Mayor & Commission Meetings

LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE Thursday, July 16, 2020 Committee Members Present: Committee Members Absent: Commissioner Allison Wright, Committee Chair Commissioner Russell Edwards Commissioner Mike Hamby Commissioner Mariah Parker Commissioner Ovita Thornton Staff: Deborah Lonon, Assistant Manager Krystle Cobran, Inclusion Office Sherrie Hines, Assistant Attorney Sarah George, Recorder Doug Hansford, Building Permits & Inspection Chief Cleveland Spruill, Police Department Judge Ryan Hope, Municipal Court Committee Chair Wright called the meeting to order at 1:07 pm. A. Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Wright requested the May 21, 2020 minutes be updated at the bottom to note the June 18, 2020 meeting was cancelled due to a rescheduled budget meeting. Commissioner Edwards made a motion to approve the May 21, 2020 Minutes, and Commissioner Hamby seconded. The motion passed by unanimous vote. Commission Identified Items of Interest: B. Examine opportunities for local civil rights legislation, modelled on the recent Brookhaven ordinance, and utilizing the Municipal Court and ACC Attorney’s Office as support for the prospective ordinance (Mayor Girtz assigned to LRC on March 3, 2020) Sherrie Hines began the discussion by addressing some concerns and requests the Committee previously had regarding this topic. In the most recent meeting, Commissioner Parker had requested the Attorney’s Office compile a brief public memorandum, as the memorandum sent previously was an attorney-client confidential privilege memorandum due to the detailed research that had been included in it. Sherrie advised that it was difficult to draft a public-facing memorandum that can adequately discuss the concerns without then waiving their privilege. She further advised that, after speaking with Attorney Judd Drake, they agreed it was not possible for them to write an adequate public-facing memo that would give the public an understanding of the details that the Committee was considering. Sherrie Hines also noted Commissioner Thornton had previously requested whether we could modify or pass an ordinance that could prevent discrimination based on past criminal history. In researching this topic, it appears there is a growing movement in a number of states that involves passing legislation that bans the box that people would check off in employment applications that acknowledges they have been convicted of a felony or a crime in the past. This has happened in thirteen other states; however, Georgia is not one of these states. That said, the EEOC has put out a lot of guidance about how to properly consider criminal background history. Commissioner Thornton explained that she had requested this information because of the numerous criminal justice reforms that are moving all over the country, and because she is  aware of a movement by the Justice Project in Atlanta around records restriction. She further explained there is a new records restriction legislation that just passed, and she is planning to speak with Judge Hope and some others to understand more about it and its possible impact. Commissioner Thornton advised that she would like the Committee to continue to explore opportunities for people with criminal backgrounds to get a second chance. Commissioner Wright inquired as to whether or not the Committee would like to have a summary of that legislation provided at the next meeting. Commissioner Thornton explained the Committee can plan on having the discussion in case there is something that she can share from her discussions with legal professionals; however, there may not be anything to share. Commissioner Wright asked for clarification on whether or not this was the same thing as when an employer calls their job application a felon-friendly job application. Judge Hope explained that there are some employers that advertise themselves as felon-friendly that, even if the candidate had to answer that question, they would still consider candidates with a past criminal history. The Ban the Box movement ensures candidates do not even answer that question until they get to a certain stage. Commissioner Wright questioned if legislating Ban the Box would have to be legislated at the state-level, and Sherrie Hines advised that mandating anything on individual companies or outside entities could not be done at a local-level and would need to be addressed at a state-level. Commissioner Wright explained that this discussion might capture the way things could be discussed for non-discrimination and suggested the Committee examine ways to ensure employees are not being discriminated against, including in the course of their jobs in public interactions. She also noted that it seems the Committee has more power to implement practices as a Unified Government to set an example than they have in mandating the community to do so. Sherrie Hines agreed and added that, as an employer, the Unified Government has a responsibility and legal obligation to ensure that our employees are not subject to discrimination, even from members of the public. Commissioner Thornton asked if the Unified Government had banned the box in its employment applications. Judge Hope explained that he had previously reached out to the Human Resources Department, and they advised the Unified Government does have a Ban the Box policy. If the candidate gets to the conditional offer stage, the individual will have to complete a questionnaire and disclose anything before they run a criminal history and a traffic history. Sherrie Hines mentioned that, in the last meeting, there was also discussion about adding links on the ACCGov website to existing resources for individuals who feel they have been discriminated against to seek assistance, and in some cases free help. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has resources on their website for anyone who feels they have been discriminated against in terms of employment. There is also a link to HUD for individuals who feel that they have been discriminated against with regards housing. Sherrie Hines explained that we can try to direct people to these existing resources from agencies that may specialize in certain areas or be better equipped to address violations. Commissioner Wright also noted that Commissioner Parker had previously expressed an interest in learning more about how complaints have been brought forward in other jurisdictions. Sherrie Hines reached out to other attorneys and different agencies that were involved in this and universally received no response. As far as she can tell, she advised it looks like it has been used very rarely. Decatur had one or two complaints filed in its entirety, and this is consistent with what Athens has experienced with our downtown discrimination ordinance with regards to dress code. Judge Hope advised that he also reached out to Decatur’s Clerk of Court, and they Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 071620  indicated that they have not had a single complaint that has made it to the court-side of the process, and it does not look like there has been much activity. He also reached out to Clarkston, and their judge indicated that, though they do have an anti-discrimination ordinance, it is his understanding that it only deals with discrimination in their hiring practices both internally or with city contractors. He has not had any matters that have come before his court. He also reached out to Judge Baker in Atlanta, and she advised she has not had a case come before her court either. He has not received a response from the judge in Chamblee, and he advised he would reach back out to them to try to obtain more information. Deborah Lonon advised that Krystle Cobran, the Inclusion Officer, had also reached out to City of Atlanta regarding the complaint process for discrimination and contacted one of the people who were involved in coordinating the committee, and this person is willing to connect her with some others and share more about their process. Sherrie Hines that the lack of enforcement information may be from a variety of reasons. One reason may be from a lack of people coming forward to file complaints. She further explained that ACCGov experiences this with the dress code ordinance, and though there is a desire to enforce the ordinance as zealously as possible, this cannot be done if people do not come forward. Judge Hope added that having more information about the complaint process may provide further insight as well. If the complaint process is burdensome or hard to find, this would also lead to fewer complaints being filed. Commissioner Wright noted that our own process for violations may be difficult to find or navigate and asked the Committee if they would like to explore the public interface for our own processes and what other next steps they would like to undertake. Commissioner Parker inquired as to whether we have evaluated any potential barriers to access with the process that ACCGov currently has outlined. Deborah Lonon advised that Krystle Cobran has evaluated that so far. Krystle Cobran advised that the Inclusion Office has begun to survey discrimination complaint and review processes across the country, while simultaneously learning more about our existing processes. She further described some of the findings they have made so far around ACCGov’s existing processes, including around accessibility. Individuals have to have internet access to find the form, and the form is not fillable. The individual would likely need to have the capacity to print it out, fill it out, and scan it to submit it. She also noted that there would likely be many feelings and emotions that come with filling the form out. This may be further complicated if the resident is unsure of the process for reviewing the complaint, including who will be reviewing it and what happens next. She also advised that her office has also started reaching out to various jurisdictions that seem to have a more robust mechanism in place to learn more about the process of creating their discrimination review process and any pitfalls they experienced. Commissioner Wright asked how to move forward and put everything together. Deborah Lonon advised the first question would be regarding the scope and whether or not the goal would be to adopt an ordinance similar to Brookhaven’s or improve our existing processes in hopes of setting an example and leading the way for our private businesses. Commissioner Wright requested Krystle Cobran continue to be folded into the conversation. Deborah Lonon advised that, after Krystle Cobran connects with Sherrie Hines and Judge Hope, staff may be able to present a more detailed report at the next meeting. Commissioner Wright noted that even the PowerPoint presentation from the Task Force that led to the creation of the Inclusion Office would be good information for the Committee and may be a good starting point for the Committee. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 3 071620  Deborah Lonon inquired as to whether the Committee desired to have the links to resources on how to file complaints through the EEOC and HUD, and, if so, this would have to be taken before the Commission. Commissioner Wright explained her initial thought would be for the Committee to consult with Jeff Montgomery, the Public Information Officer, on the best placement for those resources. Commissioner Edwards agreed that including Jeff Montgomery would be good. Commissioner Wright also expressed interest in learning about what we currently have on the books related and protecting ACCGov staff from discrimination to the public, and asked Deborah Lonon to provide some more context for the Committee on what staff has experienced downtown. Deborah Lonon provided a brief overview and explained a Solid Waste staff member had experienced some alleged discrimination downtown when some patrons at a bar used derogatory language towards him. The employee reported this to his supervisor, and it was passed along to the Director. After a staff meeting with her night shift staff, the Director learned that this was a common experience. The Director informed the Attorney’s Office, the Manager’s Office, and the Police. Sherrie Hines explained that she does not believe that there needs to be any additional legislation to address these kinds of instances, as ACCGov already has a responsibility as an employer to protect our employees and to make sure that they’re not in an unsafe or hostile work environment. She further noted that it can be complicated to enforce these instances, because it is often difficult to catch or prosecute the person. That said, the Police Department has met with staff to discuss ways to document what happened, so action can be taken to protect employees while they are out doing their jobs. Commissioner Wright expressed interest in including information to promote existing processes and inform residents on how anyone who may witness or videotape an incident can report it in future discussions. C. Schedule/Agenda Changes The next LRC meeting is scheduled for August 20, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. and will be held remotely via WebEx. Commissioner Parker made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Hamby seconded the motion, and it passed by unanimous vote. The meeting adjourned at 1:53 p.m. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 4 071620