PROVIDENCE — The political will to change the composition of the City Council this year may be fading.

Last night, council members met to hash out four competing proposals for including at-large members on the 15-member council. These members would be elected by the entire city, as opposed to the current system where voters in each ward elect their representatives.

Some on the council, and some private groups, have advocated changing the council to include at-large members as a way of adding a citywide perspective, and, some say, bolstering minority representation on the council.

But last night at the council’s ordinance committee meeting, two proposals were axed outright, and two others seemed to draw a cool reception from many council members.

Cliff Wood’s idea for a 15-member council with 10 ward-elected and 5 at-large members, and Seth Yurdin’s plan for a 21-member body, with 15 ward-elected and 6 at-large members were both removed from the discussion.

The council then scheduled a public hearing July 21 to consider the two survivors. One plan, by Council Finance Committee Chairman John J. Igliozzi, increases the size of the council to 18, adding 3 at-large members to the 15 ward members.

The second, proposed by Council Majority Leader Terrence M. Hassett and Ordinance Committee Chairman Michael Solomon, maintains the size of the council at 15, but removes three wards and replaces them with three at-large members.

This plan has been backed by a private group of influential city residents calling itself the “12-3 Coalition,” for the distribution of the council after the split.

A change to the composition of the council must be approved by city voters. The first chance would be concurrent with the presidential election in November, and the deadline for sending an approved resolution to the state to be put on the ballot is Aug. 6. The council would have to vote on a change before that date.

With the city knee-deep in budget deliberations, even some of the sponsors questioned whether this is the right time to consider this kind of change — which would involve redrawing ward maps, and changing the nature of representation for Providence residents. An Aug. 6 deadline, Igliozzi said, won’t leave enough time to fully inform the public on the ramifications, and properly debate the issue.

“If you’re going to go down the path of redistricting wards and reapportioning neighborhoods, we’d have to do a whole new [map] and a whole new census — the public should know what the city’s going to look like before they vote on it,” Igliozzi said.

And, Igliozzi added, he isn’t sure the common resident wants this change.

“I know there are some special interests involved, but they don’t necessarily involve the entire city, or the public at large,” he said.

Others, like Councilmen Nicholas J. Narducci and Miguel C. Luna, said that there’s no need for change, even if there was more time.

“What is the problem? I don’t even understand what we’re trying to accomplish with this,” Luna said.

Councilmen Seth Yurdin and Luis Aponte also expressed reservations –– Yurdin saying more discussion of the benefits is needed, and Aponte suggesting that the time is not right, considering that the ward boundaries may have to be redrawn again in 2011 after the U.S. census updates Providence’s population figures. Realistically, he said, the wards can’t be fully redrawn until the 2014 election.

With so much talk against the timing and the need, Hassett and Solomon sought to calm the fears of council members concerned that the council was rushing into change in order to meet the Aug. 6 deadline.

“I think we’re all in agreement — I’m not in a rush to get this passed. I don’t see anyone here in a rush,” Solomon said.

Hassett said that some of the assumptions made when these plans were introduced might not be the case now. Most importantly, he said, the assumption that three council members may not run again in 2010 might be wrong. And if it is, it would be tough to get the full council to approve a bill that would pit existing members against one another in a fight for larger, redrawn wards.

“We’re also assuming that there may not be three wards, three people, not running again. That may be too presumptuous,” Hassett said.

With Council President Peter S. Mancini largely echoing Igliozzi’s concerns, Councilman Wood was one of the few council members present last night clearly supporting a revamp of the council. He said much of this concern amounts to a fear of change.

“There is a pull towards parochialism,” Wood said.

With his own 10-5 plan dead, Wood was happy to swing his support to the 12-3 plan.

The July 21 public hearing will be followed by an Ordinance Committee meeting July 24 where council members will discuss the two plans, and either vote to send them to the full council, or let them die in committee.

dbarbari@projo.com