Language amendment is divisive
By Sara McDonald
The Daily News
Published March 2, 2007
FRIENDSWOOD — The possibility of making English the official language of Friendswood divided residents during a town hall meeting Thursday night.
About 15 people urged council members to consider their opinions about the issue when they decide Monday night whether to put the amendment on the May 12 ballot.
If passed by voters, a single sentence stating that English is the official language would be added to the city’s charter.
But that one sentence has deeper implications, Frank Ortiz, a Friendswood resident and former national vice president for the League of United Latin American Citizens, said.
“English as the official language could lead to discrimination in Friendswood, especially against Hispanics, who we think this is targeted at,” he said.
“Hispanic-Americans are very patriotic. We respect and love this nation. That’s why it hurts so much when things like this occur.”
But others thought that letting the voters decide would be the right way to settle the issue.
“Let the people vote and let the people have a choice,” Arthur Lew said.
“Language has nothing to do with race. This is just something to make it official.”
Of those who spoke before council, eight said they were against putting the amendment before voters.
One member of the charter review committee said he didn’t want the issue on the ballot because voter turnout for city elections is so low.
“We stand to lose more than we gain,” Mike Sharp said.
“One thousand, four hundred votes can carry the issue in this city. That’s not a lot of votes.”
Friendswood resident Bob Bertrand said he already has some guaranteed votes against the issue.
Bertrand presented council a letter with 72 signatures of residents against the idea.
“It’s often said that perception is reality,” he said.
“It doesn’t matter what the intent is. It’s being interpreted as an act of bigotry.”
But resident Margaret Lemmer, whose parents emigrated from Germany when she was a child, said she supported the amendment because it stood for assimilation.
“I don’t think it divides unless you allow it to be divisive,” she said.
“I don’t think it’s mean-spirited unless you make it mean spirited.”
The meeting also drew members of U.S. Border Watch, a group that monitors border security acts.
But Curtis Collier, a member of the group, said he thought that the amendment, if passed, would encourage legal immigration and active citizenship.
“It’s not an issue of racism,” he said.
“It’s an issue of inclusion for everyone.”
Monday, council will vote on which of 19 proposed amendments will go before voters. The charter review committee recommended 16 amendments — but not the English issue — and the council added two others.
In earlier council meetings, councilmen John LeCour, Jay Horecky, Jim Hill and Chris Peden said they’d support putting the issue before voters. That’s enough votes to overrule the opposition if those four stick by their earlier convictions.
Please visit www.danfrankrealty.com