See video of Jenn speaking in Washington DC below – April 30, 2019.
By: Diane Benjamin
See this section from the City Code: http://www.cityblm.org/government/codes-ordinances/city-code
Now see this Facebook post from Illinois people’s Action:
Obviously Jenn Carrillo and Jeff Crabill have “personal interest” in passing the Welcoming Ordinance and both are not capable of “rendering a fair and impartial decision”.
If this ever comes to Council and these two do not recuse themselves, I see a lawsuit in their future.
Need more proof these two can not render a fair and impartial decision?
The told WGLT they can’t: https://www.wglt.org/post/bloomington-welcomes-new-beginnings-4-new-aldermen-0?fbclid=IwAR3FJHBDQWu23_2aKZ6yB8i86r64eIYnR5oSC68ZLMRs0znfpOXa3CVH7eU#stream/0
More proof:
Jenn’s speech at People’s Wave Convention – Washington DC
Start watching at 11:50. She admits to organizing to get the Welcoming Ordinance.
She is not capable of rendering a “fair and impartial decision”.
Nice picture. Looks like a 1960’s reunion of political radicals. Power to the people. And oh by the way, “Free Angela”.
Not only should these peoples people not vote, they should not participate during discussions and debates pertaining to the welcoming law. Conflict of interest is currently rampant enough in our councils, boards and commissions. A nicey nice term for all of these unlawful activities is “networking”. Perhaps the mayor should excuse himself when this matter is before the City Council.
If you have the misfortune to employ any of the pictured, despicable Communist thugs, please, PLEASE do your “civic duty” and fire them immediately. Political radicalism is NOT a “protected class”.
With due respect, to fire someone for their religious or political beliefs is a very dangerous path to follow.
I agree Jim. I lost a job back in August for disagreeing with Tari Renner. Standing up to these people (Tari, Jenn) isn’t easy. Peoples finances should not be impacted for their beliefs.
They have jobs?
One thing is clear. Clay Wheeler is taking early retirement so he doesn’t have to deal with Jenn and her gang. I wish him well. Can’t imagine who they’ll get to replace him. That will be the show to watch.
Would love to know who is in this picture so I can be sure to avoid them like the plague.
Big night. Jenn combed her hair for a change. Please contact city manager Tim Gleason and insist on recusing if any issue rises. All the new members took an oath to follow the law so make them.
This picture should disgust the people of Bloomington. Sadly, the Welcome Ordinance will in time be seen as relatively tame when these radicals unpack their agenda and thrust it on the citizenry.
Welcoming ordinance is to protect undocumented immigrants. Hum. Is there an ordinance to protect legal immigrants? I am a legal immigrant and this seems offensive to me. I did not receive any special perks or protection… you know why? Because of we did it the right way. If everyone would follow the rules these types of ordinances would not come up. I wonder what the real reason is behind this.
Hello,
I don’t think invoking the “personal interest” clause as it pertains to a potential conflict of interest would work very well.
We can all agree that having a financial conflict of interest is usually more specific and understandable. But I’m not sure what Bloomington was trying to accomplish when it put the “personal interest” clause in its city code, but it is way overly broad, so much so that it makes little sense. All of us have numerous “personal interests” that could make it difficult to render an “impartial” decision on many matters. That shouldn’t preclude us from serving our community in a political capacity, such as a city council, and actually advocating those personal interests as one perspective in an open discussion that welcomes various viewpoints. What if someone in the community has a strong “personal interest” in being a fiscal conservative, who advocates responsible spending and transparency in financial matters, and was elected to the Bloomington City Council? According to the code, this person wouldn’t be allowed to participate in discussion and vote on any fiscal matters or spending decisions? Let’s say I belong to a recreational bicycle group. If I’m on the city council, I can’t dicuss or vote on anything that pertains to bicycles? I’m a member of the humane society; I guess that means I can’t vote on anything that has to do with animals or leash laws. You see how ridiculous this could get. As far as the newly elected members of both Bloomington and Normal town councils, I agree with some of their positions and disagree with others. But all of them were elected, in part, because of their personal beliefs on a number of matters that appealed to the voters and now their constituents. And now they are understandably expected to express a voice and be an advocate for some of those views. Again, I’m not sure what Bloomington was trying to accomplish by this “personal interest” code. It’s way too general and vague; it doesn’t seem there was a lot of thought put into it or the language expressing it, and I don’t think it wouldn’t hold up under any kind of legal challenge if it were invoked in an attempt to limit city council members from expressing their views and voting on matters that come before the council.
Thank you for letting me participate in the discussion.
Randy