Loading...
3_21_11_ Extended HRC minutes City of Boulder Human Relations Commission Minutes Thursday,March 21, 2011 th 1720 13Street, Boulder, CO 6:00p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Leisha Conners Bauer Jonathan Dings JohnPaulHarris Susan Gesundheit COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Rayford Stewart (excused) STAFF PRESENT: Carmen Atilano Karen Rahn Beth Van Dusen I.Call to Order J. Dings TheMarch 21, 2011 HRC meeting was called to order at 6:05pm by . II.Agenda Adjustments Move agenda item 6A after agenda item 4 and move agenda item 6B-4 after agenda item 6A. III.Approval of Minutes L. Conners Bauer J. P. Harris moved to accept the March 21, 2011 minutes, seconded. The motion passed 4-0. IV.Community Participation None. V.Action Items A.2011 CIF Application: Veterans Helping Veterans- Mary Ann Woellner, Co- Director of VHVNow and Trisha Dietrich, a therapist for VHVNow presented the CIF grant application requesting $1200.00 for a lecture series to be held in the City of Boulder. They presented the HRC with a handout detailing their mission and the highlights of their programs. J. Dings asked if the event isgoing to be held in the same place as in previous years. Yes, Calvary Bible Church has a large meeting room that they .J. Dings are willing to donate for the eventasked for clarification with regard to J. Dings outreach and education of the community at large with these issues. suggested J. P. contacting large employers in the city as another means to advertise the event. Harris commented that he feels that there are unmet needs in the community with respect to support services for veterans and the importance of involving family members S. Gesundheit in the process. commented on the lack of awareness in the community J. P. Harris J. Dings with regard to PTSD. 2moved to fund the request and seconded, the motion passes 4-0. B.Revision of Language: CEF and CIF Guidelines-J. Dings asked the HRC to review the highlighted changes in their packets for revisions, and the checklist for criteria as applied to grant applications in the decision making process. These changes would clarify the process for commissioners as well as applicants. S. Gesundheit asked for clarification on advertising for the CEF and CIF and further C. asked if there is a way to make applicants aware of both sources of funding. Atilano explained that there are ways to raise awareness however, it is important for the HRC to distinguish between the two for various reasons, such as deadlines and S. Gesundheit criteria for funding. asked for clarification on the youth component as C. Atilano criteria for funding and stated her concern that it seems discriminatory. eJ. xplained that the fund criteria can be modified with the rotation of commissions. Dings clarified that the youth component will be removed from the CIF guidelines L. Conners Bauer with the acceptance of the proposed changes. suggested that there C. Atilano be a monthly application deadline for the CIF. stated that we do request the application the second Wednesday of the month so that it can be sent the HRC J. P. Harris with the monthly packets. asked if the funding criteria are for the HRC J. Dings as a criteria checklist when reviewing applications. stated that yes, it was the intent to make applicants aware of the type of criteria the HRC uses in making its C. Atilano funding decisions. stated that the criteria was drafted by staff in its existing format with the understanding that it was for HRC use, if we want something similar for applicants we can put itin bullet form in the body of the application. L. Conners Bauer suggested that we not use the word event when describing the CIF J. Dings so as to minimize confusion.summarized the discussion and movedthat the following changes be made: remove passage labeled as such, add passage labeled as such, and add the bottom of the newly added passage add “therefore proposal features that the HRC will look for prominently include the following, to be followed by the first eight bullets on the criteria sheet, changing the word event in the first bullet to nd activity, and indicating that the proposal deadline is the 2Wednesday of the month. L. Conners Bauer seconded the motion. The motion passes 4-0. There was lengthy C. Atilano discussion regarding the language inthe CEF fund description. summarized the discussion and stated that staff will put the changes in draft form and bring back to the HRC for review in April. C.Nominations of Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson-J. Dings nominated L.Conners Bauer L. Conners Bauer for Chairpersonandaccepted the nomination. J. P. Harris S. Gesundheit J. Dings nominated himself for Chairperson.nominated , J. Dings J. Dings for Chairpersondeclined the nomination. moved to close L. Conners Bauer J. Dings nominations for Chairperson.nominated for Deputy J. DingsS. Gesundheit J. P. Chairpersonand accepted the nomination. nominated Harris J. P. Harris for Deputy Chairpersonand accepted the nomination. L. Conners BauerS. Gesundheit moved to close the nominations, seconded the motion. Motion passes 4-0. D.Municipal Action for Immigrant Integration (MAII) -C. Atilano provided background on the MAIIand the National League of Cities’ work on the issue. The City of Boulder has partnered with The NLC to address four specific areas of concern; C. Atilano PublicSafety, Immigrant Outreach, Civic Engagement and Citizenship. explained thatthe HRChad included immigrant outreach in their work plan for 2011 and presented an example of a proclamation that was passed in New York City. A proclamation would be an official statement regarding the City’s support of immigrant heritage in the Boulder Community. It is proposed that the proclamation occur in conjunction with specific funding distributed to organizations or groups that want to L.Conners Bauer promote immigrant heritage.asked for a draft proclamationat the April meeting and commented thatthe HRC would have to determine if this would be an annual event and identify activities that could be funded. VI. Discussion/Informational Items 2011 Budget reviewC. Atilano and B. Van Dusen -presented an updated HRC budget as requested for the period of 2007-2010 with details of the annual allocation from funding for area I (HRC allocation from .15% sales tax), annual expenditures and annual carry over. Annual allocations have remained constant, expenditures have J. P. Harris decreased and carry over has increased. asked if the carry over is due to not funding CEF/CIF grant requests. C. Atilano explained that the decrease in expenditures may be due to several factors, for example, not funding grant requests, and work plan items that require less expenditure to complete. Meeting costs, however, C. Atilano remain consistent. explained further that while the HRC has shown fiscal restraint, it is important to explain why funds should be allocated. Within the city’s priority based budgeting (PBB) process, all programs and services have been prioritized based upon city council goals and identified community needs. There are four tiers in PBB, from most essential to least essential. This process helps council, City Manager’s Office, and the budget office identify where funds can be reallocated should it become necessary. In the PBB review process budgeted to actual allocations are reviewed. A large carryover will show a high variance and this would naturally be an area that would be looked at in terms of amount of the allocation. If human service needs were high in other areas, there would be the potential for reallocation of funds. J. Dings asked what K. Rahn the timeline is with regard to the next budget process. explained that we are in 2012 budget development process now, the City Manager will present her budget to Council in August, there will be study sessions between August and October with the budget adopted at the second council meeting in October, therefore budget discussions L. Conners Bauer should take place sooner rather than later. requested additional information with regard to annual expenditures for MLK Day, CEF funding and CIF funding and feels that it makes sense to budget for these expenses and additionally we need to reexamine the work plan to determine if funds need to be allocated to implement J. P. Harris work plan items. concurs and feels that the HRC should spend more time evaluating and developing the budget work planimplementation. B.2011 Work Plan 1. 2 010 Census Update-C. Atilano reported that there will be no data specific to the demographics of Boulder until July or August. Staff will bring the informational to the HRC as soon as it becomes available. 2. I Love Boulder Campaign- Staff would like to take a photo of the of the HRC with the new commissioner at the April meeting and present to each commissioner with an I Love Boulder T-shirt. In addition, we would like to video tapeeach of the commissioners J. Dings in a thirty second spot highlighting what they love about Boulder. reminded staff that he will not be present at the April meeting. We will schedule this for the May meeting. 3.HRC Handbook- There was discussionregarding updating the HRC handbook, which C. Atilano is an item on the work plan. We are currently reviewing Chapter nine. told staff that the chapters six through nine are the chaptersthat should be reviewed, changes to L. Conners Bauer previous chapters are not necessary. recommends reviewing the handbook to determine if revisions are necessary. The following chapters will be included in monthly meeting packets for review prior to the meeting, chapter nine in April, chapter eight in May and chapters 6 and 7 in June. 4.HSF Technical Review Committee-K. Rahn clarified that the time commitment for the TRC committee members will likely be forty hours of total time for meetings rather than thirty which was previously stated, this is due to significant changes in the HSF process this year. The HRC will make a final decision at the April meeting. 5.NAHRW Conference-J.Dings and S. Gesundheit participated in the initial planning conference call on March 9, 2011. The conference will be held in Aurora, CO September rd 19–23, 2011. NAHRW is requesting sponsorship at the 5,000-10,000 dollar level. J. Dings reported that there is the possibility of the HRC leading a session, and ideas for topics were discussed. The next conference call will be held on April 13, 2011. C. HRC Applications-C. Atilano reported there are three applicants who have applied for the open seat on the HRC. City Council will make their appointments on March 29, 2011. D. Appreciation Dinner for Commissioner Stewart- The following dates were decided upon as possible dates for Commissioner Stewart’s appreciation dinner,May 4, 11, 12, or 18, 2011. Staff will contact Commissioner Stewart regarding the dates. E. Summary of Follow up Tasks- Staff will prepare VHVNow contract for $1200.00. Staff will update revisions to CEF and CIF guidelines. Staff will prepare a proclamation for review for the celebration of immigrant heritage. Staff will contact Ray Stewart to schedule farewell dinner. There are no additional announcements. VII. Immediate Action Items Noimmediate action items. . VIIIAdjournment – L. Conners Bauer J. P. Harris moved to adjourn the March 21, 2011 meeting. seconded the motion. The motion passed with a vote of 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:42p.m. Attested:Approved: Board SecretaryHRC Chairperson