A councilor in Woolwich Township in southwestern Ontario is facing backlash from some colleagues and community members for his comments against a proposal for a rainbow crosswalk. On Monday, at the regularly scheduled meeting of the five councilors and the borough’s mayor, they discussed a letter from the Canadian Mental Health Association Waterloo Wellington. The letter, signed by the group’s executive director Helen Fishburn, said it supports a local request for a rainbow crosswalk in Elmira, Ont. The letter described the crosswalk as “a visual representation to members of vulnerable populations that lets them know they are in a safe, welcoming space. The crosswalk also reminds 2SLGBTQI+ people that their community supports them as they continue their life’s journey.” Coun. Murray Martin expressed his disapproval of the idea. “It’s not in line with the values of this community, so they can send that letter back where it came from. And having said that, I’m not critical of the way people live and what they do,” he said during the meeting , which was broadcast by the municipality’s YouTube account. Martin, who is seeking re-election, said his main concern was to use the rainbow itself and cited a biblical reference. “Where did the first rainbow come from? Everyone should know that. It came after the great flood, Noah and the Ark. And God made a covenant with his people that he would not destroy the world again with the flood, and his gave the rainbow,” he said. “So now we’re using it, and we’re trashing it, to promote a lifestyle that’s not right … I don’t think it’s right,” Martin said. Despite this statement, Martin went on to say that his issue was about the rainbow symbol and not the lifestyle of the people it represents.
Council reaction
During Martin’s comments, Coun. Patrick Merlihan was visibly shaking his head. “Wow,” Merlihan said during the meeting. “I’m not shocked that these statements were made, but this was really offensive to me and a lot of my … friends.” “Our values are inclusive. They should be. Maybe not for everyone, but that should be the goal,” said Merlihan, who is running for mayor. “I apologize on behalf of Earl Martin that anyone, and especially our staff, had to hear them,” he said. Martin was quick to respond, and Mayor Sandy Shantz, who is also seeking re-election, allowed him to because she said he had a right to share his opinion, even though she disagreed with the way his initial statement “sounded.” “I thought I made it clear at the beginning – it wasn’t about the people, it wasn’t about the lifestyle. He strictly uses the rainbow and I don’t need anyone to apologize for me or anyone else. I’m entitled to my opinion,” Martin said. Coun. Scott McMillan called Martin’s comments and use of the word “lifestyle”. “With all due respect to Coun. Martin, we can’t allow statements to stand where we call people unfit for who they are. It’s not a way of life – it’s who they are, it’s their identity,” he said. He supported the implementation of a rainbow crosswalk, describing it as “a wonderful sign of support. That these are exactly the values of our community and we are a loving and welcoming place.” Coun. Fred Redekop, who is also running for re-election, agreed with McMillan’s statements. Coun. Larry Sands remained silent throughout the discussion. The City ultimately moved forward with a direction to staff to explore the idea of implementing a rainbow crosswalk in Elmira and other nearby communities.
Community reaction
Several members of the community took to social media, including Reddit, to share their reaction to Martin’s comments. Some posts said: “I’m ashamed that this guy is a representative of the community I live in” and, “On the plus side, the other councilors rejected his nonsense.” Andrew Jacob Rinehart, a member of the LGBTQ2s+ community in Waterloo, saw the post online and described some of the councilor’s language as “inhumane” and “violent”. “I was physically shocked that this kind of discussion is happening in an official meeting, in an official process, the clarity of it.” Rinehart suggested the councilor’s comments singled out a particular community, “making it clear that we are not welcome.” He said Martin should not be allowed to continue speaking. “I think too much space has been given to ‘we are allowed to express our opinions freely here.’ It should have been: “This is unacceptable language, it is against our Code of Conduct. This is against what we stand for and this will not be allowed to continue,” he said. On Tuesday night, Shantz issued a public apology, saying she regretted not stopping the comments from Martin. “I have listened to the feedback I have received from the community and have taken the time to speak and apologize to those affected by these comments. Again, I apologize and regret my actions from last night and want to reassure our community that we are a safe, diverse, inclusive, accepting and welcoming community,” Shantz said in the emailed statement.
Violation of code of conduct
Merlihan told CBC News the right thing to do was to stop the mayor from continuing with the council. “He could cite the municipality’s Code of Conduct, our meeting’s Rules of Procedure, as well as the Ontario Human Rights Code, as all of those policies govern how we conduct ourselves in public,” Merlihan said. He said he believes Martin violated the disparaging behavior section of the Code of Conduct. The municipality’s disparaging conduct harassment clause describes conduct directed at or offensive to another person “on the basis of race, descent, place of origin, color, national origin, nationality, code of conduct (Council, Council Committees , Local Boards ) creed, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital or marital status and any other reason specified in the Ontario Human Rights Code.” Merlihan said formal complaints to the integrity commissioner cannot be accepted between August 19 and October 24 due to municipal elections. “I advise residents to send complaints to the official. I had additional questions for the clerk from resident requests regarding violations of the Ontario Human Rights Code. “I will be reaching out to any community members affected by the events of this meeting if that helps. Again, I’m sorry this happened,” he added. A spokesman for Woolwich Township confirmed that Martin was the subject of three integrity commissioner investigations last year. A request for comment from Martin was not received in time for publication.
