Kalivianakis: Concerning council agendas and policy related to DEI

Brenda Kalivianakis (Submitted photo)

A frequent question I am asked by many residents is, “Why does this council spend so much time on issues that do not affect the average citizen residing in Fountain Hills? There are many other relevant, pressing issues to deal with, so why are you guys always in the weeds?”   

It’s a fair question, and one I would like to address. An agenda item can be added to our schedule at the request of just one council member if two other council members agree. According to our town code, if those simple requirements are met, that item shall be placed on the agenda. There is no further test as to whether the item is sensible, a real problem, or will address constituents’ concerns. 

Regarding the recent DEI agenda item, it seems to me this was a solution in search of a problem. According to our town code, Article 3-2, addresses “The Merit System.” Section 3-2-1 A) states, “There is hereby created and adopted a merit system governing the employees of the town…” Section B) states, “No employee or applicant of employment shall be discriminated against on the basis of age, race, color, religion, gender, political affiliation, disability or impairment.” Placing the DEI policy onto last week’s agenda violates what I call the rule against redundancy. The policy is already in the books, so why duplicate it with another unneeded policy? In other words, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court gutted race-conscious admissions policies in higher education. DEI initiatives all over the country are affected by this ruling. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the ruling's majority opinion that "eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it," and he said he has had to tell those chief diversity officers that “change is likely coming.”

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.