Waukegan parade organizer accuses alderman of intimidation; ‘This behavior is … inappropriate and very unethical'
Organizers of Waukegan's annual parade celebrating the independence of several Latin American countries and Hispanic Heritage Month are expressing disapproval with Ald. Victor Felix, 4th Ward, for trying to pry them away from the event.
Elizabeth Marrero, a director of not-for-profit organization Juntos — the organizer of the Viva la Independencia parade in September — said Felix asked the group to withdraw its special-use permit granted by the city on Jan. 14. The group began working on it in December.
'Felix stated that the parade had been promised to other individuals and warned us that if we do not withdraw, they will find loopholes to revoke the permit,' Marrero said. 'No public official should use their position to intimidate or manipulate (a) community group.'
Marrero made Felix's remarks to her and a colleague public during audience time at the Waukegan City Council meeting Monday at City Hall, asking for an investigation into the alderman's behavior.
After she finished her remarks, Marrero walked to the center of the dais and handed a copy of her speech to Mayor Sam Cunningham. When the meeting was over, Cunningham gave the paper to Corporation Counsel Joseph Miller, III.
'I'm giving it to our corporation counsel,' Cunningham said. 'We're making it an official document. Our goal is to have a successful parade.'
Near the end of the meeting, during a time reserved for council members to speak, Felix said he is committed to the city's event process and following the related rules and procedures. He did not specifically deny any of Marrero's allegations.
'If my actions were perceived as anything other than supportive, I sincerely apologize,' Felix said. 'I'm here to work alongside our community partners, not against them. I stand with those trying to bring positive and inclusive events to our city. I'm willing to support any parade that brings our city together in the right way.'
When asked specifically after the meeting if he had asked Juntos to withdraw its parade application, he said, 'No comment.' He gave the same answer when asked if any of Marrero's statements were inaccurate.
During her conversation with Felix, Marrero said at the meeting that she felt he was trying to intimidate her and her colleague. He told them that if they appealed the withdrawal of the permit, the council would vote against her.
'Felix stated that by Juntos withdrawing from coordinating the parade will be the best possible scenario for the city of Waukegan to avoid any drama,' Marrero said. 'We also learned this alderman has been questioning city staff about ways to find loopholes to revoke the permit.'
After the meeting, Marrero said she received a text from Felix on April 25 asking to meet in person. He insisted it happen quickly. She and her colleague met with Felix on April 27. Already working to organize the parade since December, Juntos was not about to leave the scene. He added pressure.
'This behavior is intimidating, inappropriate and very unethical,' Marrero said.
David Motley, the city's communications director, said the city received only one application for the annual parade, and it was already approved.
Jesus Uribe, another Juntos member, said through an interpreter during the meeting that the organization donates any excess money generated from the parade back into the community. It is already seeking donations and sponsorships.
'With the money we raised in (last year's) parade, we will be giving three (college) scholarships,' Uribe said. 'Whatever is raised from the next parade will be given to people who have cancer.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
Our politicians are the least serious in history – and that includes you, Nigel
This week an appalling case reminded us just how broken Britain is. We learnt that a 15-year-old boy killed elderly dogwalker Bhim Kohli while a female friend, aged 12, filmed it on her mobile phone. Both were laughing as the beloved grandfather lay dying in the street. How on earth can it have come to this? The case is emblematic of everything that has gone wrong – and continues to go wrong – in our fragmented, seemingly lawless society. We are led by complete incompetents: from police administering two-tier justice right the way up to our Prime Minister. It is little wonder there is a university course running in France on why the UK is such a failure. And Mayor of London Sadiq Khan's answer to our capital's woes, despite knife and other crimes soaring? Decriminalising cannabis. We knew Labour were not fit for purpose before they even took office, but this latest example of idiocy from City Hall really does sum up the problem with having hapless, careerist socialists anywhere near the levers of power. And now Reform UK appears to have imploded. Having abandoned the Conservative Party after an inept 14 years of governance, which left us with higher bills, higher taxes, higher NHS waiting lists and higher immigration, voters had hoped that Nigel Farage and his motley crew might bring the salvation Britain so desperately needs. Reform was meant to represent the alternative to 'uniparty' politics by ripping up the political rule book and restoring good old fashioned common sense. What we have learnt in the past 24 hours, however, is that the one thing uniting all four major parties in the UK (and I'm including the ludicrous Liberal Democrats in this, with their clown of a leader Sir Ed Davey) is just how thoroughly unserious they all are. Westminster currently resembles a cross-party circus act; what has the electorate done to deserve this? Let's take them one by one. We currently cannot believe a word slippery Starmer says after a string of Labour lies on tax, winter fuel, defence spending, relations with the EU, the Chagos Islands, immigration – you name it. They promised 6,500 more teachers with their vindictive VAT raid on private school fees and this week it was revealed teacher numbers are actually down since they took office. Millionaires are leaving, businesses are folding, more tax rises are on the way. We've got an Attorney General who wants to defend terrorists like Osama bin Laden's right-hand man while the justice system imprisons mothers like Lucy Connolly for 'hurty words' on the internet. The Left accuses Reform of being amateurs – and then run the country as if it's a university student union staffed by drop-outs. Yet the Right-wing opposition appears equally as childish. This week, we have had the shadow chancellor Mel Stride denouncing Liz Truss's premiership with some weasel words about the Tories 'never again undermining fiscal credibility by making promises we cannot afford'. The former prime minister – once famously compared to a lettuce – hit back with an excoriating statement on the political playground that is X, accusing Sir Mel of being a 'creature of the system' by siding with 'failed Treasury orthodoxy'. In what world does this blue-on-blue infighting help Kemi Badenoch as she struggles to cut through? Equally infantile was the typically boyish intervention of her former leadership rival Sir James Cleverly with a demand that the Conservatives stick to net zero – despite it being among the main reasons the party is now facing its own climate emergency. He's been invisible for months and then emerges with this sort of unhelpful Ed Milibandesque claptrap? Read the room, for pity's sake. All credit to Robert Jenrick for trying to find some grown-up solutions to some of the country's problems – like fare dodging, notwithstanding the self-serving nature of his attention-grabbing social media endeavours. Badenoch is trying her best to be a serious politician, with thoughtful rather than knee-jerk interventions on issues like our membership of the ECHR – only to have MPs in her ranks like Kit Malthouse spreading anti-Israel slanders like his declaration this week that Gaza is 'an abattoir where starving people are lured out through combat zones to be shot at'. Along with other Tories, he's also been calling for the Prime Minister to recognise a Palestinian state. Harebrained student politics are clearly not just confined to the Labour Party. We had hoped Reform, led by streetwise Nigel Farage, a man of political wisdom and experience, might rise above all this. But even he has been dogged by infantilism. If Rupert Lowe's 'more people watch my X videos than Nigel's' bravado wasn't bad enough, Reform now has been badly damaged by the similarly petulant flouncing out of party chairman Zia Yusuf. I like Zia and think he deserves credit for all the hard work he has put into professionalising the party over the past 11 months. But what on earth was there to be gained from such a public tantrum? Just leave quietly, don't blow the whole thing up with spiteful talk of working to get the party elected 'no longer being a good use of my time'. Similarly juvenile was the language he used to describe Reform MP Sarah Pochin's Commons call to ban the burka (which provoked laughter from the front bench: that's the state of public discourse in this country, folks). Responding to Katie Hopkins, of all people, on X, he wrote: 'Nothing to do with me. Had no idea about the question nor that it wasn't policy. Busy with other stuff. I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the PM if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do.' At the age of 38 and having worked at Goldman Sachs and established his own hugely successful business, he should know this is not the way to behave in the public eye. Reform remains a party that cannot even govern itself, let alone the country. This simply isn't good enough. The Government is useless, the Tories are a busted flush; if Reform seriously wants to break the doom loom of despair then it cannot be part of the problem. The party must get its act together – and fast. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Los Angeles Times
16 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Mailbag: Fighting back against Huntington Beach City Council
It's hard to fight City Hall. Yet here we are again. The Huntington Beach City Council would have you believe two things. First, for 50 years, our city librarians have been secretly providing pornography to your kids, and nobody ever noticed it. Second, that a 0.02% savings on the city budget will somehow prevent a budget crisis. When put in this factual context, the arguments against Measures A and B are utter nonsense. To debate City Council on the facts is a losing strategy; they have unlimited time and resources and the public gets one minute. They will get the last word and that's often all that is heard or reported. It is not a fair fight. What you need to know is this — our city's libraries are no longer safe. The City Council's tactics have enabled and rallied their supporters to attack our citizens. Our neighbors. Your friends. Don't believe me? You've seen the signs put out by the City Council. But you probably don't know: This is what our city has become. The City Council is hurting real people — librarians, volunteers and kids — these are not images placed on a sign. What I do not understand is why we accept this — why do our citizens allow the City Council to do these things? How can we fight back? The City Council encourages these things to happen. In their malicious attempt to control the city they show no mercy to those innocent people who serve our community. Ask yourself — what's next? I am asking you for help. It's simple, really. You have your ballot; just check both boxes 'yes' and drop it in the mail. It takes two minutes but would mean so much to those who participate in this community. The City Council is counting on your apathy to allow their agenda to continue. Stop the lies. Stop the hate. Stop City Council. 'Yes' on Measures A and B. Larry HershHuntington Beach When I was a girl growing up in Brooklyn, my mother and I would visit our nearby library at least once a week. A special time, though, was when we went to the huge (in my child eyes at least!) Arlington branch of the Brooklyn Public Library near Highland Park or the New York Public Library. These libraries, with their imposing size and thousands of books, became almost sacred places to me, much like a church. If I wanted to find books about topics that interested me, a kind librarian could always point me in the right direction. This experience instilled in me a great love of libraries and I was so thrilled to move to Huntington Beach in 1973, where there was an award-winning city library system. This is why what is occurring with our wonderful libraries has touched me so very much and what is at stake is so much more than book banning. It is a matter of control, control over what we can read and taking that control from parents and giving it to an appointed committee. I was very disheartened to learn that Texas just passed Senate Bill 13, which gives public school boards or parent review groups control over banning books that contain 'harmful' or 'indecent' material according to 'community values.' Librarians would have no say in the matter. This could lead to broad censorship banning 'Romeo and Juliet' (citing premarital sex) or even the Bible (if you ask what could be considered 'indecent,' look no further than the story of how King David lusted after Bathsheba when he saw her bathing!). And this is just the beginning... That is why I urge you to vote 'yes' on Measures A and B to protect our beloved libraries from privatization and the appointment of a review committee. Let's vote to keep our libraries in the sacred place they hold in our hearts! Kathleen BungeHuntington Beach Municipal codes are laws that take priority over resolutions, which can be rescinded. Huntington Beach Resolution #2025-45, is more smoke and mirrors under the guise of 'protecting the children.' In the event a majority of the City Council votes to outsource any services provided by HBPL to a private contractor, or to sell the library, a 'yes' vote on Measure B requires a majority vote of H.B. residents before outsourcing or sale of the library can happen. If the city declares a fiscal emergency, a vote of H.B. residents will not be required. The resolution fails to state that library services will not be outsourced. The idea promoted by opponents of Measure A, that just one person will make procurement decisions, is a false narrative. Several individuals are, have been, and will continue to be involved in the procurement process if Measure A passes. There is a policy in place to request reconsideration or removal of library materials, and Municipal Code Section 2.66.110. gives the Book Review Board the authority to relocate existing books or reject purchase of children's books deemed inappropriate for children, based on 'community standards.' Seven 'inappropriate for children' books have been relocated to the adult section, and several others have been identified. It is curious that neither reconsideration policy was expedited to protect children from the additional 'inappropriate books identified by 'residents.'' Municipal Code Section 2.66.110 creates a Book Review Board consisting of no more than 21 political appointees with the authority to review and relocate any books children have access to, based on undefined 'community standards' to be defined by the board. Their decisions are unappealable and not limited to materials with sexual content. This is book banning. It is censorship. The resolution stating books shall not be banned fails to include the City Council's definition of book banning. 'Inappropriate' children's books can be removed and sold or donated to other city libraries. How does this protect children? 'Yes' on Measure A will allow parents, not politicians, to choose reading materials for their own children, and to protect children from being used as pawns to promote political extremist agendas. Judy MorrisHuntington Beach Huntington Beach Public Library will hold its annual all-ages Summer Reading Kickoff Carnival in front of the Central Library on June 24 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. There will be games, crafts, activities, shows and plenty of food. Participants can also register there for the 2025 Summer Reading Challenge. Last year, about 3,000 participants signed up for the reading challenge and about 15,000 people attended the events throughout the summer! This program would not be possible without support from a team of dedicated volunteers from the Friends of the Children's Library of Huntington Beach. If our public library is outsourced to a for-profit corporation, there's a good chance this long-standing program will end. Why? The library volunteers who donate time and money to support this program will not make similar contributions to a for-profit corporation with wealthy investors. If you want the Huntington Beach Public Library to be free from corporate outsourcing as it has been for over 100 years, vote 'yes' on Measure B. And if you want the Huntington Beach Public Library to be free from political interference regarding book selection, vote 'yes' on Measure A. Election Day is June 10. Carol DausHuntington Beach For several election cycles, Huntington Beach has been plastered with large political signs by both sides of the political spectrum. It is a political sign war aimed at low information voters. Thousands of residents are over it, especially the signs for the June 10 special election that included the word 'porn.' Those signs exposed more young children to porn than any book in our public libraries. Parents were forced to have unplanned and, for most adults, uncomfortable conversations with their children. Let's start a campaign to create a new political sign policy. It is time to limit political signs both in size and where they can be displayed. Other cities manage to hold successful elections without the sign blight that overtakes Huntington Beach for several weeks for each election. Let our elected officials know that you want a change to our current sign policy. Your vote shouldn't be based on a political sign. Read the ballot. Read the political statements. Make an informed vote. Most know my vote for the June 10 special election. It will be 'yes' and 'yes.' Cathey RyderHuntington Beach As a reproductive rights advocate and Orange County resident for more than 20 years, I want to thank my Congressman, Rep. Dave Min, for voting 'no' on the recent budget reconciliation bill. Rep. Min's vote, along with the votes of Orange County Representatives Linda T. Sanchez, Derek Tran, Lou Correa and Mike Levin, accurately represent their constituents' desire to maintain Medicaid funding and keep Planned Parenthood health centers open. Representative Young Kim's vote, however, does not. By voting 'yes,' Rep. Kim voted to gut Medicaid and cut access to vital healthcare for tens of thousands of people in Orange County. That's 130,000 people in our communities relying on Planned Parenthood for healthcare, and for many of them, Planned Parenthood is the only provider they see. Over half of Planned Parenthood patients use Medicaid to get services like birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing, regular checkups and abortion care. This bill puts 200 health centers nationwide at risk of closing and millions of Americans at risk of losing access to essential care. The attack on Medicaid and Planned Parenthood health centers is an attack on any Californian's ability to choose their own healthcare provider. Everyone deserves affordable, high quality care from providers they trust. Do you really want your elected officials to make that decision for you? There is still a chance to help protect Medicaid and access to Planned Parenthood. Call Young Kim and urge her to vote 'no' on any bill that cuts Medicaid or 'defunds' Planned Parenthood. Jenna RossIrvine Pardon me if this comes across strongly, but I am deeply concerned by the rationale offered for supporting Andrea McElroy's election as a Newport-Mesa Unified School District trustee — namely, the endorsement by the mayor of Newport Beach and the endorsement of the Newport Beach Police Department. As a former NMUSD board president, I can say with confidence that school resource officers (SROs) were never a point of contention during my time on the board. There was broad support from all trustees I served alongside, making this a non-issue. Equally irrelevant is Ms. McElroy's involvement in the high school drama program her daughter participated in. While community involvement is important, this alone does not qualify someone to serve on a school board responsible for decisions that impact all students. What's notably absent from her background is meaningful PTA leadership involvement or broader community service. The claim of being a 'businesswoman' also raises concerns, considering the outcomes of her association with several ventures. This appears to be a poor vetting decision by her backers, driven more by political influence than by genuine focus on student needs. It's disappointing to see a former trustee and others seemingly prioritize political alignment over educational leadership. Our students deserve board members committed to serving their best interests, not the mayor's agenda. Vicki Snell, former NMUSD trustee presidentCosta Mesa There's a tiny little local election on June 10 and it is costing the Newport-Mesa Unified School District more than $400,000!!!! You only have to check one box, and you don't have to think about national politics to do so, but because candidate Andrea McElroy forced a special election after she didn't earn a board appointment we all have to vote for that temporary seat, which will have to be contested all over again next year. That makes me mad. That is NOT fiscally conservative, and that's why I'm out canvassing for Kirstin Walsh, the candidate who was appointed by the board in the first place. I met Ms. McElroy and she's lovely, but when I asked her why she didn't just wait until next year to run, she said, 'It's not that expensive to run the special election.' What? More than $400,000 is not expensive? That money could have been spent on education, infrastructure, art supplies, books and much-needed equipment for our kids. I was blessed to raise my boy and girl twins here on Balboa Island where they attended Lincoln Elementary and Corona del Mar Middle and High School. They were provided with an amazing education. As a PTA volunteer, I can tell you it was always a privilege to help out, but always a battle to raise funds for our kids. With more than $400,000 coming out of the school budget for this election, it reminds me of how hard PTA members have to work for every single dollar. Speaking of PTA, the other reason I'm out talking with my community about Kirstin Walsh, is she is one of those special people that steps up to service. She comes from a long line of those who have served in the military and taught her that giving back matters. She is currently Newport Harbor PTA president, served that same high position at Ensign, and has spent years on Harbor Council. That experience matters. Please vote for Kirstin Walsh because she is a doer, a volunteer, a public servant and, on a personal note, a water polo mom like me. Summer BaileyBalboa Island As our community approaches the school board election, I urge voters to see through the desperate tactics of the Walsh campaign and support Andrea McElroy, the only candidate who stands for parents' rights and school safety. The Walsh campaign continues to claim that she's not partisan and won't get involved in statewide issues in our schools. That prompts a few questions though: Would a non-partisan candidate be backed by the progressive teachers union to the tune of nearly $10,000 and a progressive women's group to the tune of $5,000? Would a non-partisan candidate proudly accept endorsements from state and local progressive elected officials? I'd like to know what the Walsh campaign is afraid of. Are they afraid to admit that she's an agent of a liberal agenda in a voting area with a decades-long history of electing conservative school board members? In contrast, Andrea McElroy has been clear from the start. She is a conservative, determined to stop the leftist majority on our school board. She is not afraid to say it because it reflects her values and the values of our community. Andrea McElroy is endorsed by our police and fire associations because they trust her commitment to school safety. Community leaders have endorsed Andrea McElroy because they trust her commitment to stand up to the leftist majority on the school board. If you value school safety, parental trust and fearless leadership, vote for Andrea. Let's protect our schools and reject the tactics of a desperate campaign. Mary Sue PediciniNewport Beach
Chicago Tribune
a day ago
- Chicago Tribune
Andy Shaw: Public officials must cut the fat before begging for taxpayer bailouts
As Yankees baseball legend and iconic quipster Yogi Berra is famously quoted as saying, 'It's deja vu all over again.' Once again the perennially and preternaturally cash-strapped city of Chicago, State of Illinois, Chicago Transit Authority, Metra and Chicago Public Schools are pointing at Washington, D.C., with their hands out, shaking their tin cups and blaming the federal government for letting the COVID cash faucet run dry. The message they're sending Washington, and local taxpayers, is as audacious as it is absurd: 'We're broke because you stopped giving us free money.' Not a word about decades of mismanagement. Not a whisper about institutional waste and inefficiency. And no sign that anyone in Springfield, City Hall, or the transit and CPS boardrooms is willing to make the hard choices that real leaders are supposed to make when times get tough. I watched this sad scenario play out for 37 years as a local journalist and 10 more as a good government watchdog, and nothing has changed. The pandemic didn't break their budgets — it merely exposed how broken they already were. The CTA is projecting a $600 million shortfall next year as federal pandemic aid evaporates. But instead of tackling excessive operating costs, administrative bloat and outdated labor rules, executives are spending