Thread: Did Riverside voters doom IA ordinance?

Posted on Fri, Nov. 10, 2006

Future of Riverside's immigration law is in flux

Some residents want an illegal-immigration law, which helped topple two politicians, rescinded.

By Toni Callas
Inquirer Staff Writer

Following a national trend that sidelined Republicans, Riverside voted in a Democratic majority on Election Day. But in this close-knit Burlington County community, trends may have had little to do with the defeat of longtime committeemen Charles Hilton and James Ott.

Instead, residents say, a heated debate over illegal immigration and a controversial ordinance played a key role in forcing the two men from power.

Democrats Lorraine Hatcher and Thomas Polino, both newcomers, won by at least 300 votes each, leaving the township committee with a 3-2 Democratic edge.

Residents now wonder what will happen to the ordinance, which has already spawned two lawsuits.

Passed in July, the ordinance fines employers and landlords up to $2,000 for intentionally hiring or housing illegal immigrants and bars violators from obtaining various business permits. The law became a hot-button issue among Riverside residents and sparked protests from civil rights and Latino groups advocating for the town's immigrant population, which is predominantly Brazilian.

"The way this whole thing was handled has cost Riverside money and reputation," Regina Collingsgru, head of the Riverside Business Association and a Republican who voted Democratic, said yesterday. "We've been represented in a way that is not accurate and that's bad for business, and people are not happy about that."

Hatcher acknowledged the problems that had arisen with the new law. "Personally, I would not have went this way," she said yesterday. "But illegal immigration is really a problem. People were asking for it [the law]. No one has asked us to rescind it."

Some residents expressed hope that members of the newly configured committee were already talking to the two groups that have filed lawsuits against the town, in hopes of getting them to drop the suits if the committee rescinds the law.

Hatcher said things had not gotten that far. She said that when the entire five-member committee comes together in January to reorganize, it will discuss what to do about the matter.

Polino said that he, too, did not foresee anything changing while the committee was in transition. He said he still had a lot of "homework" to do to catch up on the matter, adding that the township had other business to attend to, such as redevelopment.

Hilton, who served on the committee for 12 years, five as mayor, thought he lost partly due to the national trend to oust Republicans and partly because of local issues, including the immigration ordinance. The reasons for defeat were "a mixed bag," he said.

Hilton said he believed the committee was giving residents what they wanted when it passed the ordinance. "I guess we were wrong," he said. "They didn't want it that bad."

But he contended there was no other local law that covered what the immigration measure accomplished. "That ordinance went right to the heart of the problem: illegal profiteering," he said, speaking of businesses and landlords who profited off illegal immigrants. "Nothing covered that."

The National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders, based in Washington, filed a suit against the township in the summer seeking $10 million in damages.

The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund of New York also filed suit against Riverside and against Hazleton, Pa., the first community in the nation to pass an immigration law targeting illegal immigrants.

Those who support the ordinances complain that illegal immigrants don't pay their fair share of taxes, and that crime rates are higher and schools more crowded. Those who oppose the laws say that they violate civil rights and that only the federal government can mandate immigration law.

The Rev. Miguel Rivera, president of the Latino coalition, was pleased to hear of the election results. "I'm thrilled to hear Charles Hilton and James Ott have been taught a lesson by the residents of Riverside," he said yesterday. "The lesson is, there are more productive and positive ways to enforce the law."

He said his team planned to reach out to Polino and Hatcher to explore whether the sides can resolve the issue.


http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news ... 974852.htm


This baffles the heck out of me. Up until now, every article I had read about Riverside's ordinance indicated that it was broadly supported by it's legal citizens. Unless the illegal vote stole the local elections, this just doesn't make sense.

UPDATE:

Town revises contentious immigration law to gain legal advantage

The Associated Press

RIVERSIDE, N.J. - The township committee here has amended a contentious ordinance to crack down on illegal immigration in an effort to help the municipality defend itself in court.

Two main groups have sued Riverside over the law, which puts financial penalties on businesses that hire illegal immigrants and landlords who rent to them.

Though it was initially adopted in July, the law has never been enforced. Under it, Riverside wants to issue fines up to $2,000 for those who knowingly hire or house illegal immigrants.

Under the revised law, the idea remains the same, but some language was changed to clarify that the law was not seeking to restrict immigrants' access to emergency care or legal assistance.

The changes came at the suggestion of the Immigration Reform Law Institute, a Washington D.C. law firm that is expected to help Riverside defend the law against legal challenges.

In response to the law, a group of Latino clergy and a group of local businesses filed lawsuits trying to block it.

The ordinance is one of a handful around the country in which communities are delving into what it generally seen as a hot-button issue.

Riverside, a long-struggling industrial on the Delaware River midway between Trenton and Camden, has had an infusion of immigrants from Brazil in the last several years. Some residents complain that the population influx creates overcrowded housing, a scarcity of parking, and other problems.


Since the law was adopted, there have been protests by people on both sides of the issue and hundreds of Brazilians - including many who are documented - have left town.

In an unexpected twist, the township committee amended the ordinance despite last-minute opposition from the mayor, who had been a proponent of the law.

Mayor Charles Hilton Jr., a Republican, and his incumbent running mate, lost an re-election bid earlier this month to a pair of Democratic challengers who oppose the law.

However, Hilton said it would be "morally and ethically wrong to ignore the views of the voters," according to Thursday's editions of the Courier-Post of Cherry Hill.

Hilton said that though he supports the law, he thinks it should be dropped for now and its future should be decided by the committee next year.

Despite his plea, the amendment was approved 4-1.

The new committee members are to take office in January.

---

Information from: Courier-Post, http://www.courierpostonline.com/


November 23, 2006 2:55 PM
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/ ... 46367.html