Bill would prohibit local protected classes

The Judiciary Committee heard testimony Feb. 22 on a bill that would prohibit counties, municipalities and political subdivisions from implementing ordinances that would create protected classes that are not defined in state statute.

LB912, introduced by Omaha Sen. Beau McCoy, would prohibit a county, municipality or other political subdivision from requiring businesses, organizations and employers to implement nonuniform protected classifications in nondiscrimination laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules or policies.

Any local law, ordinance, resolution, rule or policy in violation of the bill adopted before its effective date would be null and void.

McCoy said the bill would ease the burden on business owners who otherwise would have to invest time and money to determine each community’s ordinances on protected classes. Discrimination does not stop at a city or county border and should be addressed at a state or federal level, he said.

Byron Babione, legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, testified in support of the bill, saying statewide policies create more uniformity. Companies would be able to do business more predictably because they would not be subjected to different provisions based on where they are located in the state, he said.

John Chatelain, member of the Statewide Property Owners Association, also testified in support of the bill. He said local ordinances are inconsistent and create a burden for property owners working in different areas of the state.

Opposition focused on the defense of a proposed ordinance in Omaha that would make it illegal for businesses to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Ben Gray, member of the Omaha City Council, testified in opposition to the bill, saying a “one-size-fits-all approach” would not help the state address discrimination issues.

“Right now, [Omaha] has a class of citizens who are not being protected as they should be,” Gray said. “[Omaha] would be harmed by this legislation because it would send a signal that we are an unwelcoming environment and [the bill] would have the chilling effect of running businesses away.”

Rhonda Uher, human rights and relations manager for the city of Omaha, also testified in opposition to the bill. Nebraska currently allows cities to adopt policies that are more comprehensive than those in state law and the bill would prevent that, Uher said. Omaha has been proactive in passing city ordinances that protect the equality of all of its residents, she said, and the city would like to continue to do so without restrictions on local control.

The committee took no immediate action on the bill.