http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dl ... 7/-1/CINCI[url]

Sunday, October 16, 2005
'Speak English' isn't so simple
Civil rights panel gets rants; bar gets better business

By Janice Morse
Enquirer staff writer

The Enquirer/Brandi Stafford

E-MAILERS HAVE SAY ON DECISION
G. Michael Payton, executive director of the Ohio Civil Rights Commission, says reaction to the Pleasure Inn case caught him off-guard.

One e-mail the commission received bore the subject line: "May I politely disagree?" That e-mailer went on to say, "While I might agree that the sign doesn't give non-English speaking patrons a warm welcome, I don't feel this incident is significant enough for our government to become involved."

Many other e-mails were less polite, including: "To attempt to deny an American citizen the right to speak their mind in regards to a request to Speak English reveals your fascist tendencies. ... You are a good example as to why this country is turning in to a cesspool of third world scum."

ADVERTISEMENT

MASON - In the week since a state agency ruled that a small tavern's "For Service Speak English" sign violated Ohio civil rights law, the agency has experienced an unprecedented backlash - and the bar has enjoyed an influx of new customers.

While the Ohio Civil Rights Commission's executive director says people have misinterpreted the ruling, the owner of the Pleasure Inn says the commission reached an unfair conclusion about his sign.

"People are getting themselves whipsawed into a frenzy over what this case is not about," said G. Michael Payton, the commission's executive director.

"This is not a referendum over English being the predominant language," he said. "It's plainly about a sign in a place of business that has a chilling effect on people who don't speak English. The plain meaning of the sign would chill someone from coming in and using that establishment. It's just a step away from earlier days when signs said, 'No colored people.' "

While some people rationally debate the decision, others launched into hate-filled rants that Payton says reaffirm the reasons why the commission's work is necessary.

"Every citizen in the state of Ohio, no matter what their race, can benefit from a civil rights law sometime in their life," he said. "This case just happens to deal with national origin discrimination. We reasonably believe that (sign) violates the law as provided to us by the General Assembly of the state of Ohio."

But the bar's owner and some customers say they don't understand the fuss.

Pleasure Inn owner Tom Ullum, 63, of Lebanon, said he intends to fight the ruling, which could eventually force him to remove the sign, undergo diversity training or pay for anti-discrimination advertising.

As of Friday, the commission had not received a request to reconsider its Oct. 6 ruling; the deadline for appeal is Wednesday.

The Pleasure Inn, a small yellow brick building with a tattered maroon awning, isn't an attention-getter.

But its yellow sign, perched in a window facing U.S. 42 near Mason-Montgomery Road, stirred controversy that hit talk-show airwaves, newspaper opinion columns and e-mails to the Civil Rights Commission.

Ullum said he has received no complaints about the sign. In fact, he said, the controversy has been good for business.

He said one woman called to say, "We've been in Mason 18 years. We've never been in your bar, but we're coming in to show support."

Ullum said he enjoys verbal jousting with his customers, even if the exchanges might be considered politically incorrect.

One regular, a die-hard Democrat, pasted Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry stickers on the bar wall to get even with Ullum for posting a Republican Bush/Cheney poster.

"I think it's funny when they do that to me," Ullum said.

Ullum said he hasn't discriminated against anyone. He says several Mexicans - who speak broken English - have come into the bar in recent months without incident.

"I think the sign's great," said patron David Joslyn, 67, as he sat at the bar Thursday afternoon. "They ought to speak English. This is America, ain't it?"

Payton, the state commission's director, says such comments miss the point: that the commission considers the sign "a form of national origin discrimination."

Payton said he agrees immigrant groups need to learn English to prosper.

"We're not saying he has to speak Spanish," Payton said.

Given that most Americans trace their lineage to overseas nations, "How would they feel if upon arriving in this country, their ancestors were met with a sign that said, 'Unless you speak English, we won't serve you here'? That would be the question I would leave them with - and that is what this case is about."

Payton also said the case is not about Ullum's First Amendment right to post a sign.

"This is not political speech. It's commercial speech," Payton said, and commercial speech is subject to regulation.

Payton points out that it was President Bush who reauthorized an executive order first issued by President Clinton, stating that all government entities that receive federal money must provide language accessibility to the limited-English population.

Ohio law says all people, regardless of national origin, should be allowed to enjoy public accommodations such as a tavern, Payton said, adding, "It wouldn't take too many interpretive skills to figure out whether someone wants a cheeseburger or a Bud Light. ... It's wrong to say that, if you want to walk in this place, you must speak English."

Payton said he welcomes discussion on the issue, but is concerned about racist and hate-filled comments that appeared in some of the 60 or more e-mails his office received.

"Rational dialog in the marketplace of ideas is as American as anything," he said. "It's one thing to reasonably disagree with us. But it's another thing to be racist and say some of the vile things that have been said as a consequence of us rendering our opinion. It reminds us why we have an agency like this and reminds us why the work we do is needed very, very sorely."

Peter Bronson contributed.