Fayetteville first in state to ban discrimination against gays

Fayetteville early Wednesday took a step that no other Arkansas city has taken, adopting an ordinance prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.

RELATED ARTICLE

http://www.arkansas…">High Court stays Virginia gay nuptials

After more than 10 hours of debate, the City Council enacted the anti-discrimination law, extending protection to gays and transgender people in areas including employment, housing, businesses and public accommodations.

With the move, the city of 73,580 joins the ranks of nearly 200 other cities and counties nationwide that as of Aug. 14 prohibit job discrimination based on sexual orientation, according to the Human Rights Campaign website.

Officials knew of no other Arkansas cities or counties that planned to replicate Fayetteville's ordinance as of late Wednesday. But groups opposing the new ordinance, which goes into effect Sept. 20, have already begun mobilizing.

The Family Council Action Committee executive director Jerry Cox said that he and others planned to have a conference call today to determine how those opposing the ordinance will proceed. He said Fayetteville residents can circulate petitions, gather enough signatures and repeal the ordinance; elect new people to the council and change the makeup of the eight-member board; or take the matter to court.

"As far as I can tell, those are the main pieces that are in play right now," Cox said. "And it could be that different groups or individuals could choose to exercise any [of those]. Right now, people are just trying to figure out where do we go from here. Opposition to the ordinance, I believe, will continue."

The municipal law sought to fill a gap -- protections based on sexual orientation -- that wasn't covered in state and federal laws, Fayetteville City Attorney Kit Williams said. State and federal laws prohibit the firing, the hiring and the eviction of people based on age, gender, national origin, race, religion or disability.

Arkansas is one of more than 25 states that doesn't extend the protections to sexual orientation.

Fayetteville's new ordinance also will include protection from discrimination against ethnicity, gender expression, familial status, marital status, socioeconomic background and veteran status.

The law applies to the city, all of its employees and contractors who do business with the city. It excludes federal, state, or county offices, along with public educational institutions within the city. The law also won't apply to religious or denominational institutions, nor will it require unisex bathrooms.

The aldermen made an exception for "sincerely held" religious beliefs, Williams said. For example, a wedding singer or a wedding photographer -- those "intimately" involved in a wedding -- could refuse to provide services to a gay couple, but those in the periphery -- a baker or a florist -- could not.

The ordinance also allows Mayor Lioneld Jordan to appoint a civil-rights administrator, who will receive, investigate and resolve complaints of discrimination.

"We're wanting voluntary compliance," Williams said. "We don't want to give citations to anybody, fine anybody or go to court. When there is an issue, hopefully the person, the business or the rental people will do the right thing and any discrimination will end there."

Violating a city ordinance -- the lowest crime in the state -- could mean up to a $500 fine. The matter could be resolved by a district court if conciliatory efforts fail.

The aldermen passed the ordinance 6-2 after hearing from more than 120 people -- state representatives, clergymen and private business owners and more than a dozen gay and transgender residents. The meeting lasted longer than 10 hours and surpassed by two hours what Jordan's chief of staff, Don Marr, thought to be the city's former longest council session, a discussion on a smoking ban.

Fayetteville resident Nathan Southerland-Kordsmeier urged the council to push the ordinance through as quickly as possible.

"People like me don't feel safe here," he said. "I'm living with a shadow over my head."

Terry Turpin, co-founder of Acumen Brands in Fayetteville, said the ordinance could lead to frivolous complaints from employees who were fired justly.

"I don't want someone who has no experience in my world coming in and telling me how to run my business," he said of the civil-rights administrator.

Alderman Justin Tennant, who voted against the measure, voiced his concerns about the civil-rights administrator, too. He said he was unwilling to create a position when he didn't know who would fill it or what that person's qualifications were.

"I'm being asked to trust the administration to figure this all out," Tennant said. That is a very difficult pill for me to swallow."

Tuesday wasn't the first time the ordinance went before the council. At an Aug. 5 meeting, the proposed ordinance drew heavier criticism. Before that, the Human Rights Council recommended a proposed ordinance to Alderman Matthew Petty, who has championed the anti-discrimination matter from the start.

Human Rights Council spokesman Hubert Tate referred questions to Petty, who did not return a message left on a listed number late Wednesday.

"We actually pared down many, many provisions in the initial ordinance -- probably more than they wanted us to," Williams said, adding that the stripped-down version followed conversations with the Human Rights Council's attorneys. "About one-third of the ordinance was removed."

The initial ordinance included agencies outside of the city's purview, including colleges, universities and public schools.

Wednesday's move marked a victory for the state, said Rita Sklar, executive director of the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

"It's very exciting," she said. "It's something I wish applied to the state of Arkansas, the entire country and the entire world. It's only right that a country that cherishes liberty and equality would ensure everyone was included."

Jason Carter, North Little Rock's city attorney, said North Little Rock officials haven't brought up any issue that would seem to show the necessity for such legislation.

"North Little Rock is generally considered to be an accepting community," Carter said. "I guess from that standpoint, no one has seen the need to offer legislation to codify an attitude that already exists within the community."

Little Rock officials were unavailable for comment Wednesday.

Officials from the Arkansas Municipal League were out of the office and could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

For Cox and the Family Council, the law was "absolutely" unnecessary. The state and federal laws "seem to work pretty well," he said.

"We already have laws dealing with threats, harassment and people being mistreated," he said. "The ordinance simply is not necessary."

The ACLU's Sklar contended the Fayetteville council made the right decision.

"There are no protections in place when it comes to employment and public accommodations," she said. "It's perfectly legal to fire someone because of sexual orientation in Arkansas. [The ordinance] is a great sign of progress for Arkansas, and hopefully the beginning of a new trend."

She remained confident that the state -- and the nation -- would continue to progress.

"We just may take a roundabout way of getting there," she said.

The ordinance may have unintended consequences, Cox cautioned.

"First among them is by elevating the status of some categories of people, you automatically devalue the status of other people," he said. "That's the difficulty of trying to carve out these special classes."

He said residents will likely turn to a petition-drive in attempts to repeal the ordinance.

The city clerk has received at least one inquiry Wednesday on the petition drives, Williams said, and the office is expecting more.

To make a special-election ballot, nearly 4,100 residents -- about 15 percent of registered voters -- would need to sign the petition. Upon receiving the signatures, the city clerk would have to certify that the petition has enough valid signatures, and the city would then prepare a proclamation calling the election.

Both Cox and Sklar said they would help get word out about the election, if the process got that far.

Information for this article was contributed by The Northwest Arkansas Times and by Chelsea Boozer and Jake Sandlin of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

A section on 08/21/2014

Upcoming Events