Spokane7
50°
June 21, 2010 in Nation/World
Town putting immigration concerns to a vote
Ordinance would likely face challenge in court
FREMONT, Neb. – Angered by a recent influx of Hispanic workers attracted by jobs at local meatpacking plants, voters in the eastern Nebraska city of Fremont will decide today whether to ban hiring or renting property to illegal immigrants.
The vote will be the culmination of a two-year fight that saw proponents collect enough signatures to put the question to a public vote. If the ordinance is approved, the community of 25,000 people could face a long and costly court battle. Either way, the emotions stirred up won’t settle quickly.
“Even if we say no … we still need to say, ‘How do we get along with each other now?’” said Kristin Ostrom, who helps oversee a campaign against the measure.
Across the nation, people have been outraged by – and demanded action against – the poor enforcement of federal laws to prevent illegal immigration. A law recently introduced in Arizona requires police to question people on their immigration status if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” they are in the country illegally.
A man who helped write the Arizona law is helping to fight for the ordinance in Fremont, which has seen its Hispanic population surge in the past two decades. That increase is largely because they were recruited to work for the Fremont Beef and Hormel plants, and the city maintains an enviably low unemployment rate.
Nonetheless, residents worry that jobs are going to illegal immigrants who they fear could drain community resources.
Clint Walraven, who has lived in Fremont all his 51 years, said the jobs should go to legal residents who are unemployed – something he believes the ordinance would help fix. Discussions on the issue can get heated, he said, particularly if racism is mentioned.
“It has nothing to do with being racist,” he said. “We all have to play by the same rules. … If you want to stay here, get legal.”
When he worked at the Hormel plant in the 1980s, Walraven said, he had one Hispanic co-worker.
From about 165 Hispanics – both legal and illegal – living in Fremont in 1990, the total surged to 1,085 in 2000, according to census expert David Drozd at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. He said an estimated 2,060 Hispanics lived there last year. In May, Fremont recorded just 4.9 percent unemployment, in line with the statewide rate and significantly lower than the national average of 9.7 percent.
If approved, the measure will require potential renters to apply for a license to rent. The application process will force Fremont officials to check if the renters are in the country legally. If they are found to be illegal, they will not be issued a license allowing them to rent.
The ordinance also requires businesses to use the federal E-Verify database to ensure employees are allowed to work.
Supporters of the proposal say it’s needed to make up for what they see as lax federal law enforcement. Opponents say it could fuel discrimination.
Results are expected tonight.
Ron Tillery, executive director of the Fremont Chamber of Commerce, which opposes the measure, said businesses are concerned the E-Verify system isn’t reliable and that they would be subject to fines if forced to rely on it. He pointed out that the main targets of the ordinance – the Fremont Beef and Hormel plants – would not be covered by it anyway because they are located outside the city.
Walraven said the measure is necessary because workers send their salaries to family in Mexico instead of spending it in the city.
“I understand supporting your family,” he said, “But it’s very much at our expense. We’re footing the bill.”
The Fremont Tribune has reported several instances of legal Hispanic residents being told to return to Mexico, including a woman who was shoved and yelled at by an elderly white man in a grocery store.
Jerry Hart, a Fremont resident who petitioned for the vote, said he’s been called a Nazi.
“Fear is kind of guiding,” said Ostrom, adding that frustration about immigration issues nationwide ignites a misconception that all Hispanic immigrants in Fremont are illegal immigrants.
The Nebraska chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has threatened a lawsuit, and the city worries about the cost of defending the policy. The city has estimated the legal action would cost $1 million per year to fight – costs that would have to be covered by property tax raises and city job cuts.
Kansas City, Mo.-based attorney Kris Kobach, who worked on the Arizona law and has been in legal battles over local ordinances elsewhere, said Valley Park, Mo., paid between $250,000 and $300,000 in legal fees in a similar case.
State Sen. Charlie Janssen, of Fremont, who has said he may introduce an Arizona-style bill in the Legislature next session, said it’s unfortunate residents have to decide how to vote amid threats of a lawsuit. He has declined to give his position on the ordinance, saying residents need to decide on their own.
“A vote for or against the ordinance does not make you more or less patriotic,” he said in a posting on his legislative blog. “Just as a vote for or against the ordinance does not make you racist or not.”
Stocks plummet as outlook in Europe dims 
oneanddone on June 21 at 6:58 a.m.
Isn’t it revealing how the ACLU is so quick to bring national resources to bear in order to allow these people to flaunt their disrespect for our laws. It’s what the ACLU does best. Illegal means ILLEGAL! The poor can’t go into a Walmart and walk out without paying. Sure, no one thinks it’s justifiable that someone should starve but neither is it acceptable to steal. Stealing is illegal and so is unlawful immigration. For the life of me I can’t see what the issue here is. Throw the bums out and don’t allow them to get a job. The real problem here is that businesses would much rather pay $3/hr than $8. Just like companies that send all their manufacturing offshore, all they care about is making themselves rich.
BigE on June 21 at 7:44 a.m.
I’ll with you oneanddone, call me an American for standing up rather than all the other names that get hurled at us.
liarsinnews on June 21 at 8:01 a.m.
Too many ambulance chasers in this country. oneanddone, it may be time to declare open season on low life attorneys.
Charlie on June 21 at 8:17 a.m.
old lawyer joke-
How do you tell if a lawyer is lying?
His lips are moving.
Ninch on June 21 at 8:32 a.m.
Hiring an undocumented worker is ILLEGAL. Renting to one is not (and also many laws to prevent discrimination in housing such as race, gender, family status, etc.). Why they convoluted the two together (working and renting) was not very smart.
P.S. Associated with this proposed law, I am curious about the residential rental vacancy rate in this city. It seems like a “permit” to rent (that everyone would have to obtain) would hurt the livelihoods of landlords and they would have a great case for economic damages.
spokanada on June 21 at 9:14 a.m.
This seems like common sense to me. Go after the people that employ illegal immigrants. Shut of the demand and the supply will decrease. I like this law way better than the “reasonable suspicion” law in Arizona.
bdr on June 21 at 9:53 a.m.
Its quite clear the intentions of business for the last 40 years
oneanddone is right.
corporations Increase profits and CEO pay
and if they cant get it out of our backs they move out of the country.
There is no benefit to foriegn made goods with the increase in CEO pay, the product price stays the same as American based product.
Our corporations don’t need education (which they claim is our fault for them not hiring us) They instead are hiring people for 3 buks and hour. (with no education and a completely foriegn language.) !
SugarShane on June 21 at 11:49 a.m.
Its because illegals work harder and longer than fat lazy Americans, anyone that has ever worked alongside them can testify to this. They also rarely complain about unfair or intolerable conditions. The American work ethic is responsible for the jobs going away, not the “evil corporations”. We have our unions and OSHA, something that can hinder profits, we brought this on ourselves by embracing capitalism. Sorry you whiners, but businesses are free to give jobs to whoever will make their bottom line look best and the laws are written to penalize the worker, not the employer so their is no incentive to change policy.