Oak Point council votes to retain city’s “English-only” resolution

luvnfreedm, says:

It's interesting to see some of the people against this resolution when they are the same people that voted AGAINST a Spanish Speaking Church, which will be located across the street from the city hall. Maybe Mr. Jones needs to do his research and look at the voting records of Jim Wohletz when he was on P&Z along with Pat Rincon, also on P&Z. Then check out the voting record of Mark Rakestraw on the same issue. Both Wohletz and Rincon opposed this church, while Rakestraw voted for it. Before the Spanish speaking church was to be built on this corner, another church was approved by these same people? Why the change by those two when it became a Spanish speaking church? Quit making out those who support "English Only" to be bigots, etc. and take a closer look at this issue. This country, state and city should not have to accommodate any other language but English. Those who do not speak English need to have the burden placed on them to understand English, not the burden placed on this government and our tax dollars, to do that for them. As far as a place of worship, any group speaking any language has the right to build, congregate and speak their mother tongue. This is not about people speaking another language at home, church, etc. and keeping their language and heritage. That is what the USA is about people. Wake up people and quit enabling those non-English speakers, which in the long run hurts them, too. The business language of the world is ENGLISH. Doesn't it make sense for this to be the language of this country, this state and this city?

kirk, says:

Si no hablan españól allí, ¿como van a sabér cuando alguién dice que son puñeteros de la primera orden? Y tu, luvnfreedom, eres jefe de los cretinos.

luvnfreedm, says:

Brewer, The best that you can come up with is attacking me on a personal level? That's what happens when you have a weak argument.

Rawlins, Where is Oak Park? Are you referring to Oak Point? Best to have your facts straight when posting.

kirk, says:

Here's an argument for you to consider, luvnfreedom:

Making any language "official" is an exercise in bureaucracy doomed to failure. It's also xenophobic and ignorant of the realities of the English language -- about 80 percent of which derives from other languages. Oh, and it's also unconstitutional in the United States.

txcutie, says:

Why is it that we need to cater to the hispanic culture only when there are many other cultures and languages here in the US? People from other countries take the time to develop the language skills to assimilate into the english culture. If an individual comes from Mexico or any other Latin American country they should also take the time to learn "The American Way". They should not expect the American people to cater to their needs. If they don't like living here in the US they are more than welcome to go back to their native country where their language is spoken. Nobody is keeping them hostage here! I'm tired of US government spending unnecessary funds to accommodate individuals who do not want to take the responsibilty to educate themselves. I am not saying that all hispanics are this way as I have friends that are hispanics who have taken a positive path to not only educate themselves in the English language but are very hard working people and have established a good life for themselves. Unfortunately these groups of individuals have been lumped into the same group that are unwilling to make an effort to become Americanized and end up suffering the consequences. We speak ENGLISH here!!!! PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN

kirk, says:

¡Ay, diós mio! Extranjeros: Quedanse en sus própias países (o por lo menos en otro estado que Texas). No hay vida inteligente en esta "planeta."

kirk, says:

For those of you who do not wish to cater to "hispanic culture":

Oh, mon dieu! Étrangers: Séjour dans vos propres pays (ou au moins un état autre que le Texas). Il n'y a aucune vie intelligente sur cette "planète."

txcutie, says:

Sí Kirk, hay vida inteligente en este planeta. Ése es porqué la gente Americana está comenzando a hablar para el "Inglés solamente". ¡Estamos intentando preservar nuestra "América"!

txcutie, says:

Kirk, people need to learn the ENGLISH language!!!!

Kirk, les gens doit apprendre l'anglais ! ! ! ! (French) ¡Kirk, gente necesita aprender la lengua INGLESA!!!! (Spanish) Kirk, Leute muß die ENGLISCHE Sprache erlernen!!!! (German) Kirk, pessoa necessita aprender a língua INGLESA!!!! (Portugese) Kirk, la gente deve imparare la lingua INGLESE!!!! (Italian)

Don't give preferential treatment to one culture when there are many wonderful people in other cultures that we don't cater to.

Scott, says:

When a non-English-speaking group achieves a certain critical mass, it's not unreasonable to expect accommodation. There are few municipalities in Texas in which Spanish speakers haven't already reached that point. (And there are few municipalities in Texas in which any other non-English-speaking population has achieved critical mass. Where there are such populations, it would be similarly reasonable to expect accommodation.) These people pay taxes. If the government they're paying for is prohibited from communicating with them in their language, it's a prime case of de Tocqueville's "tyranny of the majority."

