Back to Page 1

Back to Page 2


On this page is listed the entire text of the first page of the proposed ordinance 6093. (Ordinance 6093 has a total of 9 pages.) The text of the first page of Ordinance 6093 is in the purple boxes. I insert my commentary in the yellow boxes.

Introduced by: Council Members Ottersten, Kun,
Therrien, Rogers, and Mayor Matherly
Introduced: December 3, 2018 commentary: Though Mayor Matherly originally lent his name to the list of sponsors, I imagine that he and others became more aware of some of the pitfalls and problems, as more testimony and discussion transpired. He ultimately decided to veto the ordinance so as to give more time for review, and so as to give all the citizens a chance to vote on it as a ballot measure.


The title says "EQUAL RIGHTS". But this ordinance has nothing to do with giving "equal rights" or any kind of natural "right". This ordinance takes away rights (the natural right of the freedom to choose). When we speak of "rights", we are generally speaking about "natural rights" like freedom of speech and the right of the people to peaceably assemble, the right to keep and bear arms, etc.

What is a natural "right"?
It is a benign action that a person can engage in without being stopped by the government.
Examples are: traveling from here to there, and engaging in voluntary trade with another person. These rights are not given to us by government. These rights are natural, or intrinsic, or "God given". One of the functions of government is to protect these natural rights from being usurped by enemies foreign and domestic. All people, whether straight or gay, already have these natural rights - equally.

This ordinance uses the word "PROHIBITED" 6 times. But this word is not directed at the government so as to prohibit the government from taking away our rights. This word is directed at us citizens, so as to take away some of our rights.

Contrast that with the U.S Constitution which uses the idea of "PROHIBITED" as something directed against the government, and not directed against the people. For instance, in the First Amendment it says: "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." And in the 2nd Amendment you will find "shall not be infringed" which means that the federal government is "prohibited" from infringing on the natural rights of the people.

So if is not natural "rights" that this ordinance gives to certain people, what does it give? In my opinion, it gives government power to steal money from other citizens. In the James Bond movies, agent 007 is given the "license to kill" by the government. Killing other people is not a "natural right". But the British government gives this special "license" which is hopefully only used against the bad secret agents of SPECTER. But in the case of ordinance 6093, the city government would grant a license to certain citizens, to attack and plunder other citizens, in my opinion.

discrimination based on race, color, age, religion, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, ethnicity, or national origin, poses a threat to the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Fairbanks, and

   WHEREAS, to help eliminate such discrimination, the City adopts the following ordinance that creates a private right of action for persons who are victims of discrimination.

Fairbanks has been a city for 117 years (since 1903). We have not had this anti-discrimination law on the books, all this time. Whose "health" and "safety" has been hurt by discrimination? I'm not aware of such a problem. A person can get medical care whether they are straight or gay. Whose "safety" has been hurt by discrimination? We have a police department, fire department and ambulance service that is there to help all people, no matter what "catagory" they are in. There are charities and government agencies that provide a safety net for everyone who needs it.


Section 1. FGC Chapter 1, General Provisions is amended by adding Sections 1-21 through 1-28.

  It is the policy of the City of Fairbanks to eliminate unlawful discrimination based on race, color, age, religion, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, ethnicity, or national origin. Such discrimination poses a threat to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Fairbanks. The terms "race, color, age, religion, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, ethnicity, or national origin," rather than being repeated throughout the following sections, will be referred to by the shortened "race, color, age, etc."

The 6093 ordinance provides a whole smorgasbord of "protected" categories. In my opinion, this is to give predatory shark-like lawyers more scenarios to sink their teeth into.

FGC Sec. 1-22. Discrimination in employment.

(a) It shall be prohibited discriminatory employment practice:

        (1)    For an employer to fail or refuse to hire, to discharge, bar from employment , or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation or the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of race, color, age, etc.;

        (2)    For a labor organization to exclude or expel from membership, or otherwise to discriminate against any applicant or member, because of race, color, age, etc;

The word "prohibited" here, is used to remove some basic human rights (freedom to choose what we want) from Fairbanks citizens who previously, have always been free since 1903.
   The ordinance (above) says: "...For an employer to fail to hire..."  So, if an employer has 2 applicants for a single position, and he hires one of them, has he "failed" to hire the other one? What if the one he hired is a woman. And what if the other applicant was a man. One of the "protected" categories is "sex" (meaning gender). Did he discriminate against the man based on "sex". What if the employer did have the thought in his head that he did prefer a woman in that position (such as a secretarial position)? Is that an illegal thought? Should we have "thought-police" to prosecute people because of their thoughts? I say no. We Americans, and we Fairbanksans, should always have freedom of thought, as well as freedom of speech and freedom to write.

            (3)    For an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise discriminate against any individual because of race, color, age, etc. of said individual;
        (4)    For an employer, labor organization, or employment agency to print or circulate or cause to be printed or circulated any statement, advertisement, or publication, or to make any inquiry in connection with prospective employment, which expresses directly or indirectly a preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination because of race, color, age, etc., unless based upon a bonafide occupational qualification.

The ordinance above says that it is prohibited to "print" or "circulate" certain writings. This partially takes away some of our basic human right of freedom of the press. There are other countries which also stomp on the freedom of the press, such as communist North Korea.
   This evil ordinance also stomps on our freedom of speech by prohibiting "...any inquiry...which expresses...directly or indirectly a preference...because of ...age, etc.,..."
   How dare this totalitarian-wanna-be government encroach on what two citizens can voluntarily say to one another. Have we reached the nightmare world of George Orwell's book "1984" already?

   Well, fortunately, not yet in Fairbanks, because Ordinance 6093 was vetoed by the city mayor on March 1, 2019. But if radical progressives achieve a powerful 5 to 1 left-wing-veto-proof majority on the city council, Ordinance 6093 will be reintroduced and passed into an oppressive law that can cause unnecessary expense, fear, stress and hardship for many of Fairbanks' struggling businesses.

On page 6 of ordinance 6093, is a section covering the punishments for the good citizens who run businesses, who would be persecuted by this proposed ordinance:

FGC Sec. 1-27. Cause of Action

   (a) A person aggrieved by a discriminatory practice prohibited under this chapter may, within 300 days of any violation of this chapter, petition in court to enjoin a violation of this chapter or seek remedy for a violation.

   (b)  Remedy may include such relief as the court deems just and proper and may include one or more of the following:

          (1)    requiring training concerning discriminatory practices;

In addition to number "(1)" directly above in the 6093 text, are an additional 11 numbers that list "remedies" (or "punishments" as I call them). Many of these involve large sums of the money that the business owner must pay.
   But regarding number  "(1)", - this reminds me of a North Korean re-education camp where a business owner must kneel with a bayonet at their back, where they must confess his (or her) bad thoughts, and agree to submit to the planks of the communist party.

I say we don't need the communist agenda here in our Golden Heart City of Fairbanks. We need to preserve our liberty.

Back to page 1

Back to page 2

Written and paid for by Randy S. Griffin, PO Box 73653, Fairbanks, Alaska, 99707.
This NOTICE TO VOTERS is required by Alaska law. I certify that this ad is not authorized, paid for, or approved by the candidate.