Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pride Resolution topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents, faith leaders and a supervisor urge Kenosha County to revisit Pride Month resolution after it failed in committee
Summary
After committee rejection of a Pride Month resolution (item G9), dozens of residents, faith leaders and Supervisor Nez urged the Kenosha County Board to affirm LGBTQ+ residents’ safety and belonging; speakers criticized citing "Title Six" as a reason to block the measure and asked for the item to be heard by the full board.
Dozens of residents and community leaders urged the Kenosha County Board of Supervisors on Monday to reconsider a resolution recognizing June as Pride Month after the item (G9) failed in committee and was not taken up on the floor.
Grant Pittz, a Kenosha resident, said he was ‘‘confused’’ and ‘‘indignant’’ that the resolution did not advance and questioned the committee’s invocation of Title Six as justification for blocking the measure. He told the board: "I really struggle to see how a resolution recognizing June as Pride Month in Kenosha County is somehow out of alignment with Title Six."
Several speakers tied the vote to community safety and public health. An unnamed resident, citing data from public health organizations, said that LGBTQ+ youth face higher rates of depression and self-harm and warned that rejecting a formal recognition ‘‘sends a loud clear signal about who is valued in our community.’’ Arian Rana Ansac, a resident who said she lost a trans son to suicide, described the closure of a local LGBT center and urged supervisors to act because the recognition can ‘‘help people feel safe to live as they are.’’
Carolyn Felt, a former county human services employee, framed the resolution as consistent with county responsibilities, noting the board’s stewardship of county resources and saying a small gesture such as a proclamation or flag ‘‘says, ‘We see you. You belong here.’’’
Faith leaders also spoke in support. Wesley Isburner, pastor at Spirit Alive Lutheran Church, described the acceptance expressed by official recognition as lifesaving and asked supervisors to weigh the human impact of the committee’s decision.
Several speakers criticized a recurring argument that recognition of Pride Month constitutes reverse discrimination. Kelly Wallander called invoking ‘‘chapter 6’’ inconsistent with the chapter’s stated purpose of prohibiting discrimination and said that flying a Pride flag is not discriminatory. Steven Biggen Russell recounted prior county flag policy changes and said associating the Pride recognition with Title Six was ‘‘horrifying.’’
Supervisor Nez used the supervisors’ reports section to encourage colleagues to affirm and celebrate LGBTQ+ constituents, noting the historical significance of Stonewall and saying that recognition supports residents’ safety, dignity and well-being.
No board member made a floor motion during the meeting to revive or reconsider G9; the chair had announced earlier that G9 had failed in committee and would not be taken up that evening. Speakers asked that the resolution be returned to a committee or brought to the floor so supervisors could vote.
The meeting record shows the public comment period closed after multiple speakers supporting recognition. The board proceeded to routine business, including two unanimous appointments to county boards.
