MI: Ypsilanti adds ex-offenders as protected class in nondiscrimination ordinance

YPSILANTI, MI – People with felony convictions cannot be discriminated against in Ypsilanti in a new addition to the city’s non-discrimination ordinance that passed Tuesday.

Ypsilanti City Council voted unanimously to make ex-offenders a city-protected class at its meeting on March 3. Elected officials said the move will help returning citizens reintegrate into society and address racial disparities.

 SOURCE

15 thoughts on “MI: Ypsilanti adds ex-offenders as protected class in nondiscrimination ordinance

  • March 5, 2020 at 2:48 pm
    Permalink

    Waiting for the “excluding sex offenders…” Part

    Reply
  • March 5, 2020 at 2:59 pm
    Permalink

    Great! If they want to protect, why dont they also take them off of the SO registry.

    Reply
  • March 5, 2020 at 3:24 pm
    Permalink

    Hmmm, so no Registry in Ypsalanti? Or are Registrants, once again, excluded from criminal Justice reforms??

    Reply
    • March 5, 2020 at 4:03 pm
      Permalink

      I’m not sure you understood the article.

      Reply
      • March 5, 2020 at 4:42 pm
        Permalink

        Please help us understand it then. It looked to me that sex offenders will be included as a protected class there. Was that something that someone from the FAC wrote on the heading? Or is that actually part of the original article? Thanks ahead of time!

        Reply
        • March 5, 2020 at 4:49 pm
          Permalink

          “EX” offenders, not “Sex” offenders.
          another member did some digging and discovered that Sex offenders are actually exempted, as is the case with most legislation. Sad!

          Reply
          • March 5, 2020 at 5:03 pm
            Permalink

            This is getting even more confusing. Registrants there will be exempt from discrimination, or exempt from new protections from that discrimination? Where does it say that?

            I see that registrants are addressed directly by a councilman in the article, but not necessarily in a negative way.

            Since this is outside FL anyway, I’m not sweating it, but thanks for allowing me to vent.

  • March 5, 2020 at 3:43 pm
    Permalink

    Now wait and watch for one of the council members to propose an exception for sex offenders. (sigh)

    Reply
  • March 5, 2020 at 7:00 pm
    Permalink

    “….another member did some digging and discovered that Sex offenders are actually exempted.”

    So why didn’t FAC vet this article before posting it here? You get our hopes up only to kick us in the balls.

    So where are the real victories in our cause? Show me one in Floriduh!

    Reply
    • March 5, 2020 at 7:24 pm
      Permalink

      it was NEVER Sex Offenders – it was EX-OFFENDERS, I can take down the article.

      Reply
  • March 5, 2020 at 7:53 pm
    Permalink

    The difference between Ex-offenders and Sex offenders is NOT the letter S.
    The difference is most ex offenders can somewhat go on with their lives where as as Ex sex-offenders are still considered sex offenders for life and not given a chance to be a productive citizen.

    Can’t get a job

    Can’t find a place to live

    Can’t date ( who is going to date someone on the registry )

    Can’t go to church ( according to some new posts )

    Can’t travel

    Can’t be near a school, playground, park, etc

    Can’t get home insurance ( mine dropped and had to move )

    Would like a judge to tell us #1 How this is not punishment And #2 What the Hell we can do? Maybe go to jail, do not pass GO!

    Reply
  • March 5, 2020 at 8:43 pm
    Permalink

    This actually makes good sense and will turn out well for sex offenders.

    Michigan’s registry is about to go down in flames. The legislature doesn’t have the balls to touch it with a 100 ft rod because making it any less draconian is political suicide.
    If it goes down, they blame the courts and save face.

    Then, when the registry and accompanying restrictions are gone, the only valid law in town will be the current one forbidding discrimination against ex-cons.

    You know, the one without any specific provisions excluding those who have been convicted of sexual crimes.

    If this is by design and not simple oversight, these people should be thanked.

    Reply
  • March 5, 2020 at 9:02 pm
    Permalink

    Don’t miss the point members. While any such action is a step in the right direction, it does still point out how sex offenders are discriminated against more than other offenders, even where people claim that they are against discrimination. More evidence that sex offenders should be recognized as a class, and eventually work towards class protection.

    Reply
  • March 13, 2020 at 2:41 pm
    Permalink

    Berkeley, California is committed to providing equal opportunities to people whose lives were changed by criminal charges and who are seeking to reintegrate into society. But they are excluding “lifetime sex offenders”. What is a lifetime sex offender — someone who continues to re-offend? Or someone put on the registry for life because of a one-time sexual offense? I hope it is the former.

    https://www.dailycal.org/2020/03/13/give-all-tenants-a-fair-chance/

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *