Republican members of the Fort Wayne City Council were wrong to break the council’s long-standing tradition of allowing the introduction of most legislation brought to the table. The council custom not only shows due respect to fellow council members but also a willingness to discuss and debate issues that touch the community – even those that may be difficult or unpopular.

On Tuesday, the council voted along party lines against merely introducing a bill from Councilwoman Karen Goldner, D-2nd, that would have updated the city’s anti-discrimination ordinance and included gender identity.

It is rare for the council to rule against introduction. Former Republican Councilmen Don Schmidt, who served for 37 years, and John Crawford, who served for 12 years, could only remember three times since 1971 – Marty Bender’s attempt to revisit the much-debated city smoking ban being the most recent.

“My threshold is everything should be introduced,” Crawford said. “You shouldn’t be afraid to discuss something even if you’re going to ultimately vote against it. The only time I might vote against introduction is if it’s something that’s already been discussed, debated, fully vetted and decided.” He gave Bender’s attempt to rehash the smoking ban debate as an example.

“Karen (Goldner) and I disagree on almost everything,” he said. “But I think it’s disappointing that we can’t have a civil discussion on it.”

The numerous remarks from citizens – both for and against the legislation – during the public comment period after the vote to deny introduction are proof that the issue is one the community should discuss. Crawford was among those who spoke. He eloquently chastised the council members who refused to give Goldner’s legislation a hearing.

“I really am disappointed that they refused to even discuss it,” Goldner said on Wednesday. “I did think the public did at least begin the discussion last night. That was perhaps better than the five council members who even refused to discuss it. It’s absolutely astounding.”

The proposed legislation admittedly contained controversial elements. It eliminated language in current law that make the investigation of complaints alleging discrimination against gays and lesbians a voluntary process for businesses – questionable because sexual orientation is not in state and federal laws. It would have added gender identification and elevated sexual orientation to the same level of protection that race and religion have. The change would have made Fort Wayne’s law similar to the Indianapolis law.

The proposed ordinance also included several housekeeping issues, updates the City Council needs to make so that the city ordinance better conforms to federal guidelines. It added changes to language to conform to the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) that President George W. Bush signed into law in 2008.

“Currently, as the city ordinance is written, it is not in substantial equivalent compliance with federal law,” said Gerald Foday, executive director of Metro. He said the discrepancy “could endanger federal funding.”

Crawford couldn’t say whether he would vote in favor of the bill if he were still on the council, but he is rightly concerned about the message it sends about the community that it was not discussed.

“The community would have looked good. It would have showed a willingness to be open-minded,” he said.

Goldner said she understands the council can’t change hearts and minds and force people not to discriminate. But it can regulate the financial effects of discrimination. She said, “The need for this ordinance is clearer to me than it was before” after the blatant bigotry she witnessed in the weeks before she introduced the bill.

In the end, council members may have decided the proposal was a solution in search of a problem. But without any debate, it appears the Republican council members simply didn’t have the courage to have a needed discussion on several human rights issues.