[00:00:01]
I BELIEVE, IS TO TAKE[I. Call to Order]
A ROLL CALL.OH, THIS WOULD BE THE PART OF THE MEETING OF APPEARANCE OF CITIZENS.
[III. Approval of September 21, 2023, Meeting Minutes]
APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 21ST.PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO GO OVER THERE AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT AND ENTERTAIN ANY MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
YOU STILL HAVEN'T BEEN HERE IN THREE MONTHS.
I ALSO MIGHT SUGGEST MUTING OF PHONES AT THIS POINT.
I SENT THESE MINUTES OUT ON TUESDAY, SO I THINK EVERYONE'S PROBABLY HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THEM.
CAN WE TAKE A, A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES WITH THE NECESSARY CORRECTIONS.
SECOND, WHAT, WHAT CORRECTIONS SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE SOME
ANYBODY GOT CORRECTIONS? I'LL SECOND.
[IV. Monthly Activity Report & Summary of Cases]
UH, FRED SPANS TO, UH, BRING US UP TO DATE ON THE MONTHLY REPORT, WHICH LOOKS FAIRLY EXTENSIVE.UH, THERE'S EIGHT CASES THAT I'M REPORTING ON THIS MONTH, AND, UH, HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE THAT SHEET IN FRONT OF YOU.
THE MONTHLY HUMAN RIGHTS, UH, INVESTIGATIVE REPORT.
UH, I'LL JUST RUN THROUGH THEM.
SO THAT'S BEEN ON OUR AGENDA FOR QUITE A WHILE.
YOU MIGHT REMEMBER, UH, LAST MONTH I REPORTED THAT I HAD THOUGHT THE CASE WAS WRAPPED UP.
I CALLED THE COMPLAINANT THAT SAID THAT I WAS FINDING IN FAVOR OF THE RESPONDENT.
THE COMPLAINANT SAID, OH, NO, WAIT A MINUTE.
UH, I HAVE SOME WITNESSES THAT COULD CHANGE EVERYTHING AROUND.
WELL, I SAID, YOU HAVE TWO WEEKS CALLED BACK IN TWO WEEKS.
AND HE SAID, NAH, I, I WAS THINKING OF SOMETHING ELSE.
SO THAT CASE CLOSED, UH, WITH A FI WITH A FINDING OF NO PROBABLE CAUSE.
UH, AND THAT, UH, THE DATE OF THE CLOSING WAS, UH, SEPTEMBER 26TH.
[00:05:01]
COMPLAINANT, WHEN THERE'S A FINDING OF NO PROBABLE CAUSE OR ANY KIND OF A DISMISSAL, THE COMPLAINANT DOES HAVE A 40 DAY PERIOD WHEN THEY CAN, UH, MAKE AN APPEAL DIRECTLY TO THE COMMISSION.AND THAT'S HAPPENED IN A FEW CASES.
YOU'LL REMEMBER, UH, WITH EARLIER DISMISSALS.
SO, SO TECHNICALLY THAT CASE IS STILL OPEN.
BUT THE, UM, THE COMPLAINANT INDICATED THAT THEY WERE NOT PLANNING TO APPEAL, UH, THE NEXT 1, 2, 3 0 6 2 9 DATING TO JUNE OF THIS YEAR.
UH, AS WE WERE, UH, GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE RESPONDENT ASKING FOR A EXTENSION, UM, TO FILE THEIR RESPONSE, THEY THEN SAID, WELL, MAYBE WE CAN JUST SETTLE THIS, UH, WITH, WITH THE COMPLAINANT.
AND, UH, IT'S ONE OF THESE SITUATIONS WHERE THERE WASN'T A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, BUT THEY WORKED THROUGH ME THROUGH EMAILS AND PHONE CALLS, AND THAT THEY DID REACH AN AGREEMENT ON SEPTEMBER 22ND.
SO THAT CASE IS, IS NOW CLOSED.
UH, THE THIRD 1, 2 3 0 7 1 9, UH, RACE DISCRIMINATION AND EMPLOYMENT.
UH, THE, UH, THE RESPONDENT, UH, FILED ITS RESPONSE IN A TIMELY MATTER ON SEPTEMBER 29TH.
THAT WAS THEIR EXTENDED DEADLINE.
UH, I SENT THE RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINANT, UH, ACTUALLY, I MADE A COPY OF IT.
THE COMPLAINANT PICKED IT UP DOWN HERE, UH, AND I ASKED THE COMPLAINANT TO READ IT, TO MAKE A NOTE OF ANYTHING THAT THEY DISAGREED WITH, AND TO LIST ANY SUPPORT THEY HAD FOR THEIR POSITION.
THAT'S WHAT NORMALLY HAPPENS AFTER THE RESPONDENT.
YOU GET TWO STORIES SO THAT THEN THE COMPLAINANT IS OFFERED AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEIR STORY IS THE CORRECT ONE BY GOING THROUGH THE RESPONSE.
UH, SINCE THAT TIME I'VE MADE, I'VE SENT TWO TEXTS, TWO EMAILS, AND AN ADDITIONAL PHONE, TWO PHONE CALLS TO THE RESPONDENTS SAYING WE NEED TO MEET, I MEAN, TO THE COMPLAINANT SAYING WE NEED TO MEET, UH, SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD.
THEY HAVE RESPONDED TO NONE OF THE ABOVE.
SO THE LAST MESSAGE, WHICH I LEFT YESTERDAY WAS, IF I DON'T HEAR FROM YOU BY TOMORROW, BY FRIDAY, I WILL ASSUME THAT YOU NO LONGER WISH TO PURSUE THIS CASE.
UH, AND IN THAT CASE, I THINK, SHERRY, WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS PROBABLY SEND A, A CERTIFIED LETTER TO THE COMPLAINANT.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ONE MORE CHANCE, WE COULD SAY, YOU KNOW, EXTEND THE DEADLINE ANOTHER WEEK OR SOMETHING.
BUT, UH, WHAT OFTEN HAPPENS IN THOSE CASES THOUGH, IS THE COMPLAINANT DOESN'T PICK UP THE CERTIFIED MAIL.
SO YEAH, I WAS THINKING MAYBE SEND ONE CERTIFIED AND ONE TO HIS HOME THAT WAY.
UM, BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, IF HE'S NOT THERE, THE CERTIFIED GOES BACK TO THE POST OFFICE AND NOT PICK IT UP.
SO IF YOU GIVE HIM A CERTAIN DATE, LISA HAVE ONE GOING STRAIGHT TO HIS HOME.
YOU CAN TALK WITH YOU ABOUT THAT MAYBE TOMORROW.
AND WE CAN, UH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE COMPLAINANT HAS EVERY CHANCE, BUT THIS COMPLAINANT WAS TEXTING ME REGULARLY EARLIER, SO I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE, THAT THEY DO HAVE AN ACTIVE PHONE NUMBER AND I, UH, YOU KNOW, SO THAT, THAT'S THE STATUS OF THAT CASE.
SO IT, IT, UH, COULD, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF THEY RESPOND, THEN WE'LL THEN WE'LL PICK IT UP AND, AND, AND START THE INVESTIGATION.
IF THEY DON'T RESPOND, THEN WE'LL JUST HAVE TO CLOSE IT.
FOR, FOR NON-RESPONSIVENESS OR NON-COOPERATION, UH, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THOSE TO BE, UM, REOPENED AT SOME LATER DATE? OR IF, IF YOU CLOSE IT ONCE, IS THAT, IS IT OVER AND DONE WITH? HMM, I DON'T KNOW.
THAT WOULD, UH, IF IT'S STILL WITHIN THE 180 DEGREE DAY PERIOD, I SUPPOSE, I MEAN, IT'S DISMISSED.
THE CASE IS CLOSED, THEY COULD APPEAL.
THEY COULD APPEAL IT, THEY COULD APPEAL THE DISMISSAL, AND THAT WOULD JUST AUTOMATICALLY REOPEN THE CASE AT THAT POINT, BECAUSE I'M NOT DISMISSING, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR CAUSE IT'S JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NOT COOPERATION.
UH, SO SAY THIS PERSON CAME BACK LATER AND SAID, OKAY, NOW I WANNA, NOW I WANNA REOPEN IT.
I MEAN, THAT'S NOT COVERED IN THE ORDINANCE.
IT'S A GREAT QUESTION, WHICH IS A WAY OF SAYING, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT, YOU KNOW, I, I TEND TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF THE COMPLAINANT.
SO I PROBABLY WOULD SAY, OKAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW, TELL ME WHY YOU DIDN'T RESPOND BEFORE.
YOU KNOW, OKAY, I WAS IN THE HOSPITAL, I WASN'T ABLE TO RECEIVE ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT WOULD BE LEGIT.
WHAT, WHAT, ON THE OTHER HAND, WHAT SOMETIMES HAPPENS IS WHEN PEOPLE COME IN TO SEE ME, THEY'RE TELLING ME THEIR STORY AND THEY'RE NOT REALLY THINKING
[00:10:01]
THROUGH, WELL, THERE'S ANOTHER SIDE TO THE STORY, AND I'M GONNA GET EVIDENCE OF THAT OTHER SIDE.WHEN THE RESPONDENT FILES THEIR, YOU KNOW, AND I DO ADVISE THEM, AND ESPECIALLY IN A CASE WHERE IT'S A, THIS WAS A LARGE EMPLOYER THAT THEY WILL HAVE LEGAL TALENT ON THEIR SIDE, YOU KNOW, AND THEY WILL DO AN INVESTIGATION AND THEY'LL BRING EVERYTHING THEY CAN.
UH, SO, UH, FLIPPING OVER TO THE BACKSIDE THEN, UH, 2 3 0 7 2 5 B, UH, IT'S ANOTHER RACE, DISCRIMINATION AND EMPLOYMENT.
UH, I FOUND REASONABLE SUSPICION, UH, AND SENT THE CHARGE TO THE RESPONDENT IN AUGUST, UH, THE MIDDLE OF AUGUST.
SO THAT'S A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.
NOW, THEY, UH, ARE TRYING TO, TO SETTLE THE CASE.
WELL, THEY'VE BOTH AGREED TO TRY TO SETTLE THE CASE WITHOUT GOING ANY FURTHER, WITHOUT FILING A FORMAL RESPONSE OR DOING AN INVESTIGATION.
UH, AND, UH, AT THIS POINT, THE, THE COMPLAINANT DECLINED.
USUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THE COMPLAINANT MAKES THEIR INITIAL DEMAND OR REQUEST SAYING, YOU KNOW, I WANT SO MANY DOLLARS, OR I WANT YOU TO DO THIS TO SETTLE THE CASE.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S USUALLY WHERE IT STARTS WITH A COMPLAINANT.
IN THIS CASE, THE COMPLAINANT SAID, UH, WELL, I DON'T KNOW.
WHY DON'T YOU LET THEM GO FIRST?
I SUSPECT THEY'LL BE PRETTY FAR APART.
THEY ALWAYS START PRETTY FAR APART, AND IT'S A MATTER OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, MEET IN THE MIDDLE AT SOME POINT.
UH, SO, SO WE'LL JUST SEE WHERE THAT ONE GOES.
UH, 2 3 0 8 3 1 A RACE DISCRIMINATION AND EMPLOYMENT, UH, INITIAL INTERVIEW IN SEPTEMBER DETERMINED THERE WAS REASONABLE SUSPICION.
UH, WE'RE WAITING FOR THE RESPONDENT TO SUBMIT THEIR RESPONSE, AND THEY HAVE UNTIL OCTOBER 27TH TO DO SO.
UH, 2 3 0 9 0 8 B AGAIN, UH, SEPTEMBER 8TH ON THAT, THE, AS YOU CAN TELL, THE DATES ARE RELATED TO THE CASE NUMBER, UH, THAT, UH, I CONDUCTED THE INITIAL INTERVIEW AND, AND FELT SORT OF LIKE AN IDIOT, BECAUSE I REALIZED AS SOON AS I STARTED TALKING TO THIS PERSON, THAT THE, UH, THE LOCATION WAS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS OF DECATUR, I SHOULD HAVE REALIZED THAT BEFORE I HAD THEM COME IN.
SO I APOLOGIZED PROFUSELY AND, UH, REFERRED THEM TO THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF RIGHT, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS.
AND WE GAVE THEM THE, THE FORMS FOR IDHR, WHICH, WHICH CAN PICK UP THE CASE.
BUT, BUT WE CANNOT, BECAUSE THE INCIDENT OCCURRED OUTSIDE, OR THE EMPLOYMENT WAS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE, UH, CITY LIMITS.
AND THERE WAS A NATIONAL ORIGIN CASE, UH, 2 3 0 9 1 2 RACE DISCRIMINATION AND EMPLOYMENT THAT INVOLVED A TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT.
UH, THAT ALSO IS ONE WHERE WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THE RESPONDENT TO COME BACK.
I FOUND REASONABLE SUSPICION PREPARED THE CHARGE, UH, THE RESPONDENT HAS 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT, AND I DON'T HAVE THE DATE OF RECEIPT ON THAT, BUT ONCE THE, THE GREEN CARD COMES BACK, THEN WE'LL KNOW WHEN THAT 30 DAY PERIOD STARTS.
THE LAST ONE, UH, IS A VERY RECENT 1, 2 3 1 0 1 0, OCTOBER 10TH.
UH, DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION IN PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, UM, GONNA GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION THAN I USUALLY DO TO EXPLAIN WHERE WE ARE ON THAT CASE.
UH, I WON'T NAME THE PARTIES INVOLVED, BUT THE, THE DISABILITY IS AN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY.
WHAT, UH, PEOPLE USED TO CALL MENTAL RETARDATION.
UH, AND, UH, I TALKED, HAD A NICE DISCUSSION WITH THE COMPLAINANT YESTERDAY.
UH, BUT BECAUSE THE COMPLAINANT IS UNABLE TO READ AND, AND PROCESS INFORMATION COGNITIVELY IN, IN A WAY THAT A NORMAL ADULT COULD, UH, I ASK THEM IF, IF THEY HAD SOMEBODY WHO COULD DO THAT FOR THEM.
I CAN'T BE THEIR ADVOCATE, BUT THEY NEED SOMEONE TO BE AN ADVOCATE.
AND THEY SAID, YES, MY SISTER WILL HELP.
SO, SO WE CHATTED FOR A WHILE AND, UM, I, I SAID, I REALLY NEED TO TALK WITH YOUR SISTER, YOU KNOW, BY PHONE.
AND I MET, I TALKED WITH THE SISTER YESTERDAY AFTERNOON BY PHONE, AND THE SISTER SAID, I REALLY THINK IT'S NOT DISCRIMINATION.
I THINK IT'S MISTAKEN IDENTITY.
I THINK THE, THE PERSON AT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION THOUGHT THEY WERE SOMEBODY ELSE AND DIDN'T ASK THEM TO LEAVE BECAUSE OF THE DISABILITY, BUT ASKED THEM TO LEAVE BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND I SAID, LET, LET ME MAKE A SUGGESTION.
[00:15:01]
YOU CAN SAY NO, BUT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TAKE YOUR SIBLING SO I DON'T IDENTIFY BY GENDER TO THIS PLACE? TALK TO THE PERSON IN QUESTION AT THE PLACE AND ASK THEM IF THEY THOUGHT YOUR RELATIVE WAS SOMEBODY ELSE, OR IF THEY THOUGHT THEIR, THE RELATIVE WAS JUST, THEY DIDN'T WANT THAT THERE BECAUSE OF THEIR DISABILITY, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO, WILLING TO DO THAT? AND, AND THE SISTER SAID, YEAH, I'D BE, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.I SAID, WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WOULD, THAT WOULD HELP US FIGURE OUT WHERE WE GO FROM HERE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I COULD EXPLAIN IT TO YOU, WAS TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON THERE.
AND, AND I HOPE I MADE A GOOD DECISION WITH THAT, BUT I JUST, UH, IT'S A DIFF YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S AN ODD TYPE OF CASE.
SO ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THAT OR ANY OTHER CASE? DO YOU THINK IT, I'M SORRY, ON, ON THE LAST CASE, UM, HOW, HOW DID YOU GET THE COMPLAINT THEN? WAS IT FROM THE INDIVIDUAL? FROM THE INDIVIDUAL? SHE, BUT WAS, SORRY, I WANNA, I WANNA BE, IT WAS WRITTEN, IT WAS WRITTEN IN, IN A, UH, IN A, IN A, IN A FORMAT THAT YOU MIGHT EXPECT FROM SOMEBODY, LIKE AN ELEMENTARY STU STUDENT OR SOMETHING.
