Thursday, March 28, 2024

Tolerance proclamation sparks emotional debate

Posted

By Ian Dunn

Editor

At the Feb. 28 Leavenworth City Council meeting, the NCW United group urged the council to pass a “Welcoming City” resolution. After that, the council talked about the pros and cons of such a resolution at their city council retreat on March 24.

Ultimately, the council supported Councilman Rich Brinkman’s offer to create a Proclamation of Intolerance: Condemning Hate Crimes and Hate Speech. At the April 11 city council study session, Brinkman’s proclamation was discussed.

“We have three statements all dealing with immigration. I don’t think that is the focus. It was supposed to be hate speech. Just leaving one of those in would be adequate. I say that because I don’t want this perceived as a statement against Trump or immigration,” said Councilman Elmer Larsen. “I want this to be about hate speech. I want to protect the value of federal dollars coming to this community. If we put out something too far over the line, if somebody chooses to make that an issue, then we’d lose funding. That is a tremendous cost to the city.”

Larsen said the focus needs to be the locals. He did not believe the city needs to be making any political statements. Mayor Cheri Kelley Farivar indicated the threat to withhold federal funding is very real.

“Washington state had put in for some federal disaster funding which was rejected. It’s the first time in history this kind of funding has been withheld. I think the administration is saying, we told you we would do this and we meant it,” Farivar said. “That is my take on it. I’ve had a discussion with Mr. Brinkman about not that specific issue, where he actually said, I don’t want to be held up for ransom by the federal government. I think every one of us feels like that, but the reality of what can happen if we go too far is very real and very evident now.”

Councilwoman Carolyn Wilson felt the proclamation was directed at immigrants.

“That made me nervous, because all of sudden it might become a welcoming city. I worried about funding. If it is hate speech against white, black, Native Americans, Hispanics, Catholics, Jews...I think it should just be more general. Take out the part that mentions immigration and that seems like a slippery slope,” Wilson said.

As an elected representative to the community, Larsen said his responsibility is not to try and change the federal government’s way of doing business. His responsibility is to his neighbors, keeping sewer rates down.

Councilwoman Mia Bretz disagreed with Larsen, because the council is not “insular.”

“We’re not our own experience outside of the federal government. Our responsibility as representatives extends to advocating at the county, state and federal levels for our people. I hear what you are saying. I definitely agree that I don’t want to be political,” Bretz said. “I don’t think that is where we should be going. But I do think, we have to stand up for truth as we believe it to be. If that means we don’t get funding for a couple years ...for me, that is a sacrifice worth making to stand up for a value that is going to be incredibly important to our community.”

We also have to recognize for whom we are speaking, Farivar said. She said they are speaking for the citizens of Leavenworth.

“Are we speaking for them? Do we know the citizens of the city of Leavenworth want to be as politically incorrect as you are advocating? You just said, if it keeps us from getting a sewer plant for a couple years, it’s worth it. I don’t think that is so,” Farivar said.

Councilwoman Margaret Neighbors said she did not like the thought of caving into play yard bullies.

“I think that is what the federal government is doing. I’m absolutely sure the state of Washington and state of California will push back against those things,” Neighbors said. “I agree with Mia. We do have to stand up for some values. I really like this. I really like that we’re doing it. I don’t think it addresses what the group that came to us really wants to talk about. I think there might be other ways of doing that.”

Farivar said immigration reform is not the purview of the city of Leavenworth.

“It is going to impact the city if we have nasty deportations. It will impact this city. How many businesses in the city rely on the documented and undocumented to run their businesses? It does affect us. I think we need to let our legislators know, as a city, that it is affecting us,” Neighbors said.

Larsen said he disagreed that it was affecting us.

“I see no mass deportations. We are not in jeopardy of losing a workforce but we are in jeopardy of losing millions of dollars in a grant for a sewer plant we’re required to do,” Larsen said.

Councilwoman Gretchen Wearne suggested some edits to the proclamation. Brinkman said it would be quite sad if some important parts were omitted.

“We also know we are a nation of immigrants. If anything written in here is considered political or controversial, then we’re in real trouble as a country,” Brinkman said.

It’s not about who wins for me, Farivar said. It is about who pays for the push back, she said. She felt while the states of Washington and California could push back, the little town of Leavenworth cannot afford that.

She encouraged the council to do something as individuals, not as a city. Bretz said, no matter what they say, it will be considered political.

“In truth, it is political. We would not be doing this, if not for many people’s response in our city to the election, which was political. So this is political. Don’t kid yourself. It will be regarded as political because it has a political push behind it,” Farivar said. “It is part of a political backlash. There is no doubt about it. For it to be perceived as anything but political would be surprising.”

Farivar said they have responsibilities as citizens, but are those the same responsibilities as representatives of the city?

“In some respects, your role as a representative is greater to speak for the voices which aren’t easily heard that are from your area. I have a hard time here. I really appreciate what you’re saying, about being really pragmatic about the benefit to the city,” Bretz said. “It’s hard to weigh and see because it is not a hard number. To understand the value is difficult. We know what a sewer plant costs and the value to people. What’s the benefit of having an environment of safety and cooperation?”

Larsen said there have not been any riots in the streets.

“There may be fear, but more likely fear mongering. I don’t think we need to rattle the chains either. We invite people from all over the world here,” Larsen said. “You don’t worry if it is a turban or sash they’re wearing, they are welcome. We’re making a public statement, let’s focus on hate speech. Anything other than that moves us into the political realm. I’m uncomfortable with that.”

Larsen said they don’t need to emphasize times past. They need to focus on what is happening today. Brinkman took issue with that.

“If we’re not cognizant of our past, we’re destined to repeat. I don’t think it is fair to conveniently forget about what has happened in the past. You’ve mentioned we’re a nation of laws. Let’s consider the Jim Crow segregation laws, where it was a criminal offense to educate black people.

We have to understand our past Elmer,” Brinkman said.

Larsen said they are not trying to clarify they are the victims of their own behavior.

“We’re trying to address a situation that is supposedly happening today. That is what we should be focusing on. Anything else is a political football because of fear we are going to mass deport people. I find that assumption is crazy. It’s not going to happen,” Larsen said.

Brinkman, a college instructor, told about a recent experience.

“When I have students with tears in their eyes come up to me and share they are being treated in a certain way and told they need to go back home because what is going on nationally. I’m sorry, I don’t find that political. I find that a real shame,” Brinkman said.

Farivar said she agreed with that.

“Everyone that is here should be treated respectfully. Honestly, I feel, as a conservative, that I’m being treated with a lot of hate speech recently. Joel and I had this conversation recently. It’s coming pretty hard and heavy toward the right, right now,” Farivar said. “Hate speech of any kind is inappropriate. It is disrespectful and does nothing to foment the public discourse that will take our country forward. Immigration is not the only hate speech we’re hearing, so focusing on immigration is perhaps inappropriate.”

Councilwoman Sharon Waters said the city should not say anything. Neighbors said if the city does not say anything, it is in collusion. Farivar then cautioned the council, there needed to be unanimous agreement on this issue.

“Unless we have 100 percent agreement on this, I’m not signing it. I want consensus or it is not going to happen. Listen closely to everyone’s opinions and feelings about this,” Farivar said.

It was decided to make some changes to the proclamation, then revisit it later.

Ian Dunn can be reached at 548-5286 or editor@leavenworthecho.com.

 

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here