The fact that governmental entities have been able to operate for so long in this country on a de facto "English only" basis is the historical upshot of imperialism, genocide, and the same flavor of insensitivity that permitted slavery and disenfranchisement of women for so long. It's nothing to be proud of.

txcutie, says:

donnaries: I don't use the translator. These are languages I myself learned through the education process. Another words, I went to school to learn these languages just as I feel spanish speaking individuals coming to the US should go to school and learn the English language. I agree with Diversity, in fact I taught diversity in the corporate world for many years. And the beauty of diversity is to be able to celebrate and enjoy all the wonderful things that ALL cultures offer to our world. Not just choose one culture and cater to that one alone. There is a difference between celebrating diversity and using taxpayers dollars to cater to one culture because they choose not to want to learn the language of the country they are living in. The US government has a process for individuals from various countries to come to the US and this is through the immigration process, which many are not even following as they come here illegally and expect a handout and don't even have the gracious courtesy to even learn the language. I would be more than happy to post schools, universities, etc. where these individuals can go to and learn the English language.

kirk, says:

Donnaaries is right.

And, txcutie, the difference between your very cute translations and mine is that I speak Spanish and French fluently (plus English and two others passably). That, and the fact that your Spanish translation sucks.

kirk, says:

Mike:

A "good step?"

txcutie, says:

Kirk: sorry you feel that you think my translation is bad because you see. I am from Mexico and lived there most of my life. I came to the states the legal way!!! And from my english you can see that I also went to learn the English language. Maybe it is you that needs to go back to school as your translation is not only poorly but you have no respect by the language that you use on this website

txcutie, says:

Kirk: before you start to write things on the web, get your facts straight. People like you are the one's that cause confusion and chaos where it doesn't need to be. Are you Hispanic??? I am so don't speak from the side of your mouth.

kirk, says:

Txcutie:

Mentiroso (o mentirosa) eres.

luvnfreedm, says:

Scott: Your comparisons, including "genocide", to expectations for "visitors, immigrants, ILLEGAL immigrants (who by the way are NOT paying taxes in most cases) to try and function in English or get assistance either through a computer translater, a dictionary, or a human translater, studying English, etc. (paying for it out of their own pockets), is ridiculous.

Also, I'd like to comment on donnairies' comments about expecting other countries to cater to our English language. Maybe that is your expectation, but it is certainly not mine, and I have lived in a foreign country, along with traveled to a foreign country When I needed translation, that was MY ISSUE, not the country I lived in. Do you understand? I needed to take responsibility for my understanding and communication in this country. Now, I will agree that learning another language is a positive thing and I've taken steps to do this. If I'm going to travel to a foreign country, which I have many times, I brush up on the language spoken in that country and bring along my dictionary. Thankfully, the world has adopted ENGLISH as the common business language, so it does make it a bit easier on us native English speakers. I recall a story of a gentleman who lived in a foreign country who did not fluently speak the language and was buying a car. His son, who had grown up in the country was fluent in this language and in English, so his 10 year old son had to negotiate the car deal. Even with the situation of a customer, they did not run out to pay someone to translate. He brought his own translator, even if it was a 10 year old.

Scott, says:

Luvnfreedm4whitey,

You're not a very careful reader. I didn't compare the "English only" movement to genocide. I said that one of the reasons "English only" is the status quo in this country is the genocidal conquest by which English-speakers took the land.

Secondly, who said anything about "illegal immigrants"? I certainly didn't. It's telling, that you're incapable of imagining a Spanish-speaker without leaping to the conclusion that he's an "illegal immigrant."

But since you raised the topic, as for your statement that undocumented immigrants "are NOT paying taxes in most cases," which taxes, exactly, are they not paying? Do they get to opt out of the sales tax, when they make purchases? Do they get a special exemption from property taxes, when they own property? And, if they rent, are the moneys they pay to their landlords treated differently than those of citizens, legal residents, etc.? Do they get tax-free gasoline and cigarettes? If they get cable TV or a cell phone, do they get a one-page bill without all those pesky taxes and franchise fees? Shed some light on this for me. Is there a vast, complex black market where undocumented immigrants can barter for all their needs and avoid the tax man? If so, give me the details, because I really, really would like to be a part of it.

luvnfreedm, says:

Scott,

So, you must resort to namecalling? What's funny is that you have no idea why "luvnfreedm" is my user name on here and it has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. This is par for the course though with those who don't have a strong argument...personal attacks and namecalling.

Also, I listed "illegal immigrants" as one of the people groups included in those that are coming into the country. Re-read my post. In case you didn't know this, there are over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country. I will NOT include this people group in the same category as those that LEGALLY enter the country as tourists, immmigrants, etc. and it makes no difference to me what country they ILLEGALLY entered from (color of skin, race, etc.) There is a difference in their status...whether you want to face that or not. They have not earned the right to be lumped in with the legal immigrants, who have done things the legal way. They are choosing to disregard the laws of this great country. Again, you are insinuating something and twisting something that was not written.

You are correct that they are paying taxes through rent, utilities, purchases, etc. But, most are not paying income tax, which I'm sure even you could figure out. As you know ILLEGAL immigration is just that...it's ILLEGAL!!

I will stand corrected on my misunderstandiing of your first point. As you notice, I don't have to stoop to namecalling or insinuations about what you've written. That isn't my character and never will be.

DC, says:

So much going on....

Let the damned English speak English!

Maybe everyone should use this for their translations: www.engrish.com

kirk, says:

luvnfreedm:

I think you might want to have a conversation with someone to explore your belief that anyone who disagrees with your points is attacking you personally.

