ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) – A proposed Anchorage law banning discrimination against gays, lesbians and bisexuals has been rewritten to specify it wouldn’t apply to small, home-operated businesses or to owner-occupied four-plexes or duplexes.

The new version written by the city administration also drops military veterans’ discharge status, another category originally proposed for inclusion in the city’s equal rights law.

Anchorage officials say some veterans’ groups asked for more time to discuss the issue.

The revamped ordinance was discussed Friday at an Assembly work session and is scheduled for a public hearing Tuesday evening.

The law is being proposed by acting Mayor Matt Claman at the request of a citizens group called Equality Works.

The proposal seeks to add sexual orientation to the list of characteristics including race, gender, religion and age that are protected from discrimination in property sales and rentals, employment, public accommodations, educational institutions or city practices.

City attorney James Reeves said several misconceptions about the proposal have emerged since it was introduced in May. He said the ordinance would not allow men to come to work dressed as women, would not allow men dressed as women to enter women’s restrooms in public facilities or businesses and would not require employers to allow workers to advocate a particular sexual preference in the workplace.

The Rev. Jerry Prevo, a local minister, is one of the proposal’s opponents and said he still believes “it’s a bad ordinance.”

Prevo said the measure, if adopted, could lead to long, costly lawsuits.

Claman said in a statement that the measure is intended only to protect people from unfair discrimination.

“A person’s sexual orientation or gender identity has nothing to do with job performance (or) qualifications as a good tenant or customer,” he said. “It is the right thing to do and the right time to do it.”

PHOENIX (AP) – Arizona state workers who just won health benefits for their domestic partners will lose them under a proposed budget lawmakers are considering.

The move would reverse a decision made last year by Democratic former Gov. Janet Napolitano’s administration. Critics at the time blasted the decision as a breach of power that would undermine the tradition of marriage.

The change is part of a budget proposed by Republican legislative leaders that would eliminate benefits as of Oct. 1, a year after they went into effect.

Cathi Herrod, president of the socially conservative advocacy group Center for Arizona Policy, praised the legislative move, saying Napolitano’s administration should never have created the benefits.

“The issue of domestic partner benefits should be decided by the legislative branch through legislative hearings,” Herrod said.

Napolitano created the benefits through a policy change at the Department of Administration. It was approved by the Governor’s Regulatory Review Council, an obscure board that reviews policy changes at state agencies.

The elimination of domestic partner benefits would affect about 750 state workers now receiving them, saving about $3 million of the state’s $650 million employee health care budget.

Critics slammed the move, saying it would leave people without health care coverage and make it harder for the state to recruit and retain quality workers.

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, said the change would take health care away from people who work hard to earn it.

“To discriminately deny that health care to some while providing it to others I think is especially nefarious,” she said.

Many state workers will probably look for jobs in local government or the private sector if lawmakers eliminate their domestic partner benefits.

Sen. Ken Cheuvront, D-Phoenix, said supporters of the change were “mean-spirited” to take away health benefits during an economic downturn.

“After their success in putting a constitutional ban on gay marriage, they weren’t satisfied,” he said. “They wanted to go further and deny benefits to same-sex and opposite-sex couples who for whatever reason do not get married.”

Department of Administration spokesperson Alan Ecker said it’s impossible to know how many domestic partner benefits are going to same-sex couples because the state doesn’t track that information.