http://www.registerguard.com

Springfield councilors won't enter debate
By Jack Moran
The Register-Guard
Published: Saturday, July 22, 2006

SPRINGFIELD - The City Council has no plans to discuss any local response to the national debate on illegal immigration, Mayor Sid Leiken said Friday.

Leiken and City Council President John Woodrow met Friday morning to set the council's agenda and decided it would not be appropriate for councilors to debate a proposed ordinance setting penalties for illegal immigrants in Springfield and the people who help them.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when a man named Michael Nave e-mailed the city asking the council to consider a proposal that would penalize landlords and employers who provide housing and jobs to illegal immigrants. The proposal also would make English the city's official language.

In an e-mail to his fellow councilors, Councilor Dave Ralston expressed support for the Nave proposal and spoke out harshly against illegal immigrants. Reacting to that, local activists and members of the Hispanic community on Thursday held a news conference at City Hall to denounce Ralston's comments.

Ralston on Friday said Spring- field leaders should discuss the possibility of an anti-illegal-immigrants ordinance.

"I may force the council to make some kind of decision on this," Ralston said. "What I would like to do is not necessarily make anything official, but take a stand one way or another. I want everybody (on the council) to be on the record with their opinion about illegal immigration."

Leiken said he personally believes that federal officials should enforce federal laws that bar illegal immigration. But it's not an issue that cities have any business debating as a matter of policy, he said.

Even if Springfield passed an anti-illegal-immigrants ordinance, the city probably could not enforce it.

That's because Oregon law prohibits state and local agencies from using any resources to identify and arrest illegal aliens. So it would be unlawful for Springfield to enforce such rules.

"If a resolution like this was implemented, it would just be a piece of paper and that's it," Leiken said.

Ralston says he understands the state law but believes that it should be changed.

"I'm aware of it and it astounds me," he said. "It's a ridiculous law."

Ralston wrote in his July 13 e-mail to other councilors that he was "tired of being politically correct in order to not offend anyone" and said local officials must deal with illegal immigrants because many people who lack appropriate documentation benefit from government services and "take jobs that Americans can and will do."

Ralston wrote that groups of illegal immigrants from Mexico "want to invade and not assimilate," and concluded his message by stating, "This is 'America,' and we speak English, love it or leave it."

The remarks angered local activists who branded the Ward 4 councilor's comments as racist and bigoted.

Francisca Leyva-Johnson, chairwoman of the state Commission on Hispanic Affairs, earlier this week called on the Springfield City Council to adopt a resolution that ensures the rights of all people in the city, including illegal immigrants. The Eugene City Council has adopted a similar resolution.

Leiken and Woodrow decided Friday that the full council would not consider that idea, in part because a resolution stating Springfield's commitment to protecting "people of diverse cultures and background" is already on the books.

"We feel that the language included in our resolution is very strong," Leiken said.

After learning that Ralston's e-mailed remarks had offended some community members, Leiken last Wednesday issued a strongly-worded statement condemning Ralston's comments and apologizing if anyone in Springfield felt insulted.

Ralston said Friday that he feels "hung out to dry" by the mayor and deserves an apology.

"I'm hurt by the fact that (Leiken) had to apologize for me," Ralston said. "He's going to have to apologize to me, and he's going to have to do it publicly.

"I've been talking to my constituents, and the next time he runs, I'm going to run against him and I'm going to kick his butt."

Ralston said he has received "overwhelming" support from people who share his views on illegal immigration. He believes community activists are unfairly making it a racial issue when his only intention was to state his opinion on a topic that is being debated across the nation.

"I'm not against immigrants. I want to make that clear," Ralston said. "What I'm against are illegal immigrants."

Leiken said he has heard from several people who agree with Ralston's views but has no plans to apologize for criticizing the councilor's remarks.

Leiken added that he feels it was unfortunate that Ralston's e-mail, which was sent to City Hall and to all other city councilors on Ralston's request, became a matter of public debate.

"I'm not sure an apology from me is needed," Leiken said. "If an apology is needed, then maybe the person who leaked (the e-mail) to the public should give one. Because if it wasn't leaked, then we could have dealt with this internally."

Ralston said he doesn't mind that his comments have ignited a local controversy.

"I'm glad this happened," he said. "It was a time bomb, and all I did was lit the fuse. ... I do hope things calm down so we can talk about it rationally. I don't want to tear the city apart. I'm hoping this is something that can unite us."