Notably, the revisions would also protect the City of East Lansing, and all its departments and officials from any complaints filed against them by the HRC. The revisions propose that instead, complaints against these individuals should be filed with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or the courts.

At the Wednesday meeting, Tina Farhat, vice chair of the HRC, said that residents who file complaints need the confidence that their concerns will receive a meaningful review.

"Young people, students, and members of historically marginalized communities are less likely to come forward if they believe local oversight mechanisms have been weakened,” Farhat said. “A civil rights process should not only exist on paper, it should be accessible, visible, and trusted. Moving every significant matter to state agencies may create additional barriers for residents who are seeking local avenues for resolution.”

EL City Attorney Steven Joppich argued that independent HRC investigations into city staff violate the city charter.

EL City Council also argues that it cannot grant judicial powers to its commissions because it doesn’t possess them itself. The council also cited a 1978 Michigan Attorney General opinion in support of its explanation of the matter.

Commissioners of the HRC highlighted their concerns about a subsequent amendment that would prohibit the HRC from taking action on complaints against city contractors, and institute that they be forwarded to the EL City Council and City Manager instead.

Commissioner Rebecca Kasen feels that this would create a special exception for businesses or contractors who have agreements with the city and could have implications for some potentially unexpected parties as well.

She explains that, for example, a landlord may be renting space to the city or giving space to the city, but also has student housing or rental housing.

"The way that this is written means that if a landlord were to discriminate against a student, but they also have to have a contract with the city, that student, again, loses any ability to have their issue investigated and potentially seek a solution,” Kasen said.

“This encourages more people to have contracts with the city just so that they can avoid investigation by spot," she added. 

Another notable amendment would require that one member of the HRC have mediation training, while another amendment strips the commission’s ability to “mediate complaints.”

“Why require it when you're stripping us of the power to mediate anyway? Seems nonsensical,” Farhat said.

After a lengthy community discussion forum on June 8, commissioners met again on June 10 to discuss how they could push back against the proposed changes.

The commission concluded that it would be sending a memo to the EL City Council requesting that they wait to vote on the matter, and that a committee, including at least one HRC member and one EL resident, be formed to review the changes first.

They also requested that any council member who has received funds or has had any business relationships with companies or individuals that the HRC has investigated remove themselves from the vote or the committee.

Commissioners continue to point out that these changes come after the commission undertook a significant review involving the East Lansing Police Department.

In response to the section of the revised ordinance that would take away the HRC’s ability to investigate any case active in state or federal courts, Farhat said, “The only reason I can think of for this is to avoid cases like we just received and decided on.”

The HRC recently reviewed an incident where ELPD pepper-sprayed two Black men on campus during welcome week in August.

ELPD sent a press release after naming the two young men, violating a city policy that stops press releases from including the names of detainees unless a serious crime has been committed out of concern for reputational harm.

After the incident, the HRC issued corrective actions to the city at its May 27 meeting, including that the city pays the two young men $50,000 each for reputational harm and other damages, and that the city covers any ongoing medical, psychological and legal costs.

The ordinance amendment explains that although the granting of the HRC’s judicial powers happened decades ago, “the HRC has not, until now, endeavored to exercise those powers in a significant way, which has brought the issue to light.”

Even if the proposal is motivated by legitimate legal concerns, the sequence of events may undermine the public’s confidence in the city, Farhat said.

Many members of the commission said they fully support changes to the ordinance, but that these changes are coming too quickly and without enough review.

“The concern is that sweeping structural changes are being proposed immediately after the Human Rights Commission engaged in one of the most visible and consequential investigations,” Farhat said. “When an oversight body exercises its authority and then faces significant reduction in that authority, residents may reasonably question whether accountability is being weakened.”

In recent months, various transparency concerns about the City of East Lansing have arisen for many.

Many commissioners pointed out their concerns about the city's attorney mandating that they go into closed sessions when speaking about the proposed changes during meetings.

Commissioner Matthew Boughton said they shouldn’t be closed, with Kasen adding that they shouldn’t be, especially since those sessions don’t discuss private cases.

“I think that we have gotten to a place where they know that the reasons and explanations for what they are doing are unpopular, and they do not want that information in the public,” Boughton said. “All of this information should be out in the open. Everyone has a right to know what the effects of these changes should be. And we are told time and again that we have to go into closed session. It's beginning to be farcical.”

How the city has the authority to close meetings from the public in situations like this is going to be his “biggest question coming out of this.”

Kasen received a message from the HRC Commission Chair, Karen Hoene, during the Wednesday meeting, suggesting steps forward for the commission if that authority turns out to be unfounded.

Kasen said that if the HRC finds that there is no legal justification for them to be in closed session, or that there has been other poor legal advice given to the city by the city’s law firm, they should encourage those who are recipients of the poor legal advice to report the law firm and any of the attorneys to the Bar Association.

Boughton and Farhat mentioned their disappointment in the EL City Council members and city attorneys for not being present to answer questions from the commission about the proposed changes at the Wednesday meeting.

The EL City Council may vote on the proposal as soon as June 16.