Scott, says:

Luvnfreedm,

You continue to dodge the issue by resorting to kneejerk nativist rhetoric. Forget about those pesky "ILLEGAL" immigrants for a moment. Think about those "LEGALLY" residing in the US, for whom English is a second language (if they have any facility with it at all).

Do you disagree with the (I think) fairly intuitive idea I originally set out: that, when a non-English-speaking population (of "LEGAL" residents) achieves a certain critical mass, it is reasonable for them to expect that their municipal government--which they're supporting with their tax dollars--should be responsive to their needs by making critical communications to them available in their own language?

I'm not saying what that critical mass is. But, just to flush you out, let's pose a little thought experiment. Suppose that, somewhere down in the Valley, there's a city in which 95% of the "LEGAL" residents speak Spanish only (with the remaining 5% being English monoglots). They're the majority. Their tax dollars are fueling the machine. They have the political stroke to get their candidates in office. Tell me if you'd find either of the following resolutions/ordinances unacceptable and why:

(1) An ordinance that makes Spanish the official language of the municipality. The city is prohibited from funding English-speaking positions or publishing materials in any language other than Spanish.

(2) An ordinance that requires that positions involving interaction with the public be filled with bilingual candidates (or that translators be provided for) and that all official communications and publications must be in Spanish and English.

If you'd find either of those ordinances acceptable, is there a point at which the balance of Spanish to English speakers shifts so much that it would make that same ordinance unacceptable in your view? If so, what's the break point?

kirk, says:

Yes, Bill, that was a personal attack, meant to express my disgust with ignorant and xenophobic opinions such as, "Wake up people and quit enabling those non-English speakers, which in the long run hurts them, too. The business language of the world is ENGLISH. Doesn't it make sense for this to be the language of this country, this state and this city?"

luvnfreedm, says:

To add what Bill posted, if you look at the previous post that Scott posted, he added his own "twist" to my username. That is a personal attack as well. I'm sure Kirk didn't think I could translate the nice remarks he made in Spanish. A personal attack is when someone has to resort to namecalling and also to insinuations of racism, etc. (in whatever language) I have not made any racist comment on any of this blog and you will not see me make a racist comment. I love and embrace those from other countries. I lived in another country. My whole point is that when I moved to this country, I didn't expect the country to change for me. Now, had I lived in a "bubble of English speaking Americans", of course, we are going to use our common language. But, this doesn't mean the country we are in has to or should accommodate us in their government. (which they did not in my case and I didn't expect it...I used a translator) I have a very clear and concise opinion here. I believe that English should be the language of the USA. This is the United States of America and our constitution is in what language? One language is what unites us as Americans from all different backgrounds. Since we are a diverse nation, this is one way we communicate and come together. Whether it's our first language, second, or third, this is a uniting element of living in the USA. Those from Italy, Spain, France, Mexico, etc. came over here for a BETTER life. I even understand why some use illegal methods to get to this country of opportunity, even if I don't approve of it. Although I understand your point, Scott, and I will ponder on what you've written, it will not change my mind about English being the official language.

txcutie, says:

Well stated LUVNFREEDOM. You hit the nail on the nose with your comments and told it how it is. Thank you DONNAARIES for rescinding your comment. Part of my education was to learn multi languages. I went to a private school.

KIRK: answer to your comment to LUVNFREEDOM---- Wasn't America founded by English speaking people? The constitution and all government documents were written in English.

I feel anybody has the right to speak in any language they choose. They should also be able to embrace their cultural celebrations. However, when it comes to conducting business on local city, state or federal government levels we must have a uniform language and that language based on our history is English. What the city resolution states is that it will conduct all city business in english unless there is a superceding law requiring them to use some other language. This does not mean that a person cannot speak spanish or any other language. It also does not mean that a restaurant cannot put up a sign in Spanish, French or any other language as well. It only means that the documents for that particular city will be in English. If you note, this is happening all across America.

luvnfreedm, says:

Wow, Kirk, you like to throw around accusations of people being xenophobic because we actually have an opinion that learning English will help others ADVANCE in an English speaking country or if they travel outside this country to a country other than their country of origin and need to discuss business. Look at Korea, Taiwan, Japan, European countries, etc. and see how they all learn what common language?...ENGLISH, that's right. People in these countries pay a high dollar to learn English. I know this to be a fact. Whether you like it or not, English is the language used Internationally. Oh, by the way, if I say that I don't condone the gay lifestyle, are you going to call me homophobic, too? Even though I have no fear of gays and don't hate gays? Or if I believe that one should work to eat, am I against people who do receive welfare and are able bodied and not working? I'm not sure the "phobic" word for this one. You probably know it though. The bottom line is that you will misconstrue what you want from my posts. Again, I haven't resorted to namecalling and I won't. I simply state what I believe unashamedly.

kirk, says:

I would call you homophobic if you said all homosexuals need to try to live as heterosexuals, and that it is OK to make it illegal for people to be homosexual because learning to be heterosexual will help them ADVANCE in the world of business.

