On 04/28/2021 the Safety and Licensing committee took up Resolution #6-R-21 the Resolution Condemning Xenophobia, Racism, and Violence Against The Asian Pacific Islander Desiamerican (APIDA) Community that had been referred back to committee during the 04/21/2021 Common Council meeting.
26 members of the public provided comment on the resolution. All but two gave full throated support of the resolution, and only one voiced opposition. The supporters of the resolution were predominantly outraged that it had been referred back to the committee. After public comment was over and the alderpersons started their discussions, Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) mentioned that the alderpersons who had voted for the refer back had been called bigots, racists, and skinheads. Although not all of the public comments echoed that, there was certainly a theme throughout the public comments that it was some combination of racist, insensitive, and/or inherently wrong to have referred the resolution back to committee instead of passing it at the Council meeting and that it was also some combination of those things to consider amending it or altering its language in any way.
Several people who gave public comment seemed to believe that Alderperson Maiyoua Thao (District 7) had personally written the resolution. That is not true. The vast bulk of it is the same as a resolution that was recently passed in Eau Claire, and the amendment that Alderperson Sheri Hartzheim (District 13) proposed for Appleton’s version of this resolution was one of two amendments that were made and passed by the City Council of Eau Claire.
There was a range of comments.
A few people mentioned the economic impact of not promoting diversity and combating racism. Kimberly Clark is moving 250 jobs to Chicago and Kathy Flores, a former Diversity and Inclusion Coordinator for the city of Appleton, tied that move directly to not just a lack of diversity but to the city actually driving people away.
Some of the Asian Americans who spoke talked of their fear.
One lady mentioned that the most severe racism she experienced was an incident at the Treasure Island shopping plaza sometime in the 1980s. A young man told her to go back to where she came from and to speak the language. She still has a deep distrust of young, white men who dress a certain way and drive a certain car, and she will not go to where Treasure Island used to be even though the building isn’t even there anymore.
An Asian American man spoke with pride about coming to America from Canada and how America is a light tower in the free world. But things have changed over the last year for Asians. His wife bought pepper spray and an alarm. They used to enjoy life here, but now when they come out of a building at night they hold pepper spray and an alarm.
Another Asian American man mentioned that at a family event the week prior the conversation was about how everyone was afraid to go out. “The tragic events we see across our nation are painful,” he said. “We don’t want to see anymore of this event.”
The father of two adopted daughters from China spoke of the fear his 22 year old daughter has begun to experience over the last year. “She will not leave the house any more by herself without me by her side because of harassment that she has received in grocery stores and other places in trying to shop.” He said a 22 year old friend of his daughter who is Russian with Mongolian features will also not leave her home without her parents.
Kou Vang the Board President of Hmong American Partnership stated that, although he didn’t represent all Hmongs there he probably represented the majority. [In this he was acknowledging the one man who opposed the resolution.] He stated racism does exist and that he experienced it. “Especially for our elders here–it doesn’t happen as much to us–but especially them. We have informed them to avoid certain spots, not be alone, maybe that’s a contributor. I don’t know.” He went on to say “We should unite, try to understand each other, work through these conflicts, and maybe we’ll get somewhere.” The Hmong have been in Appleton over 40 years and we’re going to have to work with each other.
Mr. Vang was echoing what a previous speaker, a Hmong pastor of a white church, had said–that all human beings are equal before god and that no human being can be discriminated against by others. He was standing there to defeat those injustices.
There were also speakers who made accusations of racism. These ranged from general accusations of racism in the community and in the nation to more specific accusations of racism by the alderpersons as individuals or a group. Some speakers even spoke of their own personal racism.
There were also accusations of sexism both of the alderpersons for referring the resolution back to committee and contemplating amendments and of the local Hmong man who spoke against the resolution.
A man stated that “racism is woven into the fabric of our society, and it’s woven into the fabric of this community. It is woven into our economy, into education, policing, housing, healthcare, job opportunities. Unfortunately, in part it defines us as a country and as a community.”
Another man, through tears said, “Growing up, you learn about racism. My brother can tell you about it, my mom can tell you about it, I can tell you about it. It damages this community’s reputation and it drives people away.”
