City to weigh anti-bias law

Fayetteville’s attorney rewrites proposal from scratch

FAYETTEVILLE -- City Attorney Kit Williams wants the Fayetteville City Council to consider an entirely new anti-discrimination law, rather than using the ordinance voters repealed as a starting point for discussion.

A proposal Williams drafted is based on the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993 instead of drawing from model language provided by the Human Rights Campaign, a national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy group.

"Rather than going back to an ordinance ... that's based on language from a group out of Washington, D.C., we should probably have our ordinance based on the Arkansas Civil Rights law," Williams said.

He added the ordinance that was rejected by 52 percent of residents who voted in a Dec. 9 special election "should be discarded."

Williams drafted his proposal a day after Alderman Matthew Petty, the sponsor of the Civil Rights Administration ordinance, said he wanted to refer the repealed ordinance to the City Council's Ordinance Review committee for amendments.

The Arkansas Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment and places of public accommodation on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, age, sex, religion and disability. It doesn't offer protections for gay residents.

William Cash, director of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Little Rock area office, said gay employees have no legal recourse in Arkansas if they're fired because of their sexual preferences.

Williams' proposal would grant gay residents in Fayetteville the same rights other protected classes have under state and federal law.

Specifically, his proposal mentions: "The right to obtain and hold employment without discrimination; the right to the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage or amusement; the right to engage in property transactions [including sales and leases] without discrimination; the right to engage in credit and other contractual transactions without discrimination; (and) the right to vote and participate fully in the political process."

Williams' definitions of "employee," "employer" and places of public accommodation mirror state law. For example, his proposal would apply only to businesses with nine or more employees, rather than those with five or more as stated in the repealed ordinance.

A place of public accommodation would be defined as "any place, store or other establishment, either licensed or unlicensed, that supplies accommodations, goods or services to the general public." Establishments with fewer than five rooms for rent and private clubs would be exempted -- as they are under state law. So would all churches and church-owned schools and day care centers.

Petty said last week that he supports any proposal extending protections that don't exist under state or federal law to members of the gay, bisexual and transgender community. He said an email he sent to Mayor Lioneld Jordan previously was simply an attempt to have the ordinance review committee revisit some version of an anti-discrimination ordinance.

"I don't see how [Williams' proposal] is really out of line with that idea," Petty said.

Williams' proposal mentions gay residents, specifically. But it does not prohibit "gender identity" discrimination as the repealed ordinance would have. Williams said that's because emerging case law seems to offer protections to transgender residents if they're the victim of "gender stereotyping."

Williams and Cash said a transgender employee could rightfully file a legal claim under Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 if chastised for acting too effeminately or fired for dressing like a woman.

One big difference between the repealed ordinance and Williams' proposal is how the laws would be enforced.

Williams' proposal wouldn't create a position to investigate complaints. Instead, it would require mediation.

If mediation was unsuccessful, the case would be forwarded to the Development Services director, and the violators' business license could be revoked.

Petty and Williams said the City Council likely won't consider further discussion on a revised anti-discrimination law until early 2015.

State Desk on 12/21/2014

Upcoming Events