That's pretty much the basis of your ENGLISH argument. If you are not afraid of what homosexuals or non-English speakers might do or how they will act if they don't change, why do you even think you should have any say in what they choose to do or how they choose to act?

Scott, says:

Luvnfreedm,

You write, "Although I understand your point, Scott, and I will ponder on what you've written, it will not change my mind about English being the official language."

This suggests that your position is faith-based, in which case there's little point in talking with you further.

Suffice it to say that I disagree with your article of faith about the sanctity of the English language. I am much more interested in the concepts and institutions envisioned by the Constitution than I am the language in which it was written. Those concepts and institutions were designed to safeguard fundamental individual liberties--not just from foreign threats and those originating with other individuals, but first and foremost from government itself. This is clear, not only from the text of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but from many of the key writings that influenced the drafting (e.g., the Federalist Papers). Efforts to make government less available, accountable, and responsive to a substantial number of citizens seem repugnant to the document's express goals.

The progress of the document over time has been towards a more expansive view of "the People" and greater accommodation of and protection for minorities (and, in the case of women, the majority). I see nothing in the original text of the document or its development through history (by amendment or judicial interpretation) to suggest that the Constitution's purpose is to preserve Anglo-American language or culture.

And, incidentally, the fact that one chooses to call you a name does not mean one "can only resort" to doing so. Nor does it mean the name doesn't fit you to a T.

Cheers.

terryorze, says:

They are not truly bigots. They are just trying to find a legal loophole to avoid constiutional problems like Habeas Corpus. I wonder how many members of the board are bilingual. They probably think that learning a language is easy. I am a trilingual full blooded Native American Indian that has lived in 3 countries while I was in the Navy not counting Iraq and Iran. I have never learned another language well enough to feel safe while filling out a government form. I have never been able to learn the one letter of sanscrit. Some people are incapable of empathy. It seems that should be the first requirement to be any type of elected official.

txcutie, says:

RAWLINS: re: your comment on Chinese and other immigrants that came to the US in the 1880's and early 20th century. The US government did not translate documents to accommodate their native language. These people learned the English language on their own. Nobody catered to these immigrants by changing signs, document, voting ballots, etc. in their language. Nobody is complaining about immigrants here to have a better life. Everybody deserves to have a chance for a good life....but go through the immigration process. Government agencies do not need to be burdened with changing documents for one race because they do not want to take the responsibility to teach themselves the language of the country they are living in. I will guarantee you that if you immigrated to another country such as China per say, the Chinese government would not change documents to accommodate your needs. They would expect you to learn their language.

txcutie, says:

Kirk Brewer Verified Txcutie:

Mentiroso (o mentirosa) eres. KIRK: How dare you call me a liar and state I don't know Spanish when I myself am Hispanic. You have a tendancy to be very attacking towards people you do not know. Especially if they don't agree with you. I noticed what you responded to the individual called luvenfredom where you stated the following in spanish:

"Si no hablan españól allí, ¿como van a sabér cuando alguién dice que son puñeteros de la primera orden? Y tu, luvnfreedom, eres jefe de los cretinos"

I could say a lot about the language you have been using in the webpage and I am surprised the webmaster has allowed you to continue to write on this web. For the sake of individuals such as myself and others, you need to be courteous and respectful of peoples thoughts and ideas. Your type of language is less than to be desired and has no place in this web!!!

terryorze, says:

Oh no you didn't? TxCutie you didn't use the institutionalized racism against the chinese of 1800s as an example of the way we should treat people did you? Yes they did make 40,400 Chinese people choose between starvation and signing a contract in English that made them a slave for five years without even telling them what it said.

kirk, says:

I am not sure what Hispanic country you come from, Txcutie, but the Diccionario de la lengua española de la Reál Academia Española (22nd edition) defines "Puñetero" thus:

puñetero, ra.

1. adj. Molesto, fastidioso, cargante.

2. adj. onanista (‖ que practica el onanismo). U. t. c. s. m.

"Cretino," thus:

cretino, na.

(Del fr. crétin).

1. adj. Que padece cretinismo. U. t. c. s.

2. adj. Estúpido, necio. U. t. c. s.

And "mentiroso" thus:

mentiroso, sa.

1. adj. Que tiene costumbre de mentir. U. t. c. s.

2. adj. Dicho de un libro o de un escrito: Que tiene muchos errores o erratas.

3. adj. Engañoso, aparente, fingido, falso.

Which of those deserves to be removed by the webmaster, and why? And which do you think do not apply here?

txcutie, says:

TERRYORZE

RE: your statement......give me a break nobody here is talking about slavery....the discussion is regarding English only... period. You are going way into left field and that is a subject I will not discuss or believe in. Now you want to talk about English only....I will be more than happy to do so. I stand by with what I say....you come to the United States....you learn the English language. But don't come here and expect for us to accommodate you because you don't choose to learn the language in a country you are living in.

txcutie, says:

Kirk: you yourself proved exactly what I meant by posting your own spanish translation on this web as stated above. You are being attacking towards individuals and this is not what this web page is about. You were rude in the use of your spanish language with your postings to luvinfreedom and also to me . It's sad that you state that you speak the Spanish language fluently but you need to divert to "Diccionario de la lengua española de la Reál Academia Española." You see that is the difference between you and I. I speak the language very fluently without needing to look up words in a dictionary such as yourself. Nor will I use words such as you have used in your postings to state my opinions. That my friend is called respect. Again, please do not be attackful towards the individuals in this web page because although we may not agree on this topic one can still be respectful to one another.

terryorze, says:

Txcutie - Have you ever had to sign a government document in a country you were legally in, and did not know the alphabet much less the language? You know foreign nationals can buy property, pay taxes, get traffic tickets, get fined for watering on the wrong day. Get served subpoenas. Get sued. Oh and it would be illegal for a Polish speaking police officer to tell a Polish visitor that he has pulled over which line he supposed to sign because that would be a city employee translating a document.

kirk, says:

Jesús, José y María ... Bendito o bendita sea.

txcutie, says:

Terryorze:

Have you read what the resolution "English Only" is about. This resolution has nothing to do with race or immigration. It has to do only with using the english language on official city documents. Except for as stated on Section 3 of the resolution:

1. To teach or encourage the learning of languages other than English
2. to protect and promote public health, sanitation and public safety
3. To teach english to those who are not fluent in the language
4. To comply with Native American Languages Act, the individuals with disabilities education act, the voting rights act, or any other feleral or state law.

etc., etc., etc.

Clay213, says:

I skipped over most of the comments...

All I need to say is that this is a whole lot to do about a resolution that doesn't do anything but say the local government can't translate documents to other languages.

terryorze, says:

txCutie. What does passing a law preventing a polish speaking police officer from telling a polish speaking visitor where the signature line is on a warning ticket have to do with immigration? I merely pointed out that not everybody that might have to do business with the city is living in the U.S. Surely, you do not think that before a person visits the US they should be fluent in English?

Now will you please comment on if you think it is right to prevent a billingual person that works for the city from telling a visitor from another country what a city document says. It does not cost the city a dime. That is what this law is about. Carpe Diem

terryorze, says:

They just do not want Hispanics in their city. This is a city that is 94% white. That did not happen by accident. You must remember that there was never a law compelling this city to translate anything. What possible reason could there be for passing a law against it. Clearly they are trying to send a message. It is documented here that one of the city councilman said this was to send a message that they do not want this amnesty. It is easy to translate that to English as they do not want Hispanics in this country. What could be the reason they do not want Hispanics in this country?

txcutie, says:

Terryorze:

Like I said earlier, you are writing about race, slaves, Polish immigrants, and other issues that I will not discuss with you re: what the city wants or does not want. I wrote in this blog re: that I agreed with the resolution of ENGLISH ONLY! That is all I am writing about. This topic has to do with the City passing the resolution and nothing else. Like I stated earlier, you are going way into left field by bringing up other topics of discussion that has nothing to do with English only resolution and have really lost thought of what the original discussion was about. I will continue to stand on my original statement that I agree that any government entity should have an English Only documentation unless otherwise governed by law. If you read the resolution it explains everything to you as to what it stands for in plain ENGLISH!!!

txcutie, says:

Yes, they are sending a signal that the city will only do business in ENGLISH only unless mandated by law and that is all they are sending!!!! Any other issues YOU and TERRYORZE are stating has nothing to do with the resolution as they are your own points of view and issues. Sounds like you guys are racists and want to make this a racist issue. I will not get pulled into that topic as I do not believe in racists conversations such as those. SHAME ON YOU!!!!!

txcutie, says:

Rawlins: yes you were rude and inflamatory and had made comments that had nothing to do with the resolution. That's what happens when you have a weak argument! There is a true meaning of debate where people can speak their minds, hold discussions, and thoughts without being called names or being rude to or even bring up racism and you went beyond the "debate". You started to make comments re: racism and the city which has no place on a discussion such as this re: the resolution or intent of the resolution which is English the Official Language of the City of Oak Point. Enjoy your stay in Mexico City.....which by the way it's MeXico...not Meico as you so wrote. I enjoy Cozumel or Ixtapa myself...nice people....great food...

Hasta la proxima!!

DC, says:

So I guess they don't need the "forgein languages" part on here any more:

http://www.oakpointtexas.com/employme...

luvnfreedm, says:

Chad: First of all, you are the one that has been reporting on the city of Oak Point's politics. Therefore, in writing your articles, I would think that you would dig a bit deeper into the voting records of those on the different committees and council in Oak Point.(especially those that you interview and also write about) In regards to whether the P&Z knew what type of church was being built, they did know, as there was a large sign, which is still there today, written in Spanish, with church information. Normally, before a vote is taken, there is discussion that takes place between all interested parties and the P&Z members. Now, the reasons given for the "no" vote from the members you mentioned, are interesting, because a former church that was an English speaking church was going to be built in that same location, with a parsonage, and the same P&Z members voted approval of this church. What about the traffic flow and size of that church? Mark Rakestraw voted approval for both churches. You can call the city and request the records if you want proof. I challenge you to do that and then report the facts. But, is it possible that when the facts and something that is documented in city records that may cast a different "take" on the situation, that it is conveniently "forgotten"? All I'm asking you is to research and write your articles with complete information.

Phoenix, says:

To Chad Jones:

This is in regard to the Oak Point City Council meeting, held on August 20, 2007 to vote on the “English Only” resolution. I would suggest that you obtain the correct facts before publishing your articles. I have broken down some figures as below:

1. Pegasus stated that ¾ of the citizens of Oak Point spoke against the “English Only resolution”. How could this possibly be true? That would be 2,625 people of the approximate 3500 citizens living in Oak Point. Presuming this is so, let’s take it logically step by step.

2. There were approximately 150 signatures on a petition of Oak Point residents against the resolution. This is less than ½ % of the total population. Had a poll been conducted of all residents, it would have been a more accurate accounting of people’s opinions on this matter.
   

3. We’ll assume there were 75 people at the meeting. There are approximately 3500 people in Oak Point. We will give you the benefit of the doubt and take 75% of the 75 people attending the meeting, which is 56 people that were against the resolution. Actually, very few people actually spoke with their opinions.

4. Adding the 150 signatures on the petition and the 56 people (against the resolution) at the meeting, that is a sum total of 206 people against the resolution, which is .058% of the citizens, which rounded off would be 6% of the citizens of Oak Point.

5. 6% of the citizens of Oak Point, certainly does not equal 75% that Chad Jones stated were against the resolution, or an "overwhelming majority".

6. There are many, many people “for” the “English Only resolution”, but their voices will never be heard, because many people don’t get involved.

7. I would like to remind everyone, that “English Only” is strictly for paperwork being printed in one language to avoid additional costs of an interpreter and tons of paperwork. By law, voting is always in Spanish and English. Any citizen of Oak Point may speak any language he desires, but paperwork from the city will be in English.

luvnfreedm, says:

Chad: I'm glad you are looking into the full details of the P&Z votes. I've given you enough information to lead you to the facts. I know that many may not like what I've brought up here, but the record speaks for itself and is open to the public. This is part of the "Open Records Act" which I'm sure you are aware of. My identity has no bearing on what I've posted or this issue. I've contributed to this blog with my opinion and some facts about the city of Oak Point and feel I've done so in a "grown up" manner.

terryorze, says:

OK txcutie I will try this one more time. If an Oak Point policeman wants to issue a person that does not speak english a warning ticket, and he tells the person what the ticket says in a language other than English should he be charged with translating documents and punished for translating documents.

terryorze, says:

OMG Chad you get the point. I can't put any words into the my question that give it any meaning in the real world or somebody will comment on that instead of the only question.

terryorze, says:

Should a city official that translates a document and as a result avoids the trouble and expense of punishing the person for not complying with the contents of the official city document.

We are assuming that this document does not qualify as one of the few exceptions listed in the law that allow it to be translated.

As an aside I do not think that a warning ticket met that standard either.

txcutie, says:

terryorze: read the resolution and you will get your answers to your questions. You just don't seem to get it!

Phoenix, says:

To Chad:

I read your reply to my message. I am not trying to be critical of you, but I would like to clarify something. I stand corrected when I said there were about 75 people at the Oak Point City Council Meeting, but according to Mr. Brown, there were approximately 60 people present. 17 people who were against the resolution spoke, while 6 people who were against the resolution did not speak. 4 people who were for the resolution spoke, while 4 people who were for the resolution did not speak. Thus the 23 people who were against the resolution would be 38 percent of the 60 people present, not 75 percent as you stated. Also some of the people attending the meeting were observers, thus changing the 38% to an even smaller percentage. You were including only the speakers in your calculations, but you should include everyone at the meeting to be fair. Another statement was made that there was an overwhelming majority voting against the resolution. I hardly consider 38 percent of the total people present an overwhelming majority.

I guess I am tired of the emotionalism and deceptiveness, bordering on exaggeration and maybe even fabrication to win a point and for what purpose? This is not casting any aspersions on you at all, but for others where I see a fine thread of manipulation. Remember that the petition of less than 150 people is selectively acquiring names for one’s individual objective. Who knows how many people were by-passed that rejected this petition. Also, I see an anonymous poll is being taken on the Emerald sound web site, and so far the statistics are (For the resolution – 66%, Against the resolution - 26%, Indifferent- 6%, and Undecided - 0%). .

Think of it this way: The second meeting was held to have another vote. Naturally, the people against the resolution would show up. The people for the resolution were satisfied with the vote, so did not show up. This is bogus – in other words, keep trying till you win.

As far as being anonymous, I chose to do that so I can be free to voice my opinion without fear of retribution. Your job for all purposes is to report. I’ve always been told that reporting should be free of all inferences and slanting of information. I see a lot of SPIN happening, because there is a definite slant to what you report.

