Show Thumbnails
Show Captions

A Springfield City Council committee has asked city legal staff to draft a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity that is stronger than a compromise suggested by a task force.

Based on a recommendation made by the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Task Force, the proposed ordinance would make it illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation and gender identity in the areas of housing, employment or public accommodations. It would also expand an exemption for religious organizations included in an original bill, which was tabled in August 2012.

Ask the Watchdog: Can a barber shop legally turn away a female customer?

MORE: Councilman: City shouldn't be leader on nondiscrimination bill

The task force recommendation not embraced by the council committee was seen as a compromise. It would have watered down the bill by removing provisions banning discrimination related to sexual orientation and gender identity in all areas except housing.

Councilwoman Cindy Rushefsky questioned whether the compromise recommendation could even be counted as progress, saying it "would not put Springfield anywhere in advance of where we are at this moment."

"That's kind of the impression that I have," she said.

The lunch meeting was the latest resurgence of one of the most controversial issues in the city in recent memory. In early 2012, the Mayor's Commission on Human Rights proposed adding gender identity and sexual orientation to the city's nondiscrimination ordinance. Heated public comment before council that summer resulted in the bill being tabled, and the task force being established. After meeting in the first half of 2013, the task force released its report in November. Today was the first time it was formally presented to council members.

While the typical committee meeting is fairly dry, Monday's presented a microcosm of the debate that has surrounded the issue. Rushefsky asked task force chair Miles Sweeney to present the group's recommendations, according to Sweeney, before requesting a "minority view" as well. Sweeney selected Dick Hardy, a former vice president at Central Bible College and consultant to the Assemblies of God, to speak. That prompted the task force to invite retired teacher David Trippe to comment as well, to provide opinions that often differ with those of Hardy.

Hardy began by telling the committee that — while it wasn't, in his opinion, a deliberate move — the task force never really had a balance of opinions.

"The 15 members shook out this way, in my view," Hardy said. "Eleven with socially liberal world views, three with socially conservative world views and one which I called a swing vote ... Hence the task force itself, in my opinion, was not a valid representation of the city of Springfield."

Hardy argued that while some members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community had described to the task force what they felt amounted to discrimination, the task force could not verify that any of it actually happened. While some compare the resistance to same-sex marriage to the resistance to interracial marriage, he said, that isn't a good comparison.

"The comparison to race ... is apples and oranges," he said. "Everyone in this room today can go home tonight, choose to take off their clothes and have sex with whoever we choose to have sex with. We are not robots. However, a black man can not go home at the end of the day and say I'm going to be white."

Hardy said he did not support the recommendation ultimately chosen by the council committee. He said it provides protection for religious institutions, but not so much for individuals acting in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Describing additional protections that are needed, Hardy said: "If a gay couple asks a photographer to take pictures of them as a couple in various intimate settings, a business owner could say no."

"There will be some that say, when is it right to discriminate?" Hardy added. "It's right to discriminate when you're being forced to participate in a moral belief that runs contrary to yours."

Trippe, who said he voted for the compromise bill, spoke positively of both recommendations.

"Do you want a class of citizens to be second class citizens?" he asked. "That's the fundamental question here."

The proposed ordinance, once drawn up, will return to the committee, which can then make additional changes or vote on whether to send it to the full council for public comment and a possible vote.

Time line of the issue

February 2012: The Mayor's Commission on Human Rights proposes adding gender identity and sexual orientation to the city's nondiscrimination ordinance.

"We're all unanimous about going forward with this," Kelly Johnson, vice-chair of the commission, says.

Currently, under the city's ordinance, discrimination based on race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, disability and sex is forbidden when it comes to housing, employment or public accommodations. In housing, discrimination based on familial status is also forbidden, and in employment, age discrimination between 40 and 69 years is forbidden.

August: Followed heated public comments, Springfield City Council votes 7-2, with councilmen Jerry Compton and Doug Burlison dissenting, to table the proposal. Plans are made for a city task force to study the issue.

October: Comments made by Rev. Phil Snider in support of the proposal at the Aug. 13 council meeting go viral after being shared by online news agencies and former Star Trek actor George Takei. His comments have been viewed millions of times on YouTube.

December: Members of the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Task Force are finalized.

February 2013: The task force meets for the first time.

"First we're gonna gather information about what other communities have done, how it's worked out other places, that sort of thing," Chairman Miles Sweeney. a retired Greene County circuit judge, says. "We're going to summarize that information for the benefit of City Council. We're going to identify options for City Council — there may be more options than just up or down (on the proposal) — and then we're going to prioritize those options and list the pros and cons."

March: The task force splits into three subcommittees to focus on broad topics: employment, public accommodations and housing, and health care and transgender issues.

April: At one meeting, Gerald Porter, a psychology professor, and Josh Castillo, a local health care worker who was born female before transitioning to male, addresses the group.

"Sex is our biological identity, male or female," Porter says. "Gender is about our sense of being male or female."

At a second meeting, members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender communities address the council.

"I haven't been to the gym in two months," one individual says. "Because if there's a confrontation with someone, I don't want to be pulled out onto the carpet to explain myself."

April 22: At a third meeting, Rev. John Lindell, of James River Assembly, emphasizes a need to express love — while at the same time equating homosexuality with greed, anger, gambling and chemical dependence.

"It's like if someone had a natural tendency to anger," he says. "They wouldn't be allowed to express that without restriction."

A letter signed by 23 pastors and Christian leaders is subsequently sent to the task force.

"Our hearts continue to break for the (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community of Springfield," the letter says. "As pastors and Christian leaders, we are deeply sorry for the ways Christianity is frequently used to hurt rather than heal, and we want you to know there are many of us in support of you."

June: A subcommittee for the task force reports that after surveying 182 businesses — including the city's 22 largest — about 54 percent said they would support the additions, while 31 percent said they would not and 15 percent offered no opinion.

Another survey finds that about 84 percent of the 56 churches surveyed were opposed to an ordinance — 79 percent said they would still oppose an ordinance even if the task force could show discrimination.

November: In a report, the Springfield Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Task Force recommends that City Council pass an ordinance only guarding against discrimination in housing — and warns against a public vote on any ordinance.

To hold a vote, it says, could create a public rift and harm the city's reputation.

However, in a second recommendation, the task force backs broader protections for gays and lesbians that would ban discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations, provided the ordinance contain strong religious exemptions.

The housing-only ordinance recommendation is favored by the task force 12-3. The broader ordinance is favored 9-6.

Read or Share this story: