CCP 02242025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, January 22, 2024 Page 7 about it in a way that provides for the best preservation and advancement of human rights in the community, maybe not necessarily involving specific advocation for specific cases or specific individuals because sometimes there are factors that can be involved which everyone may not be privy to. Commissioner Tidball thought if it would be appropriate, just as a process of working on this, since he understood Councilmembers Etten and Schroeder are taking the lead on the scope together. He stated it is unfortunate that the part of his brain that likes to work with words and writing does not work well with the part of his brain that needs to listen to what people are saying. So, he jotted down a couple of ideas or possible different wordings. But, to sit at the meeting and actually do that, is not appropriate. If appropriate for the Commission to have some back and forth via email and suggested language to work around and take it back to the next Commission meeting they can talk about suggestions from everyone and a possible rewording of at least the first sentence of that section to see if the Commission can come up with something that retains what Councilmember Strahan was talking about regarding the need for human rights to be uplifted as an important emphasis but without putting the Commission in the wrong role. He had a couple of ideas for language on that. Mayor Roe thought that process made sense. Councilmember Etten indicated several of his questions have been addressed and he appreciated that. He asked the Commission how the new language clarifies the Commission’s concerns of incongruity between the Code language and the workplan. Commissioner Tidball explained the way the Commission wrote the scope gives them basically three different broad roles. The advising role, ambassador role, and advocacy role, at least the way it is written now, which was a neat pneumonic thing to do. Within those roles in any given year, there could be things that were in the old scope that the Commission might end up doing. There is a fair amount of language about evaluating City policies and programs, for instance. Something that appeared to him when he attended the meeting last May for all of the departments, was that it seemed to him they were already doing a lot of that work, actually have the expertise to do that work, but there may be sometimes where the City Council needs another opinion. Actually, sometimes it is better to have an opinion from folks that do not have an expertise in that and maybe sometimes in a workplan where the Commission needs to do evaluation of something and would get together and agree that is what is needed to be done. If it is written in the scope, if makes it look like the Commission has to do that all the time. It either looks like the Commission is not doing their duties or that is not something the Commission is really supposed to be doing, in that case, why is it in the scope. That was part of the notion of taking some of those specifics out. It is not that these are not important or Qbhf!7:!pg!354