their time lobbying for a federal or state bailout — one they know won't fix a single structural problem. Anyone who's taken the Red Line after dark knows the CTA doesn't just need more money — it needs more competence. Meanwhile, transit leadership continues to drive or be driven to work instead of riding, top managers cash six-plus figure paychecks and union contracts are treated like sacred texts instead of the fungible documents they need to be in the post-COVID era. Then there's City Hall, where Mayor Brandon Johnson is asking for hundreds of millions in new federal and state funds to prevent drastic service cuts while also rolling out feel-good programs with questionable funding sources. The migrant crisis, pension time bombs and public safety concerns are real. But rather than prioritize, consolidate and streamline, Johnson's team is cobbling together budget Band-Aids and sending invoices to D.C. or Springfield hoping Uncle Sam or Uncle J.B.— more accurately, taxpayers — will foot the bill. As for the state, the other bailout target of local governments, the picture's not much better. Gov. JB Pritzker proudly touted Illinois' temporary budget surpluses during the pandemic, but those were largely a mirage — the result of federal stimulus funds and delayed spending. Now that the spigot's shut off, the state's back to deficit projections and renewed calls for 'revenue enhancements' — political code for higher taxes on the very companies and people that are already exiting Illinois in record numbers. Finally, few local institutions are as financially fragile, and equally shameless, as CPS, which is projecting a $391 million budget gap next year; and like its sister agencies, pointing fingers at Washington and Springfield instead of looking in the mirror. 'The cliff is coming,' CPS officials say, referring to the end of federal COVID relief funding. But what they don't say is they built their post-pandemic budget on a sandcastle of temporary dollars with no plan for how to sustain expanded staffing and programs once that tide inevitably went out. Rather than using the federal windfall to right-size operations or address glaring long-term issues like special education, building maintenance, union overreach and enrollment-based reallocations, CPS went on a hiring spree, expanded programs without metrics, approved generous union contracts and padded administrative overhead. The real outrage? CPS is bleeding students — enrollment is down by more than 85,000 since 2010, but the budget keeps ballooning. We're paying more to educate fewer children, with less to show for it. Nobody seems willing to talk about the elephant in every government room: Waste, in its multiple iterations; there's enough fat in these budgets to make a butcher weep. But trimming it would require the kind of political courage we haven't seen in decades. It would mean saying no to special interests, rethinking sacred cows and upsetting the apple cart of status quo politics — a cart too many of our leaders are riding in comfortably. Instead, our politicians are taking the easy way out: Blame Washington, Springfield or the allegedly undertaxed wealthy, ask for more money and cross their fingers that voters won't notice the hypocrisy. It's fiscal malpractice dressed up as righteous indignation. And let's be clear about one thing: The federal government doesn't owe them another dime. COVID relief was meant to be temporary — a bridge over troubled waters — not a permanent subsidy for governments that refuse to adapt. If local and state leaders treated those funds as lifelines rather than blank checks, they would've used the past three years to modernize, trim and right-size their operations. Instead, they papered over the cracks, kicked the cans down the road and now expect Washington and wealthy taxpayers to refill the punch bowl. Chicagoans, and all Illinoisans, deserve much better. They deserve transit systems that work, budgets that balance and leaders who don't use crises as a cover for failure. They deserve governments that take responsibility for their own finances before asking others to bail them out. There's a concept in the private sector called accountability. When companies run out of money, they cut costs, restructure or go bankrupt. They don't send letters to Washington or Springfield demanding a lifeline because their customers stopped coming. But in the public sector, failure is rewarded with more funding and fewer questions. That needs to change. And it starts with us — the voters, the taxpayers and the residents. We need to stop accepting the tired narrative that more money will fix everything, and stop rewarding the elected and appointed leaders who espouse that canard. We need to demand audits, zero-based budgeting and creative, humane staff and agency cutbacks. We need to demand efficiency, and call out the bureaucratic inertia that keeps our governments stuck in a cycle of dysfunction. So the next time a city, state or transit agency asks for a bailout, the first question we should ask is simple: What have you cut from your own budget? If their answer is 'nothing,' or obfuscation, our answer to their request should be just as simple: 'No!' And many of those doing the asking should be pointed to the exit door.
