Mayor & Commission Meetings

LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE Thursday, September 9, 2021 Committee Members Present: Committee Members Absent: Commissioner Allison Wright, Chair Commissioner Mariah Parker Commissioner Carol Myers Commissioner Jesse Houle Commissioner Ovita Thornton Staff: Blaine Williams, Manager Niki Jones, Assistant Manager Krystle Cobran, Inclusion Officer Lisa Pappas, Assistant Attorney Sarah George, Recorder Visitors: Travis McCollum, City of Raleigh Sonya Voelkel, City of Atlanta Brenda Mills, City of Asheville Lillian Govus, Buncombe County Government Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, County Commissioner- Buncombe County Government Commissioner Wright called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. A. Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Thornton made a motion to approve the August 26, 2021 minutes. Commissioner Myers seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Commission Identified Items of Interest: B. Determine ideal composition and mission for a local civil rights/human rights commission, situated to provide support to the Inclusion Office. (Mayor Girtz assigned to LRC on August 3, 2021) Niki Jones introduced the topic and summarized the charge and reviewed the timeline. He also reiterated key questions for consideration that were discussed in the last meeting. Krystle Cobran outlined the sequence of presentations that will be shared during the meeting. Travis McCollum, Community Relations Analyst with the City of Raleigh, shared a presentation on the mission and functions of Raleigh’s Human Relations Commission (HRC), including the background, current practice in Raleigh, Board/Office accomplishments, and opportunities for enhancement and current initiatives. Krystle Cobran asked Travis McCollum about what impact the HRC had on their community. Travis McCollum explained that, in his time with the department, the impact has been widespread and of great magnitude because of the scope of the commission being focused on seek impacting the lives of their residents. He named their Social Equity Book Club and a local bookbag giveaway as two examples of initiatives that positively impacted the community. Additionally, McCollum advised the Committee to consider the intersectionality of the issues being addressed. Their department oversees 7 other boards, and many of the issues the Human Relations Commission tackles are issues the other boards and commissions are also working on; the boards and commission that have been established over the years are a direct product of the work of their HRC.  Krystle Cobran inquired as to how their team evaluates the progress of the HRC in Raleigh. Travis McCollum shared that he believes the importance of their annual retreat cannot be understated in regards to how they evaluate their work. During this retreat, they meet together for 8 to 9 hours to assess what they worked on and what went well in the last year, as well as to heed the guidance of their staff’s expertise regarding some meaningful issues that they are observing residents of Raleigh encountering. In addition to meeting on a monthly basis, there is also a monthly leadership meeting that staff has with the two co-chairs. In his experience, the way to assess the work is to remain engaged with each other and with full-time staff to stay connected to any concerns or thoughts on the work being done. Niki Jones asked how often the HRC reported to the city council. Travis McCollum explained that his understanding is that the HRC reports to the city council on an annual basis, shortly after the work plan is completed. Krystle Cobran requested clarification on whether or not the annual work plan was developed during the annual retreat. Travis McCollum explained that, while the core principles and concepts that are going to ultimately evolve into the work plan are developed during the annual retreat, creating the work plan is a process that typically ends up taking multiple weeks thereafter. Krystle Cobran also inquired about what some of the factors are that they consider during the selection process and what steps they are taking to ensure that there is diversity throughout the selection process. Travis McCollum shared that the city council is very involved with the selection process and, ultimately, the members elected to the HRC are at the discretion of the council. Applications are received from people within the community. The applications are then vetted by the City of Raleigh’s administrative team, and then they will go before the city council to determine which applicants will be selected to serve on the HRC. The City of Raleigh’s organizational values and scope of the board call for diversity and equal representation; city council is very sensitive to this and reflects that in their selections. Commissioner Myers inquired as to whether or not they have enough diversity in applicants to allow the city council to select a diverse group. Travis McCollum explained that, to the best of his knowledge, they do. They tend to have very diverse representation because of the demographics of Raleigh and the scope of the work of the HRC. He noted that there may have been times in the past where this was a challenge, but in his experience it has been a very diverse board and had diverse applicants. Sonya Voelkel, Constituent Services Specialist with the City of Atlanta, joined the meeting to discuss the City of Atlanta’s approach to the HRC. Krystle Cobran asked who created the City of Atlanta’s HRC and what impact it has had within Atlanta. Sonya Voelkel explained the creation of the HRC for the City of Atlanta was the result of an agreement between the Atlanta City Council and Mayor. They agreed upon and founded the HRC in 2000. She shared that she believes that the HRC has provided their constituents strength and helped their ability to unite people of different backgrounds, beliefs, and cultures around common principles. In her experience, she has seen a sense of belonging and inclusion. Krystle Cobran requested clarification on whether the HRC is more advisory or judicial in function. Sonya Voelkel explained that it is more advisory. They do review individual complaints. The complaint is filed with the Office of Constituent Services. She shared that she receives and reviews the complaints, as well as conducts the initial investigation. They make sure that the constituent understands the process clearly, and she also emphasized the importance of clear communication from the staff member assigned to receive the complaints. Krystle Cobran inquired as to how the City of Atlanta evaluates progress with respect to the HRC and how they assess whether or not the scope needs to be modified. Sonya Voelkel explained that they have to truly know and see the confirmation and responsiveness from the community, as well as the community’s awareness that the HRC exists. She noted the HRC had gone to Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 090921  great lengths to educate the community about the HRC. They produced and edited a brochure that was distributed to promote the mission and awareness of the HRC. The responsiveness from the community and the complaints filed shines a light on and is an important role in evaluating discrimination experiences. They use the facts and number of complaints received to establish a review of the potential changes that may be needed. She also advised that it is imperative to establish guidelines for filing a complaint for progress and resolution. Krystle Cobran requested information on the factors that are considered in selecting HRC members in Atlanta. Sonya Voelkel explained that they make certain that the HRC seats remain full and that all appointments and confirmations are executed in a timely fashion. Their HRC consists of 7 commissioners; two are appointed by the Mayor, two are appointed by the President of the City Council, and three are elected by the at-large members of the City Council. Each commissioner must reside in the City of Atlanta. They select members that reflect the diversity of the city, including having a balance of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age, and disability, and attention to this should be in alignment with the administration’s commitment to equity, diversity, and inclusion. Brenda Mills, Interim Equity and Inclusion Officer with the City of Asheville, joined to share the City of Asheville’s approach to their HRC. Krystle Cobran inquired about who created the HRC in Nashville and what impact it has made in their community. Brenda Mills shared that their HRC was the brainchild of one of their city council members, and he had pushed for the HRC to be formed in 2016. The Blue Ribbon Committee worked on setting up the protocol for the HRC and brought their recommendation to their city council. She explained that their HRC is basically an advisory board, and, ultimately, their city council makes the final decision. She shared that they have experienced constant turnover on their board, and she advised that they consider who was being selected for the board and their criteria. She noted that, if the goal was to have a board that will be making decisions on human relations or discrimination issues, it would be helpful to have some expertise; examples provided included legal, historic, or purchasing background. Another lesson she shared was that training is key. Volunteers are being asked to lead each other, which can be a daunting task. She believes it would have been helpful for them if they could have had some major training after being selected to the board. Krystle Cobran inquired about how the HRC evaluated progress and whether or not there has been any assessment of whether or not the scope needs to change with respect to the HRC. Brenda Mills shared that the City of Asheville is in the process of looking at all boards and commissions. She explained that, to the best of her knowledge, they have not assessed their progress. They are planning a work session in October, which will include training from the city clerk’s office on how to serve on boards and what kinds of things can and cannot be done. While the board does have the support of a legal representative, she explained that they are trying to build capacity in the members of the board. She advised that she cannot stress enough about the importance of training board members and explaining their mission, as well as helping develop a work plan. Krystle Cobran asked how they developed their work plan. Brenda Mills shared that they do not have a work plan presently, and this was a notable issue. They are working on developing one now. Krystle Cobran also asked what factors are considered within the City of Asheville when selecting HRC members. Brenda Mills shared that they ask on the application why they want to join, but she advised that she believes they should revisit interviewing applicants with city council. This interview would allow the city council to speak about the direction they would like to see the HRC go, the objectives of the commission, and provide an opportunity to learn more about applicant backgrounds. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 3 090921  Krystle Cobran explained that she understands from what Brenda Mills shared that there had been a gap between expectations and the reality of the scope of the commission. She inquired about what factors may have led to that gap and how they are working to close the gap. Brenda Mills shared that the HRC experienced turnover in staff liaison, which was a big loss for them. She also noted that they need to start scheduling check-ins; she is observing the need for more support. Lillian Govus, Director of Communications and Public Engagement, and Commissioner Jasmine Beach-Ferrara with Buncombe County Government joined to discuss their approach to establishing a nondiscrimination ordinance. Krystle Cobran asked what the top three priorities were when passing their nondiscrimination ordinance. Commissioner Beach-Ferrara provided some political context that precipitated their nondiscrimination ordinance, including the timeline of North Carolina legislation changes. They were able to reintroduce this conversation in December of last year when the state bill that had prohibited these had sunset. She shared that they were thrilled to work with the City of Asheville on the passage of the city and county ordinances. Krystle Cobran asked for information on how they are educating their community on the impact or intended impact. Commissioner Beach-Ferrara explained that a lot of education was needed around some of the technical aspects of what could happen at the level of a local ordinance. They added protections around natural hair and hairstyles, and there was an opportunity for some education around that. There was also, at the broader community level, a range of opportunities and needs for dialoguing education. They did a long period of outreach and dialogue with their Chamber of Commerce, which included ongoing dialogue with some key leaders, as the ordinance was being drafted. After the passage of the draft, they organized a roundtable discussion with their Chamber of Commerce to address questions; the goal was that local businesses would feel fully equipped and informed. She explained that the reality was that most were already complying by virtue of their practices, but there was a desire and need for people to feel like they really understood what this meant, particularly with the enforcement piece. She shared they also worked very hard to make this a very public conversation at the county commission, and they created a lot of opportunities for dialogue and public comment. Krystle Cobran also inquired about what steps Buncombe County was taking to operationalize their nondiscrimination ordinance. Commissioner Beach-Ferrara explained that their staff has done a tremendous job building not only the enforcement scheme but also how that will be staffed and communicated. Staff made a presentation about how to report an incident through their online portal as well as through forms. Lillian Govus shared that, from a staffing standpoint, the number of reports that they were receiving was not very cumbersome, so it was fairly easy to operationalize. Krystle Cobran requested clarification on what the staffing piece looked like for their process. Lillian Govus explained that this person is going to not only oversee the responses to the nondiscrimination ordinance but would also serve as kind of an office administrator role. They will be reporting to the county manager but will also connect with their new Chief Equity and Human Rights Officer, which is currently in the hiring process. Commissioner Thornton inquired about what the role of the county manager would be in their process. Commissioner Beach-Ferrara explained that an appeal could be made to the county manager. She explained they tried to structure and implement this in the spirit of education and mitigation rather than trying to direct it as a punitive, fine-based mechanism. Built within the sort of due process of the investigation and findings, there is an appeal process that can go to the county manager’s office. If reconciliation cannot be achieved, the case would go through this final appeal process with the county manager, staff, attorney, and strategic partnership’s director. Commissioner Myers complimented the website Buncombe County has made to provide information on their nondiscrimination ordinance and requested clarification on whether or not Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 4 090921  the investigator was a separate position from the office administrator. Lillian Govus explained that it was the same position. Commissioner Myers shared that she learned a lot in this conversation about what to consider in terms of board membership and the training and support that will be needed, and she requested further education on the scope and mission of the commissions. Niki Jones shared that further discussion on the scope will be held at the next meeting. He noted staff could provide the scope of the jurisdictions the Committee heard from in this meeting. Commissioner Wright agreed that would be helpful. She explained that she favors the idea of the HRC having an annual work plan that is approved by the Mayor & Commission. Commissioner Thornton agreed with the need for further discussion and information on scope. She explained that the presenters gave more information to consider. Commissioner Myers requested staff compile a spreadsheet with the scope of each of the jurisdictions. Niki Jones explained that staff could provide that. Commissioner Wright asked the Committee if they were amenable to limiting the examples of other jurisdictions to those that shared information during this meeting. The Committee agreed. C. Schedule/Agenda Changes The next LRC meeting is scheduled for September 16, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. and will be held remotely via WebEx. Commissioner Myers made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Thornton seconded the motion. The motion passed by unanimous vote. The meeting adjourned at 2:33 p.m. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 5 090921