By Jim Sack
Sex can be very, very divisive. It certainly was at council last night. Just ask Councilman Tom Smith how it felt to be personally attacked for a rude and insensitive statement he is alleged to have made. Just ask the dozens of young people who showed up to lobby for “their rights.” Just ask the score or so who were there to rail against “those people.” Just ask the rest of council all of whom who sat through forty long, long minutes of contentious arguments from both sides. It was an impassioned evening that can be described as sad.
Karen Goldner tried again, the second time, to introduce an ordinance which would have given certain protections to members of the gay-lesbian-transgender community of which she is a member and an advocate. But, introduction of the ordinance failed by a four to five vote. The Democrats voted in favor, the Republicans voted against it. Glynn Hines, the lone Black council member, gave a speech in favor in which he cited being the butt of racism as a kid. Tom Didier gave a speech against the measure in which he tried to explain as a kid he, too, had been called a “fag” and understood the suffering of the gays, but would not support them. “I’m one of you, I feel your pain, but get over it, move on,” was his mantra. Tim Pape lamented the “bigotry” expressed in emails that he had received concerning the measure and asked if we could not rise above the invective. He wondered how the community would react to see those many emails published on line.
The most dramatic and difficult moment came when a distraught supporter of the bill, a young man, loudly accused Tom Smith of having unfavorably compared gays-lesbians-transgenders to “dog shit.” He repeated the comment more than once, loudly, and it took council President Marty Bender painfully long to curtail the outburst. No council members came to the defense of Mr. Smith. None. Only Mr. Bender’s gavel eventually restored a measure of decorum.
There were other speakers, some who ridiculed the gays, some who thumped the Bible, some who envisioned snarling the courts in frivolous suits, some who challenged Fort Wayne to be a more accepting, open place. One young man, a Girardot, reminded most in the audience that we are all very closely linked in Fort Wayne as he ticked off the many occupations of his family and cousins in his “big, Catholic family.” He introduced his father who has a long record of productivity in Fort Wayne as a construction manager who sat in his wheelchair nearby in support of his gay son. One degree of separation in Fort Wayne, everybody knows everybody here. His point: it is not we-they, it is us.
John Crawford, however, may have been, for many the most interesting speaker and not necessarily for what he said, simply that he was there. Crawford is strong, intelligent and forceful man. Some love him, some revile him for his stewardship of the anti-smoking ordinance. Whether he will try to regain a seat on council or whether he will run for the Republican nomination for mayor is the question. His presence reminded the politicians there last night of that. He lives, by the way, in Mr. Smith’s district.
So, Mitch Harper tried to show respect for everyone last night in a variety of ways. He expressed concerns about the ordinance as presented, but noted that other cities had successfully created legislation that had protected gays-lesbians-transgenders from wanton abuse, but had managed not to burden business nor the courts. Mr. Pape loved the comment and all but announced the formation of the Harper-Goldner Commission to craft a better bill. Mr. Harper certainly spoke with dignity and respect for all last night and has the legislative experience to manage the division that was deep and passionate.
There were other matters on the agenda and forcing the hundred or so citizens in the room to sit through the discussions was probably beneficial for all, a civics lesson. They learned about sewer interceptors, amendments to development plans and about tax abatements. The later matter turned into a fencing match between Councilman Pape and Councilwoman Brown.
In receiving tax abatements companies are required to report annually their progress toward fulfilling their side of the bargain. They pay fewer taxes but promise to create jobs in return. Last year a few businesses failed to turn in reports on time, some for good reasons, some for technical reasons. Fort Wayne Newspapers was the poster boy. They all then sought waivers and all were granted. Alyssa McGauley, the program manager, explained that despite extensive “hand-holding” some companies simply fail to keep their end of the bargain. Mrs. Brown last night asked Mrs. McGauley if the current ordinance has the teeth necessary to encourage better compliance, or to penalize indifference. Tim Pape shot back that Mrs. Brown’s question was not germane to the discussion, but Mrs. Brown was allowed to continue by President Bender. Mrs. McGauley laughed a bit and then tried to answer the question. Essentially, “no.” Later, Mr. Pape and Mrs. Brown tangled again over the same matter, Mrs. Brown, the Republican, the party purportedly pro-business, demanding a new law to penalize businesses for failing in their obligations; Mr. Pape, the Democrat, long the party critical of business excesses, sounding every bit the public relations consultant for the Chamber of Commerce in defending businesses and noting the great contributions made and the very abuses reported.
It was an interesting meeting, probably the most lively since the budget fights in November. One interesting matter that will require further discussion is the question of emails.
A council member noted that hundreds and hundreds of emails had been sent his way during the course of the debate. Tim Pape wondered what the community would think if the emails were to be posted on the web for all to see. They should, in fact, they are part of the public record and should be displayed. Perhaps a public airing of one’s thoughts might prompt one to be more careful in their expression. Last night’s meeting could have benefited from more thoughtful expression.
No related posts.
Entries (RSS)

I'm amused by Mr Sack's comment about Mr. Pape: "Tim Pape wondered what the community would think if the emails were to be posted on the web for all to see."
I wonder where Mr. Pape was when Council President Bender, and others, complained about "all those emails" people sent him about the Calhoun Street fiasco. Would Mr. Pape have been so eager to publish those emails then?
Further, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press' Open Goverment Guide has fascinating detail on the Indiana Open Door Law and the Indiana Access to Public Records Act. prepared by Jan M. Carroll of BARNES & THORNBURG in Indy. Emails sent to public officials of a legislative body are not excluded from the public.
I can not imagine why no one has forced our Imperial City Council to make public the letters and emails they recieve from constituents regarding pending ordinances. It would be very revealing…..
So, who steps up and demands this stuff? Tim Pape….you go first.
Well, I mentioned this to Smith, Shoaff and Harper after the meeting. Smith was opposed to putting the web site. Shoaff was fully in favor, as I expected him to be. Harper ordered another beer. I think, humor, or attempt at humor, aside, he would be in favor. Mitch has nothing to hide. Tom Smith was concerned about privacy and about hindering frank communications. I think he misunderstands.
In fact, Doug, I think I will ask about this tonight….
Thanks, Jim. When I get back to the midwest, I’ll see what the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press can specificaly suggest. Also, I have an email out to the Open Meeting/Records person in Indianapolis.
I brought it up again and Harper and Shoaff nodded agreement while Mr. Smith remained silent. Next step…hmmm, not sure. I may ask Sandy to how that might be done. She was in too festive a mood last night, Kennedy and all.