The council first discussed potential abortion solutions at its February 21 meeting in response to a petition received in August. About 90 residents have signed a petition asking the city council to discuss ways to protect residents who access, support, or provide abortion services.

After debate and an hour of public comment on February 21, the City Council instructed city officials to draft a resolution to be discussed at a subsequent meeting.

The majority of comments at Tuesday’s meeting — 45 out of 65 total — were against the resolution, including religious leaders, local residents and at least one anti-abortion supporter.

The city council approved the resolution at its meeting on Tuesday, with Mayor Becky Daggett, Deputy Mayor Austin Aslan, Deborah Harris, Jim McCarthy, Miranda Sweet and Kara House voting in favor. Only one, Rep. Lori Matthews, voted against it.

“Abortion is never an easy decision, and no one takes it lightly….it’s not a decision that should be made in the state legislature,” McCarthy said during a discussion at the city council.

“This resolution states our opinion as a council body,” House said. “…because this conversation is being presented, it’s part of our role to participate in it, to share our views on it, to have these kinds of conversations. Difficult, challenging, nuanced maybe.”

The resolution was based in part on similar resolutions passed by the city councils of Tucson and Phoenix in 2022 and challenged the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The Flagstaff resolution “supports the constitutional rights of pregnant women, including access to reproductive health care and abortion,” while also opposing the decision to criminalize abortion and Arizona’s laws. manifesting.

It also called Flagstaff Police in establishing priorities and policies related to abortion that “considered the need to protect the physical, psychological and socioeconomic well-being of pregnant women and their caregivers.” It also includes ways to help.

Read the full text of the resolution online.

But city attorney Sterling Solomon and a city council member said at both meetings that the action would be a statement, not a law, because medical care in Arizona is regulated by the state, not the city.

This, along with Arizona’s current law, was part of the reason Matthews voted against the resolution.

Abortion is currently legal in Arizona up to the 15th week of pregnancy, but access is restricted in Flagstaff. For example, the local Planned Parenthood now offers abortion referrals rather than abortion services.

“I’m surprised we’re still talking about this,” Matthews said. “I respect all citizens, their decisions and wishes. Your abortion rights are protected. I think the figure is offending and stating that by taking a political position that you disagree with, you will lose faith in local government.It has no legal status.”

Other councilors disagreed.

“I think part of the motivation for this conversation from people wanting to hear from the council and the police that they are protected is [abortion laws] It may change,” Aslan said. “…regardless of which state legislature passed the law at any given time, we need to make sure resources are directed wisely.”

“We have had many courageous conversations over the years in this country, and this is not the last we have,” Harris said. “We have the right to go against the legislators and we believe this is the proper way to go. When we don’t like something, we can tell them. Sitting in doesn’t mean we give up our rights or our feelings…but I think we owe it to those who voted for me and those who didn’t vote for me to be heard. Take what you have to say and what decision I think is best.Currently, in this particular case, I support this resolution.”

Most commentators attended the meeting in person on Tuesday. For each he was given three minutes to speak.

Many of those opposing the resolution discussed their own views against abortion, and some said the board that passed the resolution did not represent the convictions of the voters.

“I believe that all people are worthy of respect and have the right to have an opinion. , it’s very divisive and pulls our community apart when a lot of people don’t agree with that opinion,” said resident Ann. Ingram. “I think you’ve seen here on the show that a lot of people are against certain resolutions.”

Many of the commenters opposing the resolution cited religion, particularly Christianity, as their reason for opposing abortion, citing Bible verses and prayers, and using religious language.

This group included several local pastors. Joshua Walker, teaching Elder of the Resurrection Church (he said he was here as a “concerned citizen” rather than a pastor); David Berry; Swee, Jim Dorman, Associate Pastor of Northland Christian Assembly and Founding Pastor (now retired) of Flagstaff Christ Church.

“I am here today to represent myself and about 300 people from my church,” Berry said. “…we together vigorously oppose proposed Resolution 2023-12. Flagstaff’s mission is to protect and improve the quality of life for all. It includes those in the womb who are the most vulnerable among us, unable to defend or speak for themselves.”

Some of those who supported the resolution referred to the separation of church and state in their comments, saying that acting on the religious beliefs of other commenters would go against it.

Diana Coleman, professor of comparative cultural studies at Northern Arizona University, also pointed out that these beliefs are from a subset of one religion.

“We’ve heard people say, but we haven’t heard the religious side. I’ve heard of it,’ she said. ”

Matthews said religious views are those of community members and should be listened to.

“I don’t think it worked. This is a religious thing or a God thing, so you have to be ashamed to make a decision,” she said. “…this is their belief, they are part of the community.”

During the discussion, McCarthy said the question was about who was making the decisions.

“who [tonight] He said there are different opinions on this issue. Well, it’s clear. But the side saying “I agree with the choice” says “I’m not going to make that decision for you”. increase. “

Some of the opponents of the resolution mentioned their own children, and some took them to meetings to make their point. Others referred to different perspectives on their experiences with pregnancy, abortion, and parenthood and used them to support and oppose solutions.

Among those who spoke out in support of the resolution were members of the Flagstaff Abortion Alliance, along with other local residents. While many had taken at least some of their time to respond to previous comments, some said they supported access to abortion as needed medical care in Flagstaff.

“We believe that we should protect and improve the lives of pregnant people, parents and children,” said NAU student Leslie Hansen. “Abortion bans do not do this. It hurts many, many lives.…I know this resolution is just a statement, it doesn’t change the law, it doesn’t grant access to abortion, but it really needs I think it’s going to be a show of support for people.”

Meeting recording available onlineThis item begins approximately 1 hour and 10 minutes into the recording, and discussion of the resolution by Council members begins approximately 4 hours and 15 minutes.