Hourly Update

State, cities move to shield employees from Prop. 200 litigation

PHOENIX - Arizona and its largest city will defend its workers who find themselves in legal hot water over Proposition 200. Tim Nelson, chief counsel to Gov. Janet Napolitano, said Wednesday the state will pay the legal expenses of any employee who follows the guidance to be issued Friday by the Attorney General's Office about the scope of the voter-approved law. "We'll do everything we can to protect employees who make a good faith effort to comply with state law," said Nelson. That law requires public employees to check the immigration status of applicants for "public benefits," a term not defined in the initiative. Goddard's opinion is expected to decide what is - and is not - included. Public workers also must file written reports of those not here legally with federal immigration officials. The measure also permits any Arizona resident who believes the law is not being obeyed to file suit to demand compliance. It also says workers who break the law - and supervisors who ignore those violations - are subject to criminal fines and jail terms up to four months. But Nelson said the state will provide legal assistance even if an employee faces criminal charges, as long as that person follows the Attorney General's guidance and acts in good faith. For example, he said, Goddard's formal legal opinion may say that a particular agency does not provide "public benefits" and is not covered by Proposition 200. Nelson said if someone sues an employee of that agency anyway - or a prosecutor brings charges - then it is the obligation of the government to protect that worker. State and local officials became particularly alarmed earlier this week when Randy Pullen, chairman of the Yes on 200 Committee, said the initiative covers far more than just welfare benefits - and far more than just state services. He said its scope could reach as far as requiring city employees to check whether applicants for library cards are legal resident. On Wednesday, the Phoenix City Council voted unanimously to protect its own workers. "It's a matter of fundamental fairness that we stand up for our employees," said councilman Greg Stanton. And Tom Simplot called the decision "a no-brainer." Other cities are expected to follow suit soon. For example, Steve Leal, a member of the Tucson City Council, is crafting a measure he said is modeled after what was adopted in Phoenix. "This is clearly something to protect our employees so they're not living in some precarious netherworld, waiting for the shoe to drop, because of the vagaries of the law," he said. "What a stress factor that is." Time is a factor: The voter-approved initiative is scheduled to take effect after the results of last week's election are formally certified on Nov. 22. The only thing that will hold that up is if the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund succeeds in getting a federal judge to block enforcement of the new law while its constitutionality is evaluated. Nelson said he is not attempting to circumvent enforcement of the initiative. But he said that public employees who work to comply with the law should not fear that they are going to have to spend their own funds to defend themselves in court if they are sued. "We'll do everything we can to protect employees who make a good faith effort to comply with state law," said Nelson. That line, said Nelson, will be drawn by Goddard who is expected to issue a formal legal opinion Friday on what is a "public benefit." Nelson pointed out that state law says employees are not personally liable if they follow a written legal opinion of the Attorney General or even a city or county attorney. That, he said, also entitles them to have any legal fees incurred picked up by the state. Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, who helped craft Proposition 200, said he has no problem with taxpayers picking up the tab if someone files suit against a state worker - as long as the employee is acting in good faith.