Loading...
HRC_3_21_11_HRC_mins_summary City of Boulder BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING SUMMARY FORM NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: Human Relations Commission DATE OF MEETING: March 21, 2011 NAME/TELEPHONE OF PERSON PREPARING SUMMARY: Beth Van Dusen (303) 441-4003 NAMES OF MEMBERS, STAFF AND INVITED GUESTS PRESENT: Commissioners Present –Leisha Conners Bauer,Jonathan Dings,John Paul Harris,Susan Gesundheit Commissioners Absent– Rayford Stewart (excused) Staff –Carmen Atilano,Karen Rahn, Beth Van Dusen WHAT TYPE OF MEETING (CIRCLE ONE) [REGULAR] [SPECIAL] [QUASI-JUDICIAL] AGENDA ITEM 1 -CALL TO ORDER –J. Dings The FebruaryHRC meeting was called to order at 6:05pm by . AGENDA ITEM 2-AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS – Move agenda item 6A afteragenda item 4and move agendaitem6B-4after agenda item 6A. AGENDA ITEM 3 –APPROVAL OF MINUTES –L.C. Bauer J. P. Harris movedto accept the February 17, 2011minutes, seconded.The motion passed 4-0. AGENDA ITEM 4 –COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION –None. AGENDA ITEM 5–ACTION ITEMS AGENDA ITEM 5A–2011 CIF Application: Veterans Helping Veterans- Mary Ann Woellner, Co-Director of VHVNow and Trisha Dietrich, a therapist for VHVNowpresented 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 is going to be held in the same place as in previous years. Yes, Calvary Bible Church hasa large meeting . J. Dings room that they are willing to donate for the eventasked for clarification with regard to outreach and education of the J. Dings community at largewith these issues.suggested contacting large employers in the city as another means to advertise J. P.Harris the event.commented that he feels that there are unmet needs in the community with respect to support services S. Gesundheit for veterans and the importance of involving family members in the process. commented on the lack of J. P. Harris J. Dings awareness in the community withregard to PTSD. moved to fund the request and seconded, the motion passes 4-0. AGENDA ITEM 5B-Revision of Language: CEF and CIF Guidelines-J. Dingsask ed 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 S. Gesundheit process. These changes would clarify the process for commissioners as well as applicants. asked for clarification on advertising for the CEF and CIF and further asked if there is a way to make applicants aware of both sources of C. Atilano funding. explained that there are ways to raise awareness however, it is important for the HRC to distinguish S. Gesundheit between the two for various reasons, such as deadlines andcriteria for funding. asked for clarification on the C. Atilano e youth component as criteria for funding and stated her concern that it seems discriminatory. xplained that the fund J. Dings criteria is modified with the rotation of commissions. clarified that the youth component will be removed from the L.Conners Bauer CIF guidelines with the acceptance of the proposed changes.suggested that there be a monthly application C. Atilano deadline for the CIF. stated that we do request theapplication the second Wednesdayof the month so that it can be J. P. Harris sent theHRC with the monthly packets.asked if the funding criteria are for the HRC as a criteria checklist when J. Dings reviewing applications. stated that yes,it was the intent to make applicants aware of the type of criteria the HRC uses C. Atilano in making itsfunding decisions.stated that the criteria was draftedby staff in its existing format with the understanding that it was for HRC use, if we want something similar for applicants we can put it in bullet form in the body of the L. Conners Bauer confusion. application.suggested that we not use the word event when describing the CIF so as to minimize J. Dings 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 nd L. Conners Bauer the first bullet to activity, and indicating that the proposal deadline is the 2Wednesday of the month. seconded the motion. The motion passes 4-0.There was lengthydiscussion regarding the language in the CEF fund C. Atilano 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. AGENDA ITEM 5C-Nominations of Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson-J. Dings L.Conners Bauer nominated for , L. Conners Bauer and J. P. Harris S. Gesundheit Chairpersonaccepted the nomination,nominated himself for Chairperson. J. Dings, J. Dings J. Dings nominated for Chairpersondeclined the nomination. moved to close nominations for Chairperson. L. Conners Bauer J. Dings J. DingsS. Gesundheit nominatedfor Deputy Chairpersonand accepted the nomination. J.P. HarrisJ. P. HarrisL. Conners Bauer nominated for Deputy chair andaccepted the nomination.moved to close the S. Gesundheit nominations,seconded the motion.Motion passes 4-0. AGENDA ITEM 5D-Municipal Action for Immigrant