Norman City Council summary of LGBT action

On December 22, 2015, the college town of Norman, Oklahoma, took an historic step of equality for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender citizens among the community’s residents. Following are excerpts of a report on that action, outlining the process followed and praising the work of Norman citizens in helping make the city a fair, equal, and welcoming community.

Norman's governing body, the City Council, announced that the municipal ordinances banning "sex" discrimination in the areas of employment, housing and public accommodations - public and private - would be enforced and administered to prohibit "discrimination based on assumptions and stereotypes associated with discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity."

The Norman City Council's action was the first of its type in a State too often identified as the "reddest of the red." The council's action was done without debate.

There was no alarmist or hateful rhetoric. Indeed, no one spoke in opposition to the action being taken. The vote was unanimous. Within the city hall complex that night, there was a sense of drama, but it was a feeling of celebration.

Upon passage, sustained applause dominated the room. The mayor, Cindy Rosenthal, called it an "historic moment" for the community and the citizens.

The City Council's action caused Norman, Oklahoma, to join a growing list of over 200 cities across the nation which have-decided to wait no longer on a federal non-discrimination act protecting LGBT citizens and their children against discrimination in the most vital areas of their lives.

The vote was preceded by a year of preparation spearheaded by the Norman United advocacy coalition. The Norman Code already contained powerful policy statements of inclusiveness and equality for all citizens, and recited the right of all citizens to be "provided with an opportunity to reach their full potential as humans."

The City's existing non-discrimination ordinance expressly prohibited discrimination based on sex in three vital areas: employment and the workplace, housing, and access-to public accommodations (i.e.: restaurants, retail business establishments, theatres, sporting events, etc.).

The Norman United membership, guided by a task force of Dr. Kami Day, Lena Tenney, Andy Jacobs, Melissa Gill, and Charles Burnell, debated whether to support either amending or scrapping the existing non-discrimination ordinance, first passed in the mid-1980s, in favor of language specifically delineating non-discrimination against a person based, on that person's sexual orientation or gender identity.

While considering their choices, the Norman United group was offered an alternative path. On July 15, 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (commonly referred to as the "EEOC") ruled in the case of Baldwin v. Foxx that under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, sexual orientation discrimination is a form of "sex" discrimination.

Three years earlier, in Macy v. Holder, the EEOC had reached a similar conclusion involving transgender discrimination, holding that claims involving gender identity discrimination were legally recognizable under Title VII.

Mayor Rosenthal and City Council member Lynne Miller had both been searching for the best way to meet Norman United's objective. Both saw a council resolution interpreting Norman's existing ordinance - in the same manner as the EEOC had interpreted the identical language under Title VII - as a quick and viable route for achieving Norman United's primary goal. Tying the resolution's interpretive provisions to EEOC precedents and federal jurisprudence trends, provided the strongest route for skirting the expected state legislative preemption issue being encountered in other states.

They presented the possibility of a resolution at a Norman United meeting in August, and their proposal was positively received by NU's membership. After this meeting, Lynne Miller spoke with attorney Troy Stevenson, executive director of "Freedom Oklahoma, and then with Don Holladay, the lead attorney in the lawsuit which had successfullv declared Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional. Both, separately, also saw a council resolution interpreting Norman's existing ordinance in a manner consistent with the EEOC's interpretation as a rapid, workable route for achieving Norman United's objective.

Cindy Rosenthal asked the City Attorney and his staff to provide the council with legal guidance in the entire area. The City Attorney, Jeff Bryant, and assistant city attorney Kristina Belt developed a comprehensive legal memorandum summarizing existing law, and began working on the content of a possible resolution.

In draft form, the proposed resolution acknowledged that the City Council is responsible for administering and enforcing City policies and ordinances. In addition, it noted that the U.S. Supreme Court had already extended federal protection under the Constitution to include the fundamental right of all citizens to have equal access to marriage regardless of sexual orientation, and to protect such marriages and the children being raised in those marriages.

The resolution said that interpreting Norman's Code provisions prohibiting sex discrimination to include assumptions and stereotypes associated with discrimination based-on sexual orientation and gender identity would be consistent with both the interpretation given to such language under Title VII by the EEOC and to the interpretation given such language by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the Fair Housing Act.

It also resolved that the City Manager be directed to administer both the City's personnel policies and the ordinances which applied to the City's workplaces, housing, and public accommodations, in a manner consistent with the intent of the Resolution.

Freedom Oklahoma's executive director Troy Stevenson expressed hope that other Oklahoma communities would follow Norman's momentous action, saying Norman had ·chosen to follow 'a route of passage that can become a model for other Oklahoma communities, at least those no longer willing to listen to anti-LGBT voices in the state legislature.

The irony of the possibilities now on the horizon has become inescapable: At Oklahoma's- state capitol, a handful of legislators continue to spend inordinate amounts of legislative energy proposing ways to evade the Supreme Court decision permitting same-sex marriage in Oklahoma.

Now that over-200 U. S. cities have passed some form of municipal law protecting against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, some opponents of such protection have suggested the need for statewide legislation declaring no municipality or county can pass greater protection for a class of persons than otherwise available under state law.

The intent of such- proposed legislation would be to exclude anti- discrimination protection based on sexual orientation and gender identity, by legislatively limiting protection to only areas delineated under Oklahoma's "Anti-Discrimination" Act. Oklahoma law, of course, does not mention sexual orientation or gender identity, but contains the plain vanilla list of prohibited types of discrimination found in Title V, (one of which is the prohibition based on "sex).

As of December 22, 2015, there were no longer two classes of LGBT citizens living in Norman. Those covered by the EEOC, or working for the military, or a federal contractor, or employed by a Fortune 500 company, already shared protection in the workplace. Now, the rest of the LGBT community enjoys the same protection. Likewise, there is no longer the threat. of a landlord deciding not to rent to a same-sex couple and their children. And for the entire LGBT community, Norman's restaurants, businesses, theatres, and any establishment that seeks patronage from the public, are open to all - regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Gayly - January 17, 2016 @ 4 p.m.