Only 295 valid signatures of registered voters are required by Jackson city ordinance to place a proposed ordinance on the ballot, so if homosexual activists choose, they can easily do so. With a conceptually identical ordinance already on the ballot this November in Kalamazoo, we still face the possibility of having to fight two city ballot campaigns this fall. Your ongoing support is deeply appreciated.

Click to make your tax-deductible contribution today:
https://www.campaigncontribution.com/version6/process/info.asp?id=1700&jid=

Gary Glenn
AFA-Michigan
_________________________________________________

“(Homosexual) activists pushing the (‘gay rights’/cross-dressing) ordinance said they were ready to push the issue in a public ballot initiative. ‘It’s an option I am not thrilled about, but it’s something that is still on the table,’ said Kathleen Conley, who chairs the (Jackson) Human Relations Commission. She said the commission would meet to discuss how to move forward, and said some options included working with councilmembers to pass an ordinance which would only apply to city employees, or putting the issue on the ballot. (Cross-dressing activist John now) Julie Nemecek, co-director of Michigan Equality, said the HRC would only need about 400 signatures of Jackson voters to put the issue to a vote.”

—————————————————
MICHIGAN MESSENGER
Lansing, Michigan
August 12, 2009

Jackson City Council rejects anti-
discrimination ordinance 5-2

by Todd A. Heywood

JACKSON — In a 5-2 vote, the city council on Tuesday night rejected a controversial anti-discrimination ordinance aimed at curbing bias on the basis of sexual orientation, HIV status or gender identity and expression among other categories, setting the stage for what could be an ugly public ballot battle.

City Council members Kenneth Glasier, from the Fourth Ward, and Carl Breeding from the First Ward, voted (against a motion) to reject the ordinance. The motion was put forward by Daniel Greer, who represents the Third Ward and Robert Howe of the Second Ward.

“I feel like we are in Washington. We’re talking about an issue, but we’re not dealing with it,” Mayor Jerry Ludwig said before casting a vote to reject the ordinance. “We’re too small for that. Sure we have a problem. Anyone who would deny that would be a liar. But it’s not a problem to the extent where it will affect the business or housing market.”

The move came after nearly 45 minutes of testimony about the ordinance. About 35 people spoke, with the majority of those speaking in opposition to the ordinance living outside the city, and the majority of those speaking in favor being Jackson residents.

Bryan Ramsey, who owns RTD Manufacturing in the city but lives in Grass Lake, said his concern was about the impact of the ordinance on businesses. Under the ordinance, a business found guilty of violating the ordinance is subject to a fine of $500 a day, as well as back wages and legal fees.

“We have agencies trying to attract businesses to Jackson,” Ramsey told council members. “I know if this ordinance troubles me, I am sure it bothers some of those considering a move to Jackson.”

Stephen Artz, RTD’s vice president, also spoke against the ordinance citing cost concerns for businesses. But when asked if he was aware that many manufacturing companies in the United States, including the Big Three automakers, protected employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation, Artz said, “No, I’m not.”

Activists pushing the ordinance said they were ready to push the issue in a public ballot initiative.

“It’s an option I am not thrilled about, but it’s something that is still on the table,” said Kathleen Conley, who chairs the Human Relations Commission. She said the the commission would meet to discuss how to move forward, and said some options included working with councilmembers to pass an ordinance which would only apply to city employees, or putting the issue on the ballot.

Julie Nemecek, co-director of Michigan Equality, said the HRC would only need about 400 signatures of Jackson voters to put the issue to a vote.

http://michiganmessenger.com/24706/jackson-city-council-rejects-anti-discrimination-ordinance-5-2
__________________________________________________

Cross-dressing activist John (now “Julie”) Nemecek of Spring Arbor, executive director of the Lansing-based homosexual activist group Michigan Equality, failed August 11th in his attempt to compel families, businesses, and community organizations by force of law in Jackson to pretend that his psycho-emotional delusions are reality.

Thankfully, the discriminatory “gay rights”/cross-dressing ordinance he’s pushing — which in other communities has violated the privacy rights of women and children in public restrooms, while being used to discriminate against and punish individual business owners as well as the Boy Scouts, Catholic Charities, Salvation Army, and United Way — was rejected outright by the Jackson City Council on a vote of 5 to 2. (See Jackson Citizen Patriot story below.)

Concerned citizens in Kalamazoo face a ballot campaign this fall on the same issue, which will be heavily funded by homosexual activist billionaire Jon Stryker, a resident of that city.

————————————-

“The City Council voted 5-2 to reject the (so-called ‘gay rights’/cross-dressing) ordinance at its meeting Tuesday. …About 20 people addressed the city council about the ordinance, the majority of whom voiced opposition. The proposed ordinance says no person shall be denied equal protection of the law, their civil or political rights or be discriminated against because of their…’sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or HIV status.’ …Points of contention about the ordinance centered around the sexual-orientation protections it provided, the potential for lawsuits for business owners and additional cost for employers.”

