Premium ContentClick on Premium Content on the Featured navigation bar for information.
Mytty predicts that about 7,500 of the 15,208 voters registered in Fremont will participate.
So far, 336 people have turned in early ballots. That's nearly twice the 178 ballots submitted countywide for the May primary election and nearly four times the 89 submitted for a Fremont School District special election in March, he said. — Leslie Reed
A city analysis of the illegal immigration ordinance to be voted on Monday in Fremont, Neb., tells residents they could be dealt a double-digit increase in city property taxes if the measure passes.
Or they could see up to 15 percent of their city workforce cut, or some combination of the two, the analysis says, to pay for anticipated legal and other costs the city faces if the legislation is adopted and then challenged.
Some supporters of the Fremont measure have taken issue with the analysis published on Fremont's official website. City government leaders also submitted the “immigration ordinance fact sheet” to the local paper, which posted it online.
Omahan Susan Smith, of the anti-illegal immigration group called NAG (Nebraskans Advisory Group), called the city's analysis biased, misleading and a scare tactic to sway voters.
Fremont City Attorney Dean Skokan said, however, that “great pains” were taken to simply present a factual account of how the ordinance might affect the city's 25,000 residents.
Intended to stop illegal immigrants from renting or working in Fremont, the measure would punish landlords and employers for doing business with people who cannot prove their legal status.
Skokan said the city analysis — presented in a question-and-answer format with 33 footnotes indicating sources of information — was not intended to support either side. It was, he said, an attempt to answer the most common questions city officials were fielding and was based largely on what city researchers said has happened in two towns that passed similar ordinances.
Those cities, Hazleton, Pa., and Farmers Branch, Texas, face paying millions of dollars to defend themselves in suits filed by the ACLU and other opponents, the city said. ACLU Nebraska has warned Fremont that it is considering similar action.
“The budget team is going on the assumption that total costs (legal fees, overtime, computer software, etc.) will average $1 million per year if the ordinance passes,” the city analysis said.
To raise that kind of money, the document said, Fremont could raise taxes and fees, trim city services and workers, or do a combination of the two.
The city analysis did note that Fremont received an e-mail in 2008 from the Mountain States Legal Foundation saying its attorneys would defend the city at no charge. The analysis said the city would solicit requests for proposals, including one from that foundation, if litigation was necessary.
If Fremont had to pay its own legal costs and relied only on property taxes to cover costs, the analysis said, the city's portion of the rate would increase by about 24 percent. That means an owner of a $200,000 house would pay about $154 more in city property taxes per year.
State Sen. Charlie Janssen of Fremont issued a statement Tuesday saying it was unfortunate that the people of Fremont were being “threatened by outside forces with higher taxes and lawsuits if the ordinance gets passed.”
He encouraged people to vote.
“We need to let the people of Fremont vote on this calmly and rationally, without creating a circus atmosphere,” Janssen said in his statement, adding: “The federal government is either unable or unwilling to do anything about” illegal immigration.
The three Fremont petitioners who led the call for the ballot issue did not return phone calls. But Smith, who is working with them, said she was considering filing a complaint with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission.
Skokan, in response, said city leaders were cognizant of the law that prohibits city resources from being used to advocate either for or against a ballot issue.
“The city went to considerable pains and effort to determine the fact sheet was: a) factual, and b) did not advocate either for or against the ballot ordinance,” Skokan said.
State Accountability and Disclosure Commission Executive Director Frank Daley declined to say whether he thought the city's statement was within legal bounds. He said the full commission would weigh in if a formal investigation was launched.
Contrary to what the city said in its analysis, however, Daley said he hadn't received a list of questions from Fremont officials.
He said he has probably had conversations with Fremont administrators, as he often does with other officials grappling with ballot issues.
“But if there is some sort of implication that these questions were submitted in writing to us, that did not happen,” Daley said.
The city analysis starts off by saying it is not intended to be a comprehensive analysis. It says the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission was unable to provide an opinion without full deliberation.
World-Herald staff writer Paul Hammel contributed to this report.
Contact the writer:
444-1224, cindy.gonzalez@owh.com
Copyright ©2012 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, displayed or redistributed for any purpose without permission from the Omaha World-Herald.