Integration (MAII)-C. Atilano provided background on the MAII.The City of Boulderhas partnered with The National League ofCitiesto address four specific areas of concern; Public Safety, C. Atilano Immigrant Outreach, Civic Engagement and Citizenship.explained that the HRChad included immigrant outreach in their work plan for 2011 and presented an example of a proclamation that was passed in New York City. Aproclamation 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 toorganizations or groups that want to promote L. Conners Bauer immigrant heritage. asked for a draft proclamationatthe April meeting and commented that the HRC would have to determine if this would be an annual event and identify activities that could be funded. AGENDA ITEM 6–DISCUSSION/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A.2011 BudgetreviewC. Atilanoand B. Van Dusen -presented an updated HRC budget as requested for the period of 2007- 2010withdetailsofthe annual allocation from funding for area I (HRC allocation from .15% sales tax), annual expenditures andannual carry over. Annual allocations have remainedconstant, expenditures have decreased and carry over has increased. J. P. Harris asked if the carry over is due to not funding CEF/CIFgrant requests. C. Atilano explained that the decrease in expenditures may be due to several factors, for example, not funding grant requests,andwork plan items that require less C. Atilano expenditure to complete. Meeting costs, however, remain consistent. explained further that while the HRC has shown fiscal restraint, it is important to explain why funds should be allocated. Withinthe city’spriority 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 essentialto 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 actualallocationsare 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 theallocation.If human service needs were high in other areas, there would be the potential for K. Rahn reallocation of funds. J. Dings asked what the timeline is with regard to the next budget process. explained that we are in 2012 budget development process now, the City Manager will presentherbudgetto 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 L. Conners Bauer discussions should take place sooner rather than later. . requested additional informationwith regard to annual expenditures for MLK Day, CEF funding and CIF funding and feels that it makes sense to budget for these expensesand J. P. additionally we need to reexamine the work plan to determine if funds need to be allocated to implement work plan items. Harris concurs and feels that the HRC should spend more time evaluating and developing the budget work plan implementation.. B.2011Work Plan- 1. 2010 CensusUpdate-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.ILove Boulder Campaign- Staff wouldlike 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 tape J. Dings each of the commissioners in a thirty second spot highlighting what they love aboutBoulder. 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 is an item on the work plan. C. Atilano We are currently reviewing Chapternine.told staff that the chapters six through nine are the chapters that L. Conners Bauer should be reviewed, changes to 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 reviewprior to the meeting, chapter nine in April, chapter eightin May and chapters 6 and 7 in June. 4. HSF Technical Review Committee-K. Rahn clarified that the time commitment for the TRC committeemembers will likely be forty hours of total time for meetings rather than thirty which was previously stated, this is due to significant changesin the HSF process this year. The HRC will make a final decision at the April meeting. 5.NAHRW Conference-J. Dingsand S. Gesundheit participated in theinitial planning conference call on March 9, rd 2011.The conference will be held in Aurora, COSeptember 19–23, 2011. NAHRW is requesting sponsorship at the J. Dings 5,000-10,000 dollar level.reported that there is the possibility of the HRC leading a session, and ideasfor topics werediscussed. The next conference call will be held on April 13, 2011. C.HRC Applications-C. Atilano reported there are three applicants whohave 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, May4, 11, 12, or 18, 2011. Staff will contact Commissioner Stewart regarding the dates. AGENDA ITEM 6E-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. AGENDA ITEM 7 –IMMEDIATE ACTION ITEMS -None AGENDA ITEM 8 –Adjournment L. Conners BauerJ. P. Harris –moved to adjourn theMarch 21, 2011meeting. seconded the motion. The motion passed with a vote of 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:42 p.m. TIME AND LOCATION OF ANY FUTURE MEETINGS, COMMITTEES OR SPECIAL HEARINGS: The next regular meeting of the HRC will be April 18, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers.