Re[2]: Re[2]: Warrant Review, April 25, 7 PM, Costin Room at the Main Library

Let's not pretend that cutting CDBG funding for the Adult ESL program is going
to have a significant impact on the immigrant population in Framingham or on
school costs, for that matter. Most of the Adult ESL program is funded through
sources other than the CDBG grant, which funds about 2 classes. (Simple math:
a class is about $10,000).

"Because of this lack of oversight we are paying over 24 million dollars a
year to educated the children of illegals in Framingham. If there were no
enticements like ESL we wouldn't have that huge cost."--Jim Rizoli

As Ned's analysis pointed out, the $24 million number estimate of the
additional cost of providing educational services is as inflated as it could
possibly be. It assumes all students in the ELL program are illegal, and that
all additional costs that are greater than Natick's are created by the need to
service English Language Learners. Talk about a skewed set of assumptions.

I know one reason Natick's costs are so much lower that Framingham's, one that
actually happens to have some evidence to support it instead of made-up
numbers.

Natick's average teacher salary is much lower than Framingham's. Here is the
summary of the differences for the past 6 years:

2007: $7850
2008: $5502
2009: $8311
2010: $8597
2011: $7583
2012: $6140

Pretty simple math, I think.

I know a second reason: In 2012, Framingham spent 27% of its budget on special
education, and Natick spent only 21.6% of its budget on special education (a
budget that was already less per student due to the lower teacher salary).

More simple math.

Given the affordable housing costs in Framingham, we are likely to continue to
be a destination for all immigrants regardless of their immigration status.

Since Linda stole all the points I was going to make on this, I'll just add two
thoughts.

#1. Jim has been voicing this $24 million exaggeration for years. He comes up
with an estimate of how many illegal immigrants he thinks are in Framingham,
multiplies it by the per pupil expenditures, and puts that out as the cost of
illegal immigration. It is ,at best, an unrealistic way to think about the
issue. The central issue, as Linda alluded to, is housing. If every illegal
immigrant's child disappeared, the homes and apartments they live in would not
be empty. They'd be filled by other families who would have.....children. And
those children would go to our schools and we would need to have teachers for
them. Swapping who the children are in terms of first, second, third, or 9th
generation makes little difference to the cost of schools in the context of the
whole budget. Even the costs we do have for sheltered english classes,
translations, etc. would be partially offset by the need for more "regular"
teachers unless we want to encourage rows of uninhabited houses and empty
apartments.

#2. One of the goals of school is to prepare our children for the world they
will enter. In our case, the US of 2020 or 2030 is becoming far more diverse
than the one we grew up in. As the group of people who will one day have to
solve a lot of problems, I am glad that Framingham students do not need a "book
group" or a speaker to learn about someone who is of a different race,
ethnicity, socio-economic status, or perhaps even immigration status. They
live, play, study, and work together, and get to know each other just as other
human beings. Hooray for Framingham and hooray for them--if only adults could
display the same capacity.

Adam Blumer

Let's not pretend that cutting CDBG funding for the Adult ESL program is going
to have a significant impact on the immigrant population in Framingham or on
school costs, for that matter. Most of the Adult ESL program is funded through
sources other than the CDBG grant, which funds about 2 classes. (Simple math:
a class is about $10,000).

"Because of this lack of oversight we are paying over 24 million dollars a
year to educated the children of illegals in Framingham. If there were no
enticements like ESL we wouldn't have that huge cost."--Jim Rizoli

As Ned's analysis pointed out, the $24 million number estimate of the
additional cost of providing educational services is as inflated as it could
possibly be. It assumes all students in the ELL program are illegal, and that
all additional costs that are greater than Natick's are created by the need to
service English Language Learners. Talk about a skewed set of assumptions.

I know one reason Natick's costs are so much lower that Framingham's, one that
actually happens to have some evidence to support it instead of made-up
numbers.

Natick's average teacher salary is much lower than Framingham's. Here is the
summary of the differences for the past 6 years:

2007: $7850
2008: $5502
2009: $8311
2010: $8597
2011: $7583
2012: $6140

Pretty simple math, I think.

I know a second reason: In 2012, Framingham spent 27% of its budget on special
education, and Natick spent only 21.6% of its budget on special education (a
budget that was already less per student due to the lower teacher salary).

More simple math.

Given the affordable housing costs in Framingham, we are likely to continue to
be a destination for all immigrants regardless of their immigration status.

I would think if you really want to know how many children attending the
schools are children of illegals is pretty simple math. Just ask the parents,
they will tell you.
Then you can put my "inflated" figures to rest.
But guess what? You won't do it, or have refused to do it.
That's all I'm asking is for you to zero in on the issue but you refuse.
So I have to work with what I find here and there from statements said. You
also have the kids here just ask them.

Now in regards to a "destination" for immigrants, you bet.
Why wouldn't they come here. They have been told this is where they should come
from people back home.
They get free adult ESL, and all the other things they are able to get why
wouldn't they come here.
It's the American parents that have to struggle as the illegals are seeing the
pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and that end is Framingham. American
parents don't have it so good.

The cutting of the CDBG money is mostly symbolic to show that we are spending
enough on them already, lets spend some money to help out struggling American
families.
It also sends a message that the past performance of the adult school run ESL
has been negligent in the past and for that reason alone they don't deserve a
cent.

Jim Rizoli

Jim,

Realistically, as long Framingham is a base for affordable housing and job
opportunities, we are going to have a substantial immigrant population. I doubt
free Adult ESL with a 600+ person waiting list is much of a draw for any
rational person when compared to those two factors.

I do have a three questions:

--Are you saying that the Town should violate Civil Rights Act of 1964 and risk
a huge lawsuit just so that you can count the children of undocumented
immigrants who are served by are school system? Do you know that it is illegal
to ask children or their parents their immigration status under the case law
established by Phyler v, Doe and the Office of Civil Rights guidelines. Risking
a lawsuit doesn't seem very fiscally conservative, and intentionally violating
the law would seem to be a double standard coming from someone who wants "every
i dotted and t crossed" when it comes to immigration law.

--Could you please be transparent about how you calculated your $24 million
figure? Show us that simple math you keep referencing, as both James and I have
asked, because if it is the math that Ned shared, there is a word for it:
fiction.

