A public hearing before Pittsburgh City Council on Wednesday at times grew raucous, with dozens of residents sharing conflicting opinions about dueling zoning bills that have divided Pittsburghers and city leaders.

Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey’s administration has pitched a comprehensive zoning reform bill.

Among many other things, it includes a controversial proposal to redefine small personal care homes — which would include small homeless shelters and halfway homes, as well as housing for people with disabilities — and allow them to be built in residential areas by right.

That means that — rather than going through the zoning staff review currently required — those sites could be built without any additional hurdles.

The administration has said the goal is to remove red tape, clear up confusing zoning language and ensure the city is compliance with federal rules around fair housing.

The mayor’s proposal also would allow the city’s zoning administrator to approve any proposals to convert empty institutions — like schools or hospitals — into homeless shelters or other group housing.

Councilwoman Theresa Kail-Smith, D-West End, has introduced a dueling bill that would instead require additional public process for personal care residences and community homes for people with disabilities.

Kail-Smith’s proposal would require that the Planning Commission and City Council hold public hearings and take votes on such developments before they could be allowed.

She has said her goal is to ensure there’s a robust public process that allows residents to have a voice in what comes into their communities.

She said her bill was not penned in response to the administration’s zoning reform proposals, but was in response to concerns from her constituents.

Some residents who spoke during an hourslong public hearing before City Council on Wednesday evening supported Kail-Smith’s proposal to ensure communities had input.

Others said her measure was discriminatory. They advocated for the mayor’s proposal.

Many people argued they don’t want to allow any zoning changes that could bring homeless people or halfway house residents into their neighborhoods.

“Those places do not belong in residential neighborhoods,” said Mary Kozakiewicz, a city resident who portrayed the city’s homeless population as “criminally and mentally ill.”

Councilwoman Barb Warwick, D-Greenfield, said she was upset by the way many people spoke about homeless people after several speakers painted homeless people broadly as threats to their safety or neighborhoods.

“I do not like the demonization of our unhoused neighbors that we have heard today,” she said. “I think it’s mean. However, I do understand that it’s grounded in fear.”

Other residents during Wednesday’s meeting said they wanted to see more public process and final approvals from elected council members, which is what Kail-Smith proposes.

“It needs to be for the neighborhood to decide,” said Judy Hackel, of Allentown.

But others opposed Kail-Smith’s bill and called for officials to cut red tape and move ahead with Gainey’s zoning package instead.

“I don’t know why we would try to make it more difficult to provide housing for people with disabilities,” said David Breingan, executive director of Lawrenceville United.

Vlad Kaplan, of East Liberty, said the focus on potential problems that may arise from homeless shelters was “fear mongering” on Kail-Smith’s part.

“We should be making it easier to house people, not harder,” Kaplan said.

Councilwoman Warwick said she feels the decisions over community homes should not ultimately fall on council, because it could become politicized. She said she feels it would be more appropriate for the city’s zoning officials to make those determinations.

“I think that we can reach a compromise here, but it’s going to take some time,” she said.

Councilman Bobby Wilson, D-North Side, acknowledged it will likely take council time to fully understand the potential implications of the proposed zoning changes.

“There are a lot of details that aren’t being discussed here that are pretty in-depth,” Wilson said. “I think it’s above a lot of our heads as to what that means.”

Wilson also raised concerns about the way the mayor’s zoning bill was introduced. Rather than sending it to council first, the mayor sent the bill straight to the Planning Commission.

The commission has already voted to recommend the proposal to council, but council has not yet formally considered the legislation. It is first considering Kail-Smith’s bill.

Because the two measures conflict, council members said they will not consider both at the same time.

Councilman Bob Charland, D-South Side, criticized the administration for lumping several different zoning changes into one bill and for not communicating directly with council about the proposed changes.

There’s no reason the administration should try to squeeze so many zoning reforms into one piece of legislation, Charland said, “unless you’re trying to rush something through.”

But council members on Wednesday pledged to have further public discussions on the proposed zoning changes before taking any final action.