Debate in Butler over a proposed nondiscrimination ordinance will look much different from now on.

Mayor Tom Donaldson on Tuesday vowed to clamp down on rules governing the city’s public comment period at meetings. Also, the council member expected to propose the measure at Thursday’s voting session confirmed she was pulling it from the table.

Council member Kathy Kline said Tuesday that she would pull the proposed ordinance from Thursday’s meeting agenda to give proponents and opponents more time to work through their disagreements in private meetings.

“Let’s see what common ground — what language is there,” Kline said. “I just feel we haven’t done the due diligence.”

The two sides of public debate over the issue — represented Tuesday by Josh Crawford and Sabrina Schnur of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), which supports the measure, and Bill Halle of Grace Youth and Family Foundation, who along with some religious and business leaders oppose it — agreed to continue private meetings where they discuss their differences over the ordinance.

Both sides apparently met once late last month, according to Kline, after she and council member Mike Walter proposed holding the private meetings. Some minor consensus between the sides was found, said Halle and Schnur, but scheduling issues derailed the effort and no more meetings have been held.

Walter, in discussion over whether the measure should be pulled from Thursday’s agenda, said he was in favor if both sides could commit to scheduled meetings on the issue. Walter said he felt a smaller group discussion might be more productive because larger meetings have proven “too easy to get out of control.”

Donaldson, who said Tuesday he would begin clamping down on public comment on the proposed ordnance by non-residents and nontaxpayers, called pulling the ordinance from council’s voting schedule wrongheaded.

Regardless of any consensus reached by the groups, Donaldson said, council members ultimately have the final say on whether to authorize or reject the measure.

He pledged to continue his opposition to the proposal, which in its current form would impose so-called “public accommodation,” employment and other protections for LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) citizens and form a Human Relations Commission to investigate complaints of discrimination.

“I stated my position three months ago and it hasn’t changed and it’s not going to change,” Donaldson said. “Let’s vote on this and see where this table’s at. We’re the ones who pass or fail ordinances.”

Halle, Schnur and Crawford on Tuesday agreed to set up future meetings to discuss their disagreements over the ordinance, but acknowledged that so far they’ve only been able to agree on minor aspects.

The central issue for Halle and other opponents is that the measure’s current language is, to them, discriminatory against faith-based organizations that currently use religious tenets to affect hiring practices and other organizational decisions.

Current state and federal law establishing civil rights protections does not include specific language regarding sexual orientation, so the organizations are free to do so. But passing the ordinance in its current form, Halle said, would open the organizations up to lawsuits.

“We’re not saying that’s what Josh and Sabrina want to do,” Halle said. “But unfortunately that’s not what has happened,” in other states.

Halle also objects to the formation of the commission, saying it would not be accountable to voters for any actions it might take or opinions it might issue.

Proponents of the ordinance say Halle’s concerns over possible litigation prompted by the ordinance are overblown.

“You’ve still not showed one time in 35 years of this ordinance where any of the things you say could happen actually happened,” Schnur said. “Not one.”

Schnur said she would oppose a resolution that Tom Donaldson vowed to present Thursday.

The resolution, in part, states that the community should: “show proper respect for the dignity of all members ... regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, religious belief, or conscience so that there remains adequate space for diverse beliefs and action and so that people of goodwill can enjoy the freedoms and blessings of liberty ...”

Schnur called the resolution a self-serving and toothless measure that’s meant to make people feel good about themselves, but lacks any ability to address or stop discriminatory behavior.

“It’s nothing more than saying ‘we don’t want something to happen, but we’re not going to do anything if it does,’” Schnur said. “A ‘no’ vote (on the ordinance) would be better than a resolution.”