Human Rights Commission Regular Meeting December 16, 2021 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:30pm Agenda Packet Attachments 1. Agenda 2. 11-18-2021 HRC Regular Meeting Minutes 3. 12-07-2021 HRC Community Engagement Committee Meeting Minutes 4. December OHR Staff Report 5. Resolution HR21-1 Attachment 1 Human Rights Commission AGENDA Regular Meeting December 16, 2021 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:30pm Please take Notice that this virtual meeting of the Human Rights Commission is for the purposes of planning, developing and drafting management and administration documents for the Human Rights Commission. For the purpose of addressing issues during the quarantine, this virtual meeting will be a limited public forum to discuss the agenda items designated under Section 5 below and to ensure the continuity of services provided by the Commission. The Commission Chair may limit public comments or discussion points that are unrelated to agenda items under Section 5 or that pertain to topics outside the scope of this Agenda. Members of the public are limited to three minutes of comment time per person related to the Agenda below. A maximum of sixteen public comment time slots are allotted per meeting. This will be a virtual/electronic meeting open to the public and registration information is available at www.charlottesville.gov/zoom. Link to Human Rights Commission shared Box folder: https://app.box.com/s/xty3wnn2s1tj8h7trkknvd79bipyxezy 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER b. ROLL CALL c. MISSION (recited by all): Act as a strong advocate to justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. 2. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT (Webinar attendees use the “raise hand” function, phone attendees use *9) b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC 3. MINUTES a. 11/18/2021 HRC Regular Meeting Minutes* b. 12/07/2021 HRC Community Engagement Committee Meeting Minutes* 4. BUSINESS MATTERS a. CHAIR UPDATE b. OHR STAFF REPORT 5. WORK SESSION a. Presentation regarding tenant’s assertion bill b. Accessibility Committee i. HR 21-1* c. Nominating Committee updates 6. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT (Webinar attendees use the “raise hand” function, phone attendees use *9) b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC 7. COMMISSIONER UPDATES 8. NEXT STEPS & ADJOURN * ACTION NEEDED Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in the public meeting may call the ADA Coordinator at (434) 970-3182 or submit a request via email to ada@charlottesville.gov. The City of Charlottesville requests that you provide a 48 hour notice so that proper arrangements may be made. Attachment 2 Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting November 18, 2021 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:30 pm Public link to meeting rebroadcasts on Boxcast: https://boxcast.tv/channel/vabajtzezuyv3iclkx1a Public link to HRC documents on Box: https://app.box.com/s/xty3wnn2s1tj8h7trkknvd79bipyxezy 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Chair, Mary Bauer, called the meeting to order at 6:32 pm b. ROLL CALL i. Mary Bauer ii. Kathryn Laughon iii. Jeanette Abi-Nader iv. Ernest Chambers v. Jessica Harris vi. Andrew Orban vii. Lyndele Von Schill c. MISSION (recited by all): Act as a strong advocate to justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. 2. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. Tanesha Hudson 1. Would like to address the work session regarding public comment 2. Equates public comment to freedom of speech 3. Urges Commissioners to listen to the message behind what people are saying rather than disregarding them as personal attacks 4. Says Black leaders have been treated as if they do not belong, and Commissioners have the responsibility to defend them a. If personal attacks are coming from someone on the Commission, it is the other members’ responsibility to address it 5. Says Commissioners should expect public comment, as they are public figures in the city a. Says she is using her own personal resources to do the work that the Commission should be doing 6. Urges Commissioners to listen to the message and not the way it is being said b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. Chair 1. Clarifies that while the Commission requests people to refrain from personal attacks, it would not stop individuals from expressing their opinions 3. MINUTES a. Commissioner asks if two people were present at a committee meeting, one person would constitute a quorum i. Chair says that upon looking at bylaws, there is no rule for a quorum in a committee ii. Suggests that since committees fluctuate in membership, any votes from individuals present at the appropriate committee meeting are valid b. Review of Legal Representation Committee Meeting minutes from 09/02/2021 i. 2 individuals at committee meeting; 2 individuals present now ii. Vote 1. In favor: 2 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 c. Review of Legislative Agenda Committee Meeting minutes from 09/09/2021 i. 1 individual at committee meeting;1 individual present now ii. Vote 1. In favor: 1 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 d. Review of Regular Meeting minutes from 09/16/2021 i. Ernest did participate in the language access plan vote; Todd will ensure this is reflected in the meeting’s minutes ii. Vote 1. In favor: 6 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 1 e. Review of Housing Committee Meeting minutes from 10/07/2021 i. 3 individuals at committee meeting; 3 individuals present now ii. Vote 1. In favor: 3 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 f. Review of Legal Representation Committee Meeting minutes from 10/07/2021 i. 1 individual at committee meeting;1 individual present now ii. Vote 1. In favor:1 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 g. Review of Accessibility Committee Meeting minutes from 10/14/2021 i. 3 individuals at committee meeting; 1 individual present now ii. Vote 1. In favor: 1 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 h. Review of Regular Meeting minutes from 10/21/2021 i. Vote 1. In favor: 5 2. Opposed: 3. Abstained: 2 i. Review of Community Engagement Committee Meeting minutes from 11/04/2021 i. 4 individuals at committee meeting; 4 individuals present now ii. Todd will change “Committee Engagement Committee” to “Community Engagement Committee” iii. Vote 1. In favor: 4 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 4. BUSINESS MATTERS (1) a. Speaker: Anna Mendez on housing discrimination against those with mental health and substance use challenges i. Is the Executive Director of Partner for Mental Health (PMH), which supports community members living with psychiatric disabilities to access clinical care 1. Housing is the issue this organization spends the most time on ii. Concern 1: There are motels operating within the city limits that are explicitly denying service to people working with PMH on the basis of their disability 1. PMH staff has called these motels anonymously and been told there is availability, but upon revealing the organization’s role as payers, they have been told, “We do not rent to your people” 2. TJACH and Home to Hope have also experienced this 3. The process of filing a complaint with OHR can be especially arduous for a person living with a mental illness or addiction a. City Attorney told Anna that because the discrimination did not directly happen to the organization, PMH cannot file a complaint on a client’s behalf b. A recent client to whom this situation has happened decided to spend his time and PMH’s resources securing housing for himself instead of filing a complaint i. Element of learned hopelessness, as this individual has experienced discrimination many times before 4. PMH believes this systemic discrimination is occurring to the very people who are least likely able to defend themselves 5. Talked to Todd about HUD structure that the Commission could be moving toward that could allow the Director of OHR to bring forth a complaint in situations like this a. Asks Commission to prioritize and expedite the process of becoming this entity, because the lack of remedy to this situation is currently causing harm to Charlottesville residents 6. Commissioner asks if it is possible to serve as an advocate and assist with the complaint process by helping start it then act as the voice for a client a. Anna replies that the organization could help, but the client would have to be the driver, which takes a level of executive function that a mental illness or addiction prevents clients from accessing b. Also takes resources away from finding them emergency housing c. Commissioner wants to push back against the ruling; asks if a Commissioner could be this advocate spending time helping clients file complaints i. Is interested in pursuing HUD structure in addition to immediate action against the City d. Anna notes that it has taken much time and trust to build rapport with some people they support, so it would be difficult to add more people into the equation 7. Chair says under federal law, the standing principle for the Fair Housing Act discrimination is incredibly broad a. Fair housing organizations and testers can bring suit b. Would like to look at the Ordinance with this in mind; says HRC can look at the Ordinance and change it to allow third-party complaints about systemic discrimination 8. Commissioner asks if there is anything Commissioners can do now, as the process can take awhile a. Also asks if a power of attorney could file a complaint on behalf of a client b. Anna replies that powers of attorney and/or guardianship are significant invasions of people’s civil rights; PMH strongly opposes them except in cases of last resort c. Also, these people need shelter, so if there were a family member willing to be power of attorney, they would more likely have shelter anyway 9. A Commissioner asks in the chat who determines harm—PMH is experiencing harm? a. Anna agrees the organization is experiencing harm because its payments are being declined, but the City Attorney does not agree b. Anna is aware that the HUD direction is not a quick fix, but would still like HRC to move in that direction; also, would like if HRC looked at the Ordinance to make necessary changes 10. Chair suggests looking at the Human Rights Ordinance in the Housing committee, then coming back to the full meeting with recommendations for changing it 11. Todd clarifies that this HUD program process is OHR becoming a Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) by making specific amendments (including Director-initiated complaint procedures) to bring the Ordinance into “substantial equivalence to federal fair housing law” a. It is close to being done—the next step is reviewing it with the City Attorney’s office, then getting it approved by City Council 12. Commissioner asks what HRC can do right now to provide relief to those in immediate danger a. Anna replies that there are funds available for people who are unsheltered and at imminent risk for hospitalization; PMH is currently accessing these funds b. It would be helpful to loosen the requirements around accessing the funds so that PMH can access funds before someone is unsheltered and at risk i. Funds are accessed through TJACH; Anna does not know who imposed the requirements c. Commissioner asks if someone from the City could talk to TJACH and support negotiating the requirements; HRC does not have much power with TJACH, but it does with the City i. OHR staff asks to clarify what the funds would be used for ii. Anna says that being able to access funds before individuals’ symptoms cause them to act out of character would likely increase success with securing motel rooms d. Commissioner notes that money will not help if motels are not letting these individuals in and supports the idea of immediate action, such as a press release i. Anna replies that the having the resources to support individuals before a crisis would go a long way ii. Also suggests a letter written by HRC to hotels in Charlottesville explicitly stating that discrimination on the basis of disability based on disability and payer source is illegal iii. Commissioner says a public letter with some press attention could be very effective 1. Chair asks if this is an action the Commission would like to take, and Commissioners express general approval 13. Chair suggests a dual track to analyze the Ordinance and publish the public letter a. Anna requests HRC write a letter of commendation to Ashley Shifflett, Property Manager of Affordable Suites in Charlottesville, as she has been extremely helpful in providing housing for PMH’s clients 14. Jeanette suggests reaching out to Cville Tomorrow about interviewing Anna, Ashley, and a Commissioner; offers to help coordinate a. Chair would be willing to do Cville Tomorrow interview 15. Chair can work on the letter by Saturday then send it out to the other Commissioners 16. Summary of next steps a. Draft public letter and seek press attention b. Continue FHAP process c. Review Ordinance and determine whether changes are needed (Housing committee) iii. Concern 2: Premier Circle is a great resource created in Charlottesville to provide housing opportunities for unsheltered individuals at greatest risk for morbidity and mortality due to COVID 1. Is using CDC high-risk list to determine eligibility; individual must be unsheltered and have one of the diagnoses on the CDC list a. Substance use disorder is a condition on the CDC list, encompassing alcohol addiction and recovering illicit substance users 2. Case law has established these people as people with disabilities to whom the ADA and Fair Housing Act attach 3. The current Premier Circle procedures exclude this group from eligibility despite their inclusion on the CDC high-risk list 4. Premier Circle has agreed to meet with PMH after Thanksgiving to discuss the policy 5. Requests that HRC write a letter to Premier Circle in support of expanding the eligibility criteria to include everyone on the CDC high-risk list and protected by the Fair Housing Act 6. Premier Circle a. Housing opportunity for individuals falling under 3 criteria: must be unsheltered, must fall under CDC’s high-risk list, must be able to manage activities of daily living b. Is in Albemarle County by about a block, but residents of Charlottesville are often referred there, and city funds are used to support its operation 7. Chair asks if there were a complaint made to OHR and HRC had to adjudicate, if the letter would make HRC a conflict of interest for the adjudication process a. OHR clarifies that OHR would have jurisdiction over a complaint made about Premier Circle because the offices of its parent organization, PACEM, are located in the city b. Also replies that HRC would be possibly evaluating the evidence of the case under the Ordinance for a different protected class; he is unsure how a letter would later affect HRC’s role in adjudication i. Anna adds that this applies to the motel letter, as well c. Chair is concerned because the letter names a specific entity, though is unsure if it would actually disqualify HRC from acting as adjudicator; the Ordinance does not say anything about what to do when there is a conflict of interest i. Commissioner asks if there are any broader guidelines the organization is working under that could be addressed in the letter instead of the specific organization 1. This is only the organization’s policy 8. Commissioners express general support for writing the letter 9. Chair will draft letter a. Will contact Anna to ensure the language is accurate to the situation 10. Anna clarifies that the issue is not that those with alcohol addictions are barred from Premier Circle, it is that the addiction itself is not singularly qualifying b. Review of HRC Rules and Procedures as pertains to a quorum i. Current rules require 7 for a quorum regardless of how many people are on the Commission ii. To change this, HRC needs to provide 5 days’ notice; Chair recommends making decision now to be able to vote on it next meeting iii. Commissioner asks why the 5 days’ notice is necessary iv. Another Commissioner asks what the Commission aiming to change the quorum to 1. Chair suggests an over 50% vote, but is open to other ideas 2. There are currently 9 members, and the recent Ordinance change limits it to 9 going forward v. Chair says there are two questions going around—how many Commissioners are needed to vote, and how many Commissioners are needed to hold an official meeting 1. Commissioner adds in the chat that Martha’s Rules state a quorum is established if half or more of voting members are present vi. Commissioner expresses concern that a simple majority would allow motions to be made with a very small group of people (3, if going by Martha’s Rules) 1. Chair reminds that these are publicly-noticed meetings that describe what will be discussed ahead of the meeting vii. Commissioner asks if under the hypothetical 3-to-pass scenario, a Commissioner could ask to further discuss an item if they know they will not be able to attend the vote 1. Expresses that 3 is fine with her as long as every member would get a chance to see everything voted upon viii. Commissioners express general support for changing a quorum to be a simple majority ix. Vote upon requiring a majority of Commissioners to have a quorum (a majority of a quorum present is already the rule to pass an item) 1. In favor: 6 2. Opposed: 1 3. Change is approved; Commission will write this up in an updated Rules and Procedures to be voted upon during the next meeting to comply with the 5 days’ notice requisite c. Formation of HRC Officer Nominating Committee i. Requires a committee of at least 3 people ii. Officers serve one-year terms; elections will occur for Chair and Vice- Chair iii. Committee is only to nominate a slate iv. Jeanette, Andy, and Mary volunteer to form the committee v. Will convene this committee before the next regular meeting; it must be public d. Chair update i. Formally recognizes Todd as the new Director of OHR ii. Follow-up on letter to City Council regarding retention of people of color 1. Sent letter but has not engaged in any follow-up actions; asks if Commission wants anything else to be done 2. Did not speak at the recent City Council meeting, but could do so at the next one 3. It is publicly known that the former Police Chief has filed with OHR; Chair does not plan to speak about this matter publicly iii. Chair, Todd, and other local advocates attended a Midway Manor meeting last week to talk about conditions there 1. Midway Manor is a privately owned but subsidized housing project for the elderly and disabled; there have been significant concerns about the poor conditions residents are provided, including broken elevators 2. Meeting was productive, but Tanesha Hudson raised the general issue of subsidized housing having poor conditions in Charlottesville; asked HRC to address this 3. Chair asks what the Commission can and should do a. Could be a part of a compelling report; may be time- consuming 4. OHR staff adds that HRC could partner with another organization to conduct a study and get the work done a. Adds that at the meeting, an attorney from LAJC was present to speak about residents’ options under the Landlord Tenant Act, as well as option of filing with OHR 5. Chair suggests holding a public hearing concerning subsidized housing and ask community members to come and speak about the issue publicly a. Commissioner expresses support for public forum 6. Chair suggests either asking people to come and speak at the December HRC meeting or setting up a separate public hearing a. Commissioner believes the second option would be the most convenient and accessible to the most community members b. Chair suggests reaching out to PHAR in addition to Midway Manor residents, and to ask them what time works best for them 7. OHR staff says for Midway Manor residents, prompt action on the concerns is their priority a. Complaint process takes time b. A tool for quicker action is mediation, potentially through group action i. A group in mediation with the owner could be a quick way to resolution c. Commissioner suggests another letter to support mediation; however, a complaint must be filed to do mediation d. Chair notes they encouraged individuals to speak with counsel with LAJC to proceed 8. Commissioners express general support for holding separate public meeting to hear community members’ concerns a. Chair and OHR staff will talk to PHAR and Midway Manor residents to set up a time e. OHR Staff report i. Report is attached in the agenda packet ii. Data entry is very close to current 1. Number of daily incoming contacts has quadrupled since April and has been steady in recent months iii. Only one Commissioner away from the entire Commission having charlottesville.gov emails 1. All Commissioners must fill out security form—Todd can send it out again 2. Will be shifting away from using personal emails; also will be shifting from Box to OneDrive for documents (makes FOIA easier iv. All Commissioners (except Jessica) need to reapply to continue on the Commission past the date of February 28, 2022 1. Contact Todd for any questions or if you do not intend to serve another term v. FHAP process 1. Has received final feedback for informal review from HUD 2. Substantial equivalence with federal fair housing is now in place 3. Now, staff is working on updating other parts of the Ordinance for legal review with the City Attorney’s office, and after that, HRC 4. Asks Commission if they would like to create a sub-committee to review content before presenting to the full Commission a. Potentially for the December meeting vi. Is aiming to hire a community outreach staff-person who can eventually train to do investigative work, as well 1. An interview panel will eventually be necessary— let Todd know if interested in being