--The posts from you and your brother seem to boil down to a few simple
concepts with regard to town government:

A. You have a political opinion that the town should do the maximum possible
under the law to discourage illegal immigrants from moving to Framingham.
B. If town officials disagree with your specific political viewpoint on this
issue, you want town meeting to use every means at its disposal to encourage
town officials to do the maximum possible with regard to immigration
enforcement.
C. You want Town Meeting to take the symbolic act of cutting the CDBG money
from the ESL program as a show of support for your political position, (a
position that you contended is politically risky because people were being
targeted by a vast left-wing conspiracy.)

After 17 posts with the same basic theme, I think we all kind of understand
that that is what you think.

You say you are fiscal conservatives, and that fiscal conservatives are
underrepresented in Town Meeting. We have a warrant with hundreds of millions
of dollars at stake. My question is: Do you have an opinion about anything else
in the warrant that you'd like to share, beyond this relatively small amount of
CDBG money?

I think one area that a few here are missing about this ESL problem is that we
are dealing with rule of law. Apparently some think that lying on any form of
document is to be winked at or even approved. When I was a kid in High School
when I heard of people using false licenses to buy beer that it was WRONG.
These people were breaking the law and it was conduct that was inappropriate.
The same situation is happening with most of the immigrants who are coming here
but ten times worse.

They just don't have false licenses but false Visas, birth certificates and
whatever else will perpetuate their stay here in America. The Adult ESL program
especially should be concerned because certain people have a much more
preponderance to do these illegal things but those running these programs have
no concern for this so they do minimal to check their Immigration status. Just
signing a form and given your word certainly is a joke, and those doing this
know it. If this is the type of people you want in your town, people who can't
even be honest on forms then good luck to you. The Adult ESL Plus program is
that type of program where the "wink wink" is happening and all it does is
cause more lawlessness and is a feather in these peoples hats to do more
illegal, unethical things.

If you, the citizen fail to curtail this lawlessness then you will reap as the
Bible says the whirlwinds. You already are reaping it with a School, Woodrow
Wilson that is 85% one nationality of children. That is proof of what my
brother Jim has been saying.

This overly represented population of children is proof that nothing has been
done to stop into our town and country the entry of people that shouldn't be
here. The Adult ESL Program is that agency of entitlements that will continue
the downward spiral of Framingham that you won't be able to fix other than
feed.

This is a reminder that insulting characterizations about and strongly inflamed
speech targeted at a group of people based on their race, color, national
origin, ethnic background, immigration status etc. is prohibited under list
rules.

Thank you for your understanding.

Linda

It's hard to talk about something without some details.
We have a very good understanding of what has happened to this town. We
predicted it ten years ago and everything is happening as planned.
It's not our fault that those responsible for it don't want to hear it.
I guess there is no nice way of saying something very wrong.
When you figure out how it can be done let me know.
By the way I'm still waiting for the figure how many children of illegals are
attending the schools.
My last understanding is around 1200-1500
That small detail would answer a lot of questions.
These answers can be found if those in the right positions look for them.
If you keep people in the dark you get what you're getting here.

Jim Rizoli

Mr. Jim Rizoli,

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Jim Rizoli <<email obscured>> wrote:
<snip>
> By the way I'm still waiting for the figure how many children of illegals
are attending the schools.

I'd like to note that the immigration status of a K-12 student's parent(s)
doesn't matter for 2 reasons:

1. US citizen children have a right to a public education, regardless of
their parents' status

2. Due to the Plyler v. Doe Supreme Court ruling, children who are in the
US illegally also get a public education. Some might not like that ruling,
but we must follow the law, right?
For reference, the Plyler opinion is here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0202_ZO.html

> My last understanding is around 1200-1500

Where do these numbers come from?

<snip>

> Jim Rizoli
>
> Jim Rizoli
> South Side, Framingham
>

Thanks,
James Wellnitz
Precinct 13

You're are absolutely right in your assessment. But guess what? As Citizens of
our town we have the right to know where every penny of our money is going. The
point that most of you are missing is it DOES COST US. Give us a figure and not
skirt the issue. The Town won't because our point would be proven.

The writer who made the opinion that even if one group wasn't here another
would take its place. That is like saying, if one form of a cost generated
problem was in our town that another would take its place if we fixed the
original condition.

NOBODY is going to tell me that Woodrow Wilson School is going to have another
nationality of children if the first 85% representation there left. Then again
nobody is going to tell me that Woodrow Wilson School isn't costing the
taxpayers MILLIONS of extra monies for books, translators, bilingual teaches.
Oh ya right, it cost us nothing as compared to just a school for American
English speakers. Stop this nonsense.

My poiint is, as any other cost generated situation, if you let it happen
again in another way then the powers to be aren't trying to stop it in the
first place. Saying it will pop up somewhere else is luducrious.

As to children of Immigrants we certainly have to apply the rules and
regulations established for their welfare.
It isn't their fault.

My bigger concern is the ADULTS who don't come under the rules for the
children. Already a big mess is happening with the welfare payments going to
the "suppossed" marathon bombers. It is NOT these people as kids that bothers
me it is the payments that went to their PARENTS. Now people are all upset.
They shoud be, keep stricker control on people who you let into America.

Lastly, Miss Dunbracks assessment of our views was right on the money, couldn't
have said it better.

Joe Rizoli

Mr. Joe Rizoli,

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Joseph Rizoli <<email obscured>> wrote:
<snip>

> NOBODY is going to tell me that Woodrow Wilson School is going to have
> another nationality of children if the first 85% representation there left.
> Then again nobody is going to tell me that Woodrow Wilson School isn't
> costing the taxpayers MILLIONS of extra monies for books, translators,
> bilingual teaches. Oh ya right, it cost us nothing as compared to just a
> school for American English speakers. Stop this nonsense.
>

Would you mind telling us where this "85% representation" of some
"nationality" (which one?) at the Woodrow Wilson School comes from? I can
find data on ethnicity in public schools, but I haven't found any on
nationality.

<snip>

> My bigger concern is the ADULTS who don't come under the rules for the
> children. Already a big mess is happening with the welfare payments going
> to the "suppossed" marathon bombers. It is NOT these people as kids that
> bothers me it is the payments that went to their PARENTS. Now people are
> all upset. They shoud be, keep stricker control on people who you let into
> America.
>

How did we get to the Boston marathon bombings? I think this thread has
been half about US immigration policy all along, but this seems to me to be
entirely about US immigration policy - and therefore off topic for Framgov.

>
> Lastly, Miss Dunbracks assessment of our views was right on the money,
> couldn't have said it better.
>
> Joe Rizoli
> Joseph Rizoli
> South side , Framingham
>

Thanks,
James Wellnitz
Precinct 13

The numbers come from what I've gleaned from people in the school dept, if my
memory serves me right. Notice they are staying clear from this debate. They
can set you straight if they want to.
The school enrollment is increasing from the lower grades not the upper.
Which tells us that a lot of young children are coming here from out of the
country. Now lets consider where they might be from. side note....Yes it is
true some a born here but that is another issue altogether.
It's not the American families that are having the kids.
We already know that "other" than white families outnumber white Americans 3-1
in the number of children they have.
That being what it is....Maybe someone can tell me why most of these kids are
ending up on one school.
This would of been considered a strict segregationist move back in my day and
no one would of allowed it. Yet it's allowed now. Go figure!
Now figure in the cost to have one school set aside for this "unique"
situation. Add up all the teachers and the building cost etc etc....and
you're into the tens of millions of dollars wouldn't you think just for that
one school.
How about someone providing us with the total cost of running Woodrow Wilson,
total cost from soup to nuts.
Now eliminate the school altogether and see how much it cuts our school budget
down.
I'm talking eliminate all the cost and not just shipping the teachers out to
other schools.
If we didn't have our "unique" situation in our town we wouldn't have that
school it's as simple as that. The teachers union must be loving this!

Jim Rizoli

The school enrollment is increasing from the lower grades not the upper.
Which
tells us that a lot of young children are coming here from out of the country.
Now lets consider where they might be from. side note....Yes it is true some a
born here but that is another issue altogether.
It's not the American families that are having the kids.

Sorry to wreck your perfect "theory" but actual data shows you are wrong....

The % of students whose first language is not English in FPS has been basically
steady from 2008-2013- in the 34% range, which doesn't support your idea of
what is happening. But you are claiming that it is the ones who get ESL
services are costing us more and more. Maybe you think I am tricking you, and
there are more kids getting services even though the overall percent of kids
whose first language is not English has stayed the same?

Nope....The % of students labelled Limited English Proficient is 13%. That
would be the lowest rate since 2000.

Lastly, for all the commotion of no one giving numbers to help you figure this
stuff out, I got this data from the state Dept of Ed. website district
profiles. All of it is publicly available and can be googled in about 3
minutes.

Adam Blumer
Pardon the typos!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Rizoli <<email obscured>>
To: framgov <framgov@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Wed, May 1, 2013 4:54 pm
Subject: Re: [FramGov] Re[2]: Re[2]: Warrant Review, April 25, 7 PM, Costin
Room at the Main Library

The numbers come from what I've gleaned from people in the school dept, if my
memory serves me right. Notice they are staying clear from this debate. They
can set you straight if they want to.
The school enrollment is increasing from the lower grades not the upper.
Which
tells us that a lot of young children are coming here from out of the country.
Now lets consider where they might be from. side note....Yes it is true some a
born here but that is another issue altogether.
It's not the American families that are having the kids.
We already know that "other" than white families outnumber white Americans 3-1
in the number of children they have.
That being what it is....Maybe someone can tell me why most of these kids are
ending up on one school.
This would of been considered a strict segregationist move back in my day and
no one would of allowed it. Yet it's allowed now. Go figure!
Now figure in the cost to have one school set aside for this "unique"
situation.
Add up all the teachers and the building cost etc etc....and you're into the
tens of millions of dollars wouldn't you think just for that one school.
How about someone providing us with the total cost of running Woodrow Wilson,
total cost from soup to nuts.
Now eliminate the school altogether and see how much it cuts our school budget
down.
I'm talking eliminate all the cost and not just shipping the teachers out to
other schools.
If we didn't have our "unique" situation in our town we wouldn't have that
school it's as simple as that. The teachers union must be loving this!

Jim Rizoli

Jim Rizoli
South Side, Framingham
About/contact Jim Rizoli:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/6FUtORGuNBxCtdKpaGu0zg

View full topic or share:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5f8RO1cXkGLJms1o46H9e0

* Do you love maps? Community event calendars? Join volunteer geeks:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/maps

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Post: framgov@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment.
Get digest or leave: Put "digest on" or "unsubscribe" in Subject (no quotes)
Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting: http://OnlineGroups.Net

Be sure to read our charter at
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov/charter.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." (in tribute to Steve
Orr,
who had this quote in his personal footer).

This appears to have become a circular argument. These posters makes
unsubstantiated claims about millions of dollars being spent incorrectly,
demanding that the town make amends by asking questions and taking actions that
are clearly illegal under various federal statutes. Ms. Dunbrack and others
respond with factual information stating that federal law prohibits what is
recommended by the posters and requesting that the unsubstantiated claims be
substantiated. The posters then do not substantiate their claims and demand
that the town make amends by doing something that is illegal.... and on and on.

Thank you Linda for fighting the good fight and trying to elevate the
discussion. Sorry it didn't work out. I don't hold out hope that these posters
are capable of substantiating their claims or are willing to let the law or
facts get in the way of their opinion. They believe they are right because they
believe they are right.

Time to move onto a new thread.

Kevin Gatlin
TMM Precinct 1

Well, town meeting took all the discussions about the CDBG monies and made a
very thought out solution to all this talk.
Thanks to commons sense and rule of Law I would like to thank the The Ways and
Means Committee and especially its Chair for bringing sanity to Framingham.
Apparently, seeing the situation that exist with the Adult ESL program it
appears this committee saw the unfairness of this program in favoring by way of
its lottery those who were getting into the program over LEGAL residing
immigrants. The solution was to make a resolution that would make this program
more accountable to some sort of ethics and morality on behalf of those trying
to get into this program.

The well thought out solution is to make the signers of the forms to swear
that the form is truthful under pains of perjury.
This will certainly put a BIG dent in the viability of the program as to the
way it was run in the past.

LOTS of discussion about this took place and both sides haggled it out for
quite a while past the late hour. Some left before the vote and caused the
deciding votes that played in favor of the Resolution. The vote was close,
51-49.

Apparently those voting for this were in the class that one disdruntled town
meeting member said were "neo nazis and Brazilians haters". Can't think WHO
this member was referring too.

Anyway, Rule of Law still exist for at least 51 members of the Town Meeting
which brings a great smile to my world.

Here is a quick video showing the discussion in a vote FOR the resolution.

Town meeting by a vote of 51-49 voted to tighten up the way immigrants apply
for ESL.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywHEOyixiZM&;feature=youtu.be

Joe Rizoli

Town meeting by a vote of 51-49 voted to tighten up the way immigrants apply
for ESL.
Thank goodness we have 51 reasonable TMMembers who saw the inequity of what was
happening with the ESL program.
They still got their money but that is another story.
The only issue now is these 51 members have been slanderously
lickenedto Neo-Nazis, skinheads, and Brazilians by another TMM...if you can
believe that one.
And what's up with our Town Council not backing this up?
At least show good faith that something was wrong with the program and doing
something is better than doing nothing.

JR

Speaking as a member of the 49 who voted against this measure, I am very
disappointed with Town Meeting. I think that this resolution is mean spirited
and unfairly targets one group of residents for a political point. I would have
made the following argument, but was not recognized to speak before the
question was moved.

Town Meeting is asking that undocumented immigrants be blocked from this
program and this is a poor idea for a number of reasons. First, our country is
moving in the direction of recognizing and accepting undocumented immigrants.
Whether you agree with this idea or not, it is reality and it is in our best
interest that these individuals learn English. We should be looking for
creative ways to help bring Framingham together rather than going out of our
way to exclude one group to the benefit of another.

Second, this measure asks to create a single limitation or litmus test for
participation, immigration status. There are many undocumented immigrants who
live and work in Framingham, pay sales tax, hotel and meals tax, and real
estate taxes as an embedded component of rent. Some even pay excess income tax,
when it is withheld from a standard paycheck, but cannot file income taxes to
recover some of it in the form of a refund. In general, undocumented immigrants
have a net positive impact on the U.S. economy and this cannot be denied no
matter how many posts referencing questionable sources one makes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magazine/do-illegal-immigrants-actually-hurt-the-us-economy.html?pagewanted=all

Further, why limit only based on this one attribute? Am I to believe that the
supporters of this measure have no problem with convicted felons, sex
offendors, and tax deadbeats taking English classes but that undocument
immigrants are not worthy? Aren't there horrible, intolerant U.S. citizens in
Framingham as sure as there are kind, responsible undocumented immigrants, some
of who were brought here as children and have grown up in our community and
contributed to the value of the town every step of the way. Among members of
town meeting, there is not a single one who has recently broken a traffic law,
filed a tax return with a little fuzzy math, or otherwise skirted U.S. law? Are
we that perfect that we can bring collective judgement on a large group of
people without a drop of reservation?

Third, this program should not expend a single minute or dollar verifying
immigration status because every dollar spent there is another taken away from
actual instruction. The organizers of this program have not been clamoring for
an additional administrative responsibility for a reason.

Supporters of this resolution say that undocumented immigrants are taking away
spots from legal immigrants who like to enroll. On this I agree, a change
should be made - and it is simple. I ask the leaders of the program to notify
members of town meeting the dollar amount required to erase the waiting list
and allow for full participation. Then we as a Town Meeting should appropriate
this amount. Problem solved and without a spirit of exclusion and negativity.

To me the argument is quite simple
Illegal aliens are taking spaces from those legally present in the country
When some one cuts in front of me in line at the supermarket I become
annoyed. I wonder if those
who voted against the resolution can not relate to this reaction.

Ned Price

Hear Hear.
Thank you for this posting.
I am also one of the 49. It's the spirt that is most disappointing.
Jennifer Adams
TM Prec 3

On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Adam Steiner <<email obscured>> wrote:

> Speaking as a member of the 49 who voted against this measure, I am very
> disappointed with Town Meeting. I think that this resolution is mean
> spirited and unfairly targets one group of residents for a political point.
> I would have made the following argument, but was not recognized to speak
> before the question was moved.
>
> Town Meeting is asking that undocumented immigrants be blocked from this
> program and this is a poor idea for a number of reasons. First, our country
> is moving in the direction of recognizing and accepting undocumented
> immigrants. Whether you agree with this idea or not, it is reality and it
> is in our best interest that these individuals learn English. We should be
> looking for creative ways to help bring Framingham together rather than
> going out of our way to exclude one group to the benefit of another.
>
> Second, this measure asks to create a single limitation or litmus test for
> participation, immigration status. There are many undocumented immigrants
> who live and work in Framingham, pay sales tax, hotel and meals tax, and
> real estate taxes as an embedded component of rent. Some even pay excess
> income tax, when it is withheld from a standard paycheck, but cannot file
> income taxes to recover some of it in the form of a refund. In general,
> undocumented immigrants have a net positive impact on the U.S. economy and
> this cannot be denied no matter how many posts referencing questionable
> sources one makes.
>
>
>
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magazine/do-illegal-immigrants-actually-hurt-the-us-economy.html?pagewanted=all

>
> Further, why limit only based on this one attribute? Am I to believe that
> the supporters of this measure have no problem with convicted felons, sex
> offendors, and tax deadbeats taking English classes but that undocument
> immigrants are not worthy? Aren't there horrible, intolerant U.S. citizens
> in Framingham as sure as there are kind, responsible undocumented
> immigrants, some of who were brought here as children and have grown up in
> our community and contributed to the value of the town every step of the
> way. Among members of town meeting, there is not a single one who has
> recently broken a traffic law, filed a tax return with a little fuzzy math,
> or otherwise skirted U.S. law? Are we that perfect that we can bring
> collective judgement on a large group of people without a drop of
> reservation?
>
> Third, this program should not expend a single minute or dollar verifying
> immigration status because every dollar spent there is another taken away
> from actual instruction. The organizers of this program have not been
> clamoring for an additional administrative responsibility for a reason.
>
> Supporters of this resolution say that undocumented immigrants are taking
> away spots from legal immigrants who like to enroll. On this I agree, a
> change should be made - and it is simple. I ask the leaders of the program
> to notify members of town meeting the dollar amount required to erase the
> waiting list and allow for full participation. Then we as a Town Meeting
> should appropriate this amount. Problem solved and without a spirit of
> exclusion and negativity.
>
> --Adam Steiner
> Town Meeting Member, Precinct 4
>
> Adam Steiner
> Nobscot, Framingham
> About/contact Adam Steiner:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/4z8cRwwukuVsJB3NmYaJWK
>
> View full topic or share:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5WoJozcNMPwSB9v557dC52
>
> * Do you love maps? Community event calendars? Join volunteer geeks:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/maps
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Post: framgov@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment.
> Get digest or leave: Put "digest on" or "unsubscribe" in Subject (no
> quotes)
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting:
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
> Be sure to read our charter at
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov/charter.
>
> "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." (in tribute to
> Steve Orr, who had this quote in his personal footer).
>

Adam,

Well said. I would also add that many of us who were among the 49 felt that we
did not want to risk violating other federal statutes. Town counsel noted that
this is an area of law that is unclear and changing. There is currently no
requirement to confirm immigation status according to Town Counsel. One larger,
practical point: immigration comes under the perview of the federal government,
not Framingham. The last thing we need is another unfunded mandate in the form
of being substitute ICE officials. I agree that our present immigration laws
need serious focus, but I cannot see the wisdom in handing down the enforcement
to municipalities. Talk about a budget buster!

Kevin Gatlin
TMM Precinct 1

Thank you Adam!!
Well said, and Kevin you took the words out of my mouth
"One larger, practical point: immigration comes under the perview of the
federal government, not Framingham. "

The ACLU would have a field day with this, Do we need a lawsuit?

Kylon Colinet
TMM precinct 1

Sent from my iPhone, please excuse my thumbs ....
617 877 6927

On May 2, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Kevin Gatlin <<email obscured>> wrote:

>
> Adam,
>
> Well said. I would also add that many of us who were among the 49 felt that
we did not want to risk violating other federal statutes. Town counsel noted
that this is an area of law that is unclear and changing. There is currently no
requirement to confirm immigation status according to Town Counsel. One larger,
practical point: immigration comes under the perview of the federal government,
not Framingham. The last thing we need is another unfunded mandate in the form
of being substitute ICE officials. I agree that our present immigration laws
need serious focus, but I cannot see the wisdom in handing down the enforcement
to municipalities. Talk about a budget buster!
>
> Kevin Gatlin
> TMM Precinct 1
>
>
>
> Kevin Gatlin
> Nobscot, Framingham, MA
> About/contact Kevin J. Gatlin:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/64mQBVBw5CjQtk92lp3XJt
>
> View full topic or share:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5u7SjqOZXkoDp1Bsot8G6a
>
> * Do you love maps? Community event calendars? Join volunteer geeks:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/maps
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Post: framgov@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment.
> Get digest or leave: Put "digest on" or "unsubscribe" in Subject (no quotes)
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting: http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
> Be sure to read our charter at
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov/charter.
>
> "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." (in tribute to Steve
Orr, who had this quote in his personal footer).

Adam S ask the solution is for us taxpayers to throw money at this program to
fix a problem THEY caused. No thanks.

No, make the program above board, make the people that run the program be fair
and make sure those who are trying to get in the program go somewhere else if
they are illegally here in the country.

The town needs to step up here and set an example that ANY illegal activity is
frowned upon and that using illegality in any way or form is not a good
foundation for anyone coming to the USA and Framingham.

The typical excuses for wanting ANYONE here in our country illegally has to
stop. Those who are against this resolution need a real Immigration 101
schooling in all aspects of this topic. Most are woefully inept on this.

Showing a link to a hard working Illegal just plays upon the heartstrings but
for seeing the hydra that is involved in letting that Illegal stay here in
America will probably end up with 20+ persons including that illegal.
You all need to educate yourselves and stop this nonsense.

Some great magazines are on the net, one is called The Social Contract. Very
balanced in showing where illegal immigration effects us in to many ways to
count.

The resolution could have been better for me because I wanted a program either
from a private company or through the Federal Government to provide a data base
to use in helping this program and others entitlement programs that the town is
involved in. I wish that was made mandatory before any monies go to this
program ever again.

I don't think it will happen because most of the people in the program will
have to be officially dropped, a big embarrassment for the Adult ESL program
and the town Community Development Department.

As to Town council, shame on you. He should have done more research into this
but he came back basically nothing. What do we pay him for? He was very non
committed to solving this problem.

He should have been prepared with more input from HUD that explained their
official stand on this. His input was an embarrassment.

This resolution is a first step in really revitalizing the town.
I hope the Town sees this opportunity and takes advantage of the Town Meetings
vote.

I've started this email 5 times and hope I've finally captured what I
intend. I'm one of the 51, and I did not vote with malicious intent, nor
does my vote mean any of the things implied on the floor of town meeting
or, to a lesser extent, here on framgov.
If you want to know my reasoning, please find me at Town Meeting and I'll
be happy to share it with you. That is not why I'm writing.
I'm writing to say: We all (should) feel strongly about what matters, but
we all have different thoughts about what matters and how that is best
served. One of the hardest things about town meeting (and all legislation)
is weighing these things and having to make a yes/no decision where
outcomes and consequences are not clear cut.
But most of us are voting with the good of the town in mind, and sometimes
we will disagree. And sometimes you will think a "yes" means one thing,
when it actually means another. Case-in-point: I know at least one person
who votes against the electronic voting motion on principle: not in a
futile attempt to obscure votes, but because there may be parliamentary
problems with the clause that grants the Moderator "discretion". This TMM
would actually prefer for ALL votes to be conducted using the electronic
method, or NONE at all. Not what you would imagine when you hear about the
"no" vote.
When someone votes in a way we can't understand, that is (often) a reason
to seek them out and ask them why and try to understand how their
priorities are also in service of the town. It is not a reason to boo the
single person who voted against the Library proposal (I was EMBARRASSED
that anyone would be booed for voting their conscience, especially when the
majority was so resounding), and it is not a reason to publicly, on this
forum or else-where, call a person (even as part of a faceless '51')
mean-spirited.
That said, in at least one previous post that started with the phrase
"mean-spirited" ended with a number of thoughtful observations and
suggestions that I think merit consideration. Thank you for those: that is
why I read this list - to hear what people think and why.
Respectfully,
Karl Rookey
Town Meeting Member, Precinct 14

On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Kylon Colinet <<email obscured>> wrote:

