Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pap~ approved of the domestic partner registry. He said that it was clearly not a substitute for <br />marriage. He felt that it should be limited to only residents of the City of Eugene as nonresidents <br />could entail an increase in costs and providing the service to nonresidents would be governing <br />beyond the City's jurisdictional limits. <br /> <br />Regarding the possibility of a requirement for bathroom accommodations in the gender identity <br />sections of the ordinance, Mr. Pap~ appreciated that amendments would be introduced clarifying <br />that no additional restrooms would be required in existing or new facilities. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr commended the work that Mr. Rikhoff has done with the Human Rights Commission. He <br />expressed his belief that he does not have the right to dictate to others how they should live as long <br />as people are within the law. He expressed support for all of the components of the ordinance, but <br />that he was opposed to creating bathroom accommodations for transgendered individuals because <br />of privacy issues. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly emphasized that if he thought that there was any increase in risk to individuals facilitated <br />by the ordinance changes before the council he would oppose them. He reiterated that the cities of <br />Portland and Salem, among 40-some others, had passed just such ordinance additions and <br />amendments with approximately the same wording. He related that a pre-operation transgendered <br />individual is required to live as the gender that they intend to become according to medical <br />protocol, including the use of restrooms. He felt the ordinance would provide these individuals <br />with more protection. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly opposed restricting the domestic registry to city residents. He felt that the fee would <br />cover any potential increases to cost. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he would not oppose an amendment that would eliminate any perceived <br />requirements to build restroom accommodations for transgendered individuals. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner expressed tentative approval of a requirement that people wanting to participate in the <br />domestic registry be city residents. He stated that initially he had thought that this code revision <br />was a simple issue of equity. He said that, after reading some of the mail that he had received in <br />the recent weeks, he had become convinced that protection is needed. He related that he had <br />received mail that was threatening and filled with hate and that much of it had been couched in the <br />context of religion. He noted that religion has been misused as the modus operandi for acts of <br />violence committed in other countries recently. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor supported the domestic registry and opposed limiting it to city residents. She felt that <br />leaving the registry open to all people may increase tourism. She opined that the Private Right of <br />Action should be omitted as an enforcement option. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 2002 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />