HomeMy WebLinkAboutHuman Relations Commission - Minutes - 05/15/1974Minutes
Fort Collins Human Relations Commission
May 15 , 1974
RE: Proposed Human Rights Ordinance
Public Hearing Number 2
Members Present: Elizabeth Dyer
Sam Van llhy
James Baird
Jim Nichols
Margaret Batson
Ben Napheys
Dick Yates (CSU Human Relations Comm.)
Parker Preble
Staff Present: John McGraw
Guest: Terry Belton --Boulder Human Rights Officer
Other: Members of news media
Concerned citizens
(These minutes contain only the discussion related to the proposed Human Rights
Ordinance. Tapes are available to clarify any points covered herein.)
Chairman Baird called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. He then introduced Mr. Terry
Belton, Boulder Hunan Rights Officer.
Terry Belton:
The human Rights Law is equivalent to Colorado antidiscrimination legislation and
the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Act.
Concerning jurisdiction in cases where a person has filed with both the Colorado
Commission and The Boulder Human Rights Office, the local office has jurisdiction
if the complaint is filed with that office first, but if the complaint is filed
with the Colorado Office first then the local office has no jurisdiction to proceed.
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission could decide to proceed if the local office
finds "no cause" but that is still in the air at the present.
Many people still prefer tc file with the civil rights commission because of the
greater power involved there.
The last resort in any case is the municipal court and there is some question of
how much power the municipal court can exercise because of financial limitations,
and the uncertainty as to whether the city can get involved in a class action.
Most cases in Boulder have been one person and all have been conciliated without
a court action. The whole constitutional test has yet to happen.
M V
Minutes of May 15, continued ...... Terry Belton
If the local court went against the person, the person can still bring a private
suit. If the director finds a "cause" and conciliation fails, the director recommends
the case to the City Attorney's office, who would prosecute the case, and the Human
Rights Officer would be the material witness.
The procedure for filing a complaint is:
1. The person has 90 days from time of alleged discrimination.
2. If the director finds "no cause:" the person has 30 days to appeal to the
municipal court.
3. If the director finds the allegations materially untrue the person can
appeal to the Human Relations Commission.
The service performed to the citizens of Boulder that is not done by the state
or federal agencies is mainly in regard to the time element. Most Boulder cases
have been conciliated within a month. The person who is injured has a better
chance of gettin; help immediately. With the Colorado Civil Rights Commission,
the time fora case is between 11f; and 2 years.
However, the City of Boulder cannot do as much as the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
In conciliation one can try to resolve as much as you can get by with, but when
talking about $1,000 back pay, there is a serious question if the municipal court
can legally impel a lawyer to award that kind of money. There is a $S00
limitation in the municipal court, but the ordinance does not indicate an amount.
The municipal court is not equipped mostly because of financial reasons.
Belton's Philosophy:
The first court case must be a strong one because if the court reverses the
decision of the director, that will hinder the director to conciliate in the future.
He has not had to make that decision yet and has not been involved in cases
over $500.
As of now, and up to now, there have not been cases filed with both Boulder and
the CCRC. or Boulder and EEOC.
Belton considers the job to be full-time and he has a law degree and is a member
of the Colorado Bar.
His priority is to conciliate; the court is the last resort. He has dealt with
72 cases in 11. years and both parties have been satisfied. Both parties must
sign a paper that they are satisfied with the decision.
Parker Preble--Introduction to Ordinance
Conciliation is the goal that most want when they have a complaint regarding
discrimination. People want recourse; they want relief. Reasonable people
realize that relief will come thru conciliation. Early in the historg the
F.
N 0
Minutes of May 15, continued ......Parker Preble
Human Relations Commission local people realized there was not a method of relief
thru the Commission. The Commission was a body with the power of a paper tiger. The
Commission was not acle to offer relief. The Commission realized other methods of
relief and often recommended that, but the backlog is so great that people were not
afforded relief often up to two years. The primary purpose of the Ordinance is to
give a method of relief to local people on a local basis in a reasonable length of time.
Sara Bond, CSU Student:
She has filed a job discrimination complaint with the CCRC. Already she has
found that it takes a lot of time. She realized that in cases involving discrim-
ination in housing or jobs, the time factor is most important. Since most people
need to eat and a place to live. Most people don't even know they have recourse,
perhaps a local ordinance will make that knowledge more possible.
Merle Goddard --Representing the Ft. Collins Chamber of Commerce:
ThA Chamber met three times in regard to the Ordinance. The first time to review
the legal aspects, the second with James Baird, the third to finalize the
prepared statement. The final decision was not unanimous, but the Gaamber gives
qualified approval. (See statement)
Response by Parker Preble:
Historically the purpose of the HRC was an educational one. However,as the
functions of the Commission progress, the response of the community was in
the area of grievance and investigation. A lot of time was spent in that
area and work on other committees was neglected. It is the hope of the Commission
that with the passaE-e of the.Ordinance, education can again become primary.
Response by Terry Bolton:
Over one-half of his time is spent with grievance and investigation, but he has
been able to spend >ome time with educational programs. He spent time with the
Boulder Chamber est.blisaing an Employment practices Program.
The four point education progra was:
1. Publicity releases expressing the desire to educate ,
2. A pamphlet which explained the different agencies and the jurisdiction of each,
3. A three day workshop for local employers to explain the rights of employees,
4. A model for affirmative action.
The result was that it satisfied part of the education need and alleviated many
fears of businessmen.
3
M N
Minutes of May 15, continued ...... Terry Belton
Time procedure for filing in Boulder:
1. The Director or Secretary arrange an appointment with complaintee that day
or the next,
2. The day the complaint is filed a notice goes to the employer or landlord,
3. In the letter it is explained that upon receiving the notice, the person must contact
the HR Office
4. If the person does not respond,the HR Office notifies the person in a couple
of days,
5. A meeting is set up for an investigare situation
6. The investigation can take from a daf to two weeks,
7. Then facts and testimony are sorted,
8. Within 2 or 3 weeks a decision of cause or no cause is determined, and
9. An attempt is made to conciliate
Carmella Baker --Concerned citizen:
Sees a need for the ordinance because she has been involved with discrimination two
times but saw no effective recourse. A person would be a step ahead with this
ordinance.
Barb Willing --Concerned citizen:
Who would pay attorney's fees?
The Human Rights Director and City Attorney would represent the person. Therefore,
free legal advice is provided.
Steven Winer --Welfare Rights Organization:
He would like to see provisions about complaints with the police, since now
complaints go to the Police Department and find that objective decisions
seldom result.
The Boulder Alternative to this is a Citizen's Advisory Board to which complaints
are filed.
McGra.r to Belton:
Would you be afraid of being fired if you took a case against the City, or a City
Department ---is. the Police Department?
Belton: The Director is not a popular person, but if fired, by taking a case, by
the City Manager, the Director would have a good case for filing a complaint himself.
M
M
Minutes of May 15, continued
McGraw: Jeff Sandman, Assistant Attorney General assigned to the Colorado
Civil Rights Office, will attend the next meeting to give suggestions and
his opinion of the proposal.
Meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
5
N M
(Addition to HRC minutes, May 15, 1974)
Sam Van Why:
A letter from Wanda Hoffman has been presented in regard to the HRC meeting with
the Housing Authority. The point being that many citizens concerned about the
disbursement of low-income housing, will be out of town when the Commission meets
in June. (See attached letter).
After the letter was read, Ed Ostertag emphasized the need to have a meeting with
both the Housing Authority and a representative of the Poudre R-1 School Board.
The point being that there should be cooperation between the two groups.
The consencus was to assign John McGraw to set a meeting with the Housing
Authority and the School District. He would then contact Commission members
and the press to inform the public, the time and place of that meeting.
Before adjournment, it was clarified that the Commission could hold the
third , and final public hearing regarding the proposed Human Rights Ordinance
on May 22, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers. The Commission would also meet
with the housing Authority at a time and place to be announced later. The next
regular meeting of the Commission will be June 13, 1974.
Meeting adjourned