HomeMy WebLinkAboutHuman Relations Commission - Minutes - 10/03/2002i
Human Relations Commission Community Room
215 N. Mason
October 3, 2002, 5:30 — 7:30 p.m.
Council Liaison. David Roy l Staff Liaison: Angelina Powell
Phone V: 407-7393 1 Phone: 221-6525
Bob Lenk Phone:
A regular meeting of the Human Relations Commission was held on October 3, 2002 in the 215 N.
Mason Conference Room 1B.
HRC Members present Kimberly Clouser, Mary Gomez, Ken Gordon, Jr, Rita Klepac, Bob
Lenk, Man Oberoi, Parker Preble, and Erik Rush
HRC Members absent Rich Miller
/with notification
Staff Members present Angelina Powell, Staff Liaison
I. Call to Order. The meeting was officially called to order by Chairperson Bob Lenk at 5:38 p.m.
II. Approval of Minutes. Man Oberoi made a motion to approve the minutes of September 5, 2002.
Ken Gordon Jr. seconded the motion. The commission voted unanimously to accept the motion.
III. Subcommittee Reports.
Diversity Subcommittee The last subcommittee meeting was held September 15`h
Rita reported that attendance was lower than capacity on the first two of the Eracism films series.
Two films remain to be held at the Senior Center at 6:30 pm:
• October 13, Mississippi Masala with speaker Blane Harding, Lecturer at CSU Center
for Applied American Ethnicity
• October 20, Journey to a Hate Free Millennium with comments by Barbara Catbagan
Spalding, Humans Rights Resource and Education Office, City of Fort Collins
At the next meeting of the Diversity Subcommittee meeting, the subcommittee is expecting seven
to eight guests —representatives of groups interested in learning more about who the HRC is and
how they might better interact with them. The interest is due to the mailing of about 50 letters
inviting dialogue. The date has been set as Wednesday, October 30`". The location will be
announced later.
Human Relations Award Subcommittee. No report.
Police Subcommittee. Parker Preble attended the September 15`s CRB Meeting. No report.
IV. Liaison Reports
Northern Colorado Multicultural Corn. Parker Preble attended the last NCMC meeting. No
report.
V. Old Business.
MLK Lunch/HR Awards. Ken noted the awards committee is working on another draft of a letter
seeking corporate sponsors for the event/scholarships.
riuman Relations Comt*ion
Page 2
Colorado Amendment 31—Bilingual Education. At the September meeting Erik Rush asked if the
Commission had information and wanted to share their position on the question before the State of
Colorado electorate relative to Amendment 31. In the meantime, Chair Bob Lenk learned of City
Council's Resolution 2002-084 in support the School District's opposition to the Proposed
Constitutional Amendment (Unz Iniative) as well as the URL addresses of proponents and
opponents websites. That information provided the backdrop for a discussion that sorted out the
elements of the amendment, its impact on the residents of the City and the position of the
individual commissioners. As a group, they decided for a number of reasons that they were in
opposition to the Amendment.
• Ken Gordon Jr made a motion that the HRC publicize their opposition to Amendment 31.
Rita Klepac seconded the motion. The commission voted unanimously in favor of the
motion.
Ken suggested that Erik, Mary & Rita work on a draft Soapbox that could be reviewed by the
whole commission then submitted to the Coloradoan for publication. (See attached final draft.)
VI. Announcements. The Face to Face Group will be meeting on November 5 at 8:30 in the 215 N.
Mason Community Room. The topic is related to the INS. Immigration and local law
enforcement issues such as victims and juveniles —what they can and cannot do.
VII. Adjournment. Ken Gordon Jr. made a motion to adjourn. Mary Gomez seconded. The meeting
was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. The next HRC meeting will be November 14 in the 215 N. Mason
Community Room.
Approved:
Bob Leak, Chair
OR I
An li a Powell, Staff Liaison
Human Relations Comsion
Page 3
Amendment 31 — Good Intentions, Bad Idea
•
Two of the functions of the Ft. Collins Human Relations Commission are "to acquaint Fort Collins residents
with all local, state and federal civil rights ordinances, statutes and laws," and "to promote the acceptance and
respect for diversity through educational programs and activities, and to discourage all forms of
discrimination." Therefore we, the members of the Commission, held an in-depth discussion of the issues
relating to Amendment 31. Our unanimous conclusion was to express opposition to the Amendment as follows:
First, the Commission agrees unanimously upon the value of learning English, including through immersion
programs. However, we are not all in agreement over the methods to implement this education in our schools.
We also give credence to the adage "if it aint broke, why fix it?" Poudre R-1 Schools (as well as districts across
the state) already have language programs in place for non -English-speaking students that have proven very
successful for years. We believe in our local schools and enjoy the multiple options we have available.
Amendment 31 would do away with these programs and would implement a cookie -cutter approach to
education which we do not believe is the right choice for educators or our children. Nor do we believe that one
academic year is a reasonable amount of time in which to require a child to attain the required proficiency in
English (this being the amount of time proscribed in the Amendment). The method proposed in Amendment 31
has not been proven, nor have the methods currently in place been invalidated.
Second, the campaign to pass 31 is being led by Ron Unz, a childless California software developer who
appears to have made getting this initiative passed in as many states as possible his life's work. The language
of the initiative makes sweeping presumptions with regard to the dismal future of education should the citizens
of Colorado be rash enough not to pass it. "What we call bilingual education is almost only all -Spanish," Unz
said at a Sept. 29 rally. "If the goal is to help immigrant children be successful, you have to teach them
English." Well, our goal is to teach children English, and Mr. Unz has a right to disagree with our methods. Are
our goals the same? Some believe that Amendment 31 is more of an attack on other cultures than it is
implementation of an educational technique. While any position the Commission might have on that point
would be non sequitur, if one considers the tone of the language in the initiative, it's not difficult to see how
some might interpret it that way.
The citizens of Colorado are reasonable and open-minded; however, we would prefer people from the outside to
engage our thinking rather than impose their rigid beliefs. Amendment 31's proponents have offered no
discussion regarding children who speak languages other than Spanish, the nuances of cross-cultural
educational methodology, or the unique benefits of diversity — specifically, having bilingual students in our
schools.
Let us reiterate - the method proposed in Amendment 31 has not been proven, nor have the methods currently in
place been invalidated. Our state constitution should not limit our schools, and therefore our students and
educators, to such inflexible educational methods, particularly under pressure from parties who have no vested
interest in our state or our educational system. After all, who better to decide what is best for our children than
the citizens of Colorado?
Mary Gomez, Rita Klepac, and Erik Rush
For the City of Ft. Collins Human Relations Commission
November 15, 2002