business.

Pearce said he was not trying to give a free pass to companies that purposely hired undocumented workers before the law took effect.

He said altering the law to make it prospective only probably makes it more legally defensible. The validity of the statute, while upheld by a federal judge in Phoenix, is now before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The legislation also spells out an offense at one location of a business affects only the license at that location, and only that location would be closed, protecting franchise owners.

HCR 2039, making it a violation of Arizona law to be in this country illegally, would allow state and local police to detain illegal entrants and refer them for prosecution on trespass charges or turn them over to federal immigration officials. A second violation would have to be prosecuted as a felony.

The measure, which ultimately would require voter ratification, would cover people in public places, regardless of whether they're on public or private property.

Jennifer Allen of Tucson-based Border Action Network called the proposal "incredibly invasive" because it could result in people doing nothing wrong having to prove not only who they are, but also that they are in this country legally.

Pearce, however, said police still need a valid reason to question people.