A yard sign encouraging people to vote against an amendment that would require all city work to be done in English is shown Jan. 15, 2009, in Nashville, Tenn. Nashville voters will decide Thursday, Jan. 22. (AP Photo/Juanita Cousins)
(AP)
Nashville voters rejected a proposal to make English the mandatory language for all government business, easing fears that the measure could damage the city's reputation and cost agencies millions in federal funding.
With 100 percent of precincts reporting early Friday morning, unofficial results showed the "English First" proposal losing with about 57 percent of voters against it and 43 percent in favor. Proponents said using one language would have united the city and saved money.
The city would have become the nation's largest to pass such a measure. Similar measures have passed elsewhere, though business leaders, academics, the city's mayor and Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen opposed the "English First" proposal, which the governor has previously called "mean-spirited."
"The results of this special election reaffirms Nashville's identity as a welcoming and friendly city, and our ability to come together as a community," Mayor Karl Dean said in a news release.
The referendum's leader, city Councilman Eric Crafton, had promoted it as a way to unite Nashville and prevent the kind of extensive translation services — and the associated expenses — provided by cities like New York or Los Angeles. He has pushed for English only since 2006 and got the issue before voters through a petition drive.
"I support the collective wisdom of the voters. I am not going to bring English up again because the people of Nashville have spoken," Crafton said during a phone interview late Thursday.
It wasn't clear exactly how much translation would have been silenced had the measure passed. While it called for all government communication and publications to be printed in English, it would have allowed an exception for public health and safety.
Detractors also said the English First policy may not have survived a court challenge because Title VI of the Civil Rights Act requires agencies that receive federal dollars to provide free translation services.
Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.
