City Commission gets detail-oriented over proposed anti-discrimination law; SGA approves bill supporting ordinance


Jurisdiction and other details were at the forefront of city commissioners’ concerns at a special work session Monday amid discussion over a proposed anti-discrimination ordinance.

The law, intended to be an all-inclusive rule preventing discriminatory acts at the local level, was first proposed by a group of city residents in November. On Monday, City Attorney Scott Smith, who’s contracted out of a Grand Rapids law firm, broke down the components of a draft ordinance the movement’s leaders provided last year, spurring several questions over its components and efficiency.

The work session was only the first of several steps expected over the next few months, preceding a formal presentation Feb. 27 to the City Commission from the movement’s spokeswoman, Norma Bailey, a professor of teacher education and professional development at Central Michigan University.

Smith advised commissioners his purpose was not to recommend any decision regarding the drafted ordinance or to suggest action over any of its contents.

“I’m not a civil rights attorney. I’m not an employment law attorney. I’m not an expert on public accommodations and so forth,” he said. “But I do know and have looked at what other communities have done.”

Smith provided examples of how similar ordinances have been adopted in other college towns and elsewhere, such as Holland, where it wasn’t adopted at all.

Currently Mount Pleasant is the only city in Michigan with a major university to not have this ordinance.

The draft bans discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodation, as well as policies or actions that have “discriminatory effects.”

Regulation at the city level, Smith told commissioners, would supplement state and federal regulations by specifying the city as the agency responsible for enforcing it and adding sexual orientation and gender identity, which the state’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act does not cover, to the assortment of categories of people protected.

“If you want to make a statement about gender acceptance, then you (can) do it at the local level,” said City Manager Kathie Grinzinger. “There are a number of communities that have these kinds of ordinances, but you cannot do anything the state doesn’t empower you to do anyway.”

 Questions over jurisdiction, enforcement
At the commission meeting, several commissioners focused questions around the city’s jurisdiction in later processes of enforcing such an ordinance, such as whether it’s inferred on a circuit or district court. Some inquired how the ordinance would affect the compliance of outside groups contracted by the city for service duties or capital improvement projects.

Commissioner Jim Holton asked if jurisdiction was applicable on CMU’s campus, which Smith said it likely was similar to other ordinances already enforced.

Holton also referenced a recent complaint over a potential discriminatory act he addressed within his own local business. Though the results of his investigation were “inconclusive,” he questioned if under the ordinance there’d be an obligation to report such acts, in addition to internal policies many businesses and institutions already have.

Smith said he didn’t see any obligation for similar, future incidents to be reported, unless the affected customer or employee complained to the city.

As a commissioner, Holton said he’d look at worst-case scenarios of discrimination in addressing the ordinance’s feasibility and if it could identify every potential threat.

“This is the complication of this ordinance. Every case is going to be different. Some person may perceive it as discrimination, while another person may not perceive it that way,” Holton said. “And then you have to look at the person who’s going to be investigating it and their mindset. There (are) so many variables out there.”

Commissioners said it’s too soon to know how the ordinance’s fruition will proceed until after the Feb. 27 presentation, but Holton complimented Bailey’s and the group’s preparation before proposing it.

Bailey said she found Smith’s presentation informative and was pleased the commission didn’t seem as concerned with the cost to the city as she anticipated.

“It was very reassuring in a lot of ways. You know, the assurance of no cost, that (in other cities) they had only one or two complaints (annually),” Bailey said of Smith’s research. “(With an ordinance), you’ve made a statement to your community that, ‘We are a community that doesn’t discriminate against anyone,’ and therefore, people don’t tend to discriminate.”

“But the protection is there,” she added, "that’s the beauty that people can feel."

SGA supports proposal

Also on Monday night, the CMU Student Government House unanimously approved new legislation to publicly support the anti-discrimination proposal.

The author of the bill supporting the ordinance, Vice President of College Democrats and Tecumseh sophomore John Hoag said the bill would give the student body a crucial voice on the issue.

“The SGA is the voice of the student body.” Hoag said. “By passing this bill, we are saying that we are strongly for this ordinance as a university, allowing us to take steps in making that voice heard.”

The legislation not only publicly affirms that the Student Government Association is in favor of the anti-discrimination ordinance, but also allows SGA to work toward the passage of the bill.

According to Hoag, the bill would allow SGA’s City Commission Liaison Killian Richeson to speak on behalf of the student body in favor of the bill in the upcoming commission meeting on Feb. 27. But other methods are also being pursued, including a campus-wide petition in support of the ordinance.

“There are really no major steps we can take because of this bill,” Hoag said. “But instead, it allows us to take several minor steps which will lead to larger steps and hopefully a major impact.”

Staff Reporter Ryan Fitzmaurice contributed to this report. 

Where can you find anti-discrimination ordinances across the state?

Town College/university Law Adopted No Law
Allendale Township Grand Valley State X
Ann Arbor University Michigan X
Big Rapids Ferris State X
Dearborn U-M, Dearborn X
Detroit Wayne State X
East Lansing Michigan State X
Flint U-M, Flint X
Grand Rapids Grand Valley State X
Houghton Michigan Tech X
Kalamazoo Western Michigan X
Kochville Township Saginaw Valley State X
Marquette Northern Michigan X
Mount Pleasant Central Michigan X
Rochester Oakland X
Sault Ste. Marie Lake Superior State X
Traverse City Northwestern Michigan X
Ypsilanti Eastern Michigan X

HTML Tables

Share: