Public hearings
Bias-based policing: Jim Allen, city attorney, was asked to draft the ordinance with help from civil rights groups by resolution of the council. Two of the three people he worked with were in the audience; Juan Escareno of MOSES and Dawud Walid of CAIR. He thanked them for providing valuable feedback and support. He also consulted with Chief Doyle, and provided a draft to the attorney for the Fraternal Order of Police for his input. The police generally think that any ordinance which engages the community in the law enforcement process is a good thing. The police chief has no opposition to the ordinance.

Two versions of the ordinance were circulated. The other was prepared by the city manager. There is little difference between the competing versions. He believed that the version supplied by him was passed for a first reading.
There are a number of misconceptions about the ordinance. It does not set immigration policy or conflict with federal laws. It does not determine who is legal or illegal, and it does not interfere with legitimate law enforcement functions. There were concerns raised by Majewski and Klein at the last meeting about exceptions to the ordinance.
It was discussed as an anti-profiling ordinance, but he suggested calling it the “Community Participation in Local Government and Local Law Enforcement Ordinance. It will increase participation by all people who live here. The ordinance will make people less fearful of reporting crimes and other ordinance violations, such as dangerous rental conditions. People fear they may be investigated for making complaints against their landlord. Some landlords exploit this fear. He has personally dealt with this problem in relation to code enforcement actions by the City of Hamtramck.
Council should be less worried about illegals and more fearful of violent crimes going unreported. No one is going to care if the person making the report was here legally if it leads to the arrest of a dangerous person. There have been cases where witnesses to violent crimes have refused to come forward because they don’t want to be under a microscope themselves. He doesn’t believe that has occurred, but this will help with perceptions, and make people feel better about coming forward as witnesses and victims. Predators prey on people they feel are unlikely to report it. There is statistical data that supports this phenomena. The City of Detroit passed an ordinance 18 months ago. He knows many Detroit police officers and doesn’t know of any who have complained of interference with an investigation or prosecution of a crime.
The ordinance prohibits public servants and police officers from basing probable cause determinations solely on appearance, ethnicity, gender, immigration status, manner of dress, national origin, physical characteristics, race, beliefs, or sexual orientation. There are times where race, gender, or ethnicity may be important factors in investigations. If someone is acting suspicious in the area of a reported crime, the police can still stop people based on physical descriptions. Random stops for race are not allowed. The ordinance doesn’t give preference to any group.
The city is required by law to ask about immigration status in some cases. The city has to ask about the legal right to work on job applications. The ordinance does not prohibit asking about immigration status in regards to state and federal programs. He thought the questions raised the previous week were in regards to an exception for Hamtramck police officers working with federal agents investigating a criminal offense. Officers are sometimes assigned to federal task forces and ICE. Police officers can ask “the subject of a criminal offense, or when processing an arrested person.” Prisoners can’t be shipped to the Wayne County Jail without that information.
People could be asked while they are being arrested or investigated for a criminal offense. A criminal offense is defined as a felony or misdemeanor charge, not civil infractions or blight. A person being stopped in traffic for a civil infraction could not be asked. He doesn’t believe the police are doing that now. They have other things to do.
Allen tried to do a job, and there are people who say it goes too far or not far enough. The ordinance is a good compromise, and he thinks it will benefit the city.
Dawud Walid, the executive director of the Michigan office of CAIR, America’s largest civil liberties organization protecting the rights of American Muslims. CAIR Michigan is in favor of the ordinance. It will not hamper law enforcement. CAIR does not advocate in favor of those who are undocumented or not here legally. They advocate for citizens who may be unjustly profiled. Walid grew his beard out for a couple of weeks, wore a prayer cap to the meeting, and has an Arabic name. He was born here and served 4 years in the United States military. He asked rhetorically if he could be asked about his citizenship. Citizenship can be difficult to prove, and the ordinance will save citizens from the hassle.
Gregory Manore of Yemans Street said the ordinance would show that Hamtramck is continuing it’s historical tradition of tolerance. He wished the ordinance would go further to ban discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations.
Juan Escareno, lead organizer for MOSES, said the name of his organization is a reminder that we were all aliens once. The ordinance seeks to create a community where residents and citizens can participate in the city. Immigrants fearful of being asked for their papers are less likely to participate in the process. Democracy and community involvement regardless of language, religion, and dress can be involved in improving the city. The ordinance is a reflection of what Hamtramck is and will be.
Bill Meyer urged council to vote in favor. He was a bit confused about how the wording had been changed. The title including “community participation” sounded more friendly. The ordinance is supposed to protect citizens. He didn’t know why they didn’t start out with the Detroit ordinance. We want to make the city comfortable and appealing. Threats of funding cuts are a fear tactic. He didn’t understand how immigration discussions came up because the ordinance is about anti-discrimination and profiling. Driving while Black is not a crime. It’s offensive to call immigrants illegals. They are human beings who moved from stressful situations. Being an undocumented worker is a civil violation, not a crime. Immigration is a separate issue. You can’t tell if someone is undocumented by looking at them.
Noise ordinance: Allen said there is no fixed decibel level in the ordinance. There has never been a level in Hamtramck, or in the majority of cities in Michigan. Police officers at the scene are to make the determination, and have to testify in court. He doesn’t want to be in a situation where tickets can’t be issued when equipment is not available. They would also have to present evidence of calibration on every case.
The intent was to modernize something that hasn’t been looked at in some time. Violations will now be civil infractions instead of misdemeanors, which is a trend and will make it easier to enforce. Two recent violations were upheld in court, but it is foreseeable that it could be challenged successfully in the future. The proposed ordinance is compiled from the best ordinances with no set level. Enforcement will be the same as before.
The portion of the ordinance dealing with the call to prayer and church bells was copied directly from the old ordinance because it was enacted by referendum. He said it has worked well with only “a few hiccups” that were worked out with little difficulty.
Bill Meyer asked if there are exceptions for fire trucks, police cars and semis on the freeway. Klein said there are.
Unfinished business
Bias-based policing: Shulgon asked if this was the same ordinance presented two weeks before. Allen confirmed that he sent the correct ordinance to council twice, and he didn’t receive the alternate version submitted by Crawford until that morning. He provided comments on the alternate version when he saw it, and believes the differences are non-substantive.
Shulgon said he takes offense to those saying we have to open our arms because they’ve been open 100 years. All nationalities have been welcome, and to imply that people aren’t welcome and we need an ordinance is an insult.
Gordon said she originally voted against it because she didn’t think we have the problem. She had never experienced this and she was being narrow-minded. After reading about it, many larger cities have these ordinances, and they are good will ordinances. She doesn’t think we have these problems, and that this is a unique community where we all get along. We have a wonderful police force. Part of our job on Earth is to promote good will, and she supports the ordinance.
Stackpoole did not know about the controversy during the last session, but received three different versions since the start of the year. She thought an old version said that they could ask the subject of a crime, whereas the new version says “victim, witness, or suspect of a crime”. Allen said the version he provided states “subject of a criminal offense”. Klein explained that council passed the wrong language the last week. He began calling for Stackpoole to make motions to amend the resolution. Allen suggested substituting versions for simplicity.
Klein said they would move on to discussion of the noise ordinance so the city attorney could make copies of the ordinance he proposed, and then Klein would be willing to entertain a motion to substitute it for the city manager’s version. Shulgon said they should shred it and come back to vote on the right one because he didn’t know what he was voting on. He motioned to table it, seconded by Gordon. Gordon, Algazali, and Shulgon voted to table, but the resolution failed.
Noise: Gordon asked if the ordinance is enforceable. Crawford explained that the ordinance we have has obsolete provisions. The language has been clarified. He said most noise is caused by generators, fans, or other equipment.
Gordon is concerned about entertainment venues. She doesn’t want business owners to be effected, and asked who would decide what is loud. Crawford said it is initially determined by the complainant and a police officer. There is usually discussion and notification prior to the complaint being signed. When there are complaints against places of entertainment, most proprietors try to solve it. There are usually problems with open doors or HVAC systems. Sometimes there are cases when people continually make complaints. Then it comes down to the reasonableness.
Gordon said it would be loud in some venues on Paczki Day. When a room is full of people, they absorb sound. Allen repeated that the new ordinance is the same as the old one, except for a few definitions. When a complaint is made, a police officer will go to the scene and issue a warning. If there is a violation, it will be treated the same as it has been in the past. It has been loud in the past, and he may have participated when he was younger. Gordon said the venues are concerned, and police visits tend to drive away business.
Algazali said he would not vote for the ordinance without an exception for church bells.
Solidarity voted for it, and the resolution passed.
Bias-based policing: Klein realized that the motion was still open, which is a violation of Roberts Rules of Order. He said he would entertain a resolution to substitute the version from the city attorney. Stackpoole made the motion, seconded by Algazali. Shulgon voted against it, but the substitution passed.
Algazali said the ordinance is good business and the right thing to do for our community. It will help the police because more people will cooperate with them.
Shulgon said the council is acting rash and he doesn’t know what they’re voting on. Klein noted his objection. Stackpoole supported it because she was concerned about victims and witnesses being asked about their immigration status.
Ahmed has lived here for a long time and never had any trouble. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen to others. He supports the ordinance.
Shulgon warned the others that they were “accepting the potential for financial disaster.” Shulgon voted against it, but the resolution passed.
Consent agenda
Shulgon asked about a letter from Ramsey Hussain in regards to Jet’s pizza and a large black dog running loose. Klein confirmed that it was still on the consent agenda. Shulgon said there was a large dog running around in the area. Klein said he could bring it up as a non-agenda item. All voted for the consent agenda.