You stated that the City Manager said there is no cost for translation of documents into Spanish. Who is translating for free, and who is buying paper, ink, and electricity, etc? Documents written in Spanish are nearly 3 times the size of documents written in English. Even though the cost might be minimal, it is time-consuming. If the translators work at City Hall, do they not receive a salary? Time spent is money. Please explain to me how this could be done at no cost.

txcutie, says:

Phoenix: Very well stated. If so many of the citizens are supposed to be up in arms regarding the resolution, then why weren't there a larger majority of them attending this meeting. The amount of people that are voicing their anger towards the resolution are the small vocal minority. This was proven by the number of people who attended this meeting. This has been voted on twice, which was done the democratic way and these small vocal minorities need to stop chewing on that dog bone and move on!!!!

EdWeirdness, says:

Seems idiotic to resist English only. Primarily since it's the accepted operative language of this country, and one of the requirements of becoming a citizens is demonstrating the ability to speak English. The alternative, if one assumes that residents will on occasion have need or opportunity to communicate with one another, is for an even more enormous number of American Citizens to learn Spanish, German, French, Italian, etc... fill in the blank. Obviously this would be taking diversity to the point of ridiculous idiocy. Expecting the majority to cowtow to the minority has little place in our understanding of a representative democracy. Indeed, a democracy, even a representative democracy such as ours, still has it's roots in the concept of "majority rules". There's only one thing worse than the tyranny of the majority, and that's the tyranny of the minority. After all, those unwilling to comport themselves within our laws and regulations always have the option of returning to their native country. An option that American's do not!

EdWeirdness, says:

As for making any language the official language being unconstitutional, wrong! The constitution never addresses the issue of language, either spoken or written.

Indeed, it would take a very "strained" interpretation of the constitution to reach any such conclusion. Based on the apparent intent of the founders (apparent in that no "alternative language versions of the constitution" was presented or ratified), even though Spanish, French, German, etc... were all known languages, spoken throughout the colonies, and that numerous of the founding fathers themselves were in fact fluent in several of these languages, one must accept that failure to address the "official language" of the United States was intentional, and that the language in which the constitution was originally written, there being no evidence to the contrary, serves as indication of the founders intent on this issue. The document speaks for itself!

EdWeirdness, says:

Actually, the majority of the worlds population speaks only one language. Granted there is a growing tendency toward multilingualism, mostly in industrialized nations, where the "preferred" second language is overwhelmingly English. However, on a per person basis, the overwhelming majority of people living on this planet today, speak only the language of their native country. Also, again on a per person basis, those seeking to learn a second language, overwhelmingly choose English as that second language!

EdWeirdness, says:

Council meetings almost never reflect the will of the majority of the Citizens in any community. The obvious reason seems to have escaped the attention of everyone who keep citing that 75% of those who attended opposed the regulation. If every Citizen legally allowed to vote wasn't present at the meeting, one must assume that those who did attend might have had an inordinate compelling interest or an agenda. Oak Point City Council, recognizing that they should not be influenced by a minority, albeit a very vocal minority, of the Citizens were prudent in leaving the English only regulation intact. No one said being an elected official would be easy, but we all should expect that those we elect will not cave in under pressure from any person or group. Besides, those who oppose English only can't have it both ways. Either learning a second language is a good thing or not! Expecting only America's Citizens to adapt to the linguist and cultural traditions of immigrants seems curiously biased, and dangerously misguided. Next time there's a vote for city council, you'll all have your chance to "make your thoughts known", or at least "get even"!

EdWeirdness, says:

As an afterthought, it really isn't unreasonable to expect that anyone operating a motor vehicle in the United States understand our laws, be able to read our signage, and be able to make themselves understood to law enforcement and emergency services personnel should it be necessary. Many hospitals provide translation services at no cost to immigrants, but doubtless tax payers are "whacked" for such "free services". Anecdotally, data suggests that immigrants, even those fluent in English, often opt for translators even though it's unnecessary, simply because they prefer conversing in their native tongues.

kirk, says:

Ed: More people speak French as a second language than English. In fact, the numbers (from “Top Languages: The World’s 10 Most Influential Languages” in Language Today) look like this:

1. French (190 million)
2. English (150 million)
3. Russian (125 million)
4. Portuguese (28 million)
5. Arabic (21 million)
6. Spanish (20 million)
7. Chinese (20 million)
8. German (9 million)
9. Japanese (8 million)

As to your point about being able to read traffic signs, if you ever travel outside the United States you may notice that most other countries abide by an international traffic signage protocol adopted by almost all other countries nearly 40 years ago. The U.S. has resisted changing to the international system for many of the same reasons the U.S. has avoided the metric system.

txcutie, says:

EdWeirdness: Perfectly stated!!!

kirk, says:

I hope that all of you anonymous trolls return to your land of make-believe, where "facts" are made up and arguments are countered through ad hominem fallacies.

luvnfreedm, says:

EdWeirdness: Glad to see you join in!

luvnfreedm, says:

