Irvine Law to Shield Gays, Others From Bias Gets Initial OK

The Irvine City Council late Tuesday night overrode objections from an overflowing, mostly anti-gay crowd of some 200 people and gave preliminary approval to an ordinance banning discriminating against gays and other minority groups.

The council voted 4 to 0, with council member C. David Baker absent, following a heated five-hour public hearing that included frequent bursts of applause for testimony on the pros and cons of homosexuality.

Although the ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status and physical handicap, the inclusion of protection for gays was the main target of protest by religious leaders and conservative family groups who packed into Council Chamber for the vote.

‘A Moral Issue’

“Sexual orientation is a moral issue. It is something that frankly was considered sodomy and illegal not more than 10 years ago and still is in some states,” said Scott Peotter, 31, an architect.

“The real issue for us is sexual orientation,” said the Rev. Bruce Sonnenberg of the Village Church of Irvine. “The Scriptures do declare that homosexuality is immoral and is wrong from God’s perspective.”

However, supporters of the measure, including some gay and lesbian groups, hailed the ordinance as a progressive step in a forward-minded city.

“They’re here,” retired tax auditor Herbert Hersch, 78, said of gays. “They’ve been here and we have to learn to live with them.”

Many people in the crowd wore city of Irvine “family” stickers that were passed out by people who opposed the ordinance. About 30 gay activists also attended the meeting, as well as a number of other people representing various ethnic groups who all showed up in support of the ordinance.

About 35 people signed up to testify. The loudest applause came when critics of the ordinance testified.

Mayor Larry Agran, a principal supporter of the ordinance, said it was designed only to ensure equal rights for all groups. “I would think that is a pretty good public policy to have in place,” he said.

However, Councilwoman Sally Anne Miller said she did not believe the city should be in the business of enforcing one group’s rights over another’s. She voted for the ordinance--reluctantly, she said--because “it’s a symbolic statute of fairness.”

First of Its Kind

Council members Ed Dornan and Ray Catalano also voted for the ordinance.

If passed on second reading at the next council meeting, the Irvine ordinance will be the first of its kind in Orange County. It is patterned after state and federal anti-discrimination laws, although it goes further by extending protection to gays and to the age group of people 18 to 40. State and federal laws ban discrimination by age only against people over 40.

The ordinance was submitted to the council upon recommendation by Irvine’s Human Rights Committee, which studied the issue of human rights for one year and concluded that the city needed to reaffirm its “longstanding commitment to the concept of an open city where all are welcome.” The committee reported finding sporadic incidences of discrimination in the city.

Although sternly worded, the 11-page ordinance does not give the city much enforcement power. While the city promises to intervene in discrimination disputes, it ultimately directs any aggrieved party to use the ordinance in seeking legal redress through the civil courts.

Still, the ordinance has stirred intense emotions within the planned community of 97,000 people since it was submitted for public consideration at a council meeting last month.

Business Concerns

Critics have argued that it will encourage a migration of gays into the largely family community. Irvine business groups also expressed concern that the ordinance would prove costly to them because it would encourage the filing of frivolous lawsuits and would require them to maintain extensive paper work.

However, many of the business concerns were allayed after the city revised the ordinance from its original form. For example, an ad hoc advisory committee which was formed by council to revise the ordinance simplified the record-keeping process to include only those documents already required by state law. The original ordinance required the keeping of employment documents and other business records in a separate file for two years.

The revised ordinance also pertains to employers having more than five employees, which removes a large number of small businesses, said Tom Wall, vice-chairman of the Irvine Chamber of Commerce’s government affairs council.

IRVINE’S PROPOSED HUMAN RIGHTS ORDINANCE

TERMS

The ordinance is intended to put an end within the city of Irvine to discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, marital status and physical handicap.

Discrimination will be prohibited in employment, in places of public accommodation, resort or amusement, in educational institutions, in public service, and in housing and commercial accommodation.

ENFORCEMENT

The ordinance will be enforced by the following actions:

Any person claiming to be aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice shall first file a complaint with the city of Irvine, which will seek to resolve the dispute.

After exhausting that remedy, the aggrieved party can file suit in Superior Court. The court can use the ordinance to grant injunctive relief ordering the defendant to cease and desist from any discriminatory practices. The court can also take affirmative action steps to remedy past unlawful discriminatory practices.