BAY CITY, MI — The Bay County Board of Commissioners meeting opened Tuesday, Feb. 11, with a prayer as leaders asked for wisdom on how to proceed with a proposed ordinance banning discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals.

Cynthia Killey, of Garfield Township, was quick to note the theme of the invocation.

"When you opened this meeting, you prayed to God to give you wisdom on what to do," Killey said, noting her disapproval of the ordinance. "That was your prayer, not mine. I'm going to remind you of that.”

She went on to say non-discrimination policies already in place in Bay County are sufficient.

Her granddaughter doesn’t share the same opinion.

Speaking after the more than three-hour meeting that drew upwards of 100 members of the public, Janelle Lake, a 20-year-old student at Saginaw Valley State University, and Killey’s granddaughter, said she supports the ordinance and takes issue with her grandmother’s remarks, given that her mother — Killey’s daughter — is a lesbian.

"When I was younger, she specifically told me she would never vote in support of anything a Democrat supported because Democrats support LGBTs, but her daughter is a lesbian," said Lake. "It almost made me feel like she didn't support me, simply because of what I went through with my mom, and what my mom had gone through.

“My grandmother not supporting my mom was basically saying, 'You're the same as her.' "

Emotions certainly ran high during Tuesday’s meeting, a public hearing aimed at allowing area residents to voice their support or opposition to the proposed ordinance that, if adopted, would bar the government of Bay County from discriminating in services and employment, and also would bind contractors with the county similarly.

Bay County would be the first in Michigan to pass such an ordinance.

Martha Fitzhugh, Bay County corporation counsel, explained at the hearing that the ordinance would not impact private businesses or other non-affiliates of the county.

The hearing began with Charin Davenport, a Bay City transgendered woman who has addressed the County Board on this issue before, stepping to the lectern to speak.

"Sitting on my desk at home is a small piece of the Berlin Wall. It is small, but it is a piece of something larger, so much larger," she said, noting that the non-discrimination ordinance is similarly symbolic. "What history has shown us over and over again is that to deny civil rights and freedom and equality to anyone, anywhere, is to deny them to everyone, everywhere."

Many speakers joined Davenport to note their support for the ordinance, and some, like Essexville resident Jay Crane, shared personal stories.

"I came here tonight to thank the commission for allowing this community to have this conversation,” said Crane. “It is not only needed, it is overdue.

"I also come to you … as the proud father of a gay child, and I will show up anywhere, any place to defend my gay child and her dignity."

Those opposing the measure also came out in force.

One woman, speaking from the upper gallery of the Commission Chambers, said she doesn’t think it is necessary for the county to concern itself with sexuality in the workplace.

"I don't remember going to work talking about my sexuality," she said. "I just don't understand that this is needed. Everyone in this room knows that this is a slippery slope and this is only the beginning."

Auburn resident Mark Wood agreed.

"I am here to speak against this ordinance in this county," he said. "Just what is the purpose behind this ordinance? … It is obvious that PC is alive and well in this county and that this body is willing to bend over for LGBT rights and benefits.

“How many people in this room are sick and tired of having gay rights shoved in their faces day in and day out, having to explain to young kids what it is?"

Tuesday’s meeting, though to address a Bay County proposal, drew leaders from both sides of the issue from outside of Bay County, among them Christopher Lauckner, chairman of Perceptions, a Saginaw-based group supporting the LGBT community in the Great Lakes Bay Region, and Gary Glenn, president of the Midland-based American Family Association of Michigan.

Don Tilley, D-6th District

Glenn, as he has done on several occasions since Commissioner Don Tilley, D-6th District, first proposed the ordinance in January, said he thinks the law, if adopted, might be used to punish groups who object to serving members of the LGBT community.

“I would note that our Constitution does guarantee equal treatment under the law now," Glenn said, speaking on behalf of his organization. “We believe it’s a discriminatory solution to a nonexistent problem.”

