HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 24 2020 PacketHuman Rights Commission
November 24, 2020
Electronic Formal Meeting- 5:30 PM
Zoom Meeting Platform
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is
impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of
Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
You can participate in the meeting and can comment on an agenda
item by going to
https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMkd-itrTIqG9fjYWV4Q7y5YSZz7KVS-5Dy
via the internet to visit the Zoom meeting’s registration page
and submit the required information.
Once approved, you will receive an email message with a link to join
the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting ID or webinar ID, enter the
ID number found in the email. A meeting password may also be
included in the email. Enter the password when prompted.
If you have no computer or smartphone, or a computer without a
microphone, you may call in by telephone by dialing (312) 626-6799.
When prompted, enter the meeting ID or webinar ID. The ID number for
this meeting is: ID: 979 0153 9013.
Once connected, you may dial *9 to “raise your hand,” letting the
meeting host know you would like to speak. Providing comments in
person is not an option.
Agenda:
1.Call Meeting to Order and Roll Call.
2.Approval of the October 27, 2020 meeting minutes.
3.Public Comment of Items not on the Agenda. (Commentators shall address the
Commission for no more than 5 minutes. Commissioners shall not engage in
discussion with the public concerning said items).
4.Items to be discussed:
a.Correspondence;
b. Truth & Reconciliation Ad-Hoc Committee;
c. Commission Statement in Support of Black Lives Matter;
d. United Nations Convention Rights of the Child PhotoVoice;
e. Social Justice Racial Equity Grants FY20 Request for Modification;
f. Social Justice Racial Equity Grants FY21;
g. Subcommittees: Housing, Anti-Racism, Health Equity;
h. Screening of White Privilege or Cracking the Code (December 10);
i. Commission Outreach Video;
j. Human Rights Awards;
k. Implicit Bias Training for Board and Commission Members (December 3);
l. Open Meetings and Public Records Training (December 16);
m. Decide Whether to Hold a December Meeting Date.
5. Staff/Commission Announcements. (Commissioners shall not engage in
discussion with one another concerning said announcements).
6. Adjournment.
If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this meeting please contact
the Equity Director, Stefanie Bowers, at 319-356-5022 or at stefanie-bowers@iowa-city.org.
Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
1
Draft Minutes
Human Rights Commission
October 27, 2020
Electronic Formal Regular Meeting Zoom Meeting Platform
Members Present: Ashley Lindley, Roger Lusala, Jessica Andino, Cathy McGinnis, Mark Pries, Jason
Glass, Bijou Maliabo, Noemi Ford, Adil Adams.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Others Present: David Drustrup, Daisy Torres.
Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical due to
concerns for the health and safety of council members, staff and the public presented by
COVID-19.
Recommendation to Council:
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:30 PM.
Approval of the September 15, 2020 meeting minutes: Minutes will be amended to correct the spelling
of “McGinnis”. Motion by Pries, seconded by Glass. Motion passes 7-0. (Ford, Maliabo not present).
Daisy Torres: ICPD Community Outreach Assistant: Torres introduced herself to Commission members and
spoke on some of her primary responsibilities including but not limited to doing social media posts for the
Department, trainings on PD 101, and general outreach to the community with emphasis on those new to the
community, seniors, persons with disabilities, ESL, or refugee and immigrants. Her office is located in the
Recreational Center. She is currently trying to do more outreach with youth and working on a forum with the
Immigrant Refugee Association.
IFR Request for a Recommendation for Seats on the City Council:
Cathy McGinnis: Okay, next item on our agenda for tonight.
Cathy McGinnis: Is the reconsideration request from the Iowa Freedom Riders to recommend a seat on the
city council. We did receive a letter from Aaron Paige regarding that topic. Hopefully. Everybody's had a
chance to review that. I know that Jason had wanted to speak on this. So I'm going to actually just kick this
directly to him and like take the board for a minute, Jason. Go ahead.
Jason Glass: Sure, thanks. Um, so I hope every a chance to read Aaron’s letter and obviously we've discussed
this, or the request from IFR for us to recommend to the Council to Having like a non-voting seat on the on the
Council so obviously we've talked about a little bit but I put together a few thoughts because I wanted to think
through that a little bit more and potentially offer a different solution. My thoughts. I'm just kind of, you
know, read a little bit, but when I first want to thank Aaron Paige, you know, because it's a carefully crafted
response, it obviously addresses some of the concerns that we'd had or we'd raised with this request and I can
appreciate that, if that if the members are challenged and finding the time to stay involved because you mentioned
that you know a couple different times in the letter and that because of those ongoing discussions
and because in the work during those proposals to action. So because I've heard from so many folks that are
involved on a volunteer basis on the same challenges, including on this commission and we're all volunteers as well
and it's sometimes hard to juggle everything but I would say that the other documents. He presented, I
Yes.
2
would say, although the docket makes them really articulate points about the request. I don't know that it
offers a substantially different proposal from what we discussed over the last couple of months and voted on
two months ago and discussed again last month and it does not. It doesn't change the position where they
have not changed their position I what I see as the two main areas of concern. At least that I had and I think
was shared by much of the Commission, which is that the IFR has not taken steps to become a formal
organization which would demonstrate their membership strength and more importantly, provide more
transparent and more democratic process to selecting someone that would perform in that role. And it's
because it's a role that other community organizations would not be afforded if we recommended this and,
secondly, that the IFR would need the support and backing of other organizations focused on racial justice so
and we've mentioned some of those, but it's certainly true. And as he mentioned in there that the resolution
that was passed by the city council would not exist but for the efforts of IFR and their activity and they're
pressing for it, but I also believe it to be true that the work to implement those recommendations and put
them into action must involve a really broad coalition of the community, the community and more specifically
community organizations that are focused on this work and I'm afraid that if I remember on the Council well
they're not for a council has to be supported by the other groups, I think, in order to have that kind of broad,
broad mandate, since they would be having had that opportunity that other organizations wouldn't, but all
that said, I didn't want to send a message. I was afraid of the last few months; we've sent the message that
that we're an opposition it just because we're an opposition to this particular proposal, that implies that I am
against the IFR or their intent to ensure sure that racial equity is more of an active part of the Council
discussions, which I certainly agree needs to take place so I want to provide a positive solution and not just
oppose their’ s so to that end, I want to make the following proposal for the Human Rights Commission to
consider so I propose that we recommend to the city council that that they appoint Stefanie Bowers
specifically our equity director and human rights coordinator or her staff designee if she's not able to be
present. As a permanent attendee at city council meetings so that she can speak to equity issues as needed on
any order of business considered by the Council, and there's a couple. I think there's a couple of benefits to
that. One is that it allows an immediate expert voice to speak to these issues and assist Council. That way, I
think, has an advantage that she can speak to any agenda item. Not just those specifically related to the
resolution in support of Black Lives Matter. This will hold Council accountable and assured that they are aware
of their potential blind spots. Particularly on issues that may not seem like equity issues on the surface like
things like housing or zoning or approving new developments and she can really speak to those you know and
she can speak the equity issues in addition to Black Lives Matter or to race, such as LGBTQ or disability issues,
particularly in housing and zoning. I think a lot of times those issues get overlooked because they don't seem
on the surface to be something that's that is equity related but having her permanently at the meeting, to be
able to speak to those will assure that that those issues get raised on any number of issues. It's also consistent
with the equity toolkit that the city has already committed to and that requires all issues be viewed through
an equity lens and so having her present withheld to make sure that City Council members that they have a
subject matter expert there to make sure that there they are considering that and they're being true to their
commitment to that toolkit and I think that if we present something like that, that would allow these
conversations to get you know, to get mentioned more and more present in in the Council that I think they, I
think the Council be would be receptive to that kind of recommendation, so that's my, that's my kind of my
proposal, I think that it would be a way to address some of the things that IFR is looking forward to somebody
to speak to these issues with more directly at Council meetings and I just think if so that's my proposal, I would
be curious about what your thoughts are or if there's any questions.
Noemi Ford: I'm assuming Jason, you would have made the same suggestion had IFR actually not proposed
this idea because you're recommending Stefanie for related human rights issues. To be available to dress.
You're not specifically finding this is an answer to the IFR request.
3
Jason Glass: I think it to answer your question, I mean, I don't know if I would have proposed it I know if I
would have it would have popped in my head. I mean, I think it's a good idea regard, I think it's a good idea to
have this irrespective of IFR his proposal, I just think it's an alternate proposal in my mind that I think, you
know, can be something that that would be really beneficial to counsel and avoid some of the some of the
concerns that I'd have around this. I just, I think highly of Stefanie. I think that in her role with the city and her
area of expertise. I think it allows for a lot even more discussion or, you know, and allows her to be able to
speak to and hold the Council accountable on more issues and in a wider scope, even then what the IFR would
be asking for.
Mark Pries: I appreciate work on this case. Now I'm sorry we don't have your recommendation and it so I
could read it and think about I and I'm going to suppose definitely that you're always available to the city
council and that they should seek you out. My concern is the issue before us is not simply equity issue the
forest is race and the implicit bias within our systems and I appreciate what I was trying to articulate and I'd
like to keep that focus don't mean to diminish any other matters related to equity but I do think that the zeal
in this on my notes. I think they should be encouraged with their focus. And I think the City Council. Needs to
pay attention. What I think that the determination to have someone with a voice there. I don't like the word
watchdog but God make sure that this is a for them and I think we put Stefanie in an awkward position when
we asked her to carry that torch because I'm going to suppose the Council looks as advisedly.
Mark Pries: So, what are we talking about
Cathy McGinnis: Well, we're discussing the topic. Does there need to be a motion to discuss how to respond? I
mean item on the agenda is I far as request. So, Jason has responded to that. So, I guess we're talking in
general about IFR’s requests actually can go ahead
Ashley Lindley: Thank you. Okay, so thank you Mark for bringing that up. I would say we're basically on the
same wavelength with what my thoughts were on this. Jason, I think the idea in theory is fabulous. But I would
say I share a lot of the same concerns mark does I didn't mind. The term watch but social justice warrior over
here. Um, I think that it is important that someone who is separate from the issue that does not have a
preexisting relationship with City Council be the person that is having these conversations like that, as I have
been asking. So, my concern is that as someone who is already staff to the city as wonderful and amazing as
Stefanie is because we all know how much work. She does. And, and I'm sure that she would do great fabulous
work. I think we need an Independent voice. And so, I'm not sure. While there could be good. That comes
from this proposal if it was something that came to fruition. I'm not sure that it honors the intention of IFR and
would do the same.
Noemi Ford: Yeah. Hi. Um, so I think I have three ideas just listening. And then also, I'm responding to other
ideas. One of which is I want to clarify for all of us and also maybe for Roger as well. That something that was
important to me to understand as well as time is that we're not stating that we, as the Commission, we agree
with all the demands of IFR. We're not stating that are not be holding event. The city responsible for accepting
our proposal, all we're saying by suggesting yes, they should have a seat is that we value the room for
identifiers voice to be given time physical space and time at the table. So, in a way, the city can still say no,
thank you to us. We're not crossing any boundaries. We're not doing anything out of our rules by saying that
and that statement going along with the fact that, as the Commission, we released a mission statement
regarding black lives matter which we can go through again. But we spent I don't know, many hours already
very carefully wording it we have made multiple times statements in that statement saying that we support a
smooth resolution, but also a collaboration and a discussion and improvement of police and community
relationships. And here is this letter from IFR stating that they're not allowed to participate all they're getting
4
right now is that they're getting a participation by public comments only what was their whole demand for
what was the weeklong protest. What was all the people who physically got injured and emotionally, not to
mention the mending if not to have their voices heard. And right now, this is October, and they're telling us
that no one's actually sitting down with them. So, I think that if we don't make a statement to support it, they
have the right to be there. We're not only betraying our mission statement we are betraying all the people in
the city who are being heard from what is the reality of the police and the community in 2020 in the United
States and in Iowa City. I think it's the least that we can do is to ask them to have space and time for healthy
resolution and this question. I'm not sure if I'm yeah, I guess that's it.
Mark Pries: I think it's important also for me to affirm what Jason has said about whatever we look amend
supposing we bring some kind of support for I for our recommendation is subject to IFR to organizing and
having some means by which they articulate who they've chosen to be there. That's a voice for if I think that
makes some sense. Thank you.
Cathy McGinnis: So, I guess I just wanted to kind of, um, well, any a couple of things. First of all, I think that I
really want to thank you, Jason for putting the time and effort and thought into coming up with this potential
solution. I think you've kind of looked outside the box at what's been requested and gotten a little bit creative
about a way to potentially meet the overarching goal and I really appreciate that. I do support the idea that
Jason has put forth because I do still have some of the same concerns that I've raised last couple of times. You
know, we've heard here tonight that nobody is speaking with IFR and they're not having a chance to raise their
concerns and that is not categorically true they've had many meetings with city council members. Now I
understand that they don't feel like they have had enough of a platform or enough time or enough meetings
and that that may very well be true. But to say that they've had none of that no one's talking with them is not
fair to council because I don't think that that is what has happened.
Further I continue to have a concern with placing IFR the table because of the way that IFR has publicly
address some of these issues. Including a current recent posts that they've put on Instagram basically
threatening the city council that if they don't get exactly what they want, they'll show up at their houses again
and things like that. So, when I hear messages like that coming from is far, it does not make me feel like they
actually want to have a collaboration with city council and therefore I am very reluctant and unwilling to
recommend that they have a seat at the table because I don't think that's the right attitude to approach that
with. So that's my two cents.
Roger Lusala: Well, I was in here for the previous discussion, but I'm just trying to get some clarification for my
understanding from Aaron's letter well written, is that the Iowa freedom riders are only asking to be at the
table. When the Council's discussing the resolution, nothing else. That's pretty much it. So, they're not asking
you to be voting members, you're not asking to be a big consummated. The only asking to be there when the
resolution on the agenda for the Council. Um, yes. I like Jason's proposition about Stefanie being there for all
the other matters that involve equity and disability because they can always call Stefanie in because she's a
staff. Just the same way that they have Geoff there all the time for the meeting if they're discussing. If they are
discussing issues, that have to do with the roads, they usually call the city engineer to ask questions. I don't
know what's the reservation is to have a member of the Iowa Freedom Riders present when discussing the
resolution that they actually brought up to the council to adopt. I know, believe me, I know that tactics are not
always the best, and I know you don't present every last black person in this town but the reason this
resolution was adopted, it was because of the Iowa Freedom Riders demand. So why not invite somebody
from the IFR when that's getting discussed so they can be the person because you can have an opportunity to
ask question. Instead of only having the five minutes for the comments. So, it's not really a conversation that
doesn't matter. So, I'm just trying to understand as efficient in that piece because if the council were
discussing a high riser going up, down, down they will invite an engineer from that company to answer
5
question. So, if they are discussing the resolution, why not have a representative from the Iowa Freedom
Riders to answer question. Maybe I missed the first discussion that this will do we address.
Noemi Ford: Thanks. Roger. I'm very curious to hear what other members in the Commission would answer to
Rogers question of why not my other reaction was just a reaction to what Cathy said about the social media
statement. I'm not on social media so I didn't see that message and I don't know the exact content, but I have
had two reactions to what they're suggesting that they would do. Basically, they said they could go back onto
the street and I don't think that's a threat. I think we live in a free democracy and people have the right for
freedom of speech. I'm not sure if it has to be attract and I think they got into quite a lot of political discussion
even about the idea of is it right for protesters to take the street, but they wouldn't have to take the street if
they were given a seat at the table. They might disagree on that. But I'm curious if anyone has answers to
Roger’s question, the ones who may be not supporting this proposal.
Cathy McGinnis: I can speak to that, first of all, I just wanted to say that my objection to the post was not
about them, saying that they would take to the street. It was about them specifically saying we will come to
your houses which I see is very different than taking to the street. And I have a really a real different feeling
about the appropriateness of that versus a public demonstration, so that that's the difference there.
But my reasoning all along has been that while we may ask, Roger, you made a really good point that if there
is a topic that they needed sort of an expert opinion or an or information from an outside source. They have
someone come and speak to counsel and they have them available to answer questions. Those are typically
done in more of like a presentation type format and what has been requested. Here is a regular seat at the
table where they are able to engage and weigh in on any topic, having to do with one of the resolutions which
I see is very different. And I see it as something pretty different than what has been done before to spend
equated a little bit with the student government representative that's there. But I don't think that's something
that we regularly do with other topics and with other organization. So, that's part of my objection to it. I guess
that it is a really different level. I think that if they were called in by the Council and asked to present on an
issue I feel confident that they would be happy to do that and I think that comes from those that they would
be willing to do that. So, I don't see that as not being available for them. But that's my thought on that.
Jessica Andino: I'm going to speak to what Roger was saying that, you know, they can have individuals come in
and talk about specific issues and maybe this is a Stefanie question or even maybe potentially Geoff question,
what is the capacity in which a city council member may request information from experts, which IFR could
technically be an expert on their own resolution. And what about just the encouragement of city council
members to engage with these experts, instead of having this formalized process, which I've actually always
supported, but now don't see much support for and I'm just trying to get at least the most representation
possible what Stefanie would be the process in which may or may Rotem or any council members could
engage with these experts have IFR pertaining to the resolution without having this participatory seat.
Stefanie Bowers: I don't think I could answer. That's probably a question for Geoff or somebody on the
Council.
Jessica Andino: Because if we could write a letter that is encouraging of them to at least actively engage,
which is what our letter to and in support of IFR and black lives matter primarily talked about, which was, you
know, engaging between groups assisting government and assisting the groups equally or, you know, to have
hopefully a benefit to marginalized populations. Maybe that's the route we need to go in order to have that
HR CB supporting of something I really think it's going to be in bad taste the Human Rights Commission does
not support anything besides just writing a Black Lives Matter statement.
6
Jason Glass: So, I got a couple things. So, Jessica I think makes a good recommendation that I would be
perfectly comfortable with putting something to the Council that encourages them to hear from IFR when
they're discussing the solution. So, whether that's through that's in addition to public comment, like, making
sure there's a comment period before they discussed that particular agenda item or allow some dialogue back
and forth as they would with an expert my specific objection is around this formal non-voting role that would
be a you know a permanent kind of seat on the Council as a non-voting member that that comparison has
been to the UI representative and you heard from my objections to it. That's where I saw that position,
different from UI position because they have a huge constituency, right, that they that they can clearly show
that that person represents all their students because they have a process for selecting it and it's a broad base
of support. So those are the I know that was in my kind of statement about where my objection still was with
you know, recommending that IFR have that formal seat. As far as the you know the Stefanie, you know, issue
is that what you're right I mean they can call it Stefanie anytime they want, you know, or asked her to be
present but she hasn't been. And so, what we'd be recommending is that we really want to make sure that's
more formalized that's not just a on call resource that it's an ever present resource and more to me, I would
compare it more similarly to like the city attorney who was always on the city council meeting and will
interject oftentimes, to make sure that they're considering legal issues that they may be unaware of or that
need clarification because that's not the area of expertise of people on the Council and I think that's very
similar with what I would see Stefanie's roles that she's the city subject matter expert in equity including race
and, you know, but all those other categories as well and that having her as a as a constant presence would
make sure that you know that those are getting addressed. You know consistently and not just when they
think of it, or when they because there's plenty of times where that may not be top of mind and that should
that in and somebody in her role can make sure that's happening.
Ashley Lindley: I think, Jessica brought up a really good point earlier and I think the key word here that really
stood out for me was engagement. I think that I see a lack of continued engagement as this process goes on,
and I think I had not seen Cathy, the Instagram posts. So, I actually pulled it up because I was curious about
that language as well. If no one mines I'm going to recite it here for a moment, just the portion that it looked
like Cathy was pointing out. I'll paraphrase the first sentence for you here. So, it doesn't. It makes a little more
sense out of context. If we don't see the types of plans. These types of plans built into the upcoming budget
and now it's an exact quote, we're going back to the streets back to their houses and if it's too cold will be in
our cars for a caravan protest, so in my opinion. Personally, I don't see that as a threat. I see that as these are
the things they did. That truly got the city to start paying attention and to really engage with them. I think it's a
list of what they are seeing as the action that they took that actually spurred the most engagement with them
for people to start listening on the issues. When they were doing protests in the streets when they went to
council members houses to start talking to them. I think that I mean as public figures there's a reason. Some of
us might not like it, but there's a reason why all of our information is public, people can go to our houses, they
know where we live. It's listed on the city website. And I think that if this is what it took to get those
conversations to happen. I personally am not going to hold it against them if that's what they feel they need to
do to continue having open, honest truly engaged dialogue with the city to keep things going the way they are.
And I think Roger brought up a really good point. I think that this is not a permanent seat or voting seat that
they're asking for. They just want to voice at the table. And I think as Jason brought up in his proposal with
Stefanie that we do need a person someone to be able to address issues of equity when those conversations
are being had at city council and right now. What's truly been the focus. I think over the course of this
summer. And now leading into fall is that we maybe aren't still truly seeing that when it comes to
conversations about Black Lives Matter and I would like to have someone and maybe in some other, more
broad proposal that person is Stefanie in conversations, bringing up issues of inequity and injustice,
particularly racial injustice. And I do just think that if that person is someone who is not tied to the city in any
7
way, we might be able to not be limited, and just having the discussions that city council or we here on the
Commission are comfortable having because as we have talked about in previous meeting some of them that
have gone, I think, went really well. These conversations are uncomfortable, and they're meant to be because
change is uncomfortable, and change is hard. So, I just wanted to bring that up.
Mark Pries: What the recommendation, I think I can find it again. Be it resolved that the Iowa freedom riders
have or having organized and named a representative of a seat at the Iowa City City council meetings to
participate in all topics related to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission subject to the mayor's direction. I
offer this because I want something particular for us to talk about rather than been all over the map. I
welcome a second.
Cathy McGinnis: Are you making a motion?
Noemi Ford: Could you read that one more time please.
Mark Pries: I'll send it to Stefanie, so maybe there's a chance that she can put it up on the screen.
Cathy McGinnis: OK.
Noemi Ford: So, I'm confused. I think Mark just proposed is really what they're asking us to propose and then
can someone.
Stefanie Bowers: I think Mark is saying that there is a discussion without anything being put on the floor in
terms of Roberts.
Mark Pries: Protection, but we're having so many things on the fringes, and I was trying to get everything to
call us rather simply and I appreciate it so many things that Jason provided for us in that necessity that we
needed to include in that, but I also was well, I'm very concerned that we as a Commission can't push this
down the road anymore. We need to do something. And so, this was my attempt to do something, but it will
die of lack of second and that's Robert's Rules.
Noemi Ford: I'm totally confused. I don't understand them or what we're supposed to do, but I would like to
have an end to this discussion about this topic and I would like to see if we can vote on it. I don't know what
that officially what has to be said or who has to say what to proceed.
Noemi Ford: Second.
Roger Lusala: Mark just made the motion and I think on Noemi. So my, I would say, I'm in support of this
motion because it not only shows this Iowa Freedom Riders but we as a Human Rights Commission, we
supporting this mission and for them to be there only during this discussion of the resolution, I think that's
why they're asking on this letter. The council can always vote it down if they don't want it.
Bijou Maliabo: I'm sorry, I apologize, but I don't understand is Mark’s motion to support the decision or the
motion to move on from it?
Cathy McGinnis: The motion is to support the recommendation to the Council to allow IFR a seat at their table.
Bijou Maliabo: Like why they were asked?
8
Cathy McGinnis: Correct.
Mark Pries: But it was subject to their being organized and naming someone and there's also something to the
mayor's direction.
Bijou Mali: Okay, thank you.
Stefanie Bowers: And I'm working on getting the motion on the screen so everybody can read it.
Ashley Lindley: I like the idea of what you're doing. Mark, I'm a little concerned by two specific choices of
verbiage in there. One of them is get organized so what does getting organized look like because something
that I've seen a lot of proponents and these conversations. Push is the idea that if IFR become a 501 C three or
some sort of nonprofit to have a formal system of organization which can be construed by some as a counter
to the idea of the essence of who they want to be. And I don't know that's necessary for them to be able to
have a viable representative and singular voice that comes and sits with the city council at the table. So that
was my initial concern. And then the second was that you specifically made it a point that conversation would
surround, or they would be brought in. That it would be in terms of all topics related to the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission as opposed to the 17 point resolution, which was really a joint document between
IFR initial demands and the city council. I feel like that could potentially be limiting in scope, which is a little bit
of a concern for me otherwise. I could see myself being swayed to be on board with that potentially
Mark Pries: Right so quickly. I was responding to having organized. I wanted it very nebulous. I don't care how
they organize just want them organized so we know how they're naming a representative as far as the 17
points are Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I'm sorry. I thought they were synonyms. So that would be a
friendly amendment.
Ashley Lindley: No worries.
Jessica Andino: Yeah, my main concern about this motion is that it is only in relation to the TR and the TR is
one point of the 17 points and I think that's where the sticking keeps happening is that the 17 point, they're
very encompassing of housing, of health of many other different areas. That are not just the TR. So, I know
that actually you had mentioned it. So, I greatly appreciate that and so, as it's worded right there. I did. I
definitely would not support this. We already have a TR will have a representative for that will have a whole
Commission for that. That's not needed. So, I need to see word edge of whatever is being put on there to even
consider this motion. And participate in all topics related to the 17 point resolution are generous resolutions,
subject to the mayor’s direction. And I would also propose having it be voted on annually every six months. I
know that Aaron Paige is not in favor of a term or term limits or anything of the sort. But I believe that there
should be some sort of verbiage about time.
Cathy McGinnis: I think his letter even suggested that actually didn't it.
Jason Glass: My concern with, as I said, I certainly wanted to be able to push the city council to make sure that
they are engaging with IFR so it to the extent if that is not happening, you know IFR letter, and I don't know
not having heard from Council about what their perception of how much engagement there's been. I want to
be careful that I'm not taking that as a single point of truth. But I would want to recommend them to, to the
extent that they have not engaged with the IFR that they do so that they absolutely should be engaging with
them on the continued work to address the resolution and the contents there and I'm worried that what Mark
9
is proposing overly vague so that it's, you know, to add to Jessica's point. I mean, you could interpret many of
those points and that resolution to cover almost anything. It's on the City Council agenda. So, it's not it's not as
limiting and it's in scope as it could be. And I don't want to set up just future arguments about what's in scope
and what's not. Because I think that'd be difficult. Mark’s recommendation is that it was kind of contingent
upon them having organized a named representative, I would prefer them to see them take that step and then
we support them in that, as opposed to supporting them before they've done it. In fact, the Aaron Paige letter
sounds like that's very much something they're against doing so to put a recommendation to say that, you
know, if they're, you know, contingent upon them doing those things which they’ve already stated, is not
something that they're in favor of at least currently. So that's my issue with the recommendation as worded.
Cathy McGinnis: Just to clarify. I want to make sure I'm following you, but when you said that there are things
that they're very much against doing you're referring to forming a formal organization.
Jason Glass: I think his term was like trying to push the boundaries of democratic process or something like
that. So, he was kind of arguing that it actually mentioned this, too, is that they're taking this they have taken
an approach to say we don't want to form a formal organization or a point leadership that's not the way we
want to operate, which I totally respect that they can operate however they want my issue is that without
some of those things. It makes it difficult to appoint somebody from organization that is that nebulous.
Cathy McGinnis: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Noemi Ford: I like to hear from the people who are still with us who are not members of commission to
comment to this discussion, like the IFR representatives or if they can answer some more questions
Cathy McGinnis: Here so I haven't seen anybody in case they wanted to speak.
Noemi Ford: I don't think we should wait until they create a position, or they can get a position tomorrow. I
don't think that we should expect them to create a 501C3. I’m in the middle of trying to create a 501C3 with
four other psychologists, it's a pain in the butt. That should not be a requirement, you need a lot of things for
that and it does sound like a systemic racism issue when we're requiring a formal organizational format. It
does stink like this is just obstacle. I'm sorry for my verbiage here. I find it kind of very maddening actually,
these are the details of it were debating. But I do agree with all the people who spoke before me about the
verbiage changing in Mark’s proposal. Obviously, he didn't, that the Truth and Reconciliation wasn't a formal
name. I agree with what Jessica. I'm wondering if Mark was would be happy if they could just say a formal title
of the individual who's in then they don't have to name who that person fulfills that title that can be up to IFR
to decide who they want to name. Let's say that either the director of IFR Iowa City and that person that can
be whoever they choose to be and if that is organized enough format.
Mark Pries: I intended it to be very nebulous having organized. I don't know where the stuff came from. That's
not in this recommendation, all I wanted them to tell us is who your representative is so just tell us who it is.
Somebody's got to organize.
Ashley Lindley: So just to clarify a couple of points based off of what Jason had said, and I think Noemi raised
some good points as well. I personally would say they have already done a level of organizing, we have seen
consistent representatives from IFR step up to the plate to have these conversations with city council with the
UI Center for Human Rights as a part of the working group that Jessica and I both sit in on. I think they have
done a level of organizing and I do agree with Noemi that it seems a little exclusionary that we would require
something significantly more formal just to be a part of further conversation and clarified engagement on
10
something that they brought to the table with city council in the first place seems a little silly. And I think, so
long as they continue to have a consistent representative or several consistent representatives to me that
specifies. They do have some sense of internal organization; we of course don't see what they do. But I know it
has been brought up at some of our human rights working group meetings I actually believe Aaron said just
this week or the week before that there are talks within IFR to create more structure within its structure. I
don't think that's going to require any sort of formal organizing into a nonprofit or for-profit organization, one
way or the other. I do think that it. I remember concerns that were addressed because of the lack of formal
nature of their organization that it was too informal that we wouldn't know who is supposed to be coming and
sitting in these seats and who wasn't what did they do in the organization. But I think they are starting to work
out those kinks themselves. And I know that Aaron maybe didn't mention this in his letter, but that is
information that I don't know if Jessica was at that meeting or not, but I would at least like to say information.
I was privy to from some of those discussions we've had.
Jessica Andino: Yep. Same here.
David Drustrup: Thank you. And thank you all for taking so much time and energy to discuss this really
appreciate it. And, you know, Ashley touched on a lot of what I was going to talk about and Noemi, I think you
said it right there we think we have internal structure and we do. I mean, we feel pretty comfortable with who
is sort of making decisions and those types of things. And who is leading the movement for lack of a better
term. But, you know, if it is something like external structure that you all need, or City Council decides is going
to be very important. We really respect that, and we are open to it. Jason, I'm sorry if I ever give you the
impression that we were not open to that. That's certainly something you know we heard your feedback. Last
time and had been thinking and talking about it. Talking with Aaron Paige a little bit just our sort of legal help
around this. We became aware of some of the some of the hurdles that come when you organize in certain
ways. But again, we are far from experts on this. And so, we're really open to your feedback or help even if
you want to sort of suggest things so we could organize in a way that makes you feel comfortable with
recommending this, but it is something we've thought about in a very open to I'll leave it there for now. Thank
you.
Mark Pries: I just when I said, having organized that could be past tense. It could be. Now that but I appreciate
what David said, you know that they have this internal organization that satisfies me I can delete the little
phrase, if you want to. So that, but they're the ones that are going to name their representative. I think that
was also a muscle in the recommendation that I intended, regardless of my intentions. I want to move this on
very much. So IFR have a representative is fine with me.
Jessica Andino: Since we're in the spirit of engaging and we have David here as a representative of IFR, I would
like to propose the question to David specifically, or if anybody else here is a representative IFR as far as it's
written on the screen in front of you. Would this be something that you would be supportive of the HRC
supporting
David Drustrup: Yes, absolutely. Thank you for asking that. And yeah, I think that this looks great. Let's cover is
kind of all the things that we had talked about and input from your discussion from last time. So, this looks
great. Thank you.
Jason Glass: Sorry, the only the only one thing I want to add is to Ashley's question or Noemi’s comment about
what it seems like we're having some contradictory information because I hear something like actually saying
they've been very engaged in their meeting on in multiple places with the human rights commission with the
UI Center for Human Rights, and with all these different places, but I hear that they don't, they're not being
11
heard and they're not being engaged with. So, it seems like those are two different messages to me that you
know they're not. They don't have a voice. They have not been heard. Or they've not had the opportunity to
engage with face things and then I hear, but they're doing all these things. So, it kind of seems. I'm confused
about you know what that really looks like. And I know from Aaron's letter. I mean, he clearly states that they
didn't believe that the IFR has had, you know, has been engaged with in any meaningful way with the city
council, not in a way that's acceptable to them so if we're talking about that. There they don't have a voice,
are they, do they not have a voice. Are they not getting the outcomes that they want.
Ashley Lindley: I think I will leave David to cover the bulk of this, but I would say I think you answered your
own question when fading specifically in that second to last sentence. You said that you said towards city
council. So, they are having conversations with other Community Partners, mostly, I think, is David previously
mentioned, to get a system in how to better communicate or better. I don't say better market for lack of a
better word, better market their ideas to the community and help garner allies to get these resolutions that
the City Council has agreed to pass. So, like I said, I will leave David to hash out those details, but I would say
it's the difference between being able to have open engaging conversations with community partners versus
what city.
David Drustrup: Yep. And what Ashley said is very much true. I think we've had a lot of success, talking with
community partners and organizations and individual folks. But it's very, very hard to get meetings to city
council. So, to address what Cathy said earlier. With the lesson we had formal meetings city council was back
in August, despite you know going to all the listening posts and having frequent attempts to talk to them and
inviting meetings pretty frequently. Every time we sort of send the materials we invite for the meetings and
discussion and the best we've gotten is a little bit of email contact with one and a little bit of one on one time
when I stay late after the listening posts. But besides that, it's no discussion. And I think what we talked about
last time was an important point, Jason. It's not that our voices aren't being heard. There's no conversation.
And without that conversation. It's just been really, really difficult to see momentum on these issues. Thank
you.
Roger Lusala: Thank you, David. I think that just clarify. The question that we all had I think this
recommendation will endorse that they be at the table when they are having the conversation. So, I think
that's more important document to the policymaker instead of just talking to all the Community Council.
Cathy McGinnis: So there is no further discussion.
Jessica Andino: I motion to approve the changed original motion from what Mark had originally proposed,
which is written on the screen in front of all of us. So, this is the formal motion to approve said wording.
“Be it resolved the IFR, having a named representative, have a seat at the IC City Council to participate in all topics
related to the June Resolution subject to the Mayor’s direction. Voted on annually.”
Noemi Ford: I second.
Cathy McGinnis: Alright, are we ready to take this to a vote. We've had quite a bit of conversation about it.
Unless anybody else has anything to say? All in favor of adopting the recommendation and as it stands on the
screen right in t the edited version.
Cathy McGinnis: I'm say no. Any opposed, same sign.
12
Jason Glass: Same for me.
Motion passes 7-2 (McGinnis & Glass in the negative).
Truth & Reconciliation Ad-Hoc Committee: Applications for this committee are due by Tuesday, November 10
at 5pm. Commissioners can apply for the committee because it is ad-hoc. McGinnis mentioned that there was
one Commission member that was interested in serving.
Commission Statement in Support of Black Lives Matter: Commissioners will revisit this statement at each
regularly scheduled meeting to document their progress on the items contained within it.
Screening of White Privilege or Cracking the Codes: The Commission has access and approval to Cracking the
Codes because The Center has a copy that can be used by other Departments for a community screening. Staff
will check on getting permission to hold a public screening of White Privilege 101: Cracking the Code
Human Rights Awards: Honorees have been selected by the subcommittee for 2020. Staff will work on
promoting those selected for the awards.
Subcommittees: Staff can assist with organizing any events/programs/conversations committees need in
order to fulfill their goals. Lusala will join the Anti-Racism subcommittee.
Social Justice Racial Equity Grants: Pries, Andino, and Lindsley will present on the process for the grants for
this funding cycle via Zoom. Two sessions will be held to accommodate different schedules.
Commission Public Notice of Agenda and Packet Sign Up: Staff went over how Commissioners can sign up to
receive monthly packets each month.
Reports of Commissioners:
Andino, attended the Implicit Bias Training Sponsored by the Office of Equity and Human Rights as did Pries.
McGinnis, and Glass, attended City Council Listening Posts as it related to Police Chief selection.
Maliabo, has been supporting immigrant and refugees who have been displaced by the Derecho in the
Corridor.
Meeting was adjourned at 7:24 PM.
Member Term 2/18 4/21 5/19 6/16 6/19 7/07 07/14 7/21 7/28 8/15 9/15 10/27
Maliabo 1/2021 Present Present Excused Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present
McGinnis 1/2021 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present
Rochester 1/2021 Excused Present Present Present Present Present Present Excused Resigned Resigned Resigned Resigned
Adams 1/2022 Excused Present Present Present Excused Excused Excused Excused Excused Excused Excused Present
Andino 1/2022 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present
Ford 1/2022 Excused Present Excused Present Present Present Present Present Excused Present Present Present
Lindley 1/2023 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present
Glass 1/2023 Present Present Excused Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present
Pries 1/2023 Excused Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present
Lusala 1/2024 ---------- --------- --------- --------- ---------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------- --------------- -------------- Present
Correspondence
Inside Out Reentry
Iowa City Human Rights Commission:
We are grateful you awarded us $18,000 for FY21 in the form of a Cultural Activity grant, to
afford our Chronically Mentally Ill clients social/cultural/therapeutic opportunities to be out in
the community or in other communities which they would otherwise not have available to
them, or be able to afford. Our regular agency programming includes Outreach, Housing,
Intensive Psychiatric Rehab (IPR) and Day Hab programs. All clients are eligible to participate in
the Cultural Activity and Event program.
Unfortunately, by the time this funding was received by our agency, our community (indeed,
the whole world) was under siege from the Covid-19 virus. The first priority of our agency was
to change our way of doing business in delivering services to our client population, considering
their disabilities, needs, safety and security (as well as the safety of our essential employees on
the "front lines").
Subsequently it took some time for managers, supervisors and staff to cope with the challenge
of providing these new events/activities opportunities to our clients within the context of the
coronavirus environment. This made us get off to an unexpectedly slow start in using this SJRE
grant funding for our clients.
Or agency personnel has proceeded to create new, alternative activities for clients, utilizing this
funding, by way of new outdoor events, arts, park picnics, explorations to the apple orchard,
games and more. All clients (and staff) are prepared re PPE each time, and all plans include
social distancing and hand washing.
To-date we are below budget in using the SJRE funding by just over 50%, due to a late launch of
the grant program. See the attached lists of costs incurred so far. We believe we will "catch up"
in using this funding in the next couple of months, now that we have begun planning larger and
costlier outings. We have become more confident in our approach to client and staff safety on a
regular basis now, and consequently are more confident in what we can safely provide in terms
of activities and client events.
Coming up soon we are planning a Christmas event in early December at the new FilmScene
(Chauncey Building), with a custom-chosen movie (our choice) plus snacks, and having all 3
theaters to ourselves on 2 or even 3 different days. These are somewhat extravagant events
(few audience members are allowed in any theater at once, even in the largest theater, due to
FilmScene's cautious approach to distancing), but these outings replace multiple Hancher
concerts and plays, and many other pricey activities that are no longer an option. We are
greatly looking forward to being able to offer these opportunities our clients. In a sense, it is
our good fortune we have this SJRE funding to help our clients during a period in history that is
so psychologically/emotionally hard on so many - specially on these citizens in our care. They
need this. None of them have been in the Chauncey Building, a new venue in Iowa City. in
essence we are providing a mix of less costly activities (picnics, orchard) with perhaps slightly
Successful Living
more costly events than we had originally thought - such that it will balance out evenly by end
of the program.
And since our clients love movies in movie theaters, we will also be taking advantage of special
rates at Marcus.
And we have other new, creative ideas we will also host in coming months, putting this funding
to good use entertaining, stimulating and rewarding our clients (rewarding them for simply
being who they are as deserving individuals) - and making their lives more fun and positive in
these challenging times we all face.
Attached is a summary of our costs so far, with invoices attached. I am happy to provide more
information as needed or to answer any questions.
Kind regards,
Carla J. Phelps
Director, Grants & Development
Successful Living
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Cell: (319) 471-1809
Email: cphelps@icsuccess.org
Web: https://www.icsuccess.org/
“Be the change that you wish to see in the world.” - Mahatma Gandhi
TO: Iowa City Human Rights Commission
FROM: Jennifer Sherer, Director, University of Iowa Labor Center
DATE: November 1, 2020
RE: June-October, 2020 Progress Report: University of Iowa Labor Center Corridor Apprenticeship
Opportunity Network
The University of Iowa Labor Center’s Corridor Apprenticeship Opportunity Network links unemployed
or underemployed Iowa City residents from underrepresented groups with opportunities to prepare for
and enroll in Iowa Registered Apprentice programs in skilled construction trades.
Starting in March of this year, all events and courses related to this project were converted to online
formats dur to COVID-19. We held two online orientation webinars in the summer (recording available at
this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6xwETmNq6I) and participated in events like the Iowa
School Counselors virtual annual conference to distribute information about the program, while
promoting the program heavily through communication with local nonprofit partners and via social media
advertisements and circulation of digital fliers (example here:
https://laborcenter.uiowa.edu/sites/laborcenter.uiowa.edu/files/lcqpptwoweekprogram_-
_nov_2020final_0.pdf).
We held two online six-week sessions of the apprenticeship readiness course during the summer, one
accelerated two-week course session in October, and will hold a second two-week course in November. A
total of 22 Iowa City-area residents were among those enrolled in these courses, and over half of were
members of underrepresented groups targeted for recruitment to the program, including 7 women and 16
participants who self-identified as Black, indigenous, or people of color (13 Black, 2 Latinx, and 1 Native
American).
We launched Zoom gatherings for the Iowa Women in Trades Network in July, and have since held
monthly Zoom meetings in August, September, and October. This network so far has engaged over 40
total women, including 8 course graduates or apprentices from the corridor area.
Starting in October, we initiated monthly follow-up Zoom support sessions for course graduates with a
focus on providing support for first-generation immigrants, women, or BIPOC graduates who are in the
process of submitting apprenticeship applications to training programs or preparing for interviews with
contractors or training programs.
We are on track to meet or exceed each of the goals set out in our proposal:
-Reach 250 workers through outreach and recruitment events -- Status: in place of in-person events
during COVID-19, orientation webinars held online reached 22 people when held live and were
subsequently posted for viewing on our web site and youtube channel where an additional 88 people have
viewed the session so far; online marketing of the program during COVID-19 has reached several
thousand people via social media advertising.
-Enroll at least 60 local residents in our apprenticeship readiness course -- Status: shifting to online
course delivery during COVID-19 has meant that each course is open to participants from a wide
geographic area rather than convening specific local cohorts for one location; we continue to draw
significant participation from Iowa City residents in each online course due to strong relationships with
local community partners who promote and refer clients, students, or members to our program. Since July
2020, 22 Iowa City-area residents enrolled in online sessions of the apprenticeship readiness course, and
Labor Center
Antelope Lending Library
Interim Report, November 1, 2020
Social Justice and Equity Grant: Social Enterprise Project
Center for Worker Justice of Eastern Iowa
Purpose of Project
3.Education: by providing training in food handling to minority and low-
income chefs as well as education in managing food quantities and
developing customer service skills. CWJ is also providing English
classes, which some of our cooks are taking advantage of in order to
improve their communication with customers and potential partners in the
community.
Background
The first stages of the social enterprise project began in mid-2018 with the
identification of a core of eight chefs who were members of CWJ. Discussions
as to what form the social enterprise should take began in August of 2018 among
CWJ members and consultants who could offer both technical and legal
expertise in the formation of food cooperatives. Discussions continued
throughout the fall, and in 2019 CWJ began to partner with local churches and
community organizations to provide a space for the chefs to practice making food
for customers and to test out recipes. Beginning in the spring of 2019, the social
enterprise partnered with St. Andrew Presbyterian Church to conduct fundraising
events in a space donated by the church. These events, which continued to be
held throughout 2019 and into early 2020, provided an opportunity for the
parishioners and members of the wider community to experience the cuisine of
the social enterprise cooks. The events were very successful in providing both
profit for the chefs and useful feedback from customers. Our plans for the future
Funds from the Social Justice and Racial Equity grant awarded in March of 2020
were intended to be used for specific services and items of equipment to support
the newly formed Center for Worker Justice Social Enterprise, a project focused
on creating opportunities for economic independence for members with culinary
skill through the creation of a café. The Social Enterprise project addresses the
following priority areas:
1.Community building: by providing an alternative for low-income,
underrepresented and immigrant workers to showcase their culinary skills
while also modeling good business practices within the community. The
social enterprise has resulted in a partnership with an interfaith network of
local churches to cook during community events.
2.Employment: It is anticipated that the project will initially lead to the
creation of at least ten new jobs paying $15.00 per hour at the social
enterprise café. The creation of these jobs will have a ripple effect leading
to the creation of numerous additional jobs as the chefs eventually set up
their own independent restaurants and catering businesses.
Center for Worker Justice
included continuing to host similar events and making adjustments to our internal
processes to increase profits and improve efficiency in preparing and presenting
food.
During the spring semester of 2019, CWJ and the cooks established a fruitful
partnership with students at the University of Iowa College of Law legal clinic.
These students provided legal expertise and advice to CWJ in order to help us
determine how to properly structure and set up our social enterprise. They
outlined a number of options for the legal structure of the enterprise with
recommendations regarding pros and cons for each.
Current Obstacles and Options
With the advent of the pandemic, the partnership that had developed with the
network of local churches for the social enterprise to cook and raise funds during
community events was put on hold until these facilities are again able to open
their kitchens. In the meantime, the social enterprise is exploring other options to
provide the chefs with the opportunity to prepare food for their catering services.
Consequently, we have as yet been unable to utilize the funds intended to
support the project.
The primary challenge is the acquisition of a licensed kitchen for the chefs to use
to continue their catering activities. Options that have been or are currently being
considered include:
•An option to partner with Refounders of the Mill and Save the Mill
Landmark in fundraising to purchase the Mill trademark and in operating
the Mill and the Social Enterprise. The space in the back of the restaurant
formerly used for live music could host the CWJ Social Enterprise as we
proceed with the incubator project of helping chefs develop their own
restaurants/food service. This would require sharing the rent and repair
costs. The future of this option is in question as limited funds have been
raised to date.
•Preliminary discussions were held regarding potential use of the space in
the Iowa City Martketplace formerly occupied by Lucky’s. However,
details regarding this option remain unclear and no progress has been
made thus far.
•Our best remaining option for the near future is probably to secure a
location in an unoccupied space in an Iowa City restaurant to serve as a
certified kitchen for our cooks to prepare and sell food. We are currently
working with the Chamber of Commerce and local business owners to
explore the possibilities.
Although we feel the need to secure a certified kitchen precludes consideration of
a large scale equipment purchase, we would like to have the option of making
individual equipment purchases from the current budget such as a gas grill for
use at future events to be conducted at CWJ. We respectfully submit this report
in the hopes of working with the City of Iowa City Human Rights Commission to
determine the most appropriate use for this funding.
Iowa City Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant Update Report
Grant Recipient: Little Creations Academy, PATHS for Success
Report submitted by Dr. Nancy Gardner, nancy.hayes.gardner@gmail.com
Directors of Grant: Pastor Tony Smith, Center Director Rachael Scott
Review of Progress To-Date
The staff at Little Creations Academy was excited to receive the grant to host four parent
engagement events between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021. To-date, two events have been
held.
Event #1: The theme of the first event was Literacy: Parents as a Child’s First Teacher. On
Friday, August 21, over 50 people from both Little Creations and the surrounding area enjoyed
an evening of literacy activities, food, and conversations with teachers regarding ways to
support reading in the home. Outdoor activities featured celebrity guest reader, Principal Kirk
Ryan, a book walk where children could win books, chalk writing, and a dental health station
hosted by University of Iowa dental school residents. Inside the daycare center, families
enjoyed a light supper prepared by the staff. Each child attending the event received a tote bag
containing two books, a parent information sheet on home literacy activities, and the materials
to do each activity. A paper was also included for children to record minutes spent reading with
a parent. These completed papers could then be turned in at Little Creations and the child
would receive another book. Thus, children received anywhere from three to five new books for
their home libraries. Little Creations Academy also received a donation of new backpacks
containing school supplies which were distributed to any school age children in attendance.
Parent response to this event was extremely positive with one parent remarking, “This is exactly
the kind of information I need to know to help my child at home.” Following the event, Assistant
Director Rachael Scott and Pastor Tony Smith reflected with the staff on ways that things went
well and where things might be improved. Overall, the staff was very satisfied with the event
and felt a sense of professionalism and confidence in their roles as teachers.
Event #2: This event was focused on the theme of Supporting STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, Math) Awareness. On Friday evening, October 23, eight families with children
attending Little Creations Academy enjoyed an evening of STEM interactive activities, STEM
presentations by teachers, and a chili and hot dog supper. With the cooler weather, all parts of
this evening were held indoors. Along with the interactive activities on display, children were
also able to show their parents various photos of STEM activities that had been occurring in the
daycare center leading up to this event. Totes were again provided to each child in attendance.
For this event, the totes contained materials for a STEM activity to do at home as well as two
books. The paper for recording minutes read at home was also included to continue an
emphasis on parent support of literacy.
Again, both parent and staff reflections were positive. Parents enjoyed the time spent with their
children learning more about what their child did during the day. Teachers were happy to have
the opportunity to meet with parents to discuss not only STEM ideas, but to strengthen their
relationships with families. Reflections with Assistant Director Rachael Scott and Pastor Tony
Little Creations Academy
Smith again led to ways in which these events can be improved upon. One note of awareness is
the fact that for many parents, this is the first time they have interacted with an educational
setting as a parent. By continuing to hold these positive, informative events, parents will see
how such experiences are beneficial to their child and continue to be involved in future public
school events.
Progress on Grant Goals
1. 80% of the families attending LCA will be represented at each PATHS for Success
session.
Although parent representation at each event has not yet reached this level, the staff continues
to communicate and encourage parent attendance. Parental notification, personal invitations,
posted flyers, and offering a nutritious meal are ways that parents are encouraged to attend.
Event #1 was open to others in addition to Little Creations families. Sign-in sheets show that
50% of Little Creations families were in attendance. For Event #2, approximately 60% of
families were represented.
2.Parent awareness and knowledge of methods for supporting the learning of their
children in the home will increase by 50%.
We have learned through these two events that parents do not return surveys as we had
expected. Therefore, we have only casual data to indicate growth in parent awareness of their
role in supporting their child’s learning in the home. From the positive conversations reported by
staff, it appears that parents view these events positively, however, we will be making
adjustments to our methods of data collection regarding this goal in the future.
3.75% of the parents who attend each PATHS for Success session will follow-through on
the take-home learning activities.
We have become aware of the need to encourage more parents to complete this follow-through
activity. We do not doubt that parents are reading at home with their children, but many have
not completed this take-home form. As the second event was held only recently, the staff will
continue to communicate the importance for children to return the form to receive another book.
Event #1 Reading Night
Guest Reader Book Walk Handing out books,
Principal Kirk Ryan backpacks, and supplies
Event #2 STEM Night
Teacher explaining Children showing off their project Families enjoyed dinner
STEM project
STEM bags with books and
activities
The Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in “Connecting Communities: National LGBTQ Liaison Summit” sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign.Staff of the Office of Equity and Human Rights attended an online program sponsored by the Iowa City Foreign Relations Council on "Why is Iowa So White?" The presentation answers the question, not only in terms of its demographic makeup, but also with regard to a statewide orientation that makes it difficult for people who are BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, Persons of Color) to live here comfortably. The presentation pointed to key areas in which improvements need to be made if we are to move beyond being a state in which individuals who are not white are treated as second class citizens.
Four Police Department Officers attended LGBTQ+ Virtual Training.
Office of Equity and Human Rights staff pre-sented a training on Fair Housing, including an in-depth discussion of assistance animals, to the Greater Iowa City Area Apartment Association.
Social Justice &Racial Equity
Third Quarter Update (July - September 2020)
Training
The City offered a pilot training, on Cultural Proficiency and Anti-Racism Climate conduct-ed by Laura Gray from Restorative Community Partners via Zoom. The pilot training will be used to determine on a small-scale, how the City may incorpo-rate it into a larger-scale training in the work-force. Those in attendance included staff from Iowa City, North Liberty, and Johnson County.
1
Office of Equity and Human Rights staff pre-sented to the University of Iowa class Lan-guage, Literature and the Law. The presenta-tion focused on the effect of language on law, using the history and development of anti-dis-crimination law in Iowa as a lens.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in a continuing legal education entitled “Voting Rights, Hard Won, Not Done: Honoring the Legacy of the 15th and 19th Amendments.” The program celebrated the 150th anniversary of the 15th Amendment, granting African American men the right to vote, and the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment, granting women the right to vote.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights provided a training to Neighborhood & Development Services on Inclusive Engage-ment and Outreach.
Staff of The Center participated in Racial Equity Toolkit training presented by the Office of Equity and Human Rights.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights participated in the virtual LGBTQ Older Adults Conference. The keynote
speaker Dr. Imani Woody, a nationally rec-ognized leader on LGBTQ+ elder issues, discussed the future of aging in the U.S and how the two current pandemics – racism and COVID-19 – are disproportionately affecting LGBTQ older adults.
Fire Department staff have completed the three sessions of the department’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion program. The program is ongoing, and all staff participate.Police Department Officers and Community Outreach Assistants participated in five community presentations, including De-escalation & Crisis Intervention, Community Partnerships, Alcohol & Nuisance Ordinances, Police Response to Special Needs Populations, and Victim Support.
The Office of Equity & Human Rights sponsored a complimentary Implicit Bias Zoom training. The workshop utilized a range of Power Point slides, short videos, a conceptual framework, and a personal challenge activity aimed to empower participants with the ongoing education and awareness required to build capacity in the area of diversity, equity, and inclusion. The program was facilitated by Dr. Rich Salas and implicit bias expert attorney Tom Newkirk. This training was offered twice with the second event being geared toward local property managers.
1 2
Outreach
Officers of the Police Department participated in twelve events, including Back to School Extravaganzas, a bike rodeo, neighborhood birthday parties, and handing out disposable face masks while educating the public on the Mayor’s mask mandate.
Human Resources with the assistance of Communications re-designed the recruitment flyer for City open positions that was mass-mailed to community organizations. The flyer is available in Spanish, African French, Arabic, and Swahili.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights pre-sented a “Know Your Rights” training to youth in the Neighborhood Centers for Johnson County’s G!World program.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights advertised in the GOGUIDE Magazine, Iowa’s print and online source for LGBTQ+ communities, families, friends, and allies since 2016.
The Police Department continues to provide extra patrol at resident’s requests and foot patrols where criminal activity or safety
concerns have been identified. These patrols have resulted in numerous positive resident contacts. The Evening Watch conducted 396 documented foot and extra patrols, the Day Watch conducted 5 extra patrols, and the Late-Night Watch conducted 138-foot patrols in the Downtown.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights were one of several sponsors of National Black Voter Day held at Dream City on September 18th. This event was held to increase voter awareness and knowledge in the Black Com-munity by sharing the facts on how, when, where and why it is important to vote!
Recreation staff offered a STEM camp for at-risk youth in collaboration with Science Booster Club, Open Heartland, and United Action for Youth.
Recreation staff visited two area mobile home parks, where they provided a meal and activity kits and instructors.
3
Conversations
The Center hosted two forums discussing structural racism: “Cracking the Codes” and “White Privilege 101: Getting in on the Conversation.” Participants explored institutional and structural inequalities that create racial disparities and the impact of white privilege. A combined total of 62 participants attended the events.
The City Staff Book Club held a Zoom on “Tomorrow Will Be Different” by Sarah McBride.
Members of the Police Department joined with community partners at City Council Listening Posts to discuss responses to individuals experiencing mental health and addiction crises, special needs populations, domestic abuse, sexual abuse, victim outreach, and situations involving University students.
The Center hosted the film “Healing Justice,” with a discussion facilitated by Annie Tucker. The film examines the history of the justice system, the need for reform, and the importance of healing and restorative practices.
Police Department staff met with the follow-ing community partnerships: NAACP, FBI, US Attorney’s Office, Johnson County Attorney’s Office, Johnson County Disproportionate Minority Contact Committee, Iowa City Downtown District, 4 Oakes Youth Shelter, United Action for Youth, Johnson County Drug Task Force, and Prevent Child Abuse-Johnson County.
3 4
Accountability
The Public Art Advisory Committee is working with the local Black community, artists, and organizations on creating a mural representing the community’s commitment to social justice. Iowa City Public Art will provide 70% of the funding for the project, while the remainder will be funded by the University of Iowa. The creative process will be memorialized with a documentary film.
The Iowa City Housing Authority entered into a MOU with Horizons for credit repair and homeowner education. This is for the Family Self Sufficiency participants, 91% of which identify as Black/African American.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights released a memo on Appearance Discrimination for area businesses.
The City Manager’s Office contributed $2,000 in funding to the Humanize My Hoodie Ally Experience. Part of these funds lower the overall participant registration fee, and part of it allows the first 50 residents or business owners within Iowa City to register to attend for free.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights created a memo on Emotional Support Animals based on recent Iowa Supreme Court decisions.
The City Manager’s Office, Human Resources, and the Office of Equity and Human Rights created a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Staff Committee to support the City’s efforts at creating a more inclusive workforce.
The Center introduced a “Cultivating Cultural Competency” section to its newsletter and website, including an ongoing series of
articles aimed at increasing competency within various cultures, along with investigat-ing the structural effects of White-American culture.
Neighborhood and Development Services provided $25,000 requested by the Center for Worker Justice to support their “From My Home to Yours” program in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The program provides emergency payments, up to $600 per house-hold to primarily immigrant and refugee families who may not be eligible for various state and federal benefits.
The Housing Community Development Com-mission submitted letters to Housing and Urban Development (HUD) voicing opposition to a proposed policy change that would weaken protections for transgender members of our community seeking shelter under the 2016 Equal Access Rule. The proposal directly targets a group that has historically and disproportionately suffered from the hardships of homelessness. This action was taken following a request from Shelter House.
The Office of Equity and Human Rights joined with the Johnson County United Nations As-sociation to recognize The International Day of Peace, which is observed around the globe annually on September 21.
5
Justice
The City Attorney’s Office joined an amicus (friend of the court) brief supporting the City of Philadelphia in Fulton v. Philadelphia. The case considers whether a foster care agency may turn away LGBTQ people seeking to be foster parents, based on the foster agency’s religious ideology. This case has broad implications for the application of non-dis-crimination law, and the City joins in recognition and furtherance of the values embodied in its Human Rights Ordinance.
The City Attorney’s Office joined an amicus, with 25 other American cities, towns, and counties in an amicus brief in the lawsuit filed by Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The lawsuit challenges a new policy that would prohibit international students from staying in the country if the fall classes being offered by the college they attend are fully on-line as part of their college’s COVID-19 safety plan and seeks a preliminary injunction. In addition to the harm the new rule will cause to the city, Iowa City joined the brief to support the many international students that call our community home and the right of the University of Iowa to make judgments about whether reopening in the fall is safe and edu-cationally advisable without jeopardizing the status of its international students.
5 6
Date: November 10, 2020
To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager
From: Stefanie Bowers, Human Rights Coordinator & Equity Director
Re: Racial Equity Report Card
It has been seven years since we published our first report on racial equity. We publish
this data to be transparent and to show our progress on racial equity at the City in the
areas of employment, criminal justice, and number of complaints based on race
received by the Human Rights Office alleging discrimination in the community. The
report card spotlights where we were in 2015 and compares that to where we were in
2019 (2019 reflects the most recent data the City has in these areas). The report card
has been modified from last year’s version to display the actual data.
The report card is derived from three reports: the Human Rights Commission’s Annual
Report, the Police Department’s Annual Reports and the Employee Statistics Report. All
three reports are hyperlinked on the report card.
CITY OF IOWA CITY RACIAL EQUITY REPORT CARD 2015 TO 2019
Sources: Iowa City Human Rights Commission Annual Report FY15–19Iowa City Employee Statistics Report, January 2016, 2020Iowa City Police Department Annual Report 2015–2019US Census
COMPLAINTS ALLEGING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN IOWA CITY
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT CITY EMPLOYEE DEMOGRAPHICS
ALL CHARGES BY RACE AND HISPANIC ORIGIN
YOUTH REFERRALS/CHARGES BY RACE AND HISPANIC ORIGIN
YOUTH CURFEW VIOLATIONS
TRAFFIC STOPS BY RACE/ETHNICITY AND GENDER
2015 2019 % CHANGE
Population --------------------------74,227 -----------Population --------------------------75,130 ----------------+1.0%
White ---------------------------------78.5% -----------White ----------------------------------78.5% -----------------0.0%
Black or African American -------------9.2% -----------Black or African American -------------8.2% ----------------11.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native ----0.3% -----------American Indian and Alaska Native ----0.3% -----------------0.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander------------------7.2% -----------Asian/Pacific Islander ------------------7.6% ----------------+5.0%Hispanic or Latinx ----------------------5.5% -----------Hispanic or Latinx ----------------------5.8% ----------------+5.0%
Total employees ----------------------1,008 -----------Total employees -----------------------956 -----------------5.0%
White ------------------------------------933 -----------White ------------------------------------843 ----------------9.65%Black or African American ---------------32 -----------Black or African American ---------------47 --------------+46.9%
American Indian and Alaska Native --------3 -----------American Indian and Alaska Native -------4 --------------+33.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander---------------------17 -----------Asian/Pacific Islander --------------------13 ----------------24.0%
Hispanic or Latinx ------------------------23 -----------Hispanic or Latinx ------------------------27 --------------+18.0%
Two or more races ------------------------NA -----------Two or more races ------------------------24 -------------------NA
Total charges ------------------------5,493 -----------Total charges --------------------------5,214 -----------------5.0%
White ----------------------------------3,596 -----------White -----------------------------------3,544 -----------------1.5%
Black or African American ------------1,758 -----------Black or African American ------------1,524 ----------------13.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native -------17 -----------American Indian and Alaska Native ------22 --------------+29.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander-------------------100 -----------Asian/Pacific Islander --------------------91 -----------------9.0%
Hispanic or Latinx -----------------------390 -----------Hispanic or Latinx -----------------------468 --------------+20.0%Race/ethnicity not known ----------------21 -----------Race/ethnicity not known ----------------33 --------------+57.0%
Total charges ---------------------------316 -----------Total charges ----------------------------180 ---------------43.0%
White ------------------------------------132 -----------White --------------------------------------71 ----------------46.0%
Black or African American --------------184 -----------Black or African American --------------109 ----------------41.0%American Indian and Alaska Native --------0 -----------American Indian and Alaska Native -------0 -----------------0.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander----------------------0 -----------Asian/Pacific Islander ---------------------0 -----------------0.0%
Hispanic or Latinx ------------------------24 -----------Hispanic or Latinx -------------------------9 ----------------62.5%
Race/ethnicity not known -----------------5 -----------Race/ethnicity not known -----------------5 -----------------0.0%
Total violations --------------------------20 -----------Total violations --------------------------14 ---------------30.0%
White --------------------------------------13 -----------White ----------------------------------------7 ----------------46.0%
Black or African American -----------------7 -----------Black or African American -----------------7 -----------------0.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native --------0 -----------American Indian and Alaska Native -------0 -----------------0.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander----------------------0 -----------Asian/Pacific Islander ---------------------0 -----------------0.0%
Hispanic or Latinx --------------------------3 -----------Hispanic or Latinx -------------------------3 -----------------0.0%
Male ----------------------------------8,048 -----------Male -----------------------------------9,039 --------------+12.0%
White ----------------------------------5,523 -----------White -----------------------------------5,855 ----------------+6.0%Black or African American -------------1281 -----------Black or African American ------------1,748 --------------+36.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native -------14 -----------American Indian and Alaska Native ------19 --------------+36.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander-------------------543 -----------Asian/Pacific Islander -------------------535 -----------------1.0%
Hispanic or Latinx -----------------------475 -----------Hispanic or Latinx -----------------------556 ---------------+17.0%
Two or more races -----------------------141 -----------Two or more races ------------------------72 ----------------49.0%
Female --------------------------------4,793 -----------Female --------------------------------5,423 --------------+13.0%
White ----------------------------------3,523 -----------White -----------------------------------3,901 --------------+10.0%
Black or African American --------------680 -----------Black or African American --------------835 --------------+23.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native -------10 -----------American Indian and Alaska Native --------7 ----------------30.0%Asian/Pacific Islander-------------------254 -----------Asian/Pacific Islander -------------------286 --------------+13.0%
Hispanic or Latinx -----------------------233 -----------Hispanic or Latinx -----------------------289 --------------+24.0%
Two or more races ------------------------47 -----------Two or more races ------------------------19 ----------------60.0%
Total complaints ------------------------19 -----------Total complaints -------------------------19 -----------------0.0%
Totals represent the number
of charges, not the number
of persons charged. Some
persons may have been charged more than once.
Youth charges are referrals to Juvenile Court Services.
Status of Complaints
November 12, 2020
Employment
Complainant alleges they were terminated due to sexual orientation and sex
discrimination. They further allege unlawful retaliation.
Probable cause determination on retaliation claim.
Complainant alleges they were terminated due to religious discrimination.
Investigation complete; data summary begun.
Housing
Complainant alleges landlord failed to reasonably accommodate their disability.
Recently served; awaiting responses.