"I have more passion and a greater resolve on this issue than any other."
Some Arkansas-side residents are hoping to repeal the city's anti-discrimination ordinance, while others are in favor of keeping it in place.
"This is about facts, not fear. That's what I keep telling people," said Jewel Benson, a member of a group in support of keeping the anti-discrimination ordinance.
The anti-discrimination ordinance, known as Ordinance M-130, has opposition in a group named Repeal 130. On Friday, the group turned in 2,620 signatures-more than double the 1,109 signatures needed-to the city clerk in a ballot initiative that should bring the issue to a public vote on June 14.
The ordinance was approved by the city Board of Directors on Jan. 19 to show companies that might be thinking of bringing business to Texarkana, Ark., that the city is "forward thinking," officials said.
Ward 3 Director Tim Johnson said it was "incumbent" on them to pass the ordinance. Johnson and Mayor Ruth Penny-Bell cited equality, inclusiveness and increased economic development as reasons for passing the ordinance.
Just a little over a month later, on Feb. 23, a group met at the Omega Building downtown to discuss the ordinance and start a petition to repeal it.
At that meeting, Sherry Potts stood firm to repeal the ordinance. She also spoke against the ordinance at the January board meeting when directors approved it.
"That ordinance should not have passed that night," she said in February. "There is an evil force behind this."
City Attorney George Matteson said the city's anti-discrimination ordinance approved in January mirrors one approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 21, 2015.
Matteson said not only has he vetted the ordinance, but so has the city of Little Rock, which has kept its ordinance.
Little Rock's ordinance lists the same protected classes of people as Texarkana, Ark.'s-the classes being disputed.
Some opposing Texarkana's M-130 say that sexual orientation and gender identity are classes that are not protected by state law.
Matteson made available an opinion authored by Little Rock City Attorney Thomas Carpenter in response to questions about whether Little Rock's ordinance had added protected classes.
Carpenter's opinion addressed the state's Act 137 of 2015 that went into effect last July. It states a city or municipality cannot adopt or enforce an ordinance that "creates a protected classification."
Carpenter stated in his opinion that "state law already has specific provisions to prohibit discrimination based upon gender identity and sexual orientation."
Carpenter cited Arkansas Code § 6-18-514, which talks about bullying and harassment that extends toward gender identity, sexual orientation and others.
However, at February's Repeal 130 meeting, co-leaders Richard and Sheila Wagnon introduced Fayetteville-based attorney Travis Story, who said Texarkana's ordinance has added sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes.
"These two protected classes, as the city of Texarkana is trying to add, really will affect every person in Texarkana, USA," Story said.
"If any business wants to do business with the city, they are going to have to agree to follow these same anti-discrimination practices, meaning that they are going to have to make special accommodations for sexual orientation and gender identity individuals."
Story, as well as Repeal 130 members and even some in favor of the ordinance, believe it was passed too quickly.
Story said the city "rushed (it) through before anybody could figure out what was going on."
The city passed the ordinance after doing three readings of the ordinance in one night, rather than reading the ordinance at three separate meetings, which many believe would have given the community more time to discuss the issue with the board.
Also at Repeal 130's February meeting, speakers said they thought the ordinance could lead to discrimination against Christians.
Many members of the group talked about their fear of the ordinance language, especially one section addressing "public accommodations."
"At some point, we have to have some level of morality that we as a society can depend on and everybody be treated equal."
One section of M-130 states, "The city seeks to ensure that its employees, in providing city services to the public and public accommodations, do not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, political opinions or affiliation."
Many believe the ordinance would mean men could use women's restrooms under the guise of being transgender, or that women will not have the same protection and privacy as they have now.
"This (ordinance) will lead to potential discrimination towards me, as a Christian, and my religious beliefs. I want to take a stand on that," Richard Wagnon said. "And yet, you're saying that you need protection from some perceived discrimination that I haven't even heard of. Ultimately, this is all going to boil down to the citizens' vote."
"At some point, we have to have some level of morality that we as a society can depend on and everybody be treated equal," Wagnon said.
Potts, who helped coordinate the petition drive for the repeal, also spoke out at the city board's meeting in January against passing the ordinance.
"I don't want my children going into the restroom with a man who doesn't know if he's a boy or a girl," Potts said. "God doesn't make mistakes. If he makes you male, you're a male."
Potts said that lifestyle is a choice and that people should not be subjected to the choices of others.
Dwayne Hall addressed the board the same night as Potts, but instead of expressing misgivings with the ordinance, Hall praised the board's efforts in moving forward with the anti-discrimination ordinance.
Hall said though he and Richard Wagnon are on opposite sides of this issue, Hall still considers him to be a great friend.
When Penney-Bell asked Hall if he "basically supported" the ordinance, Hall said he does so "wholeheartedly."
"I have more passion and a greater resolve on this issue than any other," Hall said. "I'm commending the people with the courage to vote on it. I encourage you all to do the right thing."
Benson said that many who want to campaign for keeping the ordinance are afraid to speak out for fear of being harassed and bullied, which she said has already been taking place.
"It doesn't give anyone a license to hurt someone else. Someone said something about a man dressing like a woman and messing with a child. This (ordinance) is not granting people the right to assault or touch someone," she said.
According to Benson, some members in favor of the repeal have told her that she is a "godless liberal," told her to go back to England because the Revolutionary War for religion had already been fought and called one other young supporter's parents to complain that their son or daughter was supporting the ordinance.
"This area is so different than a lot of the rest of the United States," Benson said. "I travel outside this area a lot and know that it's not like this in other places."
Benson said Ordinance M-130 supporters are diverse and include both Christians and veterans who fought for the United States.
"Some church leaders are telling them that this is wrong and that they (the congregation) need to fight it. It's sad," Benson said. "I'm of the opinion that we are born (with these) rights, civil rights. We shouldn't be having to fight for them.
"Throughout the (last) century, we have been fighting for civil rights, to get them back-women, colored people, etc."
Benson said one preacher sent a letter to his congregation telling them to sign the petition and that she is preparing to turn them in to get their tax-exempt status removed.
"The OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) regulations flat out say 'transgender' without minced words," Benson said. "This ordinance in no way legalizes criminal acts. Lifestyle differences doesn't mean (someone is) criminal."
Religion is also covered in the ordinance, she added.
Benson believes people trying to get M-130 repealed are frightened by other people having different lifestyles than them and are not worried about facts.
Another Texarkana, Ark., resident has similar views.
"This ordinance is about not allowing someone to be fired because they are gay. That is the main thrust of the legislation. It is about not allowing people to be denied service because of their lifestyle. It is not a 'public restrooms are now a sex free-for-all,'" Texarkana, Ark., resident Mark Vaughan wrote in a Facebook post. "This ordinance is not about bathrooms. It is about stopping discrimination. And part of that is giving trans people the right to go potty without being assaulted. Mostly, it is about treating everyone equally, with no one having any special rights such as the right to fire 10 percent of the workforce without repercussions because they happen to be gay."
To read more about the Repeal 130 group's stance, visit their Website at repeal130.com.
For more information on the discussion about the anti-discrimination ordinance, visit the city Website at arkansas.txkusa.org/board-meetings.html and click Minutes for a typed summary or Video to watch the meeting in full.