Our sham anti-discrimination oridinance is effectively an anti-civil rights ordinance.
Why the so-called LGBT leadership in Dallas celebrated this in 2002 is that they have no expectations and are willing to grovel from crumbs and a pat on the head.
Subscriptions are free.
Review of our (anti) LGBT civil rights ordinance
The ordinance was passed on Wednesday, May 1, 2002, as reported in the Dallas Voice, Friday, May 3, 2002, Vol. 19, No. 1, Ed. 1, pages 1, 10.
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth616140/
To call the Dallas LGBT ordinance a civil rights ordinance is a travesty, since it is about shutting down redress for civil rights, instituting a dubious procedure, and it has a trivial ending. That is why I am going to call is the LGBT anti-civil rights ordinance.
The ordinance is full of features to weaken it.
The entire text will be part of this post and will be at the end. Readers of this post can review it themselves.
This ordinance has many small flaws, but also some major ones and to start with they will be reviewed first.
NOTICE: The author isn’t a lawyer and is reviewing the Dallas ordinance the best he can. The author invites good faith assistance in reviewing the code. This post is to start a process of critical review and raise questions and make comparisons to other anti-discrimination ordinances by other cities.
Summary List of Major Flaws
[1] The ordinance specifically removes the victim from receiving justice through the courts. It states:
SEC. 46-3. INTERPRETATION AND EFFECT.
This chapter does not create a private cause of action, nor does it create any right or remedy that is the same or substantially equivalent to the remedies provided under federal or state law. (Ord. 24927)
The victim of discrimination has no right to go to court and sue for damages.
[2] There is no restitution for the victim at the end of a rather involved procedure. If the city finally goes to court, the city can, but the victim can’t, the guilty verdict results in a fine which goes to the city. (See Sec. 46-3 in point #3.)
If you lost a week’s wages you won’t get compensation.
[3] The fine is only $500 for whether it was one offense or a dozen and regardless of the consequences of the discrimination.
SEC. 46-13. OFFENSES AND PENALTIES.
SEC. 46-13. OFFENSES AND PENALTIES.
A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly violates a provision of this chapter or if he intentionally or knowingly obstructs or prevents compliance with this chapter. An offense committed under this chapter is punishable by a fine of not less than $200 or more than $500. (Ord. 24927)
[4] A rather large fraction of businesses are excepted from the ordinance.
(9) EMPLOYER means any person who has 15 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, and includes any agent of such a person. The term does not include a bona fide private membership club (other than a labor organization) that is exempt from taxation under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended. [Boldface added.]
Fifteen or more is a rather large number. Bureau of labor statistics would indicate that about one out of five employees would not be “protected” even by this flimsy anti-civil rights ordinance.
From the Bureau of Labor statistics.
https://www.bls.gov/charts/county-employment-and-wages/employment-by-size.htm
[5] There is no human rights commission to investigate the case. That is a body with expertise in investigating discrimination and understanding regarding discrimination.
[6] The City Manager is in charge. Not a judge which is accountable to a code of procedures and ethics in the court room, but a person who manages the city, and not necessarily having any expertise in dealing with the issues of discrimination unlike persons appointed to a human rights commission who would have expertise and would be accountable specifically on the issue of human rights.
SEC. 46-2. ADMINISTRATION.
The city manager is responsible for administering and implementing this chapter. The city manager may delegate the authority to receive, investigate, and conciliate complaints under this chapter to an administrator or other city employees. (Ord. 24927) [Bold face added.]
Summary of Procedure.
[1] The complaint of discrimination is assigned to an administrator who is designated by the City Manager. No qualifications are specified.
ARTICLE III.
ENFORCEMENT.
SEC. 46-9. PROCEDURES FOR FILING COMPLAINTS.
(a) Any person who claims to have been injured by an unlawful practice may file a complaint with the administrator. A complaint may also be filed by the administrator if the administrator has reasonable cause to believe that a person has committed an unlawful practice. A complaint must be filed within 180 calendar days after an alleged unlawful practice has occurred. [Bold face added.]
[2] The administrator will do an investigation of the complaint and decide whether the complaint is true and whether it is covered by the ordinance.
(a) Upon the filing of a complaint, the administrator shall commence a prompt and full investigation to determine the facts behind the complaint and whether there is reasonable cause to believe an unlawful practice was committed, except that no investigation may commence if, after personally reviewing the allegations with the complainant, the administrator determines that the complaint does not come within the scope of this chapter. Within 15 days after determining that a particular complaint does not come within the scope of this chapter, the administrator shall give the complainant a clear and concise explanation of the reasons why it does not and take no further action on the complaint. [Bold face added.]
[3] Then the administrator investigates the discrimination complaint seeking the voluntary cooperation of the relevant parties, including the parties that discriminated. The administrator doesn’t have the power to subpoena anything.
(b) In connection with any investigation of a complaint filed under this chapter, the administrator shall seek the voluntary cooperation of any person to: [Bold face added.]
(1) obtain access to premises, records, documents, individuals, and any other possible source of information;
(2) examine, record, and copy necessary materials; and
(3) take and record testimony or statements of any person reasonably necessary for the furtherance of the investigation.
[4] If someone doesn’t want to volunteer information the administrator needs to go to the City Council to get a subpoena to compel someone to give items to the administrator.
(c) The administrator may, at the administrator's discretion or at the request of the respondent or the complainant, request the city council to issue a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum to compel the attendance of a witness or the production of relevant materials or documents pursuant to its power under Chapter III, Section 12 of the city charter. Violation of a subpoena issued under this subsection is punishable by the same fines and penalties for contempt as are authorized before the county court. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942)
[5] Then there is a step called conciliation. Which is done in secret and kept secret. However, as it will be explained, this ordinance has no real ability to achieve a “just resolution.”
(a) During or after the investigation, but subsequent to the mailing of the notice of the complaint to the respondent, the administrator shall, if it appears that an unlawful practice has occurred, attempt to conciliate the complaint. In conciliating a complaint, the administrator shall try to achieve a just resolution and obtain assurances that the respondent will satisfactorily remedy any violation of the complainant's rights and take action to ensure the elimination of both present and future unlawful practices in compliance with this chapter. Nothing said or done during the course of conciliation may be made public or be used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding under this chapter, without the written consent of all persons concerned. [Bold face added.]
[6] If no conciliation agreement is achieved, the complaint goes to the City Attorney for prosecution.
[7] The City Attorney decides whether an unlawful practice occurred and the fact are sufficient to start a criminal action in the municipal court. Since this is a “criminal action” the rules for evidence is for a criminal, rather than a civil prosecution.
(b) If the city attorney determines that reasonable cause exists that an unlawful practice occurred and the facts are sufficient to warrant the initiation of a criminal action in municipal court, then the city attorney shall notify the administrator, who shall then provide written notification to the complainant and the respondent that the complaint will be prosecuted in municipal court. If the city attorney determines that there is no reasonable cause that an unlawful practice occurred or that the facts are insufficient to warrant the initiation of a criminal action in municipal court, the city attorney shall notify the administrator, who shall then dismiss the complaint.
[8] The City Attorney then goes to municipal court for a trial.
[9] If the prosecution is successful the penalty is no more than $500. There is no restitution.
SEC. 46-13. OFFENSES AND PENALTIES.
A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly violates a provision of this chapter or if he intentionally or knowingly obstructs or prevents compliance with this chapter. An offense committed under this chapter is punishable by a fine of not less than $200 or more than $500. (Ord. 24927)
Let’s examine how this ordinance avoids justice.
Let’s take a hypothetical case. A Gay person is fired, with his boss saying, “We don’t employ fags here!” and doesn’t find a job for two weeks and loses $500 in wages for two 40-hour weeks and has expenses finding another job. He might have really had to scramble to pay for his rent or maybe got an eviction notice.
[1] He can’t go to court to sue for lost wages and some type of punitive damages and have his case heard by a judge in a court room with long established judicial and ethical procedures with a lawyer of his choosing who is a civil rights lawyer. If the judge has possible bias in the case, he can be asked to recuse himself from the case.
There is no Human Rights Commission, a body of expertise in investigating and litigating civil rights issues since Dallas doesn’t have a Human Rights Commission.
Instead it will go to a City Manager without litigation experience in civil rights to be handed off to an administrator, whose qualifications aren’t specified and not chosen by the victim. They both easily could be homophobic and the victim of discrimination would have no recourse to reject the selection of the administrator. There is no recourse to reject the attorney handling the case. There is no basis for asking persons with potential bias to recuse themselves.
Remember this ordinance was passed in 2002, but the City of Dallas raided the Club Baths in Dallas in 2010 and refuses to release records in 2024. One of the City Council members is also a pastor for a homophobic church. When I started checking in 2023, I found that the Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson’s office was selecting really vicious homophobes to give the invocations at city hall. Links to reports on these issues of homophobia in the City of Dallas will be after this review, but before the full text of the Ordinance. Your administrator might be someone who is homophobic or is influenced
[2] Records are expected to be voluntarily handed over, even from the homophobe perpetrator who has every incentive to not cooperate.
The administrator has to appeal to the Dallas City Council for a subpoena. If it was a court case, your attorney could subpoena the homophobe as an officer of the court.
With the City of Dallas ordinance, an investigation will be delayed until it gets on the City Council agenda. Perhaps a subcommittee will need to review it.
The City Council is a place of contesting political forces and lobbyist influence.
If the homophobic perpetrator has any type of political influence or is supported by any politically influential group or organization, like our many homophobic megachurches, and it is inconvenient for the City Council to issue the subpoena it will likely not be issued.
Of course, it won’t be refused without covering rationalizations. There will be nitpicking of the case, nitpicking of the subpoena, maybe members will want to see more information or more investigation or there will be claims the information isn’t necessary or something else. Maybe it will be pushed to the next meeting for a decision.
We can’t expect that the administrator will want to alienate the City Council either with a subpoena that the City Council doesn’t want to pass. Maybe the administrator will decide that he doesn’t need certain pieces of information.
[3] There are two different places in the ordinance in which the investigation can be shut down without recourse by the victim.
The administrator can conclude his investigation and shutdown the procedure at any time.
The Dallas city attorney can decide not to prosecute the case in municipal court.
In both cases they have to issue a report as to why. No one in the Dallas city administration has to approve the dismissal of the complaint. There is no human rights commission to review the dismissal.
There are no established ethical or professional guidelines for dismissing the complaint.
The victim has no recourse to refuse the dismissal. The victim isn’t solicited as to his judgement of the dismissal. Even if somehow the victim did convince the City of Dallas not to dismiss the complaint, it would go to the same city administration that wanted to dismiss it in the first place. There is no review board for the decisions of the administrator or the attorney.
With a court procedure, the judge has to make a decision according to the law within judicial ethics and established jurisprudence. If the victim feels that the judge’s decision is wrong, the victim can appeal the decision to a higher court. The judge is a public official and subject to review and also the judge’s actions are part of an official record.
[4] Conciliation. This is a secret process. You might be bullied to accept some token adjustment. The whole thing might be gross, but you can’t say anything. You have to meet with the homophobes and perhaps his attorneys.
Basically the whole thing is a sham. The worst the homophobe might have to pay in municipal court is $500 and they might just pay the fine and walk away, whereas the victim lost $1,000 in wages and had to look for a job. The victim won’t collect any of that fine, it goes to the city because it is a fine.
With the fine only being $500, there really isn’t any reason for the homophobic perpetrator to offer anything except a trivial amount or nothing at all.
The victim won’t get his lost wages or anything in regards to what expenses he might have had in looking for a job. Fear of a $500 fine won’t be an incentive to recompense the victim of $1000 lost wages. There certainly won’t be money to compensate for throwing the victims life into turmoil or the stress.
The victim will have to consider all the effort that will be put into the complaint plus minor expenses versus getting on with life and overcoming the homophobic discrimination. The so-called Dallas anti-discrimination ordinance is just something that will be dragging him down and potentially further humiliate him.
The biggest challenge that the homophobic perpetrator will face is not visibly snickering into the administrator’s face.
[5] If it goes to court, the homophobic perpetrator might just pay the fine without a trial. Evidence won’t be presented, testimony won’t be made, so the fine will be paid and there won’t be any official record.
The ordinance doesn’t specify that the administrator’s decision or the City attorney’s decision to go to trial will be published either.
For all the effort that the victim might have put into this, all the time put into it, the victim gets nothing. A fine goes to the city.
Other cities’ ordinances are instructive.
City Los Angeles
This shows how totally worthless the Dallas ordinance is.
SEC. 51.00. TITLE AND PURPOSE.
This article shall be known as the “Los Angeles Civil and Human Rights Ordinance.” The City of Los Angeles has benefited, and will continue to benefit, from the economic, cultural and educational contributions of a wide range of groups and communities who are all too often targets of abuse and discrimination.
The City of Los Angeles has a duty to protect and promote public welfare within its boundaries and to protect residents and visitors against discrimination, threats and retaliation based on a real or perceived status. Such discriminatory and prejudicial practices pose a substantial threat to the health, safety and welfare of our community. This ordinance tasks the Commission on Civil Rights and the Civil, Human Rights and Equity Department to investigate complaints of discrimination and enforce against violators. By holding businesses and individuals accountable for discriminatory behavior, the City will make clear that discrimination will not be tolerated. (Amended by Ord. No. 187,032, Eff. 6/14/21.)
[They have a human rights commission!]
SEC. 51.06. INDIVIDUAL REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS.
A. Civil Enforcement. A Complainant may bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against any person violating this article and shall be entitled to such legal or equitable relief as may be appropriate, including, without limitation, damages, restitution, injunctive relief, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. Nothing in this section shall preclude, or otherwise limit a civil action by the City, or a separate or criminal prosecution under the Municipal Code or state law. Jeopardy shall not attach as a result of any administrative or civil enforcement action taken pursuant to this article. The right of a Complainant to bring a civil action under this section shall not be waived by private agreement. [Bold face added.]
[Contrast this to the Dallas ordinance which precludes going to court and provides no means of going to court. Further the victim can get restitution and injunctive relief, as well as attorney’s fees.]
The following section provides more contrast.
SEC. 51.07. PENALTIES AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS.
(Amended by Ord. No. 187,032, Eff. 6/14/21.)
A. Administrative Penalties, Compensatory Penalties, and Corrective Actions. In addition to any of the remedies and penalties set forth in this article or any other law, where the General Manager determines that a Respondent has violated Section 51.03 or Section 51.04, the General Manager shall impose an administrative penalty. The General Manager also may impose Compensatory Penalties unless the Complainant has been previously awarded punitive damages in a civil case arising out of the same act or transaction. The cumulative amount of the penalties imposed shall not exceed $125,000, except upon a finding by the General Manager that a violation was the result of a Respondent’s harassing or violent act, in which case the cumulative amount of the penalties shall not exceed $250,000. The General Manager may also order a Respondent to undertake corrective actions to remedy the violation or prevent future violations. Such administrative penalties, Compensatory Penalties, and corrective actions shall be set forth in the notice of violation. [Bold face added.]
[The penalties can go up to $125,000 in the Los Angeles ordinance, not a measly $500 wrist slap as in Dallas. Also, the homophobic perpetrator has to take corrective actions to remedy the violation and prevent future violations. Notice that there are compensatory penalties for the victim.]
B. Criminal Penalties. Any person who willfully resists, obstructs or interferes with the Commission, the General Manager, or the Hearing Officer in the performance of any duty under this article shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and be punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 and by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months. [Bold face added.]
[They aren’t talking about voluntary compliance with the investigation, they are talking about fines or jailing for not cooperating. This ordinance doesn’t intend on needing the Los Angeles City Council to get involved.]
B. Payments to City, Due Date, Late Payment Penalty. Administrative penalties and Compensatory Penalties shall be due and payable to the City within 30 calendar days from the date of the General Manager’s notice of violation. Failure to timely pay a penalty will result in the assessment of a late fee, assessed daily at a rate of 7 percent per annum of the outstanding amount of the penalty and late fees, if any. The City may collect any unpaid penalty, including the late fee, by means of a civil action, injunctive relief, specific performance and the recordation of a lien against real property in accordance with applicable law. Any administrative penalties recovered pursuant to this section shall be paid to the City. Any Compensatory Penalties recovered pursuant to this section shall be paid to the Complainant.
[Unlike the City of Dallas they don’t intend on fooling around.]
D. Severity of Penalties. The General Manager shall impose penalties for violations of this article only after considering factors, including, but not limited to: 1) the extent of harm caused by the violation; 2) the nature and persistence of the violation; 3) the length of time over which the violation occurs; 4) past violations; 5) any action taken to mitigate the violation; and 6) the financial burden to the Respondent. [Boldface added.]
[The penalties aren’t cap’ed as some minimal level. Also, the extent of victimization is factored into the penalty.]
Chicago
They have a human rights commission.
https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/cchr.html
Online instructions of how to file a complaint.
https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/cchr/general/CCHRBrochureMay2019.pdf
This is the statement on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Discrimination by the Chicago Commission on Human Rights.
Penalties for violations of the Human Rights Ordinance or the Fair Housing Ordinance include:
• Fines of $100 to $1,000 per incident, paid to the City
• Damages and attorney fees, paid to the complaining party
• An injunction ordering specific actions to eliminate discriminatory practices
Discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity may also violate state or federal laws. A finding of any sort of discrimination may affect the current licensure of a business by the City of Chicago as well as a City contractor or vendor status.
[The victim gets damages and attorney fees. There are injunctions to keep the homophobe perpetrator from continuing to discriminate. Penalties go up to $1,000, but are per incident. The maximum penalty in this case isn’t so important, since the victim can get damages and attorney fees. Also, having attorney fees paid, make it possible to afford a lawyer. Also, discriminating could impact a discriminatory business’ license.]
ARTICLE I: GENERAL HUMAN RIGHTS*
CHAPTER 6-10
GENERAL HUMAN RIGHTS6-10-120 Violation – Penalty.
Unless another fine or penalty is specifically provided in this Code, any person who violates this Article I of Title 6 as determined by this Commission shall be fined not less than $5,000.00 and not more than $10,000.00 for each offense. In addition, any City licensee who violates this chapter or any rule promulgated thereunder may be subject to license discipline pursuant to Section 4-4-280 of this Code. Every day that a violation shall continue shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
(Prior code § 199-12; Added Coun. J. 12-21-88, p. 23526; Amend Coun. 7-8-98, p. 72891; Amend Coun. J. 11-26-13, p. 68764, § 2; Amend Coun. J. 11-5-14, p. 95804, § 4; Amend Coun. J. 4-15-15, p. 106130, § 6; Amend Coun. J. 4-27-22, p. 46382, § 11; Amend Coun. J. 11-7-22, p. 54984, § 8)
[A business with license from the city could be disciplined regarding being a license holder. The fine is $5,000 for each offense, not what would be pocket change for a business, $500.]
Atlanta
Sec. 94-120. - Prosecution of ordinance violations in Atlanta Municipal Court.
Share Link to sectionPrint sectionDownload (Docx) of sectionsEmail sectionCompare versions
(a)
In addition to or in lieu of filing a complaint with the human relations commission, an aggrieved person may seek prosecution of alleged violations of the human relations ordinance in Atlanta Municipal Court as in other cases of alleged ordinance violations pursuant to section 62-26, et seq., of the Code of Ordinances.
(b)
In the event that the human relations commission has obtained a settlement or conciliation agreement with the consent of the aggrieved party, the basis for an ordinance violation is limited to the enforcement of the terms of the agreement or settlement.
(c)
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to invalidate or restrict or deny any right or remedy any person may have under state or federal law or preclude any cause of action in court otherwise provided for the violation of any person's civil rights.
(Ord. No. 2000-79, § 1, 12-12-00; Ord. No. 2001-20, § 1, 3-13-01; Ord. No. 2002-70, § 9, 9-24-02)
[They have a human rights commission. The victim can go to court.]
Miami
I wasn’t able to get into the code, but I found this webpage of a law firm which deals with civil rights violations. This is from the webpage for Miami of the law firm Phillips and Associates, link at the end of this section.
Local Laws
However, it is illegal under the Miami-Dade County Human Rights Ordinance, which is found in Chapter 11A, for employers to discriminate in employment based on employee sexual orientation. Under this ordinance, an employee can file a discrimination complaint with the assistance of a Miami sexual orientation discrimination attorney.
The Commission on Human Rights Board is the quasi-judicial and advisory board that enforces this law. The Board is made up of 26 members, serving in a voluntary capacity, whom the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners has appointed to serve eight-year terms. The Board’s staff conducts intake, mediation, investigation, conciliation, administrative hearings, technical assistance, and outreach.
If you are aggrieved by the Board’s Director’s recommended final order related to a sexual orientation discrimination claim, you can ask for a hearing before a panel of the Commission within 15 days of the Director’s findings. Within 180 days of your filing a complaint with the Director, if the Director was not able to get voluntary compliance, you can ask for a notice of right-to-sue. If it is issued, the jurisdiction of the Director and Board is terminated. Within 90 days of receiving that notice, you can sue for sexual orientation discrimination. If the court determines that sexual orientation discrimination has occurred it can order the practice prohibited and award, not only injunctive relief, but also actual and punitive damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and other proper relief.
[Again, they have a human rights commission, you can sue, and you can get damages and attorney’s fees. Also, having attorney fees paid, make it possible to afford a lawyer.]
The so-called LGBT leadership of Dallas claimed this ineffectual ordinance was a great accomplishment.
The ordinance was passed on Wednesday, May 1, 2002, as reported in the Dallas Voice, Friday, May 3, 2002, Vol. 19, No. 1, Ed. 1, pages 1, 10, in an article titled, "Big dayfor our community,” by David Webb. The vote was 13 to 2 for the ordinance. It was scheduled to go into effect Oct. 1, 2002. The article reports:
Leaders of the Dallas’ gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community rejoiced Wednesday as the City Council passed a nondiscrimination ordinance forbidding bias based on sexual orientation or gener identity.
….
“I’m almost beyond words,” said Steve Atkinson, former president of the Dallas Gay and Lesbian Alliance. “It’s just so wonderful. It is such a big day for our community.”
The then current president of the Dallas Gay and Lesbian Alliance, Maria Rubio, was reported fighting back tears.
The ordinance was written by Dallas Assistant City Attorney David Schulze and not by any LGBT legal organization which certain would have suggested a much better ordinance.
Dallas City Council member Mark Housewright gave away the reality of the ordinaces substantialness when he is quoted as saying.
“Even if it is just making a statement, it’s an important one.”
How important it is in the year 2002 when other cities have passed real anti-discrimination ordinances and the Dallas City Council could have passed an ordinance that was substantial is questionable.
Further, when a sham ordinance is passed it sends messages also. To businesses and employers and landlords it send a message that it is just a sham and don’t worry about it. It also sends a message that the LGBT leadership in Dallas will accept the most worthless thing as some accomplishment and “rejoice.” That there is no fight in them and they are totally groveling.
The Dallas Police realized there was no commitment to human rights for Gays when they raided the Club baths in 2010 and arrested eleven men.
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth616140/
Since this sham ordinance has been passed in 2002, there has been no effort to revise it or give it substance and no effort to get a human rights commission.
The whole point of the ordinance was to say that Dallas had an LGBT anti-discriminatin ordinance, so they appeared to be a modern world city, but not have any impact or controversy develop from it.
For the Dallas LGBT “leadership” any triviality had to be represented as great, because their political program of craving establishment approval and avoiding anything they fear might offend the establishment has to be seen as successful.
Conclusion
It is time for Dallas to get a real anti-discrimination ordinance that isn’t a sham.
I will be looking to get some legal help to review and compare codes.
This report was included in the post,
Background Reports.
2010 bath house raids.
Zarin Gracey
The senior pastor of Zarin Gracey’s church where he is an executive pastor.
Collection of posts regarding the invocation speakers.
https://dallasgayliberation.substack.com/p/collection-of-posts-regarding-anti
Sexual Orientation discrimination ordinance
The Dallas City Code
CHAPTER 46
UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES RELATING TO
SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY AND EXPRESSION
ARTICLE I.
GENERAL.
Sec. 46-1. Declaration of policy.
Sec. 46-2. Administration.
Sec. 46-3. Interpretation and effect.
Sec. 46-4. Definitions.
Sec. 46-5. Exceptions.
ARTICLE II.
UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES.
Sec. 46-6. Unlawful employment practices.
Sec. 46-6.1. Unlawful public accommodation practices.
Sec. 46-7. Unlawful housing practices.
Sec. 46-8. Unlawful intimidation, retaliation, and coercion.
ARTICLE III.
ENFORCEMENT.
Sec. 46-9. Procedures for filing complaints.
Sec. 46-10. Investigation.
Sec. 46-11. Conciliation.
Sec. 46-12. Disposition of a complaint.
Sec. 46-13. Offenses and penalties.
ARTICLE I.
GENERAL.
SEC. 46-1. DECLARATION OF POLICY.
(a) It is the policy of the city of Dallas to bring about through fair, orderly, and lawful procedures the opportunity for every person to obtain employment, access to all places of public accommodation, and housing, without regard to sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. The city of Dallas is proud of the diversity of its employees, as reflected in Section 34-35 of this Code, and is
proud of the diversity of its citizens. The city strongly encourages all entities within the city, including those who are excepted from the requirements of this chapter, to recognize the rights of every individual to work and earn wages through gainful employment, to obtain and enjoy goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations in all places of public accommodation, and to obtain housing.
(b) The denial or deprivation of these rights because of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity and expression is detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Dallas and is within the power and responsibility of the city to prevent. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942)
SEC. 46-2. ADMINISTRATION.
The city manager is responsible for administering and implementing this chapter. The city manager may delegate the authority to receive, investigate, and conciliate complaints under this chapter to an administrator or other city employees. (Ord. 24927)
SEC. 46-3. INTERPRETATION AND EFFECT.
This chapter does not create a private cause of action, nor does it create any right or remedy that is the same or substantially equivalent to the remedies provided under federal or state law. (Ord. 24927)
SEC. 46-4. DEFINITIONS.
(a) In this chapter:
(1) ADMINISTRATOR means the person designated by the city manager to receive, investigate, and conciliate complaints
under this chapter and includes the administrator's designated representatives.
(2) CITY means the city of Dallas, Texas.
(3) COMPLAINANT means a person, including the administrator, who files a complaint under this chapter.
(4) CONCILIATION means the attempted resolution of issues raised in a complaint filed under this chapter, or raised in the investigation of the complaint, through informal negotiations involving the complainant, the respondent, and the administrator.
(5) CONCILIATION AGREEMENT means a written agreement setting forth the resolution of the issues in a conciliation.
(6) DISCRIMINATION means any direct or indirect exclusion, distinction, segregation, limitation, refusal, denial, or other differentiation in the treatment of a person or persons because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.
(7) DWELLING means:
(A) any building, structure, or part of a building or structure that is occupied as, or designed and intended for occupancy as, a
residence for one or more persons; and
(B) any vacant land that is offered for sale or lease for the construction or location of any building, structure, or part of a
building or structure designed and intended for occupancy as a residence for one or more persons.
(8) EMPLOYEE means any individual employed by an employer. The term does not include an elected official.
(9) EMPLOYER means any person who has 15 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, and includes any agent of such a person. The term does not include a bona fide private membership club (other than a labor organization) that is exempt from taxation under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1954, as amended.
(10) EMPLOYMENT AGENCY means any person, and any agent of a person, who regularly undertakes, with or without
compensation, to procure:
(A) employees for an employer; or
(B) opportunities for a person to work for an employer.
(11) GENDER IDENTITY AND EXPRESSION means "gender identity and expression" as defined in Chapter 34 of the Dallas City Code.
(12) LABOR ORGANIZATION means a labor organization and any of its agents, and includes:
(A) any organization, agency, or employee representation committee, group, association, or plan in which employees participate and that exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with employers concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours, or other terms or conditions of employment; and
(B) any conference, general committee, joint or system board, or joint council so engaged that and Gender Identity and Expression is subordinate to a national or international labor organization.
(13) PERSON means one or more individuals, corporations, partnerships, associations, labor organizations, legal representatives, mutual companies, joint stock companies, trusts, unincorporated organizations, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, receivers, fiduciaries,
and other legal entities.
(14) PLACE OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION means any of the following establishments if they are open to the general public and, for compensation, offer any product, service, or facility to the general public:
(A) Any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment that provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment:
(i) located within a building that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of the establishment as a residence; or
(ii) in which the majority of the occupants are permanent residents and maintain their fixed place of domicile in the establishment.
(B) Any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises, including, but not limited to, any such facility located on the premises of a retail establishment or gasoline station.
(C) Any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment.
(D) Any bar, tavern, pub, drinking establishment, or facility where alcoholic beverages are served.
(E) Any retail or wholesale establishment selling any kind of goods or services.
(F) Any public conveyance, including stations and terminals.
(15) RELIGION means all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief.
(16) RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION means:
(A) a religious corporation, association, or society; or
(B) a school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of learning, if:
(i) the institution is, in whole or in substantial part, controlled, managed, owned, or supported by a religion, religious corporation, association, or society; or
(ii) the curriculum of the institution is directed toward the propagation of a religion.
(17) RENT means to lease, sublease, let, or otherwise grant for a consideration the right to occupy premises not owned by the occupant.
(18) RESPONDENT means a person identified in a complaint as having committed an unlawful practice under this chapter.
(19) SEXUAL ORIENTATION means "sexual orientation" as defined in Chapter 34 of the Dallas City Code.
(20) UNLAWFUL PRACTICE means a discriminatory act or practice relating to employment, public accommodations, or housing that is prohibited under this chapter.
(b) For purposes of this chapter, an individual's gender is determined solely by that individual's own perception of their gender. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942)
SEC. 46-5. EXCEPTIONS.
This chapter does not apply to:
(1) a religious organization;
(2) the United States government, any of its departments or agencies, or any corporation wholly owned by it; or
(3) the government of the State of Texas or any of its departments, agencies, or political subdivisions. (Ord. 24927)
ARTICLE II.
UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES.
SEC. 46-6. UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
(a) Employers. It is unlawful for an employer, because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression:
(1) to fail or refuse to hire, or to discharge, any person;
(2) to discriminate against any person with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment; or
(3) to limit, segregate, or classify employees or applicants for employment in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive a person of employment or employment opportunities, or that would otherwise adversely affect a person's status as an employee.
(b) Employment agencies. It is unlawful for an employment agency:
(1) to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or to otherwise discriminate against, any person because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression; or
(2) to classify or refer for employment any person on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.
(c) Labor organizations. It is unlawful for a labor organization:
(1) to exclude or expel from its membership, or to otherwise discriminate against, any person because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression;
(2) to fail or refuse to refer for employment any person because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression;
(3) to limit, segregate, or classify its members or applicants for membership in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive a person of employment or employment opportunities, or that would otherwise adversely affect a person's status as an employee or as an applicant for employment; or
(4) to cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against a person in violation of this chapter.
(d) Training programs. It is unlawful for an employer, a labor organization, or a joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining (including on-the-job training programs) to discriminate against any person because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression in the admission to, or employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or other training.
(e) Notices and advertisements.
(1) It is unlawful for an employer to print or publish, or cause to be printed or published, any notice or advertisement relating to employment by the employer that indicates any preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.
(2) It is unlawful for an employment agency to print or publish, or cause to be printed or published, any notice or advertisement relating to membership in or any classification or referral for employment by the employment agency that indicates any preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.
(3) It is unlawful for a joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining (including on the-job training programs) to print or publish, or cause to be printed or published, any notice or advertisement relating to admission to, or employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or other training by the joint labor-management committee that indicates any preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.
(4) Nothing in this subsection prohibits a notice or advertisement from indicating a preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity and expression when sexual orientation or gender identity and expression is a bona fide occupational qualification for employment.
(f) Exception. This section does not apply to, and does not require, the provision of employee benefits to a person for the benefit of the person's domestic partner. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942 )
SEC. 46-6.1. UNLAWFUL PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION PRACTICES.
(a) Discrimination in public accommodations. It is unlawful for any owner, proprietor, or lessee of any place of public
accommodation, because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression:
(1) to directly or indirectly exclude, segregate, limit, refuse, or deny to any person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, benefits, privileges, services, or goods offered to the general public at that place; or
(2) to circulate, issue, display, post, mail, or otherwise publish a statement, advertisement, or sign indicating that:
(A) a person will be denied accommodations, advantages, facilities, benefits, privileges, services, or goods at that place; or
(B) the patronage or presence of a person at that place is objectionable, unwelcome, unacceptable, undesirable, or unsolicited.
(b) Defenses. It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the refusal to admit a person to a place of public accommodation or the expulsion of a person from a place of public accommodation was required by law.
(c) Exceptions. This section does not apply to:
(1) a hotel, restaurant, bar, lounge, nightclub, cabaret, theater, bowling alley, skating rink, or golf course when the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and services are restricted to members of a club and their guests; or
(2) any bona fide social, fraternal, educational, civic, political, or religious organization, when the profits of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and services (above reasonable and necessary expenses) are solely for the benefit of the organization. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942)
SEC. 46-7. UNLAWFUL HOUSING PRACTICES.
(a) Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing.
(1) It is unlawful for a person, because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression:
(A) to refuse to negotiate with a person for the sale or rental of a dwelling or to otherwise deny or make unavailable a dwelling to a person;
(B) to refuse to sell or rent a dwelling to a person who has made a bona fide offer for the dwelling;
(C) to discriminate against a person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of the sale or rental of a dwelling or in the provision of services or facilities in connection with the sale or rental of a dwelling; or
(D) to represent to a person that a dwelling is not available for inspection, sale, or rental when the dwelling is in fact so available.
(2) It is unlawful for a person:
(A) to make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published, any notice, statement, or advertisement relating to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity and expression or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination; or
(B) for profit, to induce or attempt to induce a person to sell or rent, or to not sell or rent, a dwelling by representations that a person or persons of a particular sexual orientation or with a particular gender identity or expression are present in or may enter into the neighborhood.
(b) Discrimination in housing financing. It is unlawful for any bank, building and loan association, insurance company, or other person whose business, in whole or in part, consists of the making of real estate loans to, on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression:
(1) deny any person a loan or other financial assistance for the purchase, construction, improvement, repair, or maintenance of a dwelling; or
(2) discriminate against any person in the fixing of the amount, interest rate, duration, or other terms or conditions of a loan or other financial assistance for the purchase, construction, improvement, repair, or maintenance of a dwelling.
(c) Discrimination in providing brokerage services. It is unlawful for any person, because of sexual orientation or gender identity and expression:
(1) to deny another person access to, membership in, or participation in any multiple listing service, real estate brokers' organization, or other service, organization, or facility relating to the business of selling or renting dwellings; or
(2) to discriminate against another person in the terms or conditions of access to, membership in, or participation in any multiple listing service, real estate brokers' organization, or other service, organization, or facility relating to the business of selling or renting dwellings.
(d) Exceptions.
(1) This section does not apply to the following:
(A) The sale or rental of any single-family dwelling, if the owner:
(i) does not own an interest in or title to more than three single-family dwellings at one time, regardless of whether the
dwellings are located inside or outside of the city;
(ii) has resided in the dwelling within the 24-month period preceding the sale or rental of the dwelling; and
(iii) does not use the services or facilities of any real estate broker, agent, or salesman, or of any other person in the business of selling or renting dwellings, in connection with the sale or rental of the dwelling.
(B) The rental of a dwelling that is occupied or intended to be occupied by no more than four families living independently of each other, when the owner actually maintains and occupies part of the dwelling as a residence.
(C) The rental of a dwelling by a private organization only to its members, when the dwelling is owned, controlled, or managed by the organization for other than a commercial purpose and the rental of the dwelling is incidental to the organization's primary purpose.
(e) Nothing in this section prohibits conduct against a person because of the person's conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction of the illegal manufacture or distribution of a controlled substance under state or federal law. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942)
SEC. 46-8. UNLAWFUL INTIMIDATION, RETALIATION, AND COERCION.
It is unlawful for any person to discriminate against, harass, threaten, harm, damage, or otherwise penalize another person for opposing an unlawful practice, for filing a complaint, or for testifying, assisting, or participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this chapter. (Ord. 24927)
ARTICLE III.
ENFORCEMENT.
SEC. 46-9. PROCEDURES FOR FILING COMPLAINTS.
(a) Any person who claims to have been injured by an unlawful practice may file a complaint with the administrator. A complaint may also be filed by the administrator if the administrator has reasonable cause to believe that a person has committed an unlawful practice. A complaint must be filed within 180 calendar days after an alleged unlawful practice has occurred.
(b) A complaint must be in writing on a form provided by the administrator, made under oath or affirmation, and contain the following information:
(1) Name and address of the respondent.
