Citizen

The Raleigh news & politics blog of the Independent Weekly

Archives | RSS

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

[Updated] Raleigh council takes stand vs. anti-LGBT amendment; vote is 6-2 against discriminatory measure

Posted by Bob Geary on Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:31 PM

gaycouple.jpg

[Update, Tuesday, 3 p.m. The newly installed Raleigh City Council, led by new Mayor Nancy McFarlane, voted 6-2 this afternoon to go on record in opposition to the proposed anti-LGBT constitutional amendment. The action was swift. Councilor Eugene Weeks made the motion to follow the recommendation of the city's Human Rights Commission (see below). His motion passed by a 6-2 vote.

Councilors Bonner Gaylord and John Odom dissented. Gaylord said he was torn. His 10-year marriage needs no defense, he said, from an anti-gay amendment to the constitution allegedly aimed at "defending" marriage. But he said the Raleigh council was "outside its purview" in addressing the issue. Gaylord's vote may indicate that, while he is an unaffiliated voter, he sees his political future on the Republican rather than the Democratic side of the fence. Odom, the other no vote, is the council's lone Republican. He said he was voting to defend his 40-year marriage and the idea of marriage as "one man and one woman."

Speaking for the action, Councilor Russ Stephenson said it was indeed within the council's purview to oppose an amendment that could put Raleigh at a competitive disadvantage in attracting new businesses. A non-discriminatory environment for all employees is something many companies look for when making location decisions. Putting Raleigh's opposition in that framework should allay Gaylord's concerns about "getting off the page" and onto extraneous federal or state issues, Stephenson said.

Chris Moutos, chair of the Human Relations Commission, hailed the vote and said it's evidence of Raleigh becoming a progressive city for human rights issues. Jimmy Creech, a leading gay rights advocate, called it an important step that will help to energize Raleigh opponents to the amendment as it heads toward a referendum at the 2012 primary elections.]

***

The original post from Saturday, Dec. 3 is below:

Equality North Carolina is asking its supporters to pack the Raleigh Council chambers Tuesday afternoon in hopes the Council will take a position against the proposed state constitutional amendment to discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. The anti-LGBT amendment, billed by its supporters as anti-gay marriage, would also bar the state from enacting laws to recognize civil unions or any form of domestic partnership unless it consists of one man and one woman. The amendment was approved by the Republican-led General Assembly and will be on primary election ballots in 2012.

The Raleigh Council, newly seated following the fall elections, will be considering a recommendation from the city's Human Rights Commission that it oppose the amendment and support gay equality. Here's the agenda item:

The City of Raleigh Human Relations Commission recommends that the City Council make a public pronouncement against the “anti-gay” marriage amendment recently passed by the General Assembly and which is scheduled to appear on the May, 2012 ballot. The language which is to appear on the ballot is as follows: “Marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.” Representatives from the Commission will be present to respond to questions.

The Council meeting begins at 1 p.m. It will be the first meeting for the members elected in October, and the first led by Mayor-elect Nancy McFarlane, who will be sworn in Monday night at ceremonies in the Raleigh Convention Center. McFarlane replaces outgoing Mayor Charles Meeker; the only other change in council personnel is in District A, where Randy Stagner was elected to replace McFarlane. So, eight members — including the mayor — and one new face.

Meeker, according to Councilor Russ Stephenson, offered a ringing declaration in opposition to the anti-gay amendment this morning at the Mayor's Unity Breakfast. (I wasn't there.) Of course, Meeker won't be in office Tuesday when the issue comes up for discussion.

Stephenson said he's been flooded with emails asking him to oppose the amendment, which he's ready to do, he added.

So far, Stephenson said, he doesn't think anyone on Council has drafted specific language for a resolution. That could happen Tuesday after the Human Relations Commission makes its report.

A majority of the Council, including Mayor-elect McFarlane, took pro-gay rights positions during the elections. However, this cast of councilors (with the exception of Stagner, who's new) has never voted, in connection with city employee benefits, to accord equal treatment to employees' married spouses and same-sex partners.

Durham and Chapel Hill do treat their employees' spouses and same-sex partners equally for purposes of benefits, policies that would — not incidentally — be outlawed by the constitutional amendment.

Equality NC's website details what the amendment says and the case against it.

This is from the email Equality NC is sending to supporters:

[A] great chance to make a very public difference in fighting NC's family-harming, job-killing, discriminatory, anti-LGBT amendment will come on Tuesday.

The Raleigh City Council is set to vote on a public pronouncement against the amendment. The matter comes before the Council on Tuesday, December 6, at 1 p.m., in the municipal building located at 222 W. Hargett Street in downtown Raleigh.

Please join us in the audience as we all come together to support our capital city leaders in this important proclamation so that Raleigh can go "on the record" as opposing this discriminatory measure.

Because Raleigh is only the beginning,

Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments (6)

Showing 1-6 of 6

Add a comment

Gaylord's reasoning has some logic to it, but in essence it seems just to be a convenient excuse to avoid the issue.
Even if cities like Raleigh (and I believe Durham & Chapel Hill and others have already done this) speak out against the amendment but it still passes, it sends a clear message: "Unlike the rest of NC, we're not bigots."
A pretty strong message for a city to be on the Record about!

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   
Posted by RaleighRob on 12/08/2011 at 3:47 PM

I am sorry to learn that Councilor Odom's 40-year marriage is in such trouble that it needs defending from "the gays."

report 4 likes, 0 dislikes   
Posted by Steve Bocckino on 12/07/2011 at 12:37 AM

I tend to agree with Bonner Gaylord. I think the amendment is a horrible idea, and I hope it fails, but it's going to be voted on by the people. It's not a city council issue. All of our elected officials who are actually part of this process have already weighed in by voting. Somehow they thought this was worthy of their/our time. Now we have other elected officials who are not in any way part of this process spending their time weighing in on the issue. On the one hand, it's encouraging to see such opposition, on the other hand, this is already on the ballot. A City Council vote is nothing more then them taking time to weigh in on an issue over which they have no jurisdiction. Their opportunity to oppose this will be at the same time as the rest of ours: election day. Russ Stephenson's comments are not without merit, but rather than a blanket statement against the amendment, perhaps the council could have voted on language detailing why they believe it would be bad for the city. That, at least, would bring some tenuous bit of credibility as to why this should be a city council issue.

report 0 likes, 2 dislikes   
Posted by Rob E. on 12/06/2011 at 4:10 PM

it won't pass if i have anything to do with it.

report 2 likes, 1 dislike   
Posted by sendjollytoraleigh on 12/06/2011 at 11:40 AM

Right, amendment opponents should just not try to get any publicity and just sit on their hands until the ballot is out, because that makes sense.

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   
Posted by RaleighSince88 on 12/06/2011 at 9:26 AM

It's in the hands of the voters now. Appealing to the mayor and city council is not going to do one bit of good. But if it makes you feel good, then knock yourselves out. I think the amendment is destined to pass regardless.

report 8 likes, 8 dislikes   
Posted by jollypants on 12/03/2011 at 7:40 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-6 of 6

Add a comment

Latest in Citizen

More by Author

Facebook Activity

Twitter Activity

Read indyweek's Tweets

Comments

A War on the Family
The Family is under attack sometime I ask myself does anyone in America believe in …

by mayorbell1172 on (Updated x 2) Amendment 1 passes easily, and other primary results (Citizen)

I've always been proud to call myself a North Carolinian.... Till now - just goes to show we are a …

by Sara Rhodes on (Updated x 2) Amendment 1 passes easily, and other primary results (Citizen)

© 2012 Independent Weekly • 302 E. Pettigrew St., Suite 300, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919 286 1972 • fax 919 286 4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation