06/28/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Short recess was taken. Upon reconvening, Manager noted that the city attorney's office had pointed out . the belief that creating a youth commission as a part of the present human rights structure was not the best way to proceed. However, it was felt that a youth commission could be created and serve advocacy and co-ordinating functions under a separate ordinance. Stan Long, assistant city attorney, explained that the memo received previously i by the Council was an analysis of the amendment to the human rights ordinance proposed by the ad hoc committee. He said he had not seen the report presented at this meeting. But he had no reason to change the view that there would be sub- stantial problems with creating a youth commission as a part of the present human rights ordinance. That was far different, he said, from creating a youth commis- sion and developing a list of specific activities for that commission as now proposed. Councilman Bradley suggested the first issue was whether there was to be a youth commission, then the issue would be the form it would take, to whom it would be responsible, and the sub-issues of age, enforcement, public accommodations, etc. If it is decided to create a commission, he said, the issue might then be referred back to the ad hoc committee with participation by the Council for recommendations with regard to the framework within which to work. Mayor Anderson supported that approach. He was in favor of moving toward the es- tablishment of some kind of youth commission and told the young people in at- tendance that although discussion between the Council and staff may appear trivial, it must be recognized that there are restraints and limitations within which the city must work. He recognized the sentiment in the community and on the Council e for more direct involvement in government by the younger age group - but he emphasized the word "involvement" because he thought it important to remember that it would be a participatory atmosphere rather than one that might gradually erode into an adversary role. As already pointed out, he said, to bring this group under the present human rights ordinance would present critical problems and could complicate the activities of any youth commission or any other youth organization in the city. So he hoped that approval would be given to creation of some type of youth organization within city government, giving consideration to such basic considerations as age, then bring representatives of the ad hoc committee together with Council representatives to work out proposed legislation in either resolution or ordinance form. He hoped too the limited resources under which the city must operate would be realized so that any recommendations forth- coming would go toward establishing the purpose for which both the youth and the city were striving. Councilman Murray also favored the process suggested. He approved the concept of a youth commission but thought it important for the Council to remember that con- septual approval had been given to a youth commission on at least two other occa- sions. Because of that, he hoped that in referring the issue again, a clear di- rective would be given on the charge, particularly with regard to whether a com- mission should or should not be included in the existing human rights ordinance, and the target age group - to 18 years of age or 26. Council members generally expressed themselves in favor of creating a youth commission outside the present human rights ordinance, and to cover the ages of 13 to 18 years. Mr. Murray thought the group should be tied in some fashion to . the Human Rights Council and equal to the other commissions, but he didn't think it should come under the present ordinance. He noted too that membership on in- dividual commissions was more broadly based than the target group of each commis- sion itself. 3/8 6/28/76 - 7