Economic effects of tighter border security

Found this story from yesterday’s L.A. Times to be interesting. Apparently, the tightening of the southern border is having such an effect on nationwide farming that the Bush administration is now working “quickly and quietly” to modify current regulations for visas for immigrant farmworkers.

“It is important for the farm sector to have access to labor to stay competitive,” said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel. “As the southern border has tightened, some producers have a more difficult time finding a workforce, and that is a factor of what is going on today.”

The farm work force is down about 20%.

Almost three-quarters of farmworkers are thought to be illegal immigrants.

In turn, farmers and agriculture officials are warning of price hikes as crops lie rotting in some fields.

The California Farm Bureau says farmers are “squeaking by” in California this year, but say immigration crackdowns have created a chronic worker shortage that could be devastating in future years, causing produce prices to rise.

With the US economy in a very fragile state, it will be necessary to exercise some level of caution in the actions taken in these matters. Solutions are not as simple as saying “pay a higher wage” and workers will come to those jobs. The economic balances and effects of inequity need to be considered carefully. It is higher costs that end up being passed to consumers who then either pay those higher prices, choose alternatives or go without. In some cases, workers in other sectors may require higher paying jobs to keep up with the rising cost of living. In turn some of these companies will go out of business, raising unemployment rates and creating additional obstacles to economic recovery as well as greater need for federal assistance on the backs of a lesser number of taxpayers.

While this may be an oversimplification for the sake of keeping the information accessible, the principles behind it are quite sound.  I still think tightening the borders is necessary, but additional actions are also required in order to maintain the necessary balances to our economy.

How do we propose to balance all of these issues that must be addressed simultaneously?

Board meeting recap

Apologies to all for not getting this out sooner, but there was quite a bit to report on, and I also apologize for the length of this. I hope the amount of information provided makes it worth it.

Now, I’m a bit puzzled at why Trustees were so against going into Executive Session to obtain information from IRMA before making any final decisions on other business. From the look of his reaction, Attorney Rhodes was not pleased either, coming just short of shaking his head when the Trustees voted not to immediately move to Executive Session.

I’m sorry if this sounds like another slight against these trustees but they are just too damn willing to charge the hill without even determining if it is covered in land mines.

Anyway …

As was mentioned yesterday afternoon, Paul Lanspa addressed the Board about the water rate increase that the Board previously approved. You can read his own comments on the water rate increase thread, but basically said that he doesn’t mind paying the higher prices for his water and sewer, yet he thinks we should have notified the residents before putting the new rates on the October bill. He questioned the Board on the increase being retroactive. President Sarto suggested that they revisit this and try and do it in a more equitable way. He asked that Manager Anderson, Attorney Rhodes and Trustee Humpfer and Lisa Happ take another look at this to make it right.

A few folks were asked to sit down when they attempted to use public comments to attack a member of the Board or the audience.

Bob Sperlazzo was asked to sit down when he attempted to bring an email exchange between him and Sarto before the Board. He tried to get a member of the Board to appeal the ruling, but that went no where.

Gloria VanCleave was also directed to sit down after she began to attack resident, Paul Calusinski.

On actual matters of business being considered by the Village:

• the Board passed the amendment to the Vehicles and Traffic ordinance, adding a $250 administrative fee by what I thought was a 6-1 vote (Ben Lefebvre‘s report,mentioned 5-2, but it will be corrected. He stated that in addition to Trustee Ramirez-Sliwinski, Trustee Teeter also voted against it, but Teeter voted to approve it). It might have been a bit of a shock to some that Sarto voted for it. Sarto did clarify his position about unlicensed drivers, stating his support for an Illinois law presently under consideration in the General Assembly to provide driving certificate to illegal immigrants. (Folks can read previous statements from me on this issue here and here.)

• President Sarto also stated that he had a few more candidates to interview for consideration of appointment to the Carpentersville Improvement Committee (aka “code patrol”), so that item was basically passed by.

• Also, the Board discussed an overnight parking ban, voting 4-3 to direct Village staff to look into amending the current ban to bring back to the Board at a later date. It was suggested that only residents, with a valid Village vehicle sticker, be allowed to park on streets overnight. I’ll give my $0.02 on that next week, but will probably make it a “what’s your view” this weekend to see what you all think about it.

And, finally … again, I apologize for the length …

Trustee Sigwalt attempted to bring back the issue of changing the censure rules to cover emails, whether sent as a private citizen or as Village President. It basically went nowhere. She wanted the rules to apply whether sent from one’s personal computer to another individual or as Village President. Attorney Rhodes stated that such would be a First Amendment, Free Speech violation.

I’m going to hold off from reporting more on this because I would like to see if the Board will provide clarification of their positions on this issue before I post more.

Oh, and Sarto also read a proclamation of “Domestic Violence Awareness Month”.

Then … came Executive Session … which we are not privy to, of course.