Photo by Noah Dawson
Amarillo City Council formally received a request from the petitioning committee for the Sanctuary City for the Unborn ordinance asking for the item to be placed on the November 5th ballot. However, one point of contention remains: the ballot language.
During their most recent regular meeting, City Secretary Stephanie Coggins formally presented the request from the petitioning committee. She also noted that the charter requires that the ballot language for the election “shall state the title of the Ordinance and contain a succinct statement of its nature and purpose.”
Coggins also presented potential ballot language written by staff, based on a similar ballot proposition from Lubbock. The language written by staff reads as follows:
The code of ordinances of the City of Amarillo shall be amended by enacting an ordinance outlawing abortion, declaring Amarillo a sanctuary city for the unborn, making various provisions and findings, providing for severability, and establishing an effective date.
The potential language received pushback from Councilman Tom Scherlen. Much of the discussion regarding the ballot language revolved around a provision within the ordinance that would prohibit assisting a woman seeking an abortion by helping her travel through Amarillo.
That provision has been the subject of much of the controversy regarding the ordinance, with some on the right opposing the ordinance mostly due to that provision. On Amarillo City Council, Mayor Cole Stanley and Councilman Tom Scherlen have been especially critical. Stanley has argued that the provision is outside the jurisdiction of the city, while Scherlen has called the provision a “travel ban.”
When Stanley asked the petitioning committee if they would be open to removing that provision, the petitioning committee characterized the provision as being central to the ordinance. While Scherlen has called the provision a travel ban, supporters of the ordinance have called the provision a prohibition against “abortion trafficking.”
Scherlen, invoking the petitioning committee’s argument that the provision was central to the ordinance, argued the ballot language should refer to the provision. In particular, he argued that the language should specifically call the provision a “travel ban.” Scherlen received some pushback on his arguments from Councilman Don Tipps, who noted that the words “travel ban” do not appear in the ordinance. (Tipps was the only member of the council to vote to adopt the ordinance without placing it on the ballot.)
The council has until August 19th to finalize the ballot language and officially call an election. The proposition is likely to share the November ballot with a number of amendments to the City Charter.