Bay County votes down LGBT ordinance 4-3, but county policy change may be on horizon

BAY CITY, MI — After more than two months of consideration, passionate input from the public and a series of votes, a proposed ordinance to ban discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals in all Bay County employment practices and contract agreements, has been voted down.

The Bay County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday, March 11, voted 4-3 against the ordinance during a County Board meeting held at the Bay County Building, 515 Center Ave. in downtown Bay City.

How they voted

Here is a look at how Bay County commissioners voted on Tuesday, March 11, on a proposed ordinance to ban discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals in all Bay County employment practices and contract agreements:

• Brandon Krause

, D-1st District — No

• Vaughn Begick

, R-3rd District — No

• Tom Herek

, D-5th District — No

• Michael Lutz

, D-7th District — No

• Ernie Krygier,

D-2nd District — Yes

• Kim Coonan

, D-4th District — Yes

• Don Tilley

, D-6th District — Yes

Those voting in favor of the ordinance are Ernie Krygier, D-2nd District; Kim Coonan, D-4th District; and Don Tilley, D-6th District. Those voting against are Brandon Krause, D-1st District; Vaughn Begick, R-3rd District; Tom Herek, D-5th District; and Michael Lutz, D-7th District.

Following the vote, Tilley, who introduced the ordinance on Jan. 7, expressed disappointment, but also noted optimism that changes might be made to Bay County's internal policies that would mimic those included in the ordinance.

"I did get the affirmation that we had discussed that the commissioners did give their word that they would support the policy change, and at the end of the day, that's the right thing to do at this time," said Tilley.

He went on to say he is glad the issue was in the public eye.

"We started a discussion that's been needed to be had in Bay County, the community, the state for a long time. I think there was a lot of great discourse, and we'll move forward from here."

Prior to taking a final vote on Tuesday, nearly 20 members of the public addressed the commission during the public comment section of the meeting. Representatives on both sides of the issue made passionate arguments urging commissioners to vote either "yes" or "no."

"I ask you not to vote for this ordinance just because it's good for gay peoples' rights, but because it's good for business in Bay County," said Hazel Park resident Joanna Hill, an intersex individual who now identifies as a transgender woman.

"The future is going to judge us all," Hill said. "But it's kind of like a train — you can stand beside the tracks, and watch the future go by, or you can get on board with the reality that LGBT rights is what the people, the United States wants … or you can stand on the tracks and get clobbered."

Joseph Smith of Monitor Township stood moments before, and said Christians like him have a right to their beliefs.

"Everyone will stand before God," he said. "I have nothing against these people, I love them, I pray for them, I have friends that I talk to on a regular basis that have chosen this lifestyle. I don't discriminate them, I don't hate them."

In the moments leading up to the vote, commissioners made statements supporting and criticizing the ordinance.

"This has been a lengthy process, and I'm glad we came together to discuss this," said Krause. "I agree that there is discrimination, there's not a doubt in my mind that there are people who are lesbian or transgender who are being discriminated against."

Still, Krause voted against the ordinance because he'd rather address the issue with a policy change, something he noted at previous meetings on the issue.

“We’re going to end up with a thousand little laws for every group that comes along," Krause said last week. "If we can cover something with an existing policy, that’s the way we’re going to go on that.”

On Tuesday, Begick said an ordinance banning discrimination is unprecedented for Bay County.

"What has changed? Why can't we add it to this?" Begick asked, referring to existing Bay County policy. "Why do we need an ordinance? That's setting a standard that was higher than before."

Coonan, who has supported the ordinance for the duration of its consideration by Bay County, said he feels the issue is "bigger than Bay County."

"We have a responsibility to do something to move this issue forward so that it can garner some additional support and hopefully put pressure on people to do something in Lansing" and on the national level, he said.

Lutz also spoke, and polled members of the audience to make his point.

"By a show of hands, how many people here do not work for the County of Bay and do not work for an employer that has a contract with the County of Bay? he asked."

A majority of the gallery members present raised their hands.

"That means the majority of people sitting in this audience, it will not affect at all," he said. "It doesn't reach that far."

Tilley said it is likely that commissioners will soon take up a discussion about potential policy changes regarding discrimination of LGBT individuals. He said that could start as soon as Tuesday, March 18, during the Bay County Personnel/Human Services Committee meeting, scheduled for 4 p.m. at the County Building.

Tilley said he thinks a majority of commissioners would vote in favor of such changes to existing policy, though he doesn't know exactly what those changes would look like at this time.

“A policy would protect employees that work for Bay County based on their sexual orientation," he said. "Again, it’s like the ordinance that I wanted to get done — it’s a right that every employee should be protected that works in Bay County.

Charin Davenport, who identifies as a transgender woman and who attended most of the meetings regarding the proposed ordinance, strongly supported its passing, but said policy changes to further protect LGBT individuals would be welcome. As she put it, the ordinance was shooting for the stars and a policy change would be like taking the moon.

Furthermore, Davenport said she was happy to see the LGBT community included in the discussion that came as a result of the proposed ordinance.

"They feel included, and that's not going to go away for a long, long time."

— Sam Easter is a general assignment reporter for The Bay City Times. He can be reached at seaster@mlive.com.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.