Day Laborers on Main Street Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

City of Frisco Question and Answer Board » Frisco Q & A » Day Laborers on Main Street « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
 

Brian C
New member
Username: Brianc

Post Number: 132
Registered: 06-2003
Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 10:27 am:   

Previously, Frisco residents were told the day laborers had to stay on the gas station property. I have not been in the area lately but saw today they are on the sidewalks which is loitering. They are also across the street (East of gas station).

1. Why are the police not policing this?
2. Why has Frisco still not considered building a center like Plano, not in complete view of the downtown area?
 

Todd Renshaw, Chief of Police
Moderator
Username: Todd

Post Number: 396
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 02:50 pm:   

Brian,

I have copied below the email sent to you this morning. Your assertion that we have previously told individuals that they had to stay on the gas station property is not accurate. The construction of a day labor work center has just as many issues as not building one.

Current immigration issues have been a hot-button for many people for several years now. I am opposed to the police department taking responsibility for illegal immigrants in Frisco for several reasons:

1. Staffing: We do not have the staffing to do the job adequately. Police officers have their plates full as it is. Our mission is public safety. We do not enforce civil law, but state and local criminal law. Immigration is a federal civil law. If a person violates the law and is an illegal immigrant, we contact ICE , who conducts an interview via telephone. If they are here illegally, a hold is placed and ICE picks them up. This is the same program that Irving and Farmers Branch participate in. It is called the Criminal Alien Program (CAP).

2. Mission: Our mission is public safety. We have worked very hard to gain trust in the minority community. Some are here illegally but many are not. The chilling effect on crime reporting from all minorities is certain if the police department were to spend its time trying to determine who is here illegally and who isn’t. If people are afraid to report crimes, then those who perpetrate crime will have more free reign on victims. The Asian communities have been especially troubled about this over the years.

The only solution is for the federal government to take its mission seriously in this area and not merely try to shirk it off on local law enforcement. I guess I would ask the question: Of all of the things we currently do to promote public safety and enforce the criminal and traffic laws of the city and state, what would the citizens have us stop doing so that we could spend our time trying to enforce immigration statutes? I can't honestly answer that question.

Don't misunderstand. I, too, believe that the immigration issue is important and that the country needs to address it. However, the problem cannot be solved by simply "rounding them up" and shipping them back home. I only wish it was that simple. Compare it to the "War on Drugs," the supply and demand are both issues in this country with no significant reduction in either in the last 30 or 40 years. As a side note, I had a gentleman call me the other day to complain about the illegal immigrants that hang out downtown. After hearing his story, he had hired one for 9 hours to do some work around his house and was angry that we allowed them to gather there. I asked him how long he thought they would be there if people like him would quit hiring them? The conversation ended soon after.

I have copied a few links for your review below. This has been a discussion topic among police chiefs for some time now.


http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/10/avoidable-disaster-police-enforcing-us .php

http://www.theiacp.org/documents/index.cfm?fuseaction=document&document_type_id= 1&document_id=634

http://www.dmiblog.net/archives/2006/10/why_shouldnt_the_police_enforc.html
 

Daniel
New member
Username: Daniel

Post Number: 5
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 11:56 am:   

Is it legal to hire the day labor folks who are out at the gas station on main street?
 

Todd Renshaw, Chief of Police
Moderator
Username: Todd

Post Number: 446
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 04:40 pm:   

If the day laborers are in this country legally, yes it is. It is up to the employer to check to ensure the laborers are here legally.
 

Perry Harts, Moderator
Board Administrator
Username: Perry

Post Number: 141
Registered: 06-2002
Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 03:03 pm:   

The city has tried for years to revitalize the original downtown area. Yet from 6 am to 5 pm one of the biggest eye sores and deterrent for future investors and business owners and shoppers is the crowd around the gas station on 2nd St. Why has the city not addressed this issue and build a day labor center like surrounding cities or have a way to prevent people from loitering at this intersection?

David Sadler
 

Perry Harts, Moderator
Board Administrator
Username: Perry

Post Number: 142
Registered: 06-2002
Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 03:06 pm:   

Mr. Sadler,

This City has researched the possibility of building a day labor center. Unfortunately, there are problems with that solution. When you read this you will see what I mean…

In some communities, like Herndon in Fairfox County, they have tried to regulate the issue as well. They went so far as to pass “an ordinance the council approved in 2005 as a legal companion to the day-laborer center, barring workers and motorists from striking deals for employment on the streets [in locations other than the day labor center]. The courts have generally required that communities barring public solicitation for work -- a form of speech -- must provide an alternative venue for that speech, such as a hiring site.” OK, sounds good so far since they provided the day labor center. However, as part of this process the City required that patrons using the day labor center had to at least prove citizenship. So guess what happened next, a “Fairfax Circuit Court Judge Leslie Alden ruled for Thomas on Aug. 29. Alden said the anti-solicitation ordinance fell short not only on First Amendment grounds (in other words they have the right to gather on the streets for free speech anyway [even if there is an ordinance that says otherwise]) but also under the equal protection requirements of the 14th Amendment. She said the Herndon center was not sufficient to make up for the ban on job solicitation because the town intended to bar illegal immigrants from the site. Alden said the Supreme Court has ruled that the equal protection provision applies to noncitizens as well. That means the City could not ask the users of the facility for any proof of citizenship because it would bar noncitizens from using it, thus violating the 14th amendment. But the story does not end there…

Now, even if a community wants to open a new labor center there are continuing legal actions by citizens groups and legislatures that fight the facilities on the basis that these publically funded facilities are participating in encouraging illegal immigration. An example in the Arizona Legislature - Led by Rep. Colette Rosati of Scottsdale, the legislators want to make sure that Phoenix and other local governments never subsidize a center like the one at 25th Street and Bell Road. The problem? Day-labor centers are a failure, encourage illegal immigration and legitimize an ungrounded economy, the lawmakers said…The bill prohibits cities, towns and counties from building or maintaining a work center that facilitates the hiring of undocumented immigrants. Opponents said the proposed law would tie the hands of local governments to deal with the number of day laborers plaguing neighborhoods.” An example in the Texas Legislature – “We are saying basically you should not use taxpayer funds to build or maintain a day labor center that's designed to encourage the employment of illegal immigrants,” said Representative Bill Zedler, R-Arlington, the bill’s author. “If the federal government is not going to do anything about the border per se, then there are things we as a state can do to (discourage) illegal immigration.”

All of the above said, please note the catch 22 cities [including Frisco] are in – If a city builds a day labor facility, but does ask if the patron is in a legal status then the City would be in violation of federal law (First and Fourteenth Amendments according to the Supreme Court). And if a city builds a day labor facility, and does not ask if a patron is in a legal status then the city is subject to being sued for supporting illegal immigration thus violating the law.

I am sure you see the catch 22 with regard to day labor facilities.

Respectfully,
Ron Patterson
Assistant City Manager
 

David Sadler
New member
Username: Frisconative26

Post Number: 1
Registered: 10-2009
Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 03:19 pm:   

So what is the city doing to find alternatives to a day labor center? Again, this one of the main entrances to our city and arguably the hottest entertainment spot in town, but when people drive by they will not stop to see what this area has to offer. That is not good business.
 

Perry Harts, Moderator
Board Administrator
Username: Perry

Post Number: 143
Registered: 06-2002
Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 04:35 pm:   

There are alternative solutions being examined with some private and religious agencies to see what they may be to accomplish in providing a facility. Such a solution removes some of the restrictions placed on the City as a public agency. It is too early to determine what these alternative may yield.

Respectfully,
Ron Patterson
Assistant City Manager
 

Brian C
New member
Username: Brianc

Post Number: 139
Registered: 06-2003
Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 03:23 pm:   

1. How does Plano continue to do this? I would think since Plano and Frisco are in the same county, the same rules would apply?

2. Since it's not only myself that has seen loitering on streets, why is it not being enforced? I understand if they are on gas station property, supposedly there is nothing can be done. However, they are on sidewalks and that is city property isn't it? They are also on the roads.

3. What about a new law that says you cannot loiter at gas stations on Main Street?
 

Perry Harts, Moderator
Board Administrator
Username: Perry

Post Number: 144
Registered: 06-2002
Posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 04:42 pm:   

1. The Plano and Garland facilities were developed prior to some of the recent matters pending before the legislature and the courts. Both facilities have received scrutiny by the various watchdog groups that oppose these type facilities and are raising “public funding” arguments against them as aiding illegal activity (i.e. supporting illegal immigration) .

2.and 3. You are correct that the individuals cannot be asked to leave “private property” by the police. The only way that can be enforced is if the property owner properly post his property and he request they leave – then if they refuse, criminal trespass could be enforced. With regard to “city property” the city may not restrict the use of a public sidewalk. Loitering is not enforceable, even with passage of an Ordinance, and hasn’t been for many years. On public property, people have the freedom to assemble. Sidewalks are public property, as well as the streets. Unless they are impeding traffic or causing a disturbance, assembly is lawful. If it truly were as simple as the city passing an ordinance that says no one can stand in these locations I am sure that would have been accomplished long ago.

- Build a day labor center and do not ask for documentation of legal status; Legislature and citizens groups are aggressively pursuing legal actions to stop “public funding” due to such actions supporting “illegal immigration”.
- Build a day labor center and ask for documentation of legal status; Supreme Court has ruled this to be illegal and violates the rights of those being asked.
- Pass an ordinance that prohibits loitering; Courts ruled some time ago that this is a violation of a person’s rights to be in a public place.

The bottom line is that we are right back into the catch 22 mentioned in the previous post.

Respectfully,
Ron Patterson
Assistant City Manager

(Message edited by admin on October 26, 2009)
 

Liz Rule
New member
Username: Lovefrisco

Post Number: 1
Registered: 07-2013
Posted on Saturday, July 27, 2013 - 06:51 pm:   

Are there any updates on this topic?

(Message edited by todd on July 29, 2013)
 

Todd Renshaw, Director of Public Safety
Moderator
Username: Todd

Post Number: 511
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, July 29, 2013 - 07:10 am:   

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Federal-judge-rules-Leag ue-City-can-t-keep-out-4645458.php

The City Council voted to settle the lawsuit for $357,000.
http://www.galvestondailynews.com/news/local_news/article_2cf8fe78-f679-11e2-a65 4-0019bb30f31a.html

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: