New Battle for a Human Rights Ordinance in Jacksonville

[vicupstate]

^^ Based on the article I linked, there were two votes FOR the HRO that were changed from PRO to CON, because it had been weakened.  There was no reference to votes changing from CON to PRO because of the change.  That may be because there were no such votes.  If that is the case then the original ordinance would have passed had this strategic error not been made.   

As it stands, JAX had to weaken it's ordinance significantly, yet it still failed. There is no one on record as saying they would have supported it had it not been watered down.   

[I-10east]

^^^Yeah, I think that Charlotte definitely had the chance the pass it's HRO; Jacksonville with this separation of church and state issue, not so much.

[Spitfire]

^^^Yall didn't answer any of the issues the I brought up as to why Charlotte turned down the meat of a LGBT bill over (IMO) some bathroom nonsense. Sidetracking with some general LGBT related talking points about overall discrimination (in Jax BTW) isn't the issue here. Maybe it's time to stop calling Charlotte 'progressive; Yeah, it has a nice uptown, but no HRO to speak of. Make no mistake, there's no 'similar' in it, Charlotte is just like Jacksonville in regards to HRO status.

When I first came to MJ, I had no opinions in regards to LGBT rights. Over the years being on MJ, helped me understand why it's necessary for the LGBT community to get their rights. If Jax had a chance to pass the meat of a HRO, and some 'supporters' turned it down over some nonsense, I would've been PO'd at them. The Charlotte issue at hand specifically is an unlikely TS bathroom scenario, NOT discriminating the transgender community in every aspect like what's being portrayed.

It really wasn't "bathroom nonsense," though. They actually gave the entire council a prime example as to why the T needs to be included when they pass their HRO.

http://www.thestate.com/2015/03/04/4023671/transgender-woman-booted-from.html

Democratic Party activist Janice Covington Allison says she was at first confused when a police officer approached her Monday night in a restroom at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center and told her she couldn't be there.

"I was looking in the mirror primping my hair --- cause I had just crossed the street in the wind --- and the policewoman said, 'I've had complaints. You have to leave,'" said Allison, the chairwoman of diversity and outreach for the N.C. Democratic Party.

"I was in shock. I asked her, 'Am I being arrested?' When we walked out the door, there were 20 people standing there, eyeballing me and pointing at me, and it was clear they were talking about me."

One called her a "pervert," she recalled.

In that moment, 67-year-old Allison --- a transgender woman --- had become an unwitting illustration of the debate over a controversial nondiscrimination ordinance. She was among the more than 100 people to address the City Council.

[Jimmy]

We have a bill moving, shamefully, in Tallahassee, aimed at hurting the trans community, even in places that have managed to pass an inclusive HRO.

Shameful.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/03/05/florida_trans_bathroom_bill_easily_survives_first_vote.html

[I-10east]

Since the beginning of the Constitution, getting rights in the US has been a gradual process, even in the most liberal cities and states. Look at women's rights, the Civil Rights movement, etc; It's still undergoing metamorphosis in certain aspects. It wasn't a 'hocus pocus' snap of the finger and suddenly everyone have their rights. Is Charlotte better now, or would it have been better if the TS restroom laden HRO was passed? That's the bottomline. This is the world of politics, you get what you can get, or be completely left in the dust.

[AbelH]

A very rare post to make a point that I believe must be made.

There would have been no Civil Rights Act of 1964 without the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Read Robert Caro's masterpiece on LBJ's career in the U.S. Senate, and you develop an appreciation for the painstaking work of legislation that truly transforms society. It doesn't happen in one fell swoop.

If Jacksonville is ever going to be successful in moving beyond this issue - and I think it must - there needs to be reasonable dialogue and a willingness to focus on a first successful step, however incremental it may be. We need to expand our horizons. We can't hurl insults while demanding respect from others. We can't be unwilling to compromise while demanding others do. We need to educate ourselves on how the public at-large sees the issue. (The vast majority are unaware, but they do view words like "the HRO" as divisive and are much more accepting of terminology like "anti-discrimination," etc.)

We often have a tendancy to live in our own worlds where everyone thinks like us. We can't be like that if we want to have movement on this issue. We have to listen, educate and be willing to take the first step - which isn't likely to be what all are demanding - or we'll still be having this same conversation in 2019.

[Tacachale]

^Very well stated, Abel.

[I-10east]

We can't hurl insults while demanding respect from others.

Who's hurling insults??? I get sick and tired of that 'A resident of Jax can't critique another city' BS, but they can critique us right? Anyway, you and I agree with the 'one step at a time' approach.

[sheclown]

Joseph Willis:  Why I'm for the HRO

http://www.youtube.com/v/4Ihvho1M4K0?rel=0"

>

[sheclown]

Bill Type and Number: Ordinance 2012-296

Introducer/Sponsor(s): Council Member Jones

Date of Introduction: May 8, 2012

Committee(s) of Reference: R, RCDPHS

Date of Analysis: May 10, 2012

Type of Action: Ordinance Code amendment

Bill Summary: The bill amends several chapter of the Ordinance Code to insert "sexual orientation, gender identity or expression" into the listings of personal conditions or statuses which may not be discriminated against.  The amended chapters include: Chapter 60 - Human Rights Commission; Chapter 400 – Equal Opportunity/Equal Access; Chapter 402 – Equal Employment Opportunity; Chapter 406 – Public Accommodations; and Chapter 408 – Fair Housing.  The bill includes definitions of "sexual orientation" and "gender identity or expression."

Background Information: The current list of personal conditions or statuses that may not be the subject of discrimination includes: race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, age or disability. 

Policy Impact Area: Non-discrimination status

Fiscal Impact: Undetermined

Analyst: Clements

You can find the entire bill here:

http://cityclts.coj.net/coj/COJbillDetail.asp?F=2012-0296\Current%20Text

[Jimmy]

Don't get bogged down in all the legislative legalize.  We want a bill that does this:

Adds the words "sexual orientation" and "gender identity and expression" to the various city ordinances that prohibit nondiscrimination.  These ordinances make it illegal to discriminate in the areas of housing, employment, and public accommodation. 

It's as simple as that.  Unfortunately, the ordinances are spread all over the code and the bill to provide the simple fix has to be... complex.

[Jimmy]

I'm sure he would if we asked him to. 

But with the current Mayor and Council, it doesn't make much political sense.  Nothing has changed in the ether that would alter the outcome from what we saw in 2012.  Especially so considering the current Council President.

Better to wait for a better Council, at least, and hopefully better Mayor as well.  That would be my counsel to all concerned.

[Jimmy]

I made some changes to my post.

I would ask him not to until we have a better Council incoming. 

[Jimmy]

I'm saying there's no point in introducing new legislation until we know who is on the next Council.

The first thing the new Council has to grapple with is the budget. I'm not sure it makes sense to try and do the HRO until October.

But I'd like to see what the board looks like before plotting any moves.

[Jimmy]

Diane, I meant to mention that, but forgot to.  Thanks for the reminder!

My gut tells me this won't be back before the Jacksonville City Council until after the 2015 elections.  I mean, I guess it's technically possible that a Councilmember could file something sooner, but unless that someone is Reggie Brown or Dr. Gaffney, I don't see a different result than we saw a year ago. 

A big part of this work for Jacksonville will involve getting very clear on the views of the Council candidates - and Mayoral candidates - so that we can get a good bill passed and signed in 2015-2016.

Of course -- sometimes politicians will sometimes go back on their word, which was the case with Dr. Gaffney.  He was on-record supporting the HRO (and marriage equality!) but didn't vote that way when it was time to put it on the line.

Hate to resort to quoting myself, but my take on this hasn't changed since August 2013. http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,19224.msg340650.html#msg340650

My energy is best spent now trying to elect a Council and Mayor that will get this done.  Everything in the Council right now is politicized. Look what's happening with the pension.  Trying to shepherd a new HRO through this Council, while trying to get good people elected, would be working at cross-purposes. IMHO.