> Thank you Adam!!
> Well said, and Kevin you took the words out of my mouth
> "One larger, practical point: immigration comes under the perview of the
> federal government, not Framingham. "
>
> The ACLU would have a field day with this, Do we need a lawsuit?
>
> Kylon Colinet
> TMM precinct 1
>
> Sent from my iPhone, please excuse my thumbs ....
> 617 877 6927
>
> On May 2, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Kevin Gatlin <<email obscured>> wrote:
>
> >
> > Adam,
> >
> > Well said. I would also add that many of us who were among the 49 felt
> that we did not want to risk violating other federal statutes. Town counsel
> noted that this is an area of law that is unclear and changing. There is
> currently no requirement to confirm immigation status according to Town
> Counsel. One larger, practical point: immigration comes under the perview
> of the federal government, not Framingham. The last thing we need is
> another unfunded mandate in the form of being substitute ICE officials. I
> agree that our present immigration laws need serious focus, but I cannot
> see the wisdom in handing down the enforcement to municipalities. Talk
> about a budget buster!
> >
> > Kevin Gatlin
> > TMM Precinct 1
> >
> >
> >
> > Kevin Gatlin
> > Nobscot, Framingham, MA
> > About/contact Kevin J. Gatlin:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/64mQBVBw5CjQtk92lp3XJt
> >
> > View full topic or share:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5u7SjqOZXkoDp1Bsot8G6a
> >
> > * Do you love maps? Community event calendars? Join volunteer geeks:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/maps
> >
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > Post: framgov@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment.
> > Get digest or leave: Put "digest on" or "unsubscribe" in Subject (no
> quotes)
> > Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting:
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
> >
> > Be sure to read our charter at
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov/charter.
> >
> > "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." (in tribute to
> Steve Orr, who had this quote in his personal footer).
>
> kylon colinet
> Nobscot, Framingham
> About/contact Kylon Colinet:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/34s3XQjtprHeJT6A4hj8nQ
>
> View full topic or share:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/28NbrRfMkKfkN76nqrxVdg
>
> * Do you love maps? Community event calendars? Join volunteer geeks:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/maps
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Post: framgov@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment.
> Get digest or leave: Put "digest on" or "unsubscribe" in Subject (no
> quotes)
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting:
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
> Be sure to read our charter at
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/framgov/charter.
>
> "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." (in tribute to
> Steve Orr, who had this quote in his personal footer).
>

--
"What we think, or
what we know, or
what we believe is,
in the end, of little
consequence.

The *only* consequence is
what we *do*."
--John Ruskin
**************************
Check out my woodworking blog at http://www.robertkarl.org/woodworkingblog/

This has nothing to do with enforcement.
It has to do with people owning up to who they are.
No different than singing the dotted line on a loan application and pledging
their reputation on that signature.
In the old days it was a hand shake that would do it.
To divert the attention to all these other issues is disingenuous at best.

That's all Ways Means wanted was a an added field for their signature saying
they are legally going along with the ESL and Hud requirements. No one is
going to haul them away if they don't do it.
We have to spend our monies wisely and make sure those getting them are who
they say they are and don't have any misgivings signing their name to it.
Now lets see if the Selectmen will do what the will of the people want.....
Oh, one last point.....ALL these people are supposed to live in Framingham,
anybody checking what town they live in?

Jim Rizoli

As another TMM who supported the Resolution introduced by Ways and Means, I
appreciate the thoughtful response by a previous TMM who also supported the
resolution - I understand why it took several attempts to write. I found
myself in a similar position and really appreciated those who engaged me in a
discussion about my reasons for supporting it before making assumptions about
my reasons.

The "group" who supported this resolution probably had varying reasons and I
know in my case was not meant to support comments of a couple of former TMMs.
I, too, would encourage those who want to understand the "why" of it to talk to
me. I'm not looking to change any minds but I do have concerns about
assumptions being made regarding any TMMs vote. As on many difficult questions
before TM it isn't always just about the money that creates a heated debate.

My short version: This is a resolution. It does *not* say that those with less
than legal status would be denied if spaces are available. There is an
extremely long wait list.
I appreciate those who have made the commitment to be here legally and
contribute to the country they now call home and believe a preference is
appropriate.
Case law: The information is already required on the form. Case law on the
issue in the Resolution is not established and it was suggested that at some
point it probably will be. As this is a resolution, I have confidence that
Town Counsel will recommend appropriate action if the subject needs to be
further addressed.
RE: Immigration reform- views on that issue based on this thread probably
would best be not assumed. Happy to chat with anyone re those, too, but it is
not appropriate for FramGov

As to the Rizoli's not having to do with all this, none of you would have even
knew what was going on here if it wasn't for the Rizoli's. We've been exposing
this for years now, about time people saw the unfairness of the Adult ESL
program. Good for you all who saw common sense.

For a further no nonsense discussion go here:

http://www.voy.com/230861/1.html?z=1

I believe mentioned this before but it's worth repeating...
When this all came to a head last year the ESL program noticed a 40% drop in
applications. That's what we were told anyway.
And that was with the notion of something more being done.
So just think what can be accomplished if the Town actually took some sort of a
stand against illegal business, and all that goes along with who's working in
the town in general, who's on what programs etc...
Things could be cleaned up pretty quick but the powers to be would rather have
the town be on the other side of the LAW on this one.
Hard to believe this has come to this wouldn't you say?
I guess the slogan "Choose Framingham" sure fits well in what is really going
on.

Jim Rizoli

I am a new TMM from precinct 13. I was one of the 49 voting "no" on this
resolution. It's woefully ignorant. How interesting that those with the
strongest opinions in support of the resolution that would limit accessibility
to this ESL program are in no way connected to it. In other words, those who
have no need for this program, moreover those who do not even live near
downtown Framingham, are adamant about its administration.

I moved to Framingham specifically for its diversity, to raise my children in a
community that is not a monoculture. Shame on those who feel entitled to target
a group of people endeavoring for education. This program is not set up for
you, you do not need it, yet you feel compelled to restrict it.

So, now I will throw my hat in the ring. I'm a graduate of an ESL program
in Framingham Public Schools. I am connected to "ESL" in Framingham. I am
a legal immigrant to this country, and think that those who are here
legally should have first dibs on this and other programs. Those who are
here illegally should be left to live the difficult life that being a
criminal brings.

I have to say this one went over the top for me. In the years I was a TMM
while I may have disagreed with some of my fellow TMMs on particular items - I
never, ever would have called them ignorant, especially in a public setting.
Most TMMs sacrifice many days and nights on behalf of their neighbors (for no
pay), and such a comment is a complete and utter insult. And lets please not
mince words, calling the resolution ignorant in essence says those that voted
for it were ignorant - so lets not even bother going down the road that the
comment wasn't directed at the TMMs.

I've heard a number of reasons for voting in favor of the resolution:

making sure Americans and legal immigrants were given priority before anyone
else
stopping taxpayer funded charity type causes
concern over the horrible events in Boston with possible connections to public
assistance
making sure the program had adequate controls
elimination of enticements for more illegal immigrants
Framingham has done more than its fair share for social issues in the region

That said it is quite clear that there were a number of reasons for voting for
the resolution - and that not everybody that voted in favor for it fell into
the crew that blames even a cloudy day due to the illegal immigrant population.

