Straight talking …

By Charles Sercombe – September 4, 2008

The Secretary of the State Bureau of Elections has told the city to change the language of a ballot proposal set to be voted on this November.

But the city isn’t budging.

At issue is how the city worded a ballot proposal asking voters to either support or reject the “Natural Rights” ordinance, which has generated a lot of controversy because it provides anti-discrimination rights to gays, lesbians and transgendered people.

The American Family Association brought the ballot language to the attention of the Secretary of State, saying it’s confusing and violates state election law. The way it is worded forces those who support the ordinance to vote no and those who support to vote yes.

State election law requires ballot language to be worded “so that a ‘yes’ vote will be a vote in favor of the subject matter of the proposal or issue and a ‘no’ vote will be a vote against the subject matter of the proposal or issue.”

Hamtramck’s ballot reads: “Should the city of Hamtramck Ordinance 2008-9 be repealed?”

The AFA wants it changed to: “Shall the city of Hamtramck Ordinance 2008-9 become effective?”

The state told city officials to change the wording by Monday to meet a printing deadline. The AFA said it might take legal action if the change isn’t made.

City Manager William Cooper told The Citizen that after he and City Attorney James Allen reviewed the wording and state law, he doesn’t think any change is needed.

“At this point, the language is good,” Cooper said. “I think it’s as straightforward as we can make it.”

The AFA is a conservative Christian group that has opposed legislation in other communities that give rights to gays. They have called Hamtramck’s ordinance as “gay rights” even though it is only one small part of a comprehensive set of anti-discrimination protections.

The group is insisting the ordinance will allow men who view themselves as women to be able to use women’s public restrooms. Other opponents have said it will allow sexual deviants to molest people.

What is unknown at this point is whether the state can force the city to change the language. A spokesman with the Secretary of State Office said he would research whether the state can force the change.