Salem Political Snark

Why the City of Salem shouldn't give taxpayer money to a church that discriminates

In 2019 the most disturbing decision of the Salem City Council was to go along with a poorly thought-out plan by city officials to temporarily house the public library in a building owned by an organization that denies LGBTQ rights, the Salem Alliance Church. 

In case you missed out on reading my blog posts about this unethical travesty, type "Salem Alliance Church" in the Google search box in the right sidebar to find what I've written on this subject. For example...

Disturbing wrongness of last Monday's Salem City Council meeting
Salem's city officials say "screw you" to supporters of LGBTQ rights

Scott Rick, the librarian at South Salem High School, drew attention to how the Salem Alliance Church discriminates against gueer people in December 2018, when he wrote a letter to the editor that was published in the Statesman Journal. You can read it in my post, Two reports of how Broadway Coffee House/Commons discriminates against LGBT people. 

(The Salem Alliance Church runs the Broadway Commons and Broadway Coffee House.)

One year later, Rick has an excellent opinion piece published in the December 29, 2019 issue of the Statesman Journal, Salem taxpayer money shouldn't go to organization that denies basic human rights. Here's some excerpts from the piece.

When people suggest that President Trump’s statements and policies are racist or homophobic, he vehemently denies it in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

The same thing happens when you ask Salem Alliance Church officials about their discriminatory policies toward the queer community.

Church leaders insist, for example, that their refusal to marry same-gender couples is not discriminatory. They seem to believe that by couching discrimination within religious freedom it can no longer be considered discrimination.

By this logic, the church would also be justified in refusing to marry a mixed-race couple.

...The Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination (to which Salem Alliance belongs) refers to homosexuality as “detestable” based on Leviticus. Church leaders at Salem Alliance preach against homosexuality and gay marriage.

By sending this message of intolerance into our community they are directly contributing to the self-harm that is so prevalent in the queer community. Queer people are made to feel that there is something wrong with them, that they are detestable and detested, resulting in suicide rates much higher than for the general population. Fortunately, Salem Alliance rejects some parts of Leviticus, such as 25:44-46 which endorses slavery.

...church leaders have repeatedly refused to answer the simple question “would the Broadway Commons hire an openly queer applicant?”

The Broadway Commons also refuses to issue an equal opportunity employer statement. They believe that religious freedom grants them the right to refuse to hire any applicant that does not conform to their standard of “appropriate” sexual orientation.

...Many community members do not feel comfortable using facilities owned by a church that spreads intolerance in our community. For this reason, public and private organizations are encouraged to refrain from renting and using facilities owned by the Salem Alliance Church.

Taxpayer money should not be flowing to an organization that so blatantly denies basic human rights to cherished members of our community. Celebrate diversity.

I'm a big admirer of libraries. But I agree with Rick that those who support LGBTQ rights shouldn't use the Salem Public Library when portions of the collection are moved to a building leased from the Salem Alliance Church, which will open on February 18. 

With so many suitable buildings available in Salem, there was no good reason to house a temporary library in the church-owned building. City officials simply thought that the controversy over paying an organization that discriminates against LGBTQ people would blow over.

Hopefully that won't happen. I won't set foot in any building owned by the Salem Alliance Church, because I support LGBTQ rights. Others, I'm confident, will feel the same way.

Public records show how Salem Alliance Church lobbied to be temporary library location

Only in Salem is the public library on the wrong side of LGBTQ rights. As retired State Librarian Jim Scheppke noted recently, historically libraries in Oregon have stood up for LGBTQ rights. 

But in our city the library is going to be temporarily located in a building leased from an organization that denies fundamental gay rights -- the right to marry, and the right to engage in same-sex sex.

A headline in a Willamette Week story about this issue summed up the situation nicely.

If an anti-gay organization was a business or corporation, the bigotry of those in charge would be roundly condemned by almost everybody. However, since the Salem Alliance Church is, obviously, a religious entity, its bigotry can be excused by apologists under the cover of "religious liberty."


Which doesn't make the church's rejection of LGBTQ rights any more acceptable. That's why so many people were critical of City officials choosing the church-owned Capital Press building for a temporary library, an unnecessary choice given the availability of other suitable locations.

I was bothered so much by how City of Salem staff ignored the legitimate concerns of the LGBTQ community that I paid $844.85 for public records related to the selection of a temporary library site. My previous posts based on those records are here and here.

Most of the written testimony from citizens in opposition to the choice of the church-owned building wasn't part of the 1,245 pages of documents that I got, since it was included in a staff report to the City Council. Here's some testimony that was part of the public records.

My name is ______ and am a 29 year resident of South Salem. I am appalled at the prospect of my tax dollars going to the Salem Alliance Church to rent a facility for our library relocation. I completely agree wit our city's Human Rights Commission that this would send a message that glbt people aren't welcome.

That church condemns same sex marriage and civil rights for glbt folks. Their discriminatory hiring practices at Broadway Coffeehouse are a prime example of their values, which violate the spirit of inclusion which defines our city and its laws. 

Frankly, as a gay man, I would feel unsafe in any facility owned by Salem Alliance Church.

And...

I am respectfully writing to ask you to please consider renting library locations other than the one available from the Salem Alliance Church. I believe in freedom of religion and freedom of speech, but object when that speech is used to condemn me, my family, and LGBTQ friends.

All citizens of Salem should feel free to use the public library without feeling strange about walking into a building whose owners have so publically denounced them.

This was an email to Councilor Leung, who voted against leasing the church-owned building.

I understand that you voted NO on the use of the Salem Alliance Church's building for the temporary Library. Is there any way this can be stopped. I am in Ward 1, and Cara Kaser voted for it. I find this decision very repugnant and insulting to LGBTQ people and their family and loved ones. I cannot use the Library if it is going to be in the Salem Alliance's building. I resent my tax dollars going to this anti-gay church.

Given how controversial the possibility of leasing the church's Capital Press building for a temporary library was, it isn't surprising that church officials reached out to City officials in attempts to calm the waters roiled up by the church's anti-LGBTQ stance.

No other organization that owned a building being considered as a temporary library location lobbied City officials in writing. Just the Salem Alliance Church. (Phone calls and text messages aren't included in a public records request.)

Executive Pastor Robb Childs emailed City Manager Steve Powers on July 10, 2019, saying in part:
Download Robb Childs email

Steve Fowler, Salem Alliance's Lead Pastor, and I appreciate that you reached out and left a message for Steve in response to some negative buzz circulating in parts of the community related to the City's exploration of a lease with Salem Alliance to temporarily house the Salem Public Library in the former Capital Press building. 

Hmmmm. The top official at the City of Salem, Steve Powers, left an apparently supportive message with the Lead Pastor of the Salem Alliance Church shortly before the City Council was to decide whether to enter into a lease agreement with the church. That seems wrong to me.

Also, on July 9, 2019 the Director of Operations for the Salem Alliance Church, Tim France, sent an email to Mayor Chuck Bennett and Councilor Cara Kaser that started off with an invitation to get together. 
Download Tim France email

Hi Chuck and Kara [sic], I wanted to see if the two of you have time to meet with Steve Fowler (our Lead Pastor) and myself for 30 minutes. I realize we can't talk about the potential lease for the library move... we just want to clear the air with the rumors going around regarding Salem Alliance.

Ah, "clear the air." Which fits with the "negative buzz" comment from Pastor Robb Childs.

It's astounding that City officials put themselves in the spot of needing to hear self-serving spin from representatives of an organization that denies fundamental LGBTQ rights, especially since the City's own Human Rights Commission had voted unanimously to urge that another location other than the church-owned building be selected as a temporary library, even if that alternative cost more and wasn't as operationally efficient.

Here's part of an email that was sent to a member of the Human Rights Commission on the subject of whether the Salem Alliance Church discriminates against LGBTQ people. Of course, there's zero doubt that the church rejects same-sex marriage and considers same-sex marriage to be a sin, because the Lead Pastor has said as much in a recorded talk.

The email, though, focuses on the hiring practices at the Broadway Commons/Coffeehouse, which is owned and operated by the Salem Alliance Church. The blog post mentioned in the first paragraph can be read here.

The most definitive evidence of discrimination is the blog post by the KATU reporter that is linked on Brian's blog. The reporter directly asked church leadership if they would hire someone that was openly LGBTQ. Church leaders refused to answer this question.

I asked them the same thing and they refused to answer (please see their response below). The church has said that employees are expected to be followers of Christ, which in their interpretation excludes members of the LGBTQ community. 

They also claim that they have never discriminated, but this simply means that no openly gay individuals have ever applied for a job, so they haven't had the opportunity to discriminate. This is a "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and it is inherently discriminatory.

Anyone that questions whether or not Salem Alliance discriminates should call or email church leadership (https://www.salemalliance.org/about-us/leadership/) and ask them if they would hire an openly gay applicant. Church leaders will either refuse to answer the question, or they will dance around and not answer directly.

Included in the person's message to the Human Rights Commission member was this example of how the Salem Alliance Church dances around their anti-LGBTQ stance. Basically, Pastor Childs spouts a lot of verbiage that says next to nothing. 

Someday, maybe, perhaps, the church might choose to separate its rejection of LGBTQ rights from how it staffs the Broadway Commons. For now, as noted above, the church has a "don't ask, don't tell" approach that is far removed from a genuine acceptance of LGBTQ people.

Robb Childs, the Executive Pastor, wrote:

Let me say, first, that we share a similar set of questions with you about how closely aligned theologically the business operations at Broadway Commons should be with those of Salem Alliance Church. 

...We have had several conversations at leadership levels and continue to discuss where we do or don't expect there to be alignment by our staff at Broadway Commons with the theological beliefs of Salem Alliance Church. We have not landed on a decision yet, but we are committed to keeping at the conversations until we do reach a new consensus. 

Steve and I anticipate that we will ultimately land in a place that requires less theological alignment for our staff at Broadway Commons.

While it is true that Salem Alliance holds to the biblical standard that sexual relations are reserved for marriage between one man and one woman, and we regularly call our church family to live out that biblical standard in their lives, it is also true that we actively seek to be people who respect and welcome everyone on our campus, even those with whom we may not agree for whatever reason.

In fact, LGBT individuals/groups are regular clients at Broadway Commons and, to our knowledge, have never felt shamed or discriminated by our staff there.

Even though Broadway Commons is owned and operated by Salem Alliance, we have not chosen to use it as a religious platform. We have not discriminated on the grounds of sexual orientation during our hiring process at Broadway Commons, nor have we ever taken action against a Broadway Commons employee based on those grounds.

Robb Childs
Executive Pastor
Salem Alliance Church

Here's my take on the absurd claim that because LGBTQ people are "regular clients at Broadway Commons," this shows that the church isn't anti-gay.

I have no doubt that Hobby Lobby, the crafts store chain owned by a fundamentalist Christian family, welcomes anyone with a credit or debit card, or cash in hand. However, Hobby Lobby's policies are highly controversial, being at odds with the values of most Americans, and many people refuse to shop there for that reason.

Officials at the City of Salem never grasped that supporters of LGBTQ rights feel the same way about using a public library that is housed in space leased from an organization that rejects those rights. It isn't a question of whether the temporary library will welcome LGBTQ people.

What matters is that for 18-24 months the public library will be in a building owned by a church that denies the humanity of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning people.

City officials misled citizens about temporary library location

The key thing I wanted to learn from a City of Salem public records request that ended up costing me $844.85 was whether City officials were telling the truth when they said this in a staff report for the July 22, 2019 City Council meeting.

The former Capital Press building (Site) at 1400-1440 Broadway Street NE  (corner of Hood and Broadway) is the best and only option available to the City that meets the project schedule and site criteria.

"Best and only option." NOT TRUE. This is decidedly disturbing for those of us who value transparency and honesty in our public servants.

I'll explain why I reached this conclusion after briefly describing why choosing the former Capital Press building for a temporary public library was so controversial. 

The Salem Public Library is being renovated following the passage of a bond measure in November 2017. For about 18 to 24 months, a temporary library location needed to be found that will house a much reduced collection.

Out of all the buildings in our city of over 170,000 people, City officials settled on the Capital Press building that is owned by the Salem Alliance Church and is part of the church's "campus" on Broadway street north of downtown.

This choice was vociferously opposed by the Salem Human Rights Commission and other supporters of LGBTQ rights, because the Salem Alliance Church is notoriously gay-unfriendly and reportedly discriminates against gay people.

The church rejects same-sex marriage and considers same-sex sex to be a sin. The lead pastor, Steve Fowler, has made clear how the Salem Alliance Church feels.

And you will never find in the scriptures any positive pictures of a same sex union. It just isn’t there... Any kind of sexual activity outside of a marriage with a male and a female, this is something we should not be engaged in... What God is saying is that if you’re engaged in same-sex sex, if you’re using a same-sex relationship in that way, you also need to run, you also need to book it.

So the Human Rights Commission understandably wasn't thrilled, to say the least, about taxpayer money being used to lease the church-owned Capital Press building for a temporary library. The Commission voted unanimously to approve a statement that called for another location to be chosen, if at all possible.

That statement said in part:

The Salem Human Rights Commission (Commission) is deeply concerned about the proposed lease of the property owned by the Salem Alliance Church for the temporary location of the Salem Public Library. The Commission values having a library that they can reasonably expect all persons will access, to be consistent with the purpose and intent of the City’s Human Rights Code. The Commission believes that some members of the community, including some in LGBTQ communities, will not be comfortable accessing the space.

...The Commission has been informed that this location is the only adequate property available for the Library relocation, and that if the City does not use this space, only the west Salem library branch will be open during the renovation.

The Commission respectfully requests that the City review the available properties for other potential options, and select another location, even if that location is not as ideal in cost or operations.

Thus the main question I wanted to answer from the 1,245 pages of public records I got from the City of Salem was whether it really was true that the Capital Press building was the "only adequate property available for the Library relocation."

What I learned was what I'd already strongly suspected. City officials misled both the City Council and citizens in general about viable alternative locations for a temporary library. 

Even before I got the public records, I'd written a July 30 blog post, "Liberty Plaza is a viable alternative to a LGBTQ-unfriendly temporary library building." Excerpt: 

City officials claimed in a staff report that the church-owned building "is the best and only option available to the City that meets the project schedule and site criteria."

Almost certainly that statement is wrong, for reasons I'll describe below.

I don't blame the City Council for trusting the staff report. I blame Steve Powers, the City Manager, and Kristin Retherford, the Urban Development Director, for affixing their names to what sure seems to be a misleading staff report, at best, and a purposely deceptive staff report, at worst.

Given the facts that I'm sharing below, I stand by that view.

City officials were both misleading and purposely deceptive, because they didn't provide some highly pertinent information to the City Council and citizens about downtown's Liberty Plaza -- and possibly other buildings that could have served as a temporary library location.

Fact One. Liberty Plaza was rated by City staff as highly as Capital Press on the criteria used to assess potential sites for a temporary library.

Capital Press and Liberty Plaza each got 21 points on the four selection criteria: Tenant Improvements needed (TI), Operations Efficiency, Quality of Service, and Access.

Capital Press got an extra point for needing less Tenant Improvements. Liberty Plaza got an extra point for access, being right next to a city-owed parking garage with a covered walkway leading directly into the building. The two buildings tied on Operations Efficiency and Quality of Service.

Thus when the Human Rights Commission said that an alternative location to Capital Press should be found even if it was not as ideal in terms of operations, Liberty Plaza was equal to Capital Press in this regard. So that wasn't a reason for it not being chosen.

Fact Two. The lease cost for Liberty Plaza was higher than for Capital Press, but still within the relocation budget.

The library relocation budget was $957,000. This was to cover the cost of a lease, temporary improvements, and moving to the temporary location. Of course, City officials had some latitude to increase the budget as needed. 

As shown in the slide above, the Capital Press monthly lease cost per square foot was $1.37, while the Liberty Plaza cost was $1.92, 40% higher. However, the total cost shown in the slide is misleading, because the Capital Press building has only 16,560 square feet, while Liberty Plaza is shown as having 24,309 square feet.

When I listened to an audio recording of the May 2019 meeting of the City Council's Library Relocation Subcommittee (no written minutes exist), Councilor Chris Hoy expressed considerable concern that Capital Press was too small for a temporary library. He urged City staff to keep looking for other locations.

So it isn't true that City officials viewed the church-owned building as a "slam dunk" temporary library. In addition to worrying about the size of Capital Press, the Subcommittee spent considerable time fretting about the downside of housing Salem's public library in a building owned by a church that rejects LGBTQ rights. 

Again, the Human Rights Commission called for another location to be chosen even if it cost more and was less ideal operationally. We've already seen that Liberty Plaza was viewed by City officials as being equal to Capital Press in terms of operations.

Let's take a closer look at cost.

Fact Three. City officials failed to disclose the true cost of leasing space at Liberty Plaza. I know this, because I engaged in an exchange of emails with Norman Wright, the Community Development Director for the City of Salem.

I'd seen from the public records I got that Wright was involved in selecting a temporary library location, so I asked him why Liberty Plaza was excluded from consideration, since the public records didn't contain any reason for this, other than a pithy "Expensive and didn't meet the criteria."

Well, Liberty Plaza did meet the criteria, as noted above. So that part of the pithy explanation was false. That got me to wondering how expensive Liberty Plaza actually was.

It turns out that City officials significantly overstated the cost of Liberty Plaza in the slide above, because they assumed that the entire second floor of Liberty Plaza would need to be leased in order to have a suitably sized temporary library.

But as shown in the screenshot below, in addition to 13,309 square feet on the first floor, Liberty Plaza had spaces available in the basement, second floor, and third floor. I have no idea why City officials wrongly claimed that the entire second floor would need to be leased, but this wasn't true.

I know this, because I talked by phone with the person in charge of leasing Liberty Plaza, Dennis Randazzo.

He told me that there was flexible space available on the second floor, so another 3,000 square feet or so could have been added to the 13,309 square feet on the first floor, which would have approximated the 16,560 square feet in the Capital Press building.

Assuming the same square footage had been leased at Liberty Plaza, the monthly lease cost would have been $31,795, or $572,310 for an 18-month lease. Recall that the total temporary library budget was $957,000. It sure seems that Liberty Plaza was feasible, cost-wise. (City officials never estimated the cost of temporary improvements for Liberty Plaza.)

Yet Randazzo told me that City officials didn't speak with him in a serious fashion about Liberty Plaza. He was eager to work with them. Concerns about the non-functioning escalator could have been addressed. The lease cost was up for negotiation. Restrooms shouldn't have been a concern.

Which gets me to...

Fact Four. No formal Request for Proposals (RFP) was made by the City of Salem. Randazzo told me that based on his extensive experience in commercial real estate, he was surprised that City officials failed to issue a RFP for temporary library space here in Salem. 

Instead, the public records I got showed a rather haphazard approach to locating and assessing possible locations. City staff would hear about this or that possibility, then discuss who should be involved in scouting it out. 

Not very professional, for sure. 

It was clear that Liberty Plaza was one of the top three locations considered by City officials for a temporary library. Randazzo said that after coming up with several viable options for leased space, typically a government agency would make a final request to the prime candidates who responded to a RFP.

Agency staff would talk to each of them another time and ask for a re-bid. However, that never happened with Liberty Plaza. It seems that an informal "rush to judgement," as the saying goes, was made by a small number of City officials who favored the church-owned Capital Press building.

This calls into question the exceedingly brief assessments of alternative locations shown in the image above.

City officials knew how controversial the Capital Press building was, since a neighborhood boycott of the Broadway Commons had been publicized given the discriminatory attitude of the Salem Alliance Church toward LGBTQ people.

Yet there was no systematic approach to assessing locations for a temporary library. There's very little information in the 1,245 pages of documents I got from my public records request about why certain locations were favored over others.

Again, this reflects the puzzling absence of a RFP for leased space to house a temporary library. 

We've seen that when City officials dismissed Liberty Plaza in the slide above with "Expensive and didn't meet the criteria," this was a false statement. Which is a polite way of saying, a lie. Liberty Plaza did meet the criteria, and the cost of leasing space at Liberty Plaza appeared to fall within the library relocation budget.

So the many people in Salem and elsewhere who supported the Human Rights Commission call for a location to be selected other than the Capital Press building, even if that alternative site cost more and wasn't as operationally efficient, have good reason to be upset at how City officials mismanaged the search for a place to house a temporary public library.

They didn't inform the City Council, nor the public, that the church-owned building wasn't the only viable location. Instead, City of Salem staff misled people by wrongly claiming that no alternative to Capital Press existed.

My strong suspicion, which borders on a certainty, is that this was done because the Human Rights Commission statement contained these two sentences, as previously shared above.

Locating the Library at the proposed site will result in a Library that some members of the community, not only the LGBTQ, will not be willing to visit, and will negatively impact the Library’s mission.

The Commission has been informed that this location is the only adequate property available for the Library relocation, and that if the City does not use this space, only the west Salem library branch will be open during the renovation.

It's deeply irritating that City officials told the Human Rights Commission that the church-owned Capital Press building was the "only adequate property available for the Library relocation." This was a falsehood, a lie.

I've shown how those officials deceived the City Council and concerned citizens by both failing to present information on alternatives such as Liberty Plaza, and by failing to conduct an in-depth professional assessment of alternative sites.

There's more to say about this issue, and I'll address other topics in future blog posts.

What's highly concerning to me is how City of Salem staff failed to present pertinent facts to the public, choosing instead to put out a misleading staff report on the Capital Press building that claimed the church-owned building was the only feasible location for a temporary library, ignoring the significant drawback of housing a public library in a building owned by an organization that denies fundamental LGBTQ rights.

Since City officials put out falsehoods in this case, how much can they be trusted on other issues? I'll address that question in my next blog post.

Salem's City officials say "screw you" to supporters of LGBTQ rights

I thought I couldn't get any more irritated at the Salem City Council and City officials, and I was plenty mad before, but now I'm way more pissed off.

I just learned that those officials have signed a contract with the Salem Alliance Church to lease a building owned by the church for a temporary public library, even though City Council rules allow for reconsideration of any council decision at the next meeting, which is August 12.

The City Council voted to approve the lease on a 6-1 vote at the July 22 council meeting. But this was a hugely controversial issue. And two councilors were absent, Tom Andersen and Sally Cook. Jackie Leung was the sole sane vote in opposition to this crazy idea.

A headline in a Willamette Week story about this issue that came out a few days ago sums up the situation nicely.

The Salem Human Rights Commission unanimously said that another location for a temporary library should be chosen even if it cost more and was less efficient operationally, because the Salem Alliance Church rejects LGBTQ rights and their Broadway Coffee House has been the subject of a boycott due to the church's discriminatory practices.

There are alternative locations to house a temporary library, such as Liberty Plaza, which was one of the top three choices of the Library Renovation Subcommittee. Virtually everybody who submitted written or verbal testimony to the City Council was against using the church-owned Capital Press building.

And people have been contacting the Mayor and city councilors urging that the City Council reconsider approval of the Salem Alliance Church lease agreement at the council's next meeting on August 12. Reconsideration is allowed by a City Council rule.

Yet a little while ago I learned that City staff went ahead and signed the Salem Alliance Church contract, thereby taking away the ability for this issue to be reconsidered by the City Council -- essentially screaming a loud Screw you! at supporters of LGBTQ rights in Salem.

Margaret Stephens conveyed the contract-signing news via a comment on the Save Our Books at Salem Public Library Facebook page. Here's what Stephens wrote. I've boldfaced a portion that deserves emphasis.

Jackie Leung, the sole no vote on the use of Salem Alliance Church property for the temporary Library, kindly responded to my questions about whether anything could be done at this point. She said:

"Because I voted no, I am not able to ask for a reconsideration. One of the councilors, such as Councilor Kaser, who voted yes, will need to call it up. I can issue a plea at the council meeting for reconsideration, though no one may do so.

It also depends on if city council already signed a lease with SAC. If it has already been signed, I am afraid that there is no way to stop it from moving forward. As a frequent library user, it also concerns me about the use of the Capitol Press and what it means to our community.

Thank you for your email. Please continue reaching out to Councilor Kaser. Perhaps she will be willing to request a reconsideration if it is not too late."

Then I found out that the lease has been already signed. But before that, I contacted Councilor Cara Kaser (Ward 1, in which I live). Here is what she wrote:

"I hope you either watched live or the recording of City Council meeting when this issue was discussed. Councilor Chris Hoy summed up my position on this issue exactly. If you didn’t get a chance to watch Councilor Hoy’s remarks, I hope that you will.

The Library sub-committee charged with finding a temporary build to house the library collection recommended this location after going through several other properties. For one reason and another, the former Capital Press building was the only feasible site to relocate the library and met the sub-committee’s criteria for relocation.

The building is owned by a religious organization but the building itself is not a religious building (i.e. it’s not a church, sanctuary, chapel, etc.). Also, the building will be under lease and operated by the City, and not by a religious organization.

The City will follow it’s own ordinances and codes of conduct while the library is at this temporary location, just as it follows rules now at the permanent library site. Because of this, I believe that the temporary location for the library will be a welcoming and accepting place for all members of our community, just like our permanent library location is now."

Since I already knew that the property was owned by SAC and not a "religious" building, the only thing to take away from Councilor Kaser's comment is that her position was the same as Hoy's.

And Hoy's pertinent comment was that basically "if we (the City) scrutinizes all entities that the City does business with, it is a slippery slope"

...And my comment regarding that is that if the City does NOT look at the policies of entities, then THAT is the real slippery slope.

Would the City do business with an entity with an avowed white nationalist agenda? Would the City do business with an entity that was against marriage between different races? I think not.

So why are LGBTQIA people, their friends, allies, and loved ones being thrown under the bus? Answer that please, "progressive" council members.

Great question. 

Councilors Hoy, Kaser, and Ausec, each of whom claims to be progressive, along with Mayor Bennett and councilors Lewis and Nanke, all knew full well that the Human Rights Commission and LGBTQ community in Salem understood that the temporary library was going to be operated by City staff, not by the church.

That was irrelevant to supporters of LGBTQ rights. Which makes what Councilor Kaser said above, and what Councilor Hoy said at the July 22 council meeting, also irrelevant.

What mattered is what Stephens said: the Salem Alliance Church opposes LGBTQ rights.

The church rejects same-sex marriage and views same-sex sex as a sin. The church refuses to say whether it abides by anti-discrimination laws in its Broadway Coffee House hiring practices.

Yet not only does the City of Salem see no problem with paying almost $500,000 to the Salem Alliance Church to house a temporary library that won't be used by members of the LGBTQ community and their supporters, it rushed ahead with signing the lease contract in order to prevent public opinion from forcing a reconsideration vote at the August 12 council meeting.

UPDATE: I just realized that there's a decent chance one or more of the six members of the City Council who voted to go ahead with leasing the church owned library for a temporary library pressed City staff to sign the Salem Alliance Church lease before the next council meeting to avoid the spectacle of a reconsideration request being discussed at the meeting.

Also, here's a cogent comment from ardent library supporter Jim Scheppke that he left on a Facebook page where I shared this blog post: 

"I agree with Brian that the City staff should have waited until after the August 12th meeting to sign the lease to allow Councilors Cook and Andersen to weigh in on this issue on behalf of their constituents. We heard at the last meeting from substitute Councilor Evan White that Councilor Cook was opposed to leasing the church property. I would not be surprised to learn that Councilor Andersen is also opposed.

There was very little discussion of the issue at the last meeting because it came at the end of a long meeting and the Councilors were clearly rushing through the end of the agenda as they often do. A decision that affects a large portion of the community (LGBTQ citizens and their friends, family and supporters and others who care deeply about human rights) should not be railroaded. I also disagree that the church building was the only viable choice. I think that's false. It was the cheapest choice."

Disgusting. Outrageous. Shameful. And those are the least profane words that spring to mind.

Yesterday I paid $476.80 to the City of Salem for the required fee to get public records related to the selection of the church-owned Capital Press building for a temporary library.

I submitted the public records request because I figured there was a good chance I'd get the documents prior to the August 12 City Council meeting where a reconsideration might have been discussed.

I figured wrong, failing to anticipate that City officials would forestall reconsideration by rushing ahead with signing the contract, even though the library won't start moving into a temporary location until December.

However, I'm still glad that I'm getting the documents and emails, because I believe the public needs to understand as clearly as possible how this horrible choice of the Capital Press building happened. 

Salem's LGBTQ communities need your help

I get it. It's summer. The living is mostly easy. There's so many causes -- political, social, cultural -- that demand your attention. But please give some serious thought to spending a few minutes to help some people close to home: Salem's LGBTQ communities.

Here's the issue they need your help with.

The Salem Public Library has to be relocated while renovations are made to the library building at the Civic Center. City officials favor using the old Capital Press building adjacent to the Broadway Commons as a temporary library.

Problem is, the Capital Press building is owned by the Salem Alliance Church, as is the Broadway Commons. The church isn't LGBTQ friendly.

Now, if you're either already familiar with this issue, or don't need further convincing to support the LGBTQ communities in Salem who oppose leasing of the church-owned property for a temporary public library, I urge you to do one or more of these things as soon as possible -- since the City Council will be discussing this issue, and likely acting on it, at the Monday, July 22 council meeting.

(1) Sign the “Stand up for LGBTQ rights in Salem!” petition that will be submitted to the City Council.

(2) Submit advance testimony for the July 22 City Council meeting to [email protected] with a "cc" to [email protected]  Include your full name and address. Express support for the Human Rights Commission position that a different location than the church-owned building should be found for a temporary library, even if that location is more costly and less efficient in terms of operations. Note that alternative locations have been identified by City staff.

 

(3) Testify in person during the three-minute public comment period at the Monday, July 22 City Council meeting, 6 pm at the council chambers in City Hall (555 Liberty St. SE). Sign up before the meeting, indicating which agenda item you’re testifying on. Read your testimony if desired, but often testimony has more of an impact if it's spoken while looking at the council members and comes from the heart, as well as the head. 

 

OK, with this important citizen activism request out of the way, we return to the subject of this blog post: why Salem's LGBTQ communities need the help described in 1-3 above.

 

The Salem Alliance Church is opposed to same-sex marriage, even though this has been legal everywhere in the United States since 2015. The church also considers same-sex sex to be a sin. Last December I wrote about this in "Salem Alliance Church pastor talks about sin of same-sex sex."

 

Another post, "Two reports of how Broadway Coffee House/Commons discriminates against LBGT people," described how neighbors of the Broadway Commons were boycotting it because of the church's discriminatory attitudes.

 

I also shared a letter to the editor in the Statesman Journal calling for a boycott. So it wasn't surprising that the Salem Human Rights Commission voted unanimously to reject the plan to use the church-owned building for a temporary library, even if an alternative location costs more and is less efficient in terms of operations.

 

And that vote occurred after City officials met with both the LGBTQ Rights Task Force of the Human Rights Commission, and the Commission itself. Thus the decision to oppose using the Capital Press building during the library's relocation period (18 months or so) was well-informed, given that those officials hoped to convince the Human Rights Commission to support use of the church-owned building.

 

Here's excerpts from the full Human Rights Commission statement:

"The Salem Human Rights Commission (Commission) is deeply concerned about the proposed lease of the property owned by the Salem Alliance Church for the temporary location of the Salem Public Library.

The Commission values having a library that they can reasonably expect all persons will access, to be consistent with the purpose and intent of the City's Human Rights Code. The Commission believes that some members of the community, including some in LGBTQ communities, will not be comfortable accessing the space.

…The Commission respectfully requests that the City review the available properties for other potential options, and select another location, even if that location is not as ideal in cost or operations."

There are indeed other properties available to serve as a temporary library. I'm confident of this because I've listened to audio recordings of several meetings of the Library Renovation Subcommittee of the City Council, including the most recent meeting in June.

One of the facts I discussed in "Three facts about the controversy over Salem library moving to church property" was Seemingly there are alternatives to the building owned by the Salem Alliance Church.  Two days ago I asked City officials to let me know if they disagreed with any of the facts in that post. I've heard nothing back.

City officials don't see much wrong with using the church-owned building because the church isn't going to be running the temporary library. However, this quote in a Salem Reporter story, "Plan to move Salem library to church-owned property stirs discrimination concerns," captures why the Human Rights Commission opposes this plan.

Daniel Rollings, president of the Salem chapter of PFLAG, a national organization that advocates for LGBTQ rights, said the plan is still tantamount to partnering with a hate group.

“I am completely opposed to the city partnering with any organization, regardless of what it is, that actively discriminates against anyone,” he said. “The city should not put out bids to work with the (Ku Klux Klan) nor should they work with anti-LGBTQ organizations that actively discriminate against the LGBTQ community.”

If you find what Rollings said to be unduly provocative, here's how I see the situation.

Imagine an alternative reality. Most people are gay, attracted to the same sex. But there's a minority who are heterosexual. One of the largest churches in Salem wants to lease a building to the City of Salem for a temporary library. It's well known that the church will only marry LGBTQ individuals. And it considers sex between people of the opposite sex to be a sin.

If you're heterosexual, wanting to marry a woman if you're a man, or a man if you're a woman, would you feel comfortable using a library in a building owned by a church that denies your right to marry? And not only that. Whether you're married or not, the church says that you shouldn't be having sex with someone of the opposite gender, because that would be a sin.

How would you feel about taxpayer money being used to lease space in a building that opposes what you consider to be fundamental human rights: the right to marry whoever you love, and the right to have sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex?

Speaking as a heterosexual man, I wouldn't like that at all.

Which is why I'm supporting the Human Rights Commission, because I understand why members of Salem's LGBTQ communities don't want the City of Salem to lease space from a church that denies their basic human rights.

Human Rights Commission rejects plan for library to use church building

Thanks to quick work by staff of Salem's Human Rights Commission, today I got draft minutes of two meetings that I requested.

This allows me to sound like CNN's Wolf Blitzer and intone, Breaking news! Happening now! Human Rights Commission says "No" to City officials' plan to lease space from the anti-gay Salem Alliance Church to temporarily house library.


As noted in yesterday's blog post, "City officials may pay anti-gay church to house library," this controversial proposal was addressed by the LGBTQ Rights Task Force of the Human Rights Commission on June 26, and by the full Commission on July 2.

Below I've shared the text of three documents that I received from Gretchen Bennett, whose title is Human Rights and Relations/Federal Compliance Manager, Mayor/City Manager’s Office, City of Salem. I complimented her on the wonderfully detailed and well-written draft minutes of the meetings.

Bennett also shared a statement that was passed unanimously by the Salem Human Rights Commission on July 2 that opposes using the Salem Alliance Church building for a temporary relocation of the Salem Public Library. I've boldfaced parts for emphasis in this blog post.
Download HRC statement on the Library relocation

As you read these materials, keep in mind that the Salem Alliance Church believes that same-sex sex and same-sex marriage is a sin, and the Broadway Coffee House run by the church refuses to say that they would hire an otherwise qualified person who was a member of the LGBTQ community. 

My previous blog post contains links to other posts I've written that document these facts.

Here's the Human Rights Commission statement. I applaud the Commission for standing up for what is right, even if it causes some inconvenience to those planning the library relocation.

It's also admirable that the Commission and the LGBTQ Rights Task Force stood firm against the library director, City of Salem attorney, and Commission staff -- all of whom clearly wanted the Human Rights Commission to go along with the plan of city officials to relocate the library to the old Capital Press building owned by the Salem Alliance Church.

UPDATE: In a comment on this post, someone shared an audio file of the April 19 Library Renovation Council Subcommittee meeting. Discussion of sites to temporarily house the library is at about the 34 minute mark. This shows that contrary to what the Human Rights Commission was told, there are several other viable locations other than the Capital Press building owned by the Salem Alliance Church.

There also was a recognition by the committee that leasing the church building would be controversial, given the church's discriminatory attitude toward the LGBTQ community. At about 41:30 in the recording there's mention that Gretchen Bennett, staff to the Human Rights Commission, was asked about this and said the controversy would be "easily weathered." Well, we shall see about that.

At about the 42 minute mark a committee member asks about money from the City of Salem going into church coffers, which obviously would occur.

Bottom line: it appears that City staff wrongly asserted to the Human Rights Commission that the church building was the only viable site to house the library, while this wasn't the message being given to the Library Renovation Council Subcommittee. And they knew that the church discriminated against LGBTQ people, but thought they could still get away with leasing the church building.

The Liberty Plaza site is no longer available to lease, but the Vick Building is still listed. So City officials need to do some explaining about why they told the LGBTQ Rights Task Force, which is part of the Human Rights Commission, that the church building was the only option to house the library.

Here's a link to the audio file.

http://media.cityofsalem.net/meetings/audio/library-renovation-council-subcommittee-audio-2019-04-19.mp3

That's why I've included the full text of the documents in this blog post. Reading the material is seeing democracy in action, people struggling to find the correct way forward, and speaking truth to power.

Salem Human Rights Commission statement concerning
the potential lease of property owned by the Salem Alliance Church
for the temporary relocation of the Salem Public Library.

[Note: I've added emphasis of certain sections by boldfacing the text]

The Salem Human Rights Commission (Commission) is deeply concerned about the proposed lease of the property owned by the Salem Alliance Church for the temporary location of the Salem Public Library. The Commission values having a library that they can reasonably expect all persons will access, to be consistent with the purpose and intent of the City’s Human Rights Code. The Commission believes that some members of the community, including some in LGBTQ communities, will not be comfortable accessing the space.

The purpose of the Commission is to promote harmonious relations within the city, examine sources of tension, practices of discrimination and act of prejudice in the city, and make recommendations concerning solutions to specific problems of prejudice or discrimination. The Commission will continue to be available for reports of discrimination in the community.

The Commission fully understands and supports freedom of religion and expression for all people, including faith based organizations. One of the Commission’s roles is to actively assist persons who experience discrimination based upon religion.

This commitment to freedom of religion, however, does not allow for the Commission to be in support of this business transaction. It is offensive to some members of the Salem community for the City to enter into a contract with, and pay money to, an entity that may be experienced as unwelcoming to members of the LGBTQ community.

The Commission strongly supports and appreciates the mission and programing of the Salem Public Library, The Library plays a critical role in providing a welcoming and supportive environment for all members of the community, particularly members of the community that are vulnerable, our youth, and those of limited means. Locating the Library at the proposed site will result in a Library that some members of the community, not only the LGBTQ, will not be willing to visit, and will negatively impact the Library’s mission.

The Commission has been informed that this location is the only adequate property available for the Library relocation, and that if the City does not use this space, only the west Salem library branch will be open during the renovation.

The Commission respectfully requests that the City review the available properties for other potential options, and select another location, even if that location is not as ideal in cost or operations. In the event that the City must use this location, the Commission recommends that the City Council publicly proclaim the City’s support and adherence to the purpose and intent ofthe City’s Human Rights Code, particularly as applied to the LGBTQ community, and urge all ofthe city’s residents to support and encourage a city free of discriminatory barriers. Further, the City should affirm that the City, particularly the Library, is open and welcoming to all members of the Community, and that the City is committed to ensuring that the Library will remain so during its relocation. The Commission and the LBGTQ Task Force is committed to working with the Salem Public Library to develop options to make the Library’s temporary space accessible, welcoming and inclusive to all.

Approved by the Human Rights Commission July 2, 2019

______________________________________ Danielle Meyer, Chair,
on behalf of the Human Rights Commission

Here's the text of an Action Item discussed at the July 2 Human Rights Commission meeting that led to the statement above being approved. The full draft minutes can be read by clicking on this link.
Download 7 2 2019 Human Rights Commission

Action Item: Library Relocation/ Inclusive Space

Sarah Strahl and Dan Atchison gave a review of the library relocation project including its scope, purpose and needs of the library. The Library Renovation Council Subcommittee has been in the process of reviewing potential temporary space for a full service Library during the seismic retrofit. As options for that space came to the committee, one of the potential spaces includes the old Capital Press building, owned by Salem Alliance Church. The Subcommittee requested the Human Right’s Commission’s input into ensuring all races, creeds, religions and identities continue to be welcome in the new space, as they are in the current location. Chair Meyer asked Commissioners to review the draft statement from the Commission to see if there were any changes they would like to make.

Vice Chair Bechtoldt draws members to the fourth paragraph, second line of the draft statement which says, “[i]t is offensive to members of the Commission, and to some in the local LGBTQ community, for the City to enter into a contract with, and pay money to, an entity that may beexperienced as unwelcoming to members of the LGBTQ community” to instead read “it isoffensive to some in the local LGBTQ community....”

Member Watters suggests taking out the language of “members of the Commission” and instead read “Commission” to make it more general. Member Dass clarified with staff if this statement should be coming from the HRC and not the LGBTQ Task Force. Member Borja stated if the location will be the place of the library, it would be beneficial to add language about how the library could make itself more inclusive.

Member HK Leblond agreed and felt it was important it is stressed in the statement that the Commission is there to help the library and the community and wants more information about the experiences of people with the organization; this is seconded by Member Aquinas- Gallagher. Chair Meyer says she has personally not experienced discrimination, that no formal complaint has been made to the City or the Commission and that she feels like the statement is both accurate and necessary.

Member Schwartz shared feedback from a member of the public and Vice Chair Bechtoldt shared her experience of her work place choosing to not hold events at another church owned property. Member HK Leblond asks how the City plans to react if the library moves in and there are community concerns. Chair Meyer stresses that she is confident the City and its staff would not act discriminatory, but is concerned about the perception. Dan Atchison was able to clarify that this would purely be a business transaction as the City has with other rental sites across the city and this is a policy issue rather than a legal issue.

Member Dass circles back to Member HK Leblond’s question about issues that may arise after the library moves in and how the library plans to handle those. Librarian Sarah Strahl shares this is why the Library Renovation Council Subcommittee has approached them for feedback and how they can make the space more inclusive. Chair Meyer thanked Sarah and says that the Commission will continue to be a resource to the library through this process.

Vice Chair Bechtoldt makes a motion to amend the statement to read that “[i]t is offensive tomembers of the Salem community for the City to enter into a contract with, and pay money to,an entity that may be experienced as unwelcoming to members of the LGBTQ community.” This is seconded by Member HK Leblond and passed unanimously.

Member Borja asks if the Commission wanted to provide clearer direction to the Library staff about ways the Library could be more inclusive if the location was selected. Chair Meyer and Member Tricarico suggest adding a sentence explicitly stating the Human Rights Commission and the LGBTQ Task Force are here to provide support to the community and the Library. Dan and Sarah confirm the plan for the Library move is November, so there is time to plan more concrete suggestions if that is desired.

Member HK Leblond read aloud from Chapter 97 of the Salem Revised Code which helps guide the Commission and says that she wants to add the sentence regarding support. After discussion among the group, Member HK Leblond motions for the sentence, “[t]he Commission will continue to be available for reports of discrimination in the community” to be added to the end of the second paragraph. This is seconded by Member Watters and approved unanimously by the Commission.

Member HK Leblond then motions for the entire statement as amended to be approved by the Commission, this is seconded by Member Dass and approved unanimously. Dan lets the Commission know he will make their amendments to the statement and then provide a copy for Chair Meyer to sign on behalf of the Commission. He shares he anticipates the issue going before Council on July 22nd.

Lastly, here's part of the draft minutes of the June 26 meeting of the LGBTQ Rights Task Force of the Human Rights Commission. This is where the idea for a statement opposing relocation of the library to the building owned by the Salem Alliance Church originated.
Download LGBTQ Rights June

5. Salem Public Library: Welcoming and Inclusive Services

Norm Wright, Salem Community Development Director, and Sarah Strahl, City Librarian, shared the upcoming plan to seismically retrofit the main branch of the library. They are here to ask how, in the new space, they can make our library as welcoming and inclusive as possible. APowerPoint presentation was provided. Norm spoke to the library’s core services of welcoming spaces, collections, outreach/events, technology access and customer assistance. A temporary space will be needed for at least 18 months.

Norm noted the group has been working since November with a relocation committee which includes Councilors Hoy, Lewis and Library Advisory Board member Stark. The group researched locations and is left with one option available to continue providing services. The site was formerly known as Capital Press, and is owned by Salem Alliance Church. The space is move-in ready, and the team is running out of time. Access, building safety and life systems such as egress, are examples of criteria considered in site selection.

Warehouses were one type of building looked at, Norm explained, but these are built with different requirements, given they aren’t needing to house a large number of people. Over1,000 persons a day come through the main branch, and aspects such as exiting in case of emergency, bathrooms, and other features must be considered. The bond funding provided for the retrofit project is not able to be used for renovating temporary space, nor is there time to do so.

Sarah shared the location is in an active part of town at Broadway and Market and is on a major bus line. There will be free parking while at this interim space. There will be some viable meeting rooms available. There is also a loading dock; given the lack of overall space in the facility (going from 90,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet) a functional loading dock is key to acquire materials from partnering libraries as well as to stock outreach vehicles.

Sarah spoke to the importance of ensuring everyone is welcome in the new space. She discussed past activities such as the table in conjunction with Transgender Day of Remembrance and spoke of methods such as pins worn to express personal pronouns.

Norm and Sarah and the library renovation committee are at the Commission to request ananswer to the question, “How can we make our library space as welcoming and inclusive aspossible?”

Chair Meyer thanked Norm and Sarah for presenting and shared she has always been impressed with the library as a regular patron.

In answer to the question, she said the way to be welcoming is to learn what the published policies are of the owner of the space as to their inclusion of all persons including LGBTQ communities. She expressed strong opposition to leasing the space without clear, published statements demonstrating commitment to inclusion of LGBTQ communities by the building owner.

Commissioner Rollings expressed great hesitation, feeling it doesn’t look well to collaborate withan organization that is hostile to LGBTQ communities; as President of the local chapter of PFLaG, he said he receives reports of concerns. He shared he is hearing of kids who are directly affected by bias experienced. He was concerned city tax dollars would go to an organization that doesnot align with the library’s values of inclusion.

Commissioner Aquinas Gallagher expressed she felt it is wrong, and a stand must be taken. She spoke of an example of a person who expressed concerns to her, who is gay, and opted to leave their previous affiliation with the church.

Commissioner Schwartz spoke of reports of hateful things in a local blog and of concerns/complaints she has heard from people in the community. She raised the recent scheduling of a specific group at the library, who had been known to express hate.

Gretchen paused the conversation, and observed that everyone in the room shares a common goal to be welcoming and inclusive to all, and, to have a library space during the seismic retrofit.

Commissioner Watters was unable to be at the meeting; he submitted written input; copies of his email were shared with all participants. His input was noted.

Gretchen inquired if the complaints discussed related to places of public accommodation? She noted the community blog includes a statement from the church, which clarifies that the church does not ask questions in the hiring process related to LGBTQ, that it operates its public spaces to be open to everyone. She noted the right of faith based organizations to freedom of religion, a factor the Human Rights Commission also works with.

The group spoke of the dependence of the community on the library, and that there aren’t other options. Gretchen expressed significant concern of not having a library for the many who depend on the space especially in winter months or for critical help such as technology access.

An idea of a statement emerged. Members and Commissioners discussed the idea of making a strong statement of concern. Gretchen inquired what the statement would be based upon, given the freedom of religion and the lack of substantiated complaints received.

Gretchen spoke of criteria for what goes into a statement or a recommendation. When contemplating these it is helpful to ask questions such as what the impact will be (no library during winter months?), what the recommendation is based upon, and to always be accurate. It is difficult to take indirect or secondary reports, and from that to imply founded discrimination.

A brief recess was taken.

The group clarified that the lease agreement would allow the City to control what signs were up in the space; Norm indicated yes.

Commissioner Aquinas-Gallagher shared she would not go to the library if the site is chosen.

Chair Meyer clarified the process. Norm noted that this option is emerging as there is not another option. City Council makes decisions on lease agreements. Chair Meyer spoke of understanding the need, and putting value on people, not spaces.

Commissioner Rollings inquired about purchasing processes. Norm explained it works much like local house hunting wherein they are free to research from multiple brokers and places, not limited to those who apply or come to them. He spoke of the exhaustive search undertaken these past months.

Commissioner Schwartz urged everyone to think about what is right, not only about what is legal.

Member Kimball acknowledged the difficulty. He encouraged keeping open discussion. He encouraged the library to commit openly in forward facing ways with the LGBTQ community.Commissioner Watters’ email also contained a suggestion along those lines if this was the onlyspace available.

The group discussed looking at it through the lens of the Human Rights Commission at their next meeting, July 2.

Commissioner Borja indicated the group should also address the question the library staff asked, which is how the library space can be as welcome and inclusive as possible? She does not want to not see a library.

City officials may pay anti-gay church to house library

This seems horrible to me. How does it strike you?

I've heard from several sources that officials at the City of Salem are seriously considering paying the Salem Alliance Church to use the old Capital Press building that the church owns as a temporary public library while the library building at the Civic Center undergoes renovations.

Here's the problem with this: the Salem Alliance Church is notoriously anti-gay. Meaning, anti-homosexual, anti-LGBTQ, anti-anything that their archaic view of sexuality considers a sin.

So if this ill-considered scheme comes to pass, taxpayer money would be going to an organization that flaunts the inclusive policy prominently displayed on agendas of the Human Rights Commission, which is based in the Salem Mayor's and City Manager's Office.

Now, my understanding is that Oregon churches are partially exempt from anti-discrimination laws.

So I'll leave it to better legal minds than mine to determine whether it would be legal for the City of Salem to enter into a contract with a church that openly declares same-sex marriage and same-sex sex to be a sin, and refuses to say whether it would hire an otherwise qualified LGBTQ person to work at the Broadway Commons or Broadway Coffeehouse.

My concern isn't so much whether this would be legal, but whether it would be right.

After all, any money paid by the City of Salem to rent or lease the Capital Press building as a temporary library would go directly into the Salem Alliance Church bank account, thereby supporting a religious organization that discriminates against LGBTQ people.

I've been told that the Salem Alliance Church is eager to enter into a contract with the City of Salem because the church wants to pay off what it owes on the Capital Press building purchase. The big question is whether city officials should be equally eager to join hands with a church that is anti-gay.

Here's a sign that those officials are aware of how controversial this move would be. 

The agenda for the June 26 meeting of the Human Rights Commission LGBTQ Rights Task Force contained this item.

Then, the agenda for the July 2 meeting of the Human Rights Commission had an item related to the library relocation.

Sure seems like City officials are justifiably worried that relocating the library to a building owned by an anti-gay church could raise questions about the City of Salem's commitment to LGBTQ rights. 

(I've requested minutes of the June 26 and July 2 meetings in either audio or written form, as they aren't available on the City of Salem web site.)

So here's a suggestion to City officials: DON'T DO IT.

Choose a place to temporarily house the Salem Public Library that isn't connected with an organization that calls same-sex marriage and same-sex sex a sin. 

Here's links to my previous blog posts about the archaic views of the Salem Alliance Church:

Two reports of how Broadway Coffee House/Commons discriminates against LGBT people
Salem Alliance Church pastor talks about sin of same-sex sex
Broadway Coffee House does discriminate against gay people
Why supporters of gay rights should boycott Broadway Commons

Why supporters of gay rights should boycott Broadway Commons

Read on to learn why those in Salem who support gay rights and same-sex marriage should join in the boycott of the Broadway Commons and the Broadway Coffee House. 

I submitted what follows as a guest opinion in the Statesman Journal about three weeks ago. Recently I inquired about the piece and learned that the newspaper wasn't going to publish it. 

So here it is. The only change I've made to what was sent to the Statesman Journal was adding links to other blog posts I've written about the boycott.

Facts About the Broadway Commons Boycott
by Brian Hines

In a December 11 letter to the editor, Scott Rick called for a boycott of the Broadway Commons because Salem Alliance Church, which owns the property, refuses to allow same-sex marriages. Rick said that the church discriminates against LGBT people “in various ways,” including the refusal to marry same-sex couples.

A boycott is a serious action. It should be based on facts.

A year ago I heard about a boycott by 50 neighbors of the Broadway Commons for a similar reason. Here’s what I’ve been able to learn since about this issue. I’m confident that what follows is accurate, since it is based on demonstrable facts. 

First, in addition to the Salem Alliance Church not being willing to marry same-sex couples, lead pastor Steve Fowler has preached that same-sex sex is a sin.

I listened to a podcast of a 2016 sermon by Fowler where he says, “And you will never find in the scriptures any positive pictures of a same sex union. It just isn’t there…Any kind of sexual activity outside of a marriage with a male and a female, this is something we should not be engaged in.”

Second, in response to the boycott controversy, the Salem Alliance Church has issued a statement that affirmed an orthodox view of marriage, said that only followers of Jesus are hired to work at the Broadway Coffee House, and noted that sexual orientation questions are not asked during the hiring process.

However, the statement was silent as to whether openly LGBT people would be able to work at the coffeehouse.

Third, a KATU News reporter and I have repeatedly asked representatives of the Salem Alliance Church and Broadway Coffee House whether a LGBT person would be welcome to be a barista.

The only response has been that the above-mentioned statement is their last word on this matter. So it appears almost certain that the Broadway Coffee House does indeed discriminate against those in a same-sex relationship, in accord with the teachings of the Salem Alliance Church.

To my understanding this is legal in Oregon, since religions are not bound by anti-discrimination laws that apply to others. However, this doesn’t make it right.

The Broadway Coffee House shows no outward sign of being church owned and operated. I’ve heard from numerous people that if they had known the coffee house is run by a church that considers same-sex sex to be a sin and won’t hire LGBT people, they wouldn’t patronize it.

Here’s a cogent analogy.

Imagine Planned Parenthood ran a coffee house, but didn’t publicly indicate it was the owner. Those opposed to abortion would be disturbed to learn that the money they spent at the coffee house was going to a cause they found abhorrent, even though abortions are a small part of what Planned Parenthood does.

Likewise, backers of gay rights and same-sex marriage are justifiably concerned about supporting the Broadway Commons for the same sort of reason: not being consistent with their values.

Note: this image isn't of members of the Salem Alliance Church, but it accurately represents how the church looks upon same-sex sex. 

Broadway Coffeehouse does discriminate against gay people

It is clear that the Broadway Coffeehouse, which is run by the Salem Alliance Church, does indeed discriminate against LBGTQ people as my previous posts on this subject have laid out. See:
Two reports of how Broadway Coffee House/Commons discriminates against gay people
Salem Alliance Church pastor talks about sin of same-sex sex

As you can read below, I've asked representatives of the coffeehouse and church if the coffeehouse would refuse to hire someone otherwise well qualified but who was gay, in a same-sex marriage, or engaging in same-sex sex. The same questions have been asked by a KATU reporter and by another interested person, Johnny Green.

Those representatives have refused to give an answer to whether the Broadway Coffeehouse discriminates against LBGTQ people. I even posed the question by saying that the job applicant was a member of the Salem Alliance Church, but is openly gay and in a same-sex marriage. The applicant just considers that it isn't a sin to have same-sex sex, as the church maintains.

Again, no answer. So it seems clear that the Broadway Coffeehouse is indeed a gay unfriendly place, despite their protestations that they are an "inclusive gathering place." I don't consider homophobia to be inclusive, loving, or what Jesus would do.

(I'm an atheist, but my understanding is that the root of the Christian belief that same-sex sex is a sin comes from the Old Testament.)

KATU reporter Joe Douglass contacted me after he read my first blog post about the Broadway Coffeehouse. Later, he sent me a Facebook link to a post where Douglass shared a statement from Robb Childs, the executive pastor for Salem Alliance Church. Here's what Douglass' post says. I didn't include the link to my blog post/article since it is above.

In response to accusations the Broadway Coffeehouse and Commons in Salem discriminates against LGBTQ people as described in the below article by Brian Hines, Salem Alliance Church, which owns the coffeehouse, sent me a statement claiming they don’t ask prospective employees about their sexual orientation. It also says, “We intentionally hire followers of Jesus,” and that the church affirms an “orthodox view of marriage.”

Robb Childs, the church’s executive pastor, sent me the statement. He would not answer follow-up questions as to whether the coffeehouse would hire LGBTQ people if their orientation became known and whether any LGBTQ people work at the business.

Following is the entire statement from Childs:

“Broadway Commons was built by Salem Alliance Church as an inclusive gathering place for anyone and everyone under a vision that church, community and commerce could come together for the common good.  Broadway Coffeehouse is a business/ministry of Salem Alliance Church located in the Broadway Commons building.

For nearly 100 years, Salem Alliance Church has been committed to loving all individuals through all of its ministries. We believe everyone is created in God’s image with inestimable worth, and therefore, we seek to treat every individual, even those with whom we might disagree, with dignity and respect.

It is with this mission that we operate Broadway Coffeehouse.  While we intentionally hire followers of Jesus at Broadway Coffeehouse, it has not been our practice to ask sexual orientation questions during the hiring process.

While Salem Alliance Church affirms the long-standing, orthodox view of marriage that the Church has affirmed for centuries, we have not sought to use Broadway Coffeehouse as a religious platform.  Instead, we strive to demonstrate a welcoming spirit and provide exceptional service to everyone in our diverse community.  Jesus had a beautiful way of interacting with the people of His day with grace and truth and we want to be a reflection of Him.  We love our community and we work hard to be good neighbors, open to all who visit our church, use our facilities or stop by for coffee as we serve our city following Christ’s example.”

It's disturbing that Salem Alliance Church calls homosexuality and same-sex sex a sin in the privacy of their sermons, but isn't willing to be honest about this in its public persona. Rather, in the statement above Childs dances around the question I, the KATU reporter, Johnny Green, and many other people want answered by the church:

Would you refuse to hire a qualified  gay person to work at the Broadway Coffeehouse if they were open and upfront about their homosexuality, even if they were a member of the Salem Alliance Church?

I don't buy the "we hate the sin but love the sinner" spin that Childs tries to get away with.

Same-sex marriage is legal everywhere in the United States. Same-sex marriage has the approval of 67% of Americans. Sexuality is an integral part of marriage. Science has learned that sexual orientation is wholly or mostly determined by genetics and isn't a choice. The excerpt is from the first link:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19172387

The cross-cultural similarities evinced by the Lethbridge study offer further evidence that being gay is genetic, which is, in itself, an interesting finding. But we as a society should challenge the notion that sexual preferences must be nonvolitional to be socially acceptable or safe from scrutiny. The etiology of homosexuality, biological or otherwise, should have no bearing on gay individuals’ right to equality.

Hating the sin of same-sex sex is the same as hating people in same-sex relationships. 

The bigoted attitude of the Salem Alliance Church and the Broadway Coffeehouse is rapidly becoming a relic of an unenlightened time, in much the same way that racial prejudice has endured among a minority of people in our country even though our laws and culture are moving forward on this front.

I will never set foot in the Broadway Commons now that I know how the Salem Alliance Church looks upon same-sex relationships. In short, as a sin.

In a continuation to this post you can read a comment on my first blog post from Luke, who apparently is a manager at the Broadway Coffeehouse. As you'll see, I took him up on his offer to ask some questions, but I never heard back from Luke, or anyone else. Two of my follow-up emails also are copied in.

Salem Alliance Church pastor talks about sin of same-sex sex

Here's some simple facts about the controversy over the Broadway Coffee House, and the Broadway Commons in general, discriminating against LGBTQ people.

(1) The Salem Alliance Church and the Broadway Coffee House/Commons are one and the same. I've been told that money from the latter goes to the church. (2) The Salem Alliance Church won't marry gay people, and the pastor is on record as saying that same-sex sex is a sin. You can read what he has said below.  (3) So anyone who supports the Broadway Coffee House/Commons by going there, or spending money there, is supporting a church that denigrates gays. 

This is why many neighbors of the Broadway Commons have been boycotting it. And this is why a letter to the editor in the Statesman Journal calls for a boycott of the Broadway Commons. 

Some people defend the Salem Alliance Church by saying this is a matter of religious liberty.

Well, sure, people are free in believe in whatever crazy thing they want to. But usually it isn't so obvious that the crazy people are running a business aimed at attracting the general public -- most of whom don't believe in the crazy ideas held by the crazy people.

The situation isn't all that different from the KKK operating a restaurant back in the days when the United States tolerated racial discrimination. If you disagreed with the KKK's views about African-Americans, you wouldn't feel good supporting the KKK's restaurant, right?

Likewise, below is what the lead pastor of Salem Alliance Church, Steve Fowler, said in a podcast of what I assume is a July 16, 2016 sermon based on Romans 1:18-2:1-2. That's the part of the Bible fundamentalists use to rail against same-sex marriage and same-sex sex. 

Fundamentalists like that aren't just alive and well in the deep south.

They're alive and well right here in Salem, at the Salem Alliance Church. Think ahout this next time you ponder going to the Broadway Coffee House or Broadway Commons. I've transcribed part of Fowler's sermon from about the 32 minute mark, boldfacing some parts about same-sex sex.

Yesterday I heard from a Portland reporter who had been trying to speak with a Salem Alliance Church pastor for the entire day. It seems kind of strange that church representatives are so sure that same-sex sex is a sin that deserves to be loudly preached about, but they don't seem willing to share their dogmatic views with a reporter.

This is what Pastor Fowler said.

When Adam and Eve have sex, it is not just union. It is a reunion. It is the image of God as represented by Adam. the image of God represented by Eve. And when these two opposite genders come together it is not just union, it is a reunion. It is a beautiful picture of what God is trying to get us to understand of relational intimacy that is represented in the Godhead.

And you will see a consistent sexual code from Genesis all the way to Revelation. In fact, in Revelation there is the marriage supper of the lamb. What is that? It’s reunion. It’s all the saints. It is everyone with Christ. And this physical oneness is a beautiful picture of that.

And you will never find in the scriptures any positive pictures of a same sex union. It just isn’t there. There’s this consistent sexual code. There’s this beautiful metaphor that’s presented in sexual oneness, as a picture of people of the opposite sex coming together. 

So we talk about running from sexual sin. Here’s what we’re saying. Any kind of sexual activity outside of a marriage with a male and a female, this is something we should not be engaged in. So if you’re married and you’re having sex with someone who is not your spouse, you don’t just need to resist, you just don’t need to fight it, you need to book it, you need to run.

And if you’re sexually active with someone you’re not married to, you need to run. If you’re engaged in porn or you’re going to strip clubs, you need to run. And on this topic, what God is saying is that if you’re engaged in same-sex sex, if you’re using a same-sex relationship in that way, you also need to run, you also need to book it.

And I just want to say to you, I don’t want you ever coming to Salem Alliance Church and walking out of here, and saying that guy never told us. This is exactly what it says. And we can work hard, and we can say we know better, or that’s the ice cream cone in the pocket, but friends, it’s what God’s word reveals.