REGULAR MEETING JULY 26, 1976
<br />COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING (CONTINUED)
<br />Provided, that the Department of Law may veto the issuance of a subpoena if andt -only if such an iss
<br />ance would be an abuse of the Commission's subpoena power. Abuse of the Commission's subponena po
<br />shall include but not be limited to use of such subpoena power for harassment purposes, issuance
<br />of a subpoena for information clearly irrelevant to the investigation being conducted, and issuanc
<br />of a subpoena for information over an excessively broad span of time. Contumacy or refusal to obe
<br />a subpoena issued pursuant to this section shall constitute a contempt. All hearings shall be hel
<br />within the City of South Bend at a location determined by the Commission. A citation of contempt
<br />may be issued upon application by the Commission to the circuit or superior court, or judge thereo
<br />in the County in which hearing is held or in which the witness resides or transacts business. Sec
<br />III. Section 2 -131 (i) (1) is amended to read in its entirety as follows: (1) To state its findi
<br />of fact after a hearing and, if the Commission finds a person has engaged in an unlawful discrimin
<br />practice, it may cause to be served on such person an order requiring such person to cease and de-
<br />sist from the unlawful discriminatory practice and requiring such person to take further affirmati
<br />action as will effectuate the purposes of this article, including but not limited to the power to
<br />restore complainant's losses incurred as a result of discriminatory treatment, as the Commission m
<br />deem necessary to assure justice, provided, however, that this specific provision when applied to
<br />orders pertaining to employment shall include only wages, salary or commissions in an amount not t
<br />exceed that lost over a two year period; to require the posting of notice setting forth the publi
<br />policy of Indiana concerning civil rights and the respondent's compliance with said policy in plac
<br />of public accommodations; to require proof of compliance to be filed by the respondent at periodic
<br />intervals; to require a person who has been found to be in violations of the South Bend Human Righ
<br />Ordinance, and who is licensed by a State agency authorized to grant a license, to show cause to
<br />the licensing agency why his license should not be revoked or suspended.
<br />Council President Parent made a motion to amend the ordinance, seconded by Council Member Taylor.
<br />The motion carried. Council Member Adams indicated she would like to further amend the ordinance
<br />by changing Section 3 of the amendments to read an amount not to exceed that lost over a one year
<br />period," seconded by Council Member Kopczynski. Council President Parent indicated he would like
<br />to speak against the reduction to one year, since he felt the local ordinance has to be as strong
<br />as possible. Council Member Taylor said he agreed with the awarding of two years damages. He in-
<br />dicated he would like to second the plea and would hope the motion would be defeated. He indicate
<br />that the State and Federal governments have no limitations. Council Member Adams asked Mr. Leone,
<br />deputy city attorney, the length of the average case resolvement at the present time. He indicate
<br />most cases were resolved within ninety days. Council Member Adams indicated that she wanted the
<br />time changed to one year because if a person feels they have been discriminated against they have
<br />ninety days to file and most cases are resolved within ninety days, so one year would cover the
<br />majority of cases coming before the Commission. Mr. Leone indicated that it would cover most case
<br />Council Member Adams asked how many cases go over a year. Mr. Leone, after consulting with Mrs.
<br />Hall, the Commission's director, indicated about five percent go over a year.
<br />r
<br />,
<br />:ion
<br />Ig
<br />Ltory
<br />re
<br />-Y
<br />!s
<br />:s
<br />A roll call vote was taken on the motion and:'.it lost by a vote of four ayes (Council Members Miller
<br />Kopczynski, Adams and Horvath) and four nays (Council Members Serge, Taylor, Dombrowski and Parent .
<br />Mr. Ed Fogarty, 1219 Berkshire, Chairman of the Human Rights Commission, said he felt this was a
<br />crucial issue before the Council. He said the Commission by consensus of opinion was unanimous
<br />on its vote toward asking the administration to support these changes to the ordinance. He said t]
<br />Commission still feels that the City should have the same enforcement powers as the State Commissii
<br />He then gave the percentage of the cases handled and closed by the Commission.
<br />Mr. Jesse Dickinson, 227 RueBossuet, spoke in favor of the ordinance and the amendments.
<br />Mr. Larry Remler, staff attorneYfor Law and the Handicapped, said it was their position that the
<br />ordinance should eliminate the present restriction of awarding $500 damages. He said they feel
<br />the individual should be made whole. He said at issue here was solely compensatory damages. He
<br />indicated that the certification of handicapped should be eliminated from the ordinance. He indict
<br />that the Human Rights Commission was acting in a progressive manner by amending the ordinance, and
<br />it was commendable. He said by the South Bend Human Rights Commission having this authorization
<br />it will provide for speedy resolution of disputes at a local level.
<br />Mrs. Louvenia Cain, 1207 W. Washington, indicated she was pleased to hear of this ordinance and
<br />hoped the Council would give it consideration.
<br />Mr. John Huber, 310 Peashway, indicated he would like to speak in favor of this ordinance, parti-
<br />cularly as a parent of a handicapped child. He also indicated that the certification of handi-
<br />capped should be eliminated.
<br />Council Member Adams made a motion that the ordinance be recommended to the Council favorably, as
<br />amended, seconded by Council Member Taylor.
<br />Council President Parent made a motion to amend the ordinance by removing the section in the ordi-
<br />nance under Section 2 -128 (q) which reads "To be classified as "handicapped" under this Ordinance
<br />a person shall be certified as such pursuant to the procedures, rules and regulations as are issue
<br />by the Indiana rehabilitation services board. Provided, that a person who claims to be the victim
<br />of a discriminatory practice because of his handicap may file a complaint with the Commission prio
<br />to his being certified as handicapped." This motion was seconded by Council Member Taylor.
<br />Council Member Miller asked why just not remove the word "certified" and leave the rest. He in-
<br />dicated that the definition of handicapped should be defined. He said he would suggest "shall be
<br />certified as such" be removed. Mr. Leone indicated that the Commission has the right to promulgat
<br />rules and regulations, and it would be possible for the Commission to classify handicapped.
<br />The motion to amend the ordinance carried. The motion to recommend the ordinance to the Council
<br />favorably, as amended, carried.
<br />There being no further business to come before the Committee of the Whole, Council Member Kopczyn
<br />made a motion to rise and report to the Council, seconded by Council Member Taylor. The motion c
<br />ATTEST: i ATTEST:
<br />e
<br />kted
<br />ried.
<br />
|