Republican, Democratic parties misinform voters in Wichita anti-discrimination debate
The Republican and Democratic parties in Sedgwick County have joined the debate over a proposed ordinance to ban discrimination within the Wichita city limits, but both parties provided inaccurate information to their voters.
The Republican missive, a party e-mail and fundraising plea opposing the ordinance, confuses what the Wichita City Council passed June 15 with a proposal that the council rejected at the same meeting.
The Democratic response, favoring the ordinance, incorrectly stated the potential fines that could be levied against businesses under what the council approved.
In all probability, both sides’ positions are likely to be overtaken by events.
Although the June 15 ordinance got preliminary approval, what the city calls a “first reading,” it will likely be replaced with a completely different ordinance when it comes back to the council for a second reading July 6.
The replacement ordinance is modeled on Overland Park’s anti-discrimination law and is much more detailed than the version that emerged from the June 15 meeting.
Wichita’s City Council is technically non-partisan. But the political parties’ competing position papers have muddied the waters as City Hall debates an important, possibly defining ordinance for Wichita’s minority communities.
In their message to voters, the Republicans criticized the ordinance as a “terrible and dangerous idea.”
“With federal and state laws already making discrimination illegal, this hastily written city ordinance would create even more problems and confusion,” the GOP message said. “It will allow the government to pick winners and losers in all situations ... There’s simply no room for frivolous local mandates that can’t be enforced.”
Here’s what the Republicans got wrong:
▪ They claimed that the ordinance would allow Mayor Brandon Whipple to “create a new council, made up of 20 of his appointees” to investigate complaints and issue fines up to $2,000 a day. That’s not what the council passed. The idea of a 20-member Human Rights Commission was contained in a proposal that was dropped by the council with little discussion at the June 15 meeting. But even if that had passed, Whipple’s proposed appointees would have had to be confirmed by a majority of the City Council.
▪ The Republicans also errantly assumed the Human Rights Commission could act on anonymous complaints. Again, the approved ordinance wouldn’t have created that commission, leaving investigation of discrimination complaints in the hands of the City Attorney’s office. And if the council had created the commission, it would been bound to seek conciliation between identified parties before any enforcement actions could have taken place.
Republican Party Chairman David Thorne stood by the GOP message.
“Our statement and position in the email you referenced, which was delivered to our Sedgwick County GOP subscribers, stands on its own merit and I believe it couldn’t be more clear,” he said in an e-mail.
The Democrats strongly supported the ordinance.
“This proposed ordinance is about creating a city that lives out its values through its laws and actions,” said the Democrats’ response to the GOP, which was sent to their party members. “We remain committed to fighting for equality and inclusion for all. Not only because it is a part of our constitution, but because it is our inherent right.”
Here’s what the Democrats got wrong:
▪ In their response to the Republican message, the Democrats claimed the GOP was wrong about the city having the authority to assess fines of up to $2,000 per day, saying the ordinance said up to $2,000 per violation. The Republicans were not wrong on this point, because it accurately reflected the ordinance that passed the council on June 15. That specified mandatory fines of $500 for first offense, $1,000 for second offense and $2,000 for third and subsequent offenses. Under the council-approved ordinance, each day that a discriminatory practice continued was defined as a separate offense, so it was accurate for the GOP to say the fines could pile up daily.
Council member Brandon Johnson, who worked with Democratic Chairman Joseph Shepard on the statement, acknowledged the provision for daily fines was part of the June 15 ordinance.
But he said that’s been changed in the draft substitute ordinance that’s expected to replace the one that was voted on, and that version is what the Democratic statement was referencing.
Confusion may have emerged because of the unorthodox way the ordinance came about.
It was originally based on a Topeka ordinance that forbids discrimination against anyone because of “actual or perceived age, color, disability, familial status, gender identity, genetic information, national origin or ancestry, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, veteran status or any other factor protected by law.”
But that Topeka ordinance has no enforcement provisions.
LGBTQ rights activists, including the national group Human Rights Campaign and the state group Equality Kansas, criticized the ordinance as toothless and spent the weekend before the June 15 meeting working with the mayor on proposals for an enforcement mechanism to go before the council.
This story was originally published June 30, 2021 at 4:50 PM.