To some of Ms. Martin's comments below:

"those that do not even live near downtown Framingham, are adamant about its
administration" - did I miss something? Is the adult ESL program only available
to certain geographic sections of the town? I thought it was a town-wide
program. And in terms of its administration, since it is town money - those
TMMs have every right to be adamant about how that money is being spent.

And in terms of the notion of Framingham not being diverse. All I can say is
are you kidding me? Framingham is one of the most diverse and welcoming towns
in the area. And shame on you for suggesting otherwise.

For those TMMs who have been quick to judge those TMMs who voted on behalf of
the resolution. May I suggest you open your wallets and put your money where
your mouth is and fund the program yourselves to the point you are happy with
it.

Brian Sullivan

Hear Hear, Brian! Precincts in Framingham are just that, part of
Framingham, and have to abide by the rules set forth by the entire
governing body. Just like the state of MA has to abide by federal laws, so
Framingham precincts must abide by the rules set forth by the town.
Jennifer, you're right, some of us don't live in downtown Framingham. The
reasons are multiple for all of us why we choose to (or not to) make our
homes in certain parts of the town/state/country.

As to your question of diversity, I urge you to revisit the reasons for the
1994 signing of the IASA law by Bill Clinton at FHS. It was because
framingham was one of the most diverse mixing bowls in the nation. You're
right, the program is not set up for me, but I do pay for it. Just as when
you buy your children their meals, you feel the need to not buy a diet full
of sweets etc, because you are paying for it and feel it is best for your
family, we choose to restrict who spends our money, and on what.

There is a major gap in this discussion. I am asking precisely this: why, in
the face of a popular ESL program that is generating a wait list, does TM
respond by seeking to restrict access to it? No one has addressed the problem
from this point of view.

That is my primary point here. Seeking to limit its benefits and doing so in a
way that (as others have already pointed out) goes beyond the purview of TM
(i.e. immigration status), is only one way to look at this.

Why not see the wait list as an indication that this program should, in fact,
be expanded in order to serve more? For those hyperventilating about the
potential cost, it need not increase. Consider this:
1. seek only to serve Framingham residents (proof of residency much like
getting a beach pass)
2. utilize local high school students, FSU, etc. to build up community service
credits by getting involved as ESL tutors

Here is a tip for those parents wondering what could give their child an edge
on their college applications: community service in ESL training. Why? Because
our colleges and universities are increasingly flooded with ESL students and
English faculty (of which I am a part) are constantly working on how best to
serve these specific students. If a college applicant writes not only about
his/her community service record but his experience with ESL training and his
contributions to its constant
need for innovation, he just jumped ahead of the pack by showing service as
well as attentiveness to the global environment of today's universities.

Food for thought.

From: "Jennifer Krusinger Martin" <<email obscured>>
> I am asking precisely this: why, in the face of a popular ESL program that
> is generating a wait list, does TM respond by seeking to restrict access
> to it?

Does it not make sense when there is a waiting list to give preference to
those who are legally present in the country?
That is why I believe most TM members voted yes on the resolution
( I also fail to understand why anyone feels any obligation to give any
benefits to those who have intentionally violated our immigration laws but
that is another story)

It is interesting to note that TMM in the "immigrant" precincts 15,16,17 and
18 voted yes by a margin of 9 to 4.
I recommend all to keep track of the votes of their TMM by accessing
http://www.framinghamma.gov/weblink8/Browse.aspx?startid=9409&;dbid=0
and clicking on the report for the night in question. One can also note who
leaves early.
Alas I was not there. I admit it.

Ned Price

I think the electronic voting is pretty telling.
People I thought would vote for it didn't and visa versa.
Will make a nice topic for one of my next cable shows.
I think some still are missing the point....this has to do with funds going to
one group of people who are moving to the head of the line ahead of those that
should be there first.
If you really want to see where this town is going check out todays MWDNews and
see how our state legislatures are voting on some local state issues. Hard to
believe they are representing us.
The foxes have definitely taken over the hen house.

Jim Rizoli

Based on the emails posted here, as well as those sent directly to me, it
seems that my remarks on the floor of Town Meeting about the ESL resolution
were entirely misunderstood.

I did not say anything about the motivations of those who voted in favor of
this resolution. In no fashion did I condemn those who voted YES.

I'll re-present and re-phrase my main point.

There are notorious voices in this town who fill the internet with vile
demonization of "The Jews," raising fear among Jews, and raising fear of
Jews. The listeners are cautioned to be fearful of Jews and seek to protect
themselves and society from the Jews.

The ESL resolution is clearly the result of agitation in FramGov, and
possibly other forums by those voices. IN fact, these voices now take
credit for the bringing this issue forth and seem to claim the vote as a
victory.

From the TM floor, I said that there may be good reasons to vote yes,
unrelated to the notorious voices, but given the larger picture, those who
find themselves standing together with those who raise their voices in the
service of evil are obligated to explicitly differentiate themselves from
the evil. Silence can only be understood as acquiescence.

I would have had nothing to say if the resolution had been offered with
words such as, "While we got the impetus to propose this resolution from two
residents who are widely notorious for hate speech, we ourselves are not
motivated by such sentiment and we repudiate the unfortunate impression that
we are acting in concert with bigots."

Yaakov Cohn
TMM, Precinct 5

Hmmm.....I wonder who he was talking about?
Maybe we should take them out back of the town hall and execute them, seems
reasonable to me.
Whatever peoples views in life are there is something called the constitution
that gives people the right to say what they want as long as they don't hurt
people physically.
Your words are pretty "hateful" but I guess yours don't count, as they were
let to stay up here.
If you don't like what certain people have to say in the town perhaps you can
get your own cable show and denounce then there, if you need help producing it
I will be glad to help you.

Jim Rizoli

The removal policy for posts is pretty clear: it needs to be the result of a
court order. (See http://pages.e-democracy.org/Forum_Content_and_Removal_Policy
for details).

Civility violations are handled off-list, as I have stated numerous times, and
complaining about moderation on-list is in fact a violation of list rules.

If the list member feels that a miscarriage of town meeting justice happened I
would suggest he talk to the much respected, learned chairperson of the
Ways-and-Means Committee about her favoritism towards this resolution. Her
appearance at town meeting was very professional and she explained the
situation quite well. WHO helped her in getting this information really wasn't
of concern because she and her Ways-and-Means Members seemed to see the
injustice happening here, thus making the passed resolution. It was a shame
that her actions were met with a TMM saying anyone supporting the resolution
was a "neo-Nazi's" and a "Brazilian hater" Apparently this TMM doesn't know
much about the current Adult ESL Plus program. The program doesn't just have
Brazilians in it. Maybe the TMM should do his homework.

In todays paper 5/7/13, a town meeting member from precinct ten wrote an
article in the Opinion page showing her lack of facts also about the ESL
program. She seems to mock the fact that the claim that their was "Illegals" in
the program laughable. Hmmmmm how does one explain the explanation to us by a
drastic drop in applications by 44% as compared to last year. One wonders why
such a large drop?

Is it because the new rules were applied about membership and being truthful on
the forms?
Makes you think doesn't it that their was a large group not eligible for the
program BECAUSE of their illegal status.

If the town meeting member felt he could have challenged this resolution he
could have made a resolution or amendment to the original resolution. Crying
about it now just doesn't do it for me.

The Boston Globe did an article today, Sunday May 12, 2013,Globe West Page 1 on
the Adult ESL Plus Program.

The article wasn't bad until it got into nonsense about the Rizoli's and the
SPLC and the ADL. Totally off topic and to me nonsense. The writer of the
article or whoever interviewed me didn't ask anything to me of the ADL or the
SPLC. To throw the opinion of those two organizations in the article makes me
question the reason for this. What in Gods name does the SPLC and the ADL's
opinion of the Rizoli's have to do with the Adult ESL Plus Program?

Anyway, the article was scanned for you to read and linked here:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/west/2013/05/11/framingham-residents-taking-sides-over-town-meeting-immigration-status-vote/UCeSrd8RYZF0fQ6lYCPhgK/comments.html

If you go to the website where the article is posted you will see my comments
back to the writer of the article, if they keep my reply up that is.

ESL Boston Globe.pdf 5.54mb

It is not at all off topic to provide information about the background of an
individual who is advocating a particular point of view. This is particularly
true when the information raises questions about the motives of that individual
in advocating such position. The fact that the Southern Poverty Law Center has
identified the Rizolis' organization a hate group and that the Anti-Defamation
League had identified one of the RIzolis as a holocaust denier and an
anti-Semite is totally relevant to the issue of their stance against
undocumented aliens participating in the ESL program. It absolutely calls into
question the motivation behind such a stance.

I would also note that the very close 51-49 vote (out of more than 200 town
meeting members) hardly sends a message to Framingham officials that the town
residents want them to scrutinize the immigration status of those receiving
town services.

Suze Craighead

The "motives" of the Rizoli's is one for "Rule of Law"

The Rizoli's didn't write the voluminous material at the Framingham public
library in three volumes on the Immigration laws. The "motives" are obviously
to see those laws enforced. It gets tiresome when the Lawmakers are siding with
the lawbreakers. It certainly would be great that our Lawmakers start setting
an example on how to be law abiding and not defend people notoriously noted for
document fraud.

The Article in the Boston Globe made some very interesting comments and even
omissions.

The article stated that of the 700 applicants and users of the Adult ES Plus
program only 30 filled out the complete forms. That means 670 people currently
in the program didn't. The question is WHY?

Does it really take a rocket scientist to figure out that those 670 people
using the program seem to have a problem making their real identity's known?
The 30 figure would be precisely what I would expect for those who are legally
using the program as it was intended.

A quite disturbing quote in the article states this:

"Most of the funding for the 700 adults served annually by the program comes
from the State Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Tibor said"

This would indicate to me that we have a State sponsored entitlement that STILL
is playing games with the 1996 Welfare Reform Act as to providing services to
those who are mostly ILLEGAL. This needs to be further looked into by the
Attorney Generals Office. Again, the program is aiding and abetting mostly
illegal aliens in their stay in America, which is a Federal Felony.

Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

In those sections a quite interesting quote is made about "motives" it says:
" knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions"

Apparently our Lawmakers who had common sense at the writing of those laws,
realized that people would KNOWINGLY go against the Law for their own "personal
convictions", thus, why it was called "aiding and abetting"

The Globe article ends with saying that certain Town Meeting members are
"working on an alternate resolution that would provide more money for the ESL
programs to reduce the waiting list"

Good luck with that "personal conviction". Just what town meeting needs, more
money for helping out a waiting list of four hundred people that consist of
more people illegally in this country. Can't wait to see that happen. We will
be back to square one. Are the people LEGALLY entitled to take part in that
program? The great "shibboleth" test is whether those wanting to be in the
program will be to see if they fill out ALL the forms and do as Town Meeting
suggested, signing a statement that they are legally entitled to be in that
program.

For ANY town meeting member to go along with those not signing that statement
would be "knowingly assist (ing ) illegal aliens due to personal convictions"

The Town of Framingham by way of its Selectpersons and its Town Meeting Members
have a real opportunity to step up to the plate here and make Framingham a
welcoming town to those who are LEGALLY here and who respect Rule of Law.
Anything else backing up lawlessness would be shameful.

I put up this article and the whole Boston Globe article here:

http://www.voy.com/230861/6.html?z=1

It seems that you misunderstood my prior post. I wrote in response to your
statement: " The article wasn't bad until it got into nonsense about the
Rizoli's and the SPLC and the ADL. Totally off topic and to me nonsense.... To
throw the opinion of those two organizations in the article makes me question
the reason for this. What in Gods [sic] name does the SPLC and the ADL's
opinion of the Rizoli's have to do with the Adult ESL Plus Program?"

I was simply answering your question in the last sentence quoted above
(although I suspect G*d does not have anything to do with the matter). The
fact that one well respected national organization has identified your
organization a Hate Group and another has identified Jim Rizoli as a Holocaust
Denier and an Anti-Semite is extremely relevant. There are many laws that are
not fully enforced, yet the Rizolis pick this one area of law on which to focus
their attention. It is reasonable to question the motives of picking this
issue of immigration law. One may be opposed to illegal immigration, even
vitriolic about it, without being racist; however, some are motivated by
racism. Ergo, that is what the " SPLC and the ADL's opinion of the Rizoli's
[has] to do with the Adult ESL Plus Program".

Suze Craighead

You cannot post because you are not logged in.

E-Democracy is 100% Donation Supported Contribute Today!

Help us support participation in public life, strengthen communities, and build our democracy, donate today!.

Follow the E-Democracy Blog

Hosted by E-Democracy. Sponsored by OnlineGroups.Net - easier email collaboration for your organization. Powered by GroupServer - open source web-based mailing list manager.