Fayetteville is hardly the first governmental entity to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It is, however, the first Arkansas city to do so.
As such, it is also a target for those who oppose such laws and the example Fayetteville has set to prohibit discrimination against someone who is gay or transgender.
So, Fayetteville, get ready to be the proving ground.
People from all over who support what the city has done will look for ways in which this new ordinance is being violated, while opponents (from Fayetteville and far away) look for examples of abuse of this newly claimed authority by the city.
Each side needs evidence to support their respective arguments and they'll try to find it in Fayetteville.
The fight here definitely is not over, even if the City Council has voted.
Nor would it matter if a majority of citizens might quietly support expansion of the city's anti-discrimination ordinance -- or if the majority was against it. People on both sides have something to prove.
Last week, after a marathon meeting, Fayetteville aldermen voted 6-2 to pass the controversial ordinance.
The Tuesday meeting, which included the third and final reading of the civil rights ordinance, lasted well into the early morning on Wednesday. Most of the time went to public comments by both supporters and opponents of the measure.
The Fayetteville council also considered several amendments, one of which might have sent the issue to voters in November's general election. But the majority stood together and decided the issue themselves.
At least, they have decided it for the time being.
A public vote is still a possibility, maybe even likelihood, although a Nov. 4 referendum is not happening.
First, foes seeking to repeal it need to gather sufficient signatures to put the question on the ballot.
The requirement doesn't sound all that difficult. They'll need valid signatures from just shy of 4,100 of Fayetteville's registered voters. (The actual requirement is 15 percent of the 27,296 who voted in the last mayoral election, or 4,095.)
Presume that there are more than enough people in Fayetteville who would sign the petition.
The kicker is when the signatures must be collected and when the city clerk would have to certify the election to to get it to the November ballot.
While it might be theoretically possible that an election could be held at the same time as the general election, it will most likely be a separate special election.
In a memo written Friday, City Attorney Kit Williams said there is not sufficient time for the petitioners to collect the necessary signatures and to have each of them verified by the city clerk before a state-set deadline.
The key deadline is 70 days prior to the general election, which is the minimum time necessary to file the certification with the county clerk. It is set by state law and required in order for election officials to meet deadlines for publishing and preparing ballots.
Seventy days before the general election is literally just a couple of days away.
So, imagine that petitioners found thousands of potential signers assembled in Fayetteville this weekend, most likely at a some local churches, and had the necessary signatures turned in promptly Monday morning.
That would be an impressive feat but would meet only half the time challenge. The rest of the assignment would fall to the city clerk's small staff to verify each signature and count only those of Fayetteville residents registered to vote toward the 4,095 goal.
Clerk Sondra Smith and her staff may attempt it, but no one should expect they can do the task (and their other work) in such a short time.
Instead, the ballot issue will likely wait for another election date, but not more than 120 calendar days after the clerk certifies the petition's sufficiency. Again, state law determines the potential election dates.
Fayetteville council members knew, when they declined the amendment to refer the ordinance to voters, that it was likely the last chance for the issue to make the general election ballot.
It won't be there, at least not directly.
The issue is apparently going to be present indirectly in all of the contested City Council races.
Here's hoping city residents remember that this is hardly the only issue that the council will consider in the term that begins in January.
BRENDA BLAGG IS A FREELANCE COLUMNIST AND LONGTIME JOURNALIST IN NORTHWEST ARKANSAS.
Commentary on 08/24/2014