How We See It: Advocates Take Better Approach To Civil Rights Ordinance

The process that may lead to Fayetteville's next effort to protect gay and lesbian residents from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations is already better than the one that resulted in an ordinance voters rejected on Dec. 9.

In the wake of defeat at the polls, advocates for an ordinance have offered two options for moving forward, both of which have given the public more notice and more time to become engaged than Alderman Matthew Petty's ramrodding of Chapter 119.

What’s The Point?

Persistent advocates for a civil rights law in Fayetteville are taking an improved approach to its development, but time will tell whether a new ordinance is viable.

Petty's measure, referred to as the civil rights administration ordinance, was a revision of a "model ordinance" drafted by a national advocacy group. Petty made the strategic decision to introduce it directly to the full City Council and, with the administration's help, pressed the measure to a 6-2 approval in the minimum three meetings required by state law.

The measure never had the feel of a local ordinance designed to address local circumstances. It was crafted to make a political statement and Fayetteville, a town typically friendly to people of all kinds, was picked because in someone's evaluation, it was the least likely place a defeat would happen.

Someone didn't read those tea leaves very well.

Now, some opponents will say (and have) that the ordinance was rejected and that's that. They need to brush up on their civics lesson. A referendum like the one forced by petitioners on Dec. 9 answered only one question -- Would the Chapter 119 measure approved by the City Council be retained or rejected? The voters' answer was to get ride of it.

There is no legal reason a new measure seeking similar ends can't be introduced now or in the future. Many times when the public establishes a course correction by taking charge of the ordinance adoption process, elected officials have the political wisdom to steer clear of the matter, at least for a while. Petty and City Attorney Kit Williams nonetheless have felt compelled to press the issue again.

To their credit, however, they've not suggested a quick adoption, and the two men have different ideas about how to start new discussions on an anti-discrimination ordinance. Petty began by suggesting several amendments to the defeated ordinance to address some of the concerns that resulted in its demise. Williams, however, suggested starting with a clean slate, one that's not based on an advocacy group's draft ordinance. He suggested using the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993 as a starting point. That act doesn't include protection of gay and lesbian people, but Williams' idea is for Fayetteville to extend the state act's protections to those minority groups through a municipal adaptation.

Let's not pretend any similarly purposed measure won't face opposition, but if a new one is drafted through a local process designed to take the concerns of Fayetteville residents and businesses into account, that's a step in the right direction. And both Williams and Petty suggest the process should happen over the course of months, not three meetings.

The people who hope it will just go away will be disappointed, but the vote was close enough to demonstrate a healthy number of residents want these protections in place. A new measure is coming. We applaud the recognition that more local involvement is a necessity. Whether it ends up in a palatable ordinance is a question still to be answered.

Commentary on 12/20/2014

Upcoming Events