1. We will lose federal funding.
2. We have a desperate need for law enforcement facilities, hospital growth, affordable housing and jobs for legal citizens, how would the community ALSO afford this for many more?
3. Is housing in place? That's the first need in a sanctuary city and my belief is that the energy of the council is better spent addressing the housing need for the homeless here now; as was discussed in allowing local churches to do so.
4. Personal agendas should not be the business of the City Council. Nor should personal political agendas and therefore, as we consider closing the library that serves our current population I can't understand where funding would come not only to assist those seeking sanctuary that are here illegally but also where the City will close the fiscal gap once any federal funding is cut...to our schools, our medical subsidy for medicaid and federal housing allowances. It saddens me to see our city not putting our citizens here first in the time it spends drafting lengthy resolutions that do not support this statement on the City's own webpages:
"Homer prides itself on being an ambitious, forward-thinking community that embraces responsible economic development."
![]()
Please vote no on naming Homer as a sanctuary city. I also encourage each proponent to visit a sanctuary city prior to taking this vote. Spend some time, discover if your preference is to mirror what you see there including the increased crime, over-crowding and depleted services available to residents or to support and shepherd Homer's growth in other sensible ways.
-- Loyally,
Crisi Matthews, Broker
c: 907-299-8700
AK DRE Li #19150
CA BRE Li #01894501