Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Inclusion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bangor City Council reaffirms commitment to be “welcoming, open and supportive” after extended public comment
Summary
The Bangor City Council unanimously passed Resolve 25‑074, a resolution reaffirming the city’s commitment to being welcoming and supportive for all residents. Dozens of residents testified both for and against the measure during an extended public comment period.
The Bangor City Council on Feb. 10 unanimously approved Resolve 25‑074, a resolution “reaffirming Bangor’s commitment to be a welcoming, open and supportive community for all,” following more than an hour of public comment from residents and representatives of the city’s advisory committee on racial equity, inclusion and human rights.
Supporters told the council the resolution matters because some residents — including immigrants, LGBTQ people and people experiencing homelessness — have said they feel threatened or unwelcome. The advisory committee’s Katie Brighton urged passage, saying the measure “reflects the very principles that guide our work” and asked the council to “please pass this resolution.”
The debate illustrated differing views in the community about whether a formal reaffirmation is needed and whether it risks any implications for free‑speech protections. Justin Cartier, introduced in public comment as a Bangor resident, asked, “Who is gonna be the arbiter of what is misinformation?” expressing concern about language in the draft that mentioned misinformation and disinformation. Other speakers, including Pamela Brew Curry of the Maine Multicultural Center, described local refugees and immigrants calling the center with fear about their legal status and urged the council to provide reassurance.
Several speakers recounted incidents and local history to explain why a formal statement matters. Dylan, who identified themself as transgender and a Bangor small‑business owner, described past violence against trans people in the city and said the resolution “makes a proactive statement about what we are about as a city.” Bridal Davidson referenced known demonstrations by people carrying racist banners and wrote that “we need to show that these values are not simply idle words.”
Opponents or skeptical speakers argued the resolution was unnecessary or vague. Colleen O’Neil told the council she did not believe “there’s a resolution that needs to say this” and warned that policies intended to limit harmful speech could risk First Amendment litigation. Suzette Ferrer said she viewed parts of the public debate as a “political circus” and urged the council to prioritize drug prevention.
Council discussion touched on those concerns while emphasizing the council’s ability to take multiple actions at once. Councilor Lennox referenced constitutional protections and the limits of local action in that arena, and Councilor Dean argued that a city that “attracts what they celebrate” should affirm inclusive values. Several councilors said passage of the resolution did not single out any specific group by name but intended to signal inclusion to anyone who felt threatened or marginalized.
After the public comments and a short council discussion, the council moved, seconded and approved Resolve 25‑074 without objection.
The passage leaves the resolution in effect as a formal, symbolic statement of the city’s stated values. The council did not adopt any new enforcement mechanism or change ordinances as part of the vote; no implementation actions or new city regulations were attached to the resolution in the meeting record.