The father who had adopted two daughters from China spoke of a friend who works at Lawrence. “She had moved here with the idea that she would retire here, but after living in Appleton for 4 years she said, this is the most racist town that she has ever lived in. Her husband and her will never retire in Appleton as an Asian family.” Later on he stated, “The fact of the matter is, hate is in Appleton and my family has experienced it.”
A woman who works at Lawrence said that she’s regularly heard from students this year, particularly Asian Americans, that they are scared to walk to Walgreens from Lawrence. “I tell people when they first get to Lawrence from a big city whether they’re students or faculty or staff…if you expected it to be 1994 you won’t be disappointed by Appleton.” She was “honestly horrified” that the Council was considering rewriting Alderperson Thao’s words.
A woman stated that as a result of the Common Council referring the resolution back to committee, many members of the AAPI community, “are unsure whether they can call Appleton home. This is understandable as home is the place you are loved, respected, and cared for–where you belong.”
Amanda Stuck, Appleton’s former Assembly Representative state was horrified the Common Council decided they knew better than their constituents, referred the resolution back to committee, and “took it upon themselves to say that they would have to rewrite the words even though the community at each hearing I was at–nobody asked for changes.” She said Alderperson Thao didn’t need their help to change the words because she knows what her community needs.
The CEO for the Boys and Girls club of the Fox Valley said that “the referral back to committee of resolution 6-R-21 has led to feelings of betrayal, a loss of trust, and heightened the fear our AAPI community members face everyday. The Boys and Girls club believes the Common Council should have done all it could to avoid this result. The current situation is unacceptable and requires a quick and convincing response.” He went on to say that, “The Boys and Girls club understands the paramount importance in our world of teaching our members what is acceptable and what is not inside our clubs. We feel that in much the same way, the city of Appleton has the responsibility to clarify the standards it expects of its residents.”
One woman said she had felt some of the discomfort that the alderpersons were feeling as they were challenged on sending the resolution back to committee. “Getting called out on racist behavior is not comfortable. Especially when I didn’t intend to be racist. But I am. How could I not be? I’m white.”
Karen Nelson, another former Diversity and Inclusion coordinator for the city of Appleton, was deeply concerned that recent incidents of racism and descrimination in Appleton threaten our collective public safety. She went on to say, “Let me share with you the Xenophobic history of our nation, because it’s crystal clear.” She mentioned the 1883 Chinese Exclusion Act and the 2019 public charge rule. She mentioned that it was #DenimDay, a day for Sexual Assault Awareness. “How many of you even knew that? This is important because there is a sexism aspect and a racism aspect to this.” [I took “this” to refer to the refer back and the lack of a vote last week.]
Kathy Flores, current Director of Diverse and Resilient and, as mentioned above, a former Diversity and Inclusion Coordinator for the city of Appleton, said that it was her understanding that certain council members had reached out to men in the Asian community to go against the Hmong elders and Alderperson Maiyoua Thao and tell them to not pass the resolution at all. “If such voices should come, I want you to know they’re rooted in sexism and privilege that men have in this community.” Speaking for Diverse and Resilient and the people they serve, she went on to say that they were saddened and angered over not just the vote that went wrong last week but the ridiculous response to it by council members. She mentioned name calling, threatening, and yelling at constituents via email. “This is about the harm that you have caused in the ASian community here in the Fox Valley.” She asked that they pass the resolution as is rather than trying to put a white, male spin on it.
Jeanne Roberts, the President of League of Women Voters in Appleton asked “Don’t you understand the mistrust, hurt, and confusion that your silence has caused? The asian community was here last week. They are here now. Are you ready to listen?”
Another speaker was shocked at the response the Council gave the Asian American community members neighbors, and confused and suggested the alderpersons were not appropriately helping distressed people.
Gary Crevier, the President of Esther, told a story about how he had been racially insensitive the prior week by asking an Asian American woman what her “nationality” was when he should have asked her what her “heritage was. He wondered if the decision to refer the resolution back to committee was an example of good intentions that became “a white privilege microaggression” against all the people who had shared their stories at the common council meeting.
A man said, “The alders who voted to refer this back that are serving on this committee–so Matt Reed, Mike Smith, and Sheri Hartzheim–I hope you feel remorse tonight after hearing the pain from members of the AAPI community who were already exhausted after telling you about their experiences in front of full council and then had their trust broken.” Later on he said, “If you want to align yourself with people like Josh Hawley, you owe it to us here in Appleton to explain exactly why you are making those types of decisions. Don’t tell us we don’t understand the process. Don’t say ‘Oh, I was just trying to make it better’. Just tell us how you actually feel and why you made the choices you did. You owe that to us as the community you represent.” [Note: Alderperson Matt Reed (District 8) did vote to uphold the refer back; however, he also voted in favor of the Common Council taking it up as a Committee of the Whole that night instead of waiting for the committee meeting.]
One speaker read a letter by someone else who said,”If certain alderpersons cannot support the carefully crafted resolution in its original form. That simply reflects that their tepid embrace of diversity, inclusion, and the anti-hate ethics of most of us hold.”
A woman urged “the Council to require those alderpersons who attempted to speak over and amend the words of a resolution denouncing anti-Asian violence–a resolution written by and submitted by an Asian woman–that these alderpersons need to complete Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training.”
Into all of this waded Blong Yang, an Appleton resident and member of the local Hmong community. He was the one person who voiced opposition to the resolution, and I have transcribed his speech in full. (The video of the meeting didn’t show any of the public speakers but you can view a video taken from behind that shows him speaking.)
“Thank you for giving me time. Apparently, before I stepped up here I’ve been called a racist and a sexist already, so I’m already in the hole coming out. I am the only one that I’m aware of to speak against this resolution. Um, and for the record, there’s a lot of bomb throwing has been thrown in here of claiming all sorts of things that are not true. No one reached out to me from the Council. As a matter of fact, I took the initiative and reached out to my council member–my, the council member that represents my district. So, I’m here because I’m concerned. Everybody’s talking about–I wrote a whole bunch of notes here, so–everybody’s talking about–and first and foremost, let me say this. I grew up here. I’ve lived here since the early 80s. I’ve experienced a lot of the things that everybody else is sharing, and I think that most of us in this room, ’cause I don’t know everybody, but I think most of us can agree that we all don’t want and we all denounce racism and hate. I think we can all agree on that. Right? However. What I’ve seen over the last couple of days because I have questions about this resolution, because I don’t understand some of it. Why it’s written the way it’s written. What all the wording’s in there. Everybody’s just claiming that all we want is to denounce racism and hate. Why don’t we put a resolution together saying that? Why don’t we do that? Instead, we have a two page piece of paper that pulls junk from all over in the national media and everywhere else language and bringing it to this, and to our wonderful city of Appleton who has, in my opinion, pretty darn accepting to most people. Short of driving down to Milwaukee or Madison and busing in ethnic diversity into our community, what the heck are we supposed to do? When we’re sitting here and using our personal experience. If that counts. And saying that our community–painting our community here Appleton, Wisconsin as a racist, sexist, and everything under the sun community–I’m offended! I live here. I’ve been involved in non-profit organizations. Don’t know if Peter even remembers me but I’ve worked with him in the past from the Boys Girls Club to Rotary to having my own business here and known a lot of people here and have served with many of them, in multiple shades of colors of skin. I have never, ever known Appleton to be described as I’ve heard in this meeting. Ever. I have never experienced it like that. Ever. I’m extremely offended that everybody here–not everybody–many people here wants to say that the Asian community or the Hmong community is here. Guess what, I’m part of it. You don’t speak for me. Stop using me, ’cause I am part of the Asian community. You don’t speak for all of us. You don’t. Stop trying to. It’s absolutely ridiculous that I have to sit here, come down here and sit here and listen to everybody speak for me. That I disagree with. And that’s what it is, it’s a disagreement. Is the language appropriate or not appropriate? I don’t know. I’m just questioning why do we have two pages of it? When everybody is literally saying, why are you against–all the people I talk to and argue with they say, “Why are you against denouncing racism and hate?” Great. Here’s my proposal. Let the Council put together a resolution that says, ‘The city of Appleton, the leaders of the city of Appleton, denounces all hate and racism of all kind towards all people. Period.’ Does that not cover everything? Why do we have two pages of it? Quoting stuff from God knows where that doesn’t have any impact or anything to do with the city of Appleton in Wisconsin. Those are my questions. I don’t have answers. I just have a lot of questions. Believe in the data somebody said, well, you know what, I took the liberty to do my research. I talked to the city of Appleton officer who takes care of threat assessment. I won’t mention his name ’cause I said I wouldn’t. I asked him point blank, ‘Has there been any uptick in hates against Asian, cases against–racism cases against Asians in the last 12 months?’ No. ‘Has there been anything that you can relate to that says there’s an Asian hate wave going on in our community?’ No. So if we’re supposed to trust the data, where’s the data? Again, I’m not sitting here and saying to you guys look, uh, this is a bad thing. I think it’s a wonderful thing. The question is, it’s two pages of junk on that resolution that doesn’t belong there. If you want to accomplish, if you want to accomplish unity stop dividing us. I’m offended that this resolution is in place calling me and Asian helpless and unable to defend myself in any way, shape, or form. That I’m scared to go outside. I don’t want to be included in that group of people that claims that I am part of that. I’m not afraid to go outside. I’m not afraid to go shopping. Yes, I conceal carry, but it’s for a whole completely different scenario than racism and my fear of it. It’s absolutely crazy that we’re sitting here and having this discussion and the hate that is being thrown–I mean, we’re here talking about hate and denouncing it…”
His five minutes were up and he wanted more time. He said that other people had gone over five minutes, but Alderperson Katie Van Zeeland (District 5) said that was not true. [Note: she was correct.]
Before he left he stated, “I am ashamed of what the sham is going on here. Reword the thing. Do the right thing, and put something else out there that actually does what it’s supposed to do instead of this nonsense.”
As he turned to leave, a white lady in the audience told him to stop discriminating.
He responded, “Is this what white privilege looks like? You are white. Is this what Asian hate looks like? Stop talking to me if you don’t want me to talk.” [I’m not sure if she kept talking to him while he was talking to her.]
He walked away and I think she might have said something as he went because he turned back and said, “I will not bend over and grab my feet for you ma’am. Your white privilege doesn’t exist here and has no impact on me, ma’am.”
The second to last comment was by a man who said he didn’t know much about the resolution, but he was troubled by some of the accusations that had been made against alderpersons. “In support of the people who are here, I don’t know what the resolution is. I briefly read through some of it today, um, I think that the process needs to happen. The council, I’m assuming–that’s the wrong word–I ‘hope’ they do the right thing, whatever the right thing is, whatever the process is. If you need to look at it 10 times, it takes 10 weeks, whatever. The words ‘horrifying’ when people are doing their process, their job, I think is overkill. please just do whatever you gotta do.”
When public comment was over, the committee moved on to discussion.
Appleton Police Chief Todd Thomas said Alderperson Thao had brought the resolution to him and he approved of it at that time and still approved of it. He mentioned that there was a lot of passion behind this topic and the refer back and that “with passion sometimes words become heated and things get said, and I know things have been said on Facebook and social media in the last week that really, truly don’t represent the city and if any of those were directed at council members I’m sorry that happened to you. If any of it was directed out at the community, again that was unacceptable.” Has also said, “What I know from all the discussions I’ve had with the people on the Council this last week is that everybody supports the concept of this resolution. Everybody is against racism.”
Regarding Blong’s recounting of his discussion with the threat assessment officer, Chief Thomas said that the majority of hate crimes are not reported. Anecdotally, he’s received phone calls of things that have happened.
Alderperson Thao spoke in support of the resolution. She said the community needed to heal quickly from what happened last week. She spoke of achieving racial equity and justice for everyone and that it needed to start at the heart of our city. She then gave national statistics regarding hate crimes against Asians and said there are massive unreported anti-Asian hate crimes due to language barriers, mistrust of law enforcement, and lack of community awareness. Pushing the vote back left people feeling confused, ignored, helpless, and disappointed. “Did we do anything as a Council to elevate this collective fear? As leader our primary job function is to work in the best interest of the community and not for ourselves.” She mentioned that last year the Common Council voted to declare that racism is a public health crisis. Abstaining from voting or voting no or even having the “audacity” to push the vote back was disrespectful to the urgency of this issue. She acknowledged that there were probably many great suggestions and changes that could be made but she was not willing to let others touch the AAPI experience. She wanted to pass the resolution without their suggestions and said they should approve the resolution as it is without their own narratives added as a way to stand in solidarity with the AAPI community.
Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) spoke. “Well, I’m the author of this situation. It’s because of me we’re all here. I want to first of all express to the Hmong, Asian Pacific Island community, my most sincere apology. In my focus on having a unanimous council vote I never thought of the hurt my referback would cause. My intent with the refer back was to assure a unanimous vote which I felt the resolution deserved and if possible to offer my suggestions in putting some responsibility on the shoulders of the Common council not just telling others what they need to do. When asked by Alderperson Shultz and at the last Safety and Licensing committee meeting what changes I had in mind, I did not have an answer. I regret that I was prepared. I could have easily offered those changes on the council floor, but believing that the work of the council is done in committee, I did not. In hindsight I should have offered those changes. However, the question of the unanimous vote still remains. Prior to the council meeting I had indicated that I was going to refer the resolution back because of the question of the vote. I was told that even though I felt there were some who were going to abstain or even vote no we should take a vote and basically let the chips fall where they may. But I have to now wonder what kind of verbal public attacks those members of council would have received who abstained or voted no. Because even though our refer back is not a no vote or an abstention, we have been called bigots, racists, skinheads among other things. I know of no council member who deserves to be called any of those names and name calling in my opinion never accomplishes anything. There are many things I have learned in all this. First of all, age does not guarantee wisdom. Second of all, no matter how old you are, there is always something to learn. Having experienced attacks we have received, attacks on our character, even feeling the frustration and even pain of people not wanting to understand your actions, I have a greater compassion today for the hmong asian pacific island people. I have learned that there is a lot of hate and anger–not only in our country, but in our community. I have learned that we now struggle to be civil with each other when we disagree with each other. The pursuit of finding common ground is less sought after, and yet, having said that, I am so grateful for the Hmong councilor who reached out seeking the understanding of my actions and then sharing additional understanding of the thought process of the hmong people. I also am thankful for one of my constituents who offered me continued dialogue on inclusions, saying we can learn together. And we have all learned that beyond 15 alderpersons that the vast majority of the citizens of this community do stand behind the hmong asian pacific island community. I have offered two suggestions that I believe strengthens this resolution–nothing earth shattering but two suggestions that put some responsibility on the council. while these may fail my vote on the council floor will be yes. Even if my suggestions fail, they will serve in publicly letting the hmong asian pacific island community know that beyond my supporting the words of this resolution I am putting myself on notice and saying that my actions with God’s help will reveal the sincerity and truth of my vote. Thank you”
Alderperson Kristin Alfheim (District 11) said that this was only her second time in chambers and that it has been pretty exciting. She reviewed the key concepts and phrases she had taken away from all of the comments.
Alderpreson Denise Fenton (District 6) praised Alderperson Thao and thanked all the people who made public comments over the last three weeks. “We don’t mean to cause hurt a lot of times. We do it with the very best of intentions, and I believe that my colleagues had the very best of intentions with wanting to have a unanimous vote, wanting to put language in that changed it.” She then talked about being an ally and urged her colleagues to refrain from speaking in place of AAPI community members and vote for the resolution as is.
Alderperson Martin (District 4) said that he owed some people an apology and that he had been reaching out to people by phone. He said the city has received public records requests for his city email, and he publicly granted those requests. He said he would have supported the resolution right off the bat and would vote in favor of it. He asked people to understand that the wheels of government turn very slowly.
[I don’t understand why he has been receiving grief. He voted along with those who objected to the initial refer back. Later on, he did vote against having the Council convene as a committee of the whole to take up the matter that night, but there are reasonable reasons why he might have done so.]
