Whitesides Champions Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief, Sides with GOP on Border

 

By Santa Clarita Star Staff

02/15/2025 at 5:30 PM

 

Rep. George Whitesides (D-Calif.) introduced his first bill in Congress, the Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief Act, aimed at exempting relief payments from taxation for residents affected by the landfill's toxic fallout. Just weeks after joining Republicans to support the Laken Riley Act, Whitesides again joined Republicans to vote for the Agent Raul Gonzalez Officer Safety Act, which imposes penalties on individuals fleeing law enforcement near the border. While the tax relief bill has been widely praised, the border security legislation has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights groups over concerns of racial profiling, mass incarceration, and risks to border communities.

 

 

WASHINGTON — Rep. George Whitesides (D-Calif.) has introduced his first piece of legislation in Congress, the Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief Act, aimed at providing tax exemptions for residents impacted by the toxic fallout of the Chiquita Canyon Landfill. The introduction of this bill comes as Whitesides also crossed party lines to vote with Republicans on the Agent Raul Gonzalez Officer Safety Act.

 

Whitesides Revives Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief Bill with Updated Proposal

Whitesides introduced the Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief Act (H.R. 1179), reviving efforts to provide tax exemptions for relief payments to residents impacted by the Chiquita Canyon landfill. The legislation comes just months after a similar bill (H.R. 9918) was introduced by Whitesides' predecessor, Rep. Mike Garcia, in October 2024.

 

The original bill from Garcia aimed to exclude relief payments from gross income for tax purposes, treating them as qualified disaster relief payments under the Internal Revenue Code. The scope of Garcia’s bill included payments compensating for losses, damages, relocation, property value reduction, and other hardships caused by the Chiquita Canyon elevated temperature landfill event in Los Angeles County. These payments, retroactive to March 1, 2024, applied to funds provided by government agencies, Waste Connections, Inc., and its affiliates, insurers, or agents.

 

While the text of Whitesides’ version has not yet been released, his office stated that the bill seeks to protect residents from unfair taxation on relief payments. Whitesides highlighted the importance of addressing the financial burden on Val Verde, Castaic, and the Santa Clarita Valley communities, which have suffered from the landfill’s toxic emissions.

 

“These hardworking families should not have to pay taxes on the help they are receiving to recover from the damage caused by this environmental disaster,” Whitesides said in a statement.

 

Local advocacy groups and residents are rallying behind Whitesides’ efforts, noting the significant health and financial challenges posed by the landfill’s operations. The Val Verde Civic Association described the relief funds as critical for families struggling with exposure to landfill toxins, which have led to increased healthcare costs and loss of income-based benefits.

 

Although Garcia and Whitesides' bills share the same name and appear to target the same issue, the differences—if any—between the two proposals remain unclear until the text of Whitesides’ bill is made public.

 

Whitesides Joins Republicans to Support the Agent Raul Gonzalez Officer Safety Act

Just weeks after joining Republicans to vote for the Laken Riley Act, Whitesides again joined Republicans in voting "YEA" on the Agent Raul Gonzalez Officer Safety Act, legislation aimed at imposing criminal penalties on individuals who intentionally flee from U.S. Border Patrol, ICE, or other law enforcement officers. Named in honor of Border Patrol Agent Raul Gonzalez, Jr., who died in 2022 while pursuing individuals suspected of entering the U.S. without authorization, the bill has drawn both support and criticism.

 

The legislation would impose penalties of up to two years in prison for individuals fleeing officers, with sentences increasing to 5 to 20 years if a pursuit results in injury. In cases where a death occurs, the individual could face life imprisonment. Additionally, the bill permanently bars undocumented individuals who evade capture from obtaining legal immigration status in the United States.

 

Supporters argue the legislation is critical for deterring high-speed pursuits near the border and enhancing accountability. The bill also mandates annual reporting by the Department of Justice on violations and prosecutions under the act.

 

However, the bill has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), which argue the legislation could lead to unintended harm to border communities.

 

Civil Rights Groups Voice Concerns

The ACLU warned that H.R. 35 could endanger U.S. citizens and border residents, particularly people of color, by encouraging aggressive policing tactics and increasing the likelihood of wrongful or racially motivated stops. According to the ACLU, the legislation could lead to confusion in cases where law enforcement officers use unmarked vehicles or fail to identify themselves properly, leaving individuals unaware authorities are pursuing them.

 

The organization highlighted examples of harmful outcomes from such practices, including a Latino family in El Paso who was run off the road and detained at gunpoint by Texas officers in unmarked vehicles under Operation Lone Star. The ACLU also expressed concerns about vigilante groups in border areas, which have reportedly harassed and attacked individuals suspected of being undocumented, further complicating interactions with law enforcement.

 

"This bill may encourage more aggressive tactics, putting more community members in danger," the ACLU stated, referencing reports of fatal car crashes linked to high-speed police pursuits near the border. Human Rights Watch documented over 70 fatalities in two years from similar chases, including several bystanders and children injured or killed in Texas.

 

Calls for Alternative Solutions

Critics, including AILA and the ACLU, argue the bill duplicates existing federal and state laws that already criminalize fleeing from law enforcement and fails to address root causes of border issues. The groups also raised concerns about the bill’s lack of exceptions for individuals fleeing under duress or minors coerced by traffickers. Additionally, the ACLU criticized the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions, stating that they would contribute to mass incarceration without improving public safety.

 

Both organizations called for evidence-based solutions to border security that prioritize community safety, including improved training and oversight for law enforcement, increased resources to combat trafficking, and expanded legal pathways for immigration.

 

Whitesides has not yet issued a statement explaining his vote, but his support demonstrates his willingness to cross party lines on law enforcement and border security issues. With the Senate version of the bill now introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the legislation remains a focal point of debate, drawing support from hardline Republicans and significant opposition from civil rights groups.