EASTON, Pa. — Easton City Council on Wednesday unanimously approved a resolution supporting and protecting immigrant communities, but a request for stronger legislation led to a heated discussion in public debate.
The resolution, a revamped version of Councilman Roger Ruggles’s original approved resolution regarding immigrants from 2017, has been a passion project for Councilwoman Taiba Sultana, who originally intended it to be a Welcoming City ordinance.
After numerous council discussions and revisions, the new resolution was introduced by Ruggles, co-sponsored by the rest of council, and passed.
Outside of essentially modernizing the text to reflect the value and importance of immigrants, the current state of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other issues, the resolution largely remained the same as it was eight years ago.
However, public comment on the matter later in the meeting sparked confrontation among several members of the public and council.
Protecting immigrants in Easton
In essence, the document endorses and affirms that the federal government should recognize and support the contributions of both undocumented and documented immigrants.
It also says the government should develop a clear pathway for undocumented immigrants to obtain citizenship, and ensure humane conditions for immigrants at borders, maintain family unity and help individuals with lawful pathways to entry.
"That's the great thing about our country. We get to change who we want to lead us."Easton Mayor Sal Panto Jr.
It goes on to state that Easton supports the federal and state efforts to expand lawful pathways to immigration and citizenship to help strengthen the workforce and bolster economic growth.
And it says Easton supports the expansion of visa opportunities and collaboration with nonprofits and other entities to provide legal immigration assistance and other services, and recognizes the essential contributions of immigrants both locally and across the country.
And it says to send the resolution to neighboring municipalities and state and federal officials to support a dialogue on immigration reform, workforce development and community well-being.
Before the matter went to a vote, Mayor Sal Panto Jr. made a point that he did not want the resolution to be a “Welcoming City” resolution, as “a Welcoming City has a lot of restraints.”
Other council members clarified that the term “Welcoming City” had been removed from the resolution.
“But I just want to say that I am all in favor of protecting every person," Panto said. "I don't like what ICE is doing, I don't like what the federal government is doing, but that will be changed, hopefully in the near future.
"But that's the great thing about our country. We get to change who we want to lead us."
'Resisting fear'
Prior to the vote, Lehigh Valley Democratic Socialists of America member Mark Rosenzweig and Wilson resident Ronald Byron Johnson spoke in support of the measure.
“This is not about obstructing federal law," Rosenzweig said. "It's about ensuring our local government is not drafted into federal immigration enforcement in ways that break trust and endanger families.
“It is about resisting fear, because fear is the quiet destroyer of community and isolates people. It drives them into the shadows.”Lehigh Valley Democratic Socialists of America member Mark Rosenzweig
“It's about making sure that when a resident calls the police for help, they're not setting themselves up for detention. It's about guaranteeing that our city workers focus on serving the public, not screening the public.
"It's about stating plainly that we will not allow our libraries and city offices to become informal extension immigration policy and policing.
“It is about resisting fear, because fear is the quiet destroyer of community and isolates people. It drives them into the shadows.”
Johnson said the resolution would help the immigrant community while not forcing the city’s hand on future ordinances and resolutions.
And that “it simply signals that Easton acknowledges and values the contributions of all its residents,” Johnson said.
“I want to emphasize that this resolution is a minimum step, but minimum steps matter," he said. "They establish clarity, they prevent mixed messages, they affirm belonging.
"And they demonstrate that when residents show up to participate in the democratic process, Easton City Council shows up, too.”
'Welcoming City ordinance is necessary'
But during public comment at the conclusion of the meeting, Johnson expressed his disappointment in the lack of a true Welcoming City ordinance.
“I want to be clear and honest: Easton needs a Welcoming [City] ordinance," he said.
"For months, Easton residents have come here to this chamber consistently. We've spoken respectfully, we've offered testimony, we've shared personal stories, and we've made the case for why a Welcoming Ordinance is necessary.
“And then you still come back and you say we do this and we do that, but where you live, you still have not gone to their council and got them to pass it.”Easton City Councilman Frank Pintabone
“And yet, despite all of that, we repeatedly watched delays, procedural sidesteps and explanations that seem to shift from meeting to meeting.”
Johnson said eventually, such delays amount to obstruction, and “communities deserve accountability.”
He said an ordinance actually would protect vulnerable people, especially immigrants, and that a resolution simply amounts to symbolism, which does not help.
Councilman Frank Pintabone raised the issue that Johnson resides in Wilson, and has yet to push for such an ordinance in his own municipality.
“You come here, we let you speak, we meet with you," Pintabone said. "You bash us, you bash the police department, you bash the council, you bash the mayor, you tell half-truths. You come back, we still let you speak.
“We passed a resolution that we were very upfront and honest with. And in my opinion, this resolution is a little bit better than it was first presented.
“And then you still come back and you say we do this and we do that, but where you live, you still have not gone to their council and got them to pass it.”
'Not how this works'
Panto referenced an incident in which Easton had approved its police officers to attend a rally at the city's cost, apparently supported by Johnson and Wilson residents, stating “and when you get there, you bash the city council, the mayor.”
“Why?” Panto said in an exasperated tone. “Because I didn’t do what you wanted? Why? Because it took too long? Is that why? What was the reason?”
"I don't want to hear it."Easton Mayor Sal Panto Jr.
When Johnson offered to explain himself, Panto responded with “I don’t want to hear it.”
Stephen Schmid later came up to chastise the mayor for his conduct.
“I'm not sure that you really heard the words coming out of your mouth when you were addressing my friend Ronald before, what you said was really incredibly embarrassing and really disturbing,” Schmid said before Panto interrupted briefly.
Schmid went on to say he felt the mayor was stating “he should be groveling to you because you gave him this opportunity.”
He said Johnson had the right to criticize council and the mayor.
“You can't, if someone goes out there and says, ‘I think Sal sucks because he said this,’ guess what? You're an elected official," Schmid said.
"That's your job to take that. And you don't get to say, ‘Hey, you don't get to say that.’ That's not what this is about. That's not how this works."
Not obligated to listen
City solicitor Joel Scheer clarified that city council is not obligated to listen to non-residents during public comment.
Schleer said council has been “open to listen to everybody, but there’s a point here this will become a personality event.”
He advised that comment should be “controlled and limited” for the benefit of those present to discuss relevant business matters.
Katie Sope did not push for a Welcoming City ordinance, but highlighted the concerns that she said make one important.
“What I keep thinking about is all of the people I've talked to who I have encouraged to come to council meetings, to come and visit,” Sope said.
“They really just can't, because they're so afraid of being targeted, having a visa revoked, having a family member who came here illegally 30 years ago, who was a grandparent now being taken away and sent to a prison, essentially.”