Aldeprson Alex Schultz (District 9) reminded everyone that Appleton was named a compassion city in 2011. He thought it had been some time since they reflected on compassion and the fact that the declared themselves a compassionate city. Voting for this resolution was a small step to reclaim a little bit of that. He said, “This racism is not outside of us. It is, as many have said, within this community. It’s not akin to getting a vaccination from a flu outside but taking radiation therapy for a cancer within us and we have to work pretty hard to get rid of that cancer. We all have a little bit of it inside of us, and it takes an effort.” He said they have to forget about bettering the resolution and the language that might have been improved. Maybe there could have been some improvements and they could have put some teeth on it. But they have to set that aside because of the pain that was caused by not voting on it last week. He hoped they’d pass this resolution as is.
Alderperson Sheri Harzheim (District 13) expressed thanks for the feedback she has received over the last week and said it had been a very enlightening first week. “It’s important to me that we express support for the AAPI community in Appleton and it’s become quite clear to me that most believe that this resolution is how we express that support. So I sincerely apologize for those in the AAPI community and the community as a whole that this refer back has caused what is seen as the unwarranted delay in our affirmation of you and your health and wellbeing in this city. I assure you that that was never my intent as I voted for the refer back on my second day in office.” She wanted to show compassion for those who have experienced racial bias or violence through this resolution, but she did also want to respectfully present an amendment to the resolution. She pointed out, “The current narrative is that the verbiage of this original resolution is untouchable due to the first listed co-author’s personal life experiences, and I do respect that. I do not in any way want to detract from or minimize the personal experiences from Alderman Thao who…authored the resolution.”
However, she did not believe that any item brought through the Council should be beyond procedural amendment, regardless of the identity of the person who brings the resolution or the purpose of the resolution. There is a process by which laws and ordinances are passed and that process should not be looked on as anything other than what it is. She said, “Amendments are not racist or otherwise biased tampering of a piece of legislation if it’s passed–if they’re passed procedurally. I just hope that we as a council don’t fall into this trap because, if so, we will never move forward through cooperation amongst us, each of us from an entirely different life experience.”
She went on to say, “I very much expect that, though I am a woman with a different life experience from each of my fellow aldermen, any resolutions that I present in the future can be clarified and codified as needed by any of my fellow alderman through the procedural amendment process, no matter what the ethnicity or sex or any characteristic of the human beings presenting those amendments.”
She then reiterated that whether or not the resolution was amended, she expected to vote in favor of it.
After that, she made a motion that the second to last paragraph that reads, “Be It Further Resolved that the Appleton Common Council recognizes the City of Appleton Police Department in its continue work with local agencies and Asian American and Pacifice Islander community-based organizations to prevent discrimination, expand culturally competend and linguistically appropriate education campaigns on public reporting of hate crimes, and build intentional relationships with the diverse communities” be amended to replace “the City of Appleton Police Department” with “all City of Appleton departments”.
[That is one of the two changes the City of Eau Claire made to when they took up their version of this resolution. It seems like a beneficial change. If there is a wave of crimes being directed at Asians in Appleton that is not reflected in police statistics because local Asian American community members are too afraid to report those events to the police, then it would make sense to broaden the combatting of racist harassment or crimes to other departments that, hopefully, members of the local Asian American community are more comfortable interacting with.]
The motion was seconded by Alderperson Michael Smith (District 10) who felt that by including all of the city departments beyond the Police Department it strengthened the resolution.
Alderperson Van Zeeland, however, felt strongly that, although procedurally they could do this, that they shouldn’t. “We had the opportunity to do this and the community has overwhelmingly told us that they do not want us to amend this.”
The motion failed on a 3-2 vote.
Alderperson Michael Smith (District 10) made a motion that the section that said Whereas, the use of anti-Asian terminology and rhetoric related to Covid-19, such as the “Chinese Virus”, “Wuhan Virus”, and “Kung-flu” have perpetuated anti-Asian stigma” be amended to remove the phrase “Wuhan Virus” from that list of examples of racist rhetoric. His reasoning was that if they allowed history to be revised so that people forget where this originated from, they would be doing a disservice to the whistleblowers in China who were arrested for sharing information in the first weeks of the outbreak. He referenced an article from the Daily Mail that detailed the people who were disappeared by the Chinese communist government for telling the truth about what was happening in Wuhan. “If we can’t rightly call this the Wuhan Virus or the Wuhan Flu in recognition of all the deaths and the risk people took to get the word out to the world, then we dishonor those freedom fighters, those heroes, those dead and we let China hide behind wokism and political correctness.”
