Related articles:

Sahuarita may oppose checkpoint Sahuarita council may join foes of checkpoint Official rules out debate on Border Patrol facility Sharp divisions emerge on I-19 checkpointGrowth notes

Other articles by Josh Brodesky:

All aboard survive Tucson air crash Pima foreclosure filings spiked in JuneState has help for buying foreclosuresJosh Brodesky: What will we do with all that dirt?Parade of Homes houses go to bankJosh Brodesky: Quarrel clouds Sun City VistosoHOA in Sun City Vistoso seeks to create real estate brokeragePima home permits rise, but it's still grimStoneWater settles lawsuit Winds could push smoke from Baboquivari-area fire into city

Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Health Care
Sierra Tucson
Eating Disorders Program Coordinator General
A1 Communications
Cable Techs

SAHUARITA — When it comes to border politics and enforcement, it seems everyone has an opinion. Except, that is, the Sahuarita Town Council.

The council tabled a proposed resolution Saturday that would have stated its opposition to a permanent U.S. Border Patrol checkpoint along Interstate 19.

The proposed checkpoint has been the source of much criticism from residents and businesses in Sahuarita, who have concerns it might drive smugglers and illegal entrants into their suburban community about 20 miles south of Tucson.

As such, the proposed resolution, even if it had no true power, had been the subject of plenty of hype and attention. A number of residents and local media members filled the small room at the clubhouse where the meeting was held Saturday.

After about an hour presentation from representatives of the Border Patrol and Drug Enforcement Administration, who pitched the need for a permanent checkpoint, Mayor Lynne Skelton proposed tabling the resolution. She said the council needed more input from the community.

After the vote, in which only Vice Mayor Phil Conklin dissented, Skelton said the resolution was dead in the water.

"I think it is, but that's my opinion," she said.

That might have been the only opinion stated by any elected official in the room.

For example, Skelton wouldn't say if she supported the checkpoint.

"My personal opinion doesn't matter," she said. "I'm an elected official."

Even Conklin wouldn't weigh in on whether the town should embrace a checkpoint.

Despite voting against tabling the resolution because he felt the council "needed to take a stand on the issue," Conklin wouldn't commit on how he would have voted on the resolution itself.

"That's speculative," he said, adding that he does, in general, support law enforcement.

Only Conklin and Councilman Roger Minor asked questions of the Border Patrol and DEA. Essentially, those questions were:

Would the permanent checkpoint have any effect on smugglers moving through the Tumacacori Highlands Wilderness?

Answer: Somewhat.

Why was the 50-kilometer mark chosen for the site as opposed to 25 kilometers?

Answer: To give the Border Patrol more time to respond to smugglers and illegal entrants who are spotted coming across the border.

How long would it take to build a checkpoint?

Answer: Four to five years.

Border Patrol Assistant Chief John Fitzpatrick and DEA Assistant Special Agent Anthony Coulson, who oversees the Tucson District Office, methodically presented why they believe the checkpoint is needed.

Although the Tucson sector is only 13 percent of the U.S.-Mexico border, it accounts for a disproportionate amount of drug trafficking.

Coulson characterized I-19 as a much coveted throughway for drug cartels based in the Mexican state of Sinaloa, just south of Sonora.

"The most important thing they want is access to that highway," Coulson said.

Beyond that, he said, a checkpoint gives Border Patrol agents a base of sorts to scour the more rural regions. It also gives them a set place where agents would have the technology available to check backgrounds and search vehicles.