Michigan City Rejects Equality-Votes Down Anti-discrimination Ordinance


Jackson tank

8/23/09-by Paula Brooks
In a vote last Tuesday, the Jackson, Michigan City Council rejected a civil rights ordinance that would have protected citizens of that city from discrimination in housing, employment and public services based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or HIV status.

Jackson, located about 40 miles west of Ann Arbor, touts itself as the birthplace of the Republican Party. It has a population of about 36,000 residents.

The vote was 5 to 2, with some Council members saying they rejected the ordinance because they had not heard from enough constituents supporting the legislation, and others cited concerns for the impact on business the ordinance would have had.

The Jackson ordinance, similar to those currently in place in 17 other Michigan cities, including Grand Rapids, Detroit, Lansing and Ann Arbor, was supported by the Jackson Human Relations Commission, which has been trying to put a civil rights ordinance on the books in Jackson for a decade.

In 2002 the legislation was also defeated because of the city councils concerns about its sexual orientation provisions and how it would affect businesses

jacksonUnder the ordinance, a business found guilty of violating the ordinance is subject to a fine of $500 a day, as well as back wages and legal fees, but the measure also provided exemptions for religious organizations.

During the nearly 45 minutes of testimony about the ordinance, about 35 people were heard, with some of those in opposition to the law expressing concerns that it would unfairly impact business and others arguing it could also provide an opportunity for “predators” to follow women and children into bathrooms.

Similar ordinances are still in limbo in both Hamtramck and Kalamazoo.

Despite the defeat, some supporters of the ordinance say they were ready to push the issue in a public ballot initiative. Only about 400 signatures of Jackson voters would be needed to put the issue to a vote.

“It’s an option I am not thrilled about, but it’s something that is still on the table,” said Kathleen Conley, who chairs the Human Relations Commission.

Wednesday night, in a special meeting, of the commission members vowed to continue the fight to get the city to pass the anti-discrimination ordinance and said they would look at trimming the legislation down, and organizing the community in support of the ordinance before taking it back to the council.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Related Posts with Thumbnails

2 Comments

  1. torqueflite

    The phony “bathrooms” argument dates all the way back to Anita Bryant. Many municipalities have passed these ordinances, and there is not a single published instance of bathroom “predators” resulting from equal protection of gay people in those cities.

  2. I think this is disgusting and a reflection of the fact that our own federal government fails us in its inability to pronounce on our validity. Everything is such a battle.

Leave a Reply