Cochise will field anonymous complaints

Pima, Pinal and Santa Cruz counties require that people accusing businesses of employing unauthorized workers submit a written complaint in person and sign it under oath before a notary public.

The three counties are also warning people that anybody who knowingly files a false and frivolous complaint against an employer is subject to a $500 fine and as many as 30 days in jail.

"It is to make sure that those who do come in and file a complaint are telling the truth," said Thomas O'Sullivan, chief criminal deputy attorney in Santa Cruz County.

Cochise County Attorney Ed Rheinheimer will allow anonymous complaints despite his own apprehensions.

His office will only accept phone calls — no e-mails — and probe the caller to determine if he or she sounds reliable and has legitimate information, he said.

"I can understand why somebody who is reporting this kind of information might not want their ID to become public," Rheinheimer said. "But, at the same time, we are not going to go on a wild-goose chase because a disgruntled employee wants to cause problems."

The Pima County Attorney's Office decided against allowing anonymous complaints because it would leave them with no recourse to punish somebody for a false or frivolous complaint, said deputy county attorney Daniel Jurkowitz, who is leading the office's enforcement team on the new law.

Rheinheimer admitted that an anonymous caller who makes a bogus claim would get off free but said if that starts happening, they'll change the policy.

"We would have to stop even taking anonymous calls or complaints," Rheinheimer said. "That would be the only recourse we would have."

Ready with reservations

Southeastern Arizona county attorneys say they're prepared to handle the new law but still have concerns about the potential extra load on their offices and how the cases will play out.

The Pima County Attorney's Office is 100 percent ready to receive and investigate the complaints and determine which ones are frivolous, Jurkowitz said. Taking a case to court, however, is another story.

"We have no idea how that all will turn out," Jurkowitz said. "We've had never had that case before."

Cochise County is as ready as it can possibly be, considering enforcing the law is uncharted water for everybody, Rheinheimer said.

"I'm not sure we can say how ready we are until we get the first one," Rheinheimer said.

The Legislature devoted $2.6 million to help prosecutors enforce the law, but county attorneys say it may not be sufficient if they receive a high volume of complaints. Pima County received $500,000 and Pinal $93,000 while Santa Cruz and Cochise each get $38,462. The latter amount isn't enough to hire an additional attorney or investigator.

The lack of adequate funding means enforcing the sanctions law can't — and won't — be Santa Cruz County Attorney's office top priority, O'Sullivan said.

"If we get a large number of complaints, we are going to be unfunded for the remainder of what we spend in dealing with this new enforcement," O'Sullivan said. "It doesn't mean we won't do it but it will mean the people of Santa Cruz County will be footing the rest of the bill."

Cochise County is also worried about how they would handle a heavy load of complaints, Rheinheimer said.

Even though Pima County hired three new staffers with its share — an attorney, detective and legal assistant — the office isn't anticipating any money in future years, which would make it an unfunded mandate, Jurkowitz said.

Chamber of Commerce pushes ban on anonymous complaints / D1

SLOW START

For all the hoopla that preceded the implementation of the law, none of the county attorneys had received a complaint through Friday.

Southeastern Arizona county attorneys' offices don't have any idea whether the complaints will come flooding or trickling in. "Nobody can predict how many or how few will be filed, period," Pinal County Attorney James P. Walsh said. "There is no basis to make a prediction."

Businesses have been slow to get on board, too, with the law's requirement to sign up for the E-verify system, which verifies a person's employment eligibility. Through Thursday, 10,544 of the 145,000 state employers had signed up for E-verify, said Sharon Rummery, spokeswoman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

One of the reasons for the sluggish beginning might be uncertainty still lingering about the law. With a pending court hearing on Jan. 16 to address the constitutionality of the law, and discussion among state legislators about revisiting the law in 2008 to fix perceived shortcomings, county attorneys are cognizant of possible changes coming. And there's the possibility that no money will be given to county attorneys after the first year.

"Until the court decides for certain that this is constitutional, you bet there is some uncertainty," Walsh said.