The state legislation – House Bill 3042 – has already passed both chambers of the West Virginia Legislature and is awaiting the governor’s signature. The bill provides additional religious protections against government interference. However, the city’s proposed resolution opposed the bill, describing it as a license to discriminate under the facade of religious freedoms.

Wheeling Mayor Glenn Elliott was out of town and did not attend Tuesday night’s meeting. However, he confirmed after the meeting that he would have voted “110%” to pass the city’s resolution opposing the bill and encouraging Gov. Jim Justice to veto it. Instead, the measure failed with a tie.

In Charleston, the votes on this bill – like many other issues – have been along party lines, with an overwhelming Republican majority.

Wheeling Councilman Ben Seidler noted that city council is supposed to be a nonpartisan body, but asserted that too often are politically divisive issues brought before city council through agenda-driven means.

photo by: Photo by Eric Ayres

Wheeling City Council members Ben Seidler, Rosemary Ketchum and Jerry Sklavounakis, from left, cast votes during a meeting Tuesday night as City Manager Robert Herron, at right, listens.

“I feel like this is a political stunt,” Seidler said. “It was thrown in our laps 24½ hours ago, and I don’t really know the context of where this is coming from. I don’t feel like it’s our responsibility in city council to intermingle with state politics.”

Seidler said the resolution was apparently critical enough to be added to the agenda at the last minute but not important enough to warrant a phone call or text to fellow council members to explain or discuss it. He said members were not given time to evaluate the bill or the resolution, or time to discuss it with their constituents.

“I’m firmly against discrimination in any way shape or form, and I actively fight against it, but I really can’t stand being a political pawn for the far-left agenda or the political ambitions of some folks on this body,” Seidler said. “By our charter, we are not allowed to play partisan politics. But it’s absolutely clear by this impeccable timing and the perfectly short notice of this stunt today, that it’s yet another move by the far-left members of this body.”

Councilwoman Rosemary Ketchum moved to approve the resolution, and Councilman Ty Thorngate seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Chad Thalman – who presided over the meeting in the mayor’s absence – was the member who brought the proposal to the floor, and he also voted for the measure. Councilmen Seidler, Dave Palmer and Jerry Sklavounakis voted against it.

Despite being out of town, Elliott was aware of Seidler’s sharp comments made during the meeting and insisted on responding Tuesday night.

photo by: Photo by Eric Ayres

A split vote resulted in the failure of a resolution Tuesday night before Wheeling City Council to oppose West Virginia House Bill 3042.

“Councilman Seidler has developed an unpleasant habit of questioning the motives of his fellow members of council at our meetings,” Elliott said. “Not only is this unbecoming of an elected official, it’s also a flagrant violation of Robert’s Rules which govern council proceedings per our city charter. But perhaps most concerning was that he admitted having almost no understanding of the underlying RFRA issue and its potential implications in our community. That’s on him, not any other member of council.”

Thalman said the timing of the resolution’s appearance on the agenda was simply because the state legislature passed the bill last week, and it was expected to hit the governor’s desk this week. He noted that in the past when states have passed similar pieces of controversial legislation in other states, they watched as sports tournaments and other revenue-generating events pulled out of those areas in response.

Wheeling City Council passed a non-discrimination ordinance in 2016, and this resolution simply reaffirms the city’s commitment to that, Thalman said.

“We were told that if we would move forward with a non-discrimination ordinance, the sky would fall, and women and children would be unsafe in public bathrooms,” Thalman said. “But here we are seven years later, and none of those doomsday scenarios have come to reality. The actual reality is, since 2016 – since the non-discrimination ordinance passed, the city of Wheeling has experienced an era of unprecedented private and public investment that hasn’t happened at any other point in our lives.”

Palmer said the city’s non-discrimination ordinance was clear, and no additional action was needed.

“We don’t need this resolution,” Palmer said. “We passed an ordinance in 2016, and we have that. What we’re trying to do with this ordinance is tell the West Virginia Legislature what to do. … I think we need to stay in our lane and not color outside the lines. I just totally disagree with the need for this resolution.”

Ketchum said she respectfully disagreed with Palmer and concurred with Thalman so far as to say the city of Wheeling calls itself “The Friendly City.”

“West Virginia, I think, could call itself ‘The Friendly State’ if only we did not engage in pieces of legislation like HB 3042,” Ketchum said. “We have a duty and an obligation to our small businesses and our event centers, the people who call this place home – to protect them and to reaffirm to them that they are protected.

“To be clear – I support civil rights of all, and I support our non-discrimination ordinance,” Palmer explained. “I think this resolution is unnecessary.”

One Wheeling resident, Amy Carlson Miesel, spoke against the resolution before council voted. She noted that the state bill passes the Sherbert test – a tool to determine whether an act by the government infringes upon a person’s religious freedom. This measure is the legal standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court on issues regarding religious freedoms. The proposed resolution by city council against HB 3042 is in violation of the Sherbert test, Miesel claimed.

“But of far more concern than these legal matters are the moral and communal concerns,” she said. “The text of the resolution in at least three places erroneously characterizes HB 3042 as permitting ‘one’s religious beliefs to be used as an excuse to violate the civil rights of others.’ This resolution misrepresents HB 3042, and also the convictions and perspective actions of people of faith.”

Miesel said the city’s resolution raised several moral and communal concerns.

“Firstly, the resolution plays into the false dichotomy of two mutually exclusive opposing citizens’ claims: people of faith versus people of diverse sexuality,” she said. “A resolution such as this effectively deepens the divides between people in these United States. We are at a junction when it is more crucial than ever that American people pursue common ground and seek unity in diversity – a diversity that includes people of faith and their respectful faith convictions, not excluding them.”

The resolution also was “based on the false premises that people of faith are all bigoted and wantonly violate the civil rights of others,” Miesel said. “Thirdly, this resolution’s hostility to faith conviction raises the prospect of changing Wheeling into a hostile living environment for people of faith. This resolution is discriminatory against people of faith.

Seidler said there were far-right members in the audience who may be pleased to see members of council take a stance against “this stealthy surprise resolution that magically landed on this agenda.” However, Seidler had some choice words for them, as well.

“I’m also here to tell you that there are a number of so-called Republican members of this audience that continue to abuse this platform at any chance they get to spew their bigotry, hate and intolerance just as much if not even more than those on the opposite side,” Seidler said. “It’s your right to use your three minutes to express your opinions, but it’s also my right and members of council’s right to tune you out when you cannot share your opinions in an objective way without spewing hate and misinformation.

“These factors make you completely irrelevant to me, regardless of the message you’re tying to get across,” he added.