WATERLOO — “You should all be ashamed of yourself.”

Those were the last words the City Council heard from the public after repealing a ban on conversion therapy Monday, uttered by someone leaving the chambers. The council voted 4-3 to repeal the ban it instituted in May, with councilmembers Jonathan Grieder, Nia Wilder, and Belinda Creighton-Smith opposed.

The rules were suspended, so a third reading was waived. The suspension passed 6-1 with Creighton-Smith voting no. City Clerk Kelley Felchle said the ordinance will officially be repealed when Mayor Quentin Hart signs off and public notice is published.

Conversion therapy attempts to change an individual’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression to align with heterosexual norms.

In contrast to the previous meeting, a special session, more supporters of the ban spoke than opponents. David Dreyer was one of those who spoke in favor of the repeal.

“Why is anyone other than parents trying to determine the future, much less their gender?” he said. “So please take this ordinance off and stay out of parents’ rights.”

Eleven people urged the council not to repeal.

Grieder, who proposed the ordinance in March, pleaded with his counterparts to keep the ban in place.

“I ask, I beg with my colleagues, please do not repeal this ordinance,” he said. “To please protect a portion of our population that is under attack.”

“We can build cool bridges, new roads and new stores, but if folks are being abused none of that matters,” he continued. “We swore an oath to protect constituents. … Please do the right thing.”

Damian Thompson, the director of public policy and communication at Iowa Safe Schools – an organization that supports LGBTQ+ youths – traveled from Des Moines to speak at the meeting.

“Waterloo is the only city that repealed (a conversion therapy ban) proactively,” he later told The Courier. He said when cities such as New York City repealed a ban, it was due to a similar state law being enacted. A city in Florida repealed its ban after losing a district court case.

During last week’s special session, no reason for the repeal was given. Monday night, councilmembers and the mayor admitted it was due to a threat of a lawsuit.

“There’s been a threat of impending litigation moving forward, so it really puts people in a tough situation,” Hart said. “I don’t believe the Waterloo City Council are cowards; I believe they have a decision to make tonight.”

It is unknown what organization has threatened to sue or the basis for litigation.

Thompson said the lack of transparency from the city is “astounding.”

“This is probably one of the most disconcerting efforts (I’ve seen) to really avoid disclosing what’s really going on to constituents,” he said. “One councilmember was assured of loss in any future litigation. That’s a convenient conclusion to have … when you aren’t sharing information with your constituents.”

Thompson said his organization has a team of attorneys that says the ordinance was legally sound, and nothing has changed in state or federal law that would alter that interpretation.

Ward 1 Councilmember John Chiles, who voted to repeal the ordinance, said he did not run for public office to put the city under “a credible threat” of litigation it is “sure we cannot prevail” against.

“There are still methods, there are still things we can do, to help and prevent this from happening but … this is not the venue for this fight. The venue for this fight is elsewhere in this state,” he said. “I have never had chest pain until this week. This is just horrible. There’s nothing we can do.”

Chiles’ statements were met with groans and exasperation from the public.

“My sister’s gay, and she is probably gonna hate me for this,” he continued. “We are not the enemy here. We are not the ones they should be pointing their wrath toward. It’s the people who prevent us from being able to do anything about it. I’m sorry, but I have to vote with my duties as a council member.”

Before councilmembers made their remarks, resident Ally Heinsworth noted the city has paid out millions of dollars in lawsuits for issues related to the city’s police, engineering, and human resources departments. She said for those departments to be disbanded due to lawsuits would be “absurd.”

At-large Councilmember Dave Boesen, who has voted against the ordinance since its inception, said no matter what the council decided the ban would be repealed anyway.

“It’s going to be rescinded. It’s out of our hands,” he said. “We’re gonna be forced to rescind this and it just depends at what cost.”

Aliya Rahman, a resident who has often spoken in support of the ban, said those who voted to repeal the ordinance were too concerned about potential expense.

“The legal cost we might encounter is not as much of a financial burden as the inequality we have here,” Rahman said.

Resident Melissa Heying echoed that statement, saying councilmembers are probably worried about losing their homes, jobs and friendships.

“A lot of kids that are LGBTQ have had the same fears that they’ll be kicked out, that they’ll lose their support system,” Heying said. “One thing they shouldn’t lose is the ability to be themselves whether we agree with it or not.”

At-large Councilmember Rob Nichols said even with repeal, avenues to report instances of conversion therapy still exist.

He said the ordinance would allow someone to report the practice to the city attorney or human rights commission, but the commission doesn’t have investigative authority even with the ordinance, and the person issuing a complaint would be referred to the state’s Department of Health and Human Services or Bureau of Professional Licensure.

“That still stands in place without this ordinance,” he said. “To say that the removal of this ban takes away the initial or main thrust of our ordinance in the first place is not completely true.”

However, Thompson said the state Bureau of Licensure and Board of Medicine have previously not punished licensed professionals practicing conversion therapy.

A 2020 article from Iowa Capital Dispatch said in 2016 advocates for a ban on conversion therapy went to the Iowa Board of Medicine and the board declined to take action. Also in 2016, Des Moines television station WHO-13 reported the Board of Psychology supported banning conversion therapy but didn’t vote on it, saying it should happen through legislation instead.

“To try and pass the buck to the Board of Medicine, who has been very clear they won’t take this up, in order to pat yourself on the back to make yourself feel better, to wash your hands of it, is really unbelievable,” Thompson said.

Few residents who have undergone conversion therapy have made themselves known to the city. On Monday, two of them spoke up.

Twins Nick and Arthur Tripp were both subjected to conversion therapy by their parents. Arthur Tripp said they, along with five other area children, are now survivors. They feel it’s their duty to speak up.

“I am here, and (conversion therapy) does not work,” Arthur said.

Arthur’s sibling, Nick Tripp, disputed the argument the ban is an attack on parents’ rights.

“Unfortunately, not all parents always make the safest decision for their children,” Nick said.

They asked the council and the public to imagine what it would be like if their parents wanted to change their sexual orientation.

“It doesn’t feel great,” Nick said. “We’re not so different. We want to protect our children.”

Arguments about parents’ rights have flooded the council chambers since the ordinance was proposed in March. Most opposing the ban said the issue has divided the city. Chiles agreed.

“The whole situation is absolutely horrible,” he said. “It’s destroying the community. It’s putting us in a place when so many fantastic things are happening in our city that we’re still being held down by this.”

Many supporters argued the ban isn’t what created division.

Grieder said what is divisive is the people who have called him a Nazi, have driven by his house yelling slurs and have threatened him and his children.

Rahman agreed.

“Discrimination is what has always divided us, and the ban simply shed light on it for those not in the know,” Rahman said. “The goal of the conversion therapy movement is to prevent LGBTQ youth from becoming LGBTQ adults. Period. And so it is a costly attempt to exterminate our culture.”