Four City Council committees spent hours listening to similar presentations about the dynamics behind a $90 million package of EverBank Field improvements.
At least 10 of the 19 council members heard the same litany of pros and cons, the hows and whys multiple times through the process.
Council is taking a different approach with the human rights ordinance discussions.
President Greg Anderson announced this week the review of two bills relating to expanding the ordinance would be heard by all council members — not discussed by individual committees.
He’s called three committees-of-the-whole sessions scheduled for 3 p.m. Feb. 4, Feb. 18 and March 3. Each is scheduled for three hours, with an hour dedicated to public comment.
Anderson said the format will allow for a clear, transparent and fair process for both bills — essentially opposites — to “travel” together.
Bill Gulliford’s proposal would put expansion on the ballot as a referendum. Tommy Hazouri’s would have elected officials make the decision.
If another council member or Mayor Lenny Curry proposes their own bill, it would join the mix for discussion. Curry said he will make his decision by the end of the month.
“I just think it’s the most effective way to do it,” said Anderson.
Many of his colleagues who sat through multiple EverBank Field presentations agree.
Anna Lopez Brosche said she thought Anderson “knocked it out of the park” in how the discussions are structured. It shouldn’t be done with every issue, she said, but with this one, it’s important to have everyone in the same place hearing the same things.
Jim Love said he thought the format was a good idea and would prove to be a more efficient way of handling the controversial issue.
“It’s a way to talk to all council members instead of piecemeal,” he said.
It’ll also be a way to prevent one long, drawn-out meeting that could go into the early hours of morning, said Doyle Carter.
He’s on board, but wants to see some limitations on the public comment portion. Those interested in speaking should only be allowed to do so at one of the three meetings given the expected crowds, he said.
Repetition also is on the mind of Matt Schellenberg. Hearing the same pros and cons over and over, “I think it might be too much.”
He notes the many meetings with hours of public comment that were part of the first discussion in 2012.
Along with Schellenberg, Anderson, Love, Carter and four others are entering their second debate on the topic.
Brosche and 10 other new members will be debating the issue for the first time, although they have been hearing about it since before they were elected.
That’s only ramped up the past several months with Curry’s three community conversations on the topic.
In that time, Brosche said she and others have had their inboxes barraged daily with comments about the idea.
(904) 356-2466