Council Weighs Definition of ‘Family’

It was meant to be a routine update of the city of Sierra Madre’s zoning code, a few plainly stated sentences defining the term “family” through such criteria as a shared kitchen, mailing address and front door.

It was supposed to be the kind of talk aimed at preventing problems like illegal rental units being added to houses.

But one City Council member has turned the mundane discussion into a raging debate by demanding that the term “family” be limited to those related by blood, marriage or adoption, and that those living together in other relationships be called a “housekeeping unit.”

Using the word “family” to describe those not related by blood or law “degrades the meaning of the term,” said Councilwoman MaryAnn MacGillivray.

After the City Council tentatively approved the wording on a 4-1 vote Sept. 9, news of the proposed zoning language has prompted a deluge of phone calls to City Hall and the council members, publicly stirring passions in this otherwise peaceful town of 11,000 just east of Pasadena.

As the council prepares for its final vote on the proposed code language Tuesday, the city is split between those who see MacGillivray’s measure as an affirmation of traditional values and those who view it an attack on unmarried couples and homosexuals.

“I’m truly outraged that a governing body is doing this in 1997. They’re clueless. This discriminates against me,” said Darrell Brooke, a member of the city’s Planning Commission who lives with his fiancee and their two children from previous marriages. The Planning Commission in July rejected the “blood, marriage or adoption” criteria for defining “family.”

MacGillivray said that in “an era in which family values are under attack” she is using her position as a small-town lawmaker to send a moral message to the rest of the country. Others on the council and some townsfolk, however, say it’s a message she ought to keep to herself.

“It’s not our job to dictate morals,” said Doug Hayes, the only City Council member to vote against the proposed zoning language at its initial reading Sept. 9. “It gives me the creeps. It’s cruel to have this in the code, it creates tension and divides,” he said.

Sierra Madre Mayor James Hester said that council members passed the ordinance at its initial reading because they did not think the language pushed by MacGillivray would be considered provocative. “It was her thing and we didn’t look upon it as particularly controversial, we just let her go,” he said.

The debate has heated up despite the fact that city officials, council members and civil rights lawyers all agree that the zoning language, if adopted, will not have an effect on anyone’s living arrangements. State and federal laws clearly prohibit housing discrimination based on familial status.

The Sierra Madre ordinance does not make it illegal to live in an alternative family setting. It simply limits the use of the word family to those related by blood, marriage and adoption.

Councilwoman MacGillivray believes the ordinance is a way to state a position on the meaning of family without violating the law or infringing on anyone’s lifestyle.

The wording is such that “we can make a statement and do what we believe is correct without being exclusionary,” MacGillivray said.

Jon W. Davidson, a lawyer for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a gay and lesbian civil rights group, said that if the ordinance passes it’s not likely to result in housing discrimination, but would send a hurtful message. “Given that they ended up granting the same rights there’s not much anybody can do [to discriminate], but I think it’s offensive that they chose to structure it this way.”