After protests and nearly two hours of public comment on March 4, the Porterville City Council is still working on an ordinance that would make it unlawful for someone to use a bathroom, locker room, or other “private facility” that does not match with their sex at birth.
The city may soon also consider using public funds to support lawsuits launched against the state by women who end up sharing private spaces with transgender individuals.
“We really have to look and be creative with this ordinance, and it is the people who have the standing,” Mayor Greg Meister said. “The women that are injured from laws that are passed by the state that are unconstitutional, and violate women’s eighth amendment right, which is cruel and unusual punishment to force biological men into women’s spaces.”
“What we do have the ability to do, is to support a lawsuit for the people,” Meister said. “So if there is someone who is harmed by these laws from the state, the city can support lawfare on the state – and that is the direction that I’d like to try to take this ordinance.”
In addition to discussion of the “Women’s Safe Spaces” ordinance, plans to create a “Safeguarding Parents’ Rights in Education” ordinance were proposed by Porterville Vice-Mayor Ed McKervey at the end of the March 4 meeting.
Text of the education ordinance could be put forth for consideration at the council’s March 18 meeting.
Council uniformly supports restrictions, debates using city funds
All of the council members expressed support for restrictions on keeping transgender individuals out of gender-specific bathrooms, locker rooms, or other private areas; all also said that they supported safety for women, but did not harbor any animus towards the transgender community.
Some were more circumspect about the possibility of using public funds to support private lawsuits.
By the end of the discussion, city staff were directed to rewrite the ordinance to take into account the potential for a legal defense fund to support private lawsuits against the state, and to account for future potential Supreme Court decisions that could change laws such as California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which currently includes protections for individuals’ gender identity.
The council would then discuss the updated ordinance.
Meister drew parallels between the potential Porterville legal fund and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent move to create a $25m legal fund to back lawsuits by the State of California against President Donald Trump’s administration.
McKervey said that the “culture war has shifted,” and had choice words for those that spoke against the ordinance – noting that there were “a lot of triggered activists.”
He supported the idea to expend city funds on potential private lawsuits.
“I like the idea that we draw the boundary and say, our city will stand with the people of the city,” he said, “and I would suggest that maybe we set aside some money for litigation to protect those that are harmed by this, in preparation for something, even though there may not be a harm now.”
He said he didn’t appreciate the “hate, and the threatening behavior, and the epithets, and the slander from the audience,” and that the council needed to “continue to have this conversation until that tone comes down, and we have a real conversation where we’re talking with each other, instead of at each other.”
Council member AJ Rivas pushed back against public comments that said transgender individuals were more likely to be harmed, rather than to harm others, in public restrooms, and said that he supported the restrictions.
Rivas listed off cases of alleged assaults by transgender individuals from Virginia, Oklahoma, Wyoming, and other states. He also read off the statement that “bathrooms are often the places of sexual assault of women and children by transgenders.”
The order of news headlines and the specific statement appear identical to a list of articles compiled by the Utah Gay-Straight Coalition. That list was used to influence transgender policy discussions in Utah, according to the Salt Lake Tribune.
Council member Raymond Beltran said that he supported the ordinance, saying that he believed the state’s overreach had gone too far – noting the presence of female menstrual products in sixth grade bathrooms.
He also said he worried about the financial impact of a legal fund on the city’s budget.
“We already run a very, very tight ship with things that are needed. Diverting any funds for legal fees to fight something like this, until something comes from federal and especially Supreme Court, I’d just hate to set aside $100,000 or $500,000 when it could be going to things,” Beltran said.
“We already cut fees for utilities for youth sports, we’re doing another traffic report we did in an area already, we are redoing buses,” he added. “It feels like we’re just spending money we don’t have yet.”
Protests and public comment
Protesters gathered across the street from Porterville City Hall at 4:30PM, two hours before the council was set to meet in open session. Upwards of fifty protesters were outside before the council meeting started, and a smaller contingent stayed outside during the meeting.
The fireworks started early inside chambers – the meeting opened with an invitation for invocations from the public, which led to early commentary and controversy.
One woman’s invocation called for “victory over the proclamation to ensure the protection of women’s safe spaces,” while another woman elicited gasps and cheers from the crowd when she came to the podium to “call on to [her] Lord Satan, since you guys are here to pray to your God.”
Dr. Kathryn Hall, a pediatrician who practices in Visalia and lives in Lindsay, spoke to support the transgender community.
“The proposed ordinance and proclamation – they are misleading, unnecessary, and harmful. No transgender person presents a risk to others in a bathroom. There are no cases of women being assaulted by trans women in bathrooms. It does not happen,” she said. “The rationale for this ordinance and this proclamation does not exist.”
“The effects of this ordinance would be to require trans men, who are often bearded, bald, bulked up, to use women’s restrooms. They would not be a threat to anyone in there, but the women may perceive them as a threat, which could result in risk to both,” she added. “Trans women would be forced to use a men’s restroom, where they would be at significant risk. This ordinance would create unnecessary anxiety for cisgender women and actual risk for both trans women and trans men.”
Erica, a woman from Porterville, said she spoke on behalf of transgender youth in the city who did not feel safe speaking publicly.
“You, Mr. Mayor, stated that you did not know if any transgender people live in Porterville. Then what’s the point of the ban? You’re targeting a minority that you didn’t even know was in the city,” she said. “You claim the ban is to protect women, yet no one – not even women’s rights groups – asked you to do this.”
Brock Neeley, a Porterville LGBTQ+ activist – and one of the organizers of the protest – told the council their ordinance “blatantly” violated the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and said that state officials were lying in wait for any action the council might take.
“I’ve had a conversation with [California Attorney General] Rob Bonta already, he’s waiting. He’s got the filings already written. You’re gonna cost this city a whole bunch of money if you pass this,” he said. “The other thing is, if [City Attorney Julia] Lew helps you with this, she’s probably gonna face disbarment. How much money and staff time are you going to waste on this crap?”
Support from the public
While many of the public comments were against the proposed ordinance, some spoke at the meeting to support it. One was a familiar face to some in the crowd – former Porterville City Council Member Greg Shelton.
Shelton was on the council in 2013, when he and other members of council rescinded an LGBT Pride Proclamation passed by former Porterville Mayor Virginia Gurrola.
He harkened back to the experience in his comments to the council.
“It’s interesting to hear some of the guys reheating the nachos, you know – it’s, oh my gosh, it’s intolerance, it’s acceptance, it’s rights,” he said. “And I always find it interesting now, as I did then, that the people that scream the loudest about tolerance are the most intolerant people of everybody else.”
“I identify as a human with an X and a Y chromosome, I don’t know what that makes me. The females that I know, they’re not comfortable with this – now they’re not down here grandstanding. They stay at home, they pay their bills, they go to work,” he said. “But they don’t like the idea. And I don’t blame them.”
“Thank you for taking the hits,” he said. “I’ve been there. Good job.”
Rosemary, a Porterville resident, told the council that she has friends who are gay and transgender, and that she wasn’t at the meeting to “put them down,” but that she wanted privacy and respect as a woman.
“As a mother, and a grandmother, I would want to make sure that my child is safe, my grandchildren are safe when they’re in the public bathrooms or any public place,” she said. “Not all transgender people are bad. They’re good people – they’re just different than what I am. And I can accept that, if they can accept me as a woman.”
Korey Wells, a Springville resident, spoke during a public comment period at the end of the council meeting – at 10:55PM, after the chambers had largely emptied out. He commented on multiple items, but said he supported the ordinance.
“There’s a lot of kind of crazy verbiage that was used tonight. I am a proud white male, and I am a sigma alpha chad white male, and you know – whatever, I don’t care. It’s weird that they use the word ‘cis’ in the place of straight. Who cares,” he said.
“There are in fact boys and men going into the women’s and girls restrooms in these schools. At McDermont, the girls who are playing and practicing, when they’re doing their games, they ask for their coaches and their teammates to escort them to the bathroom so that they can have a partner walking with them to protect them,” he continued.
New Education and Child Upbringing ordinance
At the end of each meeting, council members are given an opportunity to propose new business.
McKervey motioned for the council to consider a “Safeguarding Parental Rights in Education and Child Upbringing” ordinance at its next meeting.
He said that he had vetted his proposal to avoid legal challenges.
“The state continues to overreach the bounds of the family. This secures those fundamental parental rights and makes that boundary very clear on where the city will stand in support of our parents and their rights in our education and our child upbringing,” he read.
Meister supported the motion and seconded it.
“I know we’ve worked and talked about this a little, talking about some of the bills the state has passed that violate parental rights, and hiding information from parents like gender identity or even to the point of giving children material to be sexually active like condoms and birth control – all the way to taking a child to get an abortion without parents’ consent,” Meister said. “I love where you’re going with this, Vice-Mayor, because what we’re trying to do is return to common sense and the constitution of the United States.”
The motion passed unanimously.
The next regular Porterville City Council meeting will be held on March 18, 2025 at Porterville City Hall, 291 N. Main St, Porterville, CA 93257.
That was a crazy meeting. I had thought Porterville was making progress after the 2013 fiasco, but it’s clear the city has put radically right-wing men back in charge, and they’re doing all they can to drag the city back down. Only three people spoke in the more than two hours of public comments in favor of the proposal, all the rest spoke against it. You could tell the Councilmen had closed minds on the subject, and were just putting up with the commentary because they had to. They have no plans to learn the truth about this issue, and will pursue the proposal every way they can. Porterville takes a huge step backwards.
One other thing from the meeting, I really don’t understand the transit bus ‘rebranding’. The proposed paint schemes were downright unattractive, even though it’s a patriotic ‘All America CIty’ theme. Porterville is going to spend a bunch of money on these designs, instead of selling advertising on the buses like most other transit systems do. Spend money rather than make it.
Absolutely agree. They had no intention of honestly engaging with the issues surrounding the ordinance.
I just don’t understand the desire of the people who desire to use a facility of a different sex than their God given sex , what is to be gained by this?
Also as for myself I would not be comfortable with that person being in there when I had need to be in there!
Looks to me like 👍 it is inviting all sorts of problems!
A father standing by while his daughter uses the toilet and a man walks up and heads in also to use the facility,that father is going to protect his daughter at whatever expense! Physical assault? Maybe worse!
Tony,
Thanks for the kind treatment, and even-handed reporting, of the comments I made at the Porterville City Council Meeting on 3-4-25.
Thank goodness the right wing are back in charge. Why do these unhappy liberals even stick around locally? They should just leave the Central Valley if they hate it so much. Why stay here and be miserable? Go to SF where you can be around like minded left wing people.
Liberals have been wasting the tax payers money as long as I can remember when they don’t get their way. The left has never been more unpopular because they want to force their agenda on everyone. Keep it up and you will continue to lose elections.
There are some sickos out there that would pretend to be a trans woman just to be able to get into a women’s restroom , I don’t want to be in a restroom anywhere and have to worry about a man dressed in women’s clothing coming in. Go Porterville council!!!
If this passes, you shouldn’t have to worry about men dressed in women’s clothing. You’ll have to worry about men dressed in men’s clothing walking in. You won’t be able to tell the difference between a trans woman looking to pee, and a man in women’s clothing looking to do harm. Nobody will pay any attention, because you’ve made it where trans men will be walking into the women’s facilities all the time, looking like men. You will endanger women and girls in your efforts to “protect” them. Idiotic.
Jim Reeves: Your intolerance and hate toward persons with opposing views has not changed since your defunct “blog” was up with a real newspaper, Visalia Times Delta.
Born a girl sit to pee born a boy stand to pee use right rest room.