IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR

DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

JOHN PARSONS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA,

a municipal corporation and political

subdivision of the State of Florida,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

CASE NO. 16-2017-CA-001263-XXXX-MA

DIVISION CV-E

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiff, JOHN PARSONS, pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(a), moves

the Court for an order granting summary judgment against Defendant, the CITY OF

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. As shown herein, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and

Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS

1. The grounds on which this motion is based are stated with particularity in Plaintiff’s

Complaint for Declaratory and Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Relief (the “Complaint”),

which is incorporated herein by this reference.1 As shown in the Complaint, the HRO is null and

void for failure to comply with Florida Statutes, the Jacksonville Ordinance Code, and the Rules

of the Council of the City of Jacksonville. (Compl., ¶¶ 1-22.)

2. The substantial matters of law to be argued are principally set forth in the

Complaint, and additional such matters are set forth herein.

1 Unless otherwise indicated, all capitalized terms used herein have the meanings ascribed

to them in the Complaint.

Filing # 54133468 E-Filed 03/23/2017 02:57:59 PM

2

3. The summary judgment evidence on which Plaintiff relies consists of the Affidavit

of John Parsons in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, attached hereto as MSJ

Exhibit A (the “Parsons Affidavit”), the Affidavit of Roger K. Gannam in Support of Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment, attached hereto as MSJ Exhibit B (the “Gannam Affidavit”), and

Complaint Exhibits A, B, and C.

ADDITIONAL SUBSTANTIAL MATTERS OF LAW TO BE ARGUED

4. Summary judgment must “be rendered forthwith if the pleadings and summary

judgment evidence on file show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the

moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(c); see Florida

Bar v. Greene, 926 So.2d 1195, 1200 (Fla. 2006).

5. When a person asserts a legal challenge to the validity of an ordinance, “an original

declaratory judgment or injunction action in the circuit court is the proper vehicle.” Seminole

Entm't, Inc. v. City of Casselberry, 866 So. 2d 1242, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Bd. of Com'rs of

State Institutions v. Tallahassee Bank & Trust Co., 100 So. 2d 67, 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958).

6. Standing to challenge an illegally enacted ordinance does not require allegations or

proof of any special injury. See Renard v. Dade County, 261 So. 2d 832, 838 (Fla. 1972) (“Any

affected resident, citizen or property owner of the governmental unit in question has standing to

challenge such an ordinance.”); Safer v. City of Jacksonville, 212 So. 2d 785, 787 (Fla. 1st DCA

1968); see also David v. City of Dunedin, 473 So. 2d 304, 306 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (holding

“property owners or citizens who should have been given notice pursuant to [Fla. Stat. § 166.041]”

had standing to “make a general attack on the validity of the ordinance through an injunction in

circuit court . . . without alleging special damages.”)

7. Consistent with the foregoing authorities, Fla. Stat. § 166.041(7) codifies standing

“to initiate a challenge to the adoption of an ordinance . . . based on a failure to strictly adhere to

3

the provisions contained in this section” for “a person who was entitled to actual or constructive

notice at the time the ordinance . . . was adopted.” Persons entitled to constructive notice of the

proposed adoption of an ordinance, and thus having standing to challenge its adoption for failure

to comply with Fla. Stat. § 166.041, are all persons within the municipality. Fla. Stat.

§ 166.041(3)(a).2

8. In addition to the constructive notice requirements of § 166.041(3)(a), the

amendatory language republication requirements of § 166.041(2) also serve a notice function:

“We have also held that the . . . provision was designed to inform

both the legislature and the public of the nature and extent of

proposed changes in existing laws. For this reason it is required that

when a specific section or subsection is being amended it should

be republished with the proposed amendment so that an

examination of the act itself will reflect the changes

contemplated, as well as their impact on the amended statute.”

See City of Hallandale v. State ex rel. Zachar, 371 So. 2d 186, 188 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979) (emphasis

added) (quoting Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Hillsborough County Aviation Auth., 153 So. 2d 722, 725

(Fla. 1963)3).

2 The applicable constructive notice provision requires that all ordinances, except for certain

emergency and zoning ordinances,

be noticed once in a newspaper of general circulation in the

municipality. The notice of proposed enactment shall state the date,

time, and place of the meeting; the title or titles of proposed

ordinances; and the place or places within the municipality where

such proposed ordinances may be inspected by the public. The

notice shall also advise that interested parties may appear at the

meeting and be heard with respect to the proposed ordinance.

Fla. Stat. § 166.041(a) (emphasis added).

3 Courts interpreting the language of Fla. Stat. § 166.041(2), governing the legal

requirements for amendatory city ordinances, look to cases interpreting the counterpart language

of the Florida Constitution governing the same requirements for amendatory state statutes, Art. III,

§ 6, Fla. Const. (formerly Art. III, § 16, Fla. Const.). See City of Hallandale, 371 So. 2d at 188

(“Subsection 2, which specifies procedural requirements for the enactment of municipal

ordinances, actually embodies Article III, s 16, of the Florida Constitution as it pertains to state

statutes.”)

4

9. Under the plain language of Fla. Stat. § 166.041(2), amendatory ordinances must,

at a minimum, republish the paragraph of the ordinance section or sub-section being amended. See

City of Hallandale, 371 So. 2d at 188 (“‘“The explicit terms of the . . . provision contemplate that

in a proper case reenactment of a single paragraph of a sub-section is sufficient.”’” (quoting

Jackson v. Consol. Gov't of City of Jacksonville, 225 So. 2d 497, 507 (Fla. 1969)). In addition to

the minimum requirement to republish the paragraph being amended, “enough of the act being

amended must be republished to make the meaning of the provision published intelligible from its

language and to insure that no unexpected meaning results from the combination of that language

and other language in the Act.” Jackson, 225 So. 2d at 508 (internal quotation marks omitted).

10. “Florida follows the majority view whereby measures passed in contravention of

notice requirements are invalid (null and void if not strictly enacted pursuant to the requirement of

section 166.041).” Daytona Leisure Corp. v. City of Daytona Beach, 539 So. 2d 597, 599 (Fla. 5th

DCA 1989) (citing Fountain v. City of Jacksonville, 447 So. 2d 353, 355 n.2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984));

Coleman v. City of Key West, 807 So. 2d 84, 85 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“The notices are mandated

in order to protect interested persons, who are thus given the opportunity to learn of proposed

ordinances; given the time to study the proposals for any negative or positive effects they might

have if enacted; and given notice so that they can attend the hearings and speak out to inform the

city commissioners prior to ordinance enactment. Noncompliance with the notice provisions takes

away or reduces these opportunities.”); see also David, 473 So. 2d at 306 (“Accordingly, we hold

that because appellants proved that the ordinance under which they were cited and its predecessor

were invalidly enacted, the trial court erred in refusing to issue the injunction to restrain appellees

from enforcing the ordinances.”

5

APPLICATION OF LAW TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT EVIDENCE

11. As shown by the Parsons Affidavit, Plaintiff is a resident of Jacksonville, Florida,

and has been at all times relevant to the adoption of the HRO. Accordingly, Plaintiff was entitled

to notice of the proposed adoption of the HRO pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 166.041(3)(a), and therefore,

pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 166.041(7) and applicable precedent, Plaintiff has standing to challenge the

validity of the HRO based on the failure of the City to adhere to the provisions of Fla. Stat.

§ 166.041. See supra, ¶¶ 5-7.

12. As shown by Complaint ¶¶ 1-22 (including Complaint Exhibits A-C) and the

Gannam Affidavit, neither the publicly noticed nor the enacted versions of the HRO adhered to

the requirements of Fla. Stat. § 166.041, either strictly or otherwise. Accordingly, the HRO is null

and void, and Plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction against its enforcement. See supra,

¶¶ 8-10.

13. As shown by Gannam Affidavit Exhibit 1, at the time the Complaint was filed, the

City took the position that the HRO was a validly enacted law. In its Motion to Dismiss filed March

22, 2017, the City maintains this erroneous position. (Mot. Dismiss at 1, n.1.) Accordingly, the

City’s position on the validity of the HRO is adverse to Plaintiff’s, and there is a need for a

declaration of the validity of the HRO.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a judgment declaring that the HRO is null and void,

permanently enjoining the City from enforcing the HRO, and awarding Plaintiff his costs of this

action pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 86.081 and as otherwise allowed by law, together with such other

and further relief as the Court deems just and proper

6

DATED this March 23, 2017.

/s/ Roger K. Gannam

Mathew D. Staver (Fla. 701092)

court@LC.org

Horatio G. Mihet (Fla. 26581)

hmihet@LC.org

Roger K. Gannam (Fla. 240450)

rgannam@LC.org

LIBERTY COUNSEL

P.O. Box 540774

Orlando, Florida 32854

T: (407) 875-1776

F: (407) 875-0770

Attorneys for Plaintiff, John Parsons

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that a copy of this document has been filed electronically through the Florida

Courts eFiling Portal this March 23, 2017, and that the following will receive electronic service of

the document:

Jason R. Teal

JTeal@coj.net

Gabriella Young

GCYoung@coj.net

Craig D. Feiser

CFeiser@coj.net

City of Jacksonville

Office of General Counsel 117 West Duval Street, Suite 480

Jacksonville, Florida 32202

(904) 630-1700 (Telephone)

(904) 630-1316 (Facsimile)

Attorneys for Defendant,

City of Jacksonville, Florida

/s/ Roger K. Gannam

Roger K. Gannam

Attorney for Plaintiff

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

JOHN PARSONS,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 16-2017-CA-001263-XXXX-MA DIVISION CV-E

vs.

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Florida,

Defendant. -------- -------

AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN PARSONS

IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ST A TE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF DUVAL

1. My name is John Parsons, and I am over 21 years of age.

2. I am the named Plaintiff in this action, I have personal knowledge of the matters

set forth herein, and am competent to testify to such matters.

3. I currently reside in Jacksonville, Florida, and have resided in Jacksonville for

approximately four years.

4. I am a registered voter in Jacksonville, Florida, in City Council District 5, and have

been for approximately four years.

FURTHER THE AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.

DATED this March ;.B, 2017.

JORN PARSONS

Page 1 of 2

MSJ Exhibit A

ST A TE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF DUVAL

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, appeared John Parsons, who produced a Florida Driver License, showing an address in Jacksonville, Florida, as identification, and who, after being duly sworn, says that the foregoing Affidavit of John Parsons in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is true and correct.

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on thisdS day of March, 2017.

,,,,,.,.,,,,, D. M. DAMEWOOD '''\p.flY P(JIJ ,, /.-iE''~\ Notary Public - State of Florida

~ • : · 1 My Comm. Expires Jul 6, 2017 ;i, 'i:l::il Commission # FF 007454

'•,f;,'ff,[,\,,•'' Bonded Through National Notary Assn.

Notary Public, STATE OF FLORIDA Printed Name: ------------

Type/Print/Stamp Name of Notary, Commission No. & Expiration Date:

Page 2 of 2

JOHN PARSONS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, a municipal corporation and political sub di vision of the State of Florida,

Defendant. I

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUY AL COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO. 16-2017-CA-001263-XXXX-MA DIVISION CV-E

AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER K. GANNAM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ST A TE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE

1. My name is Roger K. Gannam, and I am over 21 years of age. I submit this

declaration upon personal knowledge, except where indicated.

2. I am an attorney and the Assistant Vice President of Legal Affairs for Liberty

Counsel, and an attorney ofrecord for Plaintiff, John Parsons, in this case.

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of an e-mail exchange

(including attachments, highlighting added) between Jason Gabriel, General Counsel for the City

of Jacksonville, and me, dated February 22, 2017, Subject: HRO Veto.

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the original text of

proposed Ordinance 2017-15, Jacksonville Ordinance Code, as published by the Jacksonville City

Council on it's official website, at http://cityclts.coj.net/coj/C0Jbil1Detail.asp?F=2017-

0015\0riginal%20Text (last visited March 21, 2017).

Page 1 of 2 MSJ Exhibit B

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of the online version of the

public notice of proposed enactment of Ordinance 2017-15, stating the date, time, and place of the

public hearing on the proposed ordinance; the title of the proposed ordinance; and the place where

the proposed ordinance may be inspected by the public; and advising that interested parties may

appear at the hearing and be heard with respect to the proposed ordinance; as was published in a

newspaper of general circulation in the City of Jacksonville, the Financial News and Daily Record,

and which is available now on the newspaper's website, at http: //www.jaxdailyrecord.com/

publicnotice.php (last visited March 21 , 2017).

DATED this March 21 , 2017.

STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, appeared Roger K. Gannam, who is personally known to me, and who, after being duly sworn, says that the foregoing Affidavit of Roger K. Gannam in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is true and correct.

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this ~\ day of March, 2017.

~~ Notary Public, S] TE OE Fa &.-6 Printed Name: \'(!JlJ,s ~a (fQ'c

Type/Print/Stamp Name of Notary, Commission No. & Expiration Date:

Page 2 of2

From: Gabriel, JasonTo: Roger GannamSubject: RE: HRO VetoDate: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 11:56:46 AM

Roger –

The Charter gives the Mayor a certain timeframe to exercise his right to veto, sign or not signlegislation. The Mayor fulfilled his Charter-prescribed duty the night of the vote by officially lettingthe law go into effect without his signature.

The effective date of the law is the date he signs, or if he chooses not to sign, the date it wasenacted by Council. Accordingly, Ordinance 2017-15-E became law on February 14, 2017 without hissignature. His action is final.

Thank you,

-Jason G.

From: Roger Gannam [mailto:rgannam@lc.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 9:38 AMTo: Gabriel, JasonSubject: HRO Veto

Jason, I trust you are aware of the ongoing debate regarding the mayor’s continuingauthority to veto the HRO. You may have seen the memorandum we released yesterday(copy attached) on the issue.

Although I have seen some statements attributed to you, and others attributed tocouncil members, I have not seen any analysis engaging the argument in ourmemorandum, or even engaging the text of the Charter. Most of what I have seen islittle more than “that’s just not how it works.”

Has your office prepared any official guidance on the issue?

Regards, Roger

Roger K. Gannam, Esq.†Assistant Vice President of Legal AffairsLiberty CounselPO Box 540774Orlando, FL 32854407-875-1776 phone407-875-0770 faxwww.LC.org

EXHIBIT 1

Offices in DC, FL, VA†Licensed in Florida

This message (and any attached files) is intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If youare not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer, because anydistribution of this message by you is strictly prohibited. Email cannot be guaranteed secure or error-free. We do not accept responsibilityfor errors or omissions herein that result from email transmission. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are solely those of theauthor and do not necessarily represent those of Liberty Counsel.

Post Office Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854-0774 Telephone: 407•875•1776 Facsimile: 407•875•0770 www.LC.org

122 C Street, NW Suite 360

Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202•289•1776 Facsimile: 202•737•1776

Post Office Box 11108 Lynchburg, VA 24506-1108

Telephone: 434•592•7000 Facsimile: 434•592•7700

February 20, 2017

MEMORANDUM

From: Roger K. Gannam

Assistant Vice President of Legal Affairs

Re: Mayor Curry Can Still Veto the HRO

Summary

• The City Charter does not allow the mayor to give an ordinance

immediate effect without his signature.

• Mayor Curry’s announcement that he will allow the HRO to become

law without his signature does not give the HRO immediate effect.

• Mayor Curry still has the power to veto the HRO at or before the

February 28 City Council meeting.

Relevant Facts

On February 14, 2017, the Jacksonville City Council voted to adopt bill 2017-15, the

so-called “Human Rights Ordinance” or “HRO.” The ordinance contained standard language

making the ordinance “effective upon signature by the Mayor or upon becoming effective without

the Mayor's signature.” Barely an hour after the vote to adopt the HRO, Mayor Curry announced

to the Council that he would allow the HRO to become law without his signature. Around the same

time, Mayor Curry issued a public message:

As your Mayor, I promised to convene community

conversations about discrimination. At the conclusion of those

conversations, I exercised an executive action to implement a clear

policy for city of Jacksonville employees and contractors. I said then

and continue to believe additional legislation was unnecessary. But

this evening, a supermajority of the City Council decided otherwise.

This supermajority, representatives of the people from both parties

and every corner of the city, made their will clear.

Re: Mayor Curry Can Still Veto the HRO

Page 2

Now, with the issue resolved, I invite City Council and all

the people of Jacksonville to join me as we confront serious issues

like the final steps of pension reform to bring us financial security

and increase our efforts to end the violence and crime hurting

innocent people in our city.

Following these announcements, it was widely claimed that the HRO had become law. For

the reasons below, this claim is false. Accordingly, Mayor Curry can still veto the HRO.

Legal Analysis

The Charter of the City of Jacksonville provides the mayor three options for responding to

an ordinance adopted by the city council: The mayor can approve the ordinance, disapprove (veto)

the ordinance, or do nothing:

Section 6.05. – Mayor’s veto power.

. . . .

Any ordinance or resolution adopted by the council over which the

mayor has a veto power shall be presented to the mayor for his

consideration and recommendations. If he approves the ordinance

or resolution he shall sign it and it shall become effective according

to the terms thereof. If he disapproves he shall return the ordinance

or resolution to the council without his signature, accompanied by a

message indicating the reasons for his disapproval and

recommendations. . . . Any resolution or ordinance shall become

effective on the date provided therein unless it be disapproved by

the mayor and returned to the council at or prior to the next regular

meeting of the council occurring 10 days or more after the date when

the ordinance or resolution was delivered to the mayor's office for

consideration. . . .

According to the foregoing Charter Section 6.05, the mayor may approve an ordinance by

signing it, in which case it becomes effective upon his signature. The mayor may disapprove an

ordinance by returning it to council without his signature, “accompanied by a message indicating

the reasons for his disapproval and recommendations,” in which case the ordinance is vetoed. Or,

the ordinance will become effective without the mayor’s signature if he does not veto it—i.e., does

nothing—before the next regular council meeting which is ten or more days after the ordinance

was “delivered to the mayor's office for consideration.”

Assuming the final, amended version of the HRO (2017-15-E) was “presented to the mayor

for consideration” under Charter Section 6.05 above, Mayor Curry had three options: (1) approve

the ordinance by signing it, (2) disapprove the ordinance by returning it without his signature (with

his disapproval message and recommendations), or (3) do nothing. Which option did Mayor Curry

choose? As a legal matter, Mayor Curry did nothing.

Re: Mayor Curry Can Still Veto the HRO

Page 3

During the same council meeting in which the HRO was adopted by the council, Mayor

Curry communicated to the council that he would allow the ordinance to become law without his

signature. Around the same time, Mayor Curry delivered a public message, containing both a

reason for his disapproval (“legislation was unnecessary”) and a recommendation (“Now . . . join

me as we confront serious issues”).

It apparently is the position of the City, and it has been widely reported by the local media,

that the HRO became law upon Mayor Curry’s announcement that he would let the ordinance

become law without his signature. Charter Section 6.05, however, does not provide any mechanism

for an ordinance to become law immediately upon an announcement by the mayor that he would

not sign it. Only signing the ordinance could accomplish immediate effect. Because Mayor Curry

did not sign it, the HRO did not take immediate effect.

So what is the legal effect of Mayor Curry’s messages to the council and the public? There

are only two possible answers under Charter Section 6.05: Mayor Curry’s messages either had no

effect, or they had the effect of a veto.

A compelling argument can be made that Mayor Curry actually vetoed the HRO, as a

matter of law, because he performed the two statutory acts effecting a veto: (1) He “returned” the

ordinance “without his signature,” (2) “accompanied by a message indicating the reasons for his

disapproval and recommendations.” But, given that Mayor Curry also announced he intended to

let the ordinance become law without his signature, it is unlikely a court would ultimately conclude

that the ordinance was vetoed.

Nonetheless, it has been argued (erroneously) that the reason Mayor Curry’s announcement

during the council meeting gave the ordinance immediate effect was because Mayor Curry

“returned” the ordinance to the council. Putting aside the fact that there is no basis in the Charter

to conclude that a “return” without a signature can give an ordinance immediate effect, a court

also could not easily find that the HRO was “presented to the mayor for his consideration” in the

first place, just minutes after it was adopted, when the final version with amendments would not

be typed until the next day. Nor could a court easily find that Mayor Curry then “returned” the

as-yet untyped ordinance to the council during the same meeting. But, if a hypothetical court could

get around these significant obstacles, then it may also interpret Mayor Curry’s “return” without

his signature, accompanied by his “message” of disapproval and recommendations, as a legal veto.

In any event, the more compelling argument is that Mayor Curry’s announcement that he

would allow the HRO to go into effect without his signature, and accompanying public message,

had no legal effect whatsoever. The ordinance itself specifies that it will “become effective upon

signature by the Mayor or upon becoming effective without the Mayor's signature.” Mayor Curry

did not sign the ordinance, and it can only become effective without his signature according to

Charter Section 6.05, which does not allow for an ordinance to take immediate effect without

signature, and certainly does not allow the mayor to decide when an unsigned ordinance takes

effect. Accordingly, the HRO will not become law until the conclusion of the council meeting on

February 28, 2017. Until then, Mayor Curry still has the power to veto the HRO.

Introduced by Council Members Bowman, Hazouri and Love: 1

2

3

ORDINANCE 2017-15 4

AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND 5

EXPANDING THE CITY’S EQUAL RIGHTS LAWS TO 6

PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION BASED UPON SEXUAL 7

ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY, AMENDING 8

SECTION 60.105 (FUNCTIONS, POWERS AND DUTIES), 9

ORDINANCE CODE; AMENDING SECTION 400.101 10

(STATEMENT OF POLICY), ORDINANCE CODE; AMENDING 11

CHAPTER 402 (EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY), 12

ORDINANCE CODE; AMENDING CHAPTER 406 (PUBLIC 13

ACCOMMODATIONS), ORDINANCE CODE; AMENDING 14

CHAPTER 408 (FAIR HOUSING), ORDINANCE CODE; 15

PROVIDING LEGISLATIVE INTENT; PROVIDING FOR 16

EXEMPTION FOR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS; PROVIDING 17

FOR EXEMPTION FOR SMALL EMPLOYERS; PROVIDING 18

FOR SINGLE-SEX FACILITIES AND DRESS CODES; 19

PROVIDING FOR INTERPRETATION; AUTHORIZING THE 20

OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL TO MAKE CODIFICATION 21

CHANGES; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 22

23

WHEREAS, the City of Jacksonville is an inclusive and 24

welcoming community, wherein no discrimination should occur; and 25

WHEREAS, City of Jacksonville routinely competes with other 26

cities and counties, within Florida, in other states and 27

internationally, in the areas of economic development; and 28

WHEREAS, the City of Jacksonville seeks to be competitive in 29

attracting new industries, corporate relocations and expansions, 30

medical facilities, educational opportunities, conventions, 31

EXHIBIT 2

- 2 -

sporting, entertainment and cultural events, tourism, employee 1

recruitment and retention, and in other important categories; and 2

WHEREAS, the City of Jacksonville has great respect for the 3

many diverse religious communities represented by local houses of 4

worship and faith leaders, each of which and all of whom have been 5

carefully considered and provided for herein with appropriate 6

exemptions; and 7

WHEREAS, The City of Jacksonville is home to thriving small 8

businesses that form the backbone of the local economy, the needs 9

of which have been carefully considered and provided for herein 10

with appropriate exemptions; and 11

WHEREAS, The City of Jacksonville recognizes and appreciates 12

the contributions of the members of its lesbian, gay, bisexual and 13

transgender ("LGBT") community, and finds that a strong LGBT 14

community is a vital thread in the diverse tapestry of this City; 15

now therefore 16

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Jacksonville: 17

Section 1. Legislative Findings. 18

It is hereby ascertained, represented, determined and declared 19

that: 20

(a) The Duval County School Board passed and enacted human 21

rights protections for its students, faculty, administrators, and 22

other employees in June 2012. 23

(b) In March 2016, after leading three community conversations 24

on the topic, Mayor Lenny Curry by departmental directive required 25

the City of Jacksonville to update its equal employment opportunity 26

policy to prohibit discrimination on the basis of an applicant or 27

employee's "sexual orientation, gender identity or expression," a 28

requirement which Mayor Curry also extended to vendors that 29

contract with the City. 30

(c) Following Mayor Lenny Curry's lead, Sheriff Mike Williams 31

- 3 -

extended human rights protections to all employees of the 1

Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. In addition, several key independent 2

authorities, namely JEA, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, 3

the Jacksonville Port Authority, and the Jacksonville Aviation 4

Authority have done the same. 5

(d) The Department of Defense, including the United States 6

Navy, Marines, Coast Guard, Army, and Air Force, adopted policies 7

and procedures that protect LGBT service-members, and their 8

families, from discrimination. 9

Section 2. Amending Sections 60.105, 400.101, 400.301, 10

402.102, 402.107(g)(1), 402.107(g)(3), 402.201, 402.202, 402.203, 11

402.204, 402.206, 402.209, 402.210, 402.211, 406.102, 12

406.104(g)(1), 406.104(g)(3), 406.201, 408.102, 408.204, 408.401, 13

408.402, 408.403, 408.404, 408.406, and 408.407, Ordinance Code. 14

The foregoing sections of the Ordinance Code are hereby 15

amended as follows: wherever protected categories are listed, that 16

sexual orientation and gender identity, as defined in Section 3 17

below, shall be added to the list. 18

Section 3. Amending Sections 402.107, 406.104, and 19

408.105, Ordinance Code. 20

The foregoing sections of the Ordinance Code are hereby 21

amended as follows: 22

(a) Wherever definitions are provided, the definition of 23

sexual orientation shall be added and shall mean an individual's 24

actual or perceived orientation as heterosexual, homosexual, or 25

bisexual. 26

(b) Wherever definitions are provided, the definition of 27

gender identity shall be added and shall mean the gender-related 28

identity, appearance, or expression of a person. Gender identity 29

may be demonstrated by a person's consistent and uniform assertion 30

of a particular gender identity, appearance or expression, or by 31

- 4 -

any other evidence that a person's gender identity is sincerely 1

held, provided, however, that gender identity shall not be asserted 2

for any improper, illegal or criminal purpose. 3

Section 4. Exemption for Religious Institutions. 4

Religious organizations, such as churches, synagogues, 5

mosques, and schools of religious instruction and non-profit 6

institutions or organizations affiliated therewith, are exempt from 7

the provisions contained herein. 8

Section 5. Exemption for Small Employers. 9

Since 1964, civil and human rights statutes at all levels of 10

government have exempted employers with fewer than 15 employees. 11

The same standard applies in the City of Jacksonville with respect 12

to employment discrimination claims under this provision. 13

Section 6. Single-Sex Facilities and Dress Codes. 14

(a) Nothing herein shall prohibit a business or a place of 15

public accommodation from providing single-sex restrooms, locker 16

rooms, shower facilities, bath houses, health spas, dormitory 17

lodging facilities and similar facilities that are by their nature 18

distinctly private. 19

(b) Nothing herein shall prohibit a business from establishing 20

and enforcing a dress code for its employees, provided that such 21

dress code shall not be based upon sex stereotypes. 22

Section 7. Interpretation. 23

Any ordinance or Charter provision or part of any Ordinance or 24

Charter provision in conflict with the provisions hereof is 25

repealed to the extent of the conflict. Should any part of this 26

Ordinance 2017-15-E be held invalid by a court of competent 27

jurisdiction, the remainder of this Ordinance 2017-15-E shall 28

continue in full force and effect and it shall be presumed that 29

this Ordinance 2017-15-E was enacted without the invalid provision. 30

Section 8. Authorizing the Office of General Counsel to 31

- 5 -

make Codification changes allowed by this Ordinance. The Office of 1

General Counsel is authorized to take all necessary action in 2

connection with this legislation, to execute the finalization and 3

codification of the legislation to effectuate the purposes of this 4

Ordinance as recommended by the Council Committees and enacted by 5

Council, without further Council action, provided such changes 6

implement the ordinance as approved by 2017-15-E. All such 7

finalization and codification shall be subject to appropriate legal 8

review and approval by the General Counsel, or designee, and all 9

other appropriate official action required by law. 10

Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become 11

effective upon signature by the Mayor or upon becoming effective 12

without the Mayor's signature. 13

14

Form Approved: 15

16

/s/ Margaret M. Sidman17

Office of General Counsel 18

Legislation Prepared by: Wendy E. Byndloss 19

G:\SHARED\LEGIS.CC\2017\Ord\2017 HRO (1-3-17 draft).doc20

3/21/2017 www.jaxdailyrecord.com/publicnotice.php

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/publicnotice.php 2/3

ORDINANCE 2017­15 An Ordinance Concerning Equal Opportunity And Expanding The City’s Equal Rights Laws To

Prohibit Discrimination Based Upon Sexual Orientation And Gender Identity, AmendingSection 60.105 (Functions, Powers And Duties), Ordinance Code; Amending Section 400.101(Statement Of Policy), Ordinance Code; Amending Chapter 402 (Equal EmploymentOpportunity), Ordinance Code; Amending Chapter 406 (Public Accommodations), OrdinanceCode; Amending Chapter 408 (Fair Housing), Ordinance Code; Providing Legislative Intent;Providing For Exemption For Religious Institutions; Providing For Exemption For SmallEmployers; Providing For Single­Sex Facilities And Dress Codes; Providing ForInterpretation; Authorizing The Office Of General Counsel To Make Codification Changes;Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­16

An Ordinance Regarding Equal Opportunity/Equal Access; Amending Section 400.217(Records And Reports), Part 2 (Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Program), Chapter 400(Equal Opportunity/Equal Access), Ordinance Code, To Include Reporting Requirement ToCity Council; Requesting The Mayor Include In The 2017­2018 Annual Budget For TheConsolidation Of The City Of Jacksonville Funding To Fill The Position Of The AssistantDirector For The Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Program; Requesting IndependentAgencies Diversified Workforce Reporting; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­17

An Ordinance Concerning A Continuation Grant; Appropriating Revenue Carried ForwardFrom Prior Years’ Appropriations, As Required By The U.S. Department Of Agriculture(Grantor), To Enhance The Afterschool Food Program In Fiscal Year 2016­2017, As InitiatedBy B.T. 17­024; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­18

An Ordinance Appropriating $34,000 From The Northwest Jacksonville EconomicDevelopment Fund ­ Miscellaneous Sales To The Northwest Economic Development Fund ­Subsidies & Contributions To Private Organizations To Provide A Grant To 2385 CorbettStreet, LLC (“Company”) For The Purpose Of Providing Funding In Connection With TheRenovation Of Unused Buildings Located Generally At 2385 Corbett Street, As Initiated ByB.T. 17­045; Providing A Carryover Of Funds From Year To Year Until Such Funds AreExpended Or Lapse According To The Agreement; Approving And Authorizing Execution OfDocuments By The Mayor Or His Designee And Corporation Secretary; Authorizing ApprovalOf Technical Amendments By The Executive Director Of The OED; Providing For CityOversight By The OED; Waiving Certain Guidelines Approved And Adopted By Ordinance2007­281­E; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­19

An Ordinance Authorizing And Approving: (1) An Amendment To The RedevelopmentAgreement Between Jessie L. Wilcox And Rosa L. Wilcox (Collectively, “Developer”) AndThe City Of Jacksonville (“City”) Dated May 19, 2003 (“Redevelopment Agreement”); (2) AMortgage Modification Agreement Between The City And The Developer; And (3) AnAmended And Restated Promissory Note Between The City And Developer, For The PurposeOf Re­Amortizing The Remaining Balance Of The Loan And To Extend The Term Of The NoteAnd Mortgage Evidencing The Loan For A Period Of Seven Years, To February 1, 2024, TheOriginal Loan Having Been Authorized By 2003­300­E; Authorizing Such Other ClosingDocuments And Technical Changes As May Be Required By The General Counsel, Or HisDesignee, And The Mayor’s Office, Provided That The City’s Costs Are Not Increased;Providing For City Oversight By The Office Of Economic Development; Waiver Of ThatPortion Of The Project Evaluation Criteria Of The Northwest Jacksonville EconomicDevelopment Fund Adopted By Ordinance 2007­281­E Which Would Require The SubmissionOf Annual Audited Financial Statements And A Third Party Underwriting Requirement;Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­20

An Ordinance Authorizing The Compensation And Benefits Division Of The EmployeeServices Department To Offer The Option To Enroll In The UF Health Plan To City EmployeesOr Retirees Covered Under The City’s Group Health Plan On March 31, 2017, Any New CityEmployees First Eligible To Participate In The City’s Employee Benefit Programs On Or AfterApril 1, 2017, And Any Retirees Covered Under Any City Group Health Plan Who Retire OnOr After April 1, 2017; Authorizing The Mayor To Negotiate, Execute And Deliver A ThirdParty Administrative Services Contract With Integra Administrative Group, Inc. (“Integra”) ToAdminister The UF Health Plan; Invoking The Exemption In 126.107(G), Ordinance Code;Waiving Section 116.1406(A) (Procurement Of Plan Administrator), Ordinance Code, To AllowThe City To Enter Into A Third Party Administrative Services Contract With Integra ToAdminister The UF Health Plan; Providing For City Oversight By The Compensation AndBenefits Division Of The Employee Services Department; Requesting One Cycle EmergencyPassage; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­21

An Ordinance Concerning Surplus City Personal Property Originally Purchased By TheFlorida Department Of Health In Duval County With Funding From The U.S. Department OfHealth And Human Services (HRSA) (The “Property”); Incorporating Recitals; Authorizing TheAppropriate Officials Of The City To Transfer The Property To Agape Community HealthCenter, Inc., The New Federal Qualified Health Center (FQHC) At No Cost In Order To AllowThe Continuation Of Intended Health Services; Waiving Conflicting Provisions Of Chapter122 (Public Property), Sections 122.811 (Sales Of Tangible Personal Property; Prohibition OfSales To Certain Persons), 122.812 (Surplus, Obsolete And Waste Supplies And OtherTangible Personal Property), And 122.821 (Disposal Of Surplus Vehicles And FleetEquipment), Ordinance Code, So As To Effect The Transfer Without Public Bidding And AtNo Cost; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­22

An Ordinance Concerning The Fiscal Year 2015­2016 Jacksonville Aviation Authority (JAA)Budget; Amending Ordinance 2015­504­E (The City Of Jacksonville Budget Ordinance) ToRevise The Total Number Of Temporary Hours And Revise JAA Budget Schedule G;Attaching And Incorporating Second Revised Schedule G; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­23

An Ordinance Declaring Jarboe Lane, A Private Road Running From Strickland Road ToKings Road In The City Of Neptune Beach, Florida, R.E. Number 177419­0000, In CouncilDistrict 13 (The “Subject Parcel”), To Be Surplus To The Needs Of The City; Authorizing ItsConveyance To The City Of Neptune Beach At No Cost And Authorizing The Mayor And TheCorporation Secretary To Execute Any And All Documents Necessary For Such ConveyanceIn Accordance With The Provisions Of Subpart B (Real Property Dispositions), Part 4 (RealProperty), Chapter 122 (Public Property), Ordinance Code; Providing An Effective Date.

3/21/2017 www.jaxdailyrecord.com/publicnotice.php

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/publicnotice.php 3/3

ORDINANCE 2017­24 An Ordinance Approving, And Authorizing The Mayor, Or His Designee, And Corporation

Secretary To Execute And Deliver, The Hurricane Matthew Disaster Declaration FederallyFunded Public Assistance State Agreement Between The State Of Florida And The City OfJacksonville Allowing The City To Be Reimbursed For Eligible Costs And Damages FromHurricane Matthew; Providing For Oversight By The Emergency Preparedness Division OfThe Jacksonville Fire And Rescue Department; Providing An Effective Date. ORDINANCE 2017­25

An Ordinance Establishing A Temporary Moratorium On The Acceptance, Processing OrApproval Of Any Wireless Communication Towers Or Facilities In The City’s Rights­Of­Way;Providing An Effective Date.

A copy of the proposed ordinances may be examined in the Office of Legislative ServicesDivision of the City Council, Suite 430, City Hall, on weekdays between the hours of 8:00a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

All persons interested are notified to be present at said time and place, and they may beheard with respect to the proposed ordinances.DATED this 13th day of January, A.D. 2017.Council of the City of Jacksonville

Attest: Cheryl L. Brown

Council Secretary Jan. 13 (17­0234)

Subscribe to The Daily Record to view all of the information.

Displaying 1 to 1 (of 1 total) records

Search Again

Published for 27,152 consecutive weekdays

Covering events in the Realty and Building communities in Northeast Florida.

10 North Newnan Street · Jacksonville, FL 32202 · (904) 356­2466 · Fax (904) 353­2628 © 2017 Daily Record & Observer, LLC All Right Reserved.

Privacy Policy · Refund Policy