>>> Source: The Register-Guard (Eugene, OR)
>>> Author: unnamed editor
>>> TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/2rht
>>> URL:
http://www.registerguard.com/news/2002/11/15/ed.edit.registry.phn.1115.html
>>> Date: November 15, 2002
>>> Location: OR,US
>>> Item: Editorial
>>> Title: Clearing way for registry: Council was right to set
transgender issue aside

A Register-Guard Editorial

Politics, it has often been said, is the art of the possible. The
wisdom and truth behind that saying were brought home this week by the
Eugene City Council's decision to separate the issue of public
accommodations for transgendered people from the creation of a
domestic partnership registry for gay couples and other less
controversial revisions to the city's human rights code.

The proposed registry, an official but largely symbolic recognition of
committed relationships, will be the third of its kind in the state.
The fact that the Eugene registry has the support of all eight city
councilors and Mayor Jim Torrey - and that the city of Ashland and
Portland/Multnomah County already have registries -are welcome
indicators that the rights and needs of gay people are finally gaining
recognition in a state that not too long ago was enmeshed in a
bitterly divisive debate over gay rights.

Despite such strong council support for creation of the registry, it
might never have come to pass if supporters had not yielded on the
issue of transgendered people. That's because Torrey's well-founded
reservations on the guarantee of "reasonable accommodations" for
transgendered people in buildings open to the public - including
restrooms, dressing rooms and health clubs - had prompted him to
threaten his first veto in six years as mayor.

Thankfully, Torrey's no-veto record remained intact after Councilor
David Kelly made a motion to drop all references to transgendered
people from the code amendments and to send them back to the Human
Rights Commission for final review prior to final council action.

That was, no doubt, a distasteful move for Kelly, who supports the
transgender provisions, but it was the smart and right one. If the
council majority had bulled ahead and passed the amendments with the
provisions intact, Torrey would have made good on his veto threat.
Even if the council managed to muster the six votes necessary for an
override, the resulting controversy would have undermined public
support for the entire package of amendments.

The registry, the centerpiece of the code changes, deserves better.
While some critics have accused the city of engaging in social
engineering, the registry simply offers same-sex couples - or
heterosexual couples, for that matter - the opportunity to document
their relationships, a simple issue of fairness, respect and dignity.

The registry provisions won't require businesses or agencies to extend
benefits or privileges based on domestic partnership listings. But the
code revisions will add domestic registry status to the list of
categories protected by the city against housing and public
accommodation discrimination. They also will give the couples listed
in the registry an opportunity to use the city's recognition of their
status as a logical argument in support of requests for a variety of
benefits enjoyed by married couples - from health insurance coverage
to visitation rights at hospitals or jails. Again, these are simple
matters of fairness, respect and dignity.

It's hard to imagine unanimous council support for such a move 20, 10,
even five years ago. It took time for the fears, concerns and
questions to be resolved, and that's what must also happen before the
city moves forward with a public-accommodations guarantee for the
transgendered.

As we've noted previously, most Eugene citizens lack familiarity with
transgender issues - in fact, many people were probably unaware the
public accommodations issue even existed. If such protections are, in
fact, needed (and we're not yet convinced they are), it remains
unclear what businesses and other public places will have to do to
ensure that transgendered folks have reasonable accommodations without
leaving other customers feeling vulnerable, confused or frightened.

For now, the council acted wisely in supporting Kelly's motion to
leave the question of public accommodations for transgendered people
for another day.

Copyright 2002 The Register-Guard