When the speaker cards were counted after City Council’s Jan. 21 public hearing on the proposed human rights ordinance, the tally was about 2-to-1 in favor of the bill.
At a meeting of seven council members Thursday, the tone was more about questions, including whether the language of the bill should be amended and if council should let voters decide whether to add protection for the LGBTQ community to the city’s anti-discrimination law.
Council member Bill Gulliford said he called the meeting to allow for an objective discussion.
“I’m not interested in emotional comments or arguments. We’ve already had enough emotion,” he said, referring to the some of the comments made until midnight Jan. 21 and on Jan. 22, when council reconvened to allow everyone who filled out a speaker card to have their three minutes at the podium.
Council member Danny Becton said what troubles him most about the bill is while its text is considerably shorter than the anti-discrimination ordinance that was defeated in 2012 — from 40 pages to five pages — it’s essentially the same legislation.
“The public thinks this bill is new and simplified,” he said. “We’re dealing with the exact same bill. It’s being marketed as something that it’s not.”
Council Vice President John Crescimbeni said he’s concerned that while the legislation would exempt religious organizations from following the regulations, what constitutes a religious organization isn’t defined in the ordinance or anywhere in the municipal code.
General Counsel Jason Gabriel said he’s not sure such a definition is in the code and also that a “clear-cut exemption” isn’t in the bill.
“There is going to be gray area,” he said.
Also questioning whether the current bill is any different than previous attempts was council member Al Ferraro.
“This bill is the same as the old one. Council has already voted. I don’t see where this is going to stop,” he said.
Ferraro said he would support deciding whether to adopt the expanded protection through a referendum.
Council member Sam Newby said it’s good to have the discussion but, “I believe we should let the citizens vote. I believe in the citizens.”
Council member Reggie Brown is not in favor of a popular vote to decide whether to extend rights to a minority.
He said if the federal Civil Rights Act had been decided by voters instead of Congress, the rights of African-Americans might not have been protected by law.
There have been referendums on protecting trees and on gambling, Gulliford said, and he’s considering offering legislation to authorize a countywide ballot on the HRO ordinance, despite objections to a referendum from the LGBTQ community.
“To say we can’t trust the voters is a sad statement,” he said.
The ordinance will be on the agenda at next week’s meetings of the Neighborhood, Community Investment & Services, Rules and Finance committees.
The committee chairs have decided not to allow public comment on the ordinance at the meetings.
The bill could come up for a vote by the council as a whole on Feb. 14.
(904) 356-2466