On Tuesday night, the Scottsdale City Council voted 5-2 to adopt Ordinance No. 4662, effectively dismantling the department known as the Office of Diversity and Inclusion. This move has sparked intense debate both locally and across the region, raising questions about how local governments should balance equity initiatives with concerns over government overreach and taxpayer funds.
What Does Ordinance No. 4662 Do?
According to the council agenda, the newly adopted ordinance—titled “Merit-Based Employment and Discontinuation of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Programs”—has three core provisions:
- Merit-Based Hiring and Promotion:
The ordinance states that city employees must be hired, evaluated, and promoted solely on the basis of merit, to protect against “unlawful and anti-meritocratic forms of discrimination.” Supporters of this measure argue it safeguards taxpayers by ensuring the city employs only the most qualified candidates. - Discontinuation of DEI Systemic Programming:
All city-funded Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives—including the Office of DEI itself, DEI programming and trainings, and other related efforts—are to be discontinued. Proponents assert that these programs could violate state law (A.R.S. § 41.1494), while critics fear it marks a step backward for Scottsdale’s commitment to fostering an inclusive environment. - Reassignment of Staff and Restructuring:
The Diversity Program Director and the ADA/Title VI Compliance Coordinator will be reassigned to other departments, and the city’s organizational chart will be updated to reflect these changes. While supporters say this reorganization is a more efficient use of resources, detractors worry that it effectively disbands a vital support system for marginalized communities and individuals with disabilities.
The Broader Context: Anti-DEI Sentiment
The vote comes at a time when anti-DEI fervor, influenced by national political rhetoric dating back to the Trump administration, has led some cities and states to reevaluate or outright dismantle their DEI programs. Those who champion this ordinance believe it aligns Scottsdale with a broader shift toward “race-blind” policies, which they argue are more equitable and fiscally responsible.
However, opponents caution that removing a dedicated office and infrastructure around diversity and inclusion may erode accountability and reduce the city’s ability to address systemic issues—particularly those impacting racial and ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, and other historically underrepresented groups.
Community Reactions
Supporters:
- Fiscal Responsibility: Many supporters applaud the council for taking a stand against what they perceive as unnecessary bureaucratic costs. They argue the city should focus on core functions and rely on general anti-discrimination laws to protect employee rights.
- Merit Emphasis: By emphasizing merit-based employment, supporters say Scottsdale can continue to attract top talent while respecting the rights of all employees.
Critics:
- Rollback of Progress: Opponents see the vote as dismantling essential resources that have helped Scottsdale confront bias and create equitable opportunities for all residents. They fear that, without a dedicated office, issues of systemic discrimination will be overlooked.
- Symbolic Loss: For many, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion represented the city’s formal commitment to upholding inclusivity. Shuttering it sends a powerful message about the city’s changing priorities.
Potential Ramifications
- Legal Questions: Critics suggest that the ordinance’s vague references to potential state law violations might open the door to legal challenges or confusion about what constitutes a permissible diversity initiative.
- Employee Morale and Recruitment: Shifting away from DEI efforts could affect Scottsdale’s reputation as a welcoming place to work—especially for underrepresented groups who might have once viewed the city’s robust diversity office as a strong signal of support.
- Community Relations: As Scottsdale continues to grow and diversify, the absence of dedicated DEI programming may create friction with local advocacy groups, nonprofits, and civic organizations that rely on partnership and support from the city.
Looking Ahead
While the ordinance has officially passed, its long-term impact on Scottsdale’s culture and governance remains to be seen. The city will now be tasked with integrating ADA and Title VI compliance responsibilities into other departments and ensuring that unlawful discrimination is still prevented and addressed—without the explicit structures once provided by the Office of Diversity and Inclusion.
Ultimately, Scottsdale’s move reflects a deeper national debate about the role of local governments in proactively addressing social inequities. As other municipalities watch this unfolding situation, the outcome could shape how DEI initiatives are perceived and implemented elsewhere.