Casa Freehold to rally on July 1st, 2010

[BrianSullivan]

As a part of a state wide effort with many other groups Casa Freehold is holding a rally on July 1st from 5 PM to 7 PM at the Hall of Records.

They are protesting immigration enforcement. Part of their concerns are about the following:

• AN END TO 287(G)
• A HALT TO THE DEPLOYMENT OF “SECURE COMMUNITIES”
• A STOP TO THE RAIDS
• AN END TO THE MASS DETENTION OF IMMIGRANTS
• NO COPYCAT ARIZONA LEGISLATION IN NJ

This effort is sponsored by the following groups:

1199 United Healthcare Workers East NJ Region/SEIU; AFSC Immigrant Rights Program; Benedictines for Peace; Blessed Kateri Migrant Ministry; Casa Esperanza; Casa Freehold; DemocraciÁ Ahora; The Elizabeth Coalition to House the Homeless; Immigration Task Force - New Jersey Synod- Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; Haiti Solidarity Network of the Northeast; The Immigration Policy Reform Task force of the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of NJ (UULMNJ); IRATE & First Friends; Jornaleros Unidos de Passaic; Justice Office - Sisters of Mercy of the MidAtlantic; Latino Action Network; Latino Coalition of New Jersey; Lutheran Association of Hispanic Ministries; Lutheran Office of Governmental Ministry in New Jersey; National Association of Social Workers – NJ Chapter; NJ DREAM Act Coalition; NJ Forum for Human Rights; NJ Immigration Policy Network; NJ May 1 Coalition/Jobs for All Campaign; Pax Christi NJ; People's Organization for Progress; People's Organization for Progress, Bergen County Branch; St. Joseph Social Service Center;Sisters of St. Joseph – ESL; Social Responsibilities Council, Unitarian Society of Ridgewood; Unidad Latina en Accion; Unity Square Partnership; Wind of the Spirit Immigrant Resource Center

[ess0350]

Interesting how this information was not included or at least a seperate article in the Asbury Park Press regarding the story today regarding the resignation of Mr. Reyes from the Freehold Boro Human Relations Committe.

[lisas84]

Very keen point, Ess! Unless -- they received the release afterward?

Listen, I'm all for humane treatment of humans, but protesting 287G and the other measures to keep our country safe just aggravates my liver.

[richardkelsey]

Mother of pearl this is too rich.

If there is a god -- maybe we can get a picture of the Mayor's two-time appointee, a self-proclaimed illegal alien, leading the protest.

I might have to stay in town for that.

[BrianSullivan]

Yesterday I posted that the first of the summer concert series is on Thursday night. Looks like it will be a busy night in the borough with the rally ending aroud the time the Nerds start.

Just think, all of those people from out of town attending the Nerds show will get to see this rally. The open borders crowd loves to call the good people of Freehold some pretty awful names.

and Rich and I got accused of dragging this town through the mud?! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Maybe with a little luck, the Nerds can turn their amps up to 11? (Spinal Tap joke)

[lisas84]

My oh my, what a busy week for these day laborers! Herding in on Monday's council meeting at the request of the Freehold Landlords, and a special appearance tomorrow night to protest U.S. immigration enforcement.

Somewhere, Christopher Cross is crying out of jealousy becuase he hasn't had a request for his appearance twice in one week since about 1989.

[adefonzo]

I look forward to hearing about how this rally goes. I only wish that I was home to see this first hand.

I know...someone will say I am somehow trying to start trouble, but I would hope that someone shows up at the rally, simply stands in the back, quietly, not saying a word to anyone, no mean looks or gestures, but simply holding an American flag high and proud.

If this rally goes the same way others have gone, there will likely be flags of other nations on display...I think it would be very appropriate for an American flag to be clearly visible as well, especially since it is because of America's freedom of speech and assembly that will allow these folks to gather and hold their rally.

Any takers???

[lisas84]

Andrew, that is a very sensible idea. American pride before the 4th of July. I'm not against them protesting as it is their right to do so. In my view, the immigration rules/enforcement as they stand are enacted for a reason, to ensure the protection and management of our population and interior. Just as with any other nation. I will say, in my viewpoint, it is rather insulting that any group of people demand we relax those regulations for their own personal gain. It isn't right.

If the reason was to push for programs focusing on assistance in attaining legal citizenship in an orderly step-by-step and accountable fashion, I could support that. After all, I am a liberal.

[adefonzo]

Lisa...does that mean I can count on you to be there proudly holding "Old Glory" high in the air??

[BrianSullivan]

Andrew, I wish I could be there today, but work calls. I have certainly attended some of their rallies to observe. I do hope that readers of this site will go and report back.

Not matter what, and going back to my original point, it will be front page in the papers- making our town look great as always.

[lisas84]

You know what, Andrew? Under different circumstances, I very well might.

Again, I need to emphasize that I do empathize about and for many of these folks. I do not want to see anyone mistreated or see bias against them. But my feeling and belief is that we as a country have to have a strong structure and a lawful one that protects who we are.

We would best be served by enforcing current regulations if not making them stricter, and to encourage the human resources who are here to become productive, fully taxpaying American citizens.

Protesting against our laws just pisses me off!

[BrianSullivan]

Lisa, Do not forget, these groups are far more than about decent treatment. Right here in Freehold we have watched them fight tooth and nail against safety and quality of life that affects the very people they claim to represent.

They have stated that they are against all rental regulations. That might be OK until a run down rental opens up next to you. It might be OK until the fire department pulls out many bodies from a tragic fire because safety was not practiced.

They make noise about 287g. By doing so they are advocating for putting violent criminals right back on the street, criminals we should not have to keep. . Those very criminals who would be affected by 287g are going to go right back into the immigrant community who will be the biggest victims of the criminals.

When it comes to public relations, these groups also do the most damage to the very people they claim to represent.

These groups don't do anybody and favors, especially the people they claim to care for. If they really cared, we would have been seeing a very different approach than what we have. Their compassion is phony.

I am well reminded of the old saying : If you have to ask for respect, you have not earned it"

[lisas84]

Brian, just to clarify: I was speaking more in terms of the big picture and philosophically. (my bailiwick! )

[richardkelsey]

Jun 22, 2010 12:34:53 GMT -5 richardkelsey said:

Mother of pearl this is too rich.

If there is a god -- maybe we can get a picture of the Mayor's two-time appointee, a self-proclaimed illegal alien, leading the protest.

I might have to stay in town for that.

Please -- don't forget my request. LOL

BTW --- I assume they will also be protesting for another appointment to a Borough Committee.

Personally -- I think they should go to a Borough meeting first -- before they protest. :-)

[adefonzo]

Is there any news on how the rally went?

[BrianSullivan]

Jul 4, 2010 6:31:11 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

Is there any news on how the rally went?

Here is an article from the APP. It looks like it was uneventful. Take not that none of the people quoted are from the borough. Outside agitators.

www.app.com/article/20100701/NEWS/7010349/Advocates-rally-for-immigration-reform

As an aside, Freehold In New Jersey reported that the Nerds concert was moved due to the rally. The Nerds performed in front of the Hall of Records instead of the parking lot. That must have been tight considering the crowd the Nerds draws. It would be intersting to know how that happned, but I am guessing that the rally organizers got their permit first.

[lisas84]

As a member of the Downtown Freehold marketing and events committee (along with Jeff Friedman), The Nerds were always scheduled to perform in front of the Hall of Records. There was no change of venue. I'm sure Jeff can validate this as well.

[jefffriedman]

Lisa is correct. The concert was scheduled to be in the front of the hall of records since March. The feelings are that first we have a parking issue downtown and reducing parking is counterproductive; second people driving through or do not know that a concert is scheduled see that there is always something going on in Downtown Freehold-Better marketing; Third it allowed a better view from the promenade on the south side of East main. The only "issue" was the plan was to have the stage closer to court street but the wires were not long enough. If anything their vigle was moved from in front of the hall of records to the side.

I thought it looked great, the backdrop of the Hall of records really was a bonus visually. I also liked not being in the parking alot, the trees, the way the building framed the event just made it seem better overall. I have heard that some people thought it was too cramped but as with everything this is a work in progress; I think working out the stage location will go along way to fixing that. What did you think Lisa?

On another note that I hesitate to address but it should be. The "vigils" "protests" "gatherings" that take place are not directed at "Freehold Boro". These events whether we agree or disagree with their view are State and nation wide. They take place at the Hall of Records because Freehold Boro is the County seat. If they were "protesting" the "boro" they would have gone to Boro Hall. If the County seat was in Red Bank or Middletown or Colts Neck they would be having their event there instead. To always say they are "outside agitators" is not necessarily correct. If they are from Monmouth County and there event is addressing policies that go beyond the "Boro" I see no problem with anyones gathering even if I do not agree with their point of view. To protect their ability to voice their point of view protects my right to voice my point of view.

[Mike Rosseel]

Jul 6, 2010 9:28:00 GMT -5 jefffriedman said:

Lisa is correct. The concert was scheduled to be in the front of the hall of records since March. The feelings are that first we have a parking issue downtown and reducing parking is counterproductive; second people driving through or do not know that a concert is scheduled see that there is always something going on in Downtown Freehold-Better marketing; Third it allowed a better view from the promenade on the south side of East main. The only "issue" was the plan was to have the stage closer to court street but the wires were not long enough. If anything their vigle was moved from in front of the hall of records to the side.

I thought it looked great, the backdrop of the Hall of records really was a bonus visually. I also liked not being in the parking alot, the trees, the way the building framed the event just made it seem better overall. I have heard that some people thought it was too cramped but as with everything this is a work in progress; I think working out the stage location will go along way to fixing that. What did you think Lisa?

On another note that I hesitate to address but it should be. The "vigils" "protests" "gatherings" that take place are not directed at "Freehold Boro". These events whether we agree or disagree with their view are State and nation wide. They take place at the Hall of Records because Freehold Boro is the County seat. If they were "protesting" the "boro" they would have gone to Boro Hall. If the County seat was in Red Bank or Middletown or Colts Neck they would be having their event there instead. To always say they are "outside agitators" is not necessarily correct. If they are from Monmouth County and there event is addressing policies that go beyond the "Boro" I see no problem with anyones gathering even if I do not agree with their point of view. To protect their ability to voice their point of view protects my right to voice my point of view.

Jeff i think the two points you made are great ones.

First off, the concert looked and turned out amazing in from of the Hall of Records. I can also say many people sat on both sides of main and it made the town look packed and inviting! It was a great idea to have the concert in front of the hall.

FinJ reporting leaves alot to be desired. Never was there any talks of the concert being moved for any reason. Maybe Colleen or Kim, instead of getting bad information or assuming things, should ask the members of the committee. Once again, FinJ is the rag news of internet reporting!

The rally was held in Freehold because of the county seat. Lets not look too deep into this or make it a political issue, thats a simple fact!

[BrianSullivan]

Lisa and Jeff,
'
Thank you both for your clarity on the Nerds change of venue. That is actually very interesting. When i wrote what I did, it was based on what little info I had. As it was I tried to use restraint. I saw a reader comment on FinNJ that even if it had facts, was so devoid of logic it was sad. I tried not to go down that road, but was wrong anyway. I deal with first amendment permits in my job so it was natural for me to view things from that angle.

It is good to see that partnership trying out new things. Jeff, you nailed it by saying it is a work in progress, which is what it should be. I can see the attraction of using the Hall of Records as the backdrop. And if it doesn't work out, it can always be changed back. In the end, it sounds like it was a great night, which is what counts.


Jeff wrote:
On another note that I hesitate to address but it should be. The "vigils" "protests" "gatherings" that take place are not directed at "Freehold Boro". These events whether we agree or disagree with their view are State and nation wide. They take place at the Hall of Records because Freehold Boro is the County seat. If they were "protesting" the "boro" they would have gone to Boro Hall. If the County seat was in Red Bank or Middletown or Colts Neck they would be having their event there instead. To always say they are "outside agitators" is not necessarily correct. If they are from Monmouth County and there event is addressing policies that go beyond the "Boro" I see no problem with anyones gathering even if I do not agree with their point of view. To protect their ability to voice their point of view protects my right to voice my point of view.


From the bottom up, I agree that they have the right to protest and rally. I can assure you that I have never believed in taking that away from the advocates for the very reasons you cite.

Your points about them being a part of something bigger is not without merit due to the fact that many towns were under assault at the same time from a number of like minded groups , but from a borough standpoint there are points with merit as well.

They are outside agitators with a history toward those town that is not good, even when they were dealing with bigger picture stuff.

When they protest the Sheriff about 287g, they had a wonderful speaker who accused the town of being white supremacists who beat up Latinos. That was a blatant lie with no merit and falls under the category of character assassination.

When the LLA went to the court house and brought up police practices, they made it clear that it was a state wide effort but did mention the Irrazary incident. ( To his credit, at least Frank Fryere lives here and has a vested interest in the town)


Speaking of Irrazary, that incident also brought in outside agitators from one of the Oranges who do not care about the town or its people.

Lisa mentioned earlier in the week about groups using the day laborers as pawns. That point applies here.

And last but not least, no matter the intentions, from a marketing standpoint, these groups have done immense damage to the reputation of this town. Do the people who invested here really appreciate that?

The above is a start, I could easily look up and post many articles on this site that backs up why we the resident should have concerns about these outside advocated groups and what they have done to this town.

[jefffriedman]

I really do not want to get into a back and forth over this, I will simply say that my point, as supported by Mike, was that their event was in the Borough because the County Seat is here.

As for Lisa's comment that you referenced I must politely point out that no one was herded anywhere with regards to the council meeting. Residents, who are tenants, came and a number spoke, mothers, and a woman with a sleeping disorder. Did male tenants also attend of their own free will because an issue of importance to them was up for discussion? yes. Were they “day laborers” ?; I have no clue, they could have been restaurant workers, day laborers or anything else. How did they know? landlords spoke to their tenants and flyers were given out, no different that Dan's posting requesting homeownes turn out, just a different media, a perfectly proper approach, giveing people information and letting them decide their actions.

Brian, To reference residents going to a council meeting in one sentance and in the next to reference “outside agitators” from Orange makes no sense to me especially since no LLA nor any other “outsider agitators” attended or spoke at the Council meeting on 6/28, only Freehold Boro Residents, and Property owners. Casa did not even attend.

(If being an “inside agitator” is also not allowed I think Brian you are in big trouble.. LOL)

And finally the part I really have no interest in going back and forth with, because I too think there are “outsides” that use “issues” in Freehold for their own personal national “political agenda” but I still must ask;
Brian you are a big supporter of the Arizona immigration Law correct? Yes, I know you are. Now if I were an Arizona resident who opposed the Arizona immigration Law; Could I then brand you as an “outside agitator”?

The Ture problem with the true “outside agitators” is with regards to how they "true outside agitators" “use” Freehold, that they offer no solutions, they are not here for the long run, they do not want to fix the issues for the betterment of the whole. They pop in for their event and disappear. They are different than people who care regardless of their view on the issues.

I am friends with Rita, I disagree with a number of her positions, there are however a number of other issues where we share a common goals including cleaning up Throckmorton, getting workers registered so they pay taxes, working on a way to address the whole “mustering issues” in a way that reduces tensions and improves the Boro for everyone. She is not an “outside agitator”. I do not know Tom Baldwin personally and I do not agree with many things he says but is he an “outside agitator” because he agrees with Rita, I would say no.

I really think we need to separate “outside agitators” who have no interests in Freehold long term, who offer no solutions and do not spend enough time in the Boro to created a solution with the “proper fit” for Freehold, who only use the “issues” that are present here for their own personal national “political agenda” and those people who live and work locally who view the issue differently than myself, and vastly differently from my Republican friends who post here. To lump them all into one group I think clouds the issues that matter and does a disservice to the goal of solving problems.

[lisas84]

Jeff, you know I adore you, but you wrote:
"As for Lisa's comment that you referenced I must politely point out that no one was herded anywhere with regards to the council meeting. Residents, who are tenants, came and a number spoke, mothers, and a woman with a sleeping disorder. Did male tenants also attend of their own free will because an issue of importance to them was up for discussion? yes. Were they “day laborers” ?; I have no clue, they could have been restaurant workers, day laborers or anything else. How did they know? landlords spoke to their tenants and flyers were given out, no different that Dan's posting requesting homeownes turn out, just a different media, a perfectly proper approach, giveing people information and letting them decide their actions."

OK. We have both been to many council meetings. Do men and women -- about 40 of them or so -- of Hispanic descent just naturally go to council meetings every two weeks? No. They don't. You said "landlords spoke to their tenants" as to why they were there.

So, why were they there? The same night the landlords wanted to make their speeches? I saw it clearly as once again, these guys (and a few women) were being used to "protest" against the governing body, just like the LLA/Casa Freehold?Oranges "teach!" preacher dude had used them in the past.

The woman with the sleeping disorder who is a tenant of Kiley's is someone I can understand.
I suffer from insomnia and GAD (generalized anxiety disorder) and I have a routine of unwinding at 8:00 p.m. I also felt as though she was trotted out as a sideshow exhibit. It's just how it all came across to me.

Once again, all this is my opinion and perception -- nothing more and nothing less.

[jefffriedman]

The admiration is mutual, I disagree with your interpretation of the events but that is OK.

I was honestly impressed that so many tenants turned out. Additionally, none of us knew who, or know now, the woman with the sleeping disorder was, and yes if we did we would have wanted her to come out.

As we all know all things require "marketing" and as I speak for an Association of member, I have a duty to show the governing body the reasons why our positions hold merit and how their current policy's negatively effect law abiding residents such as yourself and the vast majority of tenants.

There is no dispute that there are criminal landlords and criminal residents and they should be dealt with, which the are not now, but my job is to speak for our members the law abiding landlords who generally have law abiding residents...

So I will just acknowledge that yes we encouraged tenants, yes we encouraged people that do not go to council meeting often to go, yes we did so to make a point to the governing body, absolutely yes, that is my duty. If they disagreed they would not have come. If that is herding I accept that.
I actually take a bit of professional pride in getting people to turn out, to get even owner occupied residents like Ted, Marc, and others to acknowledge that what we are saying has merit. To have been able to develop a working understanding with the Rental Board to me is a positive accomplishment that can only serve to improve the Boro going forward.

Lisa, were you at the concert? What did your think?

[BrianSullivan]

Jul 6, 2010 17:35:54 GMT -5 jefffriedman said:

I really do not want to get into a back and forth over this, I will simply say that my point, as supported by Mike, was that their event was in the Borough because the County Seat is here.

As for Lisa's comment that you referenced I must politely point out that no one was herded anywhere with regards to the council meeting. Residents, who are tenants, came and a number spoke, mothers, and a woman with a sleeping disorder. Did male tenants also attend of their own free will because an issue of importance to them was up for discussion? yes. Were they “day laborers” ?; I have no clue, they could have been restaurant workers, day laborers or anything else. How did they know? landlords spoke to their tenants and flyers were given out, no different that Dan's posting requesting homeownes turn out, just a different media, a perfectly proper approach, giveing people information and letting them decide their actions.

Brian, To reference residents going to a council meeting in one sentance and in the next to reference “outside agitators” from Orange makes no sense to me especially since no LLA nor any other “outsider agitators” attended or spoke at the Council meeting on 6/28, only Freehold Boro Residents, and Property owners. Casa did not even attend.

(If being an “inside agitator” is also not allowed I think Brian you are in big trouble.. LOL)

And finally the part I really have no interest in going back and forth with, because I too think there are “outsides” that use “issues” in Freehold for their own personal national “political agenda” but I still must ask;
Brian you are a big supporter of the Arizona immigration Law correct? Yes, I know you are. Now if I were an Arizona resident who opposed the Arizona immigration Law; Could I then brand you as an “outside agitator”?

The Ture problem with the true “outside agitators” is with regards to how they "true outside agitators" “use” Freehold, that they offer no solutions, they are not here for the long run, they do not want to fix the issues for the betterment of the whole. They pop in for their event and disappear. They are different than people who care regardless of their view on the issues.

I am friends with Rita, I disagree with a number of her positions, there are however a number of other issues where we share a common goals including cleaning up Throckmorton, getting workers registered so they pay taxes, working on a way to address the whole “mustering issues” in a way that reduces tensions and improves the Boro for everyone. She is not an “outside agitator”. I do not know Tom Baldwin personally and I do not agree with many things he says but is he an “outside agitator” because he agrees with Rita, I would say no.

I really think we need to separate “outside agitators” who have no interests in Freehold long term, who offer no solutions and do not spend enough time in the Boro to created a solution with the “proper fit” for Freehold, who only use the “issues” that are present here for their own personal national “political agenda” and those people who live and work locally who view the issue differently than myself, and vastly differently from my Republican friends who post here. To lump them all into one group I think clouds the issues that matter and does a disservice to the goal of solving problems.

Jeff, I respect both yours and Mikes view that they are here because we are the county seat, but as I have clearly demonstrated, these outside groups have also made it very personal against this town and its good people. It is for that reason that I will continue to remind the public of the very bad behaviors that our town has been subjected to by these groups. I will not let people forget. Casa Freehold will forever be a poison pill name due to its past actions.

