Amarillo abortion ordinance to be decided at ballot box in November

The city of Amarillo announced Wednesday that the petition committee for the ordinance designating the city a “Sanctuary City for the Unborn” has filed to place the measure on the November ballot.

After over six months of debate on having an ordinance for the city that would have restricted abortion travel and other restrictions, the city council voted down this proposal 4-1 at its June 11 meeting. The council had conducted multiple marathon sessions to find some level of common ground with the petitioners of the abortion ordinance to no avail. The 18-page ordinance will now be voted on by its citizenry and become a focus of national attention in the battle between reproductive freedom and those who seek to eliminate abortion in every form for Texans.

Stephanie Coggins, the city secretary, spoke about the process at City Hall on Tuesday.

“We received a statement from the initiating committee by email Saturday for the proposed ordinance to make Amarillo a 'Sanctuary City for the Unborn,'" she said. “They have certified the intent of the majority of their committee to send the proposed ordinance to an election.”

She said this would be presented at the next city council meeting and put on the ballot. Coggins anticipates that it will cost the city about $80,000 to $100,000 to conduct the election.

One of the significant concerns with the ordinance by four members of the council was the authority and legality of the city to impose such an ordinance, which seeks to restrict abortion travel. Coggins said that none of that will affect whether the measure gets on the ballot but would still be a question to be answered if it passes.

Amarillo Mayor Cole Stanley weighed in on the ordinance being sent to the ballot.

“We expect to vote this through and have it placed on the ballot,” he said. “If anything, there may be ballot language that may be discussed at the coming meetings to move forward with it being put to the people for a vote.”

Stanley said there would already be charter amendments to be voted on in the election, so the city would incur costs in November. When asked if he thought that if the measure passed, there would still be questions about the city's legality, Stanley expressed that there is a great likelihood that it would have to be addressed at that point.

“I think that the concern is that this would not be just symbolic in nature and that it would merit some sort of a legal question,” he said. “So, whether you get something declaratory from a district judge, which could happen, or there could be another method to challenge or confirm or challenge the language of this ordinance, which I think is likely to happen. I do not think this will be something that will just be voted on by the public and sit on the shelf as we have seen happen before.”

Stanley said that, given the interest generated by this ordinance battle, he thinks that if the measure passes, it will not be the last of it.

“I think we have a long way to go, and I have definitely learned my lesson that there can be further developments,” he said. "Who knows what can happen between now and November in developments nationally or in the state? Also, what would be the need locally if anything came up from these entities?”

One of the significant concerns for Stanley is the level of divisiveness among the community on the abortion ordinance issue.

“I know the people who are close to me and for myself are concerned about this,” he said. “The criticism of policy is always allowed and encouraged, but the criticism of people and personalities should always be discouraged. If you want to criticize this as a point of policy, I think that is great; it inspires debate and conversation. I think that when we allow it on Facebook, Instagram, and some of the articles that are written become personal attacks, I think we have lowered our standards as a people and work against ourselves. I encourage everyone to take a firm stance on policy and leave personal attacks out of it.”

Stanley said that much of the proposed ordinance is legal theory specifically written to prevent enforcement from the city and its jurisdictional bounds.

He hopes to see the council move forward after a lengthy process, which has not been fruitful in finding an agreed-upon compromise. He hopes that councilmembers can focus on supporting nonprofits and organizations around the area that help women in their time of need.

Over the process, Stanley said that the council worked as hard as they could to find common ground including seeking outside council on the legal hurdles that the proposed ordinance could create.

“I think that our role is best served by not acting in the form of things we are not paid to do,” he said. "We do not have the expertise or the legal background for that. So, I think the best thing for the council is to not step out on a legal interpretation any longer. We were forced to do that here. Ultimately it was brought to us. If you fault us for anything, maybe we tried a little too hard and walked ourselves out to the deep end and had to swim back. That does not always look the best in the public eye. We failed to find something that we could all agree on.”

When asked if the attention being focused on this divisive issue could cast a negative spotlight on the city, Stanley said that he feels like it is a great possibility.

“I know in politics they say that all news is good news, but in my construction business, it's more like no news is good news,” Stanley said. “I feel like we are doing our best job when you all (the media) are not caught up in anything that can be drama, divisive or polarizing. We were brought an ordinance that seeks to tie up loopholes at the state level that some want to solve municipally. That in itself is a problem. Our jurisdiction is municipal, and if you have state loopholes, then we need to work with the state to fix them.”

Stanley emphasized that moving forward, the city will redirect its energy and effort to the state on this issue.

“I think we can get behind that, and some of that will unify us even to the point where I know that some of the pro-choice side disagrees with my pro-life stance,” Stanley said. “But at least they respect the fact that at least we are discussing it and think it should be handled at the state at this point.”

This article originally appeared on Amarillo Globe-News: Amarillo abortion ordinance to be decided at ballot box in November