http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-08-16/story/jacksonville-supporters-human-rights-bill-press-councilman-reconsider#ixzz23oWJ4my5
QuoteMatt Carlucci, a former council president who supported the bill, said if Gaffney was confused about what the council was voting on, he has the ability to bring it back for another vote.
“Technically, since he was on the prevailing side, if that really wasn’t the side he wanted to be on, he could probably ask for reconsideration of the vote,†Carlucci said.
“He can certainly show real leadership and place it back on the agenda and call for another vote,†said Audrey Moran, a former mayoral candidate who worked in top administrative posts for mayors Ed Austin and John Delaney.
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-08-16/story/jacksonville-supporters-human-rights-bill-press-councilman-reconsider#ixzz23orYNRbu
Phone: (904) 630-1384
Email: Gaffney@coj.net
Assistant: Bridgette Rodriguez
I would probably turn down this very watered down hope for a modern city...too bad we can't fire a council member for being a right wing baptist freak..thanks to you guys you've confirmed that jax is nothing but a bunch of redneck uneducated fools...they turned down the original and this altered bs....this is a crazy city... ;).thanks jesus....could you save us from your followers
You're aware that Carlucci and Moran are Republicans, right? And that there's a spate of Republicans on this message board who supported this bill?
So..... did this guy vote and have no idea what was going on????? :o
Gaffney was not confused about his vote. In spite of all his empty words in support of the bill, he voted down the amended version in a purposeful manner. His actions boil down to a few well placed words from the mayors office to kill this bill. He held back on his vote until he could see the how the voting was going that evening. He would have voted for it if he thought he could do so and still see it defeated. However, he ended up being the swing vote. It was made clear to Gaffney what was expected and that was to make sure this issue did not end up before the mayor who would be asked by those opposing the bill to veto it if it had been approved. That would have forced the mayor to quit giving the public "lip service" about where he stands to actually making a move publicly one way or the other in support or opposition to extending these rights.
His befuddlement was due to the fact that last minute "discussions" had decided for him how he would vote and he didn't have time to come up with a good "story" for the media and public as to why he had suddenly changed his position.
Diane Melendez
Quote from: Garden guy on August 17, 2012, 02:20:28 PM
I would probably turn down this very watered down hope for a modern city...too bad we can't fire a council member for being a right wing baptist freak..thanks to you guys you've confirmed that jax is nothing but a bunch of redneck uneducated fools...they turned down the original and this altered bs....this is a crazy city... ;).thanks jesus....could you save us from your followers
the problem is one of the "right wing baptist freaks" voted yes on the revised bill....and that 3 of the no votes came from Democrats...and that's not including the Mayor's silence
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on August 17, 2012, 03:10:28 PM
Gaffney was not confused about his vote. In spite of all his empty words in support of the bill, he voted down the amended version in a purposeful manner. His actions boil down to a few well placed words from the mayors office to kill this bill. He held back on his vote until he could see the how the voting was going that evening. He would have voted for it if he thought he could do so and still see it defeated. However, he ended up being the swing vote. It was made clear to Gaffney what was expected and that was to make sure this issue did not end up before the mayor who would be asked by those opposing the bill to veto it if it had been approved. That would have forced the mayor to quit giving the public "lip service" about where he stands to actually making a move publicly one way or the other in support or opposition to extending these rights.
His befuddlement was due to the fact that last minute "discussions" had decided for him how he would vote and he didn't have time to come up with a good "story" for the media and public as to why he had suddenly changed his position.
Diane Melendez
So Gaffney took a bullet for the mayor?
Took a bullet for the mayor? If only he were so valiant. Gaffney has his "soft spots" and "secrets" as do several other elected officials. Someone knew just where to push and what to promise in return in order to get Gaffney to change course on this bill. The same goes for Reggie Brown, who some may remember was initially pontificating about equality and how the military had taken steps to change course with this regard etc. etc. All of that perspective was lost Wednesday night when he voted down the amended bill. Old school politics is what this is, nothing more, nothing less.
Make no mistake about the fact that Ms. Daniels (who remarked to the press "we won" after the vote) was making plenty of noise about this in her own political circles. Who exactly "won"? What was she really saying? Was this a game to her and some others? The manipulations and discussions that derailed this legislation were agreed upon at the eleventh hour, however some conversations and strategies about everything from this to boycotting committee meetings took place at Potters House Bistro, out of the sunshine. These meetings are also nothing new and have been going on for years at different locations. As much as the citizens may see Daniels as an outsider, she is very much a part of what is happening in some areas of local politics.
On another note there was pressure also coming to certain members of council from several black preachers to oppose this legislation. This pressure was of great influence because it is through these preachers that many local black politicians raise money and support when they are running for office. Smiting them can ruin a career. My guess is that Ms. Lee and Mr. Jones are not planning on running for office in the immediate future here in Jacksonville.
Diane Melendez
How sad is it that the best case scenario is that a councilman was too confused to know what he was voting for?
It would be a great leap forward for Councilman Gaffney to acknowledge his error by bringing 296 back for a vote and voting in favor if that was his original intention.
^That would be great... if that really was his intention.
The day after the vote the Times Union reported that both Audrey Moran and Matt Carlucci had encouraged Gaffney to ask for another vote if indeed he had been confused or made a mistake. This is allowed under council rules. He could have requested another vote when he claimed he was confused that very evening or the next morning to set the record straight. He has not done so and there is a reason he has not.
Bottom line is that this bill and it's amendments had been discussed and debated to the point of redundancy by the evening of the vote. Everyone knew it was down to voting this legislation up or down. Gaffney first claimed he made a mistake and then that he was confused. He later claimed he had changed his mind due to all the emails he had gotten from his constituent's who opposed the legislation and that changed his mind and he voted the bill down. Two very different stories. At this point him changing course will still not explain his conflicted statements and vote. Of course he could come clean and tell the truth of what went on behind the scenes. I seriously doubt he will do so, but would certainly be pleasantly surprised if he did.
DM
^That's for sure.
ck this thread:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15943.new.html#new
Warren Jones just validated Diane's theory.
So this can be construed as a criminal outcome ?
That would take proof Timkin and Warren says he has none at this point.
http://www.edgeboston.com/news/workplace//136136/jacksonville,_fla,_rejects_adding_lgbt_protections_to_anti-discrimination_law
QuoteThe largest city in Florida will not include protections of LGBT citizens from discrimination, including housing and jobs.
.....
The (Jacksonville) Florida Times Union reported that the Jacksonville City Council voted against the bill by a 10-9 vote, with the decisive vote coming from Councilman Johnny Gaffney, a Democrat, although he had supported the bill when it went through a committee last week.
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab165/sheclown/gaffney.jpg)
......
Florida does not recognize marriage equality or any kind of same-sex union. Jacksonville, which is near the border with Georgia, is considered more conservative than the better-known cities of Tampa, Orlando, Miami and Ft. Lauderdale.
Quotethanks to you guys you've confirmed that jax is nothing but a bunch of redneck uneducated fools...
That seems a bit harsh, feel free to exit our great city and never come back with that crappy attitude! This will get done and passed, it will just take more time in our conservative city. With new leaders, I am sure we can see a different outcome. We have come a long way from previous councils though, at least the bill was introduced, no way this would have been introduced under some of the previous councils.