If you were to listen to City Attorney Michael Aguirre, you’d think that everything was going to be hunky dory.

Aguirre said he saw anger, frustration and confusion last week when the San Diego City Council and Donna Frye voted against adding the city as a friend-of-the-court in an appeal of the ban of marriage licenses to same-sex couples to the California Supreme Court.

But the city attorney urged the GLBT community to be supportive, and not attack Frye.

“It’s time to be calm,” Aguirre said last week. “We all need to come together, stay consolidated, and not lose our cool.”

Frye’s “no” vote sparked outrage in San Diego and disappointment in San Francisco, where the City Attorney’s office filed opening briefs in the marriage equality case on April 2. The state filed response briefs June 14, and San Francisco replied with supplemental briefs Aug. 17. California has the largest percentage of same-sex couples in the nation.

“People were surprised that Donna Frye didn’t join in the vote,” said Theresa Stewart, chief deputy city attorney of San Francisco and lead counsel in the marriage equality case. “She has sought the gay vote, and she is considered liberal. That she was the fly in the ointment surprised a lot of people…. Of course it’s disappointing.”

Stewart said the friend-of-the-court briefs, or amicus briefs, are largely symbolic. They are meant to show statewide support for an issue, as opposed to local or grassroots support.

“Who signs on is wonderfully symbolic and substantial,” Stewart said. “They show the court what’s at stake.”

At the crux of San Francisco’s case is Family Code 300, which was amended in 1977 to define marriage as an institution between a man and woman.

The deadline to sign the brief, which failed in San Diego with a 4-4 vote Sept. 4, is Sept. 26. The council redocketed the item for Sept. 18. If San Diego signs the brief, joining San Jose, Los Angeles, Long Beach and San Francisco, the five largest cities in the state will have signed.

Frye’s vote last week, though, proved there are no guarantees – and Mayor Jerry Sanders still has the power to veto Tuesday’s vote.

“Donna is a process person,” Aguirre said. “This should not be read as opposition.”

In fact, Frye said she supported signing the brief, but did not think the item was docketed with enough time for the public to respond.

“Was the item properly docketed? Yes. Legally, was proper notice given? Yes. Did it allow the public the opportunity to have its voice heard? No, it did not,” Frye said. “I have to protect the public’s ability to participate, so they feel like they have a voice, whether we like or don’t like what they have to say.”

Constituents criticized Frye and said her “no” vote was a political ploy in a possible bid for mayor. Frye said she will not run for mayor.

“It’s insulting that I’d stand up for a principle based on open government and people would try to attach some political meaning to it,” Frye said. “I believe I stand for something – the right to participate and have voices heard. I stood for that before I was elected.”

Councilmember Toni Atkins, who sponsored the brief, avoided docketing it as a supplemental item, which the public wouldn’t have been alerted to until the day before or the day of the vote. She also opted to have it discussed in open session.

“I’d like San Diego to be on record, even late in the game,” Atkins said. “I think it is important to the Supreme Court that we’re listed representing thousands of our own community members.”

Atkins lobbied other council members to support the brief, but assumed Frye would vote in favor.

“Was I disappointed? Yes. I thought I could count on her vote,” Atkins said.

Now, the process on the backend of the brief worries some. If the council approves the brief Sept. 18, Sanders could veto, and the council wouldn’t have time to override before the Sept. 26 deadline.

Last week, the mayor’s chief of staff, George Biagi, said the mayor does not have a position on the brief. Wednesday, Biagi could not be reached for comment and did not return a phone call to his office.

When the item reappears to the council Sept. 18, Atkins is confident Frye will vote to support the brief – but she’s worried that she may lose another ally, Jim Madaffer, Scott Peters, or Ben Hueso. If one of the three votes “no,” regardless of Frye’s vote, the item will fail again.

“If we get this done, we can be a part of history, we can be a part of something positive,” Atkins said. “Donna will be with us. I hope we don’t lose anyone else. Pressure is being applied, and I hope we don’t lose another vote.”