In addition to his position with the AFA, Glenn is a Republican candidate for the 98th District state House seat currently held by Rep. Jim Stamas, R-Midland. Additionally, he is a co-author of Michigan's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, which was approved by 59 percent of voters in 2004.

Prior to Tuesday’s meeting, Glenn placed automated telephone calls to registered voters asking them to attend the meeting and speak out against the ordinance. In his message, Glenn claims the proposed ordinance would discriminate against religious freedom and women’s privacy rights.

Ernie Krygier, D-2nd District

There were moments during Tuesday’s meeting when individuals spoke out of turn. At one point, a man from the gallery spoke on his concerns the ordinance might be "opening the door" to endangering children, to which another voice responded, "gay people aren't molesters." County Board Chairman Ernie Krygier, D-2nd District, was forced to call for order and reminded members in the gallery to respect each other's opinions.

Officials never lost control of the meeting, and safety was not an issues, according to Bay County Sheriff John E. Miller, who attended the meeting along with at least one deputy from his office. Speaking after the meeting, Miller said he is pleased with the respect gallery members showed one another.

"Something like this, no matter what their thoughts are, they're very intense, but everyone did their jobs and controlled themselves, for the most part," Miller said. "There were no problems."

Moving forward, the proposed ordinance next appears before the Bay County Personnel/Human Services Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 18, where the draft may see amendments based on input from Tuesday’s public hearing. As of now, the ordinance is scheduled for a vote on March 11.

If approved, county documents state the ordinance would go into effect on May 1.

Brandon Krause, D-1st District

Following Tuesday’s public hearing, at least one commissioner, who previously supported the ordinance, said he plans to change his vote.

Brandon Krause, D-1st District, said he plans to vote against the ordinance in March, and noted that his district overwhelmingly opposes the ordinance.

Krause said he stands for equal rights for all Bay County residents, and that he wants to see Bay County policy include protections for LGBT individuals. However, he said he didn't see the need for a new ordinance when a policy change could extend the same protections to the LGBT community.

He noted that although the ordinance, being law, had a certain "wow factor" to it, he felt it wasn't necessary to make a law for this purpose.

"To me, I'm here to vote strictly on providing services and giving equality to the people of Bay County," he said. "I'm here to vote on equality, I'm not here to vote on symbolism."

Krause said that if the ordinance fails, he'll be instrumental in helping build Bay County policy that protects LGBT individuals from discrimination. He added that previous votes in support of the ordinance were meant to bring the issue to the public hearing.

Krygier said he’s no longer sure the ordinance can pass, despite previous votes in which commissioners voted 4-2 then 5-2 in support of moving the ordinance forward.

"If I was a betting man and it went to a vote today, it probably would have crashed and burned with a 4-3 vote," Krygier said, "but that's my reaction on it."

Michael Lutz, D-7th District

Joining Krause in opposition to the measure are Michael Lutz, D-7th District, and Vaughn Begick, R-3rd District.

"I can only tell you that I don't believe everybody's still on board," said Lutz. "There are some doubts out there. I think that it could have went 4-3 one way or 4-3 the other way."

Begick said he believes it would have been better to attempt a policy change from the beginning of the process.

Vaughn Begick, R-3rd District

"I think we can solve the problem a lot quicker and a lot easier," he said, noting that an ordinance would have to be enforced more rigorously and could open the county to litigation.

Tilley, Krygier and Kim Coonan, D-4th District, maintain their strong support for the ordinance. Commissioner Tom Herek, D-5th District, also has supported the ordinance in past votes.

Following Tuesday’s public hearing, Tilley said he believes support from his fellow commissioners should be readily forthcoming.

"How you can't be sympathetic to the stories on all sides is beyond me," said Tilley. "I'm afraid … with some of these commissioners, it's about their elections and not doing what's right."

Krygier agreed.

"If the individuals I represent are unhappy with the positions I take, then I'll take the consequences," he said. "I'm not there for a full-time job, I'm there to do what I can to make Bay County a better place to live."

— Sam Easter is a general assignment reporter for The Bay City Times. He can be reached at seaster@mlive.com.