(2) Name, address, and signature of the complainant.
(3) Date of occurrence of the alleged unlawful practice.
(4) Statement of the facts upon which the allegation of an unlawful practice are based.
(c) Promptly after the filing of a complaint, the administrator shall, in writing:
(1) notify the respondent named in the complaint that a complaint alleging the commission of an unlawful practice has been filed against the respondent;
(2) furnish a copy of the complaint to the respondent; and
(3) advise the respondent of the procedural rights and obligations of the respondent, including the right to file a written, signed, and verified informal answer to the complaint within 15 days after service of notice of the complaint.
(d) Not later than the 15th day after service of the notice and copy of the complaint, a respondent may file an answer to the complaint. The answer must be in writing, made under oath or affirmation, and contain the following information:
(1) Name, address, telephone number, and signature of the respondent or the respondent's attorney, if any.
(2) Concise statement of facts in response to the allegations in the complaint, including facts of any defense or exception. (Ord. 24927)
SEC. 46-10. INVESTIGATION.
(a) Upon the filing of a complaint, the administrator shall commence a prompt and full investigation to determine the facts behind the complaint and whether there is reasonable cause to believe an unlawful practice was committed, except that no investigation may commence if, after personally reviewing the allegations with the complainant, the administrator determines that the complaint does not come within the scope of this chapter. Within 15 days after determining that a particular complaint does not come within the scope of this chapter, the administrator shall give the complainant a clear and concise explanation of the reasons why it does not and take no further action on the complaint.
(b) In connection with any investigation of a complaint filed under this chapter, the administrator shall seek the voluntary cooperation of any person to:
(1) obtain access to premises, records, documents, individuals, and any other possible source of information;
(2) examine, record, and copy necessary materials; and
(3) take and record testimony or statements of any person reasonably necessary for the furtherance of the investigation.
(c) The administrator may, at the administrator's discretion or at the request of the respondent or the complainant, request the city council to issue a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum to compel the attendance of a witness or the production of relevant materials or documents pursuant to its power under Chapter III, Section 12 of the city charter. Violation of a subpoena issued under this subsection
is punishable by the same fines and penalties for contempt as are authorized before the county court. (Ord. Nos. 24927; 29942)
SEC. 46-11. CONCILIATION.
(a) During or after the investigation, but subsequent to the mailing of the notice of the complaint to the respondent, the administrator shall, if it appears that an unlawful practice has occurred, attempt to conciliate the complaint. In conciliating a complaint, the administrator shall try to achieve a just resolution and obtain assurances that the respondent will satisfactorily remedy any violation of the complainant's rights and take action to ensure the elimination of both present and future unlawful practices in compliance with this chapter. Nothing said or done during the course of conciliation may be made public or be used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding under this chapter, without the written consent of all persons concerned.
(b) A conciliation agreement executed under this section must be in writing in a form approved by the city attorney and must be signed and verified by the respondent and the complainant, subject to approval of the administrator who shall indicate approval by signing the agreement. A conciliation agreement is executed upon its signing and verification by all parties to the agreement.
(c) A party to an executed conciliation agreement may not be prosecuted in municipal court for the unlawful practice identified in the agreement unless the administrator determines that the agreement has been violated and notifies the city attorney in writing of the violation. (Ord. 24927)
SEC. 46-12. DISPOSITION OF A COMPLAINT.
(a) If, upon completion of an investigation of a complaint, the administrator determines that an unlawful practice has occurred and is unable to secure an acceptable conciliation agreement from the respondent, then the administrator shall refer the case to the city attorney for prosecution in municipal court. The administrator shall refer the entire file to the city attorney, who shall, after such referral, determine whether to proceed with prosecution of the complaint in municipal court.
(b) If the city attorney determines that reasonable cause exists that an unlawful practice occurred and the facts are sufficient to warrant the initiation of a criminal action in municipal court, then the city attorney shall notify the administrator, who shall then provide written notification to the complainant and the respondent that the complaint will be prosecuted in municipal court. If the city attorney
determines that there is no reasonable cause that an unlawful practice occurred or that the facts are insufficient to warrant the initiation of a criminal action in municipal court, the city attorney shall notify the administrator, who shall then dismiss the complaint.
(c) The administrator may dismiss a complaint:
(1) during the investigation and prior to referral to the city attorney when the administrator determines that:
(A) the complaint was not filed within the required time period;
(B) the location of the alleged unlawful practice is not within the city's jurisdiction;
(C) the alleged unlawful practice is not a violation of this chapter;
(D) the complainant refuses to cooperate with the administrator in the investigation of the complaint or enforcement of an executed conciliation agreement;
(E) the complainant cannot be located after the administrator has performed a reasonable search; or
(F) a conciliation agreement has been executed by the complainant and respondent; or
(2) after receipt of a statement from the city attorney that there is no reasonable cause that an unlawful practice occurred or that the facts are insufficient to warrant the initiation of a criminal action in municipal court.
(d) The administrator shall, in writing, notify the complainant and the respondent of the dismissal of a complaint and include a statement of the reasons for the dismissal. (Ord. 24927)
SEC. 46-13. OFFENSES AND PENALTIES.
A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly violates a provision of this chapter or if he intentionally or knowingly obstructs or prevents compliance with this chapter. An offense committed under this chapter is punishable by a fine of not less than $200 or more than $500. (Ord. 24927)