Item A: Human Rights Commission FY12/13 Work Plan

Home Browse Search

Human Rights commissioners, committee members and staff met on September 10, 2011 to refine the recommendations the commission brought to Council for consideration on October 24, 2011. The items commissioners, committee members and staff focused on were: Updating Language in Chapter 2 of City of Eugene Code The current language is about 20 years old and needs to be updated to align with o current human rights city efforts moving from a civil rights to human rights framing. Commissioners and community members would like the council to consider o updating the overall introduction in Chapter 2 to reflect current human rights work and conditions. A human rights orientation moves the ordinance from a civil rights-only focus to an inclusive broader framework. The size of the Human Rights Commission Feedback from commissioners and think tank members is that the current size of o the commission is too large and the City of Eugene should consider reducing the size to increase effectiveness. Case study research shows nationally there is an average of 9-11 members for similar commissions in other communities. The commission would like the council to consider reducing the commission to 10 o community members and 1 city councilor. The current commission has four standing subcommittees codified in City of Eugene code Feedback from commissioners and community members clearly asks for the o commission to be nimble and to tie task team and work groups to the current work plan. Maintaining the current structure is neither sustainable nor effective. o The commission would like council to consider repealing provisions for the four o subcommittees. Commission work groups would be established as needed, on a short-term basis, to support adopted work plans. An accessibility committee would be created as a department advisory committee to work directly with departments and City staff on the broad range of accessibility challenges. Effective commission appointments Feedback from commissioners and community members is that more focus on the o recruitment and appointment process is critical to the commission’s success. There is a strong desire to increase the commission’s role in supporting council in o making effective appointments. The commission would like the council to consider having the commission assume o a more active role in screening and recommending candidates for council approval, thus aligning commission practices closer to those of other council advisory bodies. These code changes are substantial and a direct result of the Human Rights Listening Project. However, the vast majority of feedback gathered from community was used to inform the Human Rights Commission work planning process.