Bad for Carpentersville

I posted the following in response to a comment by “Richard” on the New YouTube Vids entry.  I want to bring it up to the “post level” because I think (hope) it answers some points concerning this blog and a mention that it is not “center of the road”:

I call’em as I see’em. If you’ve taken the time to read this blog, I’ve taken Sarto and Sliwinski to task (in fact, just last Friday I did so). I didn’t think it was a good idea for them to bring up the issue of illegal immigration.

Sure, I might take Sigwalt and Humpfer (along with Hinz, Ritter and Teeter) to task more often but that is because of one thing: they are extremely bad for the Village of Carpentersville.

• Did Sarto and Sliwinski bring forth a proposal for an illegal immigration ordinance? No.
• Did Sarto and Sliwinski bring up an “English-only” resolution? No.
• Did Sarto and Sliwinski intend to propose the impounding of vehicles of those driving without licenses or insurance (the intent of which everywhere else is to punish illegals)? No.

For 6 months [Trustees Sigwalt and Humpfer] yelled and screamed and whined and cried about how Sarto was stifling them on the immigration ordinance and “English-only”. As recently as April they vowed that they were definitely going to talk about it. Shortly after that, after they were securely in their trustee seats [and then for the past 4 months], they changed their tune and “didn’t want to talk about it.”

Why is it that they “don’t want to talk about it?” Humpfer said it [Tuesday] night, just as they began to say shortly after the election (and Sigwalt, Ritter and Teeter echoed) “We don’t want a lawsuit filed against the Village.”

Now hang on a second here! Sarto said that almost 11 months ago! Before the ordinance was proposed. Before they went ahead and proposed it anyway. Before folks from all walks of life [and places far away] descended on the Village to talk, every meeting, about illegal immigration. Before the protests began. And, before the damage to the community over illegal immigration and anti-Hispanic rhetoric.

So, excuse me if I’m a bit disenfranchised with these two trustees, and from time to time the others who jumped on their bandwagon. Excuse me if I don’t throw my criticism around equally to both those who brought this blight on Carpentersville and those who are trying to move past it.

If anyone deserves to be called “clowns” its Sigwalt and Humpfer. These clowns want to keep a draft proposal around that has already been ruled against and which even they have admitted in the papers are looking to change.

So, [Tuesday] nite they chose to end the meeting with a number of items of Village business still on left on the agenda because they wanted to protect an ordinance that they know won’t stand up in court. Hell, even their legal consultants from IRLI and FAIR have said that it won’t stand up in court in its current form.

Now that I’ve heard the rationale behind Sarto and Sliwinski bringing up the issue, I can understand it.  But, there is something I’m having trouble with …

Can someone explain to me why they are leaving something on the table that is soliciting a slew of public comments, that cause the meetings to run several hours longer,  creating animosity among residents, causing people (not just “illegals”) to move from the Village and causing businesses — which are vital to the financial stability of the town — to leave or not even consider Carpentersville in the first place?! Can someone explain to me how anyone thinks this is good for the community?!

Random Acts

During his report at Tuesday night’s Board meeting, Trustee Paul Humpfer said that he was “disappointed” that information delivered to residents on the new waste management program was translated into Spanish.

Apparently he would prefer the garbage pile up at residences, or the job of ARC workers be made more difficult. Just another example of an unwillingness to communicate even important information to residents.

Later, Trustee Judy Sigwalt reported on an incident she said occurred at “a Hispanic bakery”. An email that was forwarded to the rest of the Board members noted that a resident was not served at the bakery because “no English”. “There are two sides to every story”, Sigwalt charged, seeming to infer that Hispanics were not welcoming either — perhaps to justify her own position and attempt to recover from the damage done by the New York Times Magazine article.

But, Trustee Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski reported that “indeed there are two sides to every story.” She said that the person did not refuse service simply because the person was an Anglo, but rather said they did not speak English. Another Anglo who went into the store (and a member of the audience raised his hand) was served at that bakery. “So, yes, there are two sides to every story.”

Yet, not all was roses for Ramirez-Sliwinski at the meeting. At one point, countering Sigwalt, she uttered a phrase in Spanish. When asked by Sigwalt if she could translate into English, Ramirez-Sliwinski said she couldn’t. Sigwalt then asked President Sarto to ask her to translate … Ramirez-Sliwinski’s reply was a curt “no”. I do not feel that this was appropriate and is representative of the kind of cattiness that does not need to be brought tit-for-tat to these meetings.

And finally, let me say that it would be nice if President Sarto could offer a bit more brevity to his commentary. He offers many good points, I think, but needs to use fewer words to make those points, especially because those good points tend to get lost in the verbosity. It would also be helpful to not belabor the points in attempts to hammer them home.

BTW, today marks Day 10 of Border Patrol Ad Watch. The Village still insists on advertising for a job that would move folks out of the community. It would be nice to see them at least advertise for job opportunities in and around Carpentersville. But, politics is the rule here; not common sense. And everyone is dug in so deep that they will never accomplish anything. Talk about needing a recall election … we need a new Board or perhaps we need to simply dissolve the Village government.