Cole Stanley
In his brief tenure as mayor of the Panhandle capital, Stanley has managed to upset and surprise a whole range of constituents. Most notably, Stanley has been at the center of the citywide debate over a proposed abortion “travel ban” that would prohibit the use of streets and highways in Amarillo to obtain an abortion in a state where the procedure is legal.
Proponents of the ordinance expected Stanley, a Republican, along with the rest of the council to rubber stamp the proposal like so many other city leaders across Texas did. Opponents don’t think he’s done enough to squash the matter, which will be up for a citywide vote in November.
[…]
Stanley, 46, said he believes legislating anything related to abortion is above his grade.
“That’s just not my job,” he said in an interview with The Texas Tribune.
Texas lawmakers have already made abortion illegal in almost all instances. Various reports suggest more than 35,000 women have left the state to get an abortion, a fact that fuels the anti-abortion activists who pushed the ordinances in many rural towns and counties last year.
Amarillo, a city of 202,000 people, is a gateway to New Mexico and Colorado, two of the nearest states that allow abortion and have seen an influx of Texas women at their clinics. The city’s proximity made it a key target for the grassroots anti-abortion movement, which began focusing on these bans and other ways to limit abortion access in 2023, just as Stanley was elected mayor.
“I don’t think that was the kind of decision he thought he would be making when he was running for mayor,” said Harper Metcalf, co-founder of the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance.
Stanley — a conservative leader who ran on faith, family and freedom — rejected the ordinance after proponents signaled they were unwilling to compromise. Stanley was prepared to adopt a local policy that mirrored state law and defined Amarillo as a “sanctuary city” for the unborn but did not include the travel provisions.
Residents were surprised. For his part, Stanley handled the issue the same way he has many other issues that have crossed his desk. He keeps his even-tempered demeanor during meetings. He routinely checks if anyone else wants to address the council in public comment sessions — regardless of if it’s late in the evening and they didn’t sign up. Through this, the council has heard from women’s rights advocates, anti-abortion activists, doctors, lawyers, and every concerned citizen in between.
Stanley acknowledges that some voters might believe he’s abandoned his conservative values. He insists he hasn’t — a mayor has to think about the entire city, not just his own policy preferences.
“This has been a good test of if I can stay true to myself, and care more about others than I do myself,” Stanley said. “So far so good, but I’ve taken a few friendly arrows in the back along the way.”
[…]
Stanley tries to work at his actual job a few times a week, but being the mayor can be a full-time, unpaid job on its own, given the gravity of the role.
He’s spent even more time at City Hall since the anti-abortion ordinance was introduced. The council has been inundated with emails, calls and letters from both sides. Council duties feel heavier than a typical 40 hours at his job, he said.
“On construction sites, I don’t have a nine-hour meeting where I’m engaged with different sides trying to get the upper hand in a debate,” Stanley said.
There’s been no shortage of influential people weighing in from outside the city limits too.
Twenty state lawmakers voiced early support for it through a letter, and other municipal leaders have written letters to the council too. Meanwhile, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services this month to try to block a federal rule that protects the medical records of women from criminal investigation if she has an abortion in a state where it’s legal.
National women’s groups, including the Women’s March, have come out against it. And U.S. Senate candidate Colin Allred, a Dallas Democrat in Congress, stumped against it with the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance.
From the beginning of the debate, Stanley has been openly conflicted. He has said he personally opposes abortions and calls himself “pro-life.” However, he has been especially critical over the role the City Council should play. He believes in small government, and says this ordinance goes against that principle.
“It’s as big government as they come, in terms of jurisdictional overreach,” Stanley said.
Steve Austin, a spokesperson for the Sanctuary City for the Unborn Initiating Committee, said they’ve had a frustrating and disappointing experience working with Stanley and the council, aside from member Don Tipps. Tipps wanted the council to support the ordinance.
“We love Mayor Cole Stanley and the rest of the City Council, but they just really let us down,” Austin said in an emailed statement to the Tribune.
The so-called travel ban, which originally flipped the city upside down a year ago, is now weeks away from being decided by voters. Even after rejecting it, the council has still discussed the ordinance. The only difference is now, they’ve had to work out how to fit an 18-page ordinance on an election ballot so voters can be informed.
Metcalf, with the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance, said it would be better if the city wasn’t spending time, money and energy on the ballot proposition. However, she does think putting it on the ballot was the best the council, and Stanley, could do.
“He was put in a position where he had a difficult choice to make,” Metcalf said.
Austin, with the sanctuary city committee, said they don’t understand why the council rejected it. He suggested a campaign by local and national organizations may have played a role. Regardless, he says their mission is no longer to convince the mayor or the council, but to inform Amarillo voters.
It’s a long story and it starts with a wild tale about wrestling, so read the whole thing. I have no complaints with what Mayor Stanley and the Council did – there’s a process for putting items on the ballot in Amarillo as is the case with most cities, so once they did the right thing by voting down the SCFTU ordinance, it was out of their hands. I think the fact that they did vote it down is largely a testament to the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance and the fact that they had the better argument – this was an overreach, it was not needed, it couldn’t be enforced, it was a big infringement on individuals, and so on. I also get a sense of entitlement from the pro-forced birthers. They’re not used to being disagreed with by people they consider to be fellow travelers.
Anyway, as I said it’s worth your time to read. It’s also worth your time to listen to my interview with Lindsay London of ARFA, an organization that deserves your support. Winning this fight would be a very big deal.
