07-10-06 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JULY, 10, 2006 Joseph Schultz, 15344 U.S. 6, LaPaz, Indiana, stated that he works in South Bend. Mr. Schultz stated that in 1990 he worked at Jeans West in University Park Mall, Mishawaka, Indiana. During that time he was the manager for six months. He noted that the store increased in sales the most of any store in the district. He was manager of the month once during the six month tenure with the company. Mr. Shultz stated that during that time his first manager, who knew he was gay, had no problems with it. But there was a shifting of districts and a new manager came in. This new manager also knew he was gay, and at that time thought he did not have a problem with it. But the new managers attitude was appearing to become cold towards him. But he put this up to being unfamiliar with his work ethic. During the two visit that the new manager came to his store, the till was short. The only time that the till was short was the two times when this new manager came to observe the store. The till was short exactly $50.00 each time. At the second visit, the manager stated that he had seen one of the employees take this fifty dollars and pass it off to an alleged customer in the hallway. Mr. Schultz stated that he was disturbed by this but wasn’t sure what he could do about it. A few days later the manager came back into the store and told him that he was going to be let go, because he could not control his till. He stated that they also told him that they didn’t trust him any longer with the money, even with the increase in sales at the store did not matter. Mr. Schultz stated that he found out shortly afterwards that everyone that he had hired in the store during his time there had been fired, except for the employee that had allegedly taken the fifty dollars. He stated that he thought that this was very odd considering that was the reason he was let go. He noted that this was a while ago, and one could say that this was in Mishawaka and not in South Bend, but he believes that it was at best naïve, and worst disingenuous to assume that things are different now. He stated that he had nowhere to go and there was no recourse because of Indiana’s employment laws and there was nobody to report to. Anybody in the same situation now, would have no recourse either. Mr. Schultz stated that the no special rights stickers being worn tonight are hypocritical. No matter how much political jargon or legal technicality or psychological studies that they have done, the opposition to this is primarily religious. Religion is a protected class, so to say that GLBT’s are asking for special rights when everyone else enjoys these rights is quite hypocritical. What is being asked tonight is to protect their very special rights to discriminate against GLBT’s , who either subscribe or conform to their religion. In a way this is religious persecution, because he does not agree with them, he doesn’t think that he should lose his job because he does not agree with someone else’s religion. As a Christian, he posed the question to those that are basing this amendment on their faith, if they think of the GLBT community as the least of your brothers and sisters among them, how do you want to say how you treated them. George Garner, 112 Franklin Place, South Bend, Indiana, thanked Councilmember Pfeifer for sharing her experiences and how they relate to being an African American Woman. He indicated that he cannot relate, because he is a straight white male, age 18- 35. He noted that the majority of people in the audience cannot relate to those experiences, because they didn’t have those experiences in life growing up. Mr. Garner stated that he is here tonight to speak in favor of stopping discrimination in any form and urged the Council to vote favorably on this amendment. rd Maria Melendez, 938 S. 23 Street, South Bend, Indiana, stated that she is a heterosexual citizen of the City of South Bend and that it really pains her to know that saying that raises her creditability. She stated that it pains her to think that if she stood before the Council and begun her speak by saying she was a lesbian or bi-sexual citizen of South Bend that that would mean something different about her statement. If your answer is yes to this for any reason, then right away that is the potential for discrimination. There has been evidence and testimony to that kind of discrimination here tonight. She stated that the reason that she is speaking in favor of Bill 29-06 is because that it should not be the case that she has the added privilege right now as a heterosexual. This bill is not about being gay or leading a gay lifestyle it is about protecting Americans, its about standing up to protect Americans against discrimination. She stated that the Council can be part of South Bend’s important history of being a community that is full of leadership and vision. She noted that it was her observation about her neighbors and her fellow citizens that oppose this bill, are better dressed than many of her neighbors and fellow citizens that are in favor of this bill. She noted that there are many wonderful suits, ties, women on the opposition have very elaborately done hair. She noted that there is a point 17