Laserfiche WebLink
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 />