JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS MISSOULA CITY COUNCIL APRIL 12, 2010
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting of the Missoula City Council was called to order by Mayor Engen at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at 140 West Pine Street. Present were Alderwomen Hellegaard, Marler, Mitchell, Rye, and Walzer and Aldermen Childers, Haines, Houseman, Jaffe, Strohmaier, Wiener and Wilkins. Also present were Chief Administrative Officer Bender, City Attorney Nugent, Finance Director Ramharter, Public Information/ Communications Officer Merriam and City Clerk Rehbein.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of the regular meeting of April 5, 2010 were approved as submitted.
SCHEDULE COMMITTEE MINUTES
The following meetings were announced:
No Meeting Plat, Annexation and Zoning Committee (PAZ) Wed., April 14, 2010, 10:30 –11:30 AM Administration and Finance Committee (A&F) Wed., April 14, 2010, 10:05 - 10:30 AM Public Works (PW) Wed., April 14, 2010, 8:15 – 9:00 AM Public Safety and Health (PSH) Wed., April 14, 2010, 9:05 – 10:00 AM Conservation Committee (Cons) Mon., April 19, 2010, after City Council meeting Committee of the Whole (COW) No meeting Budget Committee of the Whole (BCOW) No meeting Economic Development Subcommittee (EDS) No meeting Urban Wildlife Subcommittee (UWS) No meeting EIS Peer Review Subcommittee
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Jim Berkey, Community Food and Agriculture Coalition (CFAC), said this group seeks to address community needs related to food and agriculture in a comprehensive, systematic and creative way. CFAC‘s formation and mission was supported and ratified by Missoula City and County resolution in March, 2005. Last week CFAC released a report on the state of agriculture in Missoula County entitled ―Losing Ground: The Future of Farms and Food in Missoula County.‖ The report was a result of over two years of data collection synthesis and it‘s release couldn‘t be timelier. In the last 25 years Missoula County has lost 29,000 acres of working farms and ranch lands, along with agricultural heritage and opportunity for region self-reliance they support. The window remains to create a legacy of thriving farms and ranches while keeping alive the chances for Missoulians to choose a diet of healthy local food. People can find the full report through a link on the Executive Summary on their website. Mr. Berkey asked for some of the Council‘s time in front of the Plat, Annexation and Zoning Committee sometime soon so they can discuss the report and some of its recommendations. CFAC looks forward to the dialogue and the good work ahead of them to create a healthy, vibrant future for our local agriculture and local economy.
Kandi Matthew-Jenkins continued with the flip-side of Child Protective Services and Senator Nancy Schaffer who was from Georgia was found shot to death in her home. Senator Schaffer was involved in many Christian causes such as ending abortions, stopping same-sex marriage; she was the president for Family Concerns and a daily commentator on an Atlanta Christian radio, Vice-President of the Georgia Baptist Convention, trustee of Tobacco Falls College, Republican nominee for Lt. Governor of Georgia, President of Eagle Forum and Eagle Forum National Chairman for Parents Rights. She continued to read Senator Schaffer‘s research and expose on the fraudulent flip-side of Child Protective Services. Ms. Matthew-Jenkins said she left last week‘s Council meeting with information that Senator Schaffer had been working with the grandmother, trying to get her grandchildren back and the children were sent to be with their father who was in the adult entertainment business. The following notes written by Ms. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 2
Schaffer‘s notes were read into the record: ―Within a couple of days the father was knocking on the grandmother‘s door and took the girls kicking and screaming to California. The father developed an unusual relationship with the former foster parents and soon moved back to the southeast. And the foster parents began driving to the father‘s residence and picking up the girls for visits. The oldest child had told her mother and grandmother on two different occasions that the foster father had molested her. To this day, after five years, this loving, caring blood relative grandmother does not even have visitation privileges with the children. The little girls are, in my opinion, permanently traumatized and the young mother of the girls was so traumatized with the shock when the girls were first removed from her that she has not recovered. Throughout this case and through the process of dealing with multiple other mis- managed cases of the Department of Family Services I have worked with other desperate parents and children across the state because they have no rights and no one to turn to. I have witnessed ruthless behavior from many caseworkers, social workers, investigators, lawyers, judges, therapists and others such as those who pick up the children. I have been stunned by what I have seen and heard from victims all over the state of Georgia. In this report I am focusing on the Georgia Department of Family Services, however, I believe Child Protection Services nationwide has become corrupt and the entire system is broken almost beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.‖ Ms. Matthew-Jenkins said she will continue this report next week.
Mike Halvorson said he was at the City Council six years ago and had spoken about owning M&M on Brooks Street. He lost his business license because his sign was two feet too high. Six years ago he said the Bonner Mill would close and it did and he had said, ―God forbid Stone Container ‗s going to close‖ and it did. Roscoe Steel and Rail Link now have laid people off. He talked about a roundabout that the City put in that cost a lady $75,000. There are hundreds of empty commercial buildings in Missoula because of the difficulty as a business person. He‘s paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in employee taxes, insurances and had to deal with the City. Take into consideration jobs which is what is needed in Missoula. Get companies to come to Missoula and start worrying about the people that need employment because that‘s what will make people grow. He had told the Council what was going to happen and they did nothing about it. They continued with the bike paths, etc. How are 80-year-old people going to pay for the taxes and their houses when spending is continuing in a down economy? The Governor today had said that we need to drop the rent on the buildings we rent from landlords.
CONSENT AGENDA (1 ROLL CALL VOTE)
1. Approve claims totaling $258,118.66. (Detailed Claims) (Chart of Accounts) (A&F) (04/13/2010) 2. Appoint Solomon Martin as the southwest area representative on the Historic Preservation Commission for the term commencing immediately and ending on December 31, 2013. (PAZ) 3. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the settlement agreement pertaining to the litigation filed between the parties Stockyard Road Investments LLC vs. City of Missoula et. al., Cause No. DV-10- 95, filed in the Montana Fourth Judicial District Court. (PAZ) 4. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign amendment no. 7 to the City/HKM Engineering, Inc. agreement for the Russell Street / South 3rd Street – Environmental Impact Statement Project in the amount not to exceed $83,478 contingent upon the city attorney‘s and Montana Department of Transportation‘s concurrence. (PW) 5. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement for professional services to DJ&A, P.C., for Lower Miller Creek road right-of-way acquisition in the amount not to exceed $18,147.50. (PW)
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Ms. Rehbein. Anyone in the audience care to comment on any of the items on the consent agenda this evening? Seeing none, are there any questions or comments from Council members? Seeing none, we‘ll have a roll call vote on the consent agenda.
Upon a roll call vote, the vote on the consent agenda was as follows:
AYES: Childers, Haines, Hellegaard, Houseman, Jaffe, Marler, Mitchell, Rye, Strohmaier, Walzer, Wiener, Wilkins
NAYS: None City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 3
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Motion carried: 12 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Abstain, 0 Absent
COMMENTS FROM CITY STAFF, AGENCIES, COMMISSIONS, AUTHORITIES, AND COMMUNITY FORUM - None
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Missoula Diversity Day
Mayor Engen proclaimed April 12, 2010 as Missoula Diversity Day.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public hearing on an ordinance of the Missoula City Council, amending Missoula Municipal Code Title 9 Public Peace, Morals and Welfare to add chapter 9.64 entitled ―Illegal Discrimination‖ generally prohibiting discriminatory practices in the areas of employment, public accommodations and housing on the basis of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, creed, sex, age, marital or familial status, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or military veteran; and amending section 2.94.030 entitled ―Percent for Art Program Established‖ section 5.82.080 entitled ―Nondiscrimination‖ section 9.12.010 entitled ―Housing Discrimination Declared Unlawful‖ and section 12.58.100 entitled ―Exceptions.‖ (Ordinance Draft 4—redline/strikeout version—04/10/2010) (Ordinance Draft 4--04/09/2010) (Legal Opinion 2010- 008) (memo) (A&F)
Mayor Engen said, typically, ladies and gentlemen, we have…pardon me, I have a little bit of a cold…typically, ladies and gentlemen, we have a staff report from one of our staff but we have a number of folks sponsoring this legislation this evening so we‘ll have presentations from those folks to begin with as part of our staff report and in the interest of fairness, I had a request from folks who have led some of the efforts in opposition of the ordinance and I‘ve offered them time to speak as well in opposition to the ordinance in response to that staff support, and then we will conduct our public hearing where you all will be invited up and we‘ll talk to you a little bit about how we are going to proceed then, as well. So, with that, ladies and gentlemen, my recollection is that Ms. Rye was going to begin our staff report this evening.
Alderwoman Rye said, just to let you know for people who haven‘t been here before, I‘ve been talking for hours in this Chamber over the past six years every week and I‘m scared to death. So I just wanted to let you know that this is the most packed we‘ve ever seen it. Thank you all for coming. Tonight Dave Strohmaier and I are introducing an ordinance that would add sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression to our already existing illegal discrimination law. Missoula protects on the basis of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, creed, marital or family status and disability. Most of this is reflected in state and federal law but right now sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression are not in state or federal law. This ordinance would extend equality and protection to sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. We join hopefully tonight 129 other cities, 21 states in the District of Columbia in amending this shortsightedness. I want to talk a little bit about what‘s in the ordinance because there‘s been quite the coverage of it in the news and all over the internet which seems to bring us information a lot faster than it used to. For public accommodations…public accommodations I want to address some of the myths that have arisen and one of those is the idea of bathrooms. There is nothing in this ordinance about bathrooms. This is just not true and it has to be a smoke screen of some kind. There are no laws right now governing who can use which bathroom. In spite of this, common sense seems to have prevailed over the years and we have not had chaos in our bathrooms as yet. The proposed ordinance, in terms of public accommodations, does not change any criminal laws, local, state City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 4 or federal. Nothing in the proposed ordinance permits or requires access to any place for the public accommodation for the purpose or intent of engaging in criminal conduct. And there is no evidence that we could find in the other 129 cities of any outbreak of crime after laws like this have passed in other cities. What this is about is not denying services like restaurants or hardware stores based on sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. The housing section is about giving equal footing for people with a different sexual orientation and gender identity or gender expression. Housing would not be able to be denied if this were to pass on the basis of being gay, lesbian, bi-sexual or transgendered the same way housing today cannot be denied on the basis of race or sex or any of the other protected classes. While landlords retain the right to make reasonable requirements with respect to references, credit they may not make rental decisions based on actual or perceived race, sex, disability and hopefully sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. I‘ve heard that businesses would be hurt in Missoula from lots of folks that live outside of Missoula. In spite of state and federal protection…in spite of the lack of state and federal protections on the basis of employment for sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression lots of businesses already have those protections in place. Wal-Mart and Costco are but two in Missoula that already have those protections. Finally, I wanted to say that civil rights are about responding to a history of discrimination, who you are, who you love shouldn‘t be a hazard to your employment or cause you to be denied housing or services from businesses like restaurants or hardware stores. When a person is denied employment or housing, they‘re denied equal footing and there is a need to make that discrimination illegal. It was not too long ago that one group of people in our country could be legally denied the right to housing simply because it was in a white neighborhood or another group of people, namely women, could be offered only secretarial jobs even if they had a law degree. I wanted to say that Missoula is a wonderful place and tonight one piece, this is one piece, of Missoula showing that it is an open and safe space. And I would like to hand it over to Dave Strohmaier.
Alderman Strohmaier said, thank you, Stacy, and thanks to everyone who came out tonight to share your thoughts on this ordinance which I think is an important step, indeed a historic step for the City of Missoula. I want to begin by talking just for a few minutes about the framework of the ordinance, talk a little bit about the origin of the ordinance and then spend a few minutes talking about some of the concerns that I‘ve heard, that many of us have heard, related to the ordinance in relation to Constitutional rights and religious issues. So first off, and the Mayor in reading the title of the ordinance hit on many of these points but it‘s fairly simple. There are two main sections of this ordinance. First, there‘s a new chapter, Chapter 9.64 of Missoula Municipal Code being added to existing city ordinance. This sets an umbrella and a policy statement and a legal framework for discrimination and nondiscrimination in the City of Missoula. That section contains a purpose and intent section, a definition section, individual sections prohibiting discrimination in employment, public accommodation, housing and private educational institutions. There‘s a section prohibiting retaliation against individuals who make a complaint or alleged violations of the ordinance. There‘s a section that deals with posting requirements and violations. In terms of violations of this ordinance, and there seems to be maybe a little misunderstanding or confusion relating to that, that‘s currently proposed violations of portions of this ordinance not already covered by Montana state law are considered civil violations under the jurisdiction of the Missoula Municipal Court. What that means is the City of Missoula for the first through third offense are not going to be prosecuting cases. You would have to, if you feel like you have been violated in some way and then someone has violated the provisions of this ordinance, you would have to retain your own legal counsel and file a complaint with the Missoula Municipal Court. If the claim of the plaintiff is found to be frivolous, unreasonable or factually groundless, the defendant may collect attorney fees. If an individual is found to have violated any portion of the chapter three or more times during a 12-month period, the fourth offense may be charged and prosecuted as a misdemeanor violation punishable by a $500 fine and that would fall into the lap of City prosecution at that point. So that‘s the first main chunk of this ordinance that establishes a new antidiscrimination chapter. The second part of the ordinance, which contains a number of individual parts, amends existing City of Missoula Municipal Code that already contains language related to antidiscrimination and delineates the list of protected classes contained in federal or state law. So for instance we amend the Percent for Art Program chapter, that‘s 2.94.030. I received a comment the other day that someone was taking exception with there being a Percent for Art program. We‘re not establishing a Percent for Art program tonight, we‘re amending the classes that are listed as protected in that ordinance. There‘s language that we‘re amending and the Cable Television City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 5
Franchise section of Municipal Code, that‘s Chapter 5.82.080. We‘re amending language in the housing discrimination section 9.12.010 and there‘s an exception section also. The origin of the ordinance. I think as we‘ll hear from others tonight discrimination is a very real and present issue in the City of Missoula based on sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. There have been those who have articulated doubts about that but I think you will hear overwhelming testimony tonight that discrimination is real and does exist in Missoula. There was a very fortuitous energy of efforts that came together last fall, both Stacy Rye and myself individually began looking at the possibility of adopting an antidiscrimination ordinance for Missoula, Montana. At that time we learned that other folks in the state and here in Missoula were also interested so we joined forces with the Montana Human Rights Network, the ACLU, and found support with many of our community members and folks who we represent in our wards here in Missoula. So I‘m glad that we‘re here tonight with this ordinance. There‘s been some discussion as far as why don‘t we refer this to voters through a referendum, through an initiative process potentially or simply the Council referring it to the voters. My thought on that is I think this body before you tonight, each of us individually, were elected as representatives, we have a representative form of government here in the City of Missoula and indeed at the state and federal level for that matter. We‘ve been elected to make hard choices. This is one of the hard choices that is before us. For me it‘s not that hard of a choice and because of that I feel like this is something that I can absolutely get behind and I think it is our responsibility here to deal with it. A few misconceptions that I want to address here quickly. First, there have been concerns that this ordinance will infringe upon or abridge other constitutional rights, particularly rights related to exercise of religion. The Montana Constitution at Article 2, Section 5 provides that, and I quote, ―The state shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the exercise thereof. The first amendment to the United States Constitution also provides that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.‖ This ordinance does not infringe upon the free exercise of religion. To make that absolutely clear we have included some amended language that if you have copies of the latest version of the draft, in the purpose and intent section the final paragraph makes absolutely clear that this ordinance does not abridge free exercise of religion. And I‘ll read this paragraph to you to make sure that you all have it in mind when you make your comments, particularly if you don‘t have a copy of the ordinance before you. The paragraph I‘m speaking of states ―Nothing in this chapter‖ that is the ordinance before us tonight ―is intended to alter or abridge other rights, protections or privileges secured by state or federal law including state and federal constitutional protection of freedom of speech and exercise of religion.‖ So what does that mean? When it comes to hiring a pastor, a Sunday school teacher or other individual responsible for activities directly related to religious doctrine, the faith community is protected under the First Amendment to hire whoever they wish. I‘ll say that again, they are protected under the First Amendment to hire whoever they wish. Will the ordinance require anyone to perform same-sex marriage? Absolutely not. It doesn‘t even address marriage. Furthermore, Section 7 of the Montana Constitution, Article 8 states, and I quote ―Only marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognizes marriage in this state.‖ So no local government has the authority to alter Montana‘s Constitution. Even if same-sex marriage was permissible, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution would not require faith communities to perform same-sex marriage if doing so is counter to that faith community‘s doctrine and theology. With that, I thank everyone for coming and I look forward to hearing from folks tonight and unless Stacy has some additional comments, that would end my comments on the ordinance.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Mr. Strohmaier. We wanted to hear from Ms. Zupanic.
Alderman Strohmaier said, yeah, Niki Zupanic from the ACLU.
Niki Zupanic, Public Policy Director, ACLU of MT, said, I appreciate the opportunity to address you this evening. I also appreciate over the last few weeks the deliberation and the thoughtfulness that this body has shown. I‘ve had a chance to speak personally with quite a few of the members of the Council, to trade emails with even more of you and hopefully to address some of the concerns or questions that you had as this ordinance was drafted and redrafted and heard in committee and now brought before you tonight. I feel as if I‘ve had the opportunity to share with you a lot of answers to some of the questions that you have but with that said I am happy to respond to any other questions that come up tonight, especially to any of the latest amendments that we have included into this ordinance as Council member Strohmaier mentioned especially the clarification of First Amendment protections under this ordinance. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 6
What I‘d like to do with the time that I have tonight is to share with you why the ACLU of Montana, why are members who are residents of the City of Missoula worked so hard for LGBT inclusive nondiscrimination laws. At their heart, nondiscrimination laws are a statement that decisions about employment, about housing, about the selling of goods or serving the public that those decisions shouldn‘t be based on personal characteristics that are not related to a person‘s merit, to the person‘s experience or the person‘s worth. Nondiscrimination laws protect against arbitrary and unfair decisions. And the characteristics that are typically protected, race, gender, age, religion, there are reasons why we historically protect against discrimination that is based on those characteristics. Those traits are inherent. They are immutable. If they could be changed, we don‘t ask them to be changed, as in the case of religion and there‘s a history of discrimination and marginalization that people with those characteristics have been subject to. At the end of the day the only question that really should be before you with this ordinance is whether or not the LGBT community belongs in that group of people who are protected. In the grand scheme of things this ordinance is not breaking new ground. The Montana Human Rights Act, state law already on the books, already gives us the what of this ordinance and the how of this ordinance. The what, that you can‘t discriminate in areas of employment, housing, public accommodations. The how, that‘s someone who feels that he or she has been discriminated against has an opportunity to make a complaint for there to be fact finding and for an impartial person to make a final decision. We‘re also not breaking new ground as more than 120 cities and counties have adopted LGBT inclusive protections which paves the way for the who part of this ordinance. And many of those laws and ordinances have been in place for 10, 15 or more years giving us their experience as a road map for how this law can work in Missoula. So in many ways this ordinance is no big deal but for those who have been told no for decades, who have been told that state and federal laws do not protect you, who have been told that the discrimination and the exclusion that you face is okay, who have been told that you are not welcome here. For those people this ordinance is a very big deal. And for every Missoula resident who believes in fairness and equality, who believes in fostering a welcome inclusive community, who says that this kind of discrimination should not be allowed, who says that leaving the LGBT community out of our nondiscrimination laws is not to be done in their name, for all of those citizens of Missoula this is a very big deal. Again, I thank you for the weeks, months of thoughtful discussion and deliberation that you‘ve already had on this ordinance and if it‘s not too presumptuous I thank you for your yes vote on this ordinance tonight. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Ms. Zupanic and finally Mr. Greer.
Jamee Greer, Montana Human Rights Network, said, members of the City Council, thank you so much for your time and your patience during…through this whole process. For several months the Montana Human Rights Network, along with Forward Montana, Montana Women Vote, the WYCA of Missoula, Montana Equality Now and the ACLU of Montana have organized around the ordinance that the 12 of you are discussion tonight. We know there‘s strong support for this ordinance from the Missoula community, including by many of the people here tonight, who are here tonight to be proponents and testify before you. Because of this I‘m going to try to keep my comments as brief as possible. Following the kick-off of our organizing campaign to pass what we hope is Montana‘s first local nondiscrimination ordinance in February, the Network working closely with our allies at Forward Montana and Montana Equality Now has organized a strong group of volunteers, interns and members together almost 3,200 signatures from Missoulians who are supportive of policy that protects members of the gay, lesbian, bi- and trans- community from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodation. Our volunteers are members and our coalition partners have worked over the past months to gather these signatures of support and have had 3,200 conversations about equality with their neighbors, your friends and your constituents. Support for this is strong. This here is just a little bit less than half of the petitions that we‘ve raised. I‘m not sure where I need to be submitting them to but I can pass them up to the front. There will be more submitted throughout the course of the evening. Many community organizations have come forward in support of this ordinance, a diverse group that shows our community strong support. The Poverello Center, HomeWORD, Women‘s Opportunity and Resource Development, Inc., the Missoula Area Central Labor Council which includes over a dozen unions in its membership, Montana Fair Housing, Partnership Health Center, Blue Mountain Clinic, the Jeanette Rankin Peace Center and the Western Montana Community Center just to name a few. And new groups have formed as a response to the misinformation and fear directed at the ordinance and its opponents. One of these new City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 7 groups…by the opponent…one of these new groups supporting the ordinance was started by hundreds of Missoulians in the faith community and they call themselves Flush the Fear. We‘ve had great support from members of the business community, including Suzanne Peterson who‘s co-owner of Quality Supply, a local-owned ranch and home supply store, with locations across Western Montana who wrote a letter I‘m delivering tonight on her behalf because she couldn‘t be here. Here‘s a couple of lines I‘d like to read to you from her letter. ―We worked hard to raise our children with tolerance and acceptance for those who are different from us and we look forward to seeing those same values passed onto our grandson. Part of that process is to raise them in a community that shows tolerance and acceptance of others. One of the best things about Missoula is its diversity. ― The ordinance…this ordinance would support this diversity and make Missoula an even better place to live, work and raise a family. After the previous months of organizing around this ordinance and following plenty of media and input at two public hearings and various other public events, I believe the position of the Montana Human Rights Network, our membership and our supporters should be clear. We believe the Missoula Public Policy. We believe that Missoula Public Policy should reflect its values. All who live or work in Missoula and all who visit the Garden City deserve to be treated with dignity, respect and humanity. We ask that you pass the illegal discrimination ordinance tonight. I‘ve refrained from discussing my personal history or sharing my own story during this campaign but tonight I kind of wanted to share what happened to me when I came out to my father as a gay man. I was born and raised in Gallatin County and I came out pretty young and it might surprise a lot of you to hear about an 8th grader coming out at Chief Joseph Middle School in Bozeman, Montana but it did happen. It was me. I met resistance from my peers, my teachers and others, and I‘m not here to share my stories of discrimination. What I am here to say is my father‘s reaction. My father, just so we have this out, would classify himself as a conservative. He grew up in a Southern Baptist Church and he‘s a veteran. Demographically he‘s not what many of us would consider someone who‘s supportive of the LGBT community to be, but when he heard his only son was gay, his response was that he was proud of me, that he loved me and that he was afraid. And I asked him why are you afraid? And his response was that he knew that my life was going to be more difficult as a gay man, that I was going to face discrimination and hardship and his words were an uphill battle. And that‘s why we‘re here today. That‘s why our coalition is here today. That‘s why the people who‘ve supported this ordinance, organizations and the 3,200 people who have signed these petitions are here today. Thank you so much.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Mr. Greer. And that concludes our staff report this evening. Mr. Nash and Mr. Himes, you have the floor. You can just bring those up here, Jamie.
Bob Luceno said, I‘ve been a Missoula resident for 32 years. I live at 4001 Creek Crossing. I‘m a former Missoula City Council representative, representing Ward 3. This is not easy for me to do tonight, fellow Missoulians, fellow citizens. This is not easy at all. And you are exactly right, Mayor Engen, when you said that. I risk possibly friendships following my words tonight. I don‘t hate anybody. I much prefer to bring smiles to people‘s faces than frowns. Anybody that knows me knows that to be true. People who speak in opposition tonight to this ordinance are not hateful people. They‘re reasonable, thoughtful citizens who care a great deal for our City and for all of our fellow citizens. We respect your office and we pray for you all on a regular basis. We respect your authority. I come tonight as a citizen to state my opposition to this shrewdly crafted ordinance that in my opinion has been effectively drafted by out-of- state interests, maybe the ACLU, I‘m not sure. The prior gentleman said there is strong support in the City for this ordinance. I believe there‘s very strong opposition in the City for this ordinance. The latest count, as I understand as of today is that the Council and City Hall has received 439 letters and emails against this ordinance to 179 letters and emails for the ordinance, approximately. Actually what‘s really to discuss here tonight I was thinking to myself over the weekend. Really what is there to discuss? By sheer coincidence a proclamation was read before this public hearing brought by after-hours Flagship Missoula students, not representing School District 1 officially but nonetheless by students who I‘m told were invited to Caras Park or who wanted to go to Caras Park and who marched here with others. That‘s their right. The Montana Human Rights Network has weighed in. A proclamation has been read. What‘s really to discuss? This proposed antidiscrimination ordinance language, in my opinion, is very craftily engineered with an artful sophistry and I say that because it seems very cleverly sandwiched in and among noble civil rights images. What the vast majority of Americans and Montana regard as self- destructive, deviant and dysfunctional behaviors have been cloaked among iconic civil rights images like City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 8 race, color, creed and the disabled, veterans. Who can argue with that? I thought this weekend would Ralph Abernathy be here tonight? Would Martin Luther King be here? Would JFK? Would LBJ? What would they say? How would they feel? Is it a civil rights issue or not? I don‘t recall a single statement, at least publicly by any of these heroes of the civil rights movement that referred to the special interest groups we‘re talking about tonight that are cloaked in these iconic images, that brings civil rights memories to all of us. The ordinance language and the proclamation ceremony tonight infers it‘s in fact almost our patriotic duty to affirm and protect what the majority of Americans and Montanans consider a self-destructive lifestyle. I don‘t wish anyone harm and just because I disagree with a person‘s lifestyle behind their closed walls if they choose to have a dysfunctional lifestyle, including me, I don‘t want anyone to bother me and I don‘t want to bother them, but when you take it into this forum and you cloak it in civil rights imagery, I have a problem with that because I believe the majority of Missoulians and the majority of Missoula County residents, the majority of Montanans and Americans believe these are behaviors which are their business but nonetheless dysfunctional. And sometimes responsibility means saying difficult, very difficult things. Council representative David Strohmaier and Stacy Rye are asking fellow City Council colleagues tonight and the citizenry to go where the Missoula Council and its entire history that I know of has dared not gone before. They‘re literally sort of star trekking us into deep space of, and here‘s the term, legislating morality. Let me tell you about this term, legislating morality. I have a little bit of experience with that term. Let‘s go back to 1991 and ‘92. I was finishing up my term on the City Council. Missoula residents came to me, their Ward 3 Council representative, and said, Bob, do you know what‘s going on at Mulligan‘s? Do you know what‘s going at Fantasy For Adults Only? Do you know what‘s going on at Fred‘s? We have people in our family now that are being dragged into a lifestyle they really never meant and intended to be in. We feel it‘s hurting them and it‘s destructive to the community. Can you initiate a public discussion? And I‘ll admit I didn‘t want to say yes, I really didn‘t, but I did and I referred it to the Judicial Review Committee at the end of my term and a public discussion started. Al Sampson was the President of the Missoula City Council. He‘s our former Fire Chief. He‘s a man of integrity. He‘s a friend of mine. From the very Judicial Review Committee meeting, Al personally made a statement, it is not the City Council‘s role to legislate morality, no, not on moral issues of this magnitude. Not on obscenity, not on hardcore pornography. This is not something we should really tackle. Now I‘m paraphrasing that. And this discussion had a curious way of advancing. It took on a life of its own and it kept advancing through committee until it went to a full blown public hearing. It had approximately 350 people show up to the public hearing, okay, and there was spill over, there was a spill over crowd just like tonight. The Council had an opportunity to set a high moral standard with respect to hard core obscenity and hard core pornography. The Council had every right to do it. A landmark United States Supreme Court decision of Miller versus California in the 1970s gave cities that right. Cincinnati, Ohio, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma other cities utilized that landmark decision and took action and established standards so that their cities could be protected in the way they saw fit. Nonetheless the Missoula City Council voted 8 to 3 that night with one member not present to vote down this ordinance. In concluding tonight what I see happening here is a very great contradiction. The great contradiction in my opinion is that here we are tonight, a City Council 18 to 19 years later has taken on another great moral issue of our day. They are considering legislating morality. I‘m not speaking for Al, I haven‘t talked with Al, but I consider this as great an issue as hardcore pornography and obscenity. The sentiment of the Council was, let‘s stick to the nuts and bolts of streets, roads, sewers and so on. We don‘t want to go there and I believe Al‘s rationale was, number one, we don‘t want to invite a slippery slope of subsequent initiatives coming to us every week and every month. It‘ll tie us up and it‘ll just distract us from the other business we have to do. That was the biggest reason I believe. And he also generally felt, and the other Council members felt, this is not where the Council should go, and that went down. But tonight here we are again with a great moral issue of the day. This time the Council is considering setting another community standard and in the majority of opinion I believe of Missoulians and certainly of Montanans and Americans who‘ve waved in on this it‘s against the majority of opinion to get this involved in this specific moral issue. And so that‘s the paradox. And you know what, Mr. Strohmaier, Mr. Wiener, I‘ve been talking to you for five years in Ward 1 about hundreds of Missoulians on a daily basis when there‘s no snow on the road who are subject to getting killed on their bicycles as they try to navigate a piece of pavement about this wide. What have you been doing there for hundreds of Missoulians who are on bicycles? Not a lot. You did help me get it on the CIP but I never got a report. Dave, you gave me Phil Smith‘s number and that‘s about all I got and Phil tried to help me we‘re no further along.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 9
Mayor Engen said, so, Mr. Luceno, we‘re going to address the chair this evening.
Bob Luceno said, okay. And in conclusion, I‘d like the Council to take up all the other people and all the other people‘s needs that are really in danger in the City on a daily basis and getting tied up in these extraneous, moral issues. Okay? There‘s enough room in Zoo Town for all of us but I don‘t think we need to go this far. Thank you very much.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Mr. Luceno. Mr. Nash?
Tei Nash said, I need a new mic, John.
Mayor Engen said, you know you can either take that one out or use this one, Tei, whichever one works.
Tei Nash said, it‘s alright.
Mayor Engen said, you bet.
Tei Nash said, okay, Mayor Engen, Council members, respective city authorities, my name is Tei Nash. I‘m a resident of Missoula. I‘ve lived here all my life. I have five children. I own two businesses. First let me say that the antidiscrimination ordinance is purposely constructed to give no recognition to and no exempted protections to rights of conscience. And because of the intended omission of this fundamental protection throughout the language of this ordinance, it sends a very loud and clear message that the real purpose of this ordinance is to force change in the moral composition of this community. If you know anything about the ACLU and the Human Rights network, it is their ideological marker. These are two national ideological-driven organizations and outside the Missoula constituency. They do not represent and I repeat they do not represent the rule of the majority of the Missoula citizens. Council members Dave Strohmaier and Stacy Rye purport that this ordinance is simple in its obligations and reach. This is ordinance is not simple. It is massive in its social implications to this community. It is written purposely vague in its definitions. It is confusing. It is oppressive in its legal consequences to our businesses and public economy leaders. And it causes unforeseen problems with the rights to privacy and most seriously it encroaches upon the safety protections that are expected by all women and children in this community. Under the newly government created third sex referenced as gender identity in this ordinance be it understood that any man who senses that he is female or affirms he is female cannot be denied access to any facilities, accommodations, services, activities, privileges, advantages and bathrooms or enjoyment of goods and if he is denied and if he perceives you‘re not recognizing his gender expression, behavior or affirmed female gender identity you are subject to discrimination and its legal counties and in addition as it states in the ordinance under Section 9.64.090, Paragraph C, you are deemed guilty. There is no recourse except frivolous and expensive litigation. This places all business owners and all public accommodators in a legal stranglehold. Given the absence of a scientific or tangible proof distinguishing an…excuse me, or a sense of one‘s own gender no organization or individual could reasonably refute or defend against any allegation of discrimination or unfair treatment under these circumstances. No one. There are no exemptive protections in this ordinance that guide or protect businesses or public accommodators. In relationship to this example the heightened potential of rights to privacy violations and the heightened encroachment upon safety protections that this ordinance creates for vulnerable women and children is barbaric. It is irresponsible to expect and it offers no conciliation to this City‘s residents and to all those who come to this City to be told that increased opportunity for crimes to be committed by peeping toms, cross-dressing, pedophiles and other sexual predators who intentionally use gender identity protections to gain access to female identified facilities will be fully prosecuted after the fact. Because of the recklessness of this ordinance and the unnecessary overreaching implications that this will put upon Missoula citizens, should this ordinance pass, for every Council member who votes for this ordinance be informed that there is formed a highly organized community of citizens who have come together like I‘ve never seen or witnessed in my life in this City. And you‘re aspirations of future political service would be severely challenged upon re-election. This ordinance goes against the will of this community. I‘ll repeat it again. This ordinance goes against the will of this community. Thank you, Mayor.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 10
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Mr. Nash. And finally Mr. Hugh? I‘m sorry, Reverend Himes, sorry.
Harris Himes said, I‘m a lot shorter than Tei. I am an Allied attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund. And so I‘d like to address some of the legal concerns that I see this ordinance is fraught with. First off, I think it‘s fair to say that the old saying that one man‘s cup of tea is another man‘s draft of poison applies to what‘s going on here because there‘s a clash of two world views. Because as soon as we read this in the preamble that it says that there will be no discrimination on the basis of origin, ancestry, religion, creed, etc. but then in the same paragraph we find that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. When you give that to that side and that world view, you automatically discriminate against those who have a religious view in opposition. You automatically discriminate on the basis of my religion and on the basis of many who believe as I do. The fact that there is a newly added disclaimer that says that there will be no infringement upon religious rights reminds me of many of the promises that are currently coming out of Washington. The actions do not follow. And right now I look at this and I see that disclaimer but frankly that disclaimer is simply stating the obvious. That disclaimer does not remove the poison that is in the words that follow. The U.S. Supreme Court, for instance, tells us that it‘ going to look really at the language in the ordinance and not something like this disclaimer. The meaning of a statute must first be sought in the language which it employs, that‘s U.S. v. Standard Brewery 251 U.S. 210. The Supreme Court also says that we cannot construe statutory phrases in isolation, that we must also consider the design of the statute as a whole and its object in policy. And the intent of this is to allow for a nondiscrimination policy on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression. That is basically the stated intent of this and that is what a court is eventually going to look at. I am concerned that as I heard one of the items that would be brought up is that at some point, I don‘t know if it‘s this evening or whatever, there‘s going to be a judicial settlement that will have to be voted on by the Council where the City of Missoula has been a defendant and a settlement means that the City of Missoula is going to have to pay something. And while many of you on this Council will disagree with my world view and my perspective, what I‘m really talking about here is the potential for many lawsuits, lawsuits of very many different natures, because notwithstanding the statement by Mr. Strohmaier and others that there is no infringement upon churches, that is not true. That is simply not what the ordinance says. The very definition of employer in this statute identifies a church because churches, many churches, have nonmembers. In fact it‘s a basis of our evangelism that we do not have members that we want nonmembers to come in. That makes us an employer under this ordinance and as such an employer we cannot discriminate then on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression. So it does infringe upon our First Amendment rights whether you want to say it doesn‘t those words have no meaning when the language in it itself says otherwise. The court in reviewing something like this will especially look at how such an ordinance will be applied. And given that the portions on public accommodation, in 15(a) say that anyone who sells food is automatically a public accommodation and that means that that, a public accommodation, cannot discriminate in any way whatsoever. Now I have pastors in this audience and many of them sell food. I know Scheck does. I don‘t know if the Foursquare church sells food but I do know that Youth for Christ has a major portion of its money that comes, selling food, nice lattes, espressos and things like that. That means that those groups , those churches, those religious groups under this ordinance will be forced to hire people in strict disagreement of their religious principles. At such time when any of these things happen, incidentally 15(a) also has the word ―bathroom‖ in it for those who want to minimize the effect of bathroom, 15(a) has that word that it is a public accommodation and therefore cannot discriminate in any way whatsoever. But let me continue on with this. At any point where a church or this religious group is going to be forced to hire somebody of a differing religious view, the different world view that I‘m speaking of, that organization will be in violation of this ordinance. Also accommodations, a public accommodation has to open up its services and activities. That means that the services characteristically which a church provides are weddings, baptisms, nurseries and those kinds of things, that means that as a public accommodation, it cannot discriminate as to who will be married, who will work in those nurseries and that very likely could mean that a pastor of a church that does not…that considers homosexuality as sin will be forced to conduct a homosexual marriage, notwithstanding the fact that in this state, as Mr. Strohmaier correctly stated and as the ordinance states, that that is illegal in this state. Nonetheless that‘s what this ordinance implies. Therefore it‘s facially unconstitutional. And if there is any application that goes against that, the very fact that this disclaimer is there in place and also Mr. Nugent‘s explanation and his opinion about the validity of this will be absolutely the first bits of evidence in this case against the City of Missoula. Now let City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 11 me describe to you a little bit what happens when there is a case based on First Amendment freedom of expression. It does not start in the City of Missoula Municipal Court. That immediately goes up to Judge Malloy and then probably to the Ninth Circuit and then perhaps to the U.S. Supreme Court. I want to talk to you about money. I want to talk to you about how much money it will cost the City of Missoula just in terms of the defense of such a case. Then when the City of Missoula loses that case, as it most certainly will, and I don‘t have to be a prophet to say that, then the City of Missoula will also have to pay the attorneys‘ fees and costs on the other side. And so when you talk about hundreds of thousands of dollars or possibly millions, that‘s really true. And you have a lot of churches and a lot of religious agencies in this City that are vulnerable to this kind of thing. And I say to you simply on a dollars and cents basis, do you really want to attack that gorilla? Is this something that you really want? Furthermore, it‘s…this disclaimer says again that there will be no infringement and yet I do not see any language in this ordinance that exempts churches, not in here, not a word about that and yet when there was just some slight indication that there was an illegality that this ordinance was supposed to cover the public schools, which was there, and it is illegal. The state preempts the city in this fourth iteration of this ordinance. That‘s gone.
Mayor Engen said, Reverend Himes, I‘m going to ask you to wrap things up based on my watch. We‘ve had about equal time up here. A lot of folks here want to talk. No applause please. Thank you.
Harris Himes said, and I thank you for that, Mayor. The point is that it strikes hollow that you‘re going to take that out and still hold private schools, which includes private religious schools, under this discrimination. That‘s something that you want to be very careful of. I do not want the epitaph of this City Council, and I speak to you in a friendly nature as much as possible on this, that this is the City Council that bankrupted the City of Missoula because it very likely could. And I‘ll tell you the first time that a gender identity man walks into a woman‘s restroom and does something that strikes psychological fear and apprehension in a child, that lawsuit will come against this City because of that ordinance and you will know real litigation costs above and beyond the First Amendment things. So I appreciate your time as a pastor and an attorney. Of course I have much more to say but thank you very much for your attention and I beg you, I beg you to remember also for the sake of your souls this is a sin and you should not support it. Thank you very much.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, Reverend Himes. Alright, ladies and gentlemen, it‘s 8:15. We‘re going to do things a little bit differently. Those are the two staff reports for our purposes this evening. The rest of this is public comment, testimony from you all. How many of you would like to say something tonight? Please raise your hands. Alright, so your Mayor is going to enforce what we call the three-minute rule. I‘ve been pretty lenient about that over time with public hearings but because there are so many people who want to talk, I‘m going to enforce the three-minute rule this evening. I want to tell you a couple of things if you haven‘t been here before and participated in a public hearing. My responsibility here tonight, which I take very seriously, is delivering an orderly, fair and productive public hearing. If you‘ve never spoken here before, you see the two microphones? Your remarks are recorded for our permanent record and this meeting is being broadcast on Community Access Television, our government channel this evening, so if you‘re going to talk, you need to be at the microphone so that we can have you on the record and folks at home can hear you as well. Alright. Tonight I‘m going to ask you to line up at either podium, I‘m sorry, either lectern, it doesn‘t matter which one. Alright. And, again, this is all about an orderly fashion. Alright. We have this evening, ladies and gentlemen, you see right behind me we have a timer that will indicate your three minutes, alright. You do not have to speak for three minutes and in fact I can tell you it‘s as effective for you to come up, state your name, let us know whether you support or oppose the ordinance, make your points and move on. If you‘ve heard someone else who supports your opinion, say what you were going to say, you may simply say I support or oppose and someone else has already made my point, and that counts as much as telling us again and, in fact, in some cases it counts more. We‘re talking about the ordinance this evening. I need you to restrict your comments to the ordinance that‘s before you. We‘re not going to point fingers, we‘re not going to talk about individuals, we‘re going to talk about the merits of the ordinance and whether or not you support or don‘t support that ordinance. When you come to the microphone, I‘m going to ask you to say your name, tell us where you‘re from, tell us whether you support or do not support the ordinance and a complicating factor here, we‘ve had so much correspondence from outside the City that I am obliged by virtue of the fact that I work City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 12 for the City of Missoula to ask that folks who aren‘t residents of Missoula, let Missoula residents speak first and when Missoula residents are done, we‘ll ask others to the microphone. I‘ll be here as long as you all are here so everybody‘s going to get a chance tonight. But if you‘re not from Missoula, you might want to have a seat for a minute, let folks from Missoula speak and then we‘ll move through this again in an orderly fashion. The other thing is we‘re pretty crowded here tonight. You can continue to watch this hearing right behind us in the Reidy Room rather and we also have room at Missoula Community Access Television which is right down on Spruce Street. Plenty of room for you to sit and take in the meeting there if you‘d like and I‘ll bet you Sean Kelly‘s next door will turn the channel for you too if you‘re interested in that. You heard me talk about the applause and you‘ve been fantastic and thank you for that. I‘m going to expect that you continue to be fantastic. We‘re not heckling. We‘re not making fun of anyone. We‘re here to respect each other, listen to what each other has to say so that these folks around this table, who are elected to do your business, can do that business in a reasonable way. If there is disruption again, I‘ll recess the meeting and we‘ll come back and we can all make it work. I don‘t think that‘s going to be necessary. I know you‘re not going to disappoint me this evening. Alright, ladies and gentlemen, with that Ms. Merriam is going to set the clock and we‘ll start here, sir.
Ron Thiessen said, I am a resident of the City of Missoula, 8710 Mashie Lane, Ward 2, and I am also a pastor of a church here in town that is in Missoula. I am opposed to this ordinance. If I thought we were addressing a real need in this community, I would want to make sure that everybody in our community could live in safety and security and harmony whether they agree with me or not. I want that to be clear. I think that‘s what the United States represents to me. As a pastor, I readily accept that people in this community do not accept my…whether it be theological, moral or political views. That‘s a given and that is their right. I want us all to be able to live in harmony together and respectfully agree where we do not see eye-to-eye. But as I read the evidence that has been given for this ordinance, first of all, I‘m very happy how minimal the discrimination has been in our City. I see no evidence in looking at the media and that kind of a thing that warrants an ordinance like this in our City, and reading our newspaper it seems the media can‘t even seem to drum it up. After reading the ordinance, I could only conclude that it is not about the safety of our community but it‘s about advancing a political agenda in our City and then taking it from here to the rest of our state. If we need an ordinance, this is not the ordinance that we need. One reason I say that, in fact I‘ve sent an email to all of you with five reasons. I‘ll just say two and I‘m sure the rest will be covered. It is very, very poorly and badly written. Why is there so much ambiguity on this ordinance on important points? Our constitutional freedom for freedom of religion should never be a question and yet I scratch my head. I have to contact lawyers to see what different phrases mean and how that would affect where I‘m protected by state and federal law. Why is it so ambiguous at those important points? And I appreciate what Mr. Strohmaier has said but the question is in a court of law what would and wouldn‘t be protected? The second point I want to make is I think it is a serious mistake to redefine gender as subjective to the individual and not objective to equate sexual orientation with races of issue as one Council member did in a phone call with me is deceptively simple. Studies show that there are…where there is a genetic component at all, it is minimal and it is not determinative. Sexual orientation is far more complex than that. I do acknowledge that there is a small percentage of people whose genetics and biology is in discord and my heart goes out to those people. I do not mock their pain but social policy is not the place to resolve this discord in their life, therefore, I ask you to vote no to this ordinance. Thank you for your time.
Caitlin Copple said, I‘m speaking in support. I‘ve lived in Missoula for more than five years and I own a home in Mr. Wilkins and Ms. Hellegaard‘s district. Some people have expressed doubt about the need for this ordinance and I‘m here to clear that up. Two friends of mine who have given me permission to share their story tried to buy a condo and experienced discrimination. In 2006 my friend called the developer and owner of a to-be-built eight-unit condo and said that she and her partner, whose gender she did not specify, were interested in taking a look at the plans. Shortly thereafter both of the women met with the developer who had copies of the plans, bylaws and the list of prices for the units. They told him that they were interested and would be in touch. The next day my friend called and stated that she and her partner would like to make a deposit on the unit. The developer stated that he had talked with his family after the meeting and decided that they weren‘t asking enough and raised the price of the units by 10% to the tune of $35,000. My friends were quite surprised given that the units had been on the market for months and only two of the eight had sold but they considered the price increase, called the developer City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 13 back and said that they still wanted the unit and were prepared to make the deposit. During the conversation, my friend mentioned that she had a cat. The developer said that pets weren‘t allowed. My friend told him that the cat was 20 years old, had cancer and would likely be dead by the time they were ready to move in. He said that he needed to consult with his attorney to see if they could make an exception in the bylaws in the event that the cat was still alive when the condos were completed a year and a half or so later. He said he would get back to them. He never called. After two weeks of waiting the women were pretty sure he wasn‘t going to call and why. Upon closer review of the condo association documents, they discovered discriminatory language. I quote, ―No immoral, improper, unlawful, dangerous or offensive activity shall be carried on in any unit or upon the general or limited common elements nor shall anything be done which may be or become an annoyance, a nuisance, a safety or health hazard to the unit owners. They had no legal recourse. This ordinance would change that. Four years later the building is not complete. The cat is indeed dead and two of the units remain unsold. A February, 2010 Missoulian article entitled ―Condominium Market in the Doldrums‖ noted that there are…there‘s an 18-month inventory in the condo market where six months is considered healthy. What developer would refuse to sell or forget to call back buyers for a guaranteed sale? What developer would forget about interested buyers when the real estate bubble, particularly for condos, burst in 2008? One who didn‘t want a lesbian couple living in the building. Thank you.
Andrea Marcoccio said, I‘m a resident of Missoula. I‘m currently working at Forward Montana, one of the organizations that collected signatures and worked with the Montana Human Rights Network. Right here I have 1,700 signatures individually collected by our interns and volunteers, ranging in the age from high school, college, we had conservatives, members of the faith community all out on the streets of Missoula, on the campus, all over collecting signatures in support for this ordinance. I speak personally and on behalf of Forward Montana in support of this ordinance. I hope you all will vote for this. We believe that Missoula needs to be a place where diversity is accepted, where people are safe and free to live happy lives without discrimination. On behalf of Forward Montana we‘re proud to be here before you and that this ordinance is being heard and we thank you for your time and your thoughtfulness, and that‘s all I have to say. So I don‘t know where I should…
Mayor Engen said, you know we‘ll just…we‘ll grab them. Thank you.
Andrea Marcoccio said, okay, great.
Frank Chappel said, a life resident of the great state of Montana and 20 years resident of the wonderful City of Missoula and what an honor to speak before you. Fourscore and 154 years ago our forefathers started making laws and they haven‘t quit. For some reason every time we elect people they think they have to vote more stuff in. Believe me, the book‘s getting pretty thick, okay. We don‘t need this mess. This mess is going…you‘re going to be responsible for enforcing this, you realize that? Do you want the City courts to have to handle more cases and more problems constantly being barraged with complaints from this one or that one? Hey, let the district courts deal with that. It‘s more headache than you need. Now intentions…I‘m sorry, you know, with all due respect to Dave Strohmaier, whether you intended for this to be not about bathrooms and not about whatever it is, it is about that to the lawyers. He‘s not going to ask what you intended. He‘s going to look and say, oh, here‘s a way I can get some money for my client. Do you want to bring that on you? Do you want it to this…this is insanity. The people can‘t afford it. Now I‘ll admit I got a little mad at some of the people on the other side and I apologize for it, to them now. Yeah, we have problems, they have problems, we have problems. I don‘t hate anybody. I don‘t want to hate anybody and I don‘t think any of us want to but the problem is, it‘s not…the way to solve this problem is not by making a special group that gets special rights. The way to…that just makes everybody resent them. The way you want to make this thing work is for us to start putting faces on people. I put a sign out front that says, ―Unsafe for Her‖ and put two pictures of my daughters on there because I didn‘t want men walking into a bathroom where my daughters were at. I don‘t think it‘s safe for them. I don‘t think it‘s good for them. I don‘t think it‘s good for anybody. I wanted to put a face on that. Well, I got to meet a nice lesbian lady and doggone it, she‘s a sweetheart, you know, I really like her. We need to start building those kinds of situations in the City, not take on more struggles, more problems. That‘s not building problems between us. Hey, if a room full of Griz fans can tolerate a Bobcat fan, I don‘t know, you know, I don‘t know what…they‘ve already made the point for me. This isn‘t a big deal so why do we need City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 14 it? We don‘t need this and we don‘t need the headaches it can cause and I guarantee it will cause lots of them. Thank you so much for your time.
Bre Sutherland said, I am a student at the University of Montana majoring in computer science. As an activist heavily involved in the transgender community, a self-identified feminist and as a lesbian I have first-hand seen what discrimination feels like. Being a transgender individual myself I‘ve experienced discrimination of all kinds in every aspect of my life. I have experienced discrimination as both a lesbian and even that much more as a transgender woman. On more than one occasion early in my transition I was offered jobs based on my credentials but upon asking for legal identifying information the employers became aware of my transgender status and soon thereafter most jobs were withdrawn. I‘ve had my identity discredited in health care and often was referred to by my birth name and gender early in transition despite my obvious gender identity and on more than one occasion have been denied the most basic of human rights, rights that should be ensured to everyone regardless of race, sex, age, family status, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. As an individual heavily involved in activism, education, awareness and equality of individuals with gender diversity, I have seen firsthand what discrimination can do to an individual. Discrimination of any kind hurts. It‘s unacceptable to deny an individual their most basic of human rights on the basis of their gender identity or gender expression. As individuals we deserve every right of those who‘s physical born sex is consistent with their gender identity. Missoula‘s my home. It is my community. This nondiscrimination ordinance ensures the most basic of human rights to everyone. It prevents a discrimination that continues to tear our community apart. The purpose of this ordinance is to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination just as people of color, people of faith and other historically mistreated groups are protected under current city, state and federal law. I ask everyone of Missoula to come forward and do the right thing in showing your support for this ordinance. Thank you.
Brittney Freeough, Real Estate Management Group, said, I have been working as a property manager for over six years, therefore, I am here today in support of Missoula‘s proposed antidiscrimination ordinance. I would like to express my thoughts from a property manager‘s standpoint. Before I begin I want to clarify that although sexual orientation and gender identity is a not a protected class in the state of Montana, it is always and will be at Real Estate Management Group. For a brief moment I would like to direct your attention to a realistic example of what can happen if someone who is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered were to try and rent a property in Missoula. In order to become an approved applicant at Real Estate Management Group, three forms of criteria must be met. If a perspective tenant is qualified, they are allowed to choose any of our available rentals. If a gay couple were to drop off applications and later I find the individuals are 100% approved, legally I can deny their applications based on the fact that they are gay. For some people this may be difficult to accept but don‘t let that fool you just because you have never put in the position to be discriminated against. Whether you choose to believe this can actually happen or not there is someone out there who will deny someone based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. Does anyone in this room have a friend or family member who‘s attending the University? I have come across owners who wished to prohibit college students from living in their rentals, however, age is a protected class and property managers cannot deny any college students housing if they are qualified. Even though there are a few incidences that slipped through the cracks could you imagine if age was not a protected class? Your friend or family member would have a very difficult time trying to find housing. There was a time where everyone in this room could have been denied housing for no other reason than their sex, marital status, race, greed, religion, color, age, family status, physical or mental disability or national origin. Sexual orientation must be added to this list. It has been a highly discriminated class and needs to be protected. Every property manager may have his or her own favorite tenant. My favorite tenant happens to be gay. He pays his rent on time, keeps a clean home, and respects our company and his rental agreement. I hope everyone in this room can recognize this class needs protection because they are no different than anyone else. For those who are opposed to this ordinance, please let me remind you that I am here today to protect human beings just like all of you. Each day you wake up, you will face a situation that may differ from your ordinary life. This situation is called change and change is inevitable. The question isn‘t whether or not Missoula should enact the proposed antidiscrimination ordinance. The real question is why has this not been done already? Thank you.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 15
Katherine Marie Beckley said, I‘m a graduate of the University of Montana and have lived and worked in Missoula for more than 10 years. I support this ordinance. I have short hair and don‘t wear dresses. I‘m proud to be a woman. There are, however, many aspects of my personality, some of which people describe as feminine or as mescaline. I‘m not confused but sometimes other people are confused and even angered by my appearance, angered by a woman who doesn‘t look enough of a woman, angered by someone who doesn‘t fit their idea, their vision of what a woman should look like. Within the last year alone in Missoula I have twice been followed, cursed at and harassed. Last spring, on a Sunday afternoon, I was crossing the pedestrian bridge into downtown. There were five teenage boys that I passed. As I walked by they started murmuring unspeakable, horrible words and proceeded to follow me and soon started yelling at me. Outnumbered and feeling somewhat threatened, I called the police and announced that I was doing so. After another block they turned around and headed back towards the bridge. Now this ordinance would not directly affect that particular situation. What it will do is require people who are angered by my gender, because they don‘t think it properly matches my sex, to check those feelings at the door when they walk into work or a public place. It does not require favoritism rather it requires the same neutrality, objectivity and respect that our routinely afforded to masculine men, feminine women and heterosexuals. It requires that an employer consider my resume, education and experience instead of whether or not I wear heels and makeup. Finally a word on discrimination. Opponents, namely Dallas Erickson, have charged that this ordinance actually fails to provide equal protection because it does not include a host of people who can still be discriminated against, like fat people, skinny people and beautiful people. This is incredibly flawed logic. The fact is that historically skinny people have not been labeled as deviant, immoral, less human or inherently evil. There is and has never been any law prohibiting fat people from voting or marrying. People have never tried in the name of religion to illustrate the deleterious effects beautiful people have had on society. Historically, currently and legally and in the name of religion people have and continue to treat people with less respect based on their ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation and gender identity. That‘s exactly why we need this.
Ellie Hill, Executive Director of Poverello Center, said, for those of you who don‘t know what the Pov is we‘re the largest service provider for the homeless in Montana, that‘s four facilities; about 300 to 450 clients each day through those four and 7,000 contributors last year. The Pov no longer just provides the warm cot and three squares a day. Research tells us that that‘s not enough and so we also seek to address homelessness by dealing with the underlying issues facing our clients and facing our communities. We seek to end homelessness and that‘s why we fully support this ordinance. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, in collaboration with the National Coalition for the Homeless released a report finding this year that while only 3 to 5% of the United States population identifies as gay or lesbian, up to 42% of its homeless youth identifies gay or lesbian. Based on these estimates, according to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, each year between 500,000 and 1.6 million youth are homeless or runaways. That means up to 672,000 of them are LGBT youth. We serve them every day at the Poverello Center. A state of Michigan fair housing study found that 30% of same-sex couples were treated differently while they were buying a house. In a similar vein 11% of transgender people surveyed said they‘d been evicted and 19% have become homeless because of bias. This year Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shawn Donovan said the evidence is clear that some are denied the opportunity to make housing choices in our nation based on who they are and that must end. He also went on to say, ―President Obama and I are determined that a qualified individual and family will no longer be denied housing choices based on sexual orientation or gender identity.‖ You don‘t need national statistics to tell you what we at the Pov can tell you first hand. We work and serve with these folks every day on the front lines. We can tell you unequivocally that there is a segment of our population who has been repeatedly shut out of the American dream and this must change. We at the Pov envision a Montana where all individuals are engaged proudly and safely in their selves, in their community free from discrimination and this ordinance is a part of that vision. Thank you very much.
Dustin Hankin said, can you see me through the plastic?
Mayor Engen said, sure can.
Dustin Hankin said, I‘m a Missoulian and I‘m in favor of this ordinance. Hold onto your hats. If a church is a business which would make it applied to this ordinance, that would mean they should pay taxes. As far City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 16 as I recall, I don‘t think they do so there goes that argument. Second, you‘re worried about bathroom stalls. It‘s like you have some radar through the stall that you know the gender or the person next to you, from a stall police. What are we going to do? How do you know that someone who is transgendered is in the stall next to you? You‘re not. You don‘t know. So that argument is insane also. Third, well, actually it‘s a continuation of that argument. You talk about safety. Okay. On the safety. From gay, lesbian, bisexual or trans…okay, that seems to be paranoid to me. It‘s like there‘s some kind of pack of gay people who are running around, trying to capture you and do something. I don‘t think that‘s ever happened. If it has, somebody should make it into a movie or something and maybe we‘ll be aware of it. Alright, last argument. We are America. Freedom…the arrow of freedom points to more freedom. It does not point the way for freedom. We cannot claim to be the paragon of freedom and liberty and still maintain that it is absolutely acceptable to oppress people for who they are. It‘s contradictory. In the 10 seconds I have left I have to say that an ordinance like this there‘s an inevitability and you should reconcile yourselves to the world that will come from something like this, now, instead of later. Thank you.
Dr. Bruce Spear said, I‘ve been a senior pastor for 35 years and am a pastor of Cross Point Community Church here in the City of Missoula. This ordinance states that it is one of the purposes is to create unity and safety and yet I think it is already demonstrated that it is not creating unity. You said you‘ve received written complaints. I requested formally to see those and never have, probably because it had nothing to do with the complaints that we were supposedly receiving, on a legal basis here, but simply because this is introduced by the ACLU and the National Gay Rights organization because they want to change the fiber and moral values of the City. The entire…really, the entire ordinance is without merit. When I asked Stacy and Dave if they were supposed to be representing their wards and the people of this City, they said yes but have never said that they didn‘t care if anybody in their ward was for this ordinance because they were for it. And they said that, as she used the term ―civil rights‖ tonight, and yet if you ask African American people what they think of the gay community using that term, you will find out that they are outraged and offended and feel like they have…that term has been hijacked by the gay community. This is not a civil rights issue because it is not a race issue. I would simply remind you that a black person, when he goes to bed at night is black and when he wakes up in the morning he is black, but when a gay person goes to bed at night, they can change and they can opt to be straight and that is not the option of any African American person. And so using that term is an offense and has no justification for why we understand civil rights. The truth is there‘s only three or four City Council members that are going to vote for this no matter what because that is their philosophy and the values. And yet there are some of you that are here that need to know that this is a character issue and this is a values issue and people should have the right to say no if a Hell‘s Angel came up to my door and wanted to rent my room, I should be able to say no based upon the values that I perceive in that person‘s life. You said if I provided you with evidence that we were having problems other places, you would do something about it. The state of Maine has gone through the problems that we have been talking about. They‘re having it right now. They have passed the ordinance and here is documentation of the problems that they are facing with all the things that we have talked about tonight. This is not hypothetical. It is happening in other cities and other states that have passed this. So I‘d just like to pass this out to each one of the City Council if that‘s alright.
Mayor Engen said, you know, you can just leave it there and we‘ll grab it and next please.
Shirley Vincent Tierna said, I am a Missoula resident for many, many years and I love being part of this community and I think tonight‘s gathering shows a lot of the diversity. I‘m here to speak in support of the antidiscrimination ordinance. I‘m a partially retired Child Protection social worker, a supervisor, administrator and was training for bureau chief for DPHS, Child and Family Services Division. I‘ve investigated and supervised several hundred reports of possible sexual abuse of children. Most sexual abuse is perpetrated by heterosexual men and some women too. Most perpetrators are parents, relatives, boyfriends of the mother, caregivers and other adults who have control of the child such as a club leader, sometimes even priests or pastors. They‘re often trusted by the child who is their victim and they‘re almost always known to the family. In stances where the perpetrator is homosexual or bisexual the situation is the same as described above. They are very rarely strangers. So let‘s talk about bathrooms a little bit. Even though they‘re not part of the ordinance specifically, there is so much hype City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 17 about them, the talk of the community. If abuse occurs in a bathroom, it is not a public bathroom. It‘s more likely to be a private bathroom in the home of the child or the caregiver. In a public bathroom the most likely behavior that could be called abusive might be a tired or distraught mom or dad losing it because three-year-old Susie or Sam either wet their pants because they couldn‘t hold it or they were not willing to pee on demand. Let‘s not become obsessed with the bathroom talk. We‘ve been sharing bathrooms in Missoula, in airports, in our homes, you know, and most of our homes we share bathrooms with men and women, boys and girls. Please vote for this ordinance. Discrimination does exist in our town and this ordinance will not cure it but will assist in making it less prevalent and less harmful. Thank you.
Bernadette Meefe said, I‘m a licensed clinical social worker and a Missoulian. Imagine you have a job, which is hard to come by these days, you also have a secret to keep; you‘re part of the LGBT community. You go to bed each night wondering if you‘ll be found out and fired from your job. Each day at work you wonder if today is the day. It‘s not because of anything you did wrong, it‘s just because of your sexual orientation or gender expression. The stress is enormous. Experienced on a daily basis this kind of stress leads to a number of mental health issues including anxiety, depression, panic attacks, there can also be internalized feelings of loneliness, abandonment, desperation. Suicide rates in the LGBT community are higher than in the general population. LGBT kids drop out of school because of bullying and are also at greater risk of suicide than their heterosexual peers. These conditions do not have to play a role in anyone‘s life. The passage of this ordinance will send a clear message that discrimination will not be tolerated any longer. Some will testify that homosexuality is an abomination. This is a religious belief not a secular issue. Some say that homosexuality is a choice. Clearly if it were a choice one would certainly not choose to be a target of hatred. Is heterosexuality a choice? Does a person change after you find out they are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender? Aren‘t they the same person they were just a few seconds before you knew who they were? Fear is a great deterrent for living one‘s life fully. That‘s all we‘re asking tonight, the right to live life fully, without fear, fear of losing a job, of being evicted from housing or just not being hired because of how we are perceived. To finally be part of the freedom and justice for all I urge you to pass this nondiscrimination ordinance and thank you for your time.
Rick Rosio said, I‘m a member of Missoula, I live here, I‘m a business owner as well and a member of the gay community and have been. Coming out at 16 in the early ‗70s was not an easy thing to do for any of us. Those of us that are now older and have survived the ravages of the AID‘s epidemic and have worked to instill a sense of freedom for those that are younger than us. And tonight I‘ve heard and I‘ve listened to the people I sat around and I‘ve listened to the words that were being said and I hear a lot of anger, I hear a lot o fear from the religious side, and they have a right to their doctrine but this is a City and a community of civil laws. And if someone chooses to conduct themselves deviantly in a bathroom, it‘s not because they are transgender, it‘s not because they are a lesbian or a gay man or a heterosexual; they are a pervert, period, and the laws are there to deal with that, period. But to openly discriminate in teachings, in philosophy is, I guess, the right of those to do so but it should not come into the public arena. That is their right within the confines of their philosophy. Within…through a social fabric of the community all of us have the rights to live in complete peace and not to be fearful. Thank you.
KD Dickenson said, I‘m a business owner in Missoula. I‘m broker/owner of Portico Real Estate and I have lived in the area since 1976. I have been a realtor for about 16 years. I‘ve been a lesbian for just about 40 years and when…so I‘m in housing, you know, the business of selling houses and also I‘m a lesbian and am also a business owner. And when I first got my real estate license, I personally experienced some discrimination. When I applied or tried to get on with a large, local real estate company several times, when I met with the broker/owners they chose not to hire me so I went back again and then I went back again because I wanted to work at one of the bigger companies because they have a better training program. When you get out of real estate school you know nothing and I wanted to be a good realtor. So, I suspected at the time that they made their decision, at least in part, because of their discomfort with my sort of somewhat butch gender presentation in sexual identity. I don‘t make it a secret, never have, that I‘m a lesbian. I know it was partly a class issue as well but there was some definite homophobia going on there. It‘s a real long story and I‘m going to keep it real short because I know I have a limit. But the short of it is that they did hire me after I got sort of some tips from another realtor friend on how to do an interview. But they put me on a six-month probation, the first and last in the City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 18 history of that company, and then they confirmed my fears about the homophobia by telling me I should go get a makeover with a local makeup artist because I wasn‘t pretty enough and, you know, feminine enough for them. So anyway I didn‘t do it, still haven‘t. I did fill and succeed the target they set for me and in fact became Rookie of the Year that year. That was a long time ago. It was about 16, 17 years ago but it sure put a fire under me to work harder towards equality issues for all because I‘ve personally experienced it. I soon found a pool of lenders and title company people, others in the industry who knew I could…that I knew I could work with and who share my values and were not homophobic. I eventually started my own business where I am able to hire people because of their outstanding ethics and professionalism and passion and community involvement, all of whom are also in support of this ordinance. Because of my strong equal opportunity stance I‘ve become successful in Missoula. I have matched people with homes, have helped coordinate buyers with lenders who are not homophobic, have helped gay or transgendered individuals or couples through the entire process in which they might other- wise have faced discrimination. The equal treatment of these citizens should not depend on their happening to find a particular open minded professional. They should be treated equally. The City of Missoula now has the opportunity to guarantee these protections to all. I know passing this ordinance makes both social and economic sense. People facing discrimination cannot participate fully in the economic life of the City. People look at relocation guides and do their research before moving to a new community and want to know that they are moving to a place that values diversity and equality, so please vote yes to this most important ordinance. It‘s time to vote yes. Thank you very much.
Iris Schmitt said, Mayor and Board of the Council and the press, I‘m happy to be here today. I want to say that I have no hate in my heart at this time. I can honestly say I feel love and I‘m sorry for those who have been hurt. If they have been discriminated of some sort out of maybe their misbehavior, I‘m sorry for their behaviors. But, however, I am a mother and a wife. I have a divine calling to be a mother to my children and my role is to protect my children. I have done a very good job doing that and it‘s taken a lot of work. That means shutting off the cable. That means watching the Internet, what they‘re on and monitoring it because they can become desensitized. My children are so important to me. My family is a solid unit and I will fight to protect that. I work at a school, a middle school. I see children acting upon the same sex and it is not okay and where they are learning this? Hmmmm, let‘s ask that question. It is not okay and I have addressed it to the principal and I‘ll tell you, things have got to change and we have to raise up our standards. Let‘s do it as a community. Let‘s take up a higher standard for our families. Let‘s put the core into families. I am against the antidiscrimination, I am. I am a religious person. We have choices and I choose family as my core and I wish everybody would choose their family as a core, husband, wife, children raised on principles and standards that are good for our community, that helps our community, that makes strength. We can move mountains with principle and acting on principle. Please. I have no hate. I have no hate and that‘s what this is becoming as a hate issue. According to someone who had just spoke not very long ago, they had said all these community places were supporting the gay gender. Well then where are they being discriminated if all these public places are for them? Where are they being discriminated? You know, but when it comes to values and family, I love my family and I wanted you guys to know that and I will do what it takes. If it takes shutting off the Internet, if it takes describing what this…the actions of maybe children are demonstrating gay actions, I will describe to my children that it‘s not appropriate, because it‘s not appropriate. It‘s not appropriate behavior and if they‘re born that way, there is counseling and there is help. If my child was gay, I would love them just as I love all of you in this room.
Anita Keenan said, I‘m a registered nurse in the state of Montana. I‘m also the Executive Director for Blue Mountain Clinic. I‘m here tonight in full support on behalf of Blue Mountain Clinic for the antidiscrimination ordinance and I urge the City Council to adopt this ordinance for Missoula. Members of the LGBT community are constituents of Blue Mountain Clinic and represented in our organizational mission and values. These values include advocacy for the improvement of policies and education on reproductive and economic justice and health disparities. These are health disparities in our community. These are not moral choices. These are people who need non-judgmental, unbiased health care and access to the same rights as the others in our community. The concerns brought up by the opponents of this ordinance are fear-based and lack any evidential credibility. Basic human rights and dignity for marginalized population is a core value of Blue Mountain Clinic and the proponents who support this City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 19 ordinance. It is essential that our community model and embrace this fundamental, human act. Thank you.
Peter Shober said, I‘m a resident of Missoula, a pastor at University Congregational Church. I‘ve lived here 19 years. And as a pastor I recognize that there is no issue in our land that divides our communities of faith more than the issue of homosexuality. It is a divided house and there are tens of millions of people, people of faith, who would stand in firm opposition to this ordinance and there are tens of millions of people in faith who stand in favor of it. And I‘m not going to sit here and pretend that the differences aren‘t real; they‘re very real. And I want to give thanks to all of you for being willing to deal with it. And I think it‘s quite remarkable that there are so many people here because this issue goes very, very deep for all of us, and we should be here and we should be struggling with it. It‘s neither easy nor convenient but it is important. And I, through my faith, feel confident that I stand in a long line of people of faith who have stood up for civil rights and human rights for hundreds and hundreds of years. That landscape is changing. One of the principles of my particular faith tradition is that God hath yet more light and truth to shed upon all of us. And I think that‘s what we‘re experiencing and there‘s some birthing pains that go along with it. I stand up here tonight affirming that discrimination for GLBT people in our community is real. I‘m a pastor. I‘ve heard the stories. I believe those stories. I know they are true and I cannot be silent when an issue like this, an ordinance, comes up. This is not an issue for me that is elevating sin as being a good thing. It‘s about recognizing diversity as something that‘s a real part of our world and our life. Seventeen years ago this month actually my congregation voted itself to become an open and affirming congregation. Many people ask why do we have to do this? We have had to do this for many reasons not the least of which was because it was the right thing to do and it was the just thing to do. We needed to do it because in our hearts and souls we knew that these times demanded it. We needed to do it because we understood then and we understand now that love is always going to be more powerful than fear and we believe in that. Thank you.
Chris Lockridge said, I‘ve lived in Missoula. I‘ve been a Missoulian for 32 years, all of my life. I was afraid. About two years ago I had a hernia as a result of my service in the Army and it was necessary for me to have an operation. My partner and I drove to Helena to the VA Hospital. When we were checking into the hospital…when we were checking into the hotel, the person checking us in saw two men at the front desk checking into one room and when she asked me, you know, the typical questions, I was hesitant. I was afraid. About a year ago when we decided to move into together, I found a place for us to live and I talked to the apartment manager. I was filling out the paperwork and he asked me who this other person on the phone was? I said that was my roommate. I was afraid. Shortly after that, my partner‘s mother died. I was talking to my boss about getting time away from work and she asked me why? I lied. I was afraid. I really encourage you guys to…I would encourage the Council to pass this measure. I think it‘s an important one and I think you can understand why. Thank you.
Bill Waverly said, I live on 1832 Charlotte. You can direct your bricks at my picture window if you‘d like but I‘m opposed to this ordinance and it‘s because it exposes the business community and the churches to some lawsuits and some fines. There‘s not a provision in this thing to protect them. That‘s been back and forth by the different speakers here but I read the thing, several times, and I‘ve watched its iterations and I think that you could rewrite this thing so that it would be acceptable to both sides. I hope you will consider that. Thank you.
David Avery said, I‘m a Missoulian resident of about 20 years. I live up the Rattlesnake. I‘m a wordsmith by trade, specifically, I‘m an appellate attorney and I‘ve successfully litigated a bunch of cases before the Montana Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit. I support this…I support the ordinance. The idea that this ordinance is vague or ambiguous to me I just diametrically oppose that proposition. It‘s not vague. It‘s people wanting to make it vague. Maybe the intent language regarding the religion could actually be moved to the top of the ordinance and that might make people happy but otherwise I don‘t really see, and I‘ve scrutinized the thing pretty carefully, I do not see any ambiguity or vagueness that‘s going to be problematic. And speaking of language, I mean this recalls to me a passage from Shakespeare and I quote from Shakespeare through Hamlet is ―me thinks the lady doth protest too much.‖ The people who are opposing this are trying to find, you know, whimsical and arbitrary and speculative, you know, possibilities about what could be problematic with it. And I‘m not sure why they‘re so angry about it. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 20
There‘s a lot of other things in the world they could be geared up about. But I, as an attorney, an appellate attorney who‘ve litigated a bunch of vagueness issues, don‘t think this is a vague ordinance, and I support it. Thank you.
Melinda Gopher said, I‘m a Missoula resident. I‘ve lived here for about four years. I am a practitioner of fair housing over half my life. I‘m 45 years old. I served as a tester initially bringing fair housing law to Montana and at that time we found that almost 60% of instances that we tested, Native Americans were discriminated against in housing. I went on to serve as an education and outreach coordinator for a nonprofit, fair housing group. I‘ve worked as a fair housing specialist for the City of Great Falls and I was a presenter at the one and only National Fair Housing Summit in our nation‘s history in 1994, in January, on behalf of my husband and myself and my four children. He is a combat veteran. We support this ordinance. There was two things I want you to remember, well, three things and I‘m going to keep this really brief. The first thing is that there‘s always a good reason to discriminate. There‘s always really good reasons to discriminate and that‘s what laws are for so that we can have an equal society. And number two, because I know from personal experience, it‘s very hard to be a second-class citizen in a nation that guarantees democracy and equality. And number three, you would not be considering this ordinance if Title 49, the State‘s Human Rights Act, was up to par, if it was substantially equivalent to the Fair Housing law and so I thank you and I commend you for your bravery on this. Thank you.
Michelle Bashor said, I am here to oppose the ordinance.
Mayor Engen said, ma‘am, may I have you just bend that microphone down a little bit for us. Thank you very much. I want to make sure folks can hear you.
Michelle Bashor said, I am a Missoula resident, business owner and mother of five children. I do not believe this is an ordinance directly related to concerned brought about from incidences in our town. If there has been such a problem in our area, why was this ordinance not brought to the attention of residents in a more professional, out-in-the-open approach? Missoula is already a very tolerant place to live. Spend a day downtown or a morning at the Farmers Market. We are diverse. We do not need an ordinance or a stated date to prove that fact. If you look at and read the websites of the organizations, pushing this ordinance forward, like that of ACLU of Montana, Montana Human Rights Network and Forward Montana, this is most definitely part of an agenda. This ordinance is the first step towards a broader picture of what they would like our City and our state to be, not a representation of the majority of Montanans and Missoula residents really are and what we stand for. Making Missoula business-friendly does not include adding yet another ordinance to follow. Life as a small business owner is trying enough. Every year there is another tax to pay, license to buy or ordinance to follow. The hurdles of hiring and firing are tedious enough. Adding this ordinance would only open the door for another reason for an employee to cry foul when they are not hired for a position that they think they deserve or their employment is terminated. As business owners or landlords, we should have the right to refuse service or employment as we see fit for our business. Most people are good, honest business owners and are not going to discriminate against individuals. If an owner has a moral or religious obligation to themselves, they should have the right to employ those that they are comfortable with and that they are a good representation of their business. When we first moved to Missoula, I felt I was discriminated against because I had five children. I could not find a place to rent through the property management businesses. Instead of demanding a special ordinance, I moved on until I found someone willing to rent to us. All businesses should have that right. This ordinance, as it is currently written, will cause frivolous lawsuits to be filed against businesses and individuals. Every time legislation is written at local, state or federal level to give certain groups special rights, privileges or protection it takes away another portion of our freedoms from our general population. I feel like my family and many like-minded families have as much right to raise our children with our beliefs, our morals and our expectations as those that have different views. Those that have different views would be infuriated if I was demanding that they must teach their children and live by the principles I set aside. I feel this ordinance and ordinances like this are pushing in that direction. You can, as a child or an adult, be tolerant but not supportive of a lifestyle group or individual. This ordinance will demand support and not just tolerance. Support should be a choice, not a flaw. I‘m sorry, I‘m not going to be able to finish. I‘ll just cut it short. I vote that you guys do not…or I would like you guys to vote no on this for many reasons. Thank you. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 21
Betsy Mulligan Day said, I‘m a Missoulian and the director of the Jeanette Rankin Peace Center. I‘m also a straight person and as a straight person I am proud to ask you to support this ordinance because I believe that my gay, lesbian, transgendered friends, colleagues, coworkers, fellow citizens deserve the same rights as I have and as every other straight person in this room has. As the director of the Jeanette Rankin Peace Center, I ask you to support this ordinance because it‘s about justice. It‘s about justice, the same justice for all of us. One of the signs outside said don‘t ―Don‘t Harm Our Families.‖ I know that many LGBT families have already been harmed and so I say don‘t harm any of our families. Let‘s protect all of them. All of them deserve the same rights. There may be fear but there is no debate. This is the right thing to do. I thank you for taking it on, for giving all of the people in Missoula a level playing field. Thank you.
John Haveman said, I‘ve lived in Missoula for 22 years and rent a house out to people, also I‘ve had a business for 16 years and I also pastor Open Door Baptist Church. It‘s been a healthy discussion and I like to see it. I‘m not going to appeal to you as many would think I may tonight on the authority of the Scriptures since many of you may not hold the Scriptures in as high esteem as many of the…as much of the opposition does. And I want to just appeal to you this evening, Council, to the sense of decency and objectivity and reasonableness. We‘ve heard from Mr. Himes and Mr. Luceno and Mr. Nash with some very reasonable…and I‘m opposed to this, oppositions to this and problems that could arise. And I believe that since there are already laws on the books that protect the civil rights of all citizens based on race, color, national origin, sex that if this ordinance is passed, it will only create more confusion, potential confrontations and unrest in this City, lawsuits, etc. and I implore you to vote no. Thank you.
Jeanette Zentgraf said, I‘m speaking for 36 women in Concern Women for America two chapters here in Missoula City. They‘re all residents of Missoula City and I was told I could speak for them, naturally not taking all those minutes, but if I could have six minutes I would appreciate it. None of those 36 women, though many of them were here are going to speak.
Mayor Engen said, ma‘am you‘re welcome to speak. You‘re not from Missoula? Is that what I‘m hearing?
Jeanette Zentgraf said, I live in Lolo.
Mayor Engen said, okay.
Jeanette Zentgraf said, is that alright?
Mayor Engen said, and you‘re speaking for Missoula women?
Jeanette Zentgraf said, I am, absolutely am.
Mayor Engen said, alright.
Jeanette Zentgraf said, two chapters. You are preparing to pass a draconian City ordinance because of discrimination in the work place and accommodations here in the City. If Missoula City fits the national pattern, there has been a great exaggeration about discrimination against gays and lesbians in the work place, according to the Chicago Kent Law Review, 2009 on the ―Evolution of Academic Discourse on Sexual Orientation and the law, Article 559, ―Bias in the Workplace.‖ I‘ve included that in my documentation here. Data from personal surveys, many of which have been mentioned tonight, and personal interviews over a ten-year period were evaluated and the review determined that the GSS or the General Social Survey, which compared annual salaries between heterosexuals and homosexuals, was the most reliable. In California gay men and heterosexual men earn the same. And lesbians earn slightly more than heterosexual woman and that‘s a matter of record here. I‘ve included the documents from this report. Now certainly here in Missoula homosexuals are accepted by influential people. Mayor Engen can substantiate this fact. At the recent fundraiser for Blue Mountain Clinic the host and hostess made homosexual comments about themselves that were completely acceptable to the large audience, judging by the applause and laughter. The City ordinance should remain as it is and it allows the employer now and the restaurateur to run their businesses freely. Remember that there are 30 states that never passed City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 22 sexual orientation and that of those 20 who did pass sexual orientation, eight never added gender identity and gender expression. There is no significant difference in annual salaries between states according to the GSS, whether they pass this ordinance or not. Now as far as the transgender group, there were no statistics on that and so I wouldn‘t claim one thing or another. Landlords will lose their freedom to control the overt behavior of homosexuals or transgender people in rentals where people…where family people also reside. The classic example of what happens when landlords lose their freedom occurred on Fire Island, New York 30 years ago.
Mayor Engen said, ma‘am, you‘re out of time so I‘m going to ask you to wrap it up please.
Jeanette Zentgraf said, okey-doke. Well, the point was that the legislation that was passed in New York allowed a whole 60 miles of the most beautiful waterfront on Long Island to be altered completely because of what wasn‘t discreet or you would say just normal behavior of privacy of sexuality. As the homosexuals rented the facilities, objectivity and the discreetness vanished so much so that the families then were discriminated against. They couldn‘t stay there with their families.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, ma‘am. Thank you.
Jeanette Zentgraf said, I‘d just like to leave all this documentation.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Steve Knight said, I live here in Missoula, run a business here in Missoula, live in the Franklin-to-the-Fort neighborhood and I support this ordinance and I hope you all will vote yes. Thank you.
Steve Prizinski said, here from Missoula. I went back through and counted up…it took me awhile from March 23rd through the 11th of February so I guess that was yesterday…the 11th of April, just counting up the letters that were written to you and sent through the mail and it was about 232 to 19 which is a thousand percent increase. Also about the language that was put in there, the little boilerplate stuff, it says, you know, this doesn‘t take from any of the constitutionality of other things that we have. The First Amendment as it‘s written isn‘t there to protect, you know, local states or local churches from state and local statute. That‘s the First Amendment deals with the federal [end of cd]his experience in Missoula with some of the folks that he‘s dealt with, he can see a problem with this ordinance and also another question he had was under this idea of gender identity or expression, if he arrests me for instance and I saw I‘m a girl, where does he take me? Does he take me to women‘s prison? Does he take me to male prison? So I would encourage you to vote no on this just for some of those reasons.
Tom LeBons said, I pastor. My wife and I moved here 13 years ago to Missoula to start a church and I‘m thankful to be here. I want to thank you all for your service and I want to let you know that I pray for you and thank you for what you do for the Missoula community. I make no bones about it, I get my belief system from the Bible which I believe is the word of God and you may not believe that and that‘s your right and I understand that. If you perceive that to be a narrow-minded view, the English Common Law system was based upon the 10 Commandments which the Lord gave Moses on the mountain, and then our Constitution was based upon that English Common Law document. And under that were the religious freedom of all Americans is protected. And you say you want me to check that at the door. How do I check what God has told me to believe at the door? Just I would not ask you to check what you believe at the door. That would be narrow-minded, that would be unforgiving and that would be intolerant. I‘m not asking you to believe what I believe, but I am asking you is to understand that if you do pass this, it‘s not going to take away the way people feel. People are going to feel the way they‘re going to feel and that‘s what makes America great, this gathering tonight, that‘s what makes America great. And I am here and I am diametrically opposed to this ordinance and I plead with you, I plead with you to vote no.
Mike Peck said, I am opposed to this ordinance. Before any laws are enacted I would like to know if any definitions, and I know several have been talked about, have been properly addressed? I didn‘t see any in what I‘ve read as far as what I‘m interested. The first one was what is a homosexual? It‘s not on there. I have defined that as a person who wants to have sex with somebody of the same gender, and I don‘t City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 23 know if you guys would agree with that. What is a heterosexual? A person who wants to have sex with someone of different gender. I want to go further than that and say what is the definition of a Caucasian? I‘ve got someone born with DNA that dictates a physical makeup and genetics regarding color and internal and external makeup. The same goes for a black person, a Hispanic or an Asian. Now our media likes to equate homosexuality with race and I ask you, can a white person choose to become3 black? I don‘t believe they can. Can a black person choose to become white? No, there may be some things that he can do, like Michael Jackson, may look like it but no, he‘s still black, etc., etc. with Hispanic to Asian to, you know. Can a heterosexual choose to have sex or not have sex with someone of the opposite gender? Yes, they can. They can choose that lifestyle if they wanted. How about a homosexual? Can they choose to have sex or not have sex with someone of the same gender? Yes, they can, they can make that choice. Why would you want to impose a law that caters to a group of people who make a choice to live a certain lifestyle on an entire city of 100,000 people? Please just enforce the laws that we have now as they come up instead of creating more red tape with another book of new laws. And while we‘re at it, do you think that we could maybe work up a law book to protect heterosexuals? It seems to be kind of the same issue to me. Making laws to enforce tolerance and diversity is not the way to do things. Thank you for letting me speak.
Charlotte Castle said, thank you very much for proposing this ordinance. I‘m for it. I was raised in Missoula. I believe it is one step closer to…
Mayor Engen said, ma‘am, can I trouble you for your name?
Charlotte Castle said, Charlotte Castle.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Charlotte Castle said, okay. It moves us one step closer to equality, fairness and justice and that‘s what this issue is about. Homophobia is about the irrational fear of same-sex relationships. It is not grounded into reality just as racism was not grounded in reality and all other kinds of forms of prejudice. They are emotional and they are deeply rooted in fear. Fear of differences, fear of people who don‘t fit one stereotypes, fear of what we don‘t understand or know and often in this case of homophobia, and I wrote a chapter about this in my book called ―Woman, Sex and Addiction‖ which is a standard in the addiction field, a discomfort with sexuality or a definition of it. I‘ve been 30 years as a therapist and worked with sexuality and addiction. I would say this from a religious point of view God created 3 to 5% of people worldwide as gay and lesbian. And it is not something easy to change and the training and psychology, the diagnostic statistical manual now treats homophob…homosexuality as natural, normal and a given that certain people will have it and it is inborn and trying to change it is at a person‘s peril. There have been so many suicides and deaths. I have worked with this endlessly as a psychotherapist. People are so much going with their radar when it comes to this. And I would like us to get away from some of these labels, like a lesbian…whoa…or a gay man. Rather why don‘t we think of a woman who‘s a sexual…and sexual preference for other women? Same as with gay men. Like heterosexuals, we‘re teachers, students, laborers, realtors, musicians, farmers, writers. We get happy and sad. We have moods but we‘re all alike in our humanness. And I would ask people what are you really afraid of when you‘re afraid of this thing? If you look deep down inside, what inside you is afraid? And then I hear this thing, it‘ll be hard on our family. I have worked with couples for 30 years. I have never had a couple come in a say, our marital problems are because there‘s a gay or lesbian couple living down the block. It‘s never happened. And the same thing, in 30 years of working with childhood sexual abuse, it is almost…it is primarily with heterosexual males that know the child, sometimes with mothers, but it is relatives and people in the family. If people want to protect their children, that‘s what they should think of. I‘m a mother and a grandmother and I was very proud when my daughter was called the least racist and prejudice child this teacher had ever seen. In closing, I want to say all love is God‘s love and equal rights for all people needs to be however under the law and we need to extend it to all people. Thank you.
John Webster said, from Missoula here. You know, tonight I‘ll be your fan because I‘m going to keep it short. You‘ve got a monumental decision to make before you tonight. The issue, with all due respect, is bigger than this Council is. I would really encourage you to take this back, table this issue, bring the sides City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 24 together, let‘s write something that the whole community can agree upon. Okay? And then let‘s put it out to vote, with all due respect with Councilman Strohmaier. This issue is too big. It needs to go to a vote of the people of Missoula. Thank you.
Blake Benjamin Francis said, I‘m a resident of Missoula and a recent graduate from the University of Montana. Back before I came to the University of Montana I was a career seasonal employee with the U.S. government. I served in different law enforcement capacities and I also served as a manual laborer. I had an impressive resume. I had lots of awards for merit. I had several excellent recommenders but I was a seasonal employer…employee and like many other people like me, I was looking for work in Missoula around the fall time, except I was absolutely terrified. I feared the potential of employers checking my references. I feared presenting my legal documents to them upon being hired. I feared the possibility of hiring discrimination. As a successful young person and a strong professional candidate why would I feel such fear in the face of Missoula employers? I felt it because earlier that year I began transitioning from female to male. I was born female and I lived as a woman for 28 years and the decision to transition was 10 years in the making and I can honestly say it was the best decision that I‘ve ever made in my life. It was life or death for me. After…but it meant that gaining employment was really, really difficult and really, really terrifying. So regardless of my trepidation I submitted resumes in Missoula and I was offered jobs that I turned down because I either feared discrimination or I was outright verbally harassed upon presenting my documentation. I didn‘t report these at the time but I‘m reporting them now. I‘m very much aware that transgender people are offered no protection against discrimination in Missoula and in many other places around the country. The only option that I had was to limit my search for businesses that openly protect, through antidiscrimination policies, based on gender identity and gender expression. These are wonderful businesses that we share our town with, Costco‘s and WalMart‘s, but I think I deserve the ability to apply for positions based solely on my merit. And especially in my experience, since transitioning, I‘m so much happier and more confident that I‘m even more employable now than I was before when I was…before I came out as transgender. So I support this ordinance and I hope that you do too.
Patricia Clay said, I have been a resident of the Missoula area for 11 years. My husband owns a business here. My children attend school within the City limits and I do all of my business within the City limits. And I wanted to start out by saying that I have had good friends, I have had colleagues and I have had neighbors that were close, next door, across the street that were members of the LGBT community, lesbian and gay community. And in all of those cases, of all of those people that I know, I had not one issue with them. I was able to work with them, be friends with them, live next to them and not have any problem but I am opposed to certain parts of this ordinance. Specifically, and I direct your attention to, and I‘m sorry if I have an outdated draft, I have the third draft, it‘s Item 15, Section A and there is actually the word bathroom in there so that‘s what my opposition is. I tried to do a lot of research because I wanted to be prepared when I came here so I was looking into the numbers around this issue and the research I came up with was that approximately one in 500 people experience gender identity issues and that would be, if you look at the overall population of the area which is 107,000 people in this area, that would limit it to approximately 215. And I do believe that probably in this community that the percentage is higher. But I‘ve heard said that opening the restroom and changing facilities to both genders is being done with the dignity and safety of these people in mind. And I think that they should have dignity and safety but I also feel like I should have that, as should the tens of thousands of women who would probably be uncomfortable and feel that their own dignity was compromised in this issue. I would feel unsafe…I have a 13-year-old daughter that I would feel unsafe for her. And, you know, I just don‘t really believe that this particular issue is a civil rights issue or discrimination issue. I believe that it is a public safety issue. I think that we need to keep restrooms and facilities like that separate and if we need to add a third individual, then maybe that would be the way that we should go. I also had…I‘m running out of time. I also believe, really quickly, that the issues of the pedophiles and the rapists and the perverts would not probably come from this particular community but opening the restrooms to men and women would extend the invitation to these people. Thank you very much.
Gabrial Fershawn, 715 Chestnut Street, said, just moved to Missoula last fall and I want to thank you all for taking the time to support this dialogue, every single one of you. And thank you, Mayor Engen, for your proclamation that today‘s Diversity Day. It reminded me of when my high school, Helena High, City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 25 created a diversity week. The reason we did is because that year, my senior year, a young man who was a freshman, a young man who‘s also gay was followed home and a group of fellow students put a brick through his front window. Months later, after a dialogue blossomed, we were celebrating Diversity Week and I know there‘s a perception amongst some that you all are trying to fix a problem that doesn‘t exist through this antidiscrimination ordinance. And I think about that young man and I know that homophobia is something that exists in this community every single day and it is a major problem and I thank you all for having the courage to support, I dearly hope, this ordinance. Thanks for the time.
Angel Nordquist said, I‘m a resident of Missoula. I‘m here to read two letters in support of the ordinance, the first being from my employer. ―Plan Parenthood of Montana strongly supports adoption of the Missoula City ordinance prohibiting discrimination based on gender orientation and identity in housing, employment and public accommodations. As the state‘s largest reproductive health care provider, Planned Parenthood of Montana offers health care to people across the state regardless of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, age or race. We support the nondiscrimination ordinance because PPMT believes individuals are most healthy and productive in their communities, families and lives when they have the ability to free from fear of persecution and discrimination. Montana is a state recognizing the importance of equal treatment for all and the right of every individual to earn a living and provide for his or her family. By incorporating gender identity and sexual orientation in Missoula‘s nondiscrimination ordinance, the City acknowledges the importance of establishing a level playing field where all Montanans can make a living without fear of being fired from a job or denied housing because of who they are. PPMT commends the Missoula City Council for taking on this important issue and we share the belief that it‘s essential to respect diversity and honor, every individual‘s right to privacy. Passing this ordinance helps ensure our citizens can live and work in a discrimination-free community.‖ And the second letter is from the Western Montana Community Center which I am on the Board of. ―The Western Montana Community Center supports the nondiscrimination ordinance. We urge the City of Missoula to uphold equality for all human beings regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. The Western Montana Community Center has been serving persons of varying sexual orientations, gender identities and/or gender expressions for over 10 years in the City of Missoula. We pride ourselves on being housed in the most liberal and accepting town in the great state of Montana or so we believe. Missoula could be a leader in the state by passing the nondiscrimination ordinance. To show this is simply about protecting people not promoting an agenda. Montanans are guaranteed the right to privacy in order to further the well being of society, in…‖ Article 10, ―Article 2‖,…excuse me…‖Section 10 of the Constitution of Montana. Little further is a person‘s wellbeing and the opportunity of employment, housing and protection from violent words under actions based on one‘s sexual orientation, gender identity or expression. We at the Western Montana Community Center support the Missoula City Council in furthering equality with the passage of this ordinance. Thank you.‖
Roberta Zanker said, I should say that I‘m not from Missoula, however, I have lived in Missoula, I‘ve worked in Missoula, I shop in Missoula and I represent many people who live here. May I proceed?
Mayor Engen said, do you live in Missoula now?
Roberta Zanker said, I do not.
Mayor Engen said, so I‘m going to have you wait. I want to get the Missoula folks taken care of.
Roberta Zander said, alright. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, thank you though. Thank you for your honesty. It‘s the honor system here tonight, folks.
David Herrera said, I live up the Rattlesnake and work as a sole proprietor in downtown Missoula. I worked in public health, specifically in HIV prevention, for over 25 years and conducted civil rights work for even longer. I‘m here to urge you to support the ordinance to include sexual orientation, gender identity and expression in Missoula‘s nondiscrimination policy as it pertains to housing, employment and public accommodations. As a Latino gay man, and for the record I don‘t differentiate between the two, City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 26 my sexual orientation was no more choice than my ethnicity. That‘s my experience. As a Latino gay man, for the past two days, I‘ve been compared to rapists, pedophiles and adulterers. I truly hope the Council members are able to see the truth about who we are as gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans- gendered individuals. We are your sons and daughters, aunts and uncles, mothers and fathers, doctors and lawyers, legislators, artists and business owners, students and retired person. We are Latino, Native American, of European dissent, Asian and of all other ethnicities. We are Catholic, Christian, Muslim, agnostic, Jewish and of all religious faiths. We are even Republican, Democrat, Libertarian and Independent. We are homeless and housed, rich and poor, young and old. We worry about taxes, health care, paying our monthly bills and caring for our families. In short, we are much like anyone else. If you have family or friends that are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered, then you probably already know this. That said, there are ways that we differ. One of the most glaring ways is that we are not equal citizens under the law. As you heard, we can be fired, denied housing and refused accommodations. One of the reasons I started my own business was so that I didn‘t have to deal with the real possibility of discrimination as a result of coming out to an employer. These are very real and difficult choices that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered individuals make on a daily basis. It doesn‘t have to be this way. I believe that we should be judged based on our merit, character, integrity and abilities not based on who we love. This ordinance is about fairness and equality. It says that we really believe that Americans…that we really believe that the American promise that everyone should have the fair chance to be everything that they possibly can be, that they can go as far as their intellect, determination and creativity can take them. Please vote to help us achieve that promise for all Missoulians. Thank you.
Cathy Deschamps said, I‘m a volunteer on one of the neighborhood council teams and I am here tonight in favor of this ordinance. And there‘s so many things to talk about so I‘ll try to give Cliff notes. I understand and respect that everyone has a variety of religious beliefs. I was brought up in the Catholic church, I‘m happily married to a Mormon, we don‘t talk about religion at home. It works out better than way. But with regards to that, I wish at some point we could stop cherry-picking passages out of the Bible. Yes, it may say that homosexuality is an abomination. It also says that adultery is a sin and they used to stone people for that, but this goes on all the time. It also said that you shouldn‘t eat shellfish and that you shouldn‘t mix your textiles but, you know, we don‘t take those things literally now at this point because as you know the Bible has been translated many, many times and sometimes, even with an email, you know how they change as they go through the system and they take on a whole new meaning. So I wish that we could just respect everyone‘s beliefs and maybe not target specific groups because we‘re not targeting the adulterers and various facts of that. So to move on, someone had brought up an issue about the black community and civil rights. Let me tell you that Coretta Scott King is champion for the LGBT community. So is Julian Bond, the President, the Chairman of the NAACP. And he got up and he spoke and he talked about why this is a civil issue not a religious issue, not a special rights issue. And so if we could find a common ground and understand that religious groups, churches, they are already protected. All we have to fear is fear itself. So I think that with everything that‘s in place, religious groups are protected, churches are protected, you won‘t have to perform gay marriages and chances are the LGBT community is not going to come to your church to get married if you‘re against it. So with that, I want to say that I‘ve had all kinds of people come to my door, knocking and asking me to join their church but I‘ve never had a gay person come to my door to say, will you join our club? Thank you.
Beth Salonen said, I‘ve been a Missoula resident for about 12 years and I‘m here tonight because I believe that draft 4 of the illegal discrimination ordinance is unnecessary. And I‘m not going to repeat some things that some people have already addressed, trying to keep things a little short but I do believe that the state of Montana already has antidiscrimination law and I think that law is sufficient. I think the issue of the bathroom issue has come up and, yes, the word ―restroom‖ is in the ordinance and I think we should just use some common sense about that. And somebody has stated that people know which bathrooms to use and women use women‘s and men use men and on the infrequent instances that somebody that‘s transgender uses a different bathroom, probably most of us if we were in that bathroom would not know the difference and so I think it‘s kind of a really moot point. And so I‘ll just leave it at that and thank you.
Danielle Stanley said, I‘m a senior at Hellgate High School and I appreciate all of you letting me go because I still have English homework. I would like to address the issue of safety. As an 18-year-old City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 27 woman, I‘ve been the victim of one rape and two counts of sexual assaults and I have never ever felt unsafe around transgender, gay, lesbian or bisexual members of my community. I‘d also like to say that this ordinance would not be imposing an alternative sexuality lifestyle on Missoulians but only equality for people who do practice these lifestyles. I do ask you to not be afraid of those who know themselves and who are not afraid to express who they are. Thank you.
Sonja Quackenbush said, I do reside within the City limits. Dick Haines knows me well. We‘ve had many conversations on my front doorstep. He is my Councilman. I am also a part of a small Montana family corporation, excuse me, and we own two businesses within the City limits of Missoula. Last year alone we had a combined payroll of $596,000 that we paid out to Missoula residents to work for us. We also paid over $77,000 in property taxes. I wish you could see our employee roster. We have quite a roster. We have Native Americans work for us, we have men, we have women, we have one lady currently who‘s from the Philippians and we have had people work for us from Sri Lanka. Don‘t worry, they were all carded and they were all legal to work here. Have we, in our 29 years of business, employed homo- sexuals? I think so but, you know what, as long as they came to work and did the job they were hired to do it was not an issue. There was one time I had a couple of other employees say to me, I think so and so is a lesbian and I said, really, is it causing a problem? Well, no I just think that. And I said, well, as long as she‘s coming to work and doing her job there really isn‘t a problem. And we‘ve talked a lot tonight about fear and I want to tell you what fear is as an employer. Fear is letting someone go because, frankly, they weren‘t a good employee. They didn‘t enhance your business, they didn‘t do the job that you had laid out for them to do and you terminated them and fear is that they‘re going to come back at you and sue you because you didn‘t perceive their gender. How are we supposed to perceive genders when this word ―perception‖ is being thrown around all the time? That is fear. I have over $15,000 every month I have to pay to my bankers. I need to have successful businesses. I need the freedom to hire the people that best enhance my business and best work and fit for your clientele and for the business that we perform. That is my right as an employer to hire whom I deem best. If there‘s an employee that is not performing, I need the right to terminate that employee because it‘s the best for my business. We all know that Missoula is suffering economically, Stone Container, a closed Macy‘s, we need a positive business environment. Please, please don‘t hang this over the heads of business people and that we have to be afraid who we hire and we don‘t hire. Just let us go on about our lives and conduct our business without one more ordinance to worry about. Thank you.
Lilly Wilson and Sandra Netz said, we represent the UM Women‘s Resource Center. As a group of dedicated to promoting feminist and gender issues, the Women‘s Resource Center considers itself a strong ally of the LGBTQI community, not only because many of our members can identify with at least one of the letters of LGBTQI, including myself, but also for the same reason that supporters of the Suffrage tended to be supporters of abolition and vice-a-versa. Because we consider ourselves feminists, it‘s natural that we consider ourselves advocates on behalf of all marginalized groups. The LGBTQI community is patently a marginalized group and we fully support ending discrimination against them. Because we are a women‘s group, we also think it‘s necessary to share a few words regarding our status as women for it seems as though those opposing this antidiscrimination bill are concerned mostly with our safety. But we‘d like to bring up the point that the protection of women should include the protection of trans-women as well. As far as we can tell those opposing the bill have neglected an important distinction having to do with the difference between one‘s biological sex, which itself isn‘t always clearly obvious, and one‘s gender. The ordinance in question is designed to protect self-identified women who wish to use the restroom and not designed to protect sketchy male rapists who enter a women‘s bathroom. It‘s of the upmost importance to sharply distinguish between the class of sketchy sex offenders and the class of people who are LGBTQI. To make such a correlation between classes is unwarranted, unfair and ignorant. To conclude, the Women‘s Resource Center fully supports the passing of this ordinance and does not foresee it causing any harm to women. To the contrary, we foresee it sending the message that all women, including trans, lesbian, bisexual and queer women have intrinsic dignity and rights.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, and I will note that if you want to go two or three or four at a time, as long as you‘re in the three-minute rule, giddy-up.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 28
Starla Gabey said, I‘ve been a resident for nearly four years. I support and hope that you will support this ordinance and I wanted to see just a couple of things. Some people have talked about the fear of the whole bathroom thing, which just amazes me because bathrooms are crazy anyway and I can‘t imagine too many men wanting to come into a women‘s restroom because there‘s always such a line. But as a single mom of four kids, three boys and a daughter, as I was raising my kids I was always fearful of restrooms, and I don‘t think this ordinance is going to change that. We, as parents, have to always be diligent to make sure that our children are in a safe place and I don‘t think this ordinance is going to make it better or make that worse. We‘re always going to be worried because we‘re parents. And I guess, Reverend Himes, you were involved with the Darby Creation and we fought you then and won and we‘re going to win now because…
Mayor Engen said, Starla, I‘m going to have you address the Chair this evening. I‘m going to require that from everyone.
Starla Gabey said, okay, not a problem. Christ said to love everyone. He said one another. There were no lines after that that said those that are straight, those that are white, didn‘t say we can‘t love homosexuals or heterosexuals. And I think maybe if some of the spiritual people would maybe take that into mind, and I hope that you will as well, and I support equality. Thank you.
Lloyd Phillips said, I‘ve been a resident of Missoula about 35 years. I am a pastor. I am also one of the elected leaders of the Missoula Christian Network which represents I think about over 50 churches and ministries. I‘m not for this ordinance and I hope you‘ll reconsider and vote against it. I probably agree with a lot of what we‘ve heard tonight in opposition to this but I want to speak in light of how it‘s going to affect the business community here, because I‘m interested in all of Missoula, all the people, gay, straight, everybody needs a job. And I believe it‘s already difficult to do business in Missoula, and I believe this is going to make it even more difficult for people to do business here. This ordinance is bad news for business. There is ambiguity in this proposed ordinance and no matter what people say what it‘s intent is, it‘s what it says that‘s going to go to court. It‘s going to open the door wide for frivolous lawsuits, it‘s detrimental to getting the most qualified candidate. In previous positions I‘ve hired hundreds of people in this town over the years and I tried to get the most qualified candidate. I didn‘t concern myself with their sexual preference or whatever. In fact, in this town I‘ve been fired and discriminated against for being a Christian. But anyway this wording in this is not just for protection but for promotion. It says right in there requires that for an otherwise qualified person, it does not say for the most qualified person. If they‘re otherwise qualified, then you must hire them according to the wording of this ordinance. It says it requires reasonable commendation, not for the most qualified but for an otherwise qualified applicant. It requires giving a positive job reference regardless of the person‘s work history and makes an employer…that then makes an employer liable for not disclosing potentially litigious information to a perspective employer. It takes away the freedom of discretion from business owners and landlords and the freedom of expression from them. It allows for excessive fines and punishment and allows for the wording anyway says that if they‘re guilty of this, then they can be convicted. That‘s guilty before conviction. It opens wide the door for thought crimes and effectively makes an employer guilty until proven innocent which is very difficult to disprove, hence, a constitutional guarantee of innocent until proven guilty. There are many other things in there including a continuation of a $500 fine for each day that goes by when there‘s been a violation. So I want to ask you please to reconsider and vote against this. Thank you.
Roger Johnsrud said, it‘s just like the park out here and after a nice tar and feathering, I‘ll probably have to move out to it. Anyway I don‘t know why we‘re limiting our times on such an important matter tonight because our bigger brothers, you know, they work on Sunday night and Christmas and stuff like that to pass these major bills. I think you should consider that here in the future. I want the Council to know that I could care less about the sexual preferences of an individual. I mean after all we live in Montana, okay, so we can do anything we want to do here. There are plenty of laws on the state and federal level that cover antidiscrimination and a jailed individual such as peeping toms violating the law regardless of how the bathroom is labeled. Unfortunately, people have turned this into a gay, anti-gay issue. I think it‘s even more than that because if you‘ll look around and as you watch the video that have gone through here, you‘re going to find that the majority of the people that are for this appear to be in the City and the City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 29 majority against it are still sitting in the audience out of the County. So we‘re going to create a division between City and County it appears. The…I‘m concerned about the disturbing trend of the government officials spending taxpayer money without representation of the people. The law is another example of government exercising power over individuals and businesses using legal wordsmith. I have talked to thousands of people in the last week and I can state there are very few in favor of this ordinance. With the exception of the number of people that have spoken in favor of it here, the only other group that I found extremely favorable are 17-year-old males that can hardly wait to go into the women‘s bathrooms at school. If this ordinance is put into effect, has the Council considered and been authorized all the funds necessary for the public bathrooms. Now I know that Ms. Rye has said that there is no evidence but as we know, a few years ago somebody in very high authority in this country changed the word ―is.‖ There are going to be a lot of legal challenges to this ordinance. The business community is going to bear the brunt of this cost initially. However, activists on all sides will demand the government follow their own ordinances. We do not elect you to waste our government time and our taxearned money to try to overturn federal and state discrimination law which is already more than sufficient, as eloquently stated by the ACLU lawyer, that this is not new, the laws are already in place. Nor were you elected to create laws to manipulate the business in favor or disfavor of a particular business. All we ask you to do is consider all of the situation and the possible financial consequences because opinions by the lawyers are still opinions until they‘ve gone to court. Thank you.
Dan Spencer said, I‘m a resident of Missoula. I live in the Rattlesnake and I speak as a citizen who strongly supports the proposed ordinance and I‘m very thankful that Council members, Dave Strohmaier and Stacy Rye have sponsored it. I also identify myself publicly tonight as a gay man, a Christian, an ordained Christian minister and theologian. I identify myself publicly as a gay man because I believe it‘s important to have faces on the issues before us. This ordinance is very important to me, to my life partner Pat and to our family. Opponents have raised hypothetical fears about what this ordinance would mean for children and I agree that we should consider its effects on our community‘s children. Our children, Kyle, Laurel and Katie, should be able to live in a city where they need not fear about discrimination against their parents and the impacts that might have on their lives, loss of a job, loss of a home, loss of health insurance. No children of LGBT parents or of any parents should have to fear the ramifications of discrimination against their parents, just as no LGBT child should have to grow up in a city that does not protect him or her from discrimination based on sexual gender. I also want to identify myself publicly as an active Christian because the way some opponents of this ordinance publicly root their opposition in Christianity in the Bible, deeply distorting what I believe to be the center of my faith tradition which is centered in the inclusive love and justice. These values are at the heart of this ordinance which expands our moral community to fully include and embrace its LGBT citizens. And I identify myself publicly as an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ, a Christian ethicist and theologian because I have dedicated much of my life to the study of the Christian tradition and its central values of inclusive love and justice. As a student of Christian history, I‘m aware how tragically divided the Christian community has often been when confronted with issues of social justice, as it appears divided on this issue. Tragically when our nation was confronted with the issue of slavery or the full inclusion of women or civil rights, there were Christians fighting on both sides. Christians will often times quote the Bible to argue that slaves should be kept in slavery, women should be kept subordinate to men, civil rights should not be extended. And I am proud that my congregation‘s tradition uses the same Bible to argue for mandated inclusion. So just as there are Christians today who will quote the Bible to maintain discrimination against LGBT citizens, there are also many others who believe that the Biblical mandate for inclusive love and justice overrides selective proof texting. And our city and our society will be stronger and more just with ordinances like this one. I urge your support.
Jean Larson said, I‘m a Missoula resident and I‘m a minister of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. I‘m honored to speak in favor of this nondiscrimination ordinance. I speak strongly in favor of the ordinance because it will make our community safer and more just for all of our citizens, including members of the GLBT community. My commitment as a Christian leads me to this affirmation of public wellbeing and dignity since every person is created in the image of God. Every person. My denomination which is the largest Protestant denomination in the state of Montana affirmed the principles of this ordinance last summer at our official legislative assemblies, both state-wide and nationally. Our social state, called ―Human Sexuality Gift and Trust‖ says this, ―This church opposes all forms of verbal or City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 30 physical harassment and assault based on sexual orientation. It supports legislation and policies to protect civil rights and to prohibit discrimination in housing, employment and public services. It is called upon congregations and members to welcome, care for and support same-gender couples and their families and to advocate for their legal protection. This church will attend to the need for equal protection, equal opportunities and equal responsibilities under the law and just treatment for those with varied sexual orientation and gender identity.‖ That is the official statement of the largest Protestant denomination in the state of Montana. So, Mr. Mayor, Council members and fellow citizens, it is with joy and hope that I share this commitment of my denomination with you tonight. Many ordinary Christians support full inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in the blessings of equal protection under the law and the safety that it affords all of our citizens. I urge you to vote for this ordinance and help our community continue to thrive. Thank you very much.
Anne Harris, 4803 Calvin Court, Ward 2, said, I raised myself up in asking you to pass this ordinance. I‘ve been a citizen of Missoula and a voter here since 1976. I‘m a parent, a grandparent with two wonderful daughters, one son-in-law and one granddaughter who are all calling Missoula home. I belong to a strong and active evangelical Christian church whose roots are traced back to the pilgrims. We support persons of faith who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered or inter-sexed. I‘m a clinical mental health councilor and practiced here since 1987 and I‘ve served some 2,000 families with a specialty in persons who have suffered childhood abuse, neglect and sexual trauma. For the past 13 years I‘ve been working with violent and sexual offenders and I‘m a clinical member of the Montana Sex Offender Treatment Association whose members are recognized state-wide by Montana‘s courts as the experts on sexual offenders and their treatment. Also for the past 16 years I‘ve provided through my private practice counseling services to the GLBTI community principally to persons who struggle with their gender identity. From these experiences I feel well qualified to you this evening endorsing your acceptance of the proposal for antidiscrimination ordinance. I will not waste any more time regarding the well intended by baseless claims of the bathroom arguments. I believe that your attorney has addressed this matter in his brief to the Council quite clearly. I will state unequivocally the need for a clear statement from this body to declare that who a person loves or how an individual expresses their gender identity should have no influence over whether they can work, rent, buy a home, be served in a restaurant, rent a hotel room here while traveling, make a purchase of a retailer or seek the care of our wonderful medical community. As to the question this ordinance is providing any type of encouragement to sexual predators to use bathrooms for access to victims, this is plainly absurd. As an expert in this field, there are no instances of this occurring other than people who were predators and the open ordinances in those communities gave no special privileges for them to enter those restrooms. At the beginning of my statement I made reference to being a parent and grandparent and a professional person but on a more personal note I want to also state that I‘m a male to female transsexual, and I and my family are proud to be from Missoula, Montana and are civil pride will only increase to say we live in a community that affirms the rights of all its citizens including those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered or inter-sexed. Thank you.
Taryn Nash said, I‘m a Missoula native and I‘m currently in Spokane right now attending physician assistance school but will be coming back in three months. I am also Tei Nash‘s daughter. Tei Nash, if you don‘t know already, is the chairman of thenotmybathroom.com. I am also a member of the LGBT community. I am here for two very important reasons tonight and I appreciate you listening to my short statements. The first is to address my father. He just left. I don‘t know if you saw that but because of my presence I believe he left. Dad, I strongly disagree with the way you have been portraying the LGBT community who are my friends. You have gone too far. I will not sit back any longer and be quiet. I love you because you are my dad but I have lost respect for you. Your blanket judgments and irrational conclusions are ignorant, hurtful and you need to realize this crusade you are on is wrong and it affects me personally. It makes me sad to say this but, Dad, right now I am ashamed to call you my father. I am asking you to stop your ridiculous agenda of battling the LGBT rights or you will lose me forever. The second reason I am here tonight is to encourage the Council members to pass this very important ordinance. I plan to practice medicine with an emphasis in geriatric care in the Missoula community, and I hope to live in a community where I won‘t be discriminated based on my orientation. I also encourage you to pass this ordinance because these wonderful people of the LGBT community deserve protection City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 31 against discrimination in all areas. They are hardworking, trustworthy, loving and respectable people and I am proud to call them my family. Thank you for your time.
Olivia Riutta said, I‘m the Outreach Director with Montana Women Vote. We‘re a statewide coalition organization made up of nine member organizations working to educate and mobilize low income women to participate at all levels of the democratic process. Our statewide office is here and I call Missoula home. Our Montana Women Vote member organizations work on issues that are important to women such as economic justice, reproductive and environmental health, violence against women and human rights. We were one of the organizations that signed onto a recent letter to this body that outlined our clear support of the ordinance but also challenged the misinformation on the effects of this ordinance on women and girls in Missoula. Let‘s be clear, violence against women in our society is a real issue and one that we hope policy-makers and community members continue to address. Ordinances like this one, which offer protection to individuals who experience discrimination in society, help prevent violence against lesbians and transgender women. Additionally, basic rights such as those outlined in this ordinance and protections under the law have been invaluable to the women‘s movement, the advancement of women in our society and our participation in the democratic process, me being here. We believe that the same rights must be afforded to members of the LGBT community here in Missoula. We applaud your efforts and we believe we need to pass this ordinance, we need to ensure dignity, equality, fairness and safety in our community and we fully support the passage. Thank you.
Daniel Bealon said, I‘m a resident of Missoula and I‘m here today to ask you to support the ordinance because I am a Christian. The church I grew up in, St. Francis in the foothills, United Methodist, was deeply focused on the idea of love. We were taught that everyone is equal in the eyes of God, we were taught not to judge and we were taught that love is the greatest gift that God ever bestowed on human kind. Our church has many LGBT members including lay clergy. These Christians are some of the kindest most beautiful people I have ever known. Many of them are deeply called by their Creator to serve. They are truly children of God. Anyone who‘s ever grown up in a church community knows of the term ―church family‖ is no understatement. This wonderful men and women are my family. The people who support each other through baptisms and through funerals, through marriages and through tragedies, and every day these people live knowing that in any moment they can be evicted from their homes or fired from their jobs because of who God has created the to be. It hurts, and I‘m sure it would hurt any of you, to have my family harmed because of who they are. The fact is that discrimination the LGBT community faces, fall solidly against the lessons I learned in Sunday school. I was taught that Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love your neighbor. As a Christian I refuse to be silent. I refuse to bear false witness. I refuse to deny the basic holiness of my LGBT brothers and sisters. I refuse to deny the beauty of their love and the light in their souls. These people, these incredible people, are my family and I refuse to believe that God hates my family. There is nothing godly about discrimination. Discrimination is not human, it is not American and to me it is most certainly not Christian. Please, for my family, cast your vote for love.
Mayor Engen said, because I‘m not authorized to run the timer, I‘m going to use my watch for a moment. We‘ll see if I can make that work.
Marilyn McIntyre said, I‘m a native Montanan, 55 years, so I suspect I may be one of the few native Montanans here, I‘m not sure. My husband and I a few years ago moved to Frenchtown and I recently find myself back in Missoula only because he‘s had to seek employment elsewhere and he spends a lot of time on the road so that leaves me here. I would suggest to the other side that, and many of you here maybe if I were to say to you that I am a member of the NRA and I like to kill and eat animals that that might offend a lot of you. And you would have that right to be personally offended. You have the right to, you know, make that choice. And if you had a rental property and you chose not to rent to me because I‘m hanging my dead animals around and carrying my guns in and out of your property, you might decide because of ideological reasons that you‘re on one side and I‘m on the other that maybe you wouldn‘t want to rent to me, you might feel threatened. You have that right. I have nothing against the gay and lesbian community. I think we all have choices. We‘re all able to make those choices. This a moral issue to me and I say to you and I mean it, I carried a sign out there and I said, shame on you, Mayor Engen, and I say shame on us if we pass this. I am adamantly opposed to this. All of you, thank you. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 32
Curtis Davey said, thank you for allowing me to speak. I am a 33-year resident of Missoula and a graduate of the University of Montana with a Bachelor of Science in health education. I‘m a proud parent of a 14-year-old honor roll student at Washington Middle School, way to go, Christopher, and thank you, Alex Apostle; also, the husband of one lovely lady. I am here to speak against this ordinance. This isn‘t about bathrooms. I want to point out the white elephant that‘s in the middle of the room here, this is about the LGBT agenda, to force those who have an opinion based on an objective moral obligation to accept this moral intrusion. Every day it seems we are treated in some new…to some new incident of currying favor deals or power plays, dubious legislation, decisions of the court or ordinances to advance the personal agenda of some politician or group at the expense of religion, moral standards, health, safety and welfare. Now before this Council is an amendment to change the Missoula Municipal Code Title 9 Public Peace, Morals and Welfare to include members of a group. This organization stated agenda is to remove freedom of conscience by legitimizing their behavior through ordinance, intimidation and misinformation. This Council must first ask itself if there is a compelling City interest in this ordinance? Is there discrimination? We‘ve heard some stories about discrimination here. I‘ve applied for a job as a licensed practical nurse with the Missoula County Schools in the 1980s and was denied the job because I‘m a male, even though I had a college education and perfect credentials but because I was a heterosexual male in a women‘s dominated field, I was denied the job. But my son is also 6 feet, 4 inches tall and a 14-year-old and he‘s the subject of bullying and intimidation but I tell him just what I had to learn, get over it. The administration…we must also consider the administrative complexities of classifying and protecting expression and identity which creates ambiguous definitions and causes undue hardships on businesses and individual property owners. Also this is not…homosexually is not genetic, it is a choice and consequently homosexuality is changeable unlike race, national origin or sex and is undeserving of a special category. Also this is a lifestyle that has serious mental and physical health risks as acknowledged by some professionals here. I was a licensed practical nurse and I took care of people with AIDS in the ‗80s. That was before there was a lot of knowledge about this and I have extreme empathy for people who have suffered this terrible disease. I don‘t have time to go into some of the Journal of American Academy of Pediatrics and some of the World Health Organization, the Center for Disease Control or any of their documentation which clearly demonstrates that this is a health risk. I‘ve been called a bigot, a homophobe, a liar and many expletives which decorum prevents me from mentioning them here when I have presented these facts. However, the CDC, the World Health Organization, the American College of Pediatricians, American Psychological Association all states the health problems associated with this lifestyle. This is not my data but it is my opinion and the last time I checked the Constitution that was okay, but this is a sign to the community. I urge the Council to not accept this amendment to the bill and that we defeat it. Thank you very much.
Gary Bergman said, I was born here in Missoula, raised my family here. I am here to oppose this ordinance. I must assure you, in spite of some of the characterizations here tonight to the opposite, I‘m not a homophobe, I‘m not trying to set up a smokescreen, I don‘t even smoke. I mean you want to talk about discrimination, look at those poor smokers. Maybe the ACLU…
Mayor Engen said, excuse me, sir. This is kind of against your time. I‘d ask that we not have signs in here please. I‘d like everyone to respect the rules, right? Thank you. Sorry, sir.
Gary Bergman said, maybe somebody could write a special ordinance for the smoker because they‘re really discriminated against. Anyway, proponents of this antidiscrimination ordinance would have us believe it‘s only designed to prevent discrimination but I think it goes far beyond that. Equal rights are not the same thing as extraordinary, special rights for a few at the expense of the rest of us. Political correctness when carried to extremes becomes a type of insanity. This proposed ordinance includes discrimination against one‘s perceived social orientation, gender, identity or expression. A man who perceives himself or herself to be a woman today must be treated as such apparently according to this ordinance or we will have a discrimination case brought against us, a case that common sense would not entertain but this ordinance will actually invite. Edward Burke once said, ―Bad laws are the worse sort of tyranny.‖ I believe we‘re looking at that kind of bad law here, that potential for tyranny of a special minority, with the support of a few radical politicians. I have here with me copies of only two of the many articles in the news concerning this issue. One from Massachusetts concerning an older woman City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 33 struggling to save her family restaurant after several accusations of supposed transgender discrimination were brought against her by a transgender activist. And this one from the state of Maine which I now quote, ―The little girl‘s room won‘t be just for little girls anymore if the Main Human Rights Commission has its way. The Main Human Rights Commission is taking heat over a proposal that bans schools from enforcing gender division in sports teams, school organizations, bathrooms and locker rooms. Saying that forcing a student into a particular room or a group because of their biological gender amounts to discrimination. The issue came to light last year when the Commission ruled that under the Main Human Rights Act a school had discriminated against a 12-year-old transgender boy by denying him access to the girls‘ bathroom.‖ Well, there we go, the tyranny of bad laws and the can of worms that that opens up and now we want to open the same can of worms in Missoula? Some of you say this would never happen. I ask you why not? It looks to me like it will happen. I urge you to vote no to this ordinance. Thank you.
Steven Getty said, I‘m a Missoula resident and I‘ll keep this short. I support this ordinance and for all the many reasons that have already been displayed and I‘d like to urge you to vote yes on this ordinance. Thank you.
Brian Cochran said, I‘m here to speak in favor of the proposed ordinance. I‘m an associate professor in clinical psychology and I‘m also the Co-director of the Women and Gender Studies Program at the University of Montana. I speak tonight as a private citizen. I‘m proud to have called Missoula my home for the past seven years. I‘m here today because I believe the proposed ordinance is an important step for the City of Missoula in ensuring equality for all of its citizens. In the months since the ordinance was introduced, there‘s been a lot of speculation about what this ordinance will mean to the Missoula community and I believe that much of the speculation is based on unfounded fears. Will my minister be forced to marry gay men and lesbians against his or her will? Can I safely use public restrooms? Will there be a lot of frivolous lawsuits that affect the City? I believe that such fears come from our society‘s emphasis on gender and from socially defined concepts of what it means to be a woman or a man. Society teaches us from childhood that those who don‘t fit into the expectations of what it means to be male or female are punished. But I believe gender is far more complex than what we were taught as children. That for some people, like myself, loving someone of the same gender seems hardwired into who we are. And for other people the gender in which they were raised has never seemed to be the right fit. Denying housing, employment or bathroom access to people based on who they love or who they are is discrimination. Fear of the unknown is what fuels discrimination. The antidote for fear is information. So what do we know about the ordinance, about LGBT individuals and about the discrimination that happens? We know that this ordinance will not change the laws related to marriage nor will it condone sexual offenses. Establishing that discrimination is illegal is not a special right, it is a key principle of a democratic society. We also know that being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender is not a mental illness. All major mental health organizations have taken a stance firmly saying that that is the case and all those organizations that said that discrimination against LGBT individuals is what puts them at elevated risks for negative health outcomes. Living with discrimination at both the individual level and at the institutional level has definitely been associated with negative impacts on mental health. The opponents of this ordinance can speculate about ministers forced to marry gay couples or bathroom assaults but these are unfounded fears. Please don‘t allow unfounded fears to be an obstacle preventing a more equal society for all of us here in Missoula. Please approve the ordinance.
Diane Keefoffer said, in November of 2007 Kmart in Missoula hired me as a stocker. There were two other stockers that were also hired that week and we had the same experience, we had the same job, same work, same pay. Roxanne was my trainer and supervisor. We worked side by side seven to nine hours a day and we chatted about her family, the prices, the weather and we got along real well. Two weeks later in the back room the guys were joking about being gay or something and I said, hey, you know, keep it clean, guys, I‘m gay, and they kind of laughed uneasily. After that everything changed. I was buzzed in at 3:00 a.m. each morning when I got there but someone had to come and let me in, unlock the door. No one, when I buzzed on that morning, no one came for me for like 15-20 minutes and I was late punching in and got reprimanded for that too. When I saw Roxanne I asked her where the toilet brushes went and she kind of looked at me but she didn‘t. She like she looked right through me like I wasn‘t even there, she didn‘t say anything to me at all, but I could feel her hostility. The store manager City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 34 later that day called me in and said, you are mandated to stock 50 boxes in an hour for every hour you work or you will be fired. Neither of the other two new stockers were told this. No one else was given that mandate for their job. A week later the manager called me in again and said, you didn‘t meet that 50 box an hour requirement and you‘re always late so you‘re being let go. I was astounded. I worked hard. I worked real hard and I was being fired for being gay. It wasn‘t right. That day I went over to the Mansfield Library and got onto one of the websites there and filed a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, it‘s a federal commission, their offices are…their closest offices are in Seattle. A week later I heard from a representative of the EEOC and she, you know, made sure I was the person who filed the report and that I lived in Montana and I said yes and she says, in Montana you are not protected from discrimination.
Mayor Engen said, we‘re at time.
Diane Keefoffer said, okay. She said there‘s nothing we can do, I‘m sorry. I wanted to cry. This is the United States of America and it‘s not right.
Jennifer Swede said, Mr. Mayor, Council members…
Mayor Engen said, is the green light on your microphone on?
Jennifer Swede said, yeah, it is.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Jennifer Swede said, I‘m terrified to speak here tonight but I have to. I go to work every day, I do the best job I can, I pay my rent every month and unfortunately in my case that isn‘t enough, that can change at the whim of somebody because I‘m a transsexual woman.
Mayor Engen said, and may I ask your name for the record please?
Jennifer Swede said, oh, I‘m sorry, Jennifer Swede and I am a Missoula resident and a lifelong Montanan.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Jennifer Swede said, a lot of what I‘ve wanted to say has already been said here tonight so all I can do is ask you for the protection afforded all other groups in this City. Thank you.
Todd Zimmerman said, I come before you tonight as a resident of Missoula, a family, father of three lovely children and a wife. I also come before you as a business man in Missoula opening a business here four years ago. I currently have a business here in your lovely City.
Mayor Engen said, and your name, sir?
Todd Zimmerman said, and I‘m Todd Zimmerman.
Mayor Engen said, thank you, sir.
Todd Zimmerman said, I ask that you look at this in several aspects because the language in this anti- discrimination law I believe asks that your discernment be taken in consideration on each and every one of your backs, as City Council people because I believe us, as taxpayers, that we‘ve obligated you to do the right thing for us here and that is to take a look at what the state and federal laws already have offered here. And I think you‘re opening up something that each and every one of you, if you take a deep concentration on and discernment in and take a look at it, I believe that you will find that there‘s a lot of loopholes and a lot of open language in this ordinance that‘s going to allow for multiple lawsuits throughout several businesses, whether it be firing, hiring or whatever we have. You know, last I‘ve seen City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 35 sexual predators didn‘t wear a tattooed stamp on their forehead that said that that‘s what I am. If they have a transsexual moment in going to a bathroom or whether…whatever the situation is, we have a woman, a child in there, even if they only have an emotional or physical breakdown over that, the lawsuits, the ramified case of that is going to come before this City, this City is going to have to fight that in the court of law. They are going to have to pay an attorney to fight this. You know that now as you are defendants in a case, you know. The first thing is us as business owners in the City are going to feel it. We‘re going to have these burdens laid on us and it‘s going to pass on to the City level as well as the state level. I‘m asking that you do vote against this but if not to at least table it, leave it for somebody at a different time to deal with as the facts is, I don‘t think you want to open this can of worms because the dollars and cents of this bill, this ordinance, if it becomes law we‘ll have ramified cases in the City and the state that have never been seen before. And we‘re already fighting a bad economy, you know. Stone Container, several businesses, you‘ve heard it time and again tonight from other small business people in this community, so I just ask that you either table this or vote against it on those basis only.
John Blake said, I‘m gay and I‘m from Montana. I‘m also a Missoula resident. The first words that I stated were the same way in which I addressed 250,000 people in D.C. on October the 12th, when I stated unequivocally that I was not going to live in a place or accept a reality that did not allow the LGBT community to be recognized as fellow human beings. As you can see, I‘m also an African American man. I have stood here for hours and heard statements in relation to racial issues that make very clear that race is not finished here. My prepared statements were in an attempt to relate race to the LGBT community and the discrimination that we have experienced. I don‘t think I have to do that because the opponents of this ordinance have already done it for me. I hope that you will support this ordinance. Montana Equality Now of which I am the co-chair and co-founder hopes that you will support this ordinance. I don‘t know what more I can say except that I have never even in front of 250,000 people been so scared to state who I was and what I needed. I hope Missoulians will think about that. Thank you.
Rocky Allen said, I live on the west side of Missoula and have done so for 3-1/2 years now. I have a small business which hasn‘t been making any headway but that isn‘t the problem. The problem…you go back in history, 60 years ago in a small town in Michigan my mother was told blatantly at the radio station where she was working that in no way would we ever make a woman a manager of a radio station. Flash forward a few years when we‘re living in Missouri and low and behold in the city swimming pool blacks and whites couldn‘t swim at the same time. Then we flash forward again to the mid-‗60s when the civil rights acts were taking place and no discrimination on basis of race and housing was being discussed. And what did I hear there? Something I heard earlier this evening, you can‘t legislate morality. Hmmm. Well, I celebrate the diversity in my family and friends. Of my five grandchildren I have three whose father were Mexican, the other two are Jewish. And furthermore, my step-grandchildren, two of those were adopted from Korea so already there‘s a diversity with my family and I love seeing diversity among my friends as well. I, of course, by now you‘ve probably guessed I support the ordinance. In the friends I have known people of all kinds of genders and gender preferences and among them are three who…women who were born men and went through the very painful and a long process of getting their bodies converted to the way that they felt intrinsically they were. Please be kind to these people. Support the ordinance. Give us all hope that Missoula will welcome people such as my granddaughter and her lesbian partner who just produced my first great-grandchild this year. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, so, folks, it‘s10:41. You‘re all doing really well, I thank you for that. I am going to just simply suggest that as tired as you are some of the ears are getting tired as well, so again just a gentle reminder that if someone‘s made your point, please say someone‘s made my point and I support or oppose but you‘ve got your three minutes so whatever you need to do. Yes, sir. Oh, I‘m sorry, your turn.
John Porter said, that‘s okay. I‘m a resident of Missoula, married. I just had a question maybe somebody should ask about sexual orientation. Is that LGBTN or does it include anything else? I‘m just curious about that. That‘s all I‘ve got. I oppose the bill, I‘m sorry.
Emmitt said, very briefly, thank you for your patience. I‘ve never spoken to this body before but my name is Emmitt. I‘ve lived in Missoula for 24 years. After prayer and consideration, just briefly, I am against this City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 36 ordinance on constitutional grounds. I am not against…I have had neighbors who are gay and lesbian in my old apartment. I have drunk wine with them. I‘ve debated about their lifestyle. I am not here to debate the homosexual lifestyle. I am opposed to it. It has nothing to do with this. What this has to do with…if someone was forced to hire a homosexual, forced to rent to them that would be unconstitutional. It‘s the constitutionally the grounds. I am a punk rocker and yes I have been nearly murdered for being a punk rocker and I‘ve been discriminated against. The police officers who handled the case and the attorneys did an excellent job at bringing the perpetrator to justice and there were no ordinances protecting the punk rock community. But I believe that there have been protections already in place to protect those who have been gay bashed or any such thing. I do not have time in this body to explain everything but on all the arguments that I have heard against the ordinance, I am against the ordinance, after prayerful consideration, I‘m not, of course, not Democrat or Republican. I am against the war. I have angered many of my colleagues on the left and the right for many different things but thank you for your time and God bless the United States of America. This has been exciting.
Doug Wright said, I‘m a resident of Missoula, 47 years, and there isn‘t much more to be said on either side of this argument. I would just ask that all of you please consider tabling this until it could be possibly brought forth to the residents of Missoula to decide. I think it‘s too big an issue for the small group of you to end up making a decision for all of us. I would just…if you don‘t bring it to the vote, I would ask you to please vote no.
Kandi Matthew-Jenkins said, I‘ve been a resident in Missoula for almost 33 years now. I‘m going to use a certain word in my testimony. It‘s a word that I looked up in the 1907 and 1924 Dictionary and I think it defines what I‘m trying to say. I emailed the request for the complaints lodged by the public that was brought to us…that has brought us to this ordinance to be provided to the public by the Council. Are those complaints in City Council Chambers? Seeing that no complaints have been brought, I can‘t understand why this ordinance is being brought forth and I feel that it is frivolous and should be tabled. If the ordinance is called for, then it should not be referred to as an antidiscrimination ordinance because it discriminates against all those who profess a belief in a creator God. Which system considers sexual deviancy inappropriate and encompasses more of the population than those it is professing to protect. Remember we are a majority ruled republican form of government. This is not an ordinance about fairness or equity. This is about making people recognize and accept deviant sexual behavior as a lifestyle. In this statement I am not speaking of genetic and anomaly which happens in a limited sense to all living things. I am addressing those who have chosen to participate in a deviant sexual behavior and feel the need to force their decisions in life upon the rest of the population for acceptance. Where is the fairness and the equity for those of us who do not believe nor accept the deviant sexual behavior has a place in moral society. As a Christian and mother of six children, I have taught my children this truth of our Christian faith. I have not taught them to hate anyone with problems. I have taught them to show kindness and have encouraged them to stay away from sexual sin. That is my parental right, my Christian duty. This ordinance makes me a lawbreaker because of my belief system no matter what you say. If it is supposed to create a nondiscriminatory fair and equal playing field, for those who have a deviant sexual lifestyle, why has it not included child sex abusers, rapists and pedophiles? It seems that they also have deviant sexual behaviors. Why do you punish them when there is a legally licensed, nonprofit called North American Man/Boy Love Association made up of men who advocate sex with eight- year-olds if it is consensual? Or those in the mental health field who believe that pedophilia is a lifestyle and should not be a criminal offense? This is all very confusing. This is not about discrimination and never has been. This is about sexual choice agenda, very foreign to the principles involved with the founding of this very nation. This agenda is spoon fed with a stamp of approval through our schools, to the most tender of our population. This is a social issue not a governmental issue and I‘m sorry I‘m running out of time and I pray that you say no to this ordinance. If the vote is already been suggested before we spoke…
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Gordon Dexter said, I thank you for the opportunity of speaking. I want to thank Mr. Strohmaier and others who answered my emails and shared the concerns that I had. My name is Gordon Dexter. My family moved to Montana 45 years ago. I‘ve raised three children in the school systems, two have City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 37 graduated from the University of Montana and I now have a new little granddaughter. And I share concerns for all of them when I speak of the antidiscrimination ordinance. I‘m opposed to discrimination. I‘m opposed to brick throwing. I‘m opposed to name calling. I‘m opposed to cross burning. But I am vehemently opposed to this ordinance. As written, this ordinance will create reverse discrimination. In two of the sections that I expressed my concern with, while it supposedly allows Christian organizations, churches, Christian schools to maybe opt out of this, it does not allow that when you read the…it‘d be 5, under Section 2 Private Profit or to Provide Accommodations or Services. Many churches provide accommodations and services to nonmembers. We run Vacation Bible Schools, we run Bible camps, we run a number of other things. We have people that use our facilities to be married in. All of those things it appears at 2.5 would apply to churches. Also when it talks about public accommodations, it‘s not a private organization anymore if it has more than 100 members and provides some of these services. We provide some of those services. Now I am opposed to this. I represent a congregation that opposes it. As a pat member of the Montana Regular Baptist Fellowship Association, I represent the feelings of over 15 churches in Western Montana who are watching Missoula to see what they do. They are all to amen opposed to it. I think you‘re getting in over your heads. I would ask that you vote against it or at least put it to the vote of the people who live in Missoula. I guess that‘s all I have to say. Thank you for your consideration.
John Jenkins said, resident of Missoula 14 years. Everybody tired back there? I am. Just have one thing to say, Jesus was discriminated against and He was crucified for telling the truth but the difference is he was innocent and we are not, and I think that‘s what bothers us about being comfortable and being accepted.
Mayor Engen said, folks, we‘re going to have you…just go ahead and leave those microphones on if you would please.
Russ Smith said, I‘m a native of Missoula for 50 years. I have six children. I pastor a church here in town. I also own a business. A point of clarification earlier stated, churches do pay taxes on any business that they do within their church that‘s not a nonprofit circumstance. Just to clarify that earlier stated. I have four sons, two daughters. I‘d like to address this from a couple of areas and I oppose the ordinance. It‘s very confusing to read. It‘s not clear. Councilwoman Stacy, I just deferred you earlier…you said it doesn‘t refer t bathrooms and it does. That‘s not a derogatory statement towards you, it‘s just pointing out the confusing language of the ordinance and so I hope you don‘t take that as a personal statement. But the ordinance is very confusing. And quite honestly in Missoula we can‘t police discrimination. Two of my children are black, if you want to call them African American you can, they‘re black and they‘re incredible young men. I went to my parent-teacher child conference this year in the Missoula County Public Schools and my youngest child of nine years old was not sitting in the groups with the other children. He was sat by himself in another part of the classroom. Before coming here today I was told by one of my colleagues, another business owner, not to come because if I did and I spoke then I would lose business. Also as a pastor I was told that I shouldn‘t come because people wouldn‘t want to attend my church. My point of saying those three examples of my son, my business and my church are that‘s discrimination. You can‘t police the discrimination in this city. I‘m going to be discriminated against for my business, my church and I watched it with my son. This ordinance only brings the Christian community together. It‘s really rallied us and I want you all to remember that when it comes election time and I thank you for doing that for us if we‘ve never agreed on anything else, we agree on this. But I do tell you, you can‘t police discrimination and this is not going to solve anything in our City. Thank you.
Mary Nordhagen said, I am currently the Chair of the Unitarian Universal Fellowship of Missoula. We are lay-led so we have no professional minister to eloquently speak for us or to argue theology. For me personally even speaking in public is more than a bit of a stretch let alone waiting for hours to do so. But this is too big of an issue for us to remain silent, too important an issue not to make a public stand. Many of you here probably don‘t even know what Unitarian Universal is or what we stand for, however, we have a long history and a proud tradition of working for religious freedom, working for inclusion, for tolerance, celebrating diversity. The founder of the First Unitarian faith to be known literally, as Unitarianism, was Francis David. Way back in 1568 he convinced King John Sigismund of Transylvania that to declare one City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 38 religion as the state religion is wrong and King John decreed religious freedom. Unfortunately, within three years King John was dead, religious freedom temporarily died with him and Francis David died in prison because he would not renounce his beliefs. Since we‘re trying to get that quickly by here, I‘ll skip forward about three centuries to the early 1800s when William Ellery Channing, who was the father of American Unitarianism, and he was instrumental in sending Unitarianism on the path to where today our first principle is to affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every person. From the Universal side of our heritage, Josiah Ballou, a Universal minister of the mid-1800s, preached a religion of radical inclusion. He taught us that everyone is worthy. Excuse me…today standing on the side of love campaign caused our Unitarian Universalists to join our voices to those among us who have been marginalized by society‘s majorities, often merely because they do not fit some arbitrary measure of normality. The Missoula City Council cannot legislate a hate-free Missoula. People are free to believe as they wish, however, this Council can send a strong message about what behavior is intolerable and will not be allowed in this City. The Unitarian Universal Fellowship of Missoula supports this amendment and we encourage each member of the Council to vote it its favor. Thank you.
Kelly Hurzman said, I am a native Missoulian and I‘m a City resident now. I oppose this and I oppose those of you who are going for this and my vote will count. I ask that you please vote no on this and I thank all of you tonight who is on religious and moral grounds as stated everything that I‘ve wanted to say, so I‘ll keep it short. Thank you.
Larry Manchester said, I live at 4791 Christian Drive. I live in Ward 5. I stand before you tonight in favor of this ordinance. I believe that there are no valid reasons to discriminate. There are only excuses that some use to try to justify discrimination. I‘m tired of excuses that spread hate and intolerance. I please with the Council please send a message, Missoula does not discriminate. Thank you.
Laurie Franklin said, I reside in Missoula at 2347Wylie. This is my representative and I thank Dave Strohmaier and Stacy Rye for bringing this forward. I speak in favor of the ordinance. Most of the arguments that I was going to make tonight have been very eloquently expressed by other people so there‘s two unique perspectives I‘m going to bring to you, very briefly. One, I am a member of a local house of worship which is Jewish. I‘m speaking for myself here but I would like to say that as the Evangelical Lutheran pastor spoke, we also believe that everyone is created in the image of God but Salem el oheim and in the sanctity of life and that the guarantee of human rights and human dignity is consistent with us. Two, I‘m speaking non-controversially for Reformed Judaism which is the denomination I am affiliated with, which is open and affirming and has ordained Rabbis who are GLBTI for decades and has welcomed into its congregation with open harms GLBTI congregants. Three, once upon a time I was a skinny, 22-year-old and I had to go through a town in Redmond pre-Microsoft to get to my job. And I go by the construction site wearing my clothes of usual choice, which was blue jeans, work boots and a tee-shirt, kind of clothes you can change a tire in, and I had short hair and I was sort of skinny and the guys at the construction site would say to me, is that a boy or is that a girl? After a couple of days of that I got tired of it so I put on this like pink velvet number with sandals and the same guys were going, wooo, wow, honey, you want to go out with me? You know, that kind of thing. So you can‘t escape people‘s assumptions. If somebody thinks I‘m a butch looking girl and they don‘t like me because of it, it doesn‘t make any difference what I am. If they want to beat me up, deny me a job or keep me out of my house that I want to live in, it doesn‘t make any difference what I am. We are all safer if we can say that perceived or actual gender preference, association, expression, identification is included under illegal discrimination because I don‘t want to be beat up because I look funny to somebody. That‘s all. Thank you.
Doug Smith said, Missoula native and Missoula businessman. I‘d like to share quickly a couple of observations I‘ve had tonight. Number one, that‘s the most polite line I‘ve ever stood in and number two, you guys have buns of steel, I don‘t know how you do it. This is incredible. I‘ll be quick. I‘m going to do Chris Berman‘s three minutes in two minutes and 41 seconds. Alright? Montana law does currently make it unlawful to discriminate and any violations or alleged violations are investigated by the Montana Human Rights Bureau. When a Human Rights Bureau investigation finds the essential elements of an individual‘s allegation are present only then can an individual proceed to file a legal action seeking a remedy for the alleged discriminatory conduct. Here proponents of this proposed ordinance seek to City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 39 broaden the existing antidiscrimination statutes by adding protection to the specified classes of gays, lesbians, transgendered and even the gender-confused. If the proposed ordinance is passed, an entirely new cause of action will exist in Missoula that does not exist elsewhere in Montana. What will not exist in Missoula is any unbiased and independent investigated agency to investigate allegations of discrimination to ensure that businesses are not hauled into court without even a hint of evidence that discrimination actually occurred. This creates a circumstance in which a person or business must appear in Municipal Court to defend against even the most frivolous allegations of any person within the newly protected classes, even if the perceived discriminatory conduct was unrelated to any actual act of bigotry. In essence, the defendant will be guilty until proven innocent rather than the opposite which I think is a foundational precept of our justice system. Should this proposed ordinance become law in Missoula, even the most frivolous of discrimination allegations against a business owner will require the owner to expend already limited resources to obtain counsel and defend against the allegation. This risk is significant. A $500-per-day penalty for alleged discriminatory conduct that is ongoing such as when a person alleges that they were terminated from employment or not hired because of perceived discrimination. Discrimination lawsuits involving the classes currently protected can take months or even years to resolve so at a rate of $500 per day, the legal risks are too great for business owners to ignore. Passage of this ordinance will be expensive for Missoula business regardless of whether alleged discrimination claims are real or frivolous. Finally, proponents of the proposed ordinance are attempting to turn many citizens‘ moral values into bigoted conduct while imposing the cost of novel discrimination claims onto the backs of the Missoula business community. Local businesses is already economically burdened to the point that going-out-of-business signs can be seen on store windows all over Missoula. Adding this proposed ordinance to the cost of doing business in Missoula may result in Missoula businesses moving to other locales where communities do not confuse citizens‘ moral value judgments with bigotry. I respectfully urge this body to defeat the proposed ordinance or actually to return the proposed ordinance to committee just to address the unintended consequences the proposed ordinance will impose on Missoula businesses. Thank you very much. You‘re all wonderful.
Dave Berkoff said, I‘m a resident of the Rattlesnake. I‘ve lived in Missoula for 17 years. I think the opponents of this ordinance have spoken for me and shown me that bigotry is alive and well in Montana. I encourage you to pass this proposed ordinance and if there are any lawsuits out there, Jim, call me, I will use my pro bono attorney services for you in defending this ordinance. Thank you.
Dan Goodmanson, Cypress Court, said, earlier we started out with the lady from the ACLU quoting all the laws that we already have on the books so why are we here? Is it a necessary law? We‘re just moving agenda forward, an agenda that‘s going to be a hardship on businesses, small businesses and, yes, churches. Okay? We had another gentleman that come up and said he was a bright intelligent attorney from Helena and there was nothing vague or ambiguous in this law. What‘s more vague and ambiguous than the perception of item 12 under the definitions? This could be a nightmare for the City. It could be a legal and financial albatross around the neck of this City of it gets passed and made into law. I oppose it. Thank you.
Mike McGovern said, Mayor and members of the City Council, thank you for your openness to have this hearing and I don‘t envy your job. I am Mike McGovern. I pastor a church here in town. I am a Missoula resident in the South Hills Addition. And I‘m opposed to this ordinance on a number of reasons. One, it does seem to be confusing to me. The language does seem to be very broad and give opportunity for wide interpretation at both…well, primarily at the judicial level. Even if it‘s in a Municipal Court it would still be subject to a judge‘s discretion. And the purpose of law, as I understand it, or a city ordinance ought to be for the purpose of clarity. The more clear a law is or an ordinance the less time, money and possibility of misinterpretation can happen. The areas of concern for me in the language have to do with gender identity. I don‘t know…that to me is very confusing and maybe I‘m just old fashioned or whatever but it does seem very confusing to me, very broad and where does that end? Expression and gender are very, very broad concepts. The other one is the area of I understand actual discrimination. I think all of us do. In fact the word ―common sense‖ has been bandied about here a few times this evening but perceived discrimination, I don‘t know where that has any end whatsoever. Not that this has…I mean I don‘t have to give names or anything but I‘m aware of a young man who lives in the Bitterroot, he‘s not in Missoula, but it stands to support…I think. He is a Caucasian man who actually believes that he is a City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 40 black man. And I mean it‘s a perception. It‘s deep in him but he‘s not. And then just in a by way of passing, one of the definitions in the ordinance has to do with age. Age is described as from the date of birth and this City Council is endeavoring to fight and stand for people that are in some places powerless, don‘t have ability to defend themselves and be protected and I‘m thinking in the City, if that‘s the definition we use then I‘m already in opposition to it because life to me does not begin at birth; it begins at conception. And we are already found discriminating against the life of the unborn who‘s probably the most innocent of us all. So thank you for the ability to comment and I urge you to vote no on this ordinance.
Carl Williams said, I do reside in Missoula. I am opposed to this amendment..sorry…basically what I have heard here, everybody has said a lot of great things but is what I kind of look at is I‘ve heard that 3 to 5% of the population and then approximately 30% discriminated against and you‘re asking 100% of us to bear that in another City ordinance in small businesses or large businesses. Thank you.
Emily May said, I live on California Street and I am currently serving as the Vice-President of the Associated Students of the University of Montana. I‘m here representing approximately 14,000 students whose representative body has recently chosen to support this ordinance. We don‘t all vote here but most of us live here. We‘ve prioritized civil rights issues in the past. I think the body will choose to do so in the future. I hope you‘ll consider that when you‘re deliberating. I also wanted to mention to you that perhaps in the future when you consider something so controversial, a lot of people are interested in seeing…maybe you could move the hearings to a place where there‘d be more room and more people would fit. I think that would be a good change. Thank you.
Becky Hartman said, I‘m the Director of the Off Campus Renter Center, an agency of the Associated Students at the University of Montana and Student Affairs.
Mayor Engen said, would you double-check that your microphone is on for me please?
Becky Hartman said, yeah, it‘s green.
Mayor Engen said, will you hold it just a little bit closer? Thank you.
Becky Hartman said, I‘m the Director of the Off Campus Renter Center, an agency of the Associated Students at the University of Montana and Student Affairs. With me today I have Ben Weiss and Mandy Summers of my Student Housing Board. The Off Campus Renter Center strives to make off campus living more safe, affordable and efficient for student renters. We advocate for student renters at the state and local level. We support the new ordinance and are asking the City Council to also support it. As you all may recall, moving out on your own at 19 years old there‘s a steep learning curve. The transition is especially difficult for young people living in Missoula with low vacancy rates, high rent and utility costs. The LGBT students have even more to worry about because they don‘t have the basic protections, the enjoyment of their home. Our LGBT students deserve the same ability to transition into independent living as other young people. The University of Montana makes it a point to not discriminate against LGBT students and since over 75% of dorm students move off campus after their first year of living in the dorm, we at the Off Campus Renter Center believe it should be of the utmost importance that the LGBT students be treated in the same regard when they move into the Missoula community. There are around 10,000 student renters meaning that nearly one-third Missoula renters are students. We urge you to support the new ordinance with LGBT students in mind.
Ben Weiss said, I‘m a Missoula resident. I‘m also, as a member of the Housing Board, I support this ordinance. I‘ll speak to you today as the General Manager of KBGA the college radio station. Our mission statement says that we‘re committed to diversity and that usually means we just play a lot of weird music but sometimes it means that we need to stand up for what we believe is right, and this is one of those instances so the college radio station and by large extent the community radio station supports this ordinance. Thank you.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 41
John Firehammer said, I‘m from Missoula. I live at 201 North Avenue East and I support this ordinance. Three or four hours ago my pastor from University Congregational Church came here and talked about how we were open and affirming and essentially that means we welcome everybody in our church. And I wasn‘t around at the church…I have a lot of experience at the Church of Christ, growing up in that church and I know other churches have gone through that decision-making process. It has been very difficult and I think it‘s as difficult as what our community is going through right now but I will say that as a result of affirming everyone in the congregation and welcoming everyone and opening the doors at that church and is a very strong community and it‘s a vibrant place. It‘s growing and I feel very comfortable going there with my family and have many friends there and I think, you know, I think it‘s very reflective of the community of Missoula which is already diverse and strong and tolerant and I think this ordinance fits Missoula well and I hope you‘ll pass it. Thank you very much.
Mike Fellows said, I do live here in Missoula. You have some trouble with this ordinance. I think as Libertarians and I‘m a Libertarian activist we don‘t believe in the use of force or fraud to achieve our political or social goals. We seek a world of liberty, a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice their own values for the benefit of others. In fact, our platform talks about the fact that we do condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should not deny or abridge any individual‘s right based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents and other guardians have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs. Our commitment to freedom across the board means that we also support in Robert Novack‘s phrase the repeal of all prohibitions on capitalist acts between consenting adults just as the state has no business coming between you and your tenant or your landlord between you and your customer or between you and your employee, it it no more appropriate for the government to force you to rent an apartment to me or to hire me then to force you to have sex with me. Libertarians believe these relationships like all others should be voluntary. Bigots have rights too I guess. Not only that, sometimes we ourselves want to discriminate. If you have a store in a gay neighborhood, we may want to…we may prefer to hire gay employees both for businesses reasons and for support of the community. If we simply get government out of the picture, queerophobes and homophobes will have nothing to fear from each other since neither can then…could use the coercive power of the state to impose its values on the other. And I do have I guess one question for Jim there and this relates to the ordinance itself that we do have a Hooters restaurant and they talk about Hooters having a bonafide occupational qualification which applies when the essence of the business operation would be undetermined if the business inherited or eliminated the discriminatory policies. I‘m wondering how that would affect this ordinance. And that‘s just something to think about. Thank you very much for your time.
Mark Anderlik said, I‘m wearing two hats tonight. One is the President of the Missoula Area Central Labor Council and also as the Executive Officer of the United Union Local 427 which is a union of hospitality workers, low wage workers in Montana. And both organizations have unanimously and actually very enthusiastically voted to endorse this resolution, this amendment, even though it does talk about…in fact, the biggest response we had was it‘s about time. You know, how did it take us so long to come to this point? This ordinance does apply to unions. There‘s one specific line about unions and we wholeheartedly agree that it bans discrimination on the part of this new class of people under the law as applies to unions, we definitely support that. We don‘t find this law ambiguous, unclear or an illegal atrocity in any way, shape or form. This is something that has been very clear and is long overdue. One story, our union has been trying to negotiate equal rights for gays and lesbians and transgender people for the last couple of years and every time we bring it up on a negotiating table the employer will say, will start to kind of laugh nervously and then will take a look at it and say, well, we‘re not going to go along with that right now until the law in Montana changes. This is a good step forward. It is something that needs to go further as well. It does not cover domestic partners and that‘s something that can be definitely addressed later on. One last thing is that this will be an economic good for Missoula. I think you underestimate the economic power of people when they…if they feel welcomed to come to Missoula to visit here, to have a convention here, to spend their money here, that is not to be underestimated. The time to pass this is now. Thank you.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 42
Barry Padget said, I‘m a resident of Missoula. I‘m also a pastor at First United Methodist Church. I‘d like to read just a short letter. ―We the undersigned members of First United Methodist Church of Missoula want the City Council to know that we wholeheartedly support the approval of the antidiscrimination ordinance currently before you. First United Methodist Church welcomes people of any age, gender, color, ethnicity, sexual orientation, economic status or physical ability and that the full life and membership of our congregation, we expect our city to do no less. We all have LGBT friends, family members and loved ones who should not be discriminated against and please note we are voters who live in Missoula.‖ It‘s signed by a fair number of my congregation. On a personal note, let me just say that discrimination is not a Christian value. For several thousand years people have sought to use religious reasons to die, others their civil rights. It is still not right. Please pass this ordinance.
Jayme Branson said, I have a wife and five children. I live here in Missoula. Lived here for 15 years or so. I come before you in representation of maybe what you would call an average family. Our kids do sports, they go to youth group at church, we go to church, we go to Griz games, we buy food, we just do all the normal stuff. We can‘t grow a garden but we can a lot of other things. For me, from my Christian values, I can‘t get past the part about love your neighbor. I do love my neighbors and it doesn‘t matter what they are. It doesn‘t matter who they are what they represent, that‘s my approach. So, I am in opposition of this ordinance but I want to say that from a standpoint that that‘s really hard because I do love my neighbors and I believe that we‘re all neighbors. I believe that we should love each other no matter what our family life‘s like, where we came from, who we are now, and all those things. From there I want to say that what‘s really hard though is when you‘re raising a family and you‘re just…you grew up in a normal family, you grew up with some Christian values, you grew up with a mother and a father and I‘m trying to teach my five children those same values. It‘s really hard to share both sides so I come before you and I have to be in opposition because I‘ve got a duty to raise my family in the way that I believe and that‘s how I believe. All that said, fine line…I wish we could sit down and work this out and it was easier than this. From a process standpoint, I‘d like to ask you guys, there‘s 13, 14 of you guys, there‘s been a couple hundred people speak, I heard 600-700 letters were written, several thousand signatures were collected. I‘d like to ask you guys to take this to a vote. I don‘t know that…I mean, I think Stacy Rye opened up with this is the largest crowd she‘s seen here. Maybe there‘s been larger crowds in the past but it‘s evident that this is a big issue and so there shouldn‘t be any harm in taking this out to a vote and let the 100,000 or so vote for this. And I think we‘re going to get a lot truer response from a larger group of people. Thank you.
Sadie Oliver said, I‘m here to speak in support of the ordinance. Throughout my high school career I‘ve received 15 notes in my locker calling me words and names that are not allowed in this room. I‘ve been pushed against lockers and I once received a note that had my address written on it and a threat against my life. I‘ve received two threats against my life. I‘m 17 years old and I‘ve received two threats against my life due to being a lesbian but the thing is I‘m not a lesbian. My point is this ordinance does not only protect LGBT people, it protects heterosexual people as well. People…any girl that has short hair, any guy that has long hair, any girl that doesn‘t want to wear a dress or anyone that is perceived as homosexual, even though they‘re straight, but they‘re mistreated because of it. This ordinance isn‘t right simply because it protects the gay community, it protects people. And I don‘t see how religion or discomfort with a sexual practice different from yours or having a problem with someone wearing a dress when you think they should wear pants comes into this equation in any way, shape or form. And I hope that you pass this ordinance because if not I‘ll feel that this Council has failed.
Scott Swan said, thank you for hearing me tonight. I have a little bit of a unique perspective because I moved here about 13 years ago from a small town in the mid-west called Madison, Wisconsin, Berkeley of the mid-west if you will. And I experienced the opposite. I had a friend, a black pastor of a church who experienced 200-300 of these folks here that are so tolerant come in and disrupt a Sunday service in the church. If you doubt me, I would be happy to prove it to you. My point is that whether you call it homophobe for me, to me my perspective is that you‘re Christ‘s folks, okay? So fear runs both ways. Intolerance runs both ways.
Mayor Engen said, and your name, sir?
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 43
Scott Swan said, oh, I‘m sorry. My name is Scott Swan and I live in the southern edge of this town.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Scott Swan said, okay, sorry. So I am vehemently opposed to this legislation and the previous gentleman on this side before me made one of the points that I want to make. It‘s obvious to me that this is a huge issue. And you folks here, you Council members, you represent people across this town. I would be curious to know how many people, how many letters you got, how many emails you got opposing this. Only you know that, I don‘t know but if you‘re truly representing this community and your constituents, you need to vote according to their wishes. Now obviously if you‘re in a ward that supports this university vote that way but if you‘re not vote your constituents. That‘s your duty. That‘s your obligation. It isn‘t your de facto authority to just decide an issue that‘s important as this. I don‘t think you have that right. Let the people vote on this. Thank you.
Whitney Kimball said, I am a resident of Missoula. I‘ll try not to pass out from fear here so bear with me. I have heard a lot of arguments in opposition to this and I would say I‘m quite vehemently for it and I think I can wrap up the arguments against it to three things. There are people that argue that this is like a monetary complication, people that argue that this issue is too complicated or confusing and people who oppose it for religious reasons. I think the first two are terrible reasons for you to even consider something that I would hope that no civil rights, no human issue would ever be voted against because it was expensive or complicated. I think that that‘s a sad reason. The third reason that there are people who religiously and morally opposed this, I would say a) this is a civic issue, b) there are many wonderful Christians here who have represented themselves as for the ordinance and c) the people that are still religious and against this are citing Bible passages from Leviticus and Leviticus also has passages about actually, physically that you should stone children who are disobedient to their parents and you should never mix textiles and, you know, that you should actually have slaves and where you should get them from and so I think that those are all completely illogical arguments and I support the Christians who spoke in favor of the ordinance instead. Finally, I would like to also reiterate my friend Mike Phelps who was standing in line for two hours and had to go to work, as also in favor of the ordinance. Thank you.
Turee said, I‘m shaking right now. But anyway I need to share something that…I‘ve been married to my husband from this country for 43 years. I‘ve become a U.S. citizen 41 years. Missoula resident for 36 years. And I wish there was a law that tonight you‘re going to vote on 25 years ago. So I might not go through suffering but I am been to. But anyway I cannot tell the truth because if I tell the truth I get in trouble, and people don‘t believe. And so I cannot go to anything, everything in front of all of you here but do need some sort of the law to protect me from lying, because I want to tell the truth. I want to live the truth. That is how I love from Jesus when I discovered who He was. So anyway I need it for myself, for my family and I cannot go to all but I know I cry too much already, now I have no tears to cry. But I do put a loss because whatever, the law don‘t protect me. So anyway that I ask all of you here because I not a born Christian, I‘m not a raised Christian. I am adopted into Christian but I truly believe there is truly God. Thank you.
Chris Justus said, I also work for KGBA in the community and I‘m a student and I‘m here tonight in solidarity with a lot of my queer heroes throughout life. My aunt brought home her first partner and came out to my grandparents who were so radically right that they‘re pope is in Canada, they broke from the dieses and at the same time my other aunt brought home her first African American boyfriend who would go on to become her husband. And I grew up watching my grandpas and my uncle who‘s a former Klansman slowly adopt and learn to love these people and let my aunt and her partner take their children to movies and love everybody equally and it‘s, you know, covered up his swastika tattoos with tattoos of fish and really, you know, embrace this sort of love that I‘ve grown up around. And my mom was a single mother and the first people that sold us a house after her trying for 16 years was a gay couple who opened their first real estate agency in Montana and basically gave us our house with no credit. I think that throughout my life people have given me the ability to tolerate other people and I would just like to see Missoula do the same. I really appreciate you guys staying up and listening to all of us talk and I‘d just like to say that even though the bigotry and hatred and fear that some people have shown tonight City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 44 confuses me. I still love all of them equally and hope that they can find peace in their hearts no matter how well this turns out.
Sean Schilke said, I‘m a student at the University of Montana and I‘ve been a resident of Missoula for about four years. And I‘m strongly supportive in passing this resolution. And being that it‘s about 30 minutes to midnight, I‘d just like to echo the comments of those in favor of this resolution. Thank you.
Summer Nelson said, I am a Missoula resident, Roy Houseman‘s ward. Please vote yes for me. I strongly support this ordinance and just ask that you all respect and protect the rights of all the members of our community in Missoula to have a home, to have a job and to have access to public places and public amenities and just make sure that all members of our community are included and protected and that there are no reasons to discriminate against them, and just please vote yes.
John Newman said, I‘m a pastor of a church in Missoula. And it‘s been an interesting night in just even hearing the testimony. I don‘t think as Christians we‘re for discrimination. I don‘t believe we‘re…that there‘s just hatred and the fear and bigotry I keep hearing about, and I don‘t want there to be. But you do see what a divisive issue this is. You do see how this has separated our community. And they mentioned right when they spoke for it, right at the very beginning, they talked about how there are a number of organizations that were together writing this law. And I think the wise path, and really the path of leadership here, would be to table this for awhile, not indefinitely, and make the circle a little bigger. I think part of the, speaking from the church community, part of the frustration that has been in the church community is that this has kind of been brought in with no involvement of a pretty big part of our City here. And I‘d like to see this, at least let‘s try, to get some Christians from both sides, to get people from the LGBT community, to get people that represent our community and let‘s get, because this is an important law, let‘s get a good law that business leaders, that we can all live with. I think that would be important. I think that it would show a lot of leadership and I think that would be a wise path.
Ian Moochy said, I‘ve been a resident of Missoula since I was five. I currently work with the PFLAG Missoula which disbanded over two years ago. We started to work in the community again. And I‘ve heard multiple times tonight that we don‘t have a problem from different individuals. I got called within the last year about a mother who almost lost her daughter because she was a lesbian and she had no legal representation. I had a gentleman who was assaulted without police help upon the Highline and until a civil case was won, he would not be able to pass a federal. There was no help there. I personally got written up at one of my places of employment for kissing my boyfriend off the clock, no less, and the letter said ―Creating a hostile environment for those who held particular religious beliefs.‖ The only reason why I wasn‘t fired from my job was because some of the individuals that work with me told them it wasn‘t fair to fire me. That was the only thing protecting me. PLAG is currently working with the Missoula Police Department. Sgt. Casey Richardson is doing his best to do reports. The reason why you don‘t have any numbers is because the gay community is terrified to go to the police because they had their own issues with the gay community in the past. That‘s why the gay community is afraid to make reports. Other than that, you know, other people have made my other points and I thank you for listening to me and staying up with all of us so late. I urge you to pass it.
Bill Partaine said, I am a pastor in town and I appreciate again the hearing that you‘re giving this. I do believe in treating all people with love and respect but it doesn‘t mean that I don‘t consider the implication of ordinances such as this on others, on all that are involved. And I do encourage this body to consider trying to develop a greater sense of unity on this subject. I think there are ways we need to be making sure that we are protecting the welfare, the safety of others. The areas of discrimination that have been described…there‘s been some horror stories but some of them are so far beyond what this ordinance even addresses. So then this ordinance, there are other implications there, implications to businesses. And I‘ve heard attorneys from both sides that point to things that say that even the attorneys right now are not clear on how this would be enforced and what the implications would be in the courts. So one, I think if a revisit of some of the last minute language that‘s been added to this Friday and then a couple of amendments that look like are also going to be added to this, this process, let‘s slow up and that you would consider putting this to a vote of the general population. And let‘s use it as a time not to build animosity. There‘s a lot of language being thrown around that incites not any sense of unity and it is City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 45 possible in Missoula, Montana for us to come together I think on something that‘s in the interest of us all. Thank you.
Dave Hartz said, [off microphone] I‘ve lived in Missoula for 5-1/2 years. I am a gay man and I consider myself as a strong Christian and I have strong faith background. In the past I have been discriminated against by churches that did not like my sexual orientation and all I ask is to be treated and respected, like everybody else in this community. And I support this ordinance to pass Thank you.
Neil Armstrong said, I live in historic East Pine Street. I do understand what it‘s like because people on this side, because I waited for hours, and have also served on the City Commission for a couple of years so I understand how you guys feel being stuck there as long as you have. But this is Jeanette Rankin‘s town. This is Mike Mansfield‘s town. Both of them struggled for long periods to make this society a little more open, a little more understanding and responsive to everyone. We have a chance for a historic vote for here. I really urge you to vote yes. We have been through a long night together. We have seen really an awful lot of community spirit on both sides of the issue but we too need to protect and care for all our members. It‘s that simple. Business may be affected but it won‘t be affected much. The churches are not going to change their beliefs. This ordinance, I can say and it‘s relevant to the fact that I do understand where you‘re at. I have heard the ordinance called confusing. I‘ve heard all sorts of things said into it, right into it, that aren‘t there. This is the most clearly written ordinance I‘ve ever seen. It does protect gay and lesbian rights but more to the point, it protects the rights of all Missoulians, all Montanans more clearly than any other document I‘ve ever seen other than Montana State Constitution. Thank you.
James Verlanic said, [off microphone]
Mayor Engen said, I don‘t blame you, sir. Would you make sure that microphone is on for me?
James Verlanic said, how‘s that?
Mayor Engen said, that‘s perfect. If you hold it real close we‘re in business.
James Verlanic said, okay, we‘re there.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
James Verlanic said, okay. Do I have to start over again? Okay, I‘m here to voice my opposition to this ordinance from many prior speakers before me of…voice their opinions, some of which have said that this is too much, too important of an issue to be voted on by just a handful of people. Representative government was designed when people were far away from their legislatures, and now our constituents are right here. This bill or this ordinance should be voted on as important as it is by the people because this is a government of the people, by the people and for the people, not just a few. Anyway, thank you.
Jim Sambrano said, lived here 33 years. My wife was born and raised here. Met my wife when I was going to the U. My daughter is at the U now and another one who‘s been at the U. I have a nephew that‘s gay. I was raised in the south. I understand prejudice very, very well. And all the atrocities that we‘ve heard on all sides, we‘re talking gays, blacks, Asians it‘s the same. This isn‘t a gay issue. I think the picture is way, way bigger than what‘s being presented here. To this day I‘m still treated with prejudice because I‘m not honky white and my wife is white. And so I think we‘re going down the wrong path here. I think there‘s a couple of things, one, I think this is an eternal issue and there are some things, there‘s some laws that have been put down like gravity and it doesn‘t matter whether you‘re Christian, a gay, it doesn‘t matter what you are, if you get on top of this building and you jump off, you‘re going to get hurt. So your belief or disbelief in gravity has nothing to do whether it‘s true or not. It is true. God has laid down some fundamental things and we‘ve defied them and people are going to get hurt. And I would just encourage you I‘m against this but I would encourage every one of you board members because everyone in this room, barring none, have some certainties: we are all going to die. As God as said that we will…it‘s been appointed unto man to die once, we have an appointment and we‘re not going to miss it and then we‘re going to stand before Him and we‘re going to give an answer. And I would beg City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 46 every one of you not to consider my point of view, the gays‘ point of views, we need to consider what God has said that we need to do. And the way you members vote, because you‘ve been put in power, you need to vote the way that God would have you to vote, not the way the people. The reason why we‘re at right now is because we‘re trying to please everyone and you‘re trying to nail jell-o to a tree. You will never do it. You need to consider the things that are true, like gravity, that are unmovable. The sun rising in the morning, the stars that are set, that all have been placed those are the things that have been put in place by God and He has put in certain foundation, fundamental rules in place that we need to abide by and when we break those, we pay the consequences. I beg each one of you on the this Council to consider what God would have us do not what I would say or anyone else, then there will be no discrimination.
Jennifer James said, I‘m a Missoulian and I am also a parent.
Mayor Engen said, Jennifer, would you hold it just a little closer please?
Jennifer James said, sure. I moved to Montana about nine years ago to attend the University and honestly when I first moved here I didn‘t quite understand Montana pride. I was a little taken aback by how fanatic everyone here is about their state. But within under a year‘s time I understood. I love Missoula and I love its people but I have a problem. I have an eight-year-old child who is very precocious and he asks a lot of questions. And the other day he started to ask me about the diversity rally and this ordinance and he asked me why it is that I love this place so much when it doesn‘t protect everyone who lives here. And I didn‘t have an answer for him. I don‘t get it, myself. I‘m not concerned about who is going to be in a bathroom with my child but I am concerned about the message that my son is getting growing up in this town. And I am concerned about whether or not he will be protected based on who he is now or who he might be down the road as he grows up. I ask that you guys support this ordinance, I do. I would like to see Missoula be as great as I know it is without exclusion of anyone. Thank you.
Evan Hartman said, I live here and go to school at the University of Montana, and I‘ve lived in Montana for a couple of years now and I start started school here, and I‘ve got to say I love Missoula almost as much as I love Montana on the whole and that‘s both a lot, but I just wanted to throw in my two bits here. I identify as male and I also identify as gay so I feel like this really applies to me. And I think what‘s interesting that hasn‘t been brought up is that creed and religion are protected already. And I chose…I took the same care in deciding what religion and what my creed I should have as I took the care in deciding what gender I thought I was because in both cases I looked at what I felt and what I saw in the world and a lot of, you know, logical arguments and stuff and feedback from other people, and I took all those things and I decided what felt and seemed and was logically true for me. And while I may not look like a guy yet I still think it‘s important that this sort of protection is in place for people like me because it makes me feel safer and more proud to be in Missoula, even though I still have to use the women‘s bathroom. So, thanks. You guys rock.
Mayor Engen said, thank you. We‘re still rocking at this hour, that‘s pretty phenomenal.
Patience Stevens said, I‘ve lived on the…just outside of Missoula City limits for about 12 years and I‘m straight but not narrow and I support this ordinance. When I graduated from high school in Thompson Falls in 1985, I moved to San Francisco. I lived and worked there for seven years. I have had gay and lesbian relatives, roommates, friends and coworkers and I am not afraid, and I encourage you all to not be afraid either. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, how many Missoula residents have not had a chance to speak yet? Okay. Thank you.
AJ Johnston said, I live in Missoula in the Rattlesnake and I want to say that I support the ordinance. Please vote yes. I identify as a heterosexual female and I‘ve been to seminary, I have a Masters in Divinity in Christianity and while I was in seminary I looked into this issue and spent a lot of time talking with gays and lesbians and understanding the kind of oppression that has happened to them, both inside City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 47 and outside of churches. And so there‘s great pain that needs to be healed and I believe that voting yes tonight will be a beginning of that kind of healing that is very much needed in our society. Thank you.
Carol Bellin said, I‘m a Missoula resident and I am in support of this ordinance and I‘d like to thank everyone of you and your tired ears for listening to us. I think that it‘s been fascinating and on a social sense I believe we‘ve made some progress as a community just by hearing each other in such a civil way. However, I must say that when I thank the goddess for what she‘s provided, I thank her that Americans are smart enough to have a secular government and I look very much forward to your secular vote. I think it‘s very appropriate that City Councilors take action on strengthening discrimination ordinance. I‘m grateful that Americans lead I think in many places in the world against discrimination so I think it would be very appropriate for you to strengthen this. Also as a mom I have to say since we‘ve heard from many moms I want to thank Mr. Mayor Engen for listening to our children and setting such a good example with the proclamation today, listening to our children who intrinsically I think are fearless and have a great sense of justice. So thank you for this and I look forward to your vote and we will support those of you who bring this forward. The sponsors of this bill, I just want to say I think are exemplary public citizens and public servants and so I know you‘ve risked some…all the many, many aspects of City Council work that you‘ve put out gets risky when people get angry about one thing but this probably I think your best work to date, so thank you. I look forward to your vote.
Margo Hart said, I am fourth generation Montanan and my family founded a dairy up the Rattlesnake but I‘m a stone‘s throw away from the City line, I‘m County.
Mayor Engen said, we‘ll let you talk.
Margo Hart said, okay, thank you. I‘m a certified rehabilitation councilor and I‘m a licensed councilor and I am opposed to this, not because I want to discriminate. That‘s not the reason. Everybody I think they‘re kind of missing part of it. I‘ve listened for 25 years to stories and I‘ve counseled people that have had, you know, lesbian, gay, transsexual, that have been raped, that have been molested, that I mean I just can‘t tell you the stories I‘ve heard and I have a real concern. I just think the language is way off. I think we‘re opening up a door. I think when we take an emotion or an identity struggle and then allow people access to bathrooms, to the sauna, to the locker room, to, you know, that‘s why we started creating like the family bathroom because we really knew there was a single mom that needed to take the boy into the bathroom and the girl into the bathroom. It was because it was a safe place for people have that kind of interaction. And I can just tell you that I‘ve counseled predators and I‘ve counseled victims. And when I‘m counseling a victim I‘m trying to get that person to become whole enough to even acclimate themselves back into society with boundaries and if they don‘t feel safe in the boundary place that they‘ve gone, knowing that they‘re not going to run into a male in a female gathering, whether it‘s a retreat or whether it‘s at Peak Athletic Center, if you‘re transsexual nobody is going to really notice that you‘re not male. But I think we‘re opening the or to the predators. And I can tell you that they show up everywhere. And you just look on the computer and those are the ones that you know about; there‘s a lot more that we don‘t even…they don‘t have red stars on them. And so I just have a real concern about the language. I think it‘s poorly written. I think you should throw it out and then I think you should start and protect your…I think we have laws that protect people. I don‘t think gay people should be beat up. I mean, I‘m not discriminating against people but I don‘t want to be discriminated against either, you know. This is a hard topic but I think there‘s a protection and a boundary for a whole mental health issue here that nobody‘s really talking about, and there‘s just like, ah, just forget it. No, let‘s not forget it, you know. We‘re getting raped and molested and stolen and left in ditches and, you know, I‘m not trying to mark a predator thing but I‘m just saying, hey, wake up, protect everybody. And write it right so we really know what we‘re doing. Thank you.
Spider McNight said, I‘m a resident of Missoula. I live in Representative Wilkins and Hellegaard‘s district. I own a home with two wonderful straight men. I own a business in downtown Missoula. And I just want to say that I recognize that you all are very tired, I‘m very tired, but I want to talk about a bigger context of being tired. I think a lot of us here feel tired in a different way. Tired for me personally, tired of being called names, tired of being chased, tired of having my friends‘ houses burned down all because they‘re gay or lesbian, tired of being beaten myself, tired of having to come to meetings like this, tired of being City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 48 told I‘m a sexual deviant, tired of being told that you don‘t hate me but you don‘t want me to have my rights, tired of being told you don‘t discriminate against me and yet I shouldn‘t go into a bathroom or a sauna. Mostly I‘m tired of having to stand here even though I‘m a business owner, I‘m a homeowner, I sit on boards, I employ people, I volunteer, I donate money, I give pro bono but I have to stand here in front of you and say, please don‘t discriminate against me. What more do I have to do…what more do any of us have to do to just say just give us what we already should have. That‘s all. Thank you for your support.
Aldra Loyal said, I am a small business owner. I‘m gay and I moved to Missoula with the intention of staying here for four months but I‘m on my fifth year now because I found it to be such a welcoming community and one that has enabled me to establish my own business which I hope with the passing of this ordinance will continue to grow. That‘s all I have to say. Thank you.
Roberta Zanker said, it‘s almost good morning. Thank you, thank you for your patience and for your courage in proposing this ordinance. My name is Roberta Zanker. I am the first and only transgender…[off microphone]
Mayor Engen said, a little…where it says push, the green light will come on.
Roberta Zanker said, I probably pushed it off, didn‘t I? I‘ll leave it alone. I am the first and only transgender lawyer in Montana history unless and until somebody else stands up and says otherwise, that‘s my story. And it‘s an important story and I think I was invited here tonight. I live in Cardwell, Montana, a very small town about 100 miles east of here. But I was invited to come and share my story with you by many people who live here. I have endured discrimination through the university system. I had a contract with them when they found out I was transgendered, they did not renew that contract. So I do feel I have a connection to what you‘re doing here tonight and I want you to know that I support the ordinance, if that‘s not terribly obvious already. I do want to point out also just for I guess the record, in 1889 a man named Bickford, who I think a street is named after in this community, proposed Montana‘s first antidiscrimination ordinance. It read Council Bill #4, amended the law to read ―that individuals otherwise qualified should be allowed to practice as attorneys without regard to sex.‖ That law as I said was the first antidiscrimination law in Montana history proposed by a Missoulian 120 years ago. On one point I think that‘s a great heritage, it‘s a great legacy. On the other hand, you know, I‘m fairly disheartened that we still have discrimination in Missoula, Montana 120 years later. If only they‘d had the foresight then, that we have the opportunity now to provide for justice and equality for everyone. Obviously her story resonates greatly with mine. If this law had been in place throughout Montana three years ago I would not have been discriminated against by the University system, by the highest levels of our government and by some of the largest corporations in Montana. Discrimination hurts. It hurts a great deal. I left my home this morning excited and filled with hope that we are changing the world. I‘ve been through…and that was about 10 o‘clock this morning, so it‘s been a long day. I am tired but I am still hopeful and I encourage you to pass this ordinance. Thank you.
Dave Holly said, I‘m a Missoula resident and I had an employer a number of years back drive by my house, see a car parked at my house with a gay sticker on it. He told me later…he asked me whether I was gay. He told me if I were, he would fire me. I needed the job, I lied. Be nice to know that I wouldn‘t have to. Thank.
Chris Martineau said, I can almost say good morning to you. I am not a resident of Missoula but I think the one other person at least who spoke ahead of me that was not from Missoula. I am the Superintendent of a school that is within the City limits. It‘s Valley Christian School. And I think that through the five hours that I‘ve been here, I‘ve changed what I wanted to speak on for three minutes three or four times. And in summary I think what I‘d like to first say that summarizes this tension that is just tremendous in the room is that I really do believe that we have two world views that are in collision here. One world view which states essentially that there are absolute truth in the world, that there is an absolute truth and another world view which says that there is not an absolute truth, that we can create our own truth, we can create our own standards to live by and it‘s something that we can construct within ourselves. And I think that helps explain why I think I‘ve already been labeled a hatemonger and also the City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 49 bigot when I really don‘t believe that‘s the case. And that‘s just opinion because I will disagree with the lifestyle that has been discussed here quite a bit. And the reason why I‘m opposing this amendment to this ordinance is that I see it being more than just what is said in black and white, which I do agree is partly vague, in that we want to not discriminate against employees who are in no way at all interfering with how they are functioning in the job, for example, and etc. But it is also, because it‘s an ordinance, because it‘s a law that‘s going to be in place, it legitimizes a lifestyle which runs contrary to what some people claim is the absolute truth that was not created by them but was given to them. So, with that said, there is one remnant of what I wanted to present to you folks in the few seconds that I have left. And that is a concern that I do have regarding the fact that it was only on the 10th of April, Friday, that another significant series of amendments took place in the fourth draft, and a lot of red was in that draft including the Section 2, number 3 which is a definition of educational institutions. And in that definition was stricken out ―public.‖ It used to say ―public and private‖ and now ―private‖ is being singled out. And so my question to you first off, is why are you singling out ―private educational institutions‖ which of course Valley Christian School represents and then, secondly, another question which is a little bit broader is, how can the City Council make such significant changes in its language over…which is essentially over the weekend and then come to a meeting on Monday and decide they‘re going to make a vote on it and allowing the public to have the opportunity to really weight the ramifications of the changes that take place? Thank you very much for your time and your patience.
Suzy Rosette said, I moved here to Missoula in October of last year and I absolutely fell in love with this town. I wasn‘t expecting to stay long but now this is my new home base. I would like it if we could pass this ordinance so that all of us people can all share the same equality that we all deserve and we all need. This is a progressive town. We need to progressing for the better of all people and not just keeping the same thing that we‘ve been doing and not passing a law that makes everyone equal. Thank you.
John Bachino said, I am resident of Missoula. I just don‘t like to stand that much so that‘s why I‘m going right here at the end. I‘ve heard a lot that you can‘t legislate morality and it struck me that somebody else had said that previously and it was very Goldwater 40 years ago when they were considering whether civil rights should be extended to African Americans. The fact of the matter is this is a divisive issue and Doctor Spear pointed to that as an example of why it doesn‘t bring us together and why it doesn‘t serve us in the broader scheme of things. But the fact of the matter is civil rights were more divisive then. There were people that were sprayed in the streets and, you know what, 40 years later I don‘t think anybody in this room would debate that we made the right decision. I hope you all make the right decision and approve the ordinance.
Mayor Engen said, any other comment this evening? Did we miss anybody? We‘ve had one turn, that‘s all we go around. Yes, sir, please. You wanted to speak?
David Larson said, I‘m a resident of Missoula. And I think this is a very big issue, a very divisive…there‘s been lots of talk going on, on both sides of the issue saying it‘s clear, it‘s unclear. I‘ve heard on both sides that one side is bigoted and hateful and the other side is…but a concern I have in this is the broad wording of it that really opens it up. It makes it unclear for people and that‘s the concern overall that there needs to be a place because it‘s been changed three or four times, and this was just stated just a few minutes ago, just over the weekend it would be go back to regroup, to maybe clarify wording in this document and come to a better understanding, because I think that on both sides of the issue people say, I heard hate or I heard this and that‘s a device in itself. I moved to this City 16 years ago and I have a heart and passion for this City and for the people of the City. And this seems like just a…like a big chisel‘s been put in a big hammer blow and it can divide this City straight down the middle and that‘s not what anybody wants. And I‘m all for people having their rights and their beliefs, that works on both sides. So thank you all for your time.
Mayor Engen said, anyone else who hasn‘t had a chance to comment? And if there‘s anyone else, please line up if you haven‘t had a chance to comment.
Amy Francis Capaluko said, I‘m gay. I‘ve always been gay, my whole life I‘ve been gay. I mean I‘ve always known I was gay, I‘ve been gay since I was 8. I‘m just gay. I‘m like the gayest person I know. I City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 50 mean I‘m really serious about this, okay, like I mean I don‘t mean to make you laugh, I‘m totally serious. And you know when I came out to my parents, they didn‘t take it very well. They took it terribly in fact. And over time and therapy and years, I‘ll spare you from all that, the reason my father finally came to me and said, because I was afraid, I was afraid that you‘d get beat up, that you wouldn‘t be able to be all these things in life that I wanted you to be. And today, you guys have the opportunity to kind of hopefully, whoever is going to be younger, just like me, who is just gay, I mean, totally gay, okay, I mean God made me gay and whoever isn‘t here who does not think that God made me gay for five seconds, I assure you I was in Israel two years ago and they all know that God made me gay. I talked to…well, we‘ll go into that later. 514 West Alder, Amy Capaluko gay.
Mayor Engen said, Amy, focus.
Amy Francis Capaluko said, sorry, sorry, oh, sorry. It‘s late you guys. It‘s really late. Thank you, Mayor Engen, thank you. Anyway what I want to say you guys have an opportunity. You do not have to table this. Lynn, John I wish I could read all your names but I‘m tired, you have the opportunity to protect people who are younger than me who are going to be going through all of these things, all of this fear. And if you just put it out there that this is not okay to discriminate against people who are gay, you transgendered, all that stuff, you‘re making a huge stand. If you put it to a vote it won‘t pass. If you take it back, everyone is going to come here and do the same thing again. We‘re going to be here for like six weeks doing this for six hours and you‘re going to hear how gay I am again, so please thank you. I‘d love to spare you from this again so thank you so much. Have a great night or a good morning. Finnigan‘s is open probably. Thank you. Good night.
Mayor Engen said, nope, nope, nope not with the applause. Thank you. You‘re going to need to grab the microphone. Oh, yeah, you do, we‘re on the record.
Janet Seagraves said, I‘m just reading one line. After I make the statement that if you don‘t table it or redraft it again, I‘m not sure how you might need to handle it from there. I really loved my sentence about restrict your efforts to public institutions, lead by example. Why don‘t you demonstrate to the community that this can work and is not as threatening as feared. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, how many other speakers do we have tonight, folks? Line right up. Just follow right up behind this gentleman.
Hugo Mendez said, I am opposed to this proposed ordinance, not because I‘m alright with discrimination but because I think that some of this text in this ordinance is vague enough that it would…it has the possibility of going against both the Montana State Constitution and the United States Constitution and I think that the…if it turns out that this is true, then there could be a lot of detrimental affects to Missoula [End of second CD]
[recess]
Mayor Engen said, alright, ladies and gentlemen, I‘ll ask that Council members return to their seats. Ladies and gentlemen in the hallway, we do have some room in here. You‘re welcome to come on in. And we will be back in order. We‘ve completed our public hearing and now is the opportunity for Council members to ask questions.
Alderman Haines said, do you want questions or comments or both?
Mayor Engen said, questions. You‘re trying to figure out a way to turn a comment into a question. I respect that.
Alderman Haines said, well, first of all I want it to go back to committee.
Mayor Engen said, okay.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 51
Alderman Haines said, and I would be glad to talk to talk for a minute if you‘d give me that permission.
Mayor Engen said, okay. Mr. Haines has made a motion to return this item to committee.
Alderwoman Rye said, as the Chairwoman of Administration and Finance, I‘d like to keep this on the floor tonight, so I would move to suspend the rules so we can keep this on the floor tonight.
Mayor Engen said, a motion has been made to suspend our rules so this item can continue to be considered this evening. That motion is in order. Is there discussion on the motion?
Alderwoman Mitchell said, I do support this going back to committee as one of our options. I think after some long testimony and I want to thank everybody that has been patient and standing on your feet forever, I almost wanted to trade my chair because I was in a car yesterday for eight hours and I would have enjoyed standing up probably more than you. At this late hour I think there‘s a lot of things that still could be said and discussed. I‘m not sure people want to stay here forever and do it tonight. I would like to continue this at a time when people have really more wits about them. I don‘t know about some of you here but I do better usually earlier in the day than I do after midnight, as far as making sense and wanting to address some of the things that I think could improve this document.
Mayor Engen said, Mr. Wilkins, on the motion.
Alderman Wilkins said, well, on the motion I really don‘t want to send it back to committee but I need to know how many amendments we‘re going to put in because that relates to what…if there‘s going to be a bunch of amendments that are going to go in, then that bothers me but if it stays kind of like it is, I would rather get it over with tonight.
Mayor Engen said, okay. Mr. Childers, on the motion.
Alderman Childers said, thanks, Mayor. I would support keeping it here and getting it done. We‘ve certainly got a good attendance. I‘d like them to see it through.
Alderman Strohmaier said, likewise, we need to get the job done tonight. I haven‘t heard any comment this evening that is unique in nature and that would significantly change the deliberations we‘ve already had on this issue, and I don‘t think I‘ve ever seen this many people here after midnight. And so I respect to the folks who have attended tonight, and in terms of the lack of sustentative additional comment that would change my mind to the contrary, we need to do this tonight.
Alderman Jaffe said, early this morning I had sent out an email suggesting I had an amendment to make. Since then I‘ve come to the conclusion that the thing I was trying to address is addressed in state law and I don‘t plan to make that amendment.
Alderwoman Walzer said, I‘d like to keep this here and I had emailed out a couple of amendments to everybody a lot earlier that had missed…I missed the deadline in getting it in before the noon deadline on Friday and they are just technical. I don‘t think there‘s going to be any difficulty but they have been in response to public comment so I‘d like to…when the motion is made I‘d like to quickly add those amendments. And again I appreciate everyone staying here, everything that they have spoken and I‘d like to be able to honor everybody here by coming to a final vote. I was wondering why we took so long to have a public hearing after it was first introduced and now I‘m very glad we did have all these weeks from the time it was first introduced till now, so we‘ve had a lot of public comment, emails, letters, phone calls, here in person and I think we should get it done now.
Mayor Engen said, further discussion? Mr. Haines?
Alderman Haines said, when I said send it back to committee, I was not looking to torpedo it or derail it or kill it. I don‘t care what anybody says. I‘ve seen a lot of laws made. I‘ve made a lot of them myself and this has got so many vague places in it that it‘s going to invite lawsuits. We‘ve had several people say City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 52 tonight there is no vague part of this. There‘s all kinds of vague places. And those mean we‘re going to have some lawsuits sooner or later. I had a long conversation with a member of the law enforcement community and they don‘t know how to deal with this, what they can or cannot do, when they‘re afraid to do certain things for fear that it‘s going to cost them their job. I see in there, we talk about the age of a child right now under the new health care, 26 is the age of a child. It talks about reasonable accommodations. Who‘s going to decide that and how are they going to decide it? I think there‘s some questions about the status of churches. I hear a lot of ministers here tonight for this ordinance but I see some things that may affect their churches I‘m not sure they understand it. We can‘t have any negative job referrals. So let‘s say you have somebody that steals from your organization and you fire them and pretty soon somebody else calls up and wants a reference on that person. You‘re telling me you can‘t tell that new potential employer that this person stole from you? Defendant fees. Clearly they cannot be collected if the cause is fairly frivolous. Who decides that? The judge? We haven‘t said the judge says that or does somebody in the City do it? There are a couple of places that like there‘s two definitions of discrimination. I think I saw another place in there where there are two definitions of something else, I don‘t remember what it was to it point now. And disability discrimination. That‘s going to impact business and renters and we went through all kinds of agony passing this law that Mr. Wilkins pushed through here awhile back dealing with the quality of the building you‘re in. Well, there are some of the same things right in here.
Mayor Engen said, Mr. Haines, I appreciate all those concerns. You‘ll have a couple of opportunities to ask those questions. One, is if the item remains on the floor you‘ll be able to ask them and if the item goes back, you‘ll be able to ask them.
Alderman Haines said, ain‘t going fly, I don‘t think that will happen.
Mayor Engen said, okay. Ms. Mitchell, on the motion?
Alderwoman Mitchell said, well, when this came out Friday, I was down here at 5 o‘clock, I can‘t get things on my laptop. I was leaving town. I downloaded stuff into Outlook so that I could read it at least on the road, at least the hundreds of emails that I hadn‘t gotten to yet and the new ordinance. I couldn‘t open the new ordinance. When I got back to my house, I couldn‘t open it on my own computer nor could I do it on this one. As a side note, I‘m getting a new one and I can‘t wait. So I personally have not had a chance to review this until today when I came down and picked up a copy. I would like to have some input into this ordinance because up until now, except for in committee when I asked what the meaning of perceived was and a couple of other things, this thing has been taken by Mr. Strohmaier and Mrs. Rye, the ACLU…I have a list of…you guys know who you are that drafted this. When things weren‘t working right you sat on the other side of the room, six of you, while I sat here reading my emails the other day, talking about what amendments to make and this came out Friday. Right now it‘s a little bit late, no, actually it‘s pretty early and I would personally feel like I would have a little more input in this if we could spend some more time talking about where we need to take things out and add things and tweak things. If you truly want this to be representative of the Council‘s beliefs, I think you should have the whole Council working on it not just six or eight people along with the ACLU, the Montana Network, the LGBT committee or community, the whole works. And then you had NCBI working with the Flagship Program in school and to say that this was just a coincidence, my god, this is a historic day and it seems to me like it‘s more important that you pass historic legislation to top off this party that we‘ve had than to get this right the first time and make it less discriminatory for everybody in this community. So if your pleasure is to top today off and make it the historic event that you‘ve been planning with your groups for five months, leaving several of us out of the process, then take your vote and I‘ll call for the question.
Mayor Engen said, okay. Ms. Mitchell has called for an end to debate on the question of whether this item will remain on the floor this evening for further consideration. Would anyone in the audience care to comment on the motion only to keep this item on the floor? Seeing none, then we‘ll have a voice vote on suspending the rules and keeping the item on the floor. Oh, sorry, I forgot we were calling for the question.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 53
MOTION
Alderwoman Mitchell made a motion to call for the question.
Upon a voice vote the motion passed.
Mayor Engen said, motion carries. And back to the motion which we had no public comment on. This is whether to keep it on the floor.
MOTION
Alderwoman Rye made a motion to keep the item on the floor.
City Clerk Rehbein said, because this is a suspension of the rules, it requires 8 affirmative vote to pass.
Upon a roll call vote, the vote on the motion was as follows:
AYES: Childers, Houseman, Jaffe, Marler, Rye, Strohmaier, Walzer, Wiener, Wilkins
NAYS: Haines, Hellegaard, Mitchell
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Motion carried: 9 Ayes, 3 Nays, 0 Abstain, 0 Absent
Mayor Engen said, and the motion carries and the item is before Council. Are there questions from Council on the ordinance?
Alderman Wiener said, this is for an attorney as a matter of law is the question of what a reasonable accommodation is and litigate it? I‘m trying to address Mr. Haines and his concerns.
Mayor Engen said, I didn‘t hear your question.
Alderman Wiener said, do we know what a reasonable accommodation is. This is a phrase from the Americans with Disabilities Act, at the very least it‘s almost 20 years old.
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Zupanic?
Niki Zupanic, ACLU, said, yes, thank you, Mayor and Council member Wiener. Yes, reasonable accommodations is defined in the Federal and Americans with Disabilities Act, it‘s been on the books for several decades, and that special term ―reasonable accommodation‖ has been through quite a bit of federal litigation, federal case law on that terms specifically and we intend for all of that to be incorporated, just as it is with the Montana Human Rights Act. That same phrase ―reasonable accommodation‖ is in the state law interpreted the same way. We intend for it to be interpreted the same way in this ordinance.
Mayor Engen said, further questions? Ms. Hellegaard?
Alderwoman Hellegaard said, not so much a question but a statement from my own experience. ―Reasonable accommodation‖ can be subjective as to the particular situation that you‘re in, especially when it applies to a disability, depending on what that disability is, the ―reasonable accommodation‖ can be different from disability to disability. So to say that‘s a finite term with no leeway is absolutely incorrect; it‘s a subjective term dictated by the individual incident. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 54
Mayor Engen said, additional questions? Mr. Wiener?
Alderman Wiener said, for Ms. Hellegaard, based on your understanding of it, do you have any suggested changes to the text in order to clarify its meaning in this context?
Alderwoman Hellegaard said, not 12:30 in the morning.
Mayor Engen said, any additional questions? I‘m sorry, we‘ll take comment when the time comes. Question? Ms. Mitchell?
Alderwoman Mitchell said, in 9.64.010, the first sentence…,Person shall be denied his or her civil…no person denied civil rights or discriminated against based on his or her actual or perceived race, color, national origin. So I could be Methodist and perceive that I am Catholic I guess or I can be 62 and perceive that I‘m 39? I mean…
Mayor Engen said, there‘s a question in here somewhere.
Alderwoman Mitchell said, I‘m asking why is that in there? How can we actual…how is it possible to be actual or perceived regarding your race, your age? The people that wrote this, I‘m asking for questions. I didn‘t have any part in drafting this. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, well apparently there‘s some answers available. We‘ll start with Mr. Strohmaier.
Alderman Strohmaier said, yeah, Renee, that‘s absolutely incorrect. It‘s not that I am perceiving myself to be 65 years old or Native American, it‘s how someone else is perceiving me and the discrimination that they‘re propagating by incorrectly perceiving the reality that is the fact of the matter. If someone assaults me on the Higgins Street Bridge and beats the heck out of me because they think I am gay, and I‘m not, it‘s the fact that they thought I was that is discriminatory, not the fact that I am or I am not.
Mayor Engen said, further questions?
Alderwoman Hellegaard said, follow-up.
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Hellegaard? Oh, Ms. Mitchell?
Alderwoman Mitchell said, the discrimination should be based upon a person‘s race, color, national origin. The crime is the assault. Whatever they think should not be a crime. It‘s not right. I don‘t condone that but we‘re not the thought police and we‘re going to have very, very much difficulty trying to figure out and prove what someone‘s perception was if they were discriminated…
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Mitchell, I‘m all for you having a debate but this is the question period so I‘m going to take questions. Ms. Hellegaard? Other questions? Alright, with that, Ms. Rye?
Alderwoman Rye said, I shall read the motion and then I would like to briefly speak to it and in regards to a couple of minor technicalities that have been amended, so I would move that the Missoula City Council approve an ordinance amending Missoula Municipal Code Title 9 ―Public Peace, Morals and Welfare‖ to add Chapter 9.64 entitled ―Illegal Discrimination Generally Prohibiting Discriminatory Practices in the Areas of Public Employment, Public Accommodations and Housing on the Basis of Race, Color, National Origin, Ancestry, Religion, Creed, Sex, Age, Marital or Familial Status, Physical or Mental Disability, Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Gender Expression‖ and amending Section 2.94.030 entitled ―Percent for Art Program,‖ establish Section 5.82.080 entitled ―Nondiscrimination,‖ Section 9.12.010 entitled ―Housing Discrimination Declared Unlawful‖ and Section 12.58.100 entitled ―Exceptions.‖ This is the ordinance draft #4; it‘s the redline strikeout version. And just briefly I wanted to go over a couple of the things that have been redlined and struck-out.
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 55
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Rye?
Alderwoman Rye said, thank you. On the basis of a couple of thoughts that I heard from namely Ms. Walzer and maybe one or two other people before Friday the rental of sleeping rooms that is redline strikeout is a reiteration of state law, so state law speaks to this already. If you own a single-family house and you rent out three or fewer of your own rooms in that house, you can do whatever you want with those rooms. And so we are reiterating that in this law here because, of course, we can‘t trump state law. The section regarding religion, that Dave went over in the beginning of the meeting, nothing in this chapter is entitled to alter or bridge other rights, protections, so on and so forth, in regards to freedom of speech and exercise of religion, so we‘re reiterating something that exists at a far higher level than we are here. The posting requirements came from I believe the Chamber of Commerce and they just wanted some general language in regards to the employee break rooms that most of us our familiar with that have postings such as the OSHA law and the work comp laws and minimal wage and then there is usually a posting saying you cannot discriminate on the basis of, and so we‘re just adding sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression to that, and we‘re just saying you have to post this in an area where, you know, where in common sense, employees are going to see it. And then we did add the words ―actual or perceived‖ in front of some of the language and I had it here just a minute ago and I have forgotten it. ―Without discrimination based on actual or perceived‖ so we kind of made that consistent throughout the document, ―actual or perceived, race, religion, sex, marital‖ and so on and so forth, so we just made that consistent throughout all the documents so that that wording was in front of all of the classes. And then I believe Pam had a very minor amendment that I have heard about today that I read about and I asked her to read it tonight on the floor because I was too busy today doing a whole bunch of other things, but it‘s generally a little bit of renumbering and that‘s it, it‘s nothing sustentative.
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Walzer?
Alderwoman Walzer said, thank you, and I do apologize, as I was trying to make the…I took it upon myself when I heard public comment and I saw errors in the document, I was sending amendments to Stacy and Dave for inclusion and I was not able to get these last two in. So the first amendment is to amend the Violations section which is 9.64.090, the Penalty and Civil Remedy and I believe it‘s just a simple error in that this language that was put in to deal with the civic nature of three court cases. It was inserted and the standard misdemeanor language was not removed. So I‘d like to delete after the first sentence which says that after so many times they can…there will be a charge and prosecuted as a misdemeanor violation. I‘d like to delete ―any person violating any of these provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof‖ delete that and so there will be ―and may be fined up to $500 for each violation.‖ And then the remainder ―for each violation‖ and delete ―offense each day of an offense exists will constitute a separate and distinct offense.‖ So the…so if I can read the whole thing as complete with that redline strikeout? Pardon? C, I‘m sorry, it was 9.64.09C and so without the redline strikeout the completed would be ―In instances where the City of Missoula Municipal Court has found that the defendant in any civil proceeding pursuant to his chapter has violated a section of this chapter three of more times within a 12-month time period, any fourth and subsequent violation during any 12-month time period may also be charged and prosecuted as a misdemeanor violation and may be fined up to $500 for each violation. There shall be no imprisonment as penalty for a violation of this chapter.‖
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Rye?
Alderwoman Rye said, I would take that as a friendly amendment.
Alderwoman Walzer said, and the second amendment is to…in the sections that were…that we were amending language that has already has antidiscrimination language in it which would be…oh, 2.94.030 Percent for Art Program Established, 5.82.080 Nondiscrimination, 9.12.010 Housing Discrimination Declared Unlawful and 12.58.100 Exceptions. And all of those I would like to have after the terminology ―actual or perceived‖ in parenthesis, have the term ―as defined in 9.64.020.‖ This was a response to a comment that those four sections are separate from the definitions of the primary thing that we‘re working on and so the definitions of ―actual or perceived‖ is lost, and so this refers it back to the original definition. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 56
Alderwoman Rye said, that‘s fine with me, that we‘ll take that as a friendly amendment too.
Mayor Engen said, is there discussion on the motion?
Alderwoman Marler said, I‘m glad we voted to keep this on the floor tonight. There‘s a lot that I kind of feel like saying after that awesome public hearing. Everybody was very polite. I really appreciated it. It was great. But I‘m just going to give reasons from three different perspectives why I‘m voting for this tonight. The first reason, first perspective is as a small business owner and a landlord in Missoula, I‘m not afraid of this at all. I think it‘s fine. There‘s nothing scary about it and the arguments that this is anti- business and it‘s going to be the end of the world, I just can‘t believe that at all. My second perspective is, as a woman, I‘m really excited to vote for this to be an ally of the LGBT community and I have to say I fairly resent some of the arguments that were going around saying that we needed to vote it down for protection of women. That got a little bit old after awhile, so I‘m excited to vote for it from that perspective. And as a City Council member, I‘m just glad to be here to be a part of this. This is a historic thing. This will be the first antidiscrimination ordinance in Montana.
Mayor Engen said, on the motion? Mr. Strohmaier?
Alderman Strohmaier said, first off, thanks everyone for sticking with it tonight. I think what you‘re seeing is the real deal. This is important stuff and it‘s important stuff that Missoula City Council members actively take a role in for our community. Over the past several weeks I‘ve received what you might say is a fair number of less than charitable phone calls and email messages, some expressing dismay, that I have small children and at the same time would support this ordinance. To those individuals, I say, it is precisely because I have children that I‘m unwavering in my commitment to passing this ordinance this evening or this morning as the case may be. I want to bestow to my kids a Missoula that will value them regardless of who they are or what they look like, regardless of whether they‘re gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. Many arguments offered an opposition to this ordinance this evening, recapitulates similar arguments from decades past in support of segregation or in opposition to equal rights for women. Without a doubt sexuality in gender go to the heart of what it means to be human and in a pluralistic society where no one religious or philosophical tradition is universally shared by all, it‘s no surprise that we disagree over what it means to live a truly good life and flourish as human beings. In some cases we share a common vernacular of right and wrong such as we shouldn‘t hurt one another, steal from one another, etc. but in other cases the alleged harm is much more diffuse and ambiguous. Here is precisely I believe where sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression lie. It strikes me and I think it‘s been affirmed in my mind this evening that underlying much of the opposition to this ordinance is a theological argument that goes something like this, first, gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender individuals are engaging in willfully chosen sinful acts. Second, public policy should avoid doing anything that affirms a state of being deemed sinful, therefore public policy should avoid doing anything that affirms the legitimacy of the LGBT community. While it may be entirely appropriate for faith communities to debate whether scripture is inerrant or how to interpret sacred writings, be they Leviticus or Romans, the Koran or the Book of Mormon, we should avoid going down that path in this chamber. The harms that some allege will result by enacting this ordinance strike me as tenuous based primarily on either less than universally shared understanding of biblical morality or simply fear of the unknown. I believe that it‘s Missoula‘s duty to shine brightly in Montana‘s big sky and for me that means being a welcoming, inclusive community that respects and values our LGBT brothers and sisters. Hopefully our actions tonight will ripple throughout Montana from Libby to Billings, from Dillon to Wolf Point and eventually to the capital in Helena. When it comes to critical issues such as fairness, equality and dignity it‘s incumbent upon self- governing municipalities to show leadership and if need be act unilaterally in spite of state or federal lethargy. Tonight I‘m proud that Missoula, on this 13th day of April, 2010 will stand out as the first city in the state of Montana to enact legislation like this. I‘m confident that we won‘t be the last.
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Walzer?
Alderwoman Walzer said, I spent a lot of time, I think I read every single email and every letter that was sent trying to understand what we can do to make this ordinance better, and I also spent a lot of time City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 57 studying the Montana State Code and also other cities and states around the country who have enacted similar. And I‘ve been, unfortunately, I‘ve been having to almost smirk, smile or whatever in people saying this is so broad, so many things are unclear when most of this is straight out of the Montana State Code. But the definitions of employment is directly out of Montana State Code. And earlier this week or last week I was asked by a reporter of what I might have learned about this whole process. And one of the things I‘ve really come to learn is that we in Missoula, and maybe in the rest of Montana, really don‘t understand what civil rights are and that this is a great lesson to expand civil rights to those groups who are supposedly already protected, but they‘re not. When someone can stand here and say they were denied a job because they were Christian, guess what?, that‘s against the law. It‘s against the law in the state of Montana and it‘s against the law in Missoula. All we want is to extend that same protection to people who are…have a different sexual orientation than some, who have…and also to those who…protection for those people based on gender identity and gender expression. This is nothing revolutionary other than those three classes. Not very long ago it was handicap. Oh, we can‘t afford it, we can‘t afford to accommodate people with wheelchairs and the hearing impaired. That‘s terrible and before that it was, I‘m old enough to remember horrible things are going to happen if we allow blacks in our schools and allow blacks to be able to be around white women. And, you gotta keep those women out of the workplace, they need to stay home. How are we going…we need to have separate bathrooms for those women when they are working. The time is here. The time is, the time is now.
Alderwoman Rye said, I just wanted to say a couple of last things before hopefully we vote on this and that was, I was just stunned at the level of testimony tonight. I‘ve never experienced a public hearing like this. I had no idea about some of the examples that people that came up to the microphone with their examples of discrimination and how people are scared to tell their employers or their landlords or their realtors or their mortgage agents or so on and so forth that they‘re LGB or T. So this was a fascinating public hearing and I learned a lot and I‘m not exactly new to feminism or feminism 101 but this was shocking to me and I really appreciate everyone‘s stories. There were some moving ones, there were some funny ones and I really appreciate that. One of the things I did here tonight was every time we passed one of these that somehow we take away…we chip away at someone else‘s freedoms and I‘m not exactly sure how that works because if we the population of folks in Missoula, that are scared to tell their landlords and their bosses and the person that‘s waiting on them in a restaurant, that they‘re LGB or T, that person is not completely free in this society, and that‘s not okay. So this is a big deal and I think…I‘ve been thinking over the past couple of weeks why I‘ve been so shocked at the level that‘s kind of out…that‘s been the outcome of this and I‘m sorry, it‘s getting late so I‘m having problems putting words together, but I‘ve been shocked for a couple of different reasons. And one of those reasons is I think it‘s because most of us here probably at this point, I‘m 40 and most of us here can‘t remember the last time one of these classes was added to this list except for perhaps disability, and I don‘t recall that being controversial during the first George W.H. Bush term in 1991, I believe. So most of us can‘t remember civil rights in action. This is it for us. I mean, this is our lifetimes and so I think to some extent we have developed collective memory loss of what it means to watch civil rights in action, especially in a state like Montana that was so separated from the rest of the nation during the last large civil rights fight. I would like to echo Marilyn, that as a woman I‘m just really proud to vote on this and by virtue of the rights, responsibilities and privileges that the state of Montana has invested in me as an elected official for the 11,000 constituents that voted…that live in Ward 3, I‘m really happy to support this and I‘m sure I‘m forgetting something, but I‘m just really happy to support this.
Alderman Wilkins said, well, I want to thank you all for coming out and telling us how you feel about this and I have to see that I kind of wanted the voters…they need to vote on this, I kind of wanted to put it back to committee and discuss this because it‘s getting so late, but you people are all staying here so I‘m staying here and I‘m going to deal with this tonight. So I got to tell you a little bit about my life so you know where I‘m coming from and I‘ll try to make this really short. I was born in Great Falls, I was in an orphanage and I was adopted out to Dodge Center, Minnesota into a family of fundamentalists who believed their god was the right god and he was the only…you did everything they said. Well, when I started getting 12 years old and never went to a roller skating rink or to a movie house, I started to rebel and I had gentlemen like that spoke tonight, come to my house, put their hands on me and tried to drive the demons out. Well, they did but I went with them. I came back home to Montana and I went into the Army, I‘m a Viet Nam veteran. I‘ve belonged to a Labor Union 1334 which I draw retirement from today City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 58 so the union guy, I worked construction all over this state and saw many, many things, and saw discrimination. There‘s no doubt that there is discrimination in the gay community, gay, lesbian community. I think I can see that tonight, not so much of what you said but in the demeanor and how you said it, one man‘s hand shaking, he‘s scared. Another couple of people said they were scared. That tells you right there that there‘s been discrimination on this point. And, you know, I believe in God and all that too. I go to church, actually I go to the UCC church, okay, but I don‘t believe in a god that tells me that I should discriminate against somebody because of who they are or what they are or anything like that. So I‘m just not going to discriminate against anybody and that‘s why I‘m going to support this ordinance. And shame on you churches that can‘t see the light. You better start looking within yourselves. And I know you‘re not supposed to have political and religious things together, but unfortunately it kind of went that way during this meeting, but you really need to take an inner look to yourself. I grew up in that philosophy and I knew it was wrong when I was 12 and I know it‘s wrong today. And I will not let that interfere with the decision that I‘m going to make here tonight, and I‘m in strong support of this ordinance. Yeah, there‘s probably a few little things I‘d like to see changed but they‘re minor and if they become a problem later on, I‘ll be the first one to put the referral in to see it change. So, thank you again for coming.
Alderman Wiener said, I support the ordinance and I‘ll be pleased to vote for it. Most of my reasons honestly have been reactions against the things that opponents have told me about it since it was proposed. And so I‘m really grateful to the people who came here and testified tonight and gave me reasons to vote for this, you know, just unbelievable stories about being able to ask for one bed in your hotel room or, you know, tell your boss that it was your car in your own driveway. It just blows my mind. So I‘m very grateful to the testimony for that. And we certainly had the requests that we submit this to an initiative and this is, of course, a process that‘s specified by our City charter and potentially this could be repealed. I doubt very much that that‘s the case…kind of the numbers guy, so we went back and looked at 2004 when many people mobilized in order to amend the state constitution in order to prevent marriage of anybody but a man and a woman. And I looked at what the voters of Missoula City did during that election and in any precinct in this…if you take all the precincts in the City where there was even one City voter, and that includes lots of precincts that don‘t vote in City elections, people of Missoula opposed that ban on gay marriage 55 to 45, and that was in 2004. I‘ve got news for you, people who are under 30 are the most pro-equality generation in America and we‘ve added all them to the electorate. This is not going to be repealed. It‘s going to be upheld by the people if it comes to that and I don‘t think that it‘s going to come to that. So I‘m proud to vote for this. I don‘t doubt that, like every vote that I take, I‘ll have to defend it. I‘m making the vote that I‘m proud to defend. I also grew up in a fundamental Christian house and each of us kids had a plaque that was on our door with a Bible verse and so I remember mine very well. It‘s Isaiah 61:1 and it says ―The spirit of the sovereign Lord is on me because the Lord has anointed me to preach good news to the poor, he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners.‖ That‘s a hell of a charge to grow up with if you‘re a little kid and I‘ve got to say I think today is, you know, the closest I‘ve felt to living up to it.
Alderwoman Hellegaard said, I have to say that I‘ve been struggling with this for a very long time. The reason that I‘m struggling with it is because I believe that this does violate the Constitution and adding in 9-64-010(D) does not clear up the Constitutional issues. Every attorney that I have ever spoken to in my entire life has said when you‘re dealing with contracts, when you‘re dealing with ordinance, it has to be explicitly expressed, nothing can be applied or implied. The courts do not recognize implied references. I don‘t believe that anyone should be discriminated against. I‘m just…I don‘t believe that but I don‘t believe the way that this ordinance is written it‘s going to provide any protection to the GLBT community. It‘s going to give them a false sense of security that the bottom is going to drop out on, because I don‘t believe that it‘s enforceable because there‘s nothing in Montana state statute to back this up. Because they‘re not a protected class under Montana state statute an appeal of a conviction in discrimination from the Missoula Municipal Court to the District Court will probably result in a dismissal of the case and the entire ordinance because there‘s no state law to back it up. The Human Rights Commission can only…I called them, they can only investigate discrimination complaints based on the state defined classes. So this ordinance isn‘t going to give any protection with them. They can only deal with what‘s in state law. The ordinance explicitly requires everything to be run through the City Municipal Courts. Mr. Nugent, in an email dated March 22nd, that the City does not have the investigators, hearing officers or attorneys available to absorb a significant new area of work that can be associated with or generated pursuant to City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 59 the originated proposed ordinance. Granted it‘s changed four times but he still didn‘t remove the thing that he told me would resolve the Municipal Courts of this financial burden which was the 12-month period language which he said would eliminate this work. He also said it would be handled by the Human Rights Bureau. It won‘t be. He also said that individuals would probably have to hire their own investigators. Of the attorneys that I‘ve spoken to said it would most likely be thrown out because those investigations would be considered highly prejudicial because I‘m paying for the report. There‘s also a great deal of here say in that evidence so they could be thrown out on those grounds, plus they‘re very expensive. What with the perceived language in here, you‘re trying to tell people what other people were thinking and it‘s very hard to prove. There‘s also a couple of other things in here. We had a lot of University students speak up in support of this. This does not apply to University of Montana or any public school. It belongs…it applies to the private institutions, the schools, the preschools, the daycares, businesses, churches, Salvation Army, Teen Challenge to name a few. This ordinance is very poorly written with the definition again of perceived. It also talks about frivolous, unreasonable or factually groundless in the civil actions. I think all of those could be considered frivolous because we‘re attempting to legislate and document people‘s thoughts. I don‘t think we can do that effectively. So what I‘m seeing here is the message that we are sending to you, the GLBT community is…we care about discrimination, just not enough to write an ordinance that‘s going to withstand judicial review and I just can‘t support it because I don‘t think it‘s going to do what they think it‘s going to do.
Alderman Haines said, I have to take a little umber age with Pam, but that‘s nothing new. We do that almost every meeting. But one of the problems I have…my exposure to segregation, discrimination I go back probably farther than most people in this room. I remember driving between Fort Benning and an Army post in Texas and seeing the signs that say ―Colored Only‖, ―Whites Only and motels you couldn‘t stay in unless you were white. It made it difficult because at the time I was traveling with a fellow officer who‘s black and we were trying to get across the country to where he wouldn‘t be harassed and the circumstances there. And even in some places I was in Texas we saw the discrimination against people, the Hispanic or Latinos, a lot of people looked down their nose at those folks. I was thinking about this in a different sense today and a couple of days ago. As you all know, the Harlem Globetrotters are coming to town. When I was growing up the Harlem Globetrotters were, I think at that time, the only black professional basketball team in the country. And today they‘re almost irrelevant and I don‘t mean that as an insult to them but look at the teams in the final four, how many blacks are on those teams and then come home to Missoula and look at our local hero, A.J. Johnson, who put us in the tournament. Is there anybody in Missoula that wouldn‘t welcome A.J. and his wife into their home? I don‘t think so. There may be some that still have that prejudice but I think it‘s mostly gone. And so I‘m kind of where Lynn is. I see a law here and I always considered making laws the most important thing I ever did in my entire life and so I‘m really concerned about this that it will stand the test of time. I hear all the glowing comments from the other side of the room here and perhaps they‘re right. I hope they‘re right but I really think that some of this will not stand up in court and I think that‘s a shame and I think we can strengthen that. I made that offer to Mr. Strohmaier. I said why don‘t we take it and sit down and strengthen each one of these things, paragraph by paragraph. He rebuffed me. He says no I want to get this done tonight. End of discussion. Okay, folks, it‘s yours to get done tonight. I hope it, like I said, stands the test of time and I think we have to have a vote on those amendments too, separate from the…
Mayor Engen said, they were accepted as friendly amendments.
Alderman Haines said, they were accepted, I didn‘t hear that, very well. Okay, we don‘t have a problem there. So end of my comment. I know from personal experience what segregation and discrimination is and I‘d bet there‘s not many people in this room that know that.
Alderwoman Mitchell said, I would like to add a couple of changes to the amendments but first I‘d like to ask Mr. Nugent if you took a city club, whether it‘s a swim club or a golf club or whatever and you had a state event and, let‘s say it‘s a woman‘s event, and you send out an application and it says, in order to participate in this state tournament or this state golf tournament or bowling, whatever, gymnastics, that you must be female at birth. And I‘m not making this up. I‘ve actually seen applications like this. Does that mean that that event cannot be held in Missoula because it would be discriminatory? Can you give me your views on that? City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 60
City Attorney Nugent said, I‘m not the one that drafted the ordinance so you should probably direct your question to the American Civil Liberties Union, folks. I don‘t think that‘s their intent but…
Alderwoman Mitchell said, okay, I‘ll direct this to whomever wants to tackle it.
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Zupanic?
Niki Zupanic said, I apologize, Council member Mitchell, if you could repeat your question. What I understood you to have said is if there was an outside organization coming to the City of Missoula and hold an athletic event…
Alderwoman Mitchell said, okay, let‘s say I‘ll say, okay, Missoula Country Club or may be Canyon River, that‘s a City golf course or is a golf course within the City hosted the Montana State Women‘s Invitation Golf Tournament, amateur tournament, or maybe the swim club in Missoula hosted the state swimming tournament and on their application or their entry forms said, you must be a female at birth to participate in this women‘s event. Is that going to be discriminatory or are these people going to be able to hold their event at that place or will they have to take it outside into the County or another city?
Niki Zupanic said, I the question is whether or not that would be under the ordinance whether or not that would be illegal discrimination based upon someone‘s gender identity. And I think that the factor that‘s most at play here is that I don‘t think that would be considered a public accommodation. I think that the ordinance is crafted to address only employment, housing, public accommodation. And I would need to look back at the case law for how the Human Rights Act deals with this question. The Montana Human Rights Act has a prohibition against discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sex and that would be similar, a similar consideration would be at play with the hypothetical that you posed. I think that it would be dealt with the same way that the State Human Rights Act deals with that same question.
Alderwoman Mitchell said, okay, I guess what I would like to propose is under 9.64.030, excuse me, number 16, right above that on your…on the draft which is…it‘s late, isn‘t it, 9.64.020, under Definitions, the last definition under Sexual Orientation, it means heterosexuality, bisexuality or homosexuality and I think we need to add celibacy to that because I think that‘s also sexual expression or lack thereof. And then above that on 15 I would like to strike the word ―bathroom.‖ And the reason I‘d like to speak to that because what I understand now it‘s a nonissue. I can legally go into the men‘s or the women‘s room and it‘s a nonissue. And I think the only way it‘s going to remain a nonissue is to strike that. When I…I lost my train of thought.
Mayor Engen said, so, Ms. Mitchell, you‘re making a motion to amend. We‘ll take them one at a time. You want to amend 16 to add ―celibacy‖ at the end of that?
Alderwoman Mitchell said, that‘s correct.
Mayor Engen said, alright. That‘s one amendment that‘s on the floor. The motion to amend is in order. Is there discussion on the motion to amend? Seeing none, would anyone in the audience care to comment on the motion to amend?
Niki Zupanic said, in the par lands par lance of my generation, when you‘re talking about homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality the fourth term in that series is asexuality. So I don‘t know if it‘s relevant to the wording of the legal stuff but it‘s a nice little series, sorry.
Mayor Engen said, thank you. Any additional comment on the motion to amend? Seeing none, and no discussion, we‘ll have a voice vote on the motion to amend.
AMENDMENT
Alderwoman Mitchell made a motion to amend in number 16 to add ―celibacy‖ at the end of that. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 61
Upon a voice vote the motion failed.
Mayor Engen said, the motion fails. Ms. Mitchell, your second amendment?
Alderwoman Mitchell said, the other one would be on the definition on 15 to strike the room ―bathroom‖ and I guess I don‘t know what a resthouse implies but right now bathrooms are nonissues. And in order to keep it a nonissue and to allow people some degree of privacy and expectation when they use a restroom, we could just continue on the way it is. So I don‘t see why that would be a problem, I‘d like to strike that.
Mayor Engen said, and there is a motion on the floor to strike the word ―bathroom.‖ Discussion on the motion?
Alderwoman Walzer said, I‘m not going to support that. One of the reasons why something like ―roadhouse‖ and ―barbering‖ terms are in that is because that‘s one of the things that‘s taken straight from the State Human Rights section. And I‘d like to have the same language that‘s in the state on this aspect.
Mayor Engen said, further discussion? Mr. Houseman?
Alderman Houseman said, yeah, I can‘t support your amendment specifically because you could have an employee who decides or a place of accommodation that they could make a separate but equal bathroom for gay, lesbian and transgender people and that‘s not the intent, separate but equal is one of those things that we‘re real worried about. And, yeah, I‘ll call for the question on this.
Mayor Engen said, sorry, Mr. Houseman, did you call for the question? Thank you. Mr. Houseman‘s motion is to end debate. Is there any…actually any comment from the audience on ending debate on this amendment? Seeing none, we‘ll have a voice vote on ending debate.
MOTION
Alderman Houseman made a motion to end debate.
Upon a voice vote the motion passed.
Mayor Engen said, the debate is over. I will take public comment on the motion to amend. Anyone interested in commenting on that? Please step right up.
Blake Francis said, I‘m scrambled because it‘s late but we‘re talking about bathrooms, right? As I came out to all of you before…
Mayor Engen said, sir, I neglected to have the previous speaker, please identify yourself one more time.
Blake Francis said, sorry, I‘m Blake Francis.
Mayor Engen said, thank you.
Blake Francis said, I spoke before and I came out to everyone as transgender and I just want to say that since I‘ve been transgender and been passing actively as a man, I‘ve had very few problems in the men‘s room. However, for about 15 years of my life as a woman, I constantly struggled with using the women‘s room as a completely biological female, because of the way that I looked, there were several…I could think of probably 15 dozen occasions in my life where I‘ve been literally screamed out of public bathrooms, sometimes by officials in the school that I was in who mistook my gender as male, even though at the time I was legally, emotionally, physically female. And so I do think this is an important issue. I know there‘s a lot of fear and turbulence about it but I think that this is something that‘s important for me as a previously gender-queer person and now as a transgender person. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 62
Mayor Engen said, thank you. Any additional comment on the motion to amend?
Margot Hart said, my question about the bathroom issue is not about transgender people. It‘s about people that say they are or aren‘t that day and all of a sudden I‘ve got a male standing in the bathroom and how do I have a boundary with that? How do I feel safe with that? And does that expand then into locker rooms and saunas? And I‘m really empathetic with what everybody shared but there‘s just that issue, I don‘t know, as a woman…I walked across a parking lot with my keys in my hand and what are we trained to do to how to protect ourselves? And so my question is, as a public partaker in that or my children or my daughters or men for that matter, where do we know what the gender is that‘s in front of us and how do we know if they‘re just someone going into a lifestyle or if they‘re a perpetrator? And if we‘re opening that door into that arena, I think we‘re really violating a lot of our rights to feel protected and safe by visual, by visual context. There‘s a man in my shower room. There‘s, you know, and I‘m not trying to be prejudice, I‘m really not. It‘s just a real concern. So that‘s all I have.
Mayor Engen said, further comment on the motion to amend?
Ann Harris said, the bathrooms are a critical part of the ordinance. They need to remain in the ordinance. If there‘s someone in the bathroom not there to do their business, they got no business being there. It‘s that simple and that is I believe actionable and it has nothing to do with this ordinance. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, any additional comment?
Roberta Zanker said, the bathroom fear is simply irrational, you know, right now today, and Jim Nugent has got a record of saying this, is that anybody can go in anybody‘s bathroom. There‘s no law to prohibit it, yet how many of you have seen in Missoula, Montana a man in a dressing room or a woman‘s restroom? Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, any additional comment? Seeing none, debate has ended and we‘ll have a voice vote on the motion to amend.
AMENDMENT
Alderwoman Mitchell made a motion to amend in number 15 to strike the word ―bathroom.‖
Upon a voice vote the motion failed.
Mayor Engen said, motion to amend fails. We‘re back to the main motion and I have in order on the main motion Mr. Childers, Ms. Marler, Mr. Houseman, Ms. Rye.
Alderman Childers said, thank Mayor. I just have a few disjointed thoughts, I thought I‘d put out there for the heck of it. First, thank you all very much. This has been a very educational process for me. I‘ve got to get out more…just to know you were all there. I would go back I guess to where we started and think about Bob Luceno and Mulligan‘s which was a strip joint versus antidiscrimination ordinance and how he thought those were somehow related and I don‘t see that. I don‘t like to see Mr. Himes and the Allied Defense Fund threaten the City of Missoula for doing this. I understand why and I hope they don‘t but what a sad state of affairs, saddest…I learned about a number of different versions of Christianity. Now I knew they were all there, you know, the Catholics and the Protestants and all them little different branches of Protestants and a couple of branches of Catholicism and, of course, you‘ve got before Catholicism Judaism and there‘s a couple, thereof those, and some were out there. There‘s the Islamists and there‘s multiple branches of that. But I learned that if your Christianity is absolutely what the Bible says, and I won‘t say what you believe the Bible says, because that isn‘t it, it‘s absolutely what the Bible says, then other Christianities really don‘t count. So that means that there would only be one Christianity which makes it real hard, in my estimation, to go back and try to bring all the groups together and come up with some different kind of an ordinance, because it just doesn‘t seem like it would work to me. So I‘m going to support this ordinance. This is a nonpartisan Council and I‘m an old time Democrat and this City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 63 seems like the kind of thing that old time Democrats ought to do and so I really appreciate, you know, Stacy and Dave bringing the thing forward and the ACLU and the Human Rights and, you know, wherever this thing trickled down from. Thank you very much.
Alderwoman Marler said, since the hour is late I‘m going to try to call the question on the main motion.
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Marler has asked that we end debate on the main motion.
MOTION
Alderwoman Marler made a motion to end debate.
Upon a voice vote the motion passed.
Mayor Engen said, I think the ayes have it. Question?
Alderwoman Rye said, Jim Nugent just handed me his shortest legal memo ever in the history of Jim Nugent‘s career. And can I friendly amendment something myself that I think needs to be done or not at this point?
Mayor Engen said, I would ask Ms. Marler to remove her…withdraw her motion…Ms. Marler has withdrawn her motion. You‘d like to clarify something?
Alderwoman Rye said, yeah, Jim‘s memo says that in the definition section of Educational Institution means a public or a private institution includes an academy college, so on and so forth and so Jim says that we have to use the original language which is public or private because if we do not use the word ―public‖ it will exclude the University of Montana. And we did have a letter of support from the president of the University of Montana supporting this in its original form. And so it would still be okay in regards to elementary and secondary schools because we don‘t have…we‘re denied any jurisdiction over them to begin with. So unless my colleagues object, we need to put back in ―public or private institution‖ so that it does apply to the University of Montana, which they support it.
Mayor Engen said, I would think by virtue of construction here, Ms. Rye, it‘s your motion.
Alderwoman Rye said, I guess I can friendly amendment that myself.
Mayor Engen said, yeah, but we‘re not going to use that as a verb. You may alter your motion to reflect that interest.
Alderman Haines said, Mr. Mayor, I know that this point of order drives Stacy right up the wall but I think we passed the motion to end debate so I don‘t see how you can withdraw…I don‘t see how Ms. Marler can withdraw her motion if after that. I may be wrong.
Alderwoman Rye said, we have attorneys.
Mayor Engen said, ahhh, let‘s see. Ms. Marler withdrew the motion after the vote? Yeah, that‘s fair.
Alderwoman Rye said, that‘s fine.
Mayor Engen said, because it‘s 1:31 a.m….I‘ll have to think about this for a minute. Ms. Marler, would you like to make a motion? Debate on that question is ended. I would entertain a motion now to allow further discussion. How‘s that?
Alderman Haines said, I think you can do that after…
Mayor Engen said, I‘ve got to be able to get there somehow. City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 64
Alderman Strohmaier said, Mayor Engen, point of order.
Alderman Haines said, I think all you can do now, Mr. Mayor, is call…is to vote on the question.
Alderman Strohmaier said, how about a roll call vote on Marilyn‘s motion?
Mayor Engen said, oh, Mr. Strohmaier has asked for a roll call vote on the motion to end debate. How clever.
Upon a roll call vote, the vote on the motion to end debate was as follows:
AYES: Haines, Hellegaard, Marler, Wilkins
NAYS: Childers, Houseman, Jaffe, Rye, Strohmaier, Walzer, Wiener
ABSTAIN: Mitchell
ABSENT: None
Motion failed: 4 Ayes, 7 Nays, 1 Abstain, 0 Absent
Mayor Engen said, the motion to end debate fails on a roll call vote. Further discussion on the motion?
Alderwoman Rye said, okay, so I have withdrawn any friendly amendment to my own main motion and I would like Ms. Zupanic to please come up and address the short legal memo from Jim based on this issue.
Niki Zupanic said, I just wanted to share that there are a number of things that state law preempts the City Council from acting upon and public schools was removed because it‘s expressly preempted in state law, and I read that to include the university systems though, I just feel those are one of those areas that this state has unfortunately told you, you cannot do, so that‘s why we left it at private.
City Attorney Nugent said, the statutory phrase is public school system, it‘s not talking about the University on the powers denied. It‘s the public school system.
Alderwoman Rye said, so in your opinion we could say public or private institution and that would encompass…the public would encompass the University of Montana which is within the City of Missoula boundaries, in terms of discrimination in housing?
City Attorney Nugent said, by putting the word ―public‖ back in you will have the University covered. The powers to deny are not denying you powers other than the public school system and in the state statute isn‘t going to be the university.
Alderwoman Rye said, okay, so this would be in regards to housing and employment at the University of Montana. Correct? Okay, so I would like to keep ―public‖ so that the University of Montana is covered within this and we do not have the…we are denied powers to govern anything about the public school system.
Mayor Engen said, that‘s the motion before you, folks. Further discussion?
Alderman Wilkins said, well, I‘d like to see the University covered in this too but here‘s the problem that I‘m seeing. Here we‘ve got a…they want a zoning change there and they came in front of us…well, the whole thing that public schools are not covered under City ordinances. I mean, that‘s what we were told so I guess you‘ve got to clarify that, how would this be different?
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 65
City Attorney Nugent said, for so many purposes a different statute says that zoning…you can‘t…government agencies are not subject to zoning.
Alderman Wilkins said, so it‘s just zoning? Nothing else?
City Attorney Nugent said, no, there‘s two different statutes we‘re talking about. The zoning statute says that you…government agencies are not subject to zoning. A totally different statute about self- government powers about…entitled ―Powers Denied‖ talks about you don‘t have power over the public school system, and that‘s the distinction of…I think Lynn actually touched on there.
Alderman Haines said, I guess you‘ve got me confused now. Do we have power over the University on this particular ordinance?
City Attorney Nugent said, I don‘t think the public school system includes the University. That‘s one of the things we‘d have to find out.
Mayor Engen said, further discussion on the motion? Seeing none, we‘ve had a public hearing. Would anyone else like to comment on the motion? Seeing none, we‘ll have a roll call vote.
Alderwoman Mitchell said, sorry, point of order. Are we voting on an amendment to replace or the entire ordinance?
Mayor Engen said, Ms. Rye can adopt that amendment.
Alderwoman Mitchell said, so this is now on the entire ordinance?
Mayor Engen said, yes, ma‘am.
Alderwoman Mitchell said, thank you.
Alderman Houseman said, wait, debate hasn‘t ended. Point of order. Debate…no you just failed in debate so you had this motion…
Mayor Engen said, and I asked for further discussion and I didn‘t see any so I called for a vote.
Alderman Houseman said, but there was discussion you had already listed…never mind.
Mayor Engen said, if you want to say something, Mr. Houseman, you‘re in.
Alderman Houseman said, alright. I guess, yeah, I‘ve been waiting all night. I think that it‘s great that we‘re finally getting the chance to do this and I think it‘s a great opportunity and additionally there‘s been some concerns about whether students, you know, would be able to utilize this ordinance. And I think one thing that needs to be pointed out is that a lot of students live off campus and this ordinance will assist them and as we‘ve just amended, I think that we‘ll be assisting students that have lived on campus. That being said, I think that it‘s critically important and I know that a lot of people have talked about jobs earlier and they mentioned Smurfit Stone. They threw that name out there a lot. And Smurfit Stone provided equal treatment for health care for their domestic partners and it was discussed and if I remember correctly, Smurfit Stone actually had in its contract with United Steel Workers that you could not discriminate on hiring because of sexual orientation. And it should be noted that in 2002 a lesbian couple that was trying to get equal treatment for their health care rights here at the University of Montana had their house burnt down. And I think that it‘s unfortunate that we had to live through that experience in 2002 and I‘m looking forward to putting these issues aside and being able to say, hey, son, when I eventually have kids, we just spent six hours, seven hours on this ordinance and he‘s going to go, why did you guys waste so much time on this? It should have been done a long time ago. Thank you.
Mayor Engen said, further discussion? Ms. Mitchell? City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 66
Alderwoman Mitchell said, I just have a couple more things I want to say before we take our vote on this but, Roy, at no time did anybody ever discern how the house was burnt down. They know it was…there was never a determination whether it was done by arson, the people who lived there, or somebody else outside. You can go back and read all the newspapers but that question was never answered so I certainly hope it wasn‘t someone trying to hurt these people. I have never wanted to hurt anybody in any way and be cruel and mean to them whether they‘re gay, lesbian, transgender whatever. I‘m not…I hardly even use the word straight. I mean this lingo is new to me. So I do know that years ago I went to my roommate‘s wedding and not too long ago I went to her dad‘s funeral, and at the funeral I met her two grown children and her new female partner. We‘re still friends. I still love her dearly as a person. So I guess if you guys tell stories, Jon, these people might bear with me just for a few more minutes. When I grew up my dad was big-time on helping people that were down on their luck and you don‘t know how many times I came home to find some stranger painting in our house trying to work back, pay back my dad for some money he lent him to help him get back on his feet. And it didn‘t matter what persuasion these people were. All he wanted was somebody that would come do the work and wasn‘t too crazy that would have hurt his kids. So I don‘t feel that I have been raised to discriminate against people. The only thing I have a problem with this ordinance is that there are a few things that could have made it better that maybe would not cause fear for private business owners. I guess if that comes down the road the Council can always change that. I do know that if this legislation allows many of the people who gave testimony here that have had a hard time growing up and making the adjustments and having people treat them poorly, that I truly hope that you‘ll have happier lives. I‘m not so sure it‘s going to be due to this legislation but I do hope that, as a Council, we can encourage everybody to treat everybody more kindly. We all have our crosses to bear and growing up is never easy and I‘m sure it‘s doubly difficult when you have to deal with something that is not the norm. So to all of you I wish you the best and I wish you a discrimination-free life and I mean that sincerely. And I know that it‘s not going to happen…we‘re going to do the best we can to manage what we can. We‘re all going to be discriminated against at some point in time. One time I was one female out of three that was in a men‘s basketball pool of 60 guys and we were trying to get assignments and I have felt some form of discrimination but rather than leave the club and it probably would have been the easiest, no, I signed up to do city rec basketball with the guys so I could increase my skills so could become more proficient so that they would assign due to my abilities and not because I was a female. And I just want to say that I have no hard feelings. My life is probably not going to change terribly because of this ordinance, for those of you that it does, I hope it changes for the better.
Mayor Engen said, further discussion? Seeing none, we‘ll have a roll call vote.
ORDINANCE 3428
MOTION
Alderwoman Rye made a motion to adopt an ordinance of the Missoula City Council, amending Missoula Municipal Code Title 9 Public Peace, Morals and Welfare to add chapter 9.64 entitled ―Illegal Discrimination‖ generally prohibiting discriminatory practices in the areas of employment, public accommodations and housing on the basis of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, creed, sex, age, marital or familial status, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or military veteran; and amending section 2.94.030 entitled ―Percent for Art Program Established‖ section 5.82.080 entitled ―Nondiscrimination‖ section 9.12.010 entitled ―Housing Discrimination Declared Unlawful‖ and section 12.58.100 entitled ―Exceptions.‖
Upon a roll call vote, the vote on Ordinance 3428 was as follows:
AYES: Childers, Haines, Houseman, Jaffe, Marler, Rye, Strohmaier, Walzer, Wiener, Wilkins
NAYS: Hellegaard, Mitchell
City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 67
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Ordinance 3428 carried: 10 Ayes, 2 Nays, 0 Abstain, 0 Absent
Mayor Engen said, and the ordinance is approved.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM MAYOR - None
GENERAL COMMENTS OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Alderman Wilkins said to Jack Reidy, if he‘s listening out there, they just broke his record of length of a City Council meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Plat, Annexation and Zoning Committee 04/07/2010
Public Works Committee 04/07/2010
NEW BUSINESS (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, REPORTS) - None
ITEMS TO BE REFERRED
To Administration and Finance Committee: Confirm the reappointment of Ellen Buchanan as the city‘s representative to the Downtown Business Improvement District Board of Trustees for a term commencing June 1, 2010 and ending May 31, 2014 (memo).—Regular Agenda (Mayor Engen) Confirm the reappointments of Hal Fraser and Nancy Moe to the Missoula Redevelopment Agency Board for a term commencing May 1, 2010 and ending April 30, 2014 (memo).—Regular Agenda (Mayor Engen)
To Conservation Committee: Resolution accepting a $125,000 DNRC grant to manage Mountain Pine Beetle and authorize the Mayor to sign all documents related to the Montana DNRC grant to utilize $125,000 for the Mountain Pine Beetle Project (memo).—Regular Agenda (Morgan Valliant) Update from Parks and Recreation Department including Mountain Pine Beetle efforts on City lands and progress to date on the Conservation Lands Management Plan process (memo).— Regular Agenda (Morgan Valliant)
To Plat, Annexation and Zoning Committee Petition 9464—Eight Acre Woods, LLC; Lot 5 of the Ram Addition Geocode 232521101050000; Tract A-1A, Certificate of Survey No. 3019, being a portion of Tract A-1, Certificate of Survey No. 2593 Geocode 232521101030000; Petition for Annexation Petition 9465—B&E Corporation; Tract B of Certificate of Survey No. 4611 in the East 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of 34-14-20; Petition for Annexation Petition 9466—One Horse Construction, Inc.; Lot 24 of Running W Ranch, Phases I&II, Geocode 232522207240000; Petition for Annexation
To Public Safety and Health Committee Confirm the Mayor‘s appointment of Patrick Mulligan as a police officer (memo).—Regular Agenda (Mark Muir) City of Missoula City Council Minutes –April 12, 2010 - Page 68
Ordinance amending MMC Title 2, Chapter 2.32 by creating new Section 2.32.060 giving Missoula police arrest authority to five miles outside the city limits (memo).—Regular Agenda (Mark Muir)
To Public Works Committee: Request to vacate the portion of alley between Lots 8 and 12, Block P of the CP Higgins Addition (memo).—Regular Agenda (Carla Krause)
MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS, PETITIONS, REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Engen thanked the council members and the staff for their service.
The meeting adjourned at 1:47 a.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Martha L. Rehbein John Engen City Clerk Mayor
(SEAL)
Respectfully submitted by,
Nikki Rogers, Deputy City Clerk