Human Rights Commission Regular Meeting August 18, 2022 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:30pm Agenda Packet Attachments 1. Agenda 2. 06/08/2022 DRAFT HRC Community Engagement Committee Meeting Minutes 3. 06/16/2022 DRAFT HRC Regular Meeting Minutes 4. 06/28/2022 DRAFT HRC Housing Committee Meeting Minutes 5. 07/12/2022 DRAFT HRC Equity in City Government Committee Meeting Minutes 6. 07/14/2022 DRAFT HRC Community Engagement Committee Meeting Minutes 7. CY2021 HRC & OHR Annual Report, Council Memo, and Attachments 8. DRAFT Resolution A22-1: Human Rights Commission Community Engagement 9. DRAFT Community Engagement Vision Flyer 10. DRAFT City Council Recommendation – Language Access Plan Attachment 1 Human Rights Commission AGENDA Regular Meeting August 18, 2022 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 presented 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 or that pertain to topics outside the scope of this Agenda. This will be a virtual/electronic meeting open to the public and registration information is available at www.charlottesville.gov/zoom. The Commission welcomes comments and questions and commits to listening carefully and thoughtfully to what is presented. A maximum of sixteen public comment time slots are allotted per meeting. Each speaker will have three minutes to speak. The Commission requests that members of the public refrain from engaging in personal attacks against Commissioners and staff members and asks that comments and questions focus on matters related to human rights within the City. 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. 06/08/2022 DRAFT HRC Community Engagement Committee Meeting Minutes b. 06/16/2022 DRAFT HRC Regular Meeting Minutes c. 06/28/2022 DRAFT HRC Housing Committee Meeting Minutes d. 07/12/2022 DRAFT HRC Equity in City Government Committee Meeting Minutes e. 07/14/2022 DRAFT HRC Community Engagement Committee Meeting Minutes 4. BUSINESS MATTERS a. CHAIR UPDATE b. OHR STAFF REPORT 5. WORK SESSION a. AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES b. Resolution A22-1 Human Rights Commission Community Engagement & Vision Flyer c. Language Access Plan Council Recommendation Letter d. Recommendations to City Council for Legislative Agenda 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 Community Engagement Committee June 8, 2022 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:00 pm Click HERE to access rebroadcasts of past Human Rights Commission meetings on YouTube. Click HERE to access an archive of past Human Rights Commission work on the City website. 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Chair, Jessica Harris, called the meeting to order at 6:08 pm b. ROLL CALL i. Wolfgang Keppley ii. Lyndele Von Schill iii. Jeanette Abi-Nader iv. Jessica Harris 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. None 3. MINUTES a. None 4. WORK SESSION a. Discussion of steps moving forward for Community Engagement Committee i. Commissioner asks what distinguishes the Community Engagement Committee from other committees 1. Commissioners review the 2022 HRC Annual Retreat Focus Summary 2. Jeanette volunteers to draft a values or purpose statement for each of the committees ii. Committee Chair talks about committing to certain events or number of events for the HRC to commit to during the year, having a list of other bodies in Charlottesville to reach out to about outreach, and hosting more in-person events 1. Commissioner suggests making in-person events more accessible by having virtual options a. Another Commissioner says that having in-person events can also be more accessible iii. OHR Director says that OHR Outreach Specialist is finishing up OHR brochures and is open to final feedback from Commissioners during the coming week iv. Commissioner asks if events must always be on city-sanctioned platforms (as opposed to personal social media livestreams, etc.) 1. Another Commissioner points out the potential issue of personal social media accounts being subject to FOIA, so HRC or City- specific accounts would be helpful 2. Could ask members of the public who cannot attend the live meetings to submit questions beforehand via a poll a. Question of how to distribute answers after the meeting 3. Commissioner points out that some of these in-person HRC events would be very informal with no actual HRC business being conducted a. Not a meeting so much as a couple of Commissioners tabling, chatting, and handing out flyers, which would not require a livestream (could also do this same thing with open Zoom rooms) 4. HRC Director says a virtual meeting like this would be similar to a town hall, which would be fairly easy to set up with a webinar a. Could still display or send out flyers in a virtual format b. A town hall format, but differs in that there will not be an agenda 5. Commissioner suggests using the virtual platform to invite members of community organizations to talk to each other v. Could do 4 virtual meetings and 4 in-person Downtown Mall tabling events 1. Jeanette and Wolfgang are interested in in-person meetings; Lyndele is interested in virtual meetings 2. Should try to stick to 2 Commissioners for events to be safe, but it is legally acceptable for there to be more so long as no official HRC business is discussed vi. Can email OHR Outreach Specialist to discuss holding up to 4 in-person tabling events, either just the Commission or joining a different event that Outreach Specialist was already planning on attending 1. Lyndele can email OHR Outreach Specialist b. Committee Chair suggests deciding upon which in-person events to hold with the OHR i. OHR Director says there are some big events coming up, such as Westhaven Day on August 6, Region 10 Tonsler Park event in September, Cville Sabroso at IX, etc. 1. These are big events that would draw many people, but there are also smaller-scale events in public/subsidized housing communities OHR Outreach Specialist is planning with Region 10 2. Commission can also just set up on the Downtown Mall without other organizations ii. Commissioner suggests doing at least 2 in-person events with the OHR and 2 events with just the HRC c. Committee Chair asks how best to engage with community members in a virtual format i. Commissioner suggests not providing rigid structure, and more just providing a space for community members to engage with each other 1. Can work with the Housing committee or other committees to provide a little bit of guidance ii. Commissioner asks if town hall-style events are not really the focus of the Housing Equity committee 1. Commissioner expresses interest in providing a forum for service providers and those who use those services to talk about what is working, what is not working, and why 2. Another Commissioner asks if playing this role within the community is perhaps not the Commission’s place, and the HRC’s main role is to be a conduit between the community and Council, not the community and other organizations a. Another Commissioner responds that the HRC is like a closer link to the community of Charlottesville that the rest of the city government often cannot or does not be 3. OHR Director suggests having a town hall-style format and inviting leaders of community organizations as panelists to whom community members can ask questions a. It is helpful to narrow down topics of discussion during the town halls 4. Commissioner says that before advising Council, it is necessary to actually know all of the thoughts of the community, and town halls in the format as previously discussed can help give the HRC this feedback iii. Committee Chair suggests tabling this discussion about exact logistics and focus until the other committees get a chance to meet and decide upon next steps 1. The Community Engagement committee is willing to hold 4 in- person events (2 on its own and 2 with the OHR) and 4 virtual events in order to engage the community and put in contact other community members to discuss relevant concerns 2. Will relay these decisions to the rest of the Commission as well as ask for volunteers for this event d. Committee Chair Jessica passes on Chair title to Lyndele, who will now be running Community Engagement Committee meetings i. New Chair will work with OHR Director on the next committee meeting’s agenda e. Next week’s regular meeting will still occur virtually i. All HRC meetings will be online at least through September f. OHR Director suggests picking a date for the next Community Engagement Committee meeting i. Thursday 7/14/22 at 11am ii. OHR Director will book this time for one hour 5. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. None 6. NEXT STEPS a. Jeanette i. Draft a purpose statement for each of the HRC committees b. Lyndele i. Correspond with Victoria about holding at least 2 in-person events with the OHR ii. Work with OHR Director on next committee meeting’s agenda c. Todd i. Book webinar for next Community Engagement Committee meeting for 7/14/22 at 11am 7. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 7:06pm Attachment 3 Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting June 16, 2022 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:30 pm Click HERE to access rebroadcasts of past Human Rights Commission meetings on YouTube. Click HERE to access an archive of past Human Rights Commission work on the City website. 1) WELCOME a) CALL TO ORDER i) Chair, Jessica Harris, called the meeting to order at 6:50 pm b) ROLL CALL i) Jessica Harris ii) Ernest Chambers iii) Jeanette Abi-Nader iv) Mary Bauer v) Wolfgang Keppley vi) Kathryn Laughon vii) Lyndele Von Schill (arrived 7:03 pm) 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) Molly Conger (1) Asks about the IT Analyst in charge of public safety software with the Charlottesville Fire Dept. who participated in the Jan. 6 insurrection (2) The City declined to take action against him, but Molly has since uncovered videos of him partaking in events at the Capitol which fall into more than an exercise of free speech (3) Expresses concerns with analyst’s behavior and affiliations based upon his ability to prevent dispatch b) COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i) Mary (1) Interested in the specifics of his actions besides being present at the insurrection (2) Chair asks Molly to email the Commission with more information at the end of this meeting ii) Ernest (1) Expresses hope that the City will take the right course of action 3) MINUTES a) Review of minutes from 5/19/2022 i) Motion to approve: Ernest ii) Second: Mary iii) Vote (1) In favor: 5 (2) Opposed: 0 (3) Abstained: 1 4) BUSINESS MATTERS a) OHR Staff reports i) OHR Director (1) Report is attached (2) Some cases have become more complicated since posting the report (a) Mediation is challenging when a complainant does not have legal representation, but a respondent does (b) It has been difficult to find pro bono legal representation (c) OHR Director recommends thinking about how to make mediation more accessible for individuals (3) Still working on 2021 Report, Department Scorecard, and amendments to the Ordinance (a) Goal to finish by the end of June (4) Commissioner asks about current trends in types of cases coming through the Office and if the prevalence of cases about emergency housing has continued (a) Not as many emergency housing discrimination cases, just housing discrimination housing cases in general (b) Many inquiries about finding emergency housing from individuals having trouble finding stable housing, especially individuals with mental health challenges or substance use disorder challenges (c) Current lack of mental health/substance use care in the community coupled with a shortage of housing for homeless individuals (5) Commissioner asks if now is a good time to begin putting together a budget plan to address these types of issues so that it is ready by October when departments begin putting forth their budgets (a) OHR Director says there is a draft resolution that provides a skeleton program, though it is unclear whether it is for the OHR or Council-managed budget (b) City Attorney’s office said there is a possibility of starting a 501(c)(3) to create a fund (c) Director is open to ideas, and his preliminary thoughts are in the draft resolution (d) Commissioner asks if including it in the OHR budget could be a more direct way to ask Council (i) It is often difficult to change the budget, but OHR Director can look into this (6) Commissioner asks about numbers this month compared to last month (a) Not all June data is entered so far, but possibly 14 incoming contacts per day, whereas April had an average of 10 per day (b) Means the OHR cannot provide as quality service as is ideal ii) HRC Outreach Specialist update (1) Spent the last month maintaining ties with other similar community agencies (a) One-on-one or informational meetings (2) Outreach materials discussed last meeting are in the finalization process, and will be completed soon (a) Working on getting them more accessible, such as larger font and braille (3) Working with Communications to get short descriptions/videos on protected activities for the Human Rights Ordinance (a) Project with an OHR intern (b) 6 short pieces on what a protected activity is and how the Ordinance can provide help (c) Getting finalized toward the end of July b) Chair update i) Proposes not having a July meeting to provide rest and connect one on one and/or host committee meetings that did not take place last month (1) Council has canceled one or two meetings in July (2) Commissioners express general support for having committee meetings but not the regular meeting ii) Ernest makes a motion to not hold a regular meeting for the month of July (1) Second: Wolfgang (2) Vote (a) In favor: 7 (b) Opposed: 0 (c) Abstained: 0 iii) Chair will reach out individually to Commissioner to schedule potential one-on-one meetups, either virtually or in person 5) WORK SESSION a) Committee Reports i) Community Engagement Committee (Committee Chair reporting: Lyndele) (1) Met last week to discuss future goals and actions of the Community Engagement committee (2) Decided to hold sessions for the remainder of the year (a) 2 in-person sessions at the same time the OHR is tabling at certain events (i) Can pick from Westhaven Day 8/6/22, CRANU (time TBA), and Pride Festival 9/18/22 (ii) Less structured with people casually walking up to the table (b) 2 virtual meetings (i) Lyndele volunteers to be present at all of these (ii) More structured with general topics of discussion, though still flexible (3) Commissioner adds Community Engagement committee wants to hold space for other committees’ plans since they have not met yet (4) Jeanette is putting together a mission statement for the committees (5) Lyndele is the new Chair of this committee b) Resolution HR21-1 (Language Access Plan) i) Commission has already voted upon it ii) Commissioner asks previous HRC Chair Mary if she has signed the resolution and written a letter to City Council to attach to resolution iii) Can add to Housing committee agenda c) Scheduling future committee meetings i) Could create a standing meeting time to more easily coordinate in the future (1) Will do this during the August regular meeting ii) Housing committee: 6/21/22 at 6:30pm (1) Attendees: Mary, Wolfgang iii) Equity in City Government Review committee: 7/12/22 at 1pm (1) Attendees: Kathryn, Ernest iv) OHR Director will confirm times via email to the entire Commission v) OHR capacity expansion does not need its own committee, and can take more individual work with OHR Director (1) Will be more important during budget season (2) Director will have CY21 Report by the end of June and get HUD responses to finalize the Ordinance and CY21 Report to present to Commission in August; can then get work session with Council in late August then present to Council in September (just before the beginning of October budget season) (3) Commission should be prepared to look at the Ordinance during the August meeting 6) MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a) PUBLIC COMMENT i) None b) COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i) Commissioner follows up on Commissioners’ earlier comments (1) Asks other Commissioners if they want to pursue more information (2) Commissioner supports writing a letter to Council expressing concerns ii) Molly responds (1) Lloyd Snook privately shared with Molly’s acquaintance that he has no power to do anything about the situation (2) Believes it is within the Commission’s purview to make a statement to the City expressing concerns with a public safety professional participating publicly with internationally-recognized terrorist groups (a) The Proud Boys have been designated an international terrorist organization by Canada (3) The public safety professional has publicly sympathized with, appeared with, and otherwise supported the Proud Boys (4) Expresses dissatisfaction with the Mayor’s stance that he cannot do anything about it iii) Commissioner expresses hope that the City will take the right course of action iv) Commissioners express it is important to learn as much about the situation as possible before taking strong action (1) Police Department does have a Code of Conduct that applies to police officers when they are on and off duty; it is unknown if the Cire Department or City has such a Code of Conduct, but Commission could use CPD’s Code of Conduct as a reference or starting point v) Commissioner would like the City to conduct a full investigation into the matter (1) Says that participation in the armed insurrection is different than a simple difference in opinion vi) Commissioner recommends reading Ms. Conger’s Twitter feed to stay up to date on the matter (1) Expresses that the Mayor’s stance may have been taken before more information was available vii) Vice-Chair asks what course of action the Commission should take viii) Commissioner believes the HRC should find as much information as possible and issue a statement expressing concern and encouraging the City to take action (1) Question of whether this public safety individual can uphold the safety of Charlottesville citizens ix) HRC Director offers looking into the existence of a citywide Code of Conduct x) Chair and Wolfgang will work on drafting a letter to send to Council (1) Letter will be circulated through the Commission for feedback after its creation 7) COMMISSIONER UPDATES a) OHR Director i) Pending resolutions email: take a look at this email to decide which actions to take going forward ii) Will finalize during the Housing committee meeting iii) Once resolution is signed, Commission can write a letter to Council emphasizing the resolution’s importance (1) Will also add to agenda for Housing committee meeting 8) NEXT STEPS a) Jessica i) Work on draft of letter to Council regarding public safety individual b) Wolfgang i) Work on draft of letter to Council regarding public safety individual c) Todd i) Look into citywide Code of Conduct ii) Complete CY21 Report and continue steps of amending the Ordinance d) Committee meetings: i) Housing committee: 6/21/22 at 6:30pm ii) Equity in City Government Review committee: 7/12/22 at 1pm 9) ADJOURN a) Meeting adjourned at 7:41 pm Attachment 4 Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Housing Equity Committee June 28, 2022 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:30 pm Click HERE to access rebroadcasts of past Human Rights Commission meetings on YouTube. Click HERE to access an archive of past Human Rights Commission work on the City website. 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Committee Chair, Wolfgang Keppley, called the meeting to order at 6:42 pm b. ROLL CALL i. Wolfgang Keppley ii. Mary Bauer 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. Emergency housing and service provider referrals i. Commissioner raises possibility of research project looking at success for those seeking emergency housing while struggling with mental health/substance abuse 1. HRC has worked with Code for Charlottesville in the past, which created the Charlottesville Housing Hub, allowing housing agencies to share resources with one another a. Commission might be able to do something similar 2. Potential HIPAA issue of sharing mental health resources 3. Commissioner asks Todd about potential of getting in contact with Code for Charlottesville ii. OHR Director defines wraparound services (mental health/substance use disorder/etc. supports) and says that examining this continuum of care system would be a good idea 1. Asks Commissioner to elaborate on their ideas about the Code for Charlottesville system iii. Commissioner suggests different ideas for addressing housing equity in Charlottesville: 1. Identifying service providers involved in continuum of care and provide wraparound services a. Community outreach; qualitative approach asking service providers about gaps in the system 2. Creating a diagram of where people are often referred to and a flow chart detailing the process 3. Asking Code for Cville to work with the HRC to create a platform for service providers to communicate with each other iv. Commissioner suggests the Commission look at the broader system of care to find causes of gaps in the system 1. OHR Director agrees that getting background information is important v. OHR Director summarizes similar work already done in this area: 1. Ashley Reynolds-Marshall has in the past held three large meetings with TJACH and 40+ service providers creating a list of priorities a. First two called “Rumbles”; last was a summit b. In a previous meeting’s agenda packet 2. Thomas Jefferson Area Coalition for the Homeless (TJACH) led by Anthony Haro has an assessment of the system of care that is a few years old a. Currently in a strategic planning process b. Would be a good idea to invite Anthony Haro and others in the continuum of care system to talk about their plans c. Anthony Haro delivered a presentation to Council recently that is likely available online 3. Homelessness Management Information System (HMIS) managed by TJACH already exists as a system for care providers to communicate a. Currently has ~25 partners, but not all wraparound services are on it 4. Director suggests Commission spend time with providers like TJACH, look at notes from the summit, look at notes from the two meetings TJACH held with people experiencing homelessness, and examine any past TJACH studies to get a better idea of the current situation and circulating ideas a. Could also invite other agency leaders providing wraparound services vi. Commissioner says filling gap of communication may not be needed at this moment, but the Commission could likely help in different ways vii. Commissioners recognize that this is not their area of expertise, so accessing these resources would be helpful 1. TJACH listening sessions were probably not recorded to maintain privacy, but the takeaway notes should be available 2. OHR Director can send the notes from both listening sessions, which are attached in the 5/19/2022 regular meeting agenda 3. OHR Director has a diagram not for public consumption for what he identifies as holes in the system a. Will check with Deputy City Manager to see if this diagram can be more widely shared viii. Commissioner asks OHR Director for any significant priorities decided upon at the Rumbles or summit 1. Director reads priorities from summit notes: a. Need for year-round emergency shelter (some specialized to address specific physical/mental health needs) b. Wraparound services, including transportation, should be bolstered for the population c. Operational needs, like capacity of service providers d. Need for planning and coordination e. Funding 2. These themes are fairly common across conversations with other service providers ix. Commissioner raises what the Commission can do to be helpful and effective without inserting itself into these issues having not had previous knowledge or experience 1. Goal is to support service providers’ work 5. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. Anna Mendez 1. Executive Director of Partner for Mental Health 2. Works closely with the OHR 3. Addresses Commissioner’s concern about the HRC’s place in the conversation and agrees with OHR Director’s comments and suggestions 4. Says that the Commission could possibly help with an analysis of barriers or social factors preventing individuals from accessing housing a. Understanding commonalities between people barred from housing will help providers recognize the cracks in the system ii. Commissioner asks Anna about how people get barred 1. PMH does not turn anyone away 2. Every service provider has their own rules regarding which people they bar and what process their clients must go through 3. PMH has had four clients barred from emergency shelter because they were deemed by service providers as “unsafe” a. PMH was able to find these individuals long-term room at affordable suites b. Indicative of a pattern that some people who could be served under the current system are being barred iii. Commissioner recognizes it would be difficult to obtain information about individuals, though it is probably possible to obtain information from each service provider on the nature and consequences of their requirements for service provision 1. Anna says individual information is supposed to reside in the HMIS 2.Not all individuals’ profiles are complete/comprehensive 3.OHR does not currently have access to HMIS, though the OHR could possibly request a report from TJACH on individuals who have been barred a. Information can be de-identified before being released to the OHR b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. Chair brings up other topics to be addressed by the committee: 1. Housing Opportunities Made Equal (HOME) testing a. Some other Virginian HRCs had conducted testing with HOME; could look into this for Charlottesville to look at landlords b. OHR Director says the Commission could invite Directors from the Northern VA HRCs who have done HOME testing to a Charlottesville HRC meeting i. They have not done testing in-house because it requires many people ii. They have only been doing testing by phone since the pandemic c. Commissioner says it may still be worthwhile to get in contact with a NoVA OHR to have the option in the future and ask about how they conduct their testing d. Another Commissioner supports looking for more information about HOME testing e. OHR Outreach Specialist has asked briefly about HOME testing, but nothing in depth f. Could reach out to the Offices of Human Rights in Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax, and Prince William to see how any of those Offices with enforcement power are testing i. VA Beach/Newport News Offices have staff liaisons instead of Directors g. Current questions: i. When do these Commissions believe they will be able to return to non-phone testing? ii. What is the cost, timeline, and recommended scale of testing given the Charlottesville OHR’s size? iii. Do they do anything with testing landlord responsiveness during a lease instead of the initial extension of a lease? 1. Maybe not necessarily a home tester, but perhaps they have a way to measure systemic discrimination h. OHR staff can reach out to other OHRs with these questions ii. Wolfgang and Mary will look through the information that is publicly available about the TJACH report and Anthony Haro’s Council presentation iii. Chair asks for other ideas for action items 1. Could reach out to Anthony Haro to ask about what the HRC can do to support housing equity in the city a. Can talk to HRC Chair about having the full Commission meet with Anthony Haro for August regular meeting b. OHR Director says FHAP amendments may take up the entire August meeting, so this communication could possibly start with asking Anthony in what capacity he would like to meet c. Committee Chair will reach out to Anthony Haro and keep other committee members and Director informed 6. NEXT STEPS a. Wolfgang i. Look through previous information regarding housing inequity and barriers to housing in Charlottesville (notes from Rumbles, notes from summit, TJACH report and other studies, Anthony Haro’s presentation to Council) ii. Reach out to Anthony Haro about setting up a meeting with Commissioners regarding housing equity and the Commission’s place in ameliorating the system b. Mary i. Look through previous information regarding housing inequity and barriers to housing in Charlottesville (notes from Rumbles, notes from summit, TJACH report and other studies, Anthony Haro’s presentation to Council) c. Todd i. Reach out to other Virginian OHRs with questions about HOME testing: 1. When do these Commissions believe they will be able to return to non-phone testing? 2. What is the cost, timeline, and recommended scale of testing given the Charlottesville OHR’s size? 3. Do they do anything with testing landlord responsiveness during a lease instead of the initial extension of a lease? a. Maybe not necessarily a home tester, but perhaps they have a way to measure systemic discrimination ii. Ask Ashley about sharing of service provider/systemic gaps diagram 7. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 7:31 pm Attachment 5 Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Equity in City Government Committee Meeting July 12, 2022 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 1:00 pm Click HERE to access rebroadcasts of past Human Rights Commission meetings on YouTube. Click HERE to access an archive of past Human Rights Commission work on the City website. 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Chair, Kathryn Laughon, called the meeting to order at 1:07 pm b. ROLL CALL i. Kathryn Laughon ii. Ernest Chambers 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. Lakeshia Washington 1. A new member of Habitat for Humanity 2. Interested in learning more about City committees and this committee b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. Commissioner says this Equity committee is new, and the Housing committee has also been active, which may be a good resource for Ms. Washington’s work ii. Another Commissioner adds that this committee addresses how to tackle equity in the City of Charlottesville 1. Goal is to think about how the City can use equity principles and how the HRC can encourage the City to do so 2. Ex. City schools’ lack of bus transportation is dangerous given the lack of infrastructure, so a group is encouraging the City to give an emergency allocation of $1 million that will likely improve equity overall 3. MINUTES a. None 4. WORK SESSION a. Commissioners decide to end the meeting due to a lack of agenda and membership 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. None 8. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 1:13 pm Attachment 6 Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Community Engagement Committee Meeting July 14, 2022 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 11:00 am Click HERE to access rebroadcasts of past Human Rights Commission meetings on YouTube. Click HERE to access an archive of past Human Rights Commission work on the City website. 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Committee Chair, Lyndele Von Schill, called the meeting to order at 11:03 am b. ROLL CALL i. Lyndele Von Schill ii. Andy Orban iii. Jeanette Abi-Nader (joined 11:06am) 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. 6/8/22 Community Engagement Committee minutes will be available for approval at the next committee or regular meeting 4. WORK SESSION a. Community Engagement Committee Values Statement Discussion i. Committee would like to create a statement for itself that guides its work ii. Commissioners generally agree that Jeanette's draft well encapsulates the committee’s mission and scope iii. Commissioners ask OHR Director how to formalize the statement 1. OHR Director replies that if Commissioners are using the document as a general guiding statement, no action needs to be taken 2. Could also codify the statement in a resolution with the full Commission a. Could be short and easy to connect with the Ordinance 3. Commissioner suggests showing the statement to the full Commission so that it is at least available in the notes iv. Commissioner favors formalizing the statement in a resolution so that it is also available to the public 1. Lyndele volunteers to put the statement into a resolution to present at the next HRC regular meeting a. It is already in a plain-language version b. OHR Director will send over the resolution materials during this meeting b. New business i. Clarifying event calendar 1. OHR Outreach Specialist is currently putting together an event calendar which has been sent out to the committee a. Every Wednesday, OHR Outreach Specialist has been attending events at OAR due to a recent mass release of people b. Adds new events as they pop up 2. OHR Specialist had already sent out a short list of potential events to attend a. Commissioner would like to create a document with a list of events and when Commissioners would be available to table b. OHR Outreach Specialist would be already present at these events 3. Commissioner suggests either sharing the entire list with the full Commission or committing to two events (Westhaven and Pride Festival) for which Commissioners can sign up for time slots a. Jeanette says she can do partial days for Westhaven and Pride Festival 4. Committee Chair will take the events form OHR Outreach Specialist’s list and put them into an Excel spreadsheet with time slots to share with the full Commission a. These events will be listening sessions, and Commissioners can sign up for any time slot b. Use Office 365 software to make FOIA requests easier c. Commissioner uses hrcommission@charlottesville.gov to share spreadsheet with Commissioners ii. Commissioner asks if there has been discussion surrounding social media accounts 1. OHR Director says that social media accounts run by City governments are very difficult from a FOIA perspective a. There is a Dialogue on Race Twitter account and a HRC Twitter account that were created around 2013 i. Neither have been updated since around then but are still subject to FOIA ii. OHR Director is currently working with IT and Communications to download all of the content from these accounts then delete the accounts 2. Director suggests that, rather than managing additional social media accounts, Commission should work with Communications and their existing reach to share events with the community a. They have Twitter, Facebook, email lists, the City website, and many other forms of media 3. Commissioner asks if HRC public meeting business can be posted on Commissioners’ personal social media accounts a. This is allowed, and Commissioners can share links, as well b. Just be aware that it is all subject to FOIA 4. Director can share with the Commission a one-pager from the FOIA officer that may be used as a guiding informational document 5. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. None b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. None 6. NEXT STEPS a. Lyndele i. Put Community Engagement Committee Values Statement into a resolution to present at the August regular meeting ii. Make Office 365 spreadsheet of community event time slots for which Commissioners can sign up, and encourage Commissioners to sign up in the next week or two b. Todd i. Share document from FOIA officer with the Commission 7. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 11:27 am Attachment 7 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 7, 2022 Action Required: CY2021 Human Rights Commission & Office of Human Rights Annual Report review and consideration of staffing recommendations. Presenter: Jessica Harris, Chair, Human Rights Commission Todd Niemeier, Director, Human Rights Commission Staff Contacts: Todd Niemeier, Director, Human Rights Commission Title: Human Rights Commission & Office of Human Rights CY2021 Annual Report Background: The Charlottesville Human Rights Commission, in partnership with the Office of Human Rights, acts as a strong advocate for justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance (Chapter 2, Article XV of the Code of the City of Charlottesville), outlines the roles, duties, and responsibilities of the Human Rights Commission (HRC) and the Office of Human Rights (OHR). Per Sec. 2-433. of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, following the passage of the amended Ordinance on February 1, 2021, it is the role of the HRC and OHR to: (a) Assist individuals who believe they are the victim of an act of unlawful discrimination within the City. (b) Collaborate with the public and private sectors for the purpose of providing awareness, education, and guidance on methods to prevent and eliminate discrimination citywide. (c) Identify and review policies and practices of the City of Charlottesville and its boards and commissions and other public agencies within the City and advise those bodies on issues related to human rights issues. (d) Seek work share agreements with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“FEPA”) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD-FHAP”) to conduct investigations of employment and housing discrimination on their behalf, and enter into such agreement(s) subject to approval of City Council upon a finding that the agreement(s) would be in the best interest of the City. (e) Make recommendations regarding the City’s annual legislative program, with an emphasis on enabling legislation that may be needed to implement programs and policies that will address discrimination. (f) Prepare recommendations to policies and procedures the Commission believes are necessary for the performance of the roles, duties and responsibilities assigned to the Commission within this article, and for modifications or operating procedures approved by City Council. As required by Sec. 2-441. of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, the attached report provides an overview of the work of the HRC and OHR during calendar year 2021 as it relates to the roles listed above. Discussion: In previous annual reports, the work of the HRC and OHR has been summarized separately. While reporting in this manner is helpful for distinguishing the specific accomplishments of each body, it makes it more difficult to understand how the work of the HRC and OHR overlap to fulfill the roles set forth in Sec. 2-433. of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. This report provides a summary of the work done to fulfill each role outlined in Sec. 2-433. and highlights both the combined and independent work done by the HRC and OHR. By organizing the report in this fashion, it is easier to see how the actions of both bodies interrelate and tie directly back into City code and City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan. The data and information presented in this report is collected throughout the year through a variety of means. The work completed by the HRC is documented in meeting minutes and recordings, as well as in the written work products of the HRC itself, which include resolutions and letters to Council and other community organizations. Data related to services provided to individuals by the OHR is entered into a Microsoft Excel-based database and is then reported in aggregate. Aggregating service data maintains the confidentiality of individuals seeking support and reveals trends in service provision as it relates to the activities and classes protected by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. Complaints that are approved for further action are recorded in an additional Excel-based database which facilitates tracking cases that remain active for more than one year. Data reflecting community outreach and engagement work done by both the HRC and OHR is also entered into an Excel-based database, allowing for data aggregation and presentation that shows alignment with the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. In 2018, per the initiative encouraged across all City Departments, the OHR created a Department Scorecard. To maximize reporting efficiency and clarity between the Department Scorecard and the Annual Report, the Objectives and Measures in the Department Scorecard have been refined to match the sections in the Annual Report. Some of the charts, graphs, and other visual representations of the data found in the Annual Report were generated using the ClearPoint interface, which is used to create the Department Scorecard. For some datasets, Excel proved more effective than the ClearPoint interface for creating charts and graphs. In those situations, the Excel- based charts and graphs were used in both the Departmental Scorecard and the Annual Report. The HRC and OHR present the CY2021 Annual Report in conjunction with the recommended amendments to the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. The recommended amendments reflect the work of the HRC and OHR to pursue a Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) workshare with the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fair Housing Office per Sec. 2-433. (d) of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. Presenting these two documents simultaneously provides City Council with the information necessary to make strategic decisions about the future organizational structure and mission of the HRC and OHR. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The work done by the HRC and OHR aligns with City Council’s vision of Charlottesville as a “leader in social and economic justice, and healthy race relations” that is “flexible and progressive in anticipating and responding to the needs of our citizens” and is a “united community that treasures diversity.” Adopting the recommendations proposed below helps ensure that Charlottesville moves toward becoming a “Community of Mutual Respect” with a “Smart, Citizen-Focused Government” that supports and protects “Quality Housing Opportunities for All,” as well as “Economic Sustainability.” Community Engagement: The table below shows planned dates, events, and engagement opportunities for the community to review and provide feedback on the CY2021 HRC & OHR Annual Report. Date Event Engagement Opportunity August 18, 2022 HRC Regular Meeting This memo and the annual report will be included in the HRC Regular Meeting agenda packet, which will be publicly posted on the City website. Members of the public are welcome to provide public comment during the meeting. September 16, 2022 HRC Regular Meeting This memo and the annual report, with the addition of any edits or recommendations provided by the HRC, will be included again in the HRC Regular Meeting agenda packet, which will be publicly posted on the City website. Members of the public are welcome to provide public comment during the meeting. October 20, 2022 HRC Regular Meeting If the HRC did not vote to adopt this memo and the annual report for recommendation to Council at a previous meeting, both documents will again be included in the HRC Regular Meeting agenda packet, which will be publicly posted on the City website. Members of the public are welcome to provide public comment during the meeting. Budgetary Impact: Temporary funding for the additional OHR staffing recommended below could potentially come from American Rescue Plan Act funds or through capacity-building funds provided by HUD, if the City is approved for interim certification for the FHAP workshare. Within the City’s current position descriptions, the position most similar to a Human Rights Intake Counselor may be the Senior Social Services Assistant, a Non-Exempt, Technical, Zone 3, Hiring Level II position. The posted hourly wage midpoint for this position is $23.60. At this wage, a civilian position with a defined benefits plan would cost an estimated $75,524.39, per year. This position will also require one-time funding for a laptop computer and computer software. Funding may also potentially be needed for office furniture, if furniture is not provided when the OHR moves locations in the fall of 2022. The additional cost for these items is estimated to be $1,700. Within the City’s current position descriptions, the position most similar to a Human Rights Investigator may be the DSS Senior Benefit Program Specialist and Fraud Investigator, a Non- Exempt, Professional, Zone 2, Hiring Level II position. The posted hourly wage midpoint for this position is $27.90. At this wage, a civilian position with a defined benefits plan would cost an estimated $87,632.24, per year. This position will also require one-time funding for a laptop computer, computer software, and a cell phone. Funding may also potentially be needed for office furniture if furniture is not provided when the OHR moves locations in the fall of 2022. The additional cost for these items is estimated to be $2,300. The current Community Outreach and Administration Specialist in the OHR is also a Non- Exempt, Professional, Zone 2, Hiring Level II position, with the same salary range as the DSS Senior Benefit Program Specialist and Fraud Investigator. The FY22 personnel budget for the OHR was insufficient to offer the individual hired for this position the midpoint wage. Considering class and compensation equity between the Intake and Administrative Specialist, Outreach and Administrative Specialist, and Investigator positions will be an essential step in the process of building this team. Recommendation: To maintain efficient and effective service provision to the community, the HRC and OHR recommend that City Council consider appropriating funding for two additional full-time OHR staff positions, as follows: Human Rights Intake Counselor • The person in this position would be responsible for receiving and screening incoming phone, email, and walk-in contacts. • This individual would be responsible for entering service provision data into the OHR service provision database, and may assist with preparing minutes for publicly noticed meetings of the HRC, and other clerical duties as needed. These duties are currently held by two part-time Interns. • This individual would also assume the daily intake and referral duties. These responsibilities are currently held by the Community Outreach and Administrative Specialist and the Director, in addition to the specific duties required of those positions. • Upon successful interim certification into the FHAP workshare, this individual would also be responsible for entering service provision data into the HUD Enforcement Management System (HEMS). This individual would also submit the required service provision data to the EEOC should the City enter a FEPA workshare. Human Rights Investigator • The person in this position would be responsible for investigating complaints of discrimination and compiling investigative reports. • This individual would assume the investigative duties currently held by the Director, which would allow the Director to assume the duties of authorizing cases for further action and rendering findings, thereby relieving the Deputy City Manager for Racial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion of this responsibility. • It is assumed that, upon successful interim certification into the FHAP workshare, the OHR will see an uptick in the number of housing discrimination cases it receives. Based on the workload during the three-year FHAP interim certification period, the City should evaluate whether a second investigator should be hired prior to entry into a FEPA workshare. Alternatives: Should City Council elect not to fund the additional staffing recommended above, the HRC and OHR do not believe the City can successfully enter into the FHAP or FEPA workshare agreements nor maintain efficient and effective service to the community, thereby impairing the OHR’s ability to uphold City Council’s vision and stated goals. Attachments: CY2021 Human Rights Commission & Office of Human Rights Annual Report. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION & OFFICE OF HUMAN RIGHTS CALENDAR YEAR 2021 ANNUAL REPORT Introduction: The Charlottesville Human Rights Commission, in partnership with the Office of Human Rights, acts as a strong advocate for justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance (Chapter 2, Article XV of the Code of the City of Charlottesville) outlines the roles, duties, and responsibilities of the Human Rights Commission (HRC) and the Office of Human Rights (OHR). Per Sec. 2-433 of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, following the passage of the amended Ordinance on February 1, 2021, it is the role of the HRC and OHR to: a) Assist individuals who believe they are the victim of an act of unlawful discrimination within the City. b) Collaborate with the public and private sectors for the purpose of providing awareness, education, and guidance on methods to prevent and eliminate discrimination citywide. c) Identify and review policies and practices of the City of Charlottesville and its boards and commissions and other public agencies within the City and advise those bodies on issues related to human rights issues. d) Seek work share agreements with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“FEPA”) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD-FHAP”) to conduct investigations of employment and housing discrimination on their behalf, and enter into such agreement(s) subject to approval of City Council upon a finding that the agreement(s) would be in the best interest of the City. e) Make recommendations regarding the City’s annual legislative program, with an emphasis on enabling legislation that may be needed to implement programs and policies that will address discrimination. f) Prepare recommendations to policies and procedures the Commission believes are necessary for the performance of the roles, duties and responsibilities assigned to the Commission within this article, and for modifications or operating procedures approved by City Council. As required by Sec. 2-441 of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, the following report provides an overview of the work of the HRC and OHR during calendar year 2021. Data and information within this report can also be found in the Human Rights Department Scorecard on the City website. 1 Overview: During 2021, the HRC and OHR resumed many activities that had been limited by the COVID- 19 pandemic in 2020. In January 2021, the HRC elected Mary Bauer as Chair and Kathryn Laughon as Vice Chair. Commissioners held their annual retreat on February 27, 2021, during which they identified the following goals and strategies for their work in 2021: 1. Continue advocating for increased accessibility and ADA compliance of all City services. a. Finish the disability/visibility project b. Build back the relationship with the City ADA office c. Reduce barriers for residents to communicate with the City i. Add captions to online and broadcasted City meetings ii. Provide access to documents in multiple languages iii. Improve awareness of in-person ASL interpretation services d. Advocate for continued consideration of accessibility in improved City infrastructure and transportation i. Sidewalks and walkways 1. ADA-compliant sidewalks 2. Seasonal walkway accessibility 3. Accessibility considerations during construction and roadwork changes ii. Improvements to CAT and JAUNT services (reliability, timeliness) 2. Address barriers to housing. a. Strengthen our city’s capacity to support issues of housing by developing pipelines for legal representation during eviction cases b. Amplify the work of housing advocates by putting Commission support behind strategies that will heal legacies of discrimination c. Support tenants by advocating for a policy entitling people in eviction proceedings to legal counsel. i. Gather data of how many evictions proceedings occur in a year and how many tenants lack representation. 1. Track the outcomes of eviction without lawyers 2. Seek partnerships to gather data and advocate to City Council d. Advocate for legal representation also for those who bring complaints to Commission 3. Pursue a Fair Employment Practices Agency (FEPA) workshare agreement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). 4. Pursue a Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) workshare agreement with federal department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This report will examine how the goals and strategies identified by the HRC, and the actions taken by the HRC and OHR in 2021, align with the roles and responsibilities specified in the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. 2 On June 1, 2021, the OHR reopened to walk-in and in-person appointments after being closed since March 16, 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The reopening coincided with Lily Gates and Ginny Helmandollar starting work as volunteer OHR Interns. Throughout the summer of 2021, Lily and Ginny contributed a combined 24 hours per week to the OHR. While they assisted with a variety of tasks, they assumed full responsibility for entering data into the OHR Service Provision database and transcribing minutes for the HRC’s public meetings. Their service to the OHR proved invaluable throughout the summer. In the fall of 2021, Lily and Ginny were able to continue to work for the OHR as paid interns while also attending college. Without their support, keeping the OHR open and functioning would not have been feasible given OHR staffing levels and the volume of incoming contacts during the second half of the year. The following is a list of the main takeaways and trends observed from the work of the HRC and OHR in CY2021. Detailed information regarding this work and other actions can be found in the body of the report. Key Takeaways and Observed Trends • In CY2021, the OHR received 1,962 incoming contacts: more incoming contacts than during any previous year in the OHR’s history. • In CY2021, the OHR received 62 new inquiries and complaints originating in Charlottesville. • Over the past four years, housing was the most often identified protected activity in inquiries and complaints received by the OHR. • Over the past four years, race was the most frequently identified protected class in inquiries and complaints received by the OHR. • Most referrals to other service providers in CY2021 involving a housing concern did not include an allegation of housing discrimination; more frequently, an individual sought assistance with rent or deposit relief, housing navigation, utility relief, or homelessness. • The current staffing and organizational structure of the OHR is not sustainable and results in delayed complaint investigation. OHR staff recommends hiring full-time employees for all components of the complaint and enforcement process. The HRC and OHR are committed to improving accessibility to information about their work. This report has been made accessible for the visually impaired, and it uses plain language as much as possible to ensure its contents are understandable. Alternative text is included for graphs, charts, and some tables that may not be accessible for the visually impaired. Technical terms are defined as they appear in each section of the report. A complete list of technical terms used in this report can be found in the OHR Data Dictionary (Attachment 1). Upon request, the OHR can provide additional information or clarification for graphics that are not accessible. This report complements the Human Rights Department Scorecard, which can be found on the City website via the City Council or Human Rights webpages. Throughout this report there are references to corresponding Objectives and Measures in the Department Scorecard. City 3 Councilors and members of the public are encouraged to contact OHR staff with any questions about the contents of the report or for more information about the services provided by the HRC and OHR. HRC & OHR staff contact: Todd Niemeier, Director, Human Rights Commission Phone: 434-970-3023 Email: humanrights@charlottesville.gov OHR Webpage: www.charlottesville.gov/665/Human-Rights HRC Webpage: www.charlottesville.gov/963/Human-Rights-Commission Human Rights Department Scorecard: https://publish.clearpointstrategy.com/146/humanrights/ 4 Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance Sec. 2-433. (a) (Objective 1 in the Department Scorecard) Sec. 2-433. (a) Assist individuals who believe they are the victim of an act of unlawful discrimination within the City. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Unlawful Discrimination The denial of a person’s opportunity to engage in a daily life activity that is protected by law. HRC Actions Most activities involving individual assistance rest with the OHR under Sec. 2-437. Duties and responsibilities – Investigation of individual complaints and issuance of findings. The HRC has a specific role pertaining to public hearings, as explained in Sec. 2-439.1. Enforcement Authority – The Role of the Commission. In the history of the HRC, only one complaint has required the HRC to hold a public hearing. No cases of discrimination required the HRC to hold a public hearing in CY2021. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Public Hearing A service provided by the Human Rights Commission and coordinated by the Office of Human Rights, as specified by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, involving the recommendation of remedies related to either a determination of probable cause after the formal investigation of a complaint or a review of a determination of no probable cause for which a complainant seeks an appeal. The HRC partnered with the OHR in 2021 to address concerns presented by residents of Midway Manor, a local subsidized housing complex for people of advanced age and people with disabilities. On November 10, 2021, the HRC Chair, representatives of Legal Aid Justice Center, and OHR staff visited Midway Manor to listen to resident concerns about the conditions in their building. The HRC subsequently voted to hold a public panel on public and subsidized housing, which was scheduled for February 22, 2022. The OHR wrote a letter to the property owner summarizing the concerns residents expressed and requesting an in-person meeting with corporate representatives to discuss solutions. The property changed ownership at the end of 2021, so the same letter was sent to the new owners. At the time of the writing of this report in 2022, some of the concerns in the letter have been addressed by management, while others, including the requested meeting between tenants and corporate representatives, have not. The OHR continues to stay in touch with residents at Midway Manor and is working with other community partners to help amplify their concerns to property management. 5 The HRC’s use of community-based dialogue outside of regular HRC meetings as a method to address concerns aligns with both Sec. 2-433. (a) and Sec. 2-434., as well as the HRC’s own strategic goal of addressing barriers to housing (Goal 2). This is a new use of the HRC’s authority and could prove to be an effective tool for assisting residents who may not be able to easily or effectively present their concerns to those with the power to affect change. OHR Actions Individual service provision remains the primary function of the OHR. After reopening the OHR for in-person appointments, there was a dramatic increase in the number of daily contacts by people seeking assistance. The data below is an overview of types of services provided to individuals. The OHR CY2021 Individual Service Data table (Attachment 2) provides detailed individual service data by month. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Contact Any communication with an individual seeking services from the Office of Human Rights, including walk-ins, appointments, phone calls, text messages, and emails. Incoming contacts are initiated by individuals seeking assistance from the Office of Human Rights, while outgoing contacts are initiated by Office of Human Rights staff. Complaint An incoming contact in which an individual wishes to pursue action regarding an allegation of discrimination that falls within the jurisdiction of the Office of Human Rights, as defined by the Human Rights Ordinance. Client Follow-up An incoming contact from an individual who has an open inquiry or complaint. General Contact An incoming contact that involves outreach coordination, event planning, volunteer coordination, or general information. Inquiry An incoming contact involving services provided to an individual by the Office of Human Rights and/or an individual allegation of discrimination that falls outside the jurisdiction of the office, as defined by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. Staff Follow-up An outgoing contact in which staff communicates with an individual who has previously contacted the Office. Third-Party Incoming An incoming contact with a person other than the individual Contact directly involved with an inquiry or complaint being discussed. Third-Party Outgoing An outgoing contact with a person other than the individual Contact directly involved with an inquiry or complaint being discussed. The person directly involved must give verbal or written consent for staff to initiate a third-party outgoing contact. 6 Total Incoming Contacts (Objective 1, Measure 1 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends In CY2021, the OHR received 1,962 incoming contacts: more incoming contacts than during any previous year in the OHR’s history. From January through May, the office received an average of 4 incoming contacts per day. From June through December when the Office resumed in-person activities, the office received an average of 11 incoming contacts per day. The Office received an average of 8 incoming contacts per day for the full year. During CY2021, the OHR received the following incoming contacts: Contact Type Total Number New Complaints 12 New Inquiries 92 Client Follow-ups 1,103 General Contacts 84 Third Party Incoming 671 Total Incoming Contacts 1,962 The bar chart below shows the CY2021 contact data in relation to that of previous years. Data prior to CY2018 was reanalyzed and redistributed into the contact categories listed above for ease of comparison. The data pertaining to CY2014 complaints was reviewed by jurisdiction, and contacts listed as complaints that fell outside the jurisdiction of the OHR were reclassified as inquiries. 7 Because the number of client follow-ups and general contacts is much higher than the number of inquiries and complaints received each year, inquiry and complaint values for some years are too small to be visible in the chart above. The chart below isolates the number of inquiries and complaints received over the past four years. During this period, the OHR used a consistent data collection and classification system to log incoming contacts, making the data more easily comparable. As is evidenced by the data, the OHR receives far more inquiries than formal complaints. Total Complaints & Inquiries CY2018 through CY2021 12 CY2021 92 2 CY2020 63 6 CY2019 154 13 CY2018 91 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Complaints Inquiries 8 Total Inquiries and Complaints by Location (Objective 1, Measure 2 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends In CY2021, the OHR received 62 new inquiries and complaints originating in Charlottesville. Despite fluctuations in number over the years, most inquiries and complaints received by the OHR involve an incident or concern that occurred in Charlottesville. While the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance only gives the HRC and OHR express authority to process formal complaints of discrimination originating in Charlottesville, the OHR regularly receives inquiries from the surrounding county and beyond, demonstrating a potentially unmet need for services outside of Charlottesville. The OHR refers such inquiries to the appropriate service provider or state or federal agency. The chart below shows the combined number of inquiries and complaints originating in Charlottesville, Albemarle County, or a different or unspecified locality since CY2014. 9 Total Inquiries by Protected Activity (Objective 1, Measure 3 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends Over the past four years, housing was the most often identified protected activity in inquiries received by the OHR. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Protected Activity An activity of daily life in which a person who identifies as a member of a protected class can participate without fear of discrimination. The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance lists the following activities as protected: housing, employment, public accommodations, credit, and private education. In CY2021, the OHR received a total of 92 contacts classified as inquiries within the protected activities of Housing, Employment, Public Accommodation, Credit, and Private Education. The chart below shows a summary of the protected activities identified in inquiries received by the OHR from CY2018 through CY2021. Housing is the most often identified protected activity in inquiries received by the OHR, followed by Employment and Public Accommodation. Total Inquiries by Protected Activity CY2018 through CY2021 250 200 51 150 100 171 13 20 50 66 53 8 18 0 Housing Employment Other Public Credit Private (Total: 222) (Total: 79) (Unprotected) Accommodation (Total: 0) Education (Total: 73) (Total: 26) (Total: 0) CY2018 - CY2020 CY2021 10 Total Complaints by Protected Activity (Objective 1, Measure 4 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends Over the past four years, housing was the most often identified protected activity in complaints received by the OHR. In CY2021, the OHR received a total of 12 contacts classified as complaints. The chart below shows a summary of the protected activities identified in complaints received by the OHR, from CY2018 through CY2021. Housing is the most often identified protected activity in complaints received by the OHR, followed by employment and public accommodation. In CY2021, the OHR received one formal complaint identifying credit as the protected activity. This complaint was later determined to be non-jurisdictional but was still classified as a dismissed complaint rather than an inquiry because it was filed as a formal complaint requiring a jurisdictional evaluation prior to dismissal. Total Complaints by Protected Activity CY2018 through CY2021 16 14 12 5 10 5 8 1 6 9 4 6 6 2 1 0 Housing Employment Public Credit Private Education (Total: 14) (Total: 11) Accommodation (Total: 1) (Total: 0) (Total: 7) CY2018 - CY2020 CY2021 11 Total Combined Inquiries and Complaints by Protected Class (Objective 1, Measure 5 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends Over the past four years, race was the most frequently identified protected class in all inquiries and complaints received by the OHR. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Protected Class A grouping of people, as defined by state and federal law, of which an individual either self-identifies as a member or is perceived to be a member, that is protected from discrimination when an individual is participating in a protected activity. The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance lists the following classes as protected: • Age/Elderliness • Childbirth or related medical conditions • Disability • Familial Status (in housing) • Gender Identity • Marital Status • National Origin • Pregnancy • Race • Religion • Sex • Sexual Orientation • Color • Source of Funds (in housing) • Status as a Veteran Total Inquiries & Complaints by Protected Class CY2018 through CY2021 222 Race 55 49 Color 44 28 Sex 21 9 Age 7 3 Religion 3 3 Source of Funds 2 1 Gender Identity 1 0 Childbirth or Related Medical Conditions 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 12 Total Employment Discrimination Complaints by Protected Class (Objective 1, Measure 6 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends Over the past four years, race was the most often identified protected class in employment discrimination complaints received by the OHR. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Case A complaint of unlawful discrimination that has been accepted for further action by the Office of Human Rights. Complainant An individual or group of individuals who have filed a formal complaint of unlawful discrimination with the Office of Human Rights. Determination or Finding A decision made by the Director, based on the evidence presented in an investigative report regarding a complaint of unlawful discrimination, whether there is cause to believe that a violation of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance has occurred. Dismissed Complaint A complaint that has been closed by staff due to the case being too far outside the jurisdiction of the Office of Human Rights or because the client has ceased responding to attempted follow-up by staff, prior to the complainant providing enough information to decide if the complaint presents a jurisdictional prima facie case of discrimination. Further Action Steps taken to address a complaint of discrimination that may include informal conciliation, mediation, and investigation. Informal Conciliation A method of resolving a complaint of unlawful discrimination in which the Director engages in an informal dialogue with the complaint and respondent and a non- binding agreement is reached that resolves the complaint to the complainant’s satisfaction. Investigation The formal process of gathering factual evidence regarding a complaint of discrimination. Fact gathering can include interviewing the complainant, respondent, and witnesses. It may also include gathering other evidence such as documents, audio recordings, video footage, or physical evidence. Jurisdiction The geographic and legal scope of enforcement authority as defined by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. 13 Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Mediation A method of resolving a complaint of unlawful discrimination in which a third-party, licensed mediator facilitates a formal dialogue and negotiation between the complainant and respondent. If mediation is successful, the resulting settlement agreement is a private, legally binding contract between the complainant and respondent that is enforceable through civil action in the appropriate court. Prima facie A term used to define whether a complaint presents an actionable allegation of discrimination “on its face.” In a prima facie case, the following criteria must be met: • Complainant was engaged in a protected activity. • Complainant either self-identifies or is perceived by Respondent to be a member of a protected class. • There is testimonial or documentary evidence of a practice or policy to exclude or otherwise adversely treat individuals in Complainant’s protected class. • There are specific harms identified by Complainant, resulting from the alleged discrimination. Respondent An individual, group of individuals, or agency that is named by the complainant in a formal complaint of unlawful discrimination as responsible for a discriminatory act against the complainant. This section provides more details about the employment discrimination complaints received during the calendar year. Receiving and attempting to resolve complaints of discrimination is one of the most complex and labor-intensive duties of the OHR. In CY2021, the OHR received 10 total allegations of employment discrimination, 6 of which originated in Charlottesville, 5 of which were initially accepted as jurisdictional complaints for which the Complainant wished to pursue further action, though 1 was dismissed as non-jurisdictional after review. Below is a summary of the employment discrimination cases active in CY2021. Case numbers refer to the year the case was opened followed by the order in which it was received. For example, Case 2021-2 was opened in 2021 and was the second case opened that year. Note that ongoing cases not opened in the current calendar year are not counted in the total number of cases received during the current calendar year. 14 Summary of employment discrimination cases active in CY2021: Case # Protected Class(es) CY2021 Year-end Status 2021-2 • Race In mediation. 2021-4 • Sex Under investigation. • Sexual orientation 2021-5 In mediation. • Race 2021-7 • Race Settlement reached through mediation. • Race Dismissed as non-jurisdictional after 2021-10 • Color review. • Sex The chart below shows a summary of the protected classes identified in employment complaints received from CY2018 through CY2021. Note that some complaints may allege discrimination based on more than one protected class, so the total number of identified protected classes may be larger than the total number of complaints. Total Employment Discrimination Complaints by Protected Class CY2018 through CY2021 Race Color Sexual Orientation Veteran Status Pregnancy Marital Status Childbirth or Related Medical Conditions 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 15 Total Housing Discrimination Complaints by Protected Class (Objective 1, Measure 7 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends Over the past four years, race and disability are the two most often identified protected classes in housing discrimination complaints received by the OHR. This section provides more details about the housing discrimination complaints received during the calendar year. In CY2021, the OHR received 13 total allegations of housing discrimination, 10 of which originated in Charlottesville, and 5 of which were jurisdictional complaints for which the complainant wished to pursue further action. Below is a summary of the housing discrimination cases active in CY2021. Note that active cases not opened in the current calendar year are not counted in the total number of cases received but are included in the summary of active cases below. Case numbers refer to the year the case was opened followed by the order in which it was received. For example, Case 2020-2 was opened in CY2020 and was the second case opened that year. Case # Protected Class(es) CY2021 Year-end Status • Investigation completed. 2020-2 Race • Offer of mediation pending. • Dismissed due to respondent exemption 2021-1 Source of Funds under state law. 2021-6 Race • Resolved through informal conciliation. • Complainant withdrew case after 2021-9 Disability moving to a new location. • Awaiting authorization for further 2021-11 Disability action. • Complainant seeks mediation. • Unresolved due to inability to reach 2021-12 Disability Complainant for follow-up information needed to establish a prima facie case. The chart below shows a summary, from CY2018 through CY2021, of the protected classes identified in housing complaints. Note that some complaints may allege discrimination based on more than one protected class, so the total number of identified protected classes may be larger than the total number of complaints. 16 Total Housing Discrimination Complaints by Protected Class CY2018 through CY2021 Race Disability Marital Status Color Source of Funds Sex Veteran Status Sexual Orientation Religion Pregnancy National Origin Gender Identity Childbirth or Related Medical Conditions Age 0 1 2 3 4 5 Services Provided Through Individual Contacts (Objective 1, Measure 10 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends While most incoming and outgoing contacts handled by the OHR in CY2021 involved information sharing, investigation activity and counseling regarding inquiries and complaints were the second and third most provided services by the OHR. Term(s) used in this section Definition(s) Appointment Set-up A contact involving the scheduling of an appointment with the Office of Human Rights. Clerical Assistance Any activity involving creating documents or other materials on behalf or at the request of the client. Counseling Assistance provided to an individual who presents an inquiry or complaint in which staff present various courses of action to address a concern. Information A contact in which staff answers questions of a general nature or provides information regarding services, events, or programs. Investigation Activity Any activity associated with the formal investigation of a complaint. Mediation Related Services Any activity associated with the request for or coordination of mediation services, as provided by a licensed third-party mediator, in conjunction with a complaint. 17 In CY2021, services provided by the OHR through 2,959 incoming and outgoing contacts were classified by the primary services of Appointment Set-up, Clerical Assistance, Counseling, Information, Investigation Activity, and Mediation Related Services. The chart below shows the total number of service contacts by type and percentage of total services provided in CY2021: Services Provided Through Incoming & Outgoing Contacts in CY2021 Mediation Related Services (77 contacts) 3% Information (2372 contacts) 80% Investigation Activity (240 contacts) 8% Counseling (166 contacts) 6% Clerical Assistance (44 contacts) 1% Appointment Set-up (60 contacts) 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Given the greater number of formal complaints received in CY2021 compared to recent years, the number of contacts involving investigation activity was higher. For the same reason, contacts involving mediation-related services were also elevated. Contacts involving information-sharing in relation to service provision nearly doubled when compared to CY2020. Contacts related to outreach coordination, volunteer coordination, and events were few and were classified as information. Going forward, contacts related to community outreach will be tracked in a separate system to avoid mixing data with service provision. Referrals to Other Services (Objective 1, Measure 11 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends Most referrals to other service providers in CY2021 involving a housing concern did not include an allegation of housing discrimination; more frequently, an individual sought assistance with rent or deposit relief, housing navigation, utility relief, or homelessness. When individuals seek assistance from the OHR for services that the OHR cannot provide, staff will attempt to connect the individual to the most appropriate service provider. Listed below are the four primary service providers most closely related to the services provided by the OHR. Most referrals from the OHR are to agencies other than the primary four providers and are classified as “Other.” A list of these agencies is included below. 18 EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission): Individuals are referred to the EEOC for employment discrimination cases that are outside the jurisdiction of the Office of Human Rights, as defined by state and federal law and the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. DPOR (Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation): Individuals are referred to DPOR for formal fair housing discrimination investigations when the complainant expressly seeks civil action against the respondent. This is a state government department that includes the Virginia Fair Housing Office. CVLAS (Central Virginia Legal Aid Society): Individuals are referred to CVLAS for assistance with a variety of legal issues raised during intake, often pertaining to the protected activities identified in the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. In some cases, individuals have simultaneous cases with CVLAS and the Office of Human Rights. LAJC (Legal Aid Justice Center): Individuals are referred to LAJC for assistance with a variety of legal issues raised during intake, often pertaining to the protected activities identified in the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. In some cases, individuals have simultaneous cases with LAJC and the Office of Human Rights. Other: The OHR refers individuals to a wide variety of other agencies and offices depending on their specific concerns. Below is a list of agencies that fall into the "Other" referral category. These agencies were determined by staff during CY2021 to be a viable option for some people seeking assistance. Note that some individuals were referred to several of these organizations following a single contact with the OHR. Below is a list of the "Other" organizations that received one or more referrals. • Alexandria, VA, Office of Human Rights • Charlottesville Department of Human Services • Charlottesville FOIA Officer • Community Resource Hotline - English • Community Resource Hotline - Spanish • Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA) • Network2Work • Piedmont Housing Alliance • The Haven • UVA Maxine Platzer Lynn Women's Center Free Legal Clinic • Virginia Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights • Virginia Lawyer Referral Service • Virginia Rent Relief Program • Virginia Restoration of Rights Office 19 Most referrals over the past four years were to agencies other than the four identified primary agencies. This is due in part to the number of housing inquiries involving individuals who, rather than alleging housing discrimination, sought assistance with rent or deposit relief, housing navigation, utility relief, or homelessness. In CY2021 the OHR assumed more responsibility for processing employment and housing discrimination cases following the passage of amendments to the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance in February. Consequently, the need to refer cases to the EEOC and DPOR decreased. Referrals to CVLAS and LAJC were unaffected by the OHR’s change in enforcement authority. The trend of most referrals over the past four years having been to agencies other than the primary four is shown in the chart below: Total Referrals to Primary and Other Agencies CY2018 through CY2021 250 39 200 150 28 100 50 6 4 1 188 95 34 29 28 2 0 Total Referrals Other LAJC CVLAS EEOC DPOR CY2018 - CY2020 CY2021 Disposition of Cases Closed During the Calendar Year (Objective 1, Measure 12 in the Department Scorecard) Key Takeaways and Observed Trends • Maintaining an active contract with a third-party licensed mediator is an important component of effective and efficient complaint resolution. • The current staffing and organizational structure of the OHR is not sustainable and results in delayed investigation of complaints. OHR staff recommends the hiring of full-time employees for all components of the complaint and enforcement process. 20 During CY2021, the OHR had 14 active cases, which is more active cases than in the previous three years combined. At the beginning of CY2021, the OHR did not have an active contract with a third-party mediation firm. OHR staff engaged in a procurement process resulting in a new contract awarded to Resolute Mediation and Arbitration, Inc (RMA). Collaboration with RMA proved to be very effective in resolving several complaints in CY2021. By the end of CY2021, the OHR closed the following 8 cases: Case # Protected Activity Protected Class(es) Type of Closure 2019-1 Public • Race Informal conciliation. Accommodation 2021-1 Housing • Source of Funds Dismissed: non-jurisdictional. 2021-3 Public • Disability Settlement through mediation. Accommodation • Sex 2021-6 Housing • Race Informal conciliation. 2021-7 Employment • Race Settlement through mediation. 2021-8 Credit • Color Dismissed: non-jurisdictional. • National Origin • Race • Sex 2021-9 Housing • Disability Complaint withdrawn. 2021-10 Employment • Color Dismissed: non-jurisdictional. • Race • Sex At the end of CY2021, the following 6 cases remained open: Case # Protected Activity Protected Class(es) Status 2020-2 Housing • Race • Investigation completed. • Offer of mediation pending. 2021-2 Employment • Race • In mediation. 2021-4 Employment • Sex • Under investigation. 2021-5 Employment • Sexual Orientation • In mediation. • Race 2021-11 Housing • Disability • Awaiting authorization for further action. • Complainant seeks mediation. 2021-12 Housing • Disability • Unresolved due to inability to reach Complainant for follow-up information needed to establish a prima facie case. 21 Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance Sec. 2-433. (b) (Objective 2 in the Department Scorecard) Sec. 2-433. (b) Collaborate with the public and private sectors for the purpose of providing awareness, education, and guidance on methods to prevent and eliminate discrimination citywide. This role is shared between the HRC and the OHR. The specific duties and responsibilities of this role are further explained in Sec. 2-434. Duties and responsibilities – Community dialogue and engagement and Sec. 2-435. Duties and responsibilities – Systemic issues. HRC Actions In CY2021, the HRC engaged in 9 actions focused on public awareness, education, and guidance, and it refined the tools it uses to engage and reach the community. Below is a chart summarizing the actions taken by the HRC and their alignment with the duties and responsibilities in Sec. 2-434. and Sec. 2-435. in the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance and the goals Commissioners identified during their annual retreat. Documents referenced in the action summaries are publicly posted on the “Human Rights Documents” subpage within the “Human Rights” webpage on the City website. Total Number Community Awareness, Education, and Guidance Actions by the HRC (Objective 2, Measure 5 in the Department Scorecard) Date Alignment Action Summary The HRC presented an open letter affirming its support of Duties & Black and Brown victims of Responsibilities: police violence locally and Sec. 2-435 throughout the nation. The letter 4/19/2021 Systemic issues Letter of Position called for a detailed evaluation of functions currently handled by Annual Goals: police, like responding to mental No direct alignment. health crises, that could be better performed by other people or entities in the community. 22 Date Alignment Action Summary Duties & Responsibilities: The HRC hosted a public panel Sec. 2-434 discussion with Mayor Walker Community dialogue 6/17/2021 Public Discussion and Police Chief Brackney and engagement regarding police policies and practices. Annual Goals: No direct alignment. Duties & In honor of those who worked for Responsibilities: social justice before, during, and Sec. 2-435 after the summer of 2017, the 8/12/2021 Systemic issues Letter of Position HRC called on the City to continue to push toward equity Annual Goals: and racial justice through its No direct alignment. policy and practice. Duties & The HRC hosted a public panel Responsibilities: discussion with Sunshine Mathon Sec. 2-434 (Piedmont Housing Alliance Community dialogue Executive Director) and Dan 9/16/2021 and engagement Public Discussion Rosensweig (Habitat for Humanity Executive Director) Annual Goals: about the City’s Comprehensive 2. Address barriers to Plan and proposed zoning housing. revisions. The HRC Chair, representatives of Legal Aid Justice Center, and OHR staff visited Midway Manor Duties & to listen to resident concerns Responsibilities: about the conditions in their Sec. 2-434 building. The HRC subsequently Community dialogue voted to hold a future public 11/10/2021 and engagement Public Discussion panel on public and subsidized housing. The OHR wrote a letter Annual Goals: to the property owner 2. Address barriers to summarizing the concerns housing. residents expressed and requesting an in-person meeting with corporate representatives to discuss solutions. 23 Date Alignment Action Summary Ordinance: Sec. 2-434 The HRC hosted a presentation Community dialogue by Anna Mendez (Partner for and engagement Mental Health Executive 11/18/2021 Public Discussion Director) regarding housing Annual Goals: discrimination on the basis of 2. Address barriers to mental health and substance use. housing. The HRC, in collaboration with Partner for Mental Health, sent a Ordinance: letter to People and Sec. 2-435 Congregations Engaged in Systemic issues Ministry (PACEM) encouraging 11/24/2021 Letter of Position the inclusion of substance use Annual Goals: disorder on the list of high 2. Address barriers to COVID-19 risk criteria that housing. might qualify an individual for shelter at Premier Circle. Ordinance: The HRC, in collaboration with Sec. 2-435 Partner for Mental Health, wrote Systemic issues an open letter to local hotels to 11/30/2021 Letter of Position express concern over the refusal Annual Goals: to rent rooms to individuals based 2. Address barriers to on a diagnosis or perceived housing. diagnosis of mental illness. Ordinance: Sec. 2-434 The HRC hosted a presentation Community dialogue by Victoria Horrock (Legal Aid and engagement Justice Center Attorney) 12/16/2021 Public Discussion regarding proposed amendments Annual Goals: to the Virginia Residential 2. Address barriers to Landlord & Tenant Act. housing. 24 OHR Actions Community outreach is one of the primary tools used by the OHR to both encourage citizens to report allegations of discrimination and to prevent discrimination from happening in the first place. Systemic change requires major shifts in how society operates. Societal shifts start with individual awareness, education, and a willingness to make change. The OHR categorizes outreach in three ways: 1. Service Provision 2. Education & Awareness 3. Collaboration & Leadership Over many years of engaging the community through a variety of community events, meetings, and presentations, OHR staff observed that this categorization system emerged naturally and made it easier to quantify and track the work. As in CY2020, during CY2021, the OHR had only one full-time staff person in addition to two part-time Interns with highly specific duties. Given the volume of incoming individual service requests this year, outreach activities were again very limited and mostly confined to Collaboration & Leadership work. Total Number of OHR Community Outreach Activities by Outreach Type (Objective 2, Measure 1 in the Department Scorecard) In CY2021, OHR staff engaged in a total of 107 community outreach activities classified as the following: Outreach Type Total Number of Activities Service Provision 100 Education & Awareness 0 Collaboration & Leadership 7 Over the past two years, the OHR has been unable to maintain Education & Awareness outreach. This work was primarily conducted at in-person events in previous years was primarily held by the former Director who left the OHR in March of 2020. With the hire of a Community Outreach Specialist in CY2022, the OHR plans to rebuild a regular calendar of Education & Awareness events. 25 The chart below shows a summary of outreach activities conducted by the OHR over the last three years: Summary of Community Outreach Activities by Outreach Type CY2019 through CY2021 100 CY2021 7 43 CY2020 8 172 CY2019 22 17 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Collaboration & Leadership Education & Awareness Service Provision Total Number of Collaborative Activities and Partner Agencies Engaged (Objective 2, Measure 2 in the Department Scorecard) As noted above, most of the OHR’s outreach is classified as Collaboration & Leadership. The OHR engages with a variety of community partners to organize outreach events, develop referral networks for individuals seeking services, and lead discussion in projects that serve people who engage in protected activities or are members of protected classes. Of the 107 outreach activities conducted by the OHR in CY2021, 106 were in collaboration with other community partners. In CY2021, the OHR worked with the 27 primary collaborators listed below through a variety of meetings and collaborative events: • BUCK Squad • Charlottesville Department of Human Services (DHS) • Charlottesville Low-Income Housing Coalition (CLIHC) • Charlottesville Office of Community Solutions • Charlottesville Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion 26 • Charlottesville Planning Commission • Charlottesville Public Works - Climate Action • Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority (CRHA) • Code for Cville • Community Climate Collaborative (C3) • Cultivate Charlottesville • Just C-ville • Northern Real Estate Urban Ventures • Partner for Mental Health • People And Congregations Engaged in Ministry (PACEM) • Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) • Piedmont Housing Alliance (PHA) • Prince William County Human Rights Commission • Public Housing Association of Residents (PHAR) • Region Ten • Richmond Virginia (RVA) Eviction Lab • Sin Barreras • The Haven • Thomas Jefferson Area Planning District (TJPDC) • UVA Equity Center • Visible.org • Welcoming Greater Charlottesville 27 Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance Sec. 2-433. (c) (Objective 3 in the Department Scorecard) Sec. 2-433. (c) Identify and review policies and practices of the City of Charlottesville and its boards and commissions and other public agencies within the City and advise those bodies on issues related to human rights issues. This role falls primarily with the HRC, with the OHR providing administrative support. The specific duties and responsibilities under this role are further explained in Sec. 2-435. Duties and responsibilities – Systemic issues. HRC Actions The HRC engaged in 4 actions focused on City policies. Below is a chart summarizing the actions taken by the HRC and showing the alignment with the duties & responsibilities sections in the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance and the goals Commissioners identified during their annual retreat. Documents referenced in the action summaries are publicly posted on the “Human Rights Documents” subpage within the “Human Rights” webpage on the City website. Date Alignment Action Summary Duties & The HRC sent a letter to City Responsibilities: Council and the Planning Sec. 2-435 Commission outlining its support Systemic issues. Council for the inclusion of specific 9/21/2021 Recommendation details in the Future Land Use Annual Goals: Map (FLUM) to permit and 2. Address barriers to encourage the construction of housing. affordable housing. 28 Date Alignment Action Summary The HRC presented a letter to City Council outlining recommendations to address systemic inequities in City employment practices, including publishing an updated Duties & organizational equity report, Responsibilities: conducting a compensation and Sec. 2-435 class study, reporting the full Systemic issues. Council 11/9/2021 basis for the termination of the Recommendation former Police Chief, publishing a Annual Goals: plan to continue the internal No direct alignment. reforms of the police department begun by the recently dismissed Chief, and reviewing the previous recommendations provided by the HRC regarding bias-based policing and constitutional procedures. The HRC adopted Resolution Duties & A21-1 Advocacy and Action to Responsibilities: codify its methods in taking Sec. 2-434 action on community issues Community dialogue brought to its attention. This 11/18/2021 and engagement. HRC Resolution resolution also defined the scope of the Chair's ability to take Annual Goals: action on the HRC's behalf No direct alignment. regarding urgent concerns that arise between regular meetings of the HRC. Duties & The HRC adopted Resolution Responsibilities: A21-2 Use of Plain Language to Sec. 2-434 codify its intent to use plain Community dialogue language in future resolutions and engagement. 11/18/2021 HRC Resolution when possible and to create plain language versions of resolutions Annual Goals: and other documents when the 1. Accessibility and original document was written in ADA Compliance. less understandable language. 29 Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance Sec. 2-433. (d) (Objective 4 in the Department Scorecard) Sec. 2-433. (d) Seek work share agreements with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“FEPA”) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD- FHAP”) to conduct investigations of employment and housing discrimination on their behalf, and enter into such agreement(s) subject to approval of City Council upon a finding that the agreement(s) would be in the best interest of the City. This majority of the duties and responsibilities relating to the pursuit of a Fair Employment Practices Agency (FEPA) workshare with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and a Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) workshare with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) fall to the OHR, with the HRC playing a supporting role. This role, though not further clarified within the ordinance, will have a dramatic effect on the enforcement processes detailed in Sec. 2-437. Duties and responsibilities – Investigation of individual complaints and issuance of findings and Sec. 2-439.1. Enforcement authority – The role of the Commission. HRC Actions Date Alignment Action Summary The HRC hosted a question-and- answer session with Erik Steinecker, Staff Attorney with the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fair Housing Office Duties & about the process of the City Responsibilities: applying and qualifying for a Fair Sec. 2-439.1 Housing Assistance Program Enforcement authority. (FHAP) workshare. This 1/21/2021 Public Discussion discussion helped inform the Annual Goals: HRC's strategic planning and its 4. Pursue FHAP annual retreat in February, during workshare. which Commissioners decided to pursue a FHAP workshare prior to entering a Fair Employment Practices Agency (FEPA) workshare with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). 30 Date Alignment Action Summary The HRC Chair, HRC Vice Chair, and HRC Director met with Cheryl Mabry (Director) and James Yao (Deputy Director) of State, Local, and Tribal Duties & Programs for the U.S. Equal Responsibilities: Employment Opportunity Sec. 2-439.1 Commission (EEOC) to discuss Enforcement authority. the process of applying and 2/23/2021 Work Session qualifying for a Fair Employment Annual Goals: Practices Agency (FEPA) 4. Pursue FEPA workshare agreement with the workshare. EEOC. Based on the information provided, the HRC decided to prioritize pursuit of a FHAP workshare agreement prior to pursuing a FEPA workshare agreement. OHR Actions The Director began the necessary steps for entry into both the FEPA and FHAP workshares, though pursuit of the FHAP workshare was prioritized over the FEPA because simultaneous pursuit of both workshares without additional staff support was not practical. While entry into the FHAP workshare required the most initial work, including major revisions to the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, interim FHAP certification also offered substantial funding for capacity building during the first three years. FEPA certification offered no additional funding for capacity building, and the reimbursement rate offered by the EEOC for completed cases was half the 2021 rate offered by HUD. Both the FEPA and FHAP workshare agreements still require extensive action in CY2022 by the HRC and OHR, including continuing to draft the required documents and sending them for review to the City Attorney, HRC, City Council, and federal agency before final approval by the federal agency. 31 CY2021 FEPA Workshare progress (Objective 4 Measure 1 in the Department Scorecard) The chart below shows the actions taken in CY2021 to enter a FEPA workshare agreement with the EEOC. Step Summary of Actions OHR initiates contact with federal The Director set up the above-mentioned work session agency. with the HRC Chair, HRC Vice Chair, Cheryl Mabry, and James Yao of the EEOC. OHR drafts necessary documents The Director began a draft of the required request letter for application. for consideration by the HRC prior to submission to the EEOC for informal review. This effort was put on hold to pursue the FHAP workshare agreement with HUD. CY2021 FHAP Workshare Progress (Objective 4 Measure 2 in the Department Scorecard) The chart below shows the actions taken in CY2021 to enter a FHAP workshare agreement with HUD. Step Summary of Actions OHR initiates contact with federal The Director set up the above-mentioned question-and- agency. answer session with the HRC and Erik Steinecker from the HUD Fair Housing Office. OHR drafts necessary documents The Director drafted a revised version of the for application. Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance that included language necessary for substantial equivalence with federal fair housing law. OHR submits draft documents to The Director worked with Erik Steinecker at the HUD federal agency for informal Fair Housing Office throughout 2021 to edit the initial review. draft of the revised Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. OHR submits draft documents to The Director met with Allyson Davies in the City City Attorney for review. Attorney’s Office for an initial review of the revised Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. Following this meeting, the Director contacted the Fairfax County Office of Human Rights to ask questions about the practical implications of some of the duties required by substantial equivalence to federal fair housing law. OHR revises draft documents based on federal agency and City Work to be continued in 2022. Attorney feedback. 32 Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance Sec. 2-433. (e) (Objective 5 in the Department Scorecard) Sec. 2-433. (e) Make recommendations regarding the City’s annual legislative program, with an emphasis on enabling legislation that may be needed to implement programs and policies that will address discrimination. This role rests primarily with the HRC with support from the OHR. This role also relates to the HRC’s work under Sec. 2-434. Duties and responsibilities – Community dialogue and engagement and Sec. 2-435. Duties and responsibilities – Systemic issues. In CY2021, the HRC submitted recommendations to Council that reiterated its CY2020 priorities and included a recommendation to support SB 43, which would allow a City or County to take legal action to enforce the provisions of the Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenants Act related to health and safety. Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance Sec. 2-433. (f) (Objective 6 in the Department Scorecard) Sec. 2-433. (f) Prepare recommendations to policies and procedures the Commission believes are necessary for the performance of the roles, duties and responsibilities assigned to the Commission within this article, and for modifications or operating procedures approved by City Council. This role is shared by the HRC and OHR and relates to all other duties and responsibilities detailed in the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. The table on the following page summarizes the recommendations the HRC made to Council in CY2021. 33 Date Alignment Action Summary The HRC adopted proposed amendments to the Code of the City of Charlottesville Chapter 2, Article XV (Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance) for recommendation to City Council. The proposed amendments Duties & included language to bring the Responsibilities: ordinance into alignment with Sec. 2-439.1 recent changes to state laws Enforcement authority. governing human rights and fair 1/19/2021 Policy Review housing. The proposed Annual Goals: amendments also broadened the No direct alignment. potential applicant pool for new Commissioners, removed gendered language from the ordinance, and clarified aspects of the enforcement process. The proposed amendments were adopted along with some revisions presented by Council on 2/1/2021. Duties & Responsibilities: The HRC provided feedback to Sec. 2-435 City Management and Council regarding the hiring of a Director Systemic Issues Council for the Human Rights 3/1/2021 Commission and Office of Recommendation Human Rights. City Management Annual Goals: made an offer of hire on No direct alignment. 10/15/2021, which was accepted on 10/21/2021. Duties & The HRC provided Responsibilities: recommendations regarding the Sec. 2-435 establishment of a program that would ensure legal counsel for Systemic Issues Council 4/4/2021 tenants facing evictions. The Recommendation HRC presented data collected on local court hearings as well as Annual Goals: national data regarding other 2. Address barriers to localities with similar programs. housing. 34 Recommendations In CY2021, the OHR had one full-time staff person, the Community Outreach and Investigation Specialist, authorized to receive and investigate complaints. The Community Outreach and Investigation Specialist, who was promoted to the role of Director of the Human Rights Commission in October, held all intake, investigation, outreach, and administrative duties for the OHR, as well as administrative duties for the HRC. Other comparable OHRs with enforcement responsibilities have separate staff responsible for intake, investigation, outreach, and administration. This division of labor is especially essential for the separation of investigation and final determination duties. To preserve the integrity of the investigation, the Investigator must remain a neutral third party to the complaint and thus typically relies on the Director to serve as the Administrative Judge who renders a determination on the investigated complaint. Given the lack of staffing in the OHR, the role of Administrative Judge, a duty typically held by the Director, fell to the City Manager’s Office. Throughout CY2020 and CY2021, this responsibility was passed between several individuals within the City Manager’s Office until the hire of the Deputy City Manager for Racial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in late April 2021. While the Deputy City Manager can hold the role of Administrative Judge, it is atypical for an Office of Human Rights to function in this manner and places an additional and undue responsibility on the Deputy City Manager. The chart below shows the OHR staff and organizational structure in CY2021. Green boxes indicate a position that holds the appropriate duties and responsibilities in relation to the OHR and HRC (City Manager). Orange boxes indicate a position that holds a duty for the OHR and HRC that is outside of that individual’s prescribed role in the City (Deputy City Manager for Racial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; HRC Director; Human Rights Interns). CY2021 OHR Organizational Structure City Manager Deputy City Manager Held Administrative Judge duties that would Racial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion otherwise reside with the Director. Director Held primary intake, investigation, outreach, and Human Rights Commission administrative duties, due to a lack of staff. Human Rights Interns Held essential duties typically assigned to an Intake Counselor, Investigator, or Director. 35 The chart below presents the recommended organizational structure of the OHR consistent with other OHRs in Virginia. The same color scheme described above applies below with the added colors of blue to indicate a position scheduled for hiring in early CY2022 (Outreach Specialist) and lavender to indicate positions for which there was no approved funding in FY22 or FY23 (Intake Counselor, Investigator). Recommended OHR Organizational Structure City Manager Deputy City Manager Racial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Holds oversight of Human Rights Division. Director Holds role of Administrative Judge and overall Human Rights Commission management of OHR and HRC. Intake Counselor Holds intake and associated clerical duties. Investigator Holds investigation and associated clerical duties. Outreach Specialist Holds outreach and associated clerical duties. Human Rights Interns Assist OHR staff with above duties. Conclusions In CY2022, the OHR will hire an Outreach Specialist to expand community engagement, continue the work begun on the FHAP workshare agreement, and continue working in partnership with the HRC to develop capacity for addressing systemic issues. With Council’s support to hire an Intake Counselor and an Investigator, the OHR will be better equipped to effectively process incoming inquiries and complaints and be prepared to enter the FHAP workshare. Attachments 1. OHR Data Dictionary 2. OHR CY2021 Individual Service Data 36 2021 Charlottesville Office of Human Rights Data Dictionary Term Definition Appointment Set-up A contact involving the scheduling of an appointment with the Office of Human Rights. Case A complaint of unlawful discrimination that has been accepted for further action by the Office of Human Rights. Charlottesville Human A part of the Code of the City of Charlottesville found in Rights Ordinance Chapter 2, Article XV, that explains the roles and responsibilities of the Human Rights Commission and Office of Human Rights and defines the protected activities, protected classes, and enforcement mechanisms authorized to address unlawful discrimination within the jurisdiction of the City of Charlottesville. Clerical Assistance Any activity involving creating documents or other materials on behalf or at the request of the client. Client Follow-up An incoming contact from an individual who has an open inquiry or complaint. Closed Complaint A complaint that is no longer being addressed by the Office of Human Rights. An inquiry may close due to the case being resolved to the client's satisfaction, the referral of the client to another agency that can better serve them, or because the client chooses not to pursue the case further. Closed Inquiry An inquiry that is no longer being addressed by the Office of Human Rights. An inquiry may close due to the case being resolved to the client's satisfaction, the referral of the client to another agency that can better serve them, or because the client chooses not to pursue the case further. Complaint An incoming contact in which an individual wishes to pursue action regarding an allegation of discrimination that falls within the jurisdiction of the Office of Human Rights, as defined by the Human Rights Ordinance. Complainant An individual or group of individuals who have filed a formal complaint of unlawful discrimination with the Office of Human Rights. Contact All walk-ins, appointments, phone calls, text messages, and emails with individuals. Counseling Assistance provided to an individual who presents an inquiry or complaint in which staff present various courses of action to address a concern. Term Definition Determination A decision made by the Director, based on the evidence presented in an investigative report regarding a complaint of unlawful discrimination, whether there is cause to believe that a violation of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance has occurred. This term is used synonymously with “Finding.” Dismissed Complaint A complaint that has been closed by staff due to the case being too far outside the jurisdiction of the Office of Human Rights or because the client has ceased responding to attempted follow-up by staff, prior to the complainant providing enough information to decide if the complaint presents a jurisdictional prima facie case of discrimination. Dismissed Inquiry An inquiry that has been closed by staff due to the case being too far outside the jurisdiction of the Office of Human Rights or because the client has ceased responding to attempted follow-up by staff. Finding A decision made by the Director, based on the evidence presented in