His motion failed for lack of a second.
At that point, Alderperson Metzler (District 2) who was not on the committee but was in attendance asked the committee members to not compose any more amendments and instead to pass the resolution on to the Common Council. “There is only one way to fix the harm done, and that is to respond to the community’s request to keep the resolution’s original language and pass it forward.”
Alderperson Van Zeeland acknowledged that there were alderpersons who wanted to add more teeth to the resolution, and she encouraged them to write their own resolution that would show how the city could show support for the AAPI community. “There’s no reason why we can’t do that, and I think that we would love to see that.”
Alderperson Joe Prohaska (District 14) said that when he voted to refer it back he meant no disrespect. He thought he could make it better. “It’s not me putting my white hands on anything. It’s just me wanting to try to help. That’s it.” At this point, however, he thought the best thing the committee could do was to pass it with the language it was written with and then revisit it at another date with language that they thought could help the Asian community more. “This is a start; it’s not the end. This is just the beginning people.” We need to band together not only as a council but as a city
Alderperson Smith said that as long as they were explaining why they referred it back he did it in part because he was confused about how it had passed out of the committee the first time with what he thought were two abstentions. He had since clarified that it had been approved. He referred it back because committee work is done at committee. He understood the confusion as to why it was referred back but said, “We do this because we want–we hope we’re doing the right thing. It’s not a white thing. It’s not a privilege thing. It’s doing the right thing.” He did think that, on a personal level, the refer back and the response to it had moved him forward as a Council member
With that the question was called and the committee voted to recommend it for approval to the Common Council with no change in its original language.
[There’s a lot to think about in all of this.
The idea that some resolutions should not be subject to the normal legislative procedures, either because of their subject matter or the person who sponsored them, seems problematic. Likewise, the idea that, in some situations, engaging in the normal legislative process is not only undesirable but actively racist also seems problematic. If there are situations when engaging in the normal conduct that alderpersons are specifically elected to engage in is wrong, those situations should be codified into the Rules of Council. Alderpersons should not be expected to know these unspoken rules.
It seems to me that the public also is not well served when rules and expectations for their elected officials are not transparent and accessible. The lack of this resolution actually doing anything other than make a statement is perhaps good in this case, given that the alderpersons were told it was bigoted and racist to try to improve it. But, what if this resolution had actually altered the municipal code in some way? Would the alderpersons have then been free to refer it back and amend it as they thought appropriate without fear of being called racists? What are the situations under which an alderperson can bring a resolution to the Common Council and the Common Council will be expected both to pass it and to pass it without amendment? This seems like an important thing for the public to know.
Despite all of the accusations of racism against the alderpersons who voted to support the refer back, I see no evidence that they were motivated by anything other than a desire to improve the resolution. Particularly given that the process for this resolution started under a previous Council and there were three new Council members who had not participated in the committee process, it does not seem unreasonable for it to be sent back to committee for additional input from the three new alderpersons who would be voting on it–particularly in light of the fact that even in this meeting it was acknowledged that it could be improved and “given teeth” as it were.
I also see no indication that Blong Yang was motivated by sexism or bigotry. He spoke very passionately from his own experience against racism just as all the other Hmong community members did, and yet before his speech he was labeled a sexist and after his speech he was immediately confronted by someone telling him to stop discriminating. When he was briefly escorted from the room many of the people clapped and cheered. Why was he not given the respect that the other Hmong community members were given? Why was his lived experience dismissed? He was as passionately opposed to racism as anyone else in that room, and yet because he had a different idea about what the Common Council ought to do he was derided.
It seems to me that Mr. Yang already exemplifies the end result that the Common Council is hoping to promote through this resolution, which is to say, he is an Asian American living in Appleton who feels comfortable, not afraid, and not like he is the victim of racially motivated harassment and bigotry. If they move forward with further measures, it seems that he could provide some valuable insight into what factors went into his sense of security within the Appleton community and that he ought be a voice that is sought out rather than dismissed.]
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=844720&GUID=C4DAFC46-2E62-4C6C-9396-5CFC27E3A4A7&Options=info|&Search=
Be the first to reply