My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-02-20_HRC_minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Human Rights Commission
>
Minutes
>
2013 Minutes
>
2013-02-20_HRC_minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2013 3:39:02 PM
Creation date
3/21/2013 3:38:51 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Thao questioned how many winners were chosen in 2012. Ms. Curti explained <br />the HRC selected three winners and three honorable mentions. She reported first place was <br />awarded $100, second place received $50 and third place was given $30. The honorable mention <br />award winners each received $15. <br />Vice -Chair Brisbois suggested the members discuss which essay should be awarded first place. <br />Commissioner Singleton was in favor of accepting the essay scores as submitted. <br />Commissioner Doneen commented the drawback with going by the numbers was that the essay <br />topics would be the same and the winners would not cover the broad spectrum submitted. <br />Commissioner Thao thought it was important to review the schools each essay was submitted <br />from as well to assure there was a fair representation. Ms. Curti explained the top six essays did <br />represent both schools; one essay from one school and the remaining five from the other. <br />Commissioner Singleton moved and Commissioner Groff seconded a motion to approve the <br />essay winners based on the scoring submitted. <br />Commissioner Thao was in favor of having the winners be spread out based on topic and <br />schools. If the HRC were to proceed based on the current scores, the top three winners would <br />represent only one school. She commented this would provide balance and fairness. <br />Commissioner Groff reiterated that this was an essay contest and his scores were based on use of <br />language. <br />Commissioner Singleton stated the scoring system could be amended for next year if the HRC <br />was in favor of creating additional factors for the scoring system. <br />Commissioner Groff agreed with this suggestion stating next year the essays could be divided by <br />school to assure there was a fair representation of both schools, and the essay topics could also <br />be further considered when the winners were selected. <br />Commissioner Doneen recommended that the diversity of topics and fair representation of each <br />school be considered with this year's winners. <br />Commissioner Singleton commented this was not discussed prior to the scoring of the essays. <br />While he agreed these were legitimate concerns, he did not want to reevaluate the essays at this <br />time and suggested again, that the new ranking system be used next year. <br />Commissioner Doneen recommended the sixth place essay be moved to second or third place as <br />it received four perfect scores. <br />Vice -Chair called for the vote on the Singleton motion, seconded by Commissioner Groff. <br />Motion passed unanimously. <br />01 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.