on the panel 5. WORK SESSION (1) a. Resolution A21-1 i. About how to take action between meetings, as guidance in bylaws is unclear ii. Has a plain language and a plain-language graphic version iii. Vote on Resolution A21-1 1. In favor: 7 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 b. Draft Resolution—Plain Language (A21-2) i. Resolution stating that every HRC document going forward will have an accompanying plain language counterpart 1. HRC letters should be in as plain language as possible ii. Vote on Plain Language Draft Resolution 1. In favor: 7 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 c. Committee Reports i. Community Engagement (Committee Chair – Jessica) 1. Discussed having a town hall to engage with the public a. Recommends having town hall on a similar time frame to Midway Manor public hearing 2. Would like to recommend to Deputy City Manager for REDI a call to action to City Council to hold them accountable for their treatment of Black community members 3. Concerning City Manager’s memo about commemorative days, committee believes City Manager’s ideas are valuable; recommends that the City focus on educational aspects of the event and amplify the voices of marginalized community members a. There are no current next steps besides replying to City Manager 4. HRC Chair says both the general town hall and Midway Manor public hearing would take significant work, so it would be helpful to prioritize one over the other a. Committee Chair clarifies that the committee talked about how it is important to engage with the public who cannot attend HRC meetings b. Some kind of public event or visual work would be the goal 5. Commissioner asks if this town hall was related to the anniversary of August 2017 a. Committee Chair clarifies that the recommendation is to ask the City focus on educating and providing opportunities for marginalized groups to have a voice b. Commissioner adds that the town hall is to hear community members’ concerns between meetings 6. HRC Chair asks OHR staff how the town hall can be coordinated a. OHR staff replies that a virtual vs. in-person town hall is a concern—can talk to Communications about this i. In-person meetings may not be permitted for a while, however b. OHR staff says to think about the context and when the town hall would happen, and he can coordinate i. Ernest volunteers to work with Todd to coordinate event 7. Committee Chair would be willing to host town hall on Zoom a. Will need to coordinate tech with Communications 8. Committee Chair adds that there could be a creative visual event where community members can write out concerns; volunteers to help coordinate such an event a. OHR staff reminds Commission that when hearing public concerns, Commissioners should be ready to address and act upon them, so HRC should be cognizant of their time 9. Jessica, Jeanette, and Ernest volunteer to work on this community event/town hall d. Next committee meetings i. Commissioner recommends having Town Hall meeting in lieu of Housing ii. Officer Nominating committee can conduct its business via email unless there is voting iii. Town Hall committee will coordinate a time via email e. Commissioner 6. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC 7. BUSINESS MATTERS (2) a. Commissioner clarifies that there were two flyers in the agenda packet—the Commission approved the flyer that went along with Resolution A21-2, but not A21-1 i. Chair suggests voting on the A21-1 flyer for clarity 1. In favor: 7 2. Opposed: 0 3. Abstained: 0 8. COMMISSIONER UPDATES a. Jessica i. Kathryn learned from Deputy City Manager for REDI that she is proposing to do the bystander training ii. Community Engagement committee decided during meeting that Mary could speak at the next City Council meeting supporting the Jefferson School proposal 1. Will be on City Council’s 12/6/21 agenda to vote upon 9. NEXT STEPS a. General Next Steps i. Motels: send letter to motels in Charlottesville regarding discrimination of those with mental illnesses and substance addictions, continue with FHAP process, review Ordinance for potential changes in Housing committee ii. Premier Circle: send letter to Premier Circle in support expanding eligibility criteria iii. Midway Manor: Todd and Mary will convene to reach out to PHAR and Midway Manor residents to set up a time for a public hearing to discuss Charlottesville subsidized housing concerns iv. Town Hall ad-hoc committee: 12/7/21 at 4pm b. Mary i. Draft letter to motels about discrimination of those with mental illnesses and substance addictions ii. Draft letter to Premier Circle in support of expanding eligibility criteria iii. Speak at next City Council meeting about: 1. Treatment of Black Charlottesville employees 2. Support of the Jefferson School proposal c. Todd i. Send A21-1 Resolution, A21-2 Resolution, and Language Access Plan Resolution to Mary for signatures in PDF form 1. Will post them on the website ii. Post letters to website iii. Will email revisions to Ordinance to Commissioners; Commissioners can give feedback 1. Tell Todd if there is enough reason to put item on agenda about revisions iv. Change “Committee Engagement Committee” to “Community Engagement Committee” in 11/04/21 Community Engagement Committee meeting minutes v. Resend security form for charlottesville.gov emails to Commissioners d. Jeanette (?) i. Reach out to Cville Tomorrow about interviewing Anna, Ashley, and Mary about hotels and discrimination of those with mental health/addiction (as press release to go along with letter) 10. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm Attachment 3 Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Community Engagement Committee December 7, 2021 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 4:00 pm Public link to meeting rebroadcasts on Boxcast: https://boxcast.tv/channel/vabajtzezuyv3iclkx1a Public link to HRC documents on Box: https://app.box.com/s/xty3wnn2s1tj8h7trkknvd79bipyxezy 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Chair, Jessica Harris, called the meeting to order at 4:06 pm b. ROLL CALL i. Jessica Harris ii. Jeanette Abi-Nader iii. Ernest Chambers iv. Andrew Orban v. Lyndele Von Schill c. MISSION (recited by all): Act as a strong advocate to justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. 2. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. None b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. None 3. MINUTES a. None 4. WORK SESSION a. Town hall meeting planning i. Goal to open dialogue with the public ii. Committee Chair expresses it is important to articulate the Commission’s limitations and what it is capable of 1. Can't open dialogue without being able to respond 2. Suggests formatting the town hall like a needs assessment in which the Commission hears from the public, identifies resources, and creates a plan that may be made short-term or long-term iii. Commissioner says she thinks of town hall as a larger part of the community engagement process 1. When Charlene was Director, she did many community events that have not been possible since COVID, so there is not only an aspect of needs assessment, but also getting out in the community 2. It is difficult to effectively engage with the community due to the Commission’s formality and meeting infrequency 3. Suggests a quarterly Zoom outreach call during which people can share thoughts and the Commission can respond a. More informal; one quarter, committee could hear responses, then respond during the next quarter b. May reach more people than a one-time in-person town hall 4. Doing some kind of research project is also part of the goals for next year; could take questions from these meetings to inform potential research, as these are what the community finds important iv. Chair values direct feedback and expresses wanting to support OHR staff with his direct engagement with the community 1. Summarizes Commissioner’s points about the quarterly outreach call v. Commissioner agrees that frequency of meetings is important for community engagement; wonders if there is a way for Commission responses to be sooner than the next quarterly meeting vi. Commissioner mentions Hollaback! bystander training and compares personal experiences in focus groups with what the Commission could do; asks how the Commission could both hear concerns and provide information, perhaps in a workshop format 1. Information workshops about the complaint process 2. Some people are intimidated because they are unsure of the next step 3. Commissioner wants to prioritize education, responding to immediate needs, and accessibility vii. Commissioner says that having information up front about the timeliness of Commission’s response is important viii. Commissioner asks what influence/ability the Commission will actually be able to have with the current structure 1. This community initiative is different from the Dialogue on Race—it encompasses even more of the community 2. Questions what issues the Commission wants to take on and what the Commission is able to influence a. Commission’s attempts at influencing are often long processes b. Many people expect prompt action, but this is not how City government typically works ix. Commissioner suggests focusing during meetings on something the Commission knows it could move forward on, such as annually putting forth recommendations for legislative priorities 1. If the education piece was inserted, this is something the Commission knows it can move forward on 2. There could be other discrete issues the Commission chooses to pursue, as well x. Commissioner says these meetings could also be a way to keep pressure on City Council on certain issues such as Midway Manor 1. Important for Commissioners to listen to City Council meetings and stay informed a. Another Commissioner suggests shifts for keeping up with entire Council meetings xi. Chair asks OHR staff if it is possible for the Community Engagement Committee members to rotate shifts to speak at City Council meetings 1. OHR staff replies that this is possible; the HRC Chair would just have to designate who will be speaking on behalf of the Commission xii. Commissioner’s concern is setting expectations appropriately 1. Possibly by having part of the meeting dedicated to a particular topic, then the rest of the meeting as listening 2. Suggests starting each meeting with what the Commission can do and will do a. Says it is helpful to acknowledge that HRC’s limited power can be frustrating xiii. Commissioner suggests setting a target for a “pilot” meeting 1. Would need to ask the City what is possible 2. OHR staff adds that every HRC meeting could be like a town hall meeting with the opportunity for public comment; asks how to advertise and format meetings using City resources to garner as much participation as possible xiv. Commissioner asks about the status on continuing to hold virtual meetings 1. OHR staff says there is no new information 2. Reminds that the Commission is on the list of organizations that would have hybrid setups so that members of the public could still attend virtually 3. Commissioner says that always having a virtual option would be beneficial for those who cannot make it in person 4. Another Commissioner suggests asking Communications about how easy or difficult it would be to get hybrid setups to work effectively, as it is important that things run smoothly a. Suggests establishing time limits and other limits early on during the meeting in order to respect Commissioners’ time and outside lives b. Recommends having 2-3 specific topics and not opening the net too widely xv. Commissioner suggests a format like a town hall discussion in which she participated: 15min discussion with overview of the issue at hand with ground rules, then breaking out into smaller groups 1. Discussion may be more effective in more intimate settings 2. Leading with questions would be helpful to focus on a specific topic 3. In a hybrid format, Zoom attendees would have to stay on Zoom for breakout sessions and in-person attendees would have to stay with each other 4. OHR staff reminds committee to check in with Communications’ current capabilities given their recent changes a. Will follow up with Communications about this xvi. Commissioner adds that breakout rooms would allow specific people to lead discussions on topics they are passionate about 1. Could help discussions stay on track, as well 2. One Commissioner could stay in place to help with Zoom operations xvii. Commissioner adds that it is important to acknowledge what the Commission is able to do and offer support despite its limited capabilities 1. Could even put blurbs in the newspaper every month about what the community has reported as concerns xviii. Commissioner emphasizes the “what happens next” or “white paper” piece; expectation should be that there will be some effect that comes out of these meetings 1. There should be some expectation setting, but there should also always be some kind of outcome at the end of meetings, even if it is not some large action item xix. Commissioner says there is power in saying what needs to be said 1. Community art pieces or other creative visual ways to represent the community’s concerns 2. It is essential to make sure the community feels heard xx. Target topic for February 1. Commissioner asks if community members have reached out about specific topics already besides about homeless shelter situations a. OHR staff says at the Midway Manor meeting, Tanesha Hudson asked the HRC to look into subsidized housing conditions citywide 2. Commissioner summarizes current community concerns that have come up in HRC: motel/hotel treatment of those with mental illness, Midway Manor long-term subsidized housing, legal counsel for individuals facing eviction, loss of Black staff at the City level, and disability access 3. Commissioner suggests putting a poll out at the next regular meeting to ask the public about what they most want to talk about first a. Perhaps try to put it out more publicly than at the regular meeting in order to reach more people—the City’s Twitter account? i. Todd can ask Communications about this b. Public and subsidized housing conditions meeting planning i. OHR staff asks if this is a topic the committee would like to bring up during the meeting 1. Commissioner asks if Todd and Mary were going to reach out to Midway Manor to have its own town hall a. This is not what the residents asked for, but the Commission decided this style of discussion would be a good course of action c. Time frame on town hall i. Commissioner says if town hall is in February, Commission could public poll in the next couple weeks and leave