———————————

CITIZEN PATRIOT
Jackson, Michigan
August 12, 2009

Jackson City Council rejects civil rights ordinance in 5-2 vote
by Fredricka Paul

JACKSON, Mich. — A highly debated civil rights ordinance that first came before the Jackson City Council 10 years ago and was revived this year was rejected by the council Tuesday.

The City Council voted 5-2 to reject the ordinance at its meeting Tuesday. Councilmen Carl L. Breeding and Kenneth Gaiser voted in opposition of rejecting the ordinance.

“It appears to me, the majority of the council doesn’t believe certain citizens in the community deserve to be protected,” said George Brown, a member of the Human Relations Commission that brought the ordinance before the council.

“I think they showed that with their vote. I strongly believe they trivialized the process.”

About 20 people addressed the City Council about the ordinance, the majority of whom voiced opposition.

The proposed ordinance says no person shall be denied equal protection of the law, their civil or political rights or be discriminated against because of their “race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, height, weight, condition of pregnancy, marital status, physical or mental limitation, source of income, family responsibilities or status, educational association, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or HIV status.”

The ordinance was initially brought to the City Council in 1999 but eventually stalled in 2002. Points of contention about the ordinance centered around the sexual-orientation protections it provided, the potential for lawsuits for business owners and additional cost for employers.

Kathleen Conley, chairwoman of the Human Relations Commission, said the group has several options it will explore. The commission could send the issue to a public vote, but Conley said she would rather not do that yet.

“We are talking about refining the ordinance,” she said. “We need to talk to other council members and find out what their concerns were.”

Conley said she would also like to talk to residents who still had concerns. But despite being shot down by the council, she said the commission will still work on getting the ordinance considered.

“It is not the end of the story either just a different direction that we need to go in,” she said.

(Cross-dressing activist) Julie Nemecek of Spring Arbor said (he) found it troubling that people were not in support of the ordinance and that its passage is long overdue.

“It is not special rights, it is equal rights,” (he) said. “I can assure you it is needed.”

http://www.mlive.com/news/jackson/index.ssf/2009/08/jackson_city_council_rejects_c.html
__________________________________________________

WLNS-TV
Lansing, Michigan
August 11, 2009

City votes down gay rights amendment
by Alison Himelhoch

WATCH VIDEO: http://www.wlns.com/global/video/flash/popupplayer.asp?ClipID1=4036239&h1=City%20Votes%20Down%20Gay%20Rights%20Amendment&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=97900&LaunchPageAdTag=News&activePane=info&rnd=64319859

A gay rights amendment gets knocked down in Jackson. The city council voted against changes to Jackson’s anti-discrimination ordinance. It’s a law that currently says people can’t be denied rights based on certain characteristics, like race or gender.

The human rights commission wanted to add nine words to the current law, saying that in addition to what’s already on the books, people can not be discriminated against based on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or HIV status, but council voted that down 5 to 2.

Before they voted, several spoke out both for and against the proposal. Some say the debate is way overdue and the language should have been changed years ago, but others say changing the ordinance wouldn’t be fair, because the gay and lesbian community chooses to live their life that way, so employers and others shouldn’t be forced to give them equal rights.

Christine Canning-Peterson, supports ordinance: “It’s the right thing to do. I don’t want to live in a neighborhood that discriminates against people for any reason, and I appreciate and celebrate diversity in citizenry, and the city should do the same.”

Brad Foster, against ordinance: “It would be terrible for businesses. It would take out for businesses to choose how to run their business, who do they want representing them at the counter.”

I spoke with someone from the human rights commission after the vote, and he says they’re down, but they aren’t defeated. They will go back to the drawing board to see how they can get changes passed.

http://www.wlns.com/Global/story.asp?S=10890589&nav=menu25_2
__________________________________________________

“(AFA-Michigan President Gary Glenn) expects it will be a tough battle. ‘For example, homosexual activists’ campaign will be paid for by a homosexual activist billionaire who lives in Kalamazoo, so they are going to have unlimited funds to run the campaign in favor of this ordinance,’ the pro-family activist points out. Glenn adds that similar ordinances in other cities have been used to discriminate and punish not only Christian business owners, but also charities such as the Salvation Army, Boy Scouts, and United Way.”

————————————

ONE NEWS NOW
American Family Radio
Tupelo, Mississippi
August 6, 2009

“Gay-rights” ordinance — rescind it, or vote on it
by Charlie Butts

Residents of Kalamazoo, Michigan, will have a chance to vote on a city ordinance that bestows special rights on homosexuals, lesbians, and transgendered people.

Earlier the ordinance was passed, and a petition drive was successful to put the issue on the ballot. City officials, however, simply pulled out the ordinance, forcing another petition drive. Gary Glenn heads the American Family Association of Michigan.

“They were required to gather some 1,200 signatures. They gathered over 2,000,” he notes. “What that will force the city commission to do is to either rescind this so-called ‘gay-rights’ ordinance, or put it on the ballot for a vote of the people of Kalamazoo in November.”

Glenn believes they will take it to the people. He expects it will be a tough battle.

“For example, homosexual activists’ campaign will be paid for by a homosexual activist billionaire who lives in Kalamazoo — so they are going to have unlimited funds to run this campaign in favor of this ordinance,” the pro-family activist points out.

Glenn adds that similar ordinances in other cities have been used to discriminate and punish not only Christian business owners, but also charities such as the Salvation Army, Boy Scouts, and United Way.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=627770
__________________________________________________

“Kalamazoo voters will have the last word in November on a controversial, local, gay-rights ordinance… The anti-discrimination measure surfaced in late 2008 when the local gay-rights group Kalamazoo Alliance for Equality proposed ordinance language. …(C)itizens opposing the measure said the new law could require them to violate their personal, moral and religious beliefs that homosexuality is wrong by forcing them to offer jobs or rent homes to gay, lesbian or transgender people. Opponents launched a petition challenge and submitted enough signatures…get the ordinance suspended and force the commission to…put the measure to a citywide vote.”

————————————

KALAMAZOO GAZETTE
Kalamazoo, Michigan
August 4, 2009

Voters will decide gay issue
by Kathy Jessup

KALAMAZOO — Kalamazoo voters will have the last word in November on a controversial, local, gay-rights ordinance that had banned gender identity or sexual-orientation discrimination in housing, employment and access to public accommodations.

The Kalamazoo City Commission voted unanimously Monday to reaffirm its support for the ordinance that was officially suspended Friday when challenge petitions were certified by City Clerk Scott Borling.

City Attorney Clyde Robinson now will draft ballot language that will be presented to the commission at its Aug. 17 meeting. Commissioners must approve the language for it to appear on the Nov. 3 ballot.

The anti-discrimination measure surfaced in late 2008 when the local gay-rights group Kalamazoo Alliance for Equality proposed ordinance language. A final version was crafted by Robinson, and the commission passed it unanimously in December.

However, citizens opposing the measure said the new law could require them to violate their personal, moral and religious beliefs that homosexuality is wrong by forcing them to offer jobs or rent homes to gay, lesbian or transgender people. Opponents launched a petition challenge and submitted enough signatures in December to get the ordinance suspended and force the commission to rescind it or put the measure to a citywide vote.

The commission decided in January to withdraw the first ordinance and appointed a three-member committee to hear public comment and attempt to craft a compromise measure. A second version was introduced in June and again unanimously passed by the commission, despite objections from critics who said they would circulate petitions again to place the measure on the ballot.

Borling certified Friday that Kalamazoo Citizens Voting No to Special Rights Discrimination had collected sufficient petition signatures to again suspend the ordinance and prompt a citywide ballot.

http://www.mlive.com/news/kzgazette/index.ssf?/base/news-35/1249397415102620.xml&coll=7
__________________________________________________

Dear AFA-Michigan supporter,

The opposition boasts it will spend “at least $200,000″ on the ballot campaign to pass a discriminatory “gay rights” ordinance in Kalamazoo this November.  Obviously, your generous financial support is needed and appreciated.

Click here to make your tax-deductible contribution today:
https://www.campaigncontribution.com/version6/process/info.asp?id=1700&jid=

Thanks in advance!

Gary Glenn
AFA-Michigan

——————————–

“Hoadley confirmed that other national (homosexual activist) organizations would be assisting the One Kalamazoo campaign with staffing, volunteers and financial assistance…  ‘National organizations can help with messaging, voter outreach, raising money, raising visibility. …The Task Force, Human Rights Campaign, …National Center for Transgender Equality have all been sounding boards for moving forward. People are coming together to help us win in Kalamazoo,’ Hoadley said.  Hoadley expects to spend at least $200,000 on the campaign and plans to raise the money from local and national donors.

…When I asked Hoadley if he thought bringing in a national leader to helm the ballot initative would backfire, he said…  ‘The local (homosexual) community asked me to participate in helping them pass a local ordinance that will help make (their) lives better. The American Family Association is going to send in big guns and spend a lot of money sending out misinformation about our community and our lives. These people aren’t local either,’ Hoadley told me. …’It’s a unique opportunity to tackle right-wing arguments in a complete way; it’ll serve as a laboratory for the nation.  This is why the AFA is picking places like Kalamazoo…  They’re trying to find new ways to scare voters at a local level and move those lessons forward nationally. We want to fight back and win but do it in a way that diffuses their best arguments and can be used as a model for other communities facing similar fights.’”

——————————–

THE BILERICO PROJECT
Indianapolis, Indiana
August 3, 2009

Stonewall Democrats executive director Jon
Hoadley resigns to lead Kalamazoo ballot fight

http://www.bilerico.com/2009/08/stonewall_dems_ex_dir_jon_hoadley_resigns_to_lead.php
__________________________________________________

“Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, provided the following statement to Michigan Messenger by e-mail: ‘We commend the African-American churches and others who led a diverse coalition of Kalamazoo citizens who are saying “no” to a discriminatory ordinance that threatens religious freedom and conscience and the privacy rights of women and children. We will support them any way we can in opposing an ordinance that in other jurisdictions has been used to discriminate against and punish both individual business owners and cherished community groups such as Catholic Charities, the Boy Scouts, United Way, and the Salvation Army.’ Glenn’s statement concluded by alleging that Kalamazoo ordinance supporters had not been able to document any cases of discrimination in the area and called the ordinance ‘a discriminatory solution in search of a non-existent problem.’”

————————————-

MICHIGAN MESSENGER
Lansing, Michigan
July 30, 2009

Foes of anti-discrimination ordinance
in Kalamazoo turn in signatures

Opponents of a recently adopted anti-discrimination ordinance in Kalamazoo are one step closer to putting the ordinance on hold and forcing a vote on the ordinance by city residents.

Kalamazoo Citizens Voting No to Special Rights Discrimination spokesman Charles Ybema told the Kalamazoo Gazette his group had collected 2,088 signatures. Those signatures were turned over to Kalamazoo City Clerk Scott Borling. To put the ordinance up to a vote, opponents needed only 1,273 valid signatures of Kalamazoo voters.

Borling told the newspaper that as soon as he certified the signatures — or verified their validity — the ordinance would be suspended. It went into effect July 9, and opponents had 20 days to collect the needed signatures to force a vote.

Ybema did not return calls seeking comment, but Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, provided the following statement to Michigan Messenger by e-mail:

We commend the African-American churches and others who led a diverse coalition of Kalamazoo citizens who are saying “no” to a discriminatory ordinance that threatens religious freedom and conscience and the privacy rights of women and children. We will support them any way we can in opposing an ordinance that in other jurisdictions has been used to discriminate against and punish both individual business owners and cherished community groups such as Catholic Charities, the Boy Scouts, United Way, and the Salvation Army.

Glenn’s statement concluded by alleging that Kalamazoo ordinance supporters had not been able to document any cases of discrimination in the area and called the ordinance “a discriminatory solution in search of a non-existent problem.”

But supporters of the ordinance were also collecting signatures, and they held a press conference in front of city hall this afternoon to unveil the results of their actions. Kalamazoo Alliance For Equality said it had collected 5,708 signatures in support of the ordinance, reports Bil Browning at Bilerico.

The signatures collected by KAFE will not impact whether or not the issue makes it to the ballot.

Browning provides the following quote from Amy Hunter of Kalamazoo Alliance for Equality on his blog:

“The purpose of this ordinance is simple: everyone should be treated the same way on the job, in the housing market, and in public places … By collecting 5,708 signatures, we’re here to affirm what the City Commission already knew when they voted — Kalamazoo citizens support basic fairness for everyone, reject discrimination, and want to build a united community.”

Also on Bilerico is the complete text of the speeches from KAFE’s press conference today, and here’s what Terry Kueseke had to say:

The sample petitions you get from the City Clerk has room for 12 signatures on a page. We printed out 13 signatures per page and we still collected 437 pages of signatures.

What do 437 pages of names mean?

If you lined up all those pages it would be enough to reach from the top of city hall to the ground and back again.

If you lined up all those pages we could stretch all the way across Bronson Park.

But most importantly, if you lined up all the pages you’d see a community united in support of equality. There are many things that make all of us different from each other, but one of the things that bring us together is we can agree that discrimination is wrong. People who work hard should all have an equal opportunity to succeed, and that’s exactly what the Kalamazoo Non-Discrimination ordinance does.

This is only the latest round in a battle to pass a comprehensive anti-discrimination ordinance in the southwest Michigan town. The city council passed the ordinance last December, but revoked it when opponents collected enough signatures to put the ordinance up to a vote. At the time, they promised to pass it again, and did so in June. But only after holding hearings on the ordinance, including a special meeting that last nearly four and half hours.

Other Michigan cities with similar ordinances are Grand Ledge, Lansing, Grand Rapids, East Lansing and Detroit and Ann Arbor. Hamtrammck voters rejected an ordinance last Nov. The city of Jackson is preparing to consider passage of an ordinance on Aug. 11. Supporters and opponents have promised a ballot battle if the ordinance passes there.

http://michiganmessenger.com/23983/foes-of-anti-discrimination-ordinance-in-kalamazoo-turn-in-signatures
__________________________________________________