Video Interview, Bill Johnson, November 30, 2012

  • KEVIN INDOVINO: OK.
  • So let's first start with back with the seat
  • of funding and that whole issue with what
  • was called the community chest back then, I believe.
  • Can you just start off for me the story
  • about what the CETA funding issue was,
  • and how you with the Urban League got involved with it.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, there was a public service component
  • of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act,
  • CETA, funding that came about in the late 1970s.
  • And the city of Rochester received a large grant,
  • and decided to contract with the United Way, or at the time
  • was called the united community chest for administration
  • of this grant, which would be subcontracted out
  • to a number of not-for-profit agencies.
  • One of the agencies that had applied for funding
  • was the Gay Alliance of Genesee Valley.
  • And when that became public, the United Way and the city
  • came under excruciating criticism
  • from a group of white right-wingers,
  • homophobic people in the community.
  • And that led the United Way's board
  • of the United Community Chest's board to turn that grant back
  • to the city.
  • And the city then reached out to the Urban League of Rochester.
  • And I was the executive director at the time
  • then when the offer was made to us.
  • This funding would have literally doubled our funding.
  • We were about a $1.1, $1.2 million dollar agency.
  • And so now they are offering us a million dollars
  • to administer.
  • Our board, the board of the Urban League, discussed it,
  • and there were two main issues for us.
  • One is a great opportunity for us to continue to grow.
  • At the time that I came to the league in '72,
  • it was at the point of the brink of closing.
  • It was at the brink of bankruptcy.
  • And so I was hired to restore its funding
  • and to increase its programming.
  • So this was a wonderful opportunity,
  • but it also meshed with the Urban League's mission,
  • which was to fight in all forms of discrimination.
  • And generally speaking, what we did
  • was to fight racial discrimination.
  • But we saw this strong protest for what it was.
  • It was discriminatory.
  • And only the Gay Alliance proposal was singled out.
  • There were about three dozen proposals in that package.
  • And one city councilman, Charles Schiano,
  • focused on that to the detriment of a lot
  • of other activity going on.
  • And there was really nothing that sinister about the Gay
  • Alliance proposal.
  • It was a community education, it was a newsletter,
  • it was not a proselytizing kind of a thing.
  • But these homophobic people really
  • chose to exacerbate this problem.
  • And the history will show that took they over city council.
  • They came in there with tremendous protests.
  • But the council stood its ground.
  • The Urban League stood its ground.
  • Those people, Schiano, and Mike Macaluso,
  • and other people like that, threatened
  • even Urban League funding.
  • But we refused to bow to that pressure.
  • And that grant was approved by city council overwhelmingly.
  • We ran the program.
  • We didn't have picket lines out front.
  • We had crackpots who were called.
  • But those people would have never supported the Urban
  • League in the first place.
  • There was no need of us trying to accommodate
  • any of their concerns.
  • Now, on the other hand, you can imagine the problem
  • that the Community Chest faced because they were a fundraising
  • organization, and they try to avoid controversy,
  • because they view that any controversy tends to impact
  • adversely that funding.
  • So it was a great opportunity for us.
  • It led us into other areas into the future.
  • And I think it was a great blow against discrimination,
  • bigotry, intolerance that the city of Rochester made.
  • And as you know, I think this was really
  • the forefront, because Rochester has
  • been a leader on these issues in so many other ways.
  • One of the leaders of the Gay Alliance at the time
  • was Tim Mains.
  • A few years later, he was elected to city council
  • being the first openly gay person in New York state
  • to win election to political office.
  • And other things have happened in this community
  • over the years.
  • So I look back on that as really as a significant moment
  • in the history of this city, while it might not
  • have been on the par in terms of scale, of the fight with Kodak
  • and hiring of blacks back in the sixties,
  • I think that we can say that it really approximated
  • that same level of importance.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: You touched on something there
  • that I was going to come to a little bit later,
  • but now that you touched on it--
  • because you'll have a unique perspective on this.
  • What is it about Rochester, that we've always been
  • a champion for the underdogs?
  • What is it?
  • Because Rochester's not a big city.
  • But we have such a history here for activism and civil rights.
  • And a lot of that has roamed out of Rochester.
  • What is it about the city as a whole of who we are?
  • What does it say about who we are, that we step up
  • to the plate this way?
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, it's really a part
  • of our historical culture.
  • But I think you have to look at it very closely,
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: Hold that thought a second.
  • I'm just going to close that door over here.
  • Somebody's in the office over here.
  • (pause in recording)
  • So yeah, just talk about who we are as a community.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • Yeah.
  • We have achieved a reputation for being on the cutting
  • edge of issues like women's rights,
  • abolition, the fight movement in the sixties, the civil rights,
  • and a lot of areas.
  • But by then, you had to really go deep and look at it
  • even closer, because there's something really rather
  • ironic about all of this.
  • While we have achieved this reputation,
  • it didn't come without hard fights.
  • There was intense resistance, where you go back.
  • Susan B. Anthony never saw the achievement of her dream
  • in her lifetime, and yet now she is widely
  • recognized as one of the premium leaders of the fight
  • for women's equality.
  • Frederick Douglass and the abolitionist movement
  • that had a strong toehold here in Rochester,
  • he didn't achieve a lot of prominence
  • until he left Rochester and became a national figure.
  • And I cite this, and hope this won't
  • be viewed as a digression.
  • But I think it's very, very important.
  • Back in 1999, we found a time vault in the old City Hall.
  • It had been discovered, and had been placed there
  • in the latter part of the nineteenth century.
  • And the instructions were that this box
  • should be opened before the turn of the twenty-first century,
  • OK?
  • So there it had been sitting.
  • And City Hall had moved.
  • And someone went into this, and found it,
  • and it had been sitting somewhere.
  • So we opened it up, took it over to the Museum of Science
  • Center, opened it up.
  • And here's the thing that I found striking about it.
  • The contents of this box were placed at 1872, OK?
  • And they had managed to pack a lot of stuff
  • in there, newspapers, diaries, any kind of memorabilia
  • that related to that period.
  • In that box that was put together in 1872,
  • there was not one single reference, one single item
  • that could be tracked to Susan B. Anthony or Frederick
  • Douglass, which meant that during that time,
  • their contemporaries did not view
  • them to be as important as we have subsequently
  • come to view them.
  • Now, for me, that's very, very significant.
  • And I think it suggests, really, the kind of community
  • Rochester is.
  • Yes, we've done great things, but it's not
  • been without a struggle.
  • And I think that we look back now on this very significant--
  • at the time, it was viewed as a fight.
  • But I think we now can see that it
  • has led to many more prominent developments
  • in the arena of gay rights.
  • And Rochester really can claim it's place
  • at the forefront of that movement.
  • So I think that if there's any lesson to be learned,
  • it's one of persistence.
  • You don't back down in the face of very, very
  • strong opposition.
  • There are people of goodwill who probably
  • don't stand up and cheer, but quietly, they
  • support these things.
  • Because I think that the Urban League got a lot of credit
  • back then for having the courage on board and our staff
  • having the courage to take this all very publicly.
  • But I think the city council, which had just
  • become a Democratic-controlled city
  • council-- because you go back a decade,
  • it was under Republican control.
  • And if the Republicans--
  • I don't make mean this is a political statement.
  • It's just a statement of fact, that if the Republicans control
  • our city council back in 1977, '78,
  • they would have capitulated to that,
  • to all of that strong opposition,
  • because that was coming from people
  • they viewed to be part of their natural base.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: A couple quick thoughts here.
  • When the Urban League got approached
  • to administer the grant, what were your first thoughts?
  • And I can't imagine you said from the get go, let's do this.
  • There had to be some debate, some apprehension there.
  • Any concerns up front?
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, yeah, to be perfectly candid,
  • the answer is yes.
  • But driving this decision was my background
  • being born in a southern racist south,
  • and being born and raised in the 1950s,
  • and the sixties when the Civil Rights
  • Movement came to prominence.
  • Now here's a real irony.
  • There's a lot of homophobia in the black community
  • as well, and particularly in the organized religious community.
  • That is just now beginning to subside.
  • President Obama, by embracing same-sex marriage really broke
  • through, but there was fierce--
  • for example, in the state of Maryland,
  • there was an item on the constitutional amendment,
  • a referendum item on the ballot in the November election
  • that was strongly opposed by fundamentalist black churches,
  • OK?
  • But they lost.
  • They lost.
  • So what I'm saying here is that when I saw this,
  • I broke it down.
  • And I had to do this in other points of my career
  • to point out to my own people, that you can't afford
  • to be on the wrong side of this issue,
  • because all you got to do is take out gay and put in black,
  • and you've already been there.
  • We've already been victimized by the same kind of demeaning,
  • harsh, and racially-divisive feeling.
  • So how is it that you can afford to turn
  • your back on other people being discriminated against?
  • And that was very, very strong.
  • And that was an argument I can recall making to our board.
  • I think our board saw it, that it would have been hypocritical
  • for us to walk away from it.
  • And maybe-- and I never could quite
  • understand why the city council chose Urban League.
  • As I say, we were just beginning to come back from a period
  • where we have sunk to a great low level.
  • And somebody over there, Mayor Ryan or someone,
  • saw in us the capacity to do this.
  • And maybe they recognized, that if we go to x agency, or y
  • agency, they could find a way to oppose it.
  • They could say, well, there's going to be resistance.
  • But with us, they could not expect that kind of response.
  • The irony is this, our funding with the United Way
  • could have been jeopardized as well,
  • that we were at that point of our budget, over half of it
  • was coming from the United Way.
  • So we got quiet encouragement from the United Way to do this.
  • We had assurances that they weren't
  • going to succumb to any indirect pressure
  • to take away funding from one of it's agencies,
  • because they always said these agencies are autonomous,
  • they are governed by their own board of directors.
  • But they could give us assurance that we could do this
  • without bringing any great danger to our other programs.
  • But I think it was the right thing to do.
  • Looking back, it was obviously the right thing to do.
  • And it worked out because these folks went away.
  • They made their loud noises.
  • They made their threats.
  • But in the final analysis, they weren't
  • capable of following through on all those threats.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: And one last question,
  • I want to talk to you a little bit about Betty Dwyer,
  • because Betty Dwyer was very significant in helping
  • you administer these grants.
  • We interviewed Betty.
  • She had a lot of great things to say about you.
  • So I just want to get your thoughts about Betty,
  • and really significant contributions
  • that she made in helping make this grand administration
  • successful.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • Betty didn't work for us at the time.
  • Jeff Carlson, who was my deputy at the Urban League,
  • and my deputy at City Hall for until he died--
  • Jeff and I were together for over twenty-five years--
  • when we decided we going to do this,
  • we knew that we needed a strong manager.
  • We needed a strong manager.
  • And I recall that he identified Betty.
  • He had worked with Betty in other areas.
  • And he said this is the right person for the job.
  • Betty had done some work with ABC
  • and with other organizations.
  • So she had a strong community organization background.
  • But the thing that I think really
  • was Betty's strongest point, is that she's unflappable.
  • She doesn't give this appearance of being tough,
  • but she's tough as nails.
  • So she had the right disposition,
  • the right demeanor, the right background,
  • the right temperament to do this job.
  • And I would tell you, you can imagine
  • that this program was going to be
  • under severe, excruciating observation.
  • People were waiting for us to make a mistake.
  • We had to submit to evaluations.
  • We had to-- we ran the program for about five years,
  • as I recall, until seat of funding shifted
  • to a new federal program.
  • But she managed that ship so tightly
  • that it could never be a challenge to the funding based
  • on programmatic or performance lines.
  • Betty, is a joy, is my one joy--
  • I go to my grave with my deepest appreciation.
  • She worked with us in other areas.
  • She never ever failed.
  • But I'm just saying she was the right person to do this job.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: So let's move forward a few years.
  • You're now the mayor of the city.
  • And a particular proposal comes up, domestic partnership
  • benefits at the city level.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: I imagine probably
  • a lot of pressure from someone like Tim to get this through.
  • Again, talking about your first thoughts
  • about when this issue came up for discussion--
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, this issue was actually
  • driven by Tim Mains.
  • Tim had been deprived of leadership.
  • When I became mayor in 1994, Tim had run a very strong
  • at large election.
  • I think he may even have led the ticket.
  • And he had some expectations of becoming
  • the president of city council.
  • And he was deprived that, that chance.
  • So he had no consultation with me or anyone else.
  • Exercising his right as a legislator,
  • he introduced this legislation for domestic partnership.
  • Again, no other municipality in New York state
  • had ever considered such legislation.
  • And obviously, no one had passed it.
  • So now, again, this brought out Mike Macaluso, OK?
  • Charlie Schiano was off the city council.
  • But Mike Macaluso came forever, wherever
  • he had been hiding all these years, and he comes by,
  • and he begins to pound the city council on this.
  • This was a very divisive issue.
  • So let me just say without a lot of detail--
  • I'm sure Tim will talk about that--
  • we finally came to the night we were going to vote on this.
  • And this was closely divided.
  • I was mayor for twelve years.
  • And only two times during my tenure
  • did legislation ever pass by just one vote.
  • When the vote was taken, it was five to four.
  • And I didn't have any role.
  • I will not sit here and try to claim
  • any credit for leading that.
  • But I recognized, again, that there would be pressure coming.
  • So I said to Tim--
  • I gave him my assurance that I will sign that legislation, OK?
  • And remember, if it passed by only five to four vote,
  • if I vetoed it, it could not have been--
  • it was highly unlikely that it would have
  • been approved over my veto.
  • So I didn't want it to be any doubt about the fact.
  • And I, again, made statements that this was, for me,
  • a civil rights issue.
  • And all the people looked at it.
  • Well, could the city afford it?
  • Is this going to really exacerbate our costs?
  • And my point was, this is the right thing to do.
  • So the moment the vote was taken, and it was five to four,
  • I announced that, "Please, get this to me immediately
  • so I can sign it."
  • It has to be put in a certain format.
  • So there was no way it was going to be ready that night.
  • But it was ready the next morning, which I signed.
  • And amazingly, after I signed it,
  • these fundamentalist ministers, both black and white,
  • a delegation visited me a few weeks later and said,
  • "Mayor, we want you to veto that legislation."
  • I said, "Well, I think you're about three weeks late.
  • I've already signed that legislation.
  • I don't why you didn't know it because it
  • was in the newspaper."
  • "Well, you need to undo it."
  • I said, "Nope."
  • Again, I lectured them about how could they
  • be on the wrong side of this issue.
  • But there were fundamentalist white ministers,
  • who we interacted with on other issues, like violence,
  • and housing, who really threatened
  • to pull their support on those issues if somehow
  • or another we did not reverse the action
  • on the domestic partnership legislation.
  • And we stood very, very strong on that.
  • So, again, I think that the city of Rochester
  • demonstrated its foresight in its wisdom, its vision
  • on something that was highly controversial,
  • but I also believe highly important for us to do.
  • And that has stood the test of time.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: I watched the videotape of that, that city
  • council session.
  • And I just wanted to get your opinion
  • on this, because it seemed to me like Lois Geiss was
  • that deciding vote.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: But she took a long time
  • before she actually came out and says, yes, I'm voting for this.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: Just your recollections of that--
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, I will say this.
  • And I worked with Lois for the entire twelve years
  • that I was mayor.
  • She was president of city council.
  • And Lois was very deliberative, I think is the right word.
  • And even before the matter came to city council,
  • she didn't think that a measure was
  • going to pass with at least seven votes.
  • We were hard pressed to get it before city council.
  • In other words, she wanted it to have strong, strong support.
  • And if there were people on council
  • who had some individual objection,
  • she would give them that chance to express
  • their views during the debate and before the vote.
  • But she knew where the votes were, OK?
  • Now, I'm only saying this to say that if that legislation--
  • it took her a while to develop that style.
  • And I think that she did a count.
  • There were a couple of people we couldn't be certain of.
  • They could have gone either way.
  • So that vote could have been five four in either direction.
  • Five four, for or against.
  • It could have been six three, or seven two.
  • Clearly, and I don't recall the four who voted.
  • If I think about it long enough, knowing how they voted,
  • I could probably figure out who the four were.
  • So those people who were subjected
  • to tremendous pressure from the opposition,
  • maybe on religious grounds.
  • There could be on philosophical grounds.
  • But under the style that she subsequently
  • developed, if that legislation had
  • come one or two years later, it may not ever come to a vote
  • because she would not have allowed
  • it to come to a vote with just a five to four.
  • The other issue, the other issue that came maybe ten years later
  • totally unrelated to this dealt with budget and the fact
  • that I was reducing.
  • I took seven million dollars from the school district,
  • which is like a holy grail.
  • You can't do that.
  • And we needed the money for our own operations.
  • And we worked very furiously.
  • And in fact, that vote was closer than we thought it was.
  • But certainly, we couldn't hold our voting on the budget.
  • And so that was the only other time.
  • But I would say this.
  • I think Lois, the president of council
  • always casts the final vote.
  • So sitting there with a four to four vote,
  • she was the decisive one.
  • And then I've never spoken to her about her feelings
  • about this.
  • She cast the vote the right way as far as I was concerned.
  • And we solidified it because we wanted
  • to make certain there wasn't even
  • the hint of a possible veto of this legislation.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: I just want to touch base
  • on that evening again just a little bit more,
  • because the chambers were filled with a diverse range of people,
  • or pros and cons, a lot of people, very emotional.
  • But when the vote went down, you had to get up and speak,
  • and say I'm going to sign this legislation, just
  • talk to me a little bit about what you were feeling
  • emotionally at that time, the certainty
  • that you had that this was the right thing to do.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, for me, it was almost instinctive.
  • It wasn't something that I had to think about.
  • I didn't have a vote on it.
  • So, for example, if the fifth vote
  • hadn't been a no vote, at that point there was nothing
  • I could have done about it.
  • We hoped, and we talked to people,
  • and we wanted to make sure that this was important.
  • It was important to Tim.
  • Tim is a respected member of city council.
  • But, again, as I say, I haven't seen the tapes.
  • You might go back and confirm for me that some of the people
  • were talking about the economic implications
  • of this legislation, trying to really shift it away
  • from the social implications of it.
  • I just knew.
  • I had a sense based on things that
  • happened to me at the Urban League
  • that there was going to be a group of people who could claim
  • an affinity to me, who could claim that they supported me,
  • and they helped me.
  • And really, the group of ministers-- remember,
  • I won election in a very divisive and competitive
  • primary.
  • And I wasn't the front runner.
  • So I was the underdog, and I relied on and needed
  • the help of a lot of people.
  • So a lot of these people who came to see me--
  • I don't know what took them so long.
  • There was no way I was about to invite them
  • to come talk to me about this.
  • But when they said they wanted to come,
  • it would be I expected that I would receive them.
  • A lot of these people could truly say,
  • if it hadn't been for I standing by you,
  • you wouldn't be sitting where you are today.
  • And here we are.
  • This is important to us.
  • And we truly, truly, truly want you
  • to reconsider what you've done.
  • And I had to have a very, very serious discussion with them,
  • and to distill almost lecturing to them
  • about what it meant, that you can't pick and choose
  • in the area of discrimination.
  • You can't pick and choose an area of hatred.
  • You can't say well, I tolerate this form of it
  • because the environmental aspects of this
  • are too explosive, and they could turn right back on you.
  • We've seen this.
  • And let me say that--
  • think about the fact that everybody
  • said after the election of Barack Obama,
  • we have really transcended a real racial barrier
  • in this country, and yet we've seen such outpouring of hatred
  • against this man that is unbelievable.
  • So we haven't solved this problem of racism.
  • And it's now more convenient.
  • The people who can say, oh, I really
  • don't harbor any racial animus in my heart,
  • I like black people, I like Herman Cain, I like Condoleezza
  • Rice, so don't tell me that my feelings against Barack Obama
  • are racially based--
  • but now it's easy for them to choose two groups
  • that they feel are relatively helpless, gays, and lesbians,
  • transgendered people, and brown immigrants, OK?
  • So that means that they always need a manifestation
  • for their bigotry.
  • They've got to find something or somebody to hate, OK?
  • And I want to reassure my black brothers and sisters
  • that-- don't take too much comfort in the fact
  • that other people are being targeted
  • because they can circle back on you just as quickly.
  • And they've proven it with their vilification of the President
  • of the United States.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: It's interesting.
  • It's all part of that cycle.
  • OK, it's no longer acceptable to say anything negative
  • about blacks.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: So you can't do that.
  • You can't say anything about women anymore.
  • You can't do that.
  • So it's just like, OK.
  • Who's the next group?
  • BILL JOHNSON: Except that it's just--
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: Without getting--
  • hopefully no longer acceptable.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Well, let's hope not.
  • But this past election cycle was so horrible,
  • And even to the extent of women.
  • And it's just that there are just
  • a group of people who are fearful of change.
  • And they need to have a scapegoat for their feelings.
  • So they find it wherever they can.
  • And I think that this notion that somehow that being gay
  • is--
  • what do you call it--
  • an assumed behavior, and that if somehow
  • or another, if we pray hard enough,
  • or if we hate long enough, that they're going
  • to abandon this lifestyle.
  • It's really just ludicrous and has to be confronted.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: We're not only the first municipality
  • in New York to pass domestic partnership benefits,
  • but were actually one of the first in the country.
  • And I just want to get your thoughts on that.
  • Again, I hope that the pride that you
  • felt in that, that we were one of the first
  • in the country to do this, but again,
  • what that says about who we are here in Rochester.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Yeah.
  • It's says that deep down at the core,
  • we really do value our legacy and our heritage
  • as a community that's viewed as one
  • of the leaders in the tolerance and equality movement.
  • We don't brag enough about it, so
  • that a lot of people who really don't know much about Rochester
  • sometimes find it hard to believe
  • that this much social history took place
  • in such a small place.
  • So I think that what you're doing and what others are doing
  • helps us elevate that, elevate that status.
  • There are people who don't even know Frederick Douglass is
  • buried in Rochester, New York.
  • They think somehow he's down in Washington DC
  • because that's where he spent the last twenty
  • years of his life.
  • But no, it's something to be extremely, extremely proud of.
  • And I think it sets us apart as true leaders, as pioneers.
  • And as I say, it continues.
  • It continues and moves into other areas.
  • So we've been doing this now for one hundred and seventy years.
  • This has been the mantra of this little bird that's tucked away
  • in the corner of Western New York that has really
  • produced so many seminal movements in this country.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: We're going to leave it at that.
  • BILL JOHNSON: OK.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: It's good.
  • Thank you very much.
  • BILL JOHNSON: Hopefully you can find a minute or two that you
  • can use.
  • KEVIN INDOVINO: Oh, definitely.