The Porterville City Council will discuss the first draft of a “Protect Women’s Safe Spaces” ordinance at its March 4 meeting. The ordinance would make it illegal for someone in Porterville to use a bathroom, locker room, or other “private facility” that does not match with their sex at birth.
A public hearing at a future council meeting and a second reading of the ordinance would be required before the ordinance could be enacted.
If it passes as written, transgender individuals would need to use facilities matching their sex at birth, rather than the gender that they currently identify as, or they would risk fines up to $1,000 after multiple violations. Businesses who do not obey the ordinance could risk fines up to $5,000.
The draft resolution would apply to buildings owned or operated by the City of Porterville, public schools, colleges and universities in the city, any private businesses open to the public “unless they provide single-occupancy, gender-neutral facilities,” and any entity that receives funding from the City of Porterville.
Areas with “public restrooms, locker rooms, and similar facilities” would be required to post signage indicating spaces as male or female “based on biological sex,” and “business and institutions” would be required to “inform employees and patrons of their compliance with [the] ordinance.”
No specific example of required verbiage or signage was provided in the draft. Businesses would be allowed, but not required, to provide single-occupancy/unisex accommodations.
Porterville Mayor Greg Meister told the Porterville City Council at its February 18 meeting that he wanted to propose the ordinance to protect women’s safe spaces in the city.
“The goal of this is to set law in the City of Porterville to protect women’s safe spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, sports — things where women in Title IX have the right to have their own space, and it’s something that is a big issue in our country,” Meister said at the meeting. “And it’s something that is a big issue in our country, and I feel the need to fight at a local level to protect women in our community.”
Enforcement options
Guardians or parents of children under the age of six years old would be exempt from the ordinance, as would individuals assisting persons with disabilities “in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.”
First responders would also be exempt if they are required to enter a sex-specific facility as part of an emergency response.
The draft spells out escalated penalties for individuals who violate the ordinance, with fines reaching up to $1,000 and “potential prohibition from entering certain public facilities.”
- Upon the first offense, a violator would receive a written warning,
- On the second offense, a violator would receive a fine of up to $500,
- On the third offense, a violator would receive a fine of up to $1,000 and “potential prohibition from entering certain public facilities.”
Businesses that do not enforce sex-specific spaces could be fined up to $5,000 per violation. Law enforcement “or designated city personnel” would be able to remove “individuals who refuse to comply with facility usage regulations.”
Motivation
Meister told the Los Angeles Times that “no one, including women’s rights groups, approached him about the ordinance, which he came up with on his own,” and that there were “no instances in Porterville of transgender women using their preferred restrooms,” according to a Times article about the proposal of the ordinance.
He said that he wanted to confront the possibility before it became an issue, the article states.
In an interview with KMPH FOX26, Meister said that a real-world example was the presence of menstrual products in boys’ restrooms at school as enforced by California’s AB367, the “Menstrual Equity for All” bill. The law requires menstrual products to be provided in “at least one men’s restroom.”
“So, unfortunately with that being a law, and not to demonize our school districts, but they have to follow the laws in order to get their funding. So we have tampon dispensers in our boys’ restrooms,” he said. “If you’re not drawing lines, then that means a biological female can go into the boys’ restroom, and if you reverse those rules, that means a biological male can go into the girls’ restrooms, it means they could go into the locker rooms, it means they could play in their sports.”
Reaction
He told KMPH that he’s “received nothing but love from the local community,” “emails from all over the state,” and “disappointment, people that feel they’re under attack – the LGBQ community.”
Meister said the ordinance is “not against them,” and that he believes they have rights as well – that the single-stall bathroom provision would allow “people that are experiencing gender dysphoria the opportunity to have their safe space as well.”
Advocates for the LGBTQ community in Porterville and Tulare County have pushed back against the potential ordinance.
The Tulare County Stonewall Democrats are organizing a protest on March 4, two hours before the Porterville City Council meeting.
Porterville Equality and Fairness for All, an organization started after a 2013 controversy over a proclamation supporting LGBT Pride Month in Porterville, posted that it would “have to become active again” in response to the news of the ordinance.
“This time they want to know about your genitals in order to decide where you can or cannot go and what activities you can and cannot participate in everywhere in the City. This includes your children also,” the group posted later in the week. “It’s up to you and everyone you can persuade to like this page to make sure that doesn’t happen.”
Erika Hawkyard, Director of Programs for The Source LGBT+ Center, told KMPH that the ordinance would not protect women.
“I think it’s important to understand for trans individuals as well, discriminating against trans people will not affect the safety of anyone in a restroom,” she said.
The Porterville City Council will meet at 6:30PM on March 4, 2025 at 291 N. Main St in Porterville. The meeting will also be available electronically via YouTube and Zoom.
“He told KMPH that he’s “received nothing but love from the local community,” “emails from all over the state,” and “disappointment, people that feel they’re under attack – the LGBQ community.””
Well, while I was not rude in my email to each member of the City Council, I can assure you it was not “love” in its tone.
This is a bad idea, a solution for a problem that does not exist, and a clear attack on the LGBT community. We consider the “T” to be as important a part of it as the others, and we won’t be sitting this one out.
Common sence is back!
Greg Meister has been a staunch hater of transgender people, he isn’t shy about it on his facebook. Its clear this has nothing to do with protecting women, women I know aren’t concerned with Porterville bathrooms, and are more so concerned with the fact East Porterville has no running water. This point is further proved by the fact he outwardly supports both a child rapist, and a man who has 26 sexual misconduct allegations and has stated “I moved on her like a bitch” in reference to a woman he met.
Why do people care about which bathrooms transgender people use? Don’t we have bigger problems to worry about? No one is being harmed using the bathroom that matches their identified. Let’s stop this hate.
Keep Men out of Women’s Restrooms. It’s simple and makes sense.