an investigative report regarding a complaint of unlawful discrimination, whether there is cause to believe that a violation of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance has occurred. This term is used synonymously with “Determination.” Further Action Steps taken to address a complaint of discrimination that may include informal conciliation, mediation, and investigation. General Contact An incoming contact that involves outreach coordination, event planning, volunteer coordination, or general information. Incoming Contact Any walk-in, appointment, phone call, text message, or email from an individual seeking assistance from the Office of Human Rights. Informal Conciliation A method of resolving a complaint of unlawful discrimination in which the Director engages in an informal dialogue with the complaint and respondent and a non- binding agreement is reached that resolves the complaint to the complainant’s satisfaction. Information A contact in which staff answers questions of a general nature or provides information regarding services, events, or programs. Inquiry An incoming contact involving services provided to an individual by the Office of Human Rights and/or an individual allegation of discrimination that falls outside the jurisdiction of the office, as defined by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. Term Definition Investigation The formal process of gathering factual evidence regarding a complaint of discrimination. Fact gathering can include interviewing the complainant, respondent, and witnesses. It may also include gathering other evidence such as documents, audio recordings, video footage, or physical evidence. Investigation Activity Any activity associated with the formal investigation of a complaint. Jurisdiction The geographic and legal scope of enforcement authority as defined by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance. Mediation A method of resolving a complaint of unlawful discrimination in which a third-party, licensed mediator facilitates a formal dialogue and negotiation between the complainant and respondent. If mediation is successful, the resulting settlement agreement is a private, legally binding contract between the complainant and respondent that is enforceable through civil action in the appropriate court. Mediation Related Services Any activity associated with the request for or coordination of mediation services, as provided by a licensed third-party mediator, in conjunction with a complaint. Open Complaint A complaint that is still being addressed by the Office of Human Rights. Open Inquiry An inquiry that is still being addressed by the Office of Human Rights. Outgoing Contact All service-related contacts initiated by Office of Human Rights staff. Outreach Coordination Any service related to community outreach regarding service provision, education & awareness, or facilitation & leadership. Prima facie A term used to define whether a complaint presents an actionable allegation of discrimination “on its face.” In a prima facie case, the following criteria must be met: • Complainant was engaged in a protected activity. • Complainant either self-identifies or is perceived by Respondent to be a member of a protected class. • There is testimonial or documentary evidence of a practice or policy to exclude or otherwise adversely treat individuals in Complainant’s protected class. • There are specific harms identified by Complainant, resulting from the alleged discrimination. Term Definition Protected Activity An activity of daily life in which a person who identifies as a member of a protected class can participate without fear of discrimination. The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance lists the following activities as protected: housing, employment, public accommodations, credit, and private education. Protected Class A grouping of people, as defined by state and federal law, of which an individual either self-identifies as a member or is perceived to be a member, that is protected from discrimination when an individual is participating in a protected activity. The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance lists the following classes as protected: • Age/Elderliness • Childbirth or related medical conditions • Disability • Familial Status (in housing) • Gender Identity • Marital Status • National Origin • Pregnancy • Race • Religion • Sex • Sexual Orientation • Color • Source of Funds (in housing) • Status as a Veteran Public Hearing A service provided by the Human Rights Commission and coordinated by the Office of Human Rights, as specified by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, involving the recommendation of remedies related to either a determination of probable cause after the formal investigation of a complaint or a review of a determination of no probable cause for which a complainant seeks an appeal. Referral A recommendation made by OHR staff for an individual to contact another agency in order to address a concern raised during an individual contact with the Office of Human Rights. Respondent An individual, group of individuals, or agency that is named by the complainant in a formal complaint of unlawful discrimination as responsible for a discriminatory act against the complainant. Staff Follow-up An outgoing contact in which staff communicates with an individual who has previously contacted the Office. Term Definition Third-Party Incoming An incoming contact with a person other than the individual Contact directly involved with an inquiry or complaint being discussed. Third-Party Outgoing An outgoing contact with a person other than the individual Contact directly involved with an inquiry or complaint being discussed. The person directly involved must give verbal or written consent for staff to initiate a third-party outgoing contact. Unlawful Discrimination The denial of a person’s opportunity to engage in a daily life activity that is protected by law. Office of Human Rights CY2021 Individual Service Provision Data 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 171 139 145 133 197 272 307 287 330 442 307 229 2959 Total Incoming Contacts 83 70 71 68 131 176 195 210 238 308 237 175 1962 Average Incoming & Outgoing Contacts/Day 8 7 7 6 9 14 14 13 17 19 16 13 12 Average Incoming Contacts/Day 4 4 3 3 6 9 9 10 12 13 12 10 8 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 48 49 39 29 471 Total Third-Party Contacts (Outgoing) 39 36 44 35 27 51 64 45 44 85 31 25 526 Total Client Follow-ups (Incoming) 45 34 36 27 65 120 105 127 154 157 131 102 1103 Total Third-Party Contacts (Incoming) 28 28 19 30 45 40 73 54 74 130 86 64 671 Total General Contacts (Incoming) 3 4 3 4 6 12 11 15 2 8 12 4 84 Total New Inquiries (Incoming) 6 3 12 7 14 4 5 11 8 12 6 4 92 Total New Complaints (Incoming) 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 2 1 12 Total Allegations (Both I&C) 2 1 1 1 4 1 1 5 1 8 4 3 32 Total I&C: Locality - Cville 6 3 5 3 12 3 5 9 4 6 3 3 62 Total I&C: Locality - Albemarle 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 6 Total I&C: Locality - Other or Not Specified 0 1 7 2 3 1 1 5 3 7 4 2 36 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Employment 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 2 3 2 13 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Housing 6 3 8 5 8 1 5 4 3 5 2 1 51 Total Inquiries: P.A. - Public Accommodation 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 1 8 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 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 5 Total Complaints: P.A. - Housing 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 5 Total Complaints: P.A. - Public Accommodation 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total Complaints: P.A. - Credit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 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 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 2 1 10 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Employment allegations in Charlottesville 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 6 Employment allegations in Albemarle Co. 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 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 2 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 4 2 1 13 Housing allegations in Charlottesville 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 1 1 10 Housing allegations in Albemarle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total public accommodation discrimination allegations 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 1 7 Public accommodation allegations in Cville 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 Total credit discrimination allegations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Credit allegations in Charlottesville 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total private education discrimination allegations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Private education allegations in Charlottesville 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Other (Unprotected) activity allegations 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 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 1 8 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 2 1 0 0 0 3 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 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 Total I&C: P.C. - Gender Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 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. - Veteran Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total I&C: P.C. - Not specified 4 3 12 5 12 4 4 8 4 7 6 2 71 Total I&C: P.C. - Other (Unprotected) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 6 Total Counseling Contacts 17 21 17 8 18 20 18 16 6 10 6 9 166 Total Employment Counseling 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 2 3 11 Total Housing Counseling 17 21 16 6 12 18 12 13 4 7 3 6 135 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS 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 2 4 5 2 5 0 6 4 2 1 0 3 34 Referrals to CSRAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to LAJC 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 6 Referrals to CVLAS 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 Referrals to PHA 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 Referrals to EEOC 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Referrals to DPOR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Referrals to Other 2 3 5 2 4 0 5 4 1 1 0 1 28 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 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 4 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 1 0 2 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. - Veteran Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 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 Measures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTALS Total Housing Complaints: P.C. - Race 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 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. - Veteran Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 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. - Veteran Status 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 17 Total Closed Inquiries 75 Total Dismissed Inquiries 0 Total Open Complaints 6 Total Closed Complaints 4 Total Dismissed Complaints 2 Primary Service: Appointment Set-up 3 2 1 0 8 19 11 2 3 3 5 3 60 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 17 8 18 20 18 16 6 10 6 9 166 Primary Service: Event Information 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Primary Service: Investigation Activity 7 27 39 33 35 12 22 18 23 14 4 6 240 Primary Service: Information 144 84 87 87 129 208 227 240 292 404 268 202 2372 Primary Service: Mediation Related Services 0 0 0 5 4 0 11 8 6 10 24 9 77 Primary Service: Outreach Coordination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Attachment 8 CHARLOTTESVILLE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT RESOLUTION #: A22-1 PLAIN LANGUAGE VERSION The Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance says that the Charlottesville Human Rights Commission will: ● meet with the public to offer education and guidance on ways to prevent and stop discrimination ● provide a way for the public to discuss human rights issues in an open, honest conversation about equity and opportunity ● offer education and information programs to promote mutual understanding, reconciliation, and respect between people protected by the ordinance and the larger Charlottesville community The Community Engagement Committee of the Human Rights Commission aims to create opportunities to connect, build relationships, and share information about human rights with Charlottesville residents. We especially want to: ● connect with residents who are more likely to be faced with human rights violations ● connect with residents where they are, such as showing up for community events ● make it easy to get information about the Office of Human Rights and how to get support ● cultivate trust and familiarity with the Office and the Commissioners _____________________________________ __________ Jessica Harris, Chair, Human Rights Commission Date The Commission is guided by the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance: City code Article XV. Sec. 2-433. This Resolution supports Sec. 2-433 and Sec. 2-434 of the Human Rights Ordinance. Attachment 9 Attachment 10 CITY O F CH ARLOTT ESVILLE “To be one community filled with opportunity” Human Rights Commission P.O. Box 911 · Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone 434-970-3023 humanrights@charlottesville.gov www.charlottesville.gov/665/Human-Rights July 17, 2022 Commented [NT1]: Update needed. Dear Mayor Snook and City Councilors, The mission of the Human Rights Commission is to provide “citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights.” As Commissioners, we are tasked, per Sec. 2-433. (c) and Sec. 2- Deleted: such, 435. (a)(2) of the Charlottesville Human Rights Ordinance, to identify policies and practices that negatively affect residents because of their protected identities, make recommendations to correct those policies, and push the city to dismantle systemic discrimination as it exists here in Charlottesville. Almost 16% of the Charlottesville community speaks a language other than English. The Charlottesville City Council’s “Welcoming City Proclamation” and “Welcoming City Update Resolution” states that equity and inclusion are important to our community and that the City must make it easy to access its services and programs, and the Office of Human Rights and the City will work with partners in the community to make sure that everyone knows about their rights and resources. For that reason, the Charlottesville Human Rights Commission has voted and approved HR21- 1: Resolution to Establish a Citywide Language Access Plan. This resolution recommends that Deleted: , " the City of Charlottesville develop and implement a city-wide Language Access Plan, as well as Deleted: " an action-oriented implementation plan, to guide the City to establish policies and procedures to ensure access to City resources and services for Limited English-Proficient residents and to support the right of all residents to communicate with the City in their preferred language. This plan will make it easier for City residents to access City services and programs, using the language that is most comfortable for them. As you evaluate this policy recommendation, we welcome any additional questions or comments. Thank you for the work you are doing. Sincerely, Sincerely, Jessica Harris Chair Human Rights Commission Human Rights Commissioners: • Jessica Harris (Chair) • Ernest Chambers (Vice-Chair) • Jeanette Abi-Nader • Mary Bauer • Wolfgang Keppley • Kathryn Laughon • Tobiah Mundt • Andrew Orban • Lyndele Von Schill