Chamber: Repeal Civil Rights Ordinance

Citing a long laundry list of concerns, the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce is calling for the repeal of the Fayetteville civil rights ordinance — Ch. 119 of the City Code — which, among other things, protects sexual orientation from discrimination.

The Chamber will encourage its members and the public to vote for repeal on Dec. 9, the date of the citywide referendum. Passed by the Fayetteville City Council on Aug. 20, the ordinance mirrors many that have been approved across the country. In addition to sexual orientation, the ordinance includes socioeconomic background, gender identity and gender expression as protected classes in housing, employment and public accommodations.

According to the chamber, the ordinance is a failure.

“The Chamber submits to voters that it is never good public policy for any governmental entity to adopt rules, regulations, ordinances or laws that are vague, incomplete, fail to include critical definitions for prohibited acts or conduct that may later be adjudged as criminal,” according to a press release.

The chamber, which expressed concerns over the ordinance early on, first asked Mayor Lioneld Jordan to form a civil rights advisory panel, which he did. But on Sept. 20, the issue was out of the mayor’s hands when Repeal 119, a ballot question committee, submitted enough valid signatures — over 4,000 of them — to force a referendum.

A supporter of the ordinance tried to quash the ballot question on various legal grounds, thus preserving the ordinance, but her suit was found to be without merit and a judge said the referendum could proceed.  

The Chamber’s unanimous resolution states that Chapter 119 should be repealed because:

— It criminalizes civil conduct.

— It does not provide an adequate definition of what prohibited conduct will give rise to criminal prosecution.

— It does not define critical terms such as socio-economic background, and physical characteristic, nor how these terms apply regarding discriminatory acts.

— It does not include any current legal defenses under Arkansas or federal law now available to any one alleged to have discriminated.

— It does not define “perception” which can be the basis of a complaint from one believed to be a victim of discrimination.

— It is incomplete and vague in prescribing the specific types of conduct prohibited and in defining the specific businesses that will be covered and those exempt.

— It was not adopted with a complete and thorough review and debate, which has been the long standing policy and practice of the City of Fayetteville starting with incinerators and impact fees then moving to paid parking and the determination of the proper number of unrelated persons that should be permitted to live together.