UH, SO, SO IT DID INITIATE FROM THE PERSON, BUT SHE, BUT SHE HAND, OH, SHE DARN IT,
SO THAT, THAT'S BETTER THAN SAYING, CAN YOU READ, YOU DON'T WANNA ASK SOMEBODY IF THEY CAN READ.
SO, SO THAT'S, THAT'S, SO IT WAS A WRITTEN COMPLAINT, BUT IT WAS, UH, AS SOON AS I GOT IT, I THOUGHT, I, I, YEAH, COMMISSIONER GOODMAN.
SO I, YOU SAID YOU ASKED THEM, UH, THE SISTER TO TAKE THE SIBLING BACK TO THE PLACE YEAH.
AND ASKED WHICH WAY IT ACTUALLY WAS.
DO YOU HONESTLY THINK THAT THEY WOULD ADMIT THAT THEY, I, UH, ACTUALLY
I CAN'T, I, YOU KNOW, UH, BUT THIS IS A PERS THIS IS A PLACE WHERE THIS PERSON'S LIKELY TO GO BACK AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS AND THE NATURE OF THIS PERSON'S DAILY ACTIVITIES.
SO IF, SO, THE BUSINESS IS LIKELY TO LET THEM BACK IN THERE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WANT TO AVOID THE SITUATION.
SO THAT, SO THE PROBLEM ALMOST SOLVED THAT ANYWAY FOR THIS PARTICULAR PERSON.
SO, SO IF THEY SAY, YEAH, I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT THIS PERSON WAS REALLY SOMEBODY ELSE WHO'S BEEN, BEEN A PROBLEM HERE, THAT WE HAD TO ASK TO LEAVE, BUT YOU CAN COME BACK.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO EITHER.
YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW, UH, HOW ELSE TO APPROACH IT AT THAT POINT.
UH, BECAUSE THE COMPLAINANT NEEDS SOMEBODY TO, I MEAN, I CAN WALK THROUGH THE PROCESS, BUT I CAN'T BE HER, THIS PERSON'S ADVOCATE, UH, AND THE SISTER IS THE PROTECTIVE PAYEE.
SHE HAS POWER, THE SISTER HAS POWER OF ATTORNEY.
SHE'S THE LOGICAL ONE TO FILL THAT ROLE.
I DIDN'T WANT TO, YOU SERVE THE SISTER'S ROLE BY SAYING, YOU KNOW, COULD WE FIND SOME AGENCY LIKE PRAIRIE LAND SERVICE COORDINATION OR SOMEONE LIKE THAT TO HELP HELP YOU? RIGHT.
I, I WAS JUST, UH, CURIOUS AS TO WHY WE WOULD GO AS FAR AS TO GO AND ASK THEM THAT QUESTION AS OPPOSED TO MAYBE TAKING THE PERSON BACK THERE AND JUST KIND OF SEEING HOW IT PLAYS OUT.
AND I, I THINK WHAT I SAID, AND I WAS, YOU KNOW, THINKING OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD AT THIS MOMENT, WAS GO BACK THERE AND ASK IF THEY THOUGHT SHE WAS SOMEBODY ELSE NOT TO ASK IF THEY WERE DISCRIMINATED, GO, GO BACK AND ASK IF THEY THOUGHT THAT SHE WAS SOMEBODY ELSE.
I'D SAY THAT INVESTIGATOR SPAN NOT ONLY HAS A, UH, A LARGER RIGHT, UH, LIST OF CASES, BUT, UH, SOME OF UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, AND HE HAS HAD TO IMPROVISE IN SOME OF THESE CASES.
AND I WANTED TO TAKE THE MOMENT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR KEEPING ALL THESE CASES STRAIGHT AND THE JOB THAT
[00:20:01]
YOU DO EVERY SINGLE MONTH.[V.A. Update on Commissioners distributing flyers in the community]
TO, UH, UNFINISHED BUSINESS, UH, POINT A IS AN UPDATE ON COMMISSIONERS DISTRIBUTING FLYERS IN THE COMMUNITY, WHICH SOUNDS RATHER FORMAL, BUT, UH, THERE WAS A DETERMINATION MADE, MADE LAST MONTH TO, UH, ASK COMMISSIONERS TO SPREAD THESE VERY ATTRACTIVE FLYERS.UH, AROUND, INTO VARIOUS PLACES.
AND, UH, I JUST WONDERED, NOW THAT WE HAVE THOSE, IS THERE THE GOOD, UH, PROSPECT THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO FULFILL THESE, UM, UH, DISTRI DISTRIBUTION OF THEM? WELL, I INTEND TO DELIVER MINE, UH, YEAH.
AND
UM, BUT, UH, WE DIDN'T OUTLINE THE CHURCHES.
SO IF, UH, YOUR PERSONAL CHURCH OR ANY OTHERS THAT YOU HAVE AN AFFILIATION WITH, UM, THEY WEREN'T MENTIONED, UH, LAST TIME, BUT, UH, THERE WAS A VERY GOOD, UM, RESPONSE TO PLACING THEM IN, IN CITY HALL AND DOVE AND KONO AND, AND PLACES SUCH AS THAT.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, VERSIONS OF THIS WILL GO ON THE FACEBOOK PAGE FOR THE COMMISSION AND FOR THE CITY.
UM, I CONTACTED THE PERSON ABOUT PUTTING IT ON THE CITY'S, AND THAT, I THINK SHERRY'S GONNA PUT IT ON THE COMMISSIONS.
SO IN MY FOUR PLUS YEARS ON THE COMMISSION, I THINK THIS IS THE, UH, MOST PROACTIVE WE'VE BEEN ON TRYING TO GET THE WORD OUT ABOUT, UH, WHAT WE DO.
AND, UH, MAYBE, UM, AND INVESTIGATOR SPAN WON'T LIKE IT SO MUCH IF WE DO GET AN UPTICK IN, UH, FURTHER UPTAKE IN CASES.
BUT, UH, IT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TO, UM, GET THE WORD OUT THAT DISCRIMINATION HAS NO FRIENDS IN THIS CITY.
UM, THEN THE OTHER POINT IS, UH, OH, DID I HEAR, DID I HEAR YOU SAY WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT DISTRIBUTING THESE IN CHURCHES? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? OKAY.
I WAS MEANING TO SAY THAT WE DIDN'T SPECIFY THAT.
UM, YOU GO TO THE, UH, UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AND JERRY WILL GO TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCH, AND COMMISSIONER KELLER WILL GO TO THE, UH, CATHOLIC CHURCH AND WHAT HAVE YOU.
UH, SO IT WAS JUST SORT OF LEFT OPEN THERE TO HAVE PEOPLE CHOOSE WHERE THEY MIGHT WANT TO GO.
I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC SYSTEM.
WE HAVE QUITE A FEW CHURCHES IN TOWN AND SIX, SEVEN OF US, SO THAT WOULD BE QUITE A WORKLOAD.
I DO SEE SOME CHURCH, I'M SORRY, I WAS GONNA SAY, I DID NAME SOME CHURCHES AND, UM, I KEEP PRESSING DOWN.
UH, HE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT DELIVERING HIS TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCH.
I THOUGHT, WELL, IS THAT IN THE MINUTES? THERE ARE THE MINUTES.
THE MINUTES DOES SAY THE ONES THAT LIKE YOU, COMMISSIONER WALKER, YOU HAD SAID YOU HAD NAMED THREE CHURCHES, AND SO THAT'S IN THE MINUTES.
AND THEN I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER SCHLATER HAD MENTIONED THREE SPECIFIC CHURCHES.
AND THAT, SO THOSE ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT HAVE, WERE REALLY DISCUSSED WHAT'S IN THE MINUTES FROM LAST MONTH.
I DID NOTE, UH, THE, THE THREE THAT YOU'D MENTIONED, NORTH SIDE BAPTIST OCH, AND MAIN STREET IS WHAT I WROTE DOWN.
AND MAIN STREET IS MY HOME CHURCH, AND MY OFFICE IS ALSO LOCATED THERE.
SO UNLESS YOU WANT TO JUST MAKE THAT TRIP,
WELL, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE HAVE A GOOD SUPPLY OF THESE, AND I JUST ENCOURAGE PEOPLE AS YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, OUT AND ABOUT IN DIFFERENT PLACES, JUST IN YOUR NORMAL ACTIVITY TO SEE IF THE HOUSE WOULDN'T BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, BE, UH, ABLE TO LEAVE THEM THERE FOR PEOPLE TO DISPLAY.
AND I DID, WHEN, UM, I WAS AT THE PRIDE OUT AT FAIRVIEW PARK, I DID MAKE IT A POINT TO, 'CAUSE SHERRY HAD DONE SO WELL, AND WE HAD SO MANY, I DIDN'T MAKE IT A POINT TO GO AROUND AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, HAD ONE AND OR COULD TAKE SEVERAL TO OTHER PLACES.
SO YEAH, WE ARE PLANTING SEEDS AND, UH, JUST DROP BY A CHURCH.
WHAT'S THE WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN?
[00:25:01]
RIGHT.WELL, I THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR EFFORTS ON THAT.
I'M, I'M QUITE SURE, UM, I THOUGHT AT
[V.B. Discussion on potential changes to Chapter 28 of the City Code]
THIS POINT WE WOULD BEGIN OUR DISCUSSION, THE ON, UH, POTENTIAL CHANGES TO CHAPTER 28 OF THE CITY CODE.THAT IS OUR BIRTH CHAPTER AS FAR AS, UH, ESTABLISHING A HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION.
AND THE REASON, THEREFORE, I APPRECIATE ONCE AGAIN, UH, INVESTIGATOR SPAN'S LEGWORK IN PUTTING TOGETHER THIS COMPARISON OF THE ORDINANCES, UH, IN SEVERAL CITIES, UH, NEIGHBORING DECATUR.
AND, UH, PEOPLE WHO HADN'T GOTTEN TO READ EVERY BIT OF WHAT HAS BEEN SENT, UM, DON'T INCUR ANY PENALTIES, BUT I, I JUST, I, I THINK IF YOU ARE READ UP ON IT THE BEST YOU CAN, THE DISCUSSION IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SATISFYING.
SO WE WILL GO FROM WHERE WE ARE AND THE PROCESS, AS WE MENTIONED LAST MONTH, IT'S GONNA BE RATHER COMPREHENSIVE IF WE WANNA DO IT RIGHT.
THERE ARE WORDS TO BE DEFINED THERE, THERE ARE CATEGORIES PERHAPS BE INVESTIGATED AND ADDED.
UM, SO, UH, WE, WE WANNA WANT TO GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME AND PRESENT A, A, A PACKAGE THAT THE LEGAL STAFF AND THE CITY COUNCIL CAN'T REFUSE.
SO, UM, TO START WITH, UM, ARTICLES ONE THROUGH THREE OF CHAPTER 28, UM, ARTICLE TWO IS THE, THE, THE MEATY ONE.
UH, DO ANYBODY HAVE ANY STARTING QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING THAT THEY LEARNED FROM READING THOSE THREE THAT, UH, THEY NEEDED EXPLAINED OR, OR WEREN'T AWARE OF? ARE WE GOING THROUGH, UM, EACH ARTICLE? I THINK SO.
UM, IT WAS THE OPINION OF, UM, PENNY AND, UH, UM, INVESTIGATOR SPAN IS THAT WE NOT SKIP OVER ARTICLES.
UM, AND, UH, IT PROBABLY WILL PAY OFF BECAUSE THE ARTICLE FOUR AND FIVE, I THINK, DEAL WITH THE PROCESS OF INVESTIGATING COMPLAINTS AND HOW THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE COMMISSION FOR ADJUDICATION.
SO IT'S PROBABLY GOOD THAT PEOPLE ARE SCHOOLED ON HOW THAT HAPPENS, EVEN IF YOU DON'T GET A HEARING FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
AND, AND, UH, THE REASON WHY I RESPONDED AS I DID TO YOUR EMAIL TODAY, IS THAT, UH, THERE WERE CERTAIN PARTS OF ARTICLE FOUR AND FIVE THAT HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED BY ATTORNEYS IN THE PROCESS.
UH, AND, UH, I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO EXTEND SOME PROTECTIONS TO THE COMMISSION AND TO THE CITY IN THOSE AREAS.
UH, SO, SO THAT WE'RE A LITTLE BIT BETTER PROTECTED AGAINST CHALLENGES FROM OUTSIDE INTERESTS.
THAT'S, THAT WA THAT WAS THE REASON BEHIND THAT.
WE HA HAVE THEY BEEN CHALLENGED IN COURT OR JUST NO, NO, NO, NO.
JUST SAY, JUST SAYING, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THIS, AND WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUE YOU BECAUSE THAT WE'LL COOPERATE FOR NOW.
BUT WE REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THE ORDINANCE GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO DO WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
AND, AND I'M NOT SAYING THE ATTORNEYS ARE RIGHT, BUT I, I THINK THEY HAVE ARGUMENTS
UH, AND, UH, WE, WHEN WE GET TO THAT, WE'LL, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT.
BUT, UH, AND, AND THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE THINGS.
I THINK COMMISSIONER WALKER AT THE LAST MEETING, UH, MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT ARE MORE TECHNICAL AND MECHANICAL THAT ARE, THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED UP.
AND, UH, SO, SO THAT'S WHY I DON'T WANNA SKIMM OVER ANYTHING.
UH, I ALSO, THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD TIME TO MENTION TOO, THAT I HAD A KIND OF INFORMAL DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER.
WE WERE BOTH ATTENDING AN EVENT IN THE COMMUNITY A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, AND HE APPROACHED ME AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, HOW'S THE COMMISSION DOING? WHAT ARE YOU WORKING ON? AND I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU WANTED THIS TO WORK ON THE, UH, ON THE CHAPTER 28 OF THE CODE.
AND WE'RE, THE COMMISSION IS WORKING ON THAT.
UH, I THINK THE COMMISSION WILL WANNA BRING ALL THE CHANGES AT ONE TIME RATHER THAN ONE AT A TIME.
AND HE SAID HE THOUGHT THAT WAS WISE.
I SAID, IT MIGHT TAKE, YOU KNOW, QUITE A WHILE TO GET THROUGH THIS, BUT, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING.
AND HE SAID THAT'S WHAT HE WANTED.
SO, SO IT'S THAT, THAT WAS KIND OF A FORTUITOUS CONVERSATION.
I THINK IT PUTS THE COMMISSION ON SOLID SOLIDER GROUND.
UH, AND I'D ALSO MENTIONED THAT WE, AND I THINK PENNY HAD HAD TALKED OR HAD COMMUNICATED WITH CITY LEGAL AMY W WITH THE SAME MESSAGE.
YOU KNOW, SO, SO I THINK OUR BASES ARE COVERED IN TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROCESS.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES AS LONG AS IT TAKES AND YOU'LL FIND AREAS THAT THE COMMISSION CAN AGREE THAT NEED, NEED
[00:30:01]
TO BE CHANGED.AND EVENTUALLY WE'LL WRITE UP A DOCUMENT AND IT'LL COME BACK FOR A FINAL VOTE.
BUT DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR PEOPLE TO PROCEED THAT WAY? I, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT SECTION TWO DASH ONE, AND IT JUST CAME TO ME THAT IN THE, UM, CLIMATE THAT WE'RE LIVING IN NOW, UM, IF SOMETHING ALONG OF, UM, POLITICAL VIEWS OR POLITICAL AFFILIATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THAT LIST, UM, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE, ARE PRETTY HEATED ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS THESE DAYS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF ROLLED OVER IN THE PAST.
AND I, I DON'T, I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THAT ANY PLACE ELSE, UH, CHAMPAGNE DOES THAT.
THEY INCLUDE POLITICAL AFFILIATION, AND I, I DIDN'T SAY IN HERE, BUT I, I'M, I WONDER IF THE STATE MIGHT, BUT CHAMPAGNE DOES INCLUDE POLITICAL OKAY.
MISSED THAT AS A PROTECTED CATEGORY.
UH, AND YOU MEANT IN URBANA THEY HAVE SEPARATE ORDINANCES, CHAMPAGNE OR BANDONEON, UH, YEAH.
IS IT BOTH OF THOSE? YEAH, THEY SAY BOTH OF THOSE ON POLITICAL AFFILIATION, AND I JUST, HOW WOULD YOU INTERPRET AND ENFORCE POLITICAL AFFILIATION? UH, I, I'M JUST, I'M JUST REALLY NOT SURE BECAUSE WOULD YOU CHECK WHETHER SOMEBODY WAS, UH, REGISTERED WITH A PARTY OR, UH, YOU'D CHECK THEIR PRIMARY VOTING RECORDS? OR WOULD IT TAKE SOMETHING LIKE T-SHIRTS AND, AND BUTTONS AND WHAT, WHAT WOULD, SO NORMALLY IN ANY PROTECTED CLASS, THE COMPLAINANT HAS TO PROVE TWO THINGS.
ONE IS THAT THEY WERE A MEMBER OF THE PROTECTED CLASS, AND TWO, THAT THE RESPONDENT WAS AWARE OF THEIR MEMBERSHIP IN THE PROTECTED CLASS.
SO IF I AM SAYING THAT I WAS DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ON THE BASIS OF A DISABILITY, I WOULD NEED TO A SHOW THAT I HAVE A DISABILITY AND B, SHOW THAT THE RESPONDENT, THE EMPLOYER, THE LANDLORD, WHOEVER IT IS, WAS AWARE OF MY DISABILITY.
UH, SO THE SAME THING WOULD BE TRUE WITH POLITICAL AFFILIATION.
YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT I AM A LIBERTARIAN AND THAT I TOLD YOU AS MY BOSS THAT I'M A LIBERTARIAN AND YOU SAID, WE DON'T COTTON TO YOUR KIND HERE, GET OUT,
BUT THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE.
UH, SO IT WOULDN'T, I MEAN, YOU'D HAVE THE SAME STANDARDS THAT YOU WOULD FOR EVERYTHING ELSE.
UH, I SHOULD THINK THAT WOULD MAKE YOUR JOB RATHER TOUGH.
THEN THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE, THEN YOU'D HAVE TO SHOW THAT THE ACT WHATEVER ACT WAS RELATED TO YOUR POLITICAL AFFILIATION, WHICH THAT'S WHERE IT GETS HARDER.
BUT YOU'D, BUT YOU'D, WOULD IT BE THE SAME STANDARDS OF PROOF THAT YOU'D HAVE FOR OTHERS? WELL, UH, IF, IF YOU, UH, LIMITED TO THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU GAVE, THEN IT'S, IT'S, HE, SHE SAID HE, SHE SAID THAT WAS AWKWARD, BUT, UM, HE SAID, SHE SAID, YEAH, HE SAID, I, I WANTED TO BE, THEY SAID NEUTRAL ON THIS, UM, THAT THAT WOULD BE RATHER HARD TO, UH, CARRY THROUGH THE CASE.
WHEREAS IF YOU HAD SOME, UH, I HAVE A, UH, POLITICAL T-SHIRT AND I REFUSE TO TAKE IT OFF, I'M AT WORK, OR A BUTTON OR SOME, SOME SUCH THING THAT WAS DEMONSTRABLE THAT THE EMPLOYER SAY, IF IT'S AN EMPLOYER'S SITUATION, COULD POINT AT AND SAY, WELL, WE TOLD SO-AND-SO NOT TO WEAR SUCH AND SUCH T-SHIRT OR, OR SOME SORT OF APPAREL.
SO JUST SAYING THAT I MENTIONED TO YOU, YOU'RE THE BOSS.
AND I SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I'M A, UH, I'M A HARD RIGHT CONSERVATIVE, I'VE NEVER SAID THAT BEFORE,
AND, UH, AND, AND, AND THE EMPLOYER TAKES THAT TO HEART AND THEN A WEEK LATER FIRES THE PERSON.
I WOULD THINK THAT'D BE A HARD THING TO PROSECUTE.
IT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF MY LIFE IS THOSE SITUATIONS, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE NEVER DOES THE EMPLOYER SAY, I FIRED THE PERSON BECAUSE OF THEIR DISABILITY, THEIR RACE, THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
I MEAN, THAT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN.
UH, BUT THE, THE WAY THE LAW WORKS, THE COMPLAINANT HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SHOWING NEXUS SHOWING THAT THERE'S SOME CONNECTION BETWEEN THEIR PROTECTED CLASS AND THE ADVERSE ACTION THAT HAPPENED.
UH, THE EXAMPLE YOU GAVE, IF AN EMPLOYER HAS A RULE, NO POLITICAL GARB, THEN THAT APPLIES EQUALLY TO EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW.
SO, UH, THAT'S, THERE, THERE ARE, I'M THINKING MORE
[00:35:01]
OF WHAT WOULD BE MORE, UM, UH, VERBAL TYPE OF, UM, A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE OR A PERSON WOULD MAYBE CONTINUALLY KEEP SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT THIS OR ABOUT THAT, OR THIS SITUATION OR THAT SITUATION, OR, YOU KNOW, UH, WHATEVER.AND THERE WOULD BE OTHER WITNESSES TO THAT.
AND, UM, AND SO THEN AN EMPLOYER SAY, I'VE HEARD ENOUGH OF THIS, JUST SHUT UP AND I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ANYMORE.
AND THE NEXT DAY YOU GET FIRED.
AND THEN THE, THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO THE EMPLOYEE AT THIS POINT TO, TO, TO MAKE THE CASE THAT, THAT, THAT THERE WAS RELATIONSHIP, YOU KNOW, AND THAT, AND THE EXAMPLE YOU GAVE.
THEY'D, THEY'D HAVE SOME EVIDENCE, THEY'D HAVE WITNESSES, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
UH, YOU KNOW, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, IN THAT, I THINK, I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED THEN.
SO, SO THAT WOULD BE A, AN ISSUE FOR THE COMMISSION TO, TO ASK WHETHER OR NOT YOU'D WANT THAT TO BE INCLUDED AS A PROTECTED CLASS.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, WOULD OUR PROCEDURE BE TO ASK ONE OR ONE OR MORE OF THE COMMISSIONERS TO, UH, RIGHT.
A POTENTIAL, UH, DEFINITION OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION? OR WILL WE ASK YOU TO DO IT, OR? YEAH, YEAH.
YOU'D PROBABLY ASK ME TO, TO COPY THE ONE FROM CHAMPAIGN URBANA
I MEAN, 'CAUSE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHERE POSSIBLE, I, I WANT TO, WHEN WE GO TO THE LEGAL COUNSEL, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY, THESE ARE THE EXACT WORDS USED BY SOME OTHER JURISDICTION.
UH, THOSE ARE NOT ONES THAT WE MADE UP.
UH, I'D PROBABLY, I MIGHT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S UP TO YOU.
BUT THE COMMISSIONER SCHLATER, YOU KNOW, BROUGHT SOME LANGUAGE.
AND I THINK, UH, THE COMMISSION WANTED TO WAIT TILL HE WAS HERE, BUT HE BROUGHT SOME LANGUAGE THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, IN MY OPINION, IT'S PRETTY GOOD LANGUAGE.
YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU WOULD, IF YOU WANT TO ADOPT THAT, THEN I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, AND THAT, AND ALSO YOU'D HAVE TO, WHEN YOU ADD A PROTECTED CATEGORY, HE DIDN'T HAVE THIS, BUT YOU'D HAVE TO ADD THIS IN SECTION 2.12 ALONG WITH THE DEFINITION, YOU'D HAVE TO ADD THAT THAT CATEGORY IS PROTECTED.
SO, SO IF YOU WANTED TO, OR IF YOU WANTED, JUST TAKE A LOOK A CLOSER LOOK AT THE CHAMPAGNE AND URBANA LANGUAGE, YOU KNOW, YOU, I THINK YOU ALL HAVE COPIES OF THAT.
YOU COULD, UH, BRING THAT BACK, YOU KNOW, EAR MARKET, BRING IT BACK NEXT, NEXT MONTH TO SEE, TO MAKE A DECISION, UH, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANNA DO THAT.
UH, I WOULDN'T WORRY TOO MUCH ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PROCESS.
'CAUSE THE PROCESS WOULD BE THE SAME AS IT IS FOR EVERY OTHER PROTECTED CLASS.
YOU KNOW, THE BURDEN'S ALWAYS ON THE COMPLAINANT TO SHOW, SHOW THOSE THINGS.
YOU KNOW, AM I READING THE CONSENSUS OF OUR, UH, COMMISSIONERS NOW THAT, UH, WE WOULD BE CURIOUS ENOUGH ABOUT IT TO LOOK, THINK ABOUT IT FOR THE MONTH, AND, UH, IF YOU HAVE THE CHAMPAGNE AND URBANA ORDINANCES LOOK AT THEIR WORDING MORE CAREFULLY AND CONSIDER IT AS, UH, PROPOSAL TO ADD TO OUR PROTECTIVE, UH, UH, OR, OR DEFINITIONS OF, UM, DISCRIMINATION.
DOES, DOES, DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER WHETHER IT SAID POLITICAL AFFILIATION OR POLITICAL VIEWS OR WHATEVER, BECAUSE, UM, I, I, I'M WONDERING, THINKING OF HOW BEST TO STATE THAT AND AFFILIATION, I THINK WOULD BE TOO NARROW.
I THINK IT WOULD ALMOST HAVE TO BE POLITICAL VIEWS OR LEANINGS OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.
WELL, THE WORDING HERE WAS A POLITICAL AFFILIATION, THE STATE OF BELONGING TO OR ENDORSING ANY POLITICAL PARTY OR ORGANIZATION, OR TAKING PART IN ANY ACTIVITIES OF A POLITICAL NATURE.
I WAS GONNA HAVE TO LOOK IT UP.
UM, SO THAT WE COULD START WITH THE WORDING OF IT, WHAT WE WANT TO CALL IT AFFILIATION OR IS SOMETHING MORE TARGETED TOWARD WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO PROTECT.
BUT THEY, THEIR TERM IS POLITICAL AFFILIATION, AND THEN YOU READ THEIR DEFINITION.
SO I, I, I THINK I, WHAT I, I THINK IT ALMOST NEEDS TO BE BROADER THAN THAT.
OR, UM, SOMETHING OF STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
'CAUSE WHICH REALLY ISN'T COVERED IN MAYBE THE EXAMPLE THAT I GAVE.
THE, UH, WHAT I, WHAT I'M WONDERING BASED ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU SAID, COMMISSIONER POWELLS IS KINDA GETS BACK TO THAT LARGER ISSUE OF HARASSMENT ON THE BASIS OF A PROTECTED CLASS.
[00:40:02]
CODE PROHIBITS SEXUAL HARASSMENT, BUT IT DOES, DOES NOT PROHIBIT LIKE RACIAL HARASSMENT, GENDER HARASSMENT, RELIGIOUS HARASSMENT.AND IF YOU INCLUDE POLITICAL AFFILIATION AS A PROTECTED CLASS, YOU ALSO THEN WANT TO LOOK AT THAT LARGER QUESTION AS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANNA PROHIBIT, YOU KNOW, WORKPLACE HARASSMENT.
WELL, NOT JUST WORKPLACE, BUT OTHER, YOU KNOW, LANDLORD TENANT HARASSMENT ON THE BASIS OF THOSE OTHER CATEGORIES.
UH, AND THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ANOTHER THING FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE.
I MEAN, I, WHAT'S YOUR OPINION ABOUT THE CART AND THE HORSE AS FAR AS, UH, LOOKING AT HARASSMENT OR LOOKING AT THE INDIVIDUAL CATEGORIES THAT'LL COME UP IN ADDITION TO POLITICAL VIEWS? OH, I DON'T WHAT YOU HAVE TO JUST CHOOSE A PATH AND GO AND GO WITH THAT PATH.
SO I THINK PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ON THE PATH OF LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, ADDING TO THE PROTECTED CLASSES.
SO MAYBE WE SHOULD STAY THERE AND THEN COME BACK, BECAUSE I KNOW OUR, OUR TIME'S GONNA BE LIMITED EACH EVERY MEETING.
AND SO I'M, I'M GOING TO ASK, UH, COMMISSIONER PELLS IF HE WANTED TO TAKE THE BALL AND, UH, SEE WHAT THOUGHTS COME UP IN THE NEXT FOUR WEEKS AS FAR AS MAKING THIS COMPREHENSIVE ENOUGH.
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TAKE A CRACK AT THAT? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL LOOK AT THAT.
ANYBODY ELSE WITH, WITH THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT? CERTAINLY, UH, MULLED OVER AS WELL, BECAUSE, UM, UH, WHAT COMMISSIONER PELLS GIVES US WILL BE A STARTING POINT, AND THIS IS AS GOOD AS PLACE AS ANY TO START TO, UM, UH, OUR REFINEMENT AND EXPANSION PROCESS.
AND I WOULD CERTAINLY WELCOME ANY INPUT FROM, FOR MANY OF YOU ON THAT SUBJECT MATTER.
UH, SO ON THE, ON THE DEFINITIONS, YOU, YOU ALLUDED TO COMMISSIONER S LEADER'S, SUGGESTIONS AS FAR AS, UH, DEFINITIONS OF SEX AND GENDER REPLACING THE TERMINOLOGY OF, OF SEX WITH GENDER.
UM, I LOOKED AT HIS WORDING AND I MIGHT PITCH SOMETHING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HIS DEFINITION WAS FOR, FOR NEXT MONTH, BUT, UM, SO WE, WE WOULDN'T REALLY DIG INTO THAT UNTIL HE'S HERE AND HAS A CHANCE TO, UM, OFFER, UH, HIS THOUGHTS AND, UH, AND GO FURTHER ON, ON WHAT WE HAVE HERE.
BUT I HOPE PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT HE HAS SENT AS FAR AS CODE DEFINITION CHANGES.
IF NOT, LET ME KNOW AND WE WILL GO WITH THAT FURTHER.
ONE IS, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF IT FITS IN SECTION TWO ONE OR WHETHER IT, I'M NOT SURE WHERE IT WOULD FIT, BUT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT CROWN DISCRIMINATION.
NOW, IF NOT, RAISE YOUR HAND OR LET ME KNOW.
CROWN DISCRIMINATION BASICALLY IS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY WEAR THEIR HAIR IN A NATURAL HAIRSTYLE.
UH, AND THAT, UH, RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE OUR CODE DOES NOT DEFINE RACE
WE DON'T DEFINE RACE OR COLOR.
IN FACT, MOST OF THE OTHER ONES DON'T EITHER, WHICH, WHICH SEEMS A LITTLE ODD BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER PROTECTED CATEGORIES ARE DEFINED SOMEWHERE.
HOWEVER, IT'S ALSO PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE DEFINING RACE IS A, IS A HUGE ISSUE THAT EVERYBODY IS STRUGGLING WITH AT EVERY GOVERNMENTAL LEVEL.
UH, BUT SO YOU SEE THE STATE OF ILLINOIS SAYS RACE INCLUDES TRAITS ASSOCIATED WITH RACE.
SO THAT'S KIND OF, BUT THEN THEY'D SAY INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO HAIR TEXTURE AND PROTECTIVE, PROTECTIVE HAIRSTYLES SUCH AS BRAIDS, LOCKS, AND TWISTS.
UH, SO THAT'S THE WAY THEY GET THE CROWN TO CROWN DISCRIMINATION, BUT THEY DON'T REALLY DEFINE RACE.
CHAMPAGNE, UH, MAKES AN ATTEMPT AT DIS AT, UH, DEFINING RACE, SEEING A CLASS OR GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVING A DISTINCT PHYSICAL TYPE WITH CERTAIN UNCHANGING CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS COLOR OF SKIN.
AND THEN THEY ALSO DEFINE COLOR, WHICH MEAN
[00:45:01]
MEANS THE TINT OF A PERSON'S SKIN.YOU KNOW, I THINK COLOR IS PROBABLY EASIER TO DEFINE THEN RACE.
UH, BUT I'D BE, I THINK IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO SOME RESEARCH AND TRY TO FIND A LEGAL DEFINITION OF RACE, AND THEN TO INCLU INCLUDE CROWN DISCRIMINATION UNDER THAT DEFINITION, THEN THAT WOULD COVER CROWN DISCRIMINATION.
UH, I HAPPEN TO LOOK UP, UH, UH, DEFINITIONS UNDER MIRIAM WEBSTER BRITANNICA AND GOOD OLD WIKIPEDIA.
AND, UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE MORE, UM, BROAD.
UH, I, I COULD, I COULD READ THE FIRST ONE.
MIRIAM WEBSTER'S A PRETTY GOOD RESOURCE, I THINK, DEFINITION OF RACE.
MIRIAM WEBSTER SAYS, ANY ONE OF THE GROUPS THAT HUMANS ARE OFTEN DIVIDED INTO BASED ON PHYSICAL TRAITS REGARDED AS COMMON AMONG PEOPLE OF A SHARED ANCESTRY.
IT DOESN'T GET INTO, UM, IT DOESN'T GET INTO, UH, CROWN DISCRIMINATION, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, IT DOESN'T SAY RACE IS SOMETHING ASSOCIATED WITH RACE.
IT DOESN'T USE THE, THE TERM IN THE DEFINITION.
SO, SO YOU COULD USE THAT DEFINITION AND THEN ADD THIS CLAUSE FROM THE, THE STATE DEFINITION.
I WANT TO TREAD QUITE CAREFULLY ON THIS AND THE OTHER DEFINITIONS BECAUSE, UH, THIS IS NOT A PLACE FOR INSENSITIVITY WHATSOEVER.
AND, AND I COME FROM ONE POINT OF VIEW, AND OTHER PEOPLE ARE GONNA APPROACH THINGS FROM THE OTHER POINT OF VIEW.
SO, UH, I, I THINK WE SHOULD GO RATHER SLOWLY ON HASHING OUT THIS AND A LOT OF THE OTHER DEFINITIONS, BUT THAT'S MIRIAM WEBSTER.
I TRIED TO GET THE, UM, OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY, BUT YOU HAVE TO SUBSCRIBE TO THAT, AND I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE DOING THAT.
UM, ANY COMMENTS ON THAT BEFORE? I MEAN, WE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, SHOULD I REPEAT THAT BECAUSE IT'S YES, YES.
UH, THIS MIRIAM WEBSTER DICTIONARY SAYS, ANY ONE OF THE GROUPS THAT HUMANS ARE OFTEN DIVIDED INTO BASED ON PHYSICAL TRAITS REGARDED AS COMMON AMONG PEOPLE OF SHARED ANCESTRY.
IT'S NOT THE MOST SPECIFIC WAY, BUT I, I WOULD LIKE SOMEBODY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT REALLY GETS A LOT MORE SPECIFIC THAN THAT.
AND ESPECIALLY IF AS, UH, FRED SAYS THAT WE, UH, ENHANCE THIS WITH SOME OF THE, UH, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, AND WE'RE CENTERING ON HAIRSTYLES FOR THE MOMENT.
BUT THAT CERTAINLY IS ONE AREA WHERE, UH, PEOPLE CAN BE TARGETED BECAUSE IT LOOKS THAT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN, UM, THE OTHER PEOPLE.
AND THIS DEFINITION IS THE LEAST WORDY OUT OF THE ONES THAT I CAME UP WITH.
SO, SO IT, IT'S HARD TO PIN DOWN IS WHAT I'M SAYING, THAT, UM, UH, THEY, THEY SORT OF DANCE AROUND IN, IN SOMEWHAT, NOT DANCE AROUND, BUT THEY CIRCLE AROUND TO TRY TO GET A DEFINITION WITH PHRASES THAT ARE NOT IMMEDIATELY HELPFUL.
I, I, I'M STARTING TO FEEL LIKE WE'VE OPENED PANDORA'S BOX AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE IT OUT OR PUT THINGS BACK IN IT.
UM, BUT, UM, IT, I, WITHOUT MAYBE SOME KIND OF LEGAL COUNSEL IN THIS, I, I KNOW WE CAN, WE CAN START ON STUFF, BUT I, I THINK THAT WE ARE KIND OF REALLY, UM, FLOUNDERING IN THE WIND HERE UNTIL WE, WE, I MEAN, WE CAN GO THROUGH EVERY POINT IN HERE AND PROBABLY COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T THAT EXACTLY SOUND CORRECT TO US, BUT I'M NOT SO SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, I OR ANY OF THE REST OF US HERE CAN COME UP WITH BETTER WORDING OR, OR HOW BETTER TO DEFINE IT.
UH, THAT IS, UM, IN LINE WITH, UM, EVERYBODY'S WAY OF THINKING.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA SATISFY ANYBODY, BUT, UM, I MEAN, EVERYBODY, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I DO
BUT, UM, I THINK IF WE COME UP WITH OUR DEFINITION, THEN, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER LOOKS AT THIS AFTER WE GET IT FINALIZED, THEY CAN DETERMINE WHAT, WHETHER IT'S LEGAL OR NOT.
'CAUSE AREN'T THE CITY, UH, ATTORNEYS GONNA LOOK AT THIS YEP.
WHEN WE FINISH, SO YEAH, YOU BET
[00:50:01]
THAT IF WE CONSIDER RACE AS IT COMES UP IN SEVERAL OF THESE CASES, MOST PROBABLY, AND WE DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OF RACE, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD BE LIABLE FOR SOMEBODY TO, TO CHALLENGE RIGHT AWAY.IT'S WHAT, WHAT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN RACE? WHAT'S YOUR DEFINITION OF RACE? AND WE HAVE NOTHING TO FALL BACK ON AT THIS MOMENT.
UM, WELL, YOU, YOU HAVE, UM, FOUR OF THE, UH, COMPLAINTS HERE ARE RACE DISCRIMINATION.
UM, AND, AND OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE S SOME DEFINITION THAT WE HAVE USED TO HERE BEFORE US TO CATEGORIZE IT IN, IN THAT WAY.
UH, I THINK PEOPLE JUST SAY, WELL, EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT RACE IS.
AND THAT'S, UH, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK YOU MAKE SOME GOOD POINTS.
ONE, I MEAN, WE COULD, YOU KNOW, FOR PURPOSES OF DRAFTING SOMETHING, TAKE THAT DEFINITION, ADD THAT LANGUAGE FROM THE STATE, UH, STARTING WITH INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO HAIR, TEXTURE, PROTECTIVE HAIRSTYLES SUCH AS BRAIDS, LOCKS, AND TWISTS.
AND JUST PUT THAT IN OUR DRAFT AND THEN, YOU KNOW, LET THE LAWYERS DEAL WITH IT WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY GET IT.
UH, AND WE COULD ALSO USE THE, THE DEFINITION OF COLOR FROM CHAMPAGNE, JUST SO THAT, UH, THE TINT OF A PERSON'S SKIN, THAT MAKES IT PRETTY EASY.
I'M GONNA SUGGEST THAT WE START AS A STARTING POINT.
FORGET WHAT I TOLD YOU ABOUT, UH, MIRIAM WEBSTER FOR THE TIME BEING.
UH, I HAD TO START SOMEWHERE AND I WENT INTO THE TROUBLE OF LOOKING THIS UP, UH, THAT WE START OFF WITH WHAT CHAMPAGNE SAYS.
RACE MEANS A CLASS OR GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS.
UH, I WOULDN'T EVEN SAY CLASS, A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVING A DISTINCT PHYSICAL TYPE AND THEN ADD THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
UM, A PART ABOUT, UM, NOT LIMITED TO HAIR TEXTURE, AND I DUNNO ABOUT PROTECTIVE HAIRSTYLES.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANT.
HAIRSTYLES SUCH AS BRAIDS, LOCKS, AND TWISTS, PROTECTIVE, THAT THOSE ARE PROTECTIVE HAIRSTYLES,
WE USE BRAIDS AND LOCKS TO HELP PROTECT YOUR HAIR, BASICALLY.
IF YOU SEE PEOPLE WITH LOCKS OR, OR BRAIDS, IT'S LIKE THAT.
UM, IN, IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS, I'M REMINDED OF THE QUOTE FROM, UM, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE JOHN PAUL STEVENS, WHEN THEY WERE DOING SOMETHING ON PORNOGRAPHY.
AND HIS QUOTE WAS, UM, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T THINK I CAN DEFINE IT, BUT I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF THE SITUATION I THINK WE'RE IN HERE, BUT THAT WAS, YEAH.
AND THAT GETS LAUGHED AT ALL THE TIME.
AND, AND WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF GOING DOWN PAGE, WE ARE FOLLOWING PAGE THREE OF MY NOTES WHERE IT HAD OTHER DISCRIMINATION COVERED.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT POLITICAL, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, UH, RACE AND COLOR.
UH, WE, THERE'S SOME THAT ALSO COVER FAMILIAL STATUS AND PREGNANCY AND SOURCE OF INCOME.
UH, THOSE ARE OTHER ONES THAT YOU KNOW FOR DISCUSSION IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO COVER THOSE.
IF WE THINK THAT A, A, UH, UH, GETTING OUR FOOT IN THE DOOR AS FAR AS A DEFINITION OF RACE WERE, WAS SOMETHING ALONG WHAT I MENTIONED, UH, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD STICK A PIN IN IT AS FAR AS, UH, STARTING POINT.
AND I'M SURE THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED UPON, BUT I JUST FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOT LOSE SIGHT OF, OF THAT PARTICULAR DEFINITION.
WELL, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET SOME STUFF ON PAPER FOR THE COMMISSION TO LOOK AT SO THAT WE'RE NOT, AND, AND SO THAT'S A GOOD, I MEAN, THAT'S A STARTING POINT THAT I COULD, I COULD DRAFT UP.
UH, WHAT I'M KIND OF ENVISIONING RIGHT NOW IS LIKE A, A PIECE OF PAPER WITH TWO COLUMNS ON 'EM.
ONE WOULD HAVE THE EXISTING ORDINANCE AND THEN NOTES ON CHANGES WOULD BE IN THE RIGHT COLUMN.
SO IT'LL BE EASY FOR PEOPLE TO FOLLOW, UH, SEE IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO FORMAT IT THAT WAY.
BUT THAT MIGHT BE A WAY THAT PEOPLE COULD JUST READ AND SEE WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE WANT CHANGED AND WHAT WE DON'T.
WE'RE GETTING ABOUT FIVE MINUTES TO FIVE, SO, UH, MAYBE WE SHOULD, I JUST WANTED TO SAY, SITTING HERE THINKING OF THIS, AND OF COURSE THE WAY THE WORLD IS NOWADAYS, ALL I CAN SAY
[00:55:01]
IS GOD HELP US, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK GOD REALLY INTENDED FOR THE HUMAN RACE TO BE THIS COMPLICATED.CAN I GET, MAY I GET HIM ONE MECHANICAL CHANGE? YEAH.
I'M GOING THROUGH THE WHOLE SENTENCE FOR ANY PERSON TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANOTHER PERSON BECAUSE OF TAKE OUT HIS OR HER AND JUST GO ON TO ANOTHER PERSON BECAUSE OF RACE.
JUST DELETE, JUST DELETE HIS OR HER.
CAN WE TAKE UNE OUT OF THE PLACES IN AND PUT IT NEXT TO OR IN FRONT OF AN ACCOMMODATION PRACTICES? YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT THAT? MARK OUT UNEQUAL WHERE IT IS, PLACE IT NEXT IN FRONT OF ACCOMMODATION.
LET ME ASK, LET ME ASK A QUESTION.
I'M WONDERING WHETHER UNEQUAL IS EVEN NEEDED THERE AT ALL.
WELL, I WAS JUST TRYING TO KEEP IT, BUT LET'S GO HOUSING PRACTICES AND PUBLIC PLACES.
WHY DON'T, IT DOESN'T SAY AL ACCOMMODATION PRACTICE DOESN'T SAY UNEQUAL HOUSING PRACTICES.
SO JUST SAY, UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION IS PROHIBITED IN EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES, FINANCIAL CREDIT PRACTICES, HOUSING PRACTICES, AND PUBLIC PLACES OF ACCOMMODATION PRACTICES.
UN UNEQUAL CAN JUST BE DELETED.
DOWN NEXT TO 2.4, WHERE IT SAYS, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS ARTICLE, SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND CITIZENSHIP SHALL HAVE THE SAME MEETING AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE SIX OF THIS CHAPTER.
I, THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
WELL, IT, IT, I WANT YOU TO KNOW IT TOOK ME TWO MONTHS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS TRYING TO BE SAID HERE, BECAUSE WHAT'S TRYING TO BE SAID IS THAT USE THE SAME DEFINITION OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN SIX POINT IN ARTICLE SIX.
AND THAT, THAT USED THAT DEFINITION IN ARTICLE 2.4 AND THE SAME DEFINITION FOR CITIZENSHIP IN ARTICLE SIX MAKE IT THE SAME IN 2.4.
WELL, HERE'S THE SITUATION THERE.
I CAN, I CAN TELL YOU WHAT THE ANSWER IS GONNA BE.
WHAT? AND THAT'S NOT THAT I AGREE WITH THE ANSWER.
BUT THE ANSWER WILL BE THAT SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND CITIZENSHIP STATUS ARE PROHIBITED ONLY IN EMPLOYMENT.
AND ARTICLE SIX IS THE ARTICLE THAT DEALS WITH EMPLOYMENT, AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE DEFINED THERE.
I THINK YOU MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT I'M SAYING.
BUT THIS TO ME, AND I HAD SOMEBODY ELSE READ IT, SO IT'S JUST NOT ME.
SO, SO, SO YOU WANT SAY IT MEANS THE SAME THING.
SO, SO YOU SHALL HAVE THE SAME MEANING.
NO, THE SAME MEANING AS IN FOR PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE, SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND WRITTEN.
SO HOW ABOUT IF IT SAYS, SEXUAL HARASSMENT DECISION STATUS ARE DEFINED IN ARTICLE SIX OF THIS.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT I SAID TWO SECONDS AGO.
I JUST, UH, JUST SAID, UH, AS, UM, AS DEFINED IN ARE DEFINED IN ARE DEFINED IN, MM-HMM.
AND THEN ONE MORE TECHNICAL THING.
IF THEY, IF THE TIME HAS, IF THE TIME CLOCK HASN'T RUN OUT RIGHT ABOVE THAT, BEFORE THE WORD WILLFULLY, THERE SHOULD BE A CAPITAL LETTER C, BECAUSE THAT'S ACTUALLY A SEPARATE PIECE.
AND I THINK THAT'S A, WHERE'S THIS, WHERE IS IT? RIGHT HERE? OKAY.
I GOT PA SAYS RETALIATE AGAINST BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
[01:00:01]
OR COMPEL A PERSON TO COMMIT ANY VIOLATION.AND THEN IT HAS A SEMI THEN THAT SAYS WILLFULLY INTERFERE.
AND THAT LOOKS LIKE THAT SHOULD BE, THERE SHOULD BE AC IN FRONT OF THAT.
THAT SHOULD BE THE THIRD SUBPART C.
I, I THINK IT WAS JUST A MISTAKE IN FORMATTING IT.
THERE SHOULD BE AN A, B AND AC UNDER 2.3.
IS YOUR POINT ADDRESSED ON, UH, THE, NOT REALLY.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS A TECHNICAL THING.
I DON'T, I, THE WORDING IS AWKWARD AS COMMISSIONER PELL SAID.
UH, AND I THINK THEY MEANT TO SAY THAT SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS DEFINED IN ARTICLE SIX, CITIZENSHIP STATUS IS DEFINED.
ARTICLE SIX, AND THEY'RE NOT ONE IN THE SAME THING.
WE, WE'VE BUT IT'S READ, IT'S WRITTEN.
SO I'LL, UH, BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING, I'LL TRY TO DO THIS FORMATTING AND I'LL, AND I'LL COVER THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN AGREED TO TODAY.
AND THEY'RE GONNA KICK US OUT, AREN'T THEY? WELL, I, YES.
THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN, UH, FOR EVERYBODY'S WORK AND, UH, I THINK WE DON'T NEED TO GO ANY FURTHER THAN, UM, ARTICLES ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
UH, STILL MORE DEFINITIONS TO GO ON.
AND, UM, I WILL, I GUESS, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
ALL AYES AND NO NAYS? I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD MEETING.