More than three years after a highly charged debate ended without Jacksonville expanding the existing Human Rights Ordinance to protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression, the issue is center stage once again.
During Mayor Lenny Curry’s campaign, he expressed skepticism that discrimination on those basis was happening in Jacksonville, but promised to study the issue. That’s now underway, with hundreds turning out for the first of three “Community Conversations” on discrimination hosted at FSCJ Tuesday night.
“There are people here tonight that have made up their mind on this issue on either side, there are people here tonight that I hope are open minded and are here to learn tonight. But through it all, what I would ask is you to remember, please remember this- we are ‘One City, One Jacksonville’, we’re all God’s children, and we need to respect each other as individuals,” Curry said during brief opening remarks.
YOUR FEEDBACK: City wants input on discrimination in Jacksonville
The “Community Conversation” actually started as three prepared speeches- one from Jacksonville’s General Counsel laying out laws and protections that currently exist, and one from someone personally involved on either side of the debate- and a moderated panel discussion. About a dozen questions were actually taken from the community as part of the 90-minute event.
The debate
There were a few different perspectives at the table for the forum- and while all agreed that nobody should ever experience discrimination, the divide is whether enough protections exist and whether an expansion would adequately address any shortfalls.
Joey Vaughn, with Vaughn Law, was one of the first to tackle that, saying the climate in Jacksonville has been getting better since 2012, and that the City is “fair” so no more protections are needed. He was joined by Roger Gannam with the Liberty Counsel, who pointed out that LGBT persons already had many other protections- like race or nationality- and now, marital status, since the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage.
“If a person experiences discrimination on any or those bases, they already have a claim under Jacksonville law, Florida law, and federal law,” Gannam says.
But for other panelists, that is not enough.
“A more inclusive HRO will help ensure whether they’re [a LGBT person] renters or owners, and wherever they’re employed, that they can be sure that they will have the economic security to provide for their families,” says Gary Bevel, with the Jacksonville System of Care Initiative.
Cindy Watson, with JASMYN, also doesn’t believe that the laws are as encompassing as others believe.
“Folks can be married on Sunday and fired from their jobs on Monday in Jacksonville, because we don’t have those protections,” she says.
Tuesday night’s panel was supposed to focus on how potential LGBT discrimination issues specifically impacted families and children. As such, Duval County School Board member Cheryl Grymes was on the panel, and took time to detail the District’s “robust” policy. She says students are protected against discrimination, harassment, and bullying on the basis of “actual or perceived” race, color, religion, gender identity, age, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, political or religious belief, national or ethnic origin, veteran status, or any other distinguishing physical or personality trait.
Dr. Jeff Goldhagen, a University of Florida pediatrician, says especially when dealing with children, if they’re not made to feel accepted and included, that there can be severe negative consequences.
“The data is overwhelming and profound that, although on the surface there may be some changes, that we’re seeing the world experienced by children and youth- gay, LGBTQ children and youth- is still impacting them substantially,” Goldhagen says.
Gannam says there’s no proven correlation proving external pressures and circumstances lead to depression and suicide in LGBT youths, although several panelists disagreed.
When asked about whether society was ready to accept people who are transgender, Vaughn called it a “concerning issue”.
“It opens the door to a substantial set of questions and an untested experiment on society,” he says.
He brought up concerns that anyone who has followed this issue is familiar with- like a child using a locker room based on gender identity rather than physical sex, or the concern that someone can pose as transgender to gain access to the bathroom of the other sex for criminal purposes.
Bevel countered that nobody wants to be unsafe, and that transgender people currently face problems protecting themselves in these scenarios, but don’t have the protections they need from the City.
The personal stories
There was some protest in the audience over the limited number of questioners allowed from the public, due to the time constraint. The speakers were called up in the order their comment card was received, but with those roughly dozen or so speakers all seeming to favor expanding the HRO, one man tried to make his opinion on the other side heard. After a brief outburst from the crowd and plea from one of the panelists to stick to the rules, the speakers continued.
The stories included a woman asking how she’s supposed to guarantee the safety of all of her children when she says one- who’s transgender- was raped by law enforcement in another county. Another woman spoke about rude and inappropriate questions and statements she fields while at work, and not having a defined place to turn to. Another says he was fired from his City job because of his sexual orientation.
While the panelists offered sympathies for the people expressing these stories and again emphasized that none of them supported anyone being discriminated against, Gannam repeatedly brought the conversation back to his question of whether expanding the HRO would actually help in most of these cases. Others on the panel agreed that an expansion wouldn’t solve everything, but would be a way for LGBT people to know they belong and they are protected.
The history
The arguments emerging early on are similar to those we heard mid-2012, when Jacksonville last considered expanding the HRO, which currently protects against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations for areas like race and nationality. At the time, the effort was led by a Councilman, rather than the Mayor. When it seemed like support for expanding protections based on "sexual orientation, gender identity and expression" would not gain the needed support, a pared down effort that included just "sexual orientation" was put forward. Ultimately, neither passed.
While it’s unclear at this point whether Curry will put forward any bill- and if he does what it would look like- the debate seems to be hinging on the expectation that the wording would be similar.
As former Jacksonville Mayor Alvin Brown was leaving office- unseated by Curry in the past election- a study he ordered examining what protections currently exist was completed. The Office of General Counsel found that, while there are some protections against discrimination at various levels of government, there is no specific local protections on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.
There are two more scheduled "Community Conversations"- one focusing on the HRO expansion and religious freedom on December 3rd at 6 PM at Edward Waters College Milne Auditorium, and one focusing on HRO expansion and its effect on business on December 15th at 6 PM at Jacksonville University Policy Institute. Curry says he wants to experience the conversations in their entirety before determining how to move forward.
Sign Up
