The Arlington City Council is expected to vote Tuesday night on a new anti-discrimination ordinance and resolution months after the original was removed from the city code.
The upcoming vote comes after the council the previous anti-discrimination ordinance and chapter of the city code in September. A 5-4 vote in December.
The December move was one of the last in a the council took to protect $65 million in federal grant funding following an anti-DEI from President Donald Trump that threatened to freeze those funds.
The new iteration of the anti-discrimination chapter of the city code is considerably different from the version first passed in 2021, which advocates say is for the worse.
If passed, the ordinance would no longer clarify which classes are protected, instead deferring to federal law. Classes protected by the were named, alongside sexual orientation and gender identity, in the original ordinance.
The new ordinance also would no longer allow city staff to investigate claims of discrimination based on these classes. Staff would instead connect those residents with other resources to 鈥減rovide assistance to the complainant鈥� or help direct them to a state or federal agency to file a complaint.
Under the previous ordinance, city staff were allowed to investigate complaints of discrimination and engage in a mediation process between the two parties. If the issue could not be resolved, staff would refer the complainant to a state or federal agency to escalate the complaint.
Council member Bowie Hogg, who voted to suspend the original ordinance in September, previously said the city did not have a documented case where staff had conducted a discrimination investigation based on the ordinance.
Hogg did not respond to a request for comment.
DeeJay Johannessen, the CEO of Fort Worth-based HELP Center for LGBTQ+ Health, said that without the mediation or investigation process, the ordinance was not helpful.
鈥淚t was never intended to be an ordinance that protected anybody,鈥� Johannessen said, referring to the new ordinance. 鈥淚t鈥檚 an educational pamphlet mocked up to be policy.鈥�
Mayor Jim Ross said that the past ordinance, even if it was used, did not provide a recourse for action after investigations, and that findings as a result of those investigations did not hold legal precedent.
鈥�(Johannessen) and I have had a number of conversations,鈥� Ross said. 鈥淚 certainly understand and respect his position on this, but the reality of it is, it鈥檚 better than allowing this ordinance to remain suspended and have nothing at all.鈥�
Council will also vote on a resolution, disavowing discrimination, bias and hate.
Council member Rebecca Boxall and Hogg both previously agreed that the original ordinance did not give the city legal recourse and that a resolution of this type should take its place.
Johannessen previously told the Report that replacing the ordinance with a resolution would be 鈥渙ffensive.鈥�
He said the new resolution brought forward is political cover for council members to deflect from their votes to remove the ordinance in September and to keep it out of the city code in December.
鈥淭hey go through and list all the things they鈥檝e done and the awards they鈥檝e received,鈥� Johannessen said. 鈥淲ell, those awards were based upon actually having civil rights protections at the city level. They wouldn鈥檛 have those without having a fully inclusive ordinance.鈥�
In a Facebook post, council member Mauricio Galante wrote that the new ordinance recognizes the residents鈥� civil protections while ensuring the safety of the city鈥檚 federal funding, adding that staff took the community鈥檚 input into consideration when creating it.
鈥淭he upcoming vote is our chance to show the world who Arlington truly is,鈥� Galante wrote. 鈥淎 welcoming, resilient city that recognizes the civil protections of its people while responsibly managing our resources.鈥�
Galante did not respond to a request for comment.
Council member Barbara Odom-Wesley, who voted to keep the ordinance in September and to bring it back in December, said Ross canvassed all council members to create an ordinance with a compromise so the council could pass it.
Ross said that he was happy with how the conversations around the ordinance went and that they could try to bring something with a compromise to the table.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 not something done so much in the political world nowadays,鈥� Ross said.
Odom-Wesley said that while some of the teeth the ordinance originally had were removed, she is glad it has the support of council members.
鈥淚t is still in compliance with state and federal law, and it also makes a declaration to our citizens that we do not support or tolerate discrimination in the city of Arlington,鈥� Odom-Wesley said in a Monday interview with the Arlington Report. 鈥淚 think it sends a message.鈥�
Odom-Wesley added that some council members felt the mediation and investigation process of the previous ordinance forced the city not to be in compliance with the federal directives, saying the city did not have the ability to enforce it.
Odom-Wesley said that while she wishes certain parts were different, like the deference to federal law on protected classes, she plans to vote for the ordinance and resolution.
鈥淪omething is better than nothing,鈥� Odom-Wesley said.
Ross said he is 鈥渃autiously optimistic鈥� ahead of the vote, saying he thinks the council will have the votes needed to approve the resolution and ordinance.
鈥淚 think we鈥檙e going to get there, but as with every governmental entity, I never count my eggs before they鈥檙e hatched,鈥� Ross said.
Chris Moss is a reporter for the Arlington Report. Contact him at chris.moss@arlingtonreport.org.
At the Arlington Report, news decisions are made independently of our board members and financial supporters. Read more about our editorial independence policy .
This first appeared on and is republished here under a .