You bring up a number of good things where you agree with Rita. You are right to bring that up because it does belong in the public discussion. You know I even agree with you on some things. That clean up with the day laborers was one such thing that I think was great to see. I give YOU and the other business owners credit for that.

Your point about Tom Baldwin is spot on. I did not consider him when referring to outside agitators. He does not deserve that label and backs it up by going to council meetings and speaking up on a number of borough related issues. I respect him and give him credit for that. I really do hope that he activates his account here and joins us on this site for discussions. He would be welcome.

AS per your previous discussions with Lisa, I have to side with her for now. While I think it was great to see tenants showing up and voicing concerns, it is unfortunate that we only see this at certain times. True progress will be made when we see these same people showing more of an active interstest in this town as a whole, and not just the bad things. But you know me, I believe that all voices count and should be heard. Just not the outside agitators. ;D

Me an inside agitator? nah.... I just don't see it.

[jefffriedman]

Brian said "While I think it was great to see tenants showing up and voicing concerns, it is unfortunate that we only see this at certain times. True progress will be made when we see these same people showing more of an active interest in this town as a whole, and not just the bad things."

********
I think this is a very valid point which is correct. It is also a commentary that applies to everyone; as very few people in general anywhere attend their local government meeting, or vote or participate unless there is something they do not like.

[lisas84]

Hi, Jeff! I was having dinner with the fam damily that night and missed the concert. But I heard it was really lively and hugely entertaining.

Anyway, I'll make one last observation/offer one last perception on this subject. Sure, without an iota of a doubt there is a handful of ethical, respectful landlords. But -- how to cull those and monitor that number year after year? I think it would be nearly impossible and probably illegal for any town to separate the good guys from the bad guys; it would open up more lawsuits from the "bad guys." You'd have to create a fair, balanced and unbiased manner of discernment that is completely standardized. Then, someone has to continually monitor every single one. When does one landlord cross over to "good" status and how?

I actually pondered this for quite a bit and came to the conclusion that it is virtually impossible. You cannot separate the ethical landlords from the unethical, to give the small group of ethical landlords the breaks. And that's the essence of it I see.

[jefffriedman]

I think that is an interesting line of questions. How do we cull and weed out bad actors in any arena?
We have to treat all people the same, I agree, I see that as the crux of our argument; that tenants and landlords are being treaded differently that other residents and property owners.

How does a landlord “cross over to good statues?” That I believe further demonstrates what I see as the issue; landlords are treated as guilty first and have to prove their innocence.

We as a society separate the "ethical/non-criminal/good" people from "unethical/criminal/bad" people all the time. If there is drug dealing in a house on the street do we inspect all other house on the street, or that part of town, or everyone who looks like the people in the house selling drugs, because we can not cull the good from the bad. No we do not.

If a few members of a group or “class” of people whether based on race, ethnicity, gender, economic status, or a class of property owners-landlords, a class of residents-tenants, or a class of owner occupied residents; IF a few members of any individual “class” of people are bad actors do we blame everyone that falls into that same particular “class” no, we deal with the bad actors. (“Class” in this context means a group of similar situated peoples not class like middle class etc.)

This argument that the Boro has used, we can not tell the difference of the good from the bad so we have to treat all like criminals does not make sense to me. The last time that argument was used successfully in this country was the Korematsu decision upholding Japanese internment during World War II. The same rational could be used for infringing on the rights of Muslim Americans now, why do we not, I think because we universally agree that would be “overbroad”.

I would suggest that the Boro’s inspection regime, as practiced, is improper in the same sense, that we can address the problems we all agree are present through better standard enforcement not through subjecting whole “classes” of people “landlords” and “tenants” to prejudice for the acts of a few members of those “classes”.

We can have the systematic routine inspections the same way we do commercial inspections; by scheduling. This would in no way prevent or limit authorities from investigation or enforcing the law any time of day. It is the same as someone selling drugs from their home.

A perfect example was at the last council meeting, Ms. White I believe here name is, mentioned that a man has been continually in the basement next door and has been using the trees on the property line as his restroom. We all heard from her mouth “probable cause” to believe that illegal activity was occurring in the basement next door to her. Her name was on the record, it was communicated to the proper authorities. Has anything happened since her complaint? I do not know, but I do know they could have directed the officer in the room to have another officer come over, get the information from her and go over right then and gain entry to investigate and enforce that night. That did not happen; and that is where I think the problems lay.