By the way, I've been trying all day to get on this site and have not been able to. Finally, with going through a proxy server, I was allowed on and could log on. What's going on?

luvnfreedm, says:

Still having to go through a proxy server

luvnfreedm, says:

Oh, I wasn't thinking it was an English test preventing me from logging on. I did have some thoughts on why, but that one was definitely not a thought. I was able to get here this morning without the proxy server.

txcutie, says:

H.R. 997 reaches 100 co-sponsor mark With the addition of Rep. Dave Weldon [FL], Jerry Moran [KS], and Greg Walden [OR] as supporters, H.R. 997, the English Language Unity Act of 2007, has reached the 100 co-sponsors mark for the third consecutive Congress. The effort to make English the official language in the 110th Congress has already collected more than one-half of the support it received in the 109th Congress, when it was one of the most widely supported bills in the House.

txcutie, says:

“The one absolute certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, or preventing all possibility of it’s continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities. We have but one flag. We must also learn one language and that language is English.” Theodore Roosevelt

terryorze, says:

Even people that only come here on vacation should have to pass a fluency test before getting a Visa. We should turn down the foreign investment that makes up 28% of all investment in the United States unless they speak English. Not that Irish or Scottish English either. Those people from most of Great Brittain are not understandible. It was easy for TXCutie to learn English. Her spanish is pretty bad, but as long as she does not leave north Texas she should be fine.

Look at how France and Italy disappeared right after they opened up their borders to anybody that was a citzen in Europe even if they spoke English. They and thier culture are gone forever, except for a small pocket of them in Louisiana that have managed to hang on to thier cuisine and culture in the Lafayette zoo.

Thank god Darfur got English in time to save themselves. I don't want those stinking English over here either teaching our kids colour for color.

Not that I am a bigot. I love all people who speak english unless they do it strangely like Yankees. Man I hate Yankees especially if they can speak spanish.

I love TXCutie. I met her over at the first self righteous church in Greenville Texas where they still have the blackest land and whitest people.

txcutie, says:

gosh terryorze: You just can't handle it can you......You have no strong points at all for your writings except to try to criticize me and others....so sad!!!! Didn't your mamma teach you any manners?

Clay213, says:

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PLEASE LOCK THIS AND THE OTHER DAMN ARTICLE ABOUT OAK POINT

txcutie, says:

Pavel: your assumption is correct!

terryorze, says:

What do you mean TxCutie. You convinced me. I listed all your facts and arguments read them with an open mind. It is flawless and transparent. Anybody can understand why you feel the way you do after reading these quotes.

All of your arguments begin with with a bullet.

You started with

• "we should not have to cater to other cultures. "

See I had never thought about catering to other cultures. We have so many cultures right here in the USA already. I do not know how we could add another culture. Just white people alone. Ku Klux Klan. The baptists, and mormons. The head bangers. Motorcycle clubs. Southerners, Texans, Californians. Military Cultures. Yankees, Corporate cultures. We should just pick the one American culture and stick to it.

• "they are more than welcome to go back to their native country where their language is spoken." This put me over the top.

This logic is indisputable and so familiar. I am willing to chip in and put them all in a boat and send them half way back to the country where their language is spoken.

I bet your family was originally from Texas?

• "they come here illegally and expect a handout and don't even have the gracious courtesy to even learn the language."

I did not know about the hand outs. I thought they were coming here for work and because they love thier families and want them to live.This made me hate them too. I see why you want to use language to keep them out of the country until they learn english.

• "I will guarantee you that if you immigrated to another country such as China per say, the Chinese government would not change documents to accommodate your needs. They would expect you to learn their language."
  

You are so right we should get them back for this. But leave the Chineses out of it. They have changed all of thier documents to suit us. That Olympic thing coming up you know.

• "Government agencies do not need to be burdened with changing documents for one race"
  

I originally thought this was about language not race. Once you straightened me out, I realized that I only like my own race. What race are you? I am not 100% sure what race I am. Under white man's law I am a quarter polish, a quarter German and half Indian. My mother is Indian. Under my native american religion if your mother is Indian you are 100% indian. You see why I have a hard time making up my mind. Should I believe my mother or the government? Please advise me.

All in all, not liking other races is a good reason to make it hard for them to understand what is going on. They might take over.

So with all of the good logical and astoundingly truthful reasons that you gave, how could anybody come to any conclusion other than to agree with you.

You are a genius, very persuasive and so transparent we can see right to your soul.

DC, says:

www.seizurerobots.com

txcutie, says:

Terrorze: I agree with what Mike Orren posted.....you keep BEATING A DEAD HORSE!!! get over it!!!!

txcutie, says:

Mike: You posted a photo that I agreed upon completely and I commented this towards terryorze......and I will again state it "Terryorze....you are beating a dead horse" GET OVER IT!!! Your thoughts are so weak that now you have to divert to look up things in the dictionary.......Hey read the news.....look at the polls ...83% of Americans across the US voted for English Only!!!! Again Terryorze....you are the vocal minority!!!! Move on!!!!!