it up for a month and make a decision at the January meeting ii. Jeanette offers to draft the poll to present for approval at the next HRC regular meeting 1. Can also look at most recent legislative recommendations and add some of these in addition to other topics 2. Commissioner asks to add not only low-income housing, but also affordable housing a. Affordable housing is different from subsidized and public housing 3. Commissioner adds that framing exact topics is not necessary at this point; it is more important to frame expectations 4. OHR staff adds that there are currently City and non-profit discussions happening concerning the development of a definition for affordable based on AMI, HUD definitions, etc. a. Whether or not this is a topic to consider for the town hall, wonders if it would be helpful to hold a panel where people explain the situation and terminology about affordable housing b. Think about who to invite to highlight the education piece iii. Commissioner asks OHR staff if OHR has FAQ information 1. There is a small FAQ section on the Human Rights webpage 2. There are many common questions about the complaint process, and explaining it often takes intensive individual conversation 3. Commissioner says that it may be nice to have a topic at hand in addition to some kind of information flyer or other kind of workshop/resource a. Lyndele offers to help with some kind of writing or visual information source (with a plain language focus) d. OHR staff asks Chair about timeframes, especially with turnover and new Commission members—asks when she wants to host the town hall in relation to the composition of the Commission i. Should it take place after training new Commissioners and/or having gone through the retreat? ii. Chair would like to move forward the meeting for February, but recognizes the training process can be intensive; asks if February is too soon and town hall should be pushed to April iii. OHR staff replies that this is just a thought to keep in mind—this Commission has been working together for a long time to hear concerns in February and may be overwhelming for new Commissioners in March; or perhaps this would not be an issue iv. Chair expresses that it is sometimes frustrating how the Commission comes up with actions but is not able to follow through on them, so it would be good to push forward the town hall 1. May be easier if the town hall is already established in the beginning 2. Can adjust if circumstances change v. Another Commissioner clarifies with OHR staff when terms expire 1. February 28th is the end of all Commissioners’ terms except Jessica 2. OHR staff says to apply before the term expires—unsure of the exact date 3. Jeanette says she was thinking about not applying again, but if this town hall concrete action is established, she may reconsider to feel like she is making a contribution 4. Committee members agree they want to be on the Commission to make a difference in the community, and holding the town hall may invigorate some Commission members to stay on e. Chair recommends keeping the same timeframe for the poll and aiming for February for the town hall; Commission can pivot as needed 5. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. None b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. None 6. COMMISSIONER UPDATES a. None 7. NEXT STEPS a. General next steps i. Move forward with town hall ii. Release poll to public about what the target topic will be for February b. Jeanette i. Draft poll about town hall topics to present for approval at December HRC regular meeting c. Todd i. Follow up with Communications about their current capabilities 1. Also ask how HRC can release a poll on City platforms to reach as many people as possible 8. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 5:00 pm Attachment 4 Office of Human Rights Todd Niemeier Monthly Staff Report December 2021 Service Provision Data: • Data entered through the end of November 2021 o Data for open and closed inquiries and complaints is still in progress as we need to review the list and update status on ongoing cases o Lily Gates, OHR Intern, continues to be the data entry superhero – Thanks, Lily! o I removed the “Formal Investigations” data from the bottom of the data chart because some cases move in and out of investigation and the information is better reflected in the individual cases section below. • Revisiting a secure web-based customized case management system with IT o Ongoing effort to move from an Excel-based system to a customized system that would standardize data entry and allow for easier use by multiple staff o IT presented a new version of the case management system for testing on 9/14/2021 o OHR staff and intern reviewed the new system presented by IT and will be providing a summary of feedback  At present, the existing Excel-based system has more functionality o As of this month, we have not circled back with IT on a new system o We may explore uploading the current Excel-based system onto One Drive  One Drive would allow for multi-staff access and simultaneous edits  Need to confirm that One Drive has the same level of confidentiality protection as the City network Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Open office days in the month 22 20 21 22 23 20 22 22 20 23 19 18 252 Total Incoming & Outgoing Contacts 171 139 145 133 197 272 307 287 330 442 304 0 2727 Total Incoming Contacts 83 70 71 68 131 176 195 210 239 308 235 0 1786 Average Incoming & Outgoing Contacts/Day 8 7 7 6 9 14 14 13 17 19 16 0 11 Average Incoming Contacts/Day 4 4 3 3 6 9 9 10 12 13 12 0 7 Referrals from Sin Barreras 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contacts in Spanish 0 1 3 9 6 6 3 4 0 9 5 0 46 Total Staff Follow-ups (Outgoing) 49 33 30 30 39 45 48 32 47 49 38 0 440 Total Third-Party Contacts (Outgoing) 39 36 44 35 27 51 64 45 44 85 31 0 501 Total Client Follow-ups (Incoming) 45 34 36 27 65 120 105 128 154 157 129 0 1000 Total Third-Party Contacts (Incoming) 28 28 19 30 45 40 73 54 74 130 86 0 607 Total General Contacts (Incoming) 3 4 3 4 6 12 10 15 2 9 12 0 80 Total New Inquiries (Incoming) 6 3 12 7 14 4 6 11 9 11 6 0 89 Total New Complaints (Incoming) 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 10 Total Allegations (Both I&C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: Locality - Cville 6 3 5 3 12 3 6 9 5 6 3 0 61 Total I&C: Locality - Albemarle 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Total I&C: Locality - Other or Not Specified 0 1 7 2 3 1 1 4 3 6 5 0 33 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Employment 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 2 3 0 11 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Housing 6 3 8 5 8 1 6 4 4 5 2 0 52 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Public Accommodation 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 6 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Credit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Private Education 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 2 0 4 3 0 4 3 3 1 0 20 Total Complaints: P.A. - Employment 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 4 Total Complaints: P.A. - Housing 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 6 Total Complaints: P.A. - Public Accommodation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Complaints: P.A. - Credit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Complaints: P.A. - Private Education 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Complaints: P.A. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total employment discrimination allegations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Employment allegations in Charlottesville 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Employment allegations in Albemarle Co. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Emp. allegations in Cville referred to EEOC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Emp. allegations in Alb. Co. ref. to EEOC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total housing discrimination allegations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Housing allegations in Charlottesville 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Housing allegations in Albemarle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total public accommodation discrimination allegations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Public accommodation allegations in Cville 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Other (Unprotected) activity allegations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - Age 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - Disability 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 7 Total I&C: P.C. - Marital Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 Total I&C: P.C. - Pregnancy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - Childbirth or Related Medical Conditions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - Race 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 3 0 2 1 0 10 Total I&C: P.C. - Color 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total I&C: P.C. - Sex 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total I&C: P.C. - Gender Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Total I&C: P.C. - Sexual Orientation 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 Total I&C: P.C. - Source of Funds 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total I&C: P.C. - Not specified 4 3 12 5 12 4 5 8 5 6 6 0 70 Total I&C: P.C. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 5 Total Counseling Contacts 17 21 16 8 18 20 18 16 6 10 6 0 156 Total Employment Counseling 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 8 Total Housing Counseling 17 21 15 6 12 18 12 13 4 7 3 0 128 Total Public Accommodation Counseling 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 Total Credit Counseling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Private Education Counseling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Other (Unprotected) Counseling 0 0 1 0 5 2 5 1 1 1 1 0 17 Total Contacts resulting in Referrals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to CSRAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to LAJC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to CVLAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to PHA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to EEOC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to DPOR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Age 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Disability 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Marital Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Pregnancy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Childbirth or R.M.C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Race 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Color 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Sex 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Gender Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Sexual Orientation 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Not specified 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Employment Complaints: P.C. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Age 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Disability 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Marital Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Pregnancy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Childbirth or R.M.C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Race 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Color 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Sex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Gender Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Sexual Orientation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Source of Funds 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Not specified 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Age 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Disability 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Marital Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Pregnancy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Childbirth or R.M.C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Race 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Color 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Sex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Gender Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Sexual Orientation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Not specified 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pub. Accom. Comp.: P.C. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Open Inquiries 3 Total Closed Inquiries 14 Total Dismissed Inquiries 0 Total Open Complaints 5 Total Closed Complaints 2 Total Dismissed Complaints 0 Primary Service: Appointment Set-up 3 2 1 0 8 19 11 2 3 3 5 0 57 Primary Service: Clerical Assistance 0 5 1 0 3 13 18 3 0 1 0 0 44 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Primary Service: Counseling 17 21 16 8 18 20 18 16 6 10 6 0 156 Primary Service: Event Information 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Primary Service: Investigation Activity 7 27 39 33 35 12 22 18 23 14 4 0 234 Primary Service: Information 144 84 87 87 128 206 227 238 292 404 265 0 2162 Primary Service: Mediation Related Services 0 0 0 5 4 0 11 8 6 10 24 0 68 Primary Service: Outreach Coordination 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 Primary Service: Public Hearing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Primary Service: Volunteer Coordination 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Primary Service: Helpline - COVID Response 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Administrative and Reporting: • 2020 Departmental Scorecard update completed o Link to Scorecard: Human Rights (clearpointstrategy.com) o Data for individual service satisfaction surveys from 2019 and 2020 entered. o Need to create and distribute collaborative partner satisfaction surveys  This may be something we have to develop in early 2022 • 2020 Annual Report in progress o Will use Departmental Scorecard as basis for the annual report o No requests from Council yet for annual or quarterly reports o No progress made on the report this month, as intake and service provision continue to dominate staff time • Amendments to Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance for FHAP substantial equivalence in progress o Draft amendments completed