MAYOR SARNO, THAT’S NOT AMERICA!

Share this:

—By Frederick A. Hurst—
Residency has finally become a hot issue in Springfield. Too many of the folks who work for the City of Springfield live outside of it and many of those are part of the cacophony of the “Springfield is dangerous” chorus. So it is good to know that some of our City Councilors are finally putting their foot down and demanding that the residency laws of the city be enforced. Not only do people who work for Springfield and live in Springfield care more about Springfield, they also enhance the economy of Springfield to everybody’s benefit.
And let nobody be confused. This controversy is not just about the Springfield Fire Department’s blatant violation of the law with the support of Springfield Mayor Domenic Sarno. It goes much deeper than that.  Blatant disregard for the residency law or the spirit of it reaches into all levels of Springfield government where mayoral waivers are so routine that nobody feels compelled to follow the law even without a waiver.
And the residency issue is not a race issue as some claim although there are racial implications since many of those who would fill positions that are held overwhelmingly by White outsiders would be drawn from qualified candidates from Springfield’s majority/minority Black and Hispanic populations. But they would also be drawn from qualified members of Springfield’s substantial White population. And there are plenty of qualified folks living in Springfield. And for those who do not live in Springfield and do not want to move to Springfield and circulate their income to the benefit of Springfield’s economy, let them seek employment elsewhere. The silliest comment on the residency issue came from the mouth of City Councilor Tom Ashe, whom I consider a friend. He said that while he appreciates “the passion of some of my colleagues around the issue of residency, I do not agree that unilaterally wiping out the entire senior structure of the Fire Department is the way to address the situation.”
First, nobody has said anything about “wiping them out.” All of the discussion has been about “bringing them in,” according to the law. If they choose to stay out, let that be their problem.
But, second, does Councilor Ashe really believe that there are no qualified Springfield residents to fill the positions of those nonresidents who refuse to move in? If he believes such a condescending bunch of baloney, he’s not qualified to represent the people of Springfield. And he should be considered part of the problem as, it seems, is our current mayor, who seems to believe that his declarations of support for Springfield employees who violate the law takes precedent over the law itself.
That’s not America!

Recent Stories

  • What Does My Community Need?

    When I was pregnant, my husband and I wanted to give birth and welcome our baby in our home. We looked in Springfield – and then in the adjacent towns in the lower valley – for a homebirth midwife to assist us. There wasn’t one. We needed to search for that service in the upper…

The Outwin

Upcoming Events

[tribe_events view=”photo” tribe-bar=”false” events_per_page=”2″]


Af-Am Point of View Recent Issues

March 2024

Cover of the March 2024 issue of Af-Am Point of View News Magazine

February 2024

Cover of the February 2024 issue of Af-Am Point of View News Magazine

January 2024

Cover of the January 2024 issue of Af-Am Point of View News Magazine

December 2023

Cover of the December 2023 issue of Af-Am Point of View News Magazine

See More Past Issues of Af-Am Point of View Newsmagazine

Advertise with Af-Am Point of View

Ener-G-Save