12-17-73 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 17 197; COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING (CONTINUED) 1972. She also indicated that it was the hope of the commission that the subpoena power would notll have to be utilized; however, it would be a tool if needed in order to bring about due process. Council President Nemeth made a motion to amend the ordinance as follows: In Sec. 2 -51, amend the word "Commission" to read "Ordinance ". (Councilman Miller also felt that, in Sec. 2 -54 (a), a "South Bend Human Rights Commission" should be created. In Sec. 2 -54 (a), insert the words "South Bend" Human Rights Commission. In Sec. 2 -55 (a), amend the number of members to "six" to be appointed by the Mayor and "three" to be appointed by the President of the Common Council, and also amend the number of members needed to constitute a quorum to "five ". In Sec. 2 -56 (b), strike the reference to fixed compensation. In Sec. 2 -56 (d), strike the words "at" and "shall" in the fourth line and insert the words "of" and "may". In Sec. 2 -56 W, strike the second sentence and insert the following after the word "Commission" in the fourth line: "such power of subpoena, however, is to be exercised only upon approval of and through the Department of Law." In Sec. 2 -56 (i)(1), delete the entire paragraph starting with the words "if the" in the first line and insert the following: "if, upon all the evidence taken, the Commission by a majority vote shall determine that the respondent committed the discriminatory practice set forth in the complaint, the Commission shall issue an order directing the respondent to cease such discriminatory practice so found to be engaged in. The commission shall have the power to require proof of compliance." In Sec. 2 -56 (i)(2), amend the word and number "fifteen (15)" to read "thirty (30) ", and in the sixth line, delete the phrase immediately following the word "comply" and insert the following: "The Commission shall certify the case and the entire records of its proceedings to the Department of Law, which shall invoke the aid of an appropriate court to enforce the order." Councilman Kopczynski seconded the motion to amend. Councilman Parent requested that the City Attorney comment on the amendments made. He made a motion to take a recess after the questions were answered, seconded by Councilman Horvath. There was a question on the recess being taken when a motion was on the floor. Councilman Parent indicated that he did not have the personal knowledge necessary regarding the amendments, and he wanted to take a little time to personally review the amendments and talk directly with the City Attorney. There was a brief discussion, after which Councilman Horvath withdrew his second to the motion to recess. The motion, therefore, lost due to lack of a second. Mr. Newman spoke briefly on the proposed amendment to keep the number of members on the commission to nine. He wondered why the Council felt nine members were sufficient. He stated that, if the commission was to be effective, additional manpower was needed. If an additional six people would be willing to spend time on the commission, it would be strengthened greatly. Council President Nemeth reminded Mr. Newman that the Council only consisted of nine persons trying to also do a good job with a great deal more work involved. Mr. Newman again stated that he felt the commissior could be more effective with additional members. Council President Nemeth reminded him of the words "quality not quantity ". Ms. Candelaria felt the motion of quality was difficult to define. By increasing the commission, the commission would be balanced with a broader view of its members. She felt it was too concentrated and did not have the necessary input from employers, etc. Councilman Taylor was of the opinion that 15 members sounded "unwieldly ". Councilman Kopczynski talked briefly about harrassment to certain employers and wondered what could be offered to someone wrongfully accused of discrimination. Mr. Roemer cited an example of a person working in a nursinc home and being fired because of race. A hearing was held and compensation was given because the commission felt it was discrimination. Councilman Kopczynski wondered about the employer. Mr. Roemer talked briefly on the whole field of law pertaining to torts, etc. Councilman Miller states that the Council recommended that the compensatory damages be deleted. He commented on the amend- ment to Sec. 2 -56 (d) and felt that the city should set an example and should be required to furni: all necessary records to the commission. Council President Nemeth stated that, if the subpoena power was there, the records would be required regardless. Councilman Miller asked the Council President to explain his amendment to Sec. 2 -56 (i)(1), and Council President Nemeth explained that his amendment would limit the matter to a cease and desist order. Mr. Roemer indicated that the Council was talking about whether or not the commission should be able to assess something more than just a cease and desist order. Council President Nemeth mentioned that the penalty had been eliminated, and Mr. Roemer stated that the compensatory damages should be included. Councilman Miller asked if this was the body of the state ordinance, and Mr. Stanley indicated that it was. Council President Nemeth asked about the possibility of a matter being a frivolous complaint. He wondered who would take care of that party's compensatory damage. Mr. Roemer indicated that the commission would not disagree with a reasonable limitation if the Council desired. Councilman Parent indicated that the proposed ordinance was provided at the state level. Councilman Miller agreed that the Council should follow the wording of the statutes; however, he expressed concern about the compensatory damages and losses incurred. Council President Nemeth wondered if the Council had the authority to set the amount of the damages. He was concerned about an appointed body, being the commission, affixing the damages. Mr. Roemer referred to the statutes regarding the amendment to Sec. 2 -56 (i)(2). He talked about the cease and desist order and enforcement of the order. Councilman Parent made a motion to divide the questions on the amendments, seconded by Councilman Taylor. Chairman Newburn ruled the motion lost.- Councilman Miller made a motion to amend the amendment to Sec. 2 -56 (i)(1) to keep the wording of the proposed ordinance but insert the followin as pertained to losses incurred: "not to exceed $500" in the eighth line of that section, seconded by Councilman Taylor. Chairman Newburn asked for a show of hands on the amendment to the amendment He ruled the motion carried by a count of five to four. Councilman Parent then made a motion in