and under review by Deputy City Manger for REDI and City Attorney’s Office  Meeting with both set for 12/15/21 (will occur after report creation but prior to the 12/16/21 HRC meeting – OHR staff will provide update) • No new work on FEPA agreement, as FHAP process take precedence o Recall that the FHAP agreement provides substantial opportunities and resources to expand and improve the OHR, whereas the FEPA really only just increases workload with insufficient support to increase staffing or training Complaints pending authorization for further action: • Case 2021-10 o Employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, and sex  Awaiting guidance regarding jurisdiction • Case 2021-11 o Housing discrimination on the basis of disability  Awaiting response from Complainant regarding incomplete complaint Active Fact-finding Inquiries: • None. Active Investigations: • Case 2020-2 o Housing discrimination on the basis of race  Investigative Report submitted 9/2/2021  Inconclusive determination presented to Complainant on 12/1/2021  Awaiting response from Complainant regarding potential mediation • Case 2021-4 o Employment discrimination on the basis of sex  Investigation authorized 05-03-2021  Investigation in progress • Case 2021-5 o Employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and race  Mediation at impasse  Formal investigation in progress Active Mediation: • Case 2021-2 o Employment discrimination on the basis of race  Mediation in progress Closed Cases: • Case 2021-1 o Housing discrimination on the basis of source of funds  Complaint non-jurisdictional due to Respondent exemption under state law • Case 2021-3 o Public Accommodation discrimination on the basis of sex and disability  Settlement reached through mediation • Case 2021-6 o Housing discrimination on the basis of race  Informal conciliation reached • Case 2021-7 o Employment discrimination on the basis of race  Settlement reached through mediation • Case 2021-8 o Credit discrimination on the basis of color, national origin, race, and sex  Complaint was non-jurisdictional because respondent was operating from out of state • Case 2021-9 o Housing discrimination on the basis of disability  Complainant chose to drop the complaint after finding adequate resolution Outreach: • Service Provision o Most outreach on hold given staff capacity to address the overwhelming volume of active and incoming inquiries o Midway Manor  On 11/23/21, OHR sent letter to W.H.H. Trice outlining resident concerns and requesting a meeting with corporate representatives. • Education & Awareness o On hold due to staff capacity • Facilitation & Leadership o Outdoor Equity  OHR Interns continue work on building Racial and Ethnic history presentation as relates to outdoor spaces o Public Housing Association of Residents – Residents for Respectful Research (RRR)  MOU with UVA IRB signed  PHAR preparing to hire first Resident Reviewers • 6 applicants for 3 positions  PHAR conducting information sessions in public housing communities about R3 o Affordable Housing  Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) preparing submission of Virginia Eviction Reduction Program (VERP) implementation grant  Piedmont Housing Alliance has opened the Financial Opportunity Center and Housing Hub • OHR staff engaged to provide input regarding barriers to affordable housing and perspective on housing navigation • The FOC & Housing Hub may serve as the future home of the affordable housing database developed by Code of Charlottesville in partnership with PACEM and the OHR o Stakeholder meeting held on 11/4 to discuss potential data sharing across affordable housing navigation databases  UVA Equity Center Virginia Housing Justice Atlas Advisory Group • Multi-partner group working in collaboration with RVA Eviction Lab to collect data on evictions • May be a good source of information for future advocacy regarding right to counsel o CRHA Resident Services Committee – Neighborhood Crisis Intervention sub committee  Continued monthly and sometimes bi-monthly meetings to develop a potential alternative, peer-supported crisis intervention system that can supplement and support clinical services and can intervene in lieu of ECO/TDO system Attachment 5 Resolution to Establish a Citywide Language Access Plan CHARLOTTESVILLE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION RESOLUTION #: HR21-1 WHEREAS, the role of the Charlottesville Human Rights Commission, hereinafter “the Commission,” is to act as a strong advocate for justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance identifies race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, status as a veteran, and disability as protected classes; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council’s “Welcoming City Proclamation” states that advancing equity and inclusion is critical to the success of our community and our nation, that we must strongly reaffirm our commitment to diversity and to fostering an atmosphere of inclusion, and that we believe the public sector has a critical role in ensuring the public good and pledge to continue our working in making our services and programs accessible to all (“Welcoming City” Proclamation on October 5, 2015); and WHEREAS, the “Welcoming City Update Resolution” on April 17, 2017, tasked the Office of Human Rights to work with appropriate partners in our government and our community to ensure vulnerable populations have access to information about their rights and underlying resources (Welcoming City Update Resolution on April 17, 2017); and WHEREAS, an estimated 15.7% of Charlottesville’s population speaks a language other than English at home (Characteristics of People by Language Spoken at Home, ACS 5-year estimates3); and WHEREAS, a City Language Access Plan will enable Limited English Proficient (LEP) individuals within Charlottesville to more efficiently engage with local government services, show the City’s commitment to effectively communicate with all members of the public, serve as a citywide policy on how staff will meet the commitment to providing “meaningful access” to individuals who speak a primary language other than English, and further support Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 legal requirements for any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance; and WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville is committed to providing electronic communication that is accessible to the widest possible audience, regardless of technology or ability (Website Accessibility Statement5); and WHEREAS, while some City departments6 have Language Access Plans, there is no citywide policy guiding the City to ensure access to City resources and services for LEP residents; BE IT RESOLVED that the Commission hereby recommends that the City of Charlottesville develop and implement a city-wide Language Access Plan as well as an action- oriented implementation plan, above and beyond minimum requirements, to guide the City to establish policies and procedures to ensure access to City resources and services for LEP residents and to support the right of all residents to communicate with the City in the language of preference. Dated this ___________ of ________________, 2021. ___________________________________________ Mary Bauer, Chair, Human Rights Commission