Janet Anderson, Burlington

I have watched all of the recent City Council meetings where the topic of the reinstated Human Relations Committee was discussed and I noted some common arguments against the committee. While I appreciate the citizen involvement and that the Council is willing to listen to constituents and weigh their concerns, I have also noted that certain facts are not being considered and should be brought forward. First of all, the Human Relations committee is an advisory committee only and will be overseen by Council. There is no legal action being encouraged or pushed despite what some in the public are saying.

Next is the idea that “labels are bad.” Labels aren’t inherently bad. These are not the days of saying “I don’t see color” or “I don’t see ability” — we SHOULD see these things. We need to see and respect and acknowledge the ‘labels’ people claim. It’s ok to be uncomfortable with differences, but we have to acknowledge this discomfort and move beyond it.

Several people in opposition to this committee have made adamant claims that they aren’t “against” any people and they have no hate or ill-will toward anyone. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. If someone feels discriminated against or harassed then your intention doesn’t matter. This is basic harassment training. If I say something that offends you, I should not blame you for misunderstanding my intention (“it was just a joke”), I should apologize and learn not to make that same mistake again.

The claims of “this isn’t about gay people” are hard to believe. If you took out “sexual expression, gender identity or expression” from the proposed changes I believe no one would have heard a peep from the people opposing this committee.

Regarding the argument that “there are already laws for this,” people need to remember that this committee is not making laws. The proposed ordinance even states this in 2-212 d. If anything, they will be helping enforce those laws by offering a safe place for people to report concerns to. This argument is weak and nonsensical as we “we already have laws” against abuse and theft and yet there’s an entire City department who handles these issues daily. We already have laws about certain drugs and the abuse and distribution of these and yet the Mayor’s Committee on Addiction was one of the most well-received committees in Minot’s recent history.

Specific concerns brought up at the 6/5 Council meeting by area political and religious leaders also require some clarification. First of all, the mention of Home Rule Charter in the beginning of the new ordinance updating the Human Relations Committee is boilerplate language. This is standard in many of the City ordinances, not an attempt to secede from the state. Secondly, to the pastor who declared “It’s not the job of the city to be affirming and welcoming:” you may want to take a closer look at the adopted City of Minot aspirations. To be “Safe and Welcoming” is one of the primary goals of the City. Why wouldn’t we want that?

Thirdly, to those who say we can’t force people to accept others. That’s not what the committee does. It PROMOTES the idea of acceptance. To those who spoke to Council on behalf of the Christian Church and said the church “will not give an inch” if the ordinance is passed and that they would “train” their members to remove Council members from office: you do not speak for all Christians. Additionally, prefacing a threat with “this is not a threat” doesn’t make it so.

Finally, the hypocrisy of those opposed to the revised committee is astounding and should be considered. For example, these people who are crying this is “government overreach” are literally the exact same people who want to control what books can be in the public library. The same people who worry the City would be going against state mandates signed by the Governor are the same people who protested the Governor’s directive to wear masks during the Covid-19 outbreak. Those same people who are so concerned about how this committee may cost the City money all left before hearing about the need for expensive, but much-needed, infrastructure repairs.

One thing we can all agree on: this has been a divisive issue. Yet this division has always existed and many experience it regularly. A Human Relations committee won’t solve the issues of bigotry and lack of compassion, but it is a start. By backtracking on the original vote to approve, a definite statement will be made to the citizens who feel “other” and unwelcome.