NC town enacts 1st LGBTQ protections 3 years after state repealed its ‘bathroom bill’
Hillsborough became the first local government in the state to extend housing, employment and other protections to LGBTQ residents Monday night after a three-year state ban on new, anti-discrimination policies expired.
The town’s new rules also apply to public spaces and private businesses, including hotels, stores and restaurants, but leave the decision about who can use multi-occupancy bathrooms, showers and changing rooms to the state legislature.
Carrboro and Chapel Hill are expected to pass similar policies this week. The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Durham City Council could act next week.
Local governments are taking this step because state and federal lawmakers have failed to protect people, said Matt Hughes, a Hillsborough Town Board member.
“I think this is a step in the right direction,” said Hughes, who is gay. “In so many places across the country, not just in the Southeast, but really everywhere, people can marry the love of their life on a Saturday and get fired on Monday when they show up at work.”
The vote also was personal for board member Mark Bell.
“I have a trans kid, and the thought of my kid in the future losing employment or health care or being discriminated against, especially on the grounds of someone’s religion, is offensive,” Bell said before joining Hillsborough’s board in an unanimous vote.
LGBTQ policies, enforcement
Orange County has a reputation for progressive policies in North Carolina, including having the first domestic partner registries, benefits for government employees in domestic partnerships, and inclusive LGBTQ personnel and contracting policies.
The county’s residents also have elected nine LGBTQ officials to local offices, including two of North Carolina’s first three openly gay mayors, former Carrboro Mayor Mike Nelson and former Chapel Hill Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt. Carrboro Mayor Lydia Lavelle is the state’s first openly lesbian mayor.
“Our Orange County voters have historically shown overwhelming support for the LGBTQ community,” Lavelle said in a news release. “These proposed ordinances reflect the values of our communities.”
The new rules prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, as well as race, age, creed, national origin or ancestry, marital or familial status, pregnancy, veteran status, religious belief, disability, ethnicity and color.
Carrboro and Durham, in their proposed resolutions, also bar discrimination based on natural hair or hairstyles. Durham’s policy will apply to public accommodations, employment and build on the city’s fair housing rules, City Attorney Kim Rehberg told the council Thursday.
Durham council member Charlie Reece expressed full support for the policy while also noting the additional cost to the city.
“I think every member of this council understands that when we pass a new non-discrimination ordinance, in order for it to have any meaning, it has to be enforced, and enforced in a robust and impartial way,” he said
Although the Hillsborough and Carrboro resolutions state that violations area a Class 3 misdemeanor, punishable by a $500, daily fine, Hillsborough Town Attorney Bob Hornick said enforcement likely would entail taking a complaint to Superior Court. Hughes suggested talking with other local governments about directing complaints to the county’s Human Rights and Relations office.
Discrimination, harassment
Local and state groups working to end discrimination against LGBTQ residents cheered the move to add local protections.
“After such a divisive start to the year — with violent unrest at the U.S. Capitol and persistent attacks on our democratic institutions from our outgoing president — it’s inspiring to see our elected leaders coming together to consider policies that tangibly improve residents’ lives,” Allison Scott, director of policy and programs at Campaign for Southern Equality, said in a news release.
In 2015, a National Center for Transgender Equality survey found roughly a quarter of over 27,000 respondents had been verbally harassed in a public accommodation because of being transgender, and another 14% were denied equal treatment or service.
Nearly a third of the 686 North Carolinians who responded were living in poverty, and also reported being fired, denied a promotion or not hired for a job because of their gender identity or expression. At least 22% had experienced housing discrimination.
Terri Phoenix, director of UNC’s LGBTQ Center, said local rules give people within the LGBTQ community some legal recourse and also send “a message to people that this kind of harassment and discrimination is not acceptable in our community.”
“Since there are no protections on the federal or state level, the city ordinances right now are probably the best that we can do in North Carolina,” Phoenix said.
Still, Phoenix sometimes worries about visiting public spaces even in progressive cities like Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Durham.
As a transgender person in a queer relationship and the parent of a young daughter, “I have concerns when my family and I go out in public that we’re going to be harassed or catcalled,” Phoenix said.
‘Bathroom bill’ backlash, repeal
In 2016, the move to add legal protections for North Carolina’s LGBTQ residents hit a roadblock when the legislature passed House Bill 2, known as the “bathroom bill,” in response to a Charlotte policy letting transgender people use the bathroom of their identified gender.
HB2 also banned LGBTQ protections and blocked local governments from passing discrimination protections or requiring employers to pay a higher minimum wage. It spawned a nationwide backlash, costing North Carolina and its cities out-of-state visitors, business investments, conventions and sporting events, including the ACC Championship.
In 2017, state lawmakers approved a compromise replacing HB2 with HB142. While the ban on local anti-discrimination rules — a key part of HB142 — expired in December, local elected officials had not said whether they would attempt passing new rules.
Raleigh’s City Council updated the city’s policy Jan. 5 to reaffirm its commitment to anti-discrimination but didn’t expand protections.
“There is a lot more work to be done — let me be very clear about that,” said Council member Jonathan Melton, one of two LGBTQ members on the Raleigh City Council. “And I hope we will follow suit in that work.”
Religious objections
On Monday, Tami Fitzgerald, leader of the conservative Christian group N.C. Values Coalition, asked the Hillsborough board to delay its vote. She threatened legal challenges in an email statement sent to The News & Observer earlier Monday.
Hillsborough’s proposed policy is not consistent with the state’s religious protections or the state or national constitution, she told the board. Similar policies in other states have “imposed punishment and crippling legal liability on small business owners,” she said.
“Every person should be treated with dignity and respect, and our laws should protect the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of every citizen no matter who they are, but unfortunately, ordinances like the one you’re considering tonight undermine both fairness and freedom,” Fitzgerald said.
Forty-eight states allow local governments to enact non-discrimination rules, Carrboro Mayor Lavelle said in a news release. She also noted a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year affirming the right of LGBTQ citizens to be free of work-related bias and an N.C. Court of Appeals ruling that LGBTQ citizens should get the same services as any other person.
Over two-thirds of North Carolinians support non-discrimination rules, and advocacy groups have launched a joint effort, NC is Ready for LGBTQ Protections, urging local governments to act, Equality North Carolina and Campaign for Southern Equality advocates said.
“Without (these protections), LGBTQ North Carolinians, particularly Black, Brown, trans and gender-nonconforming folks, face harassment and violence on a daily basis,” said Kendra Johnson, executive director of Equality North Carolina.
Fitzgerald countered that the 2018 Supreme Court decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, ensures that businesses, churches and others have a right to free speech and religious exercise.
The Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, however, did not address whether the bakeshop owner violated a gay couple’s rights when he refused to sell them a wedding cake. The Supreme Court instead concluded that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed anti-religious bias against the bakeshop owner when it considered the case.
Religious exemptions also were used to justify segregation and Jim Crow laws targeting Black people, said Mark Dorosin, an Orange County commissioner and civil rights attorney.
“The thing is, I don’t believe that religious freedom gives you the license to discriminate against anyone,” he said.
“No one should be turned away from a business or denied service because of their race, because of their religion, because of their gender, because of their sexual identity or their sexual orientation,” Dorosin said. “That’s just a fundamental principle on which the country was founded.”
Staff writers Anna Johnson and Charles Innis contributed to this report.
This story was originally published January 12, 2021 at 7:53 AM with the headline "NC town enacts 1st LGBTQ protections 3 years after state repealed its ‘bathroom bill’."
