TEXARKANA -- Arkansas-side residents this week will begin voting on whether to keep or repeal Texarkana's anti-discrimination ordinance.
Early voting begins Tuesday on Ordinance M-130. In Texarkana and across the country, communities are wrestling with the issue of whether transgender people should be able to use the public restrooms of their choice.
Texarkana's anti-discrimination ordinance was approved quickly and with little fanfare. Opponents would later say that was by design.
On Jan. 19, the city's Board of Directors unanimously passed the ordinance using a fast-track process, voting to read it three times -- which is usually done over the course of three consecutive biweekly board meetings -- and decide on its adoption all in one night.
The ordinance enacts three provisions that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, political opinions or political affiliation.
Section 1 of the ordinance prohibits the city from engaging in such discrimination against vendors who contract with the city. Section 2 prohibits city employees from discriminating in providing city services. And Section 3 requires all contracts with the city to include a clause stating the contractor will not discriminate based on any of the listed classifications.
Some residents raised concerns about the ordinance's speedy passage and its inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity as protected categories. Led by Richard and Sheila Wagnon, who formed an organization called the Repeal 130 Committee, a movement to oppose the ordinance was soon underway.
In March, the group delivered to the city a petition with enough certified signatures to force an election on the issue.
As a result, Texarkana residents will determine whether to repeal the ordinance in a June 28 vote.
The Wagnons declined to be interviewed but provided a statement summarizing Repeal 130's position.
Repeal 130's main assertion is that the ordinance would allow transgender people to use the public restroom of their choice -- a result the group characterizes as dangerous.
"The confusion associated with 'gender identity' and places like 'public accommodations' creates a situation where biological males can, and will, use the women's bathrooms," Repeal 130's statement says. "M-130 goes beyond 'anti-discrimination' and is a danger to public safety. This isn't about equal rights, it's about special privileges for a few at the expense of women and children."
Some in favor of the ordinance say it has nothing to do with restrooms and that any claim that it does is a scare tactic to deny civil rights to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
"People who bring up the bathroom issue -- I hate to use the word -- but they're haters of LGBT people," said Dennis Young, a former Arkansas legislator and former member of the Texarkana Board of Directors.
"It's not a bathroom issue. That's a smokescreen," he said. "It's just the fear factor. 'What are you scared of? And I'm going to make you a little more scared of that because I'm going to pin that on the opposition to get you to vote for me.' That's it, pure and simple."
Mark Vaughan, spokesman for anti-repeal organization Keep M-130, agrees.
"It [the ordinance] is an employment policy for the city and city contractors. That's it. It's not about bathrooms," he said. "It's about equality and the economic benefit that equality can bring to Texarkana."
On its website, Repeal 130 argues that the ordinance violates Arkansas law by including sexual orientation and gender identity in its list of protected classifications.
The group cites Arkansas Act 137, which the Legislature passed last year with the stated purpose of improving "intrastate commerce by ensuring that businesses, organizations, and employers doing business in the state are subject to uniform nondiscrimination laws and obligations."
To that end, the statute prohibits any difference between Arkansas anti-discrimination law and that of any smaller government in the state.
"A county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state shall not adopt or enforce an ordinance ... that creates a protected classification or prohibits discrimination on a basis not contained in state law," Act 137 states.
State law does not protect people against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Advocates of repealing the Texarkana ordinance say that because it does protect those classifications, it is unlawful according to Act 137.
But Young said he thinks that is not a serious concern. Pointing out several other Arkansas cities' anti-discrimination measures that include sexual orientation and gender identity -- including Little Rock's -- he said the judicial system has not yet determined their legality.
"It has not been contested," he said. "It has not gone before a court. The city of Little Rock feels very strongly that their ordinance is a good one and it will stand up ... Little Rock's is on the books, Fayetteville's is on the books, Hot Springs has one on the books, Eureka Springs does."
Metro on 06/20/2016