HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Human Relations Commission - 03/04/1999 • ‘§03,��'i 23Q.g6
clf �o
v APR 1999
CV
MINUTES RECEIVEDra
OF THE to cm SECRETARY'S w
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING "c• OFFICE
March 4,1999 �� (bvG'
Commissioners Present Commissioners Absent
Rev.Willie Davila Ms.Anna Mercado
Ms.Lena Coleman Ms.Toni Tamez
Dr.Sylvester Peterson Rabbi Paul Joseph
Ms.Laura Rios Ms.Jeanette Stevens
Ms.Olga Tamar Mr.Errol Summerlin
Mr.Daniel Carmona(Youth Commissioner)
Ms.Kelly Garza(Youth Commissioner) Staff Present
Ms.Blaire Pittman(Youth Commissioner) Dr.Helen Gurley
Ms.June Shultz
Attorney
Mr.Alex Lopez
The Chairperson called the regular monthly meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. A quorum was present to conduct a legally
constituted meeting. Two members called in requesting excused absences—Anna Mercado and Toni Tamez.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
A motion was offered by Commissioner Coleman to accept the February 4, 1999 minutes as submitted and seconded by
Dr.Peterson. Motion was approved and the minutes were accepted as submitted.
CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT—Rev.Willie Davila
Chairman Davila was not at the last meeting,however,this morning he met and with representatives from the Homeless
Issue Business Partnership,who have undertaken plans for a survey of the homeless. They discussed a meeting to be held
at 7:00 p.m.this evening,which is being held for training/planning discussion. The last survey was conducted ten(10)years
ago. The survey will be done on March 9, 1999. They still need volunteers at the Salvation Army Office located on the
corners of Buford and Crosstown. All are invited. They have thirty(30)volunteers,they need one hundred (100).
The Commissioners received a memorandum from the Director,regarding Goals and Objectives. This will be discussed
during the Administrator's Report. At that point Commissioners input will be provided. It was also noted during the last
meeting that some questions were raised about ADA. Because of that,Mr.Art Sosa was asked to provide his understanding
of ADA and what the City has done to comply and bring about enforcement. Also there were some questions directed to
Counsel,and the Commission will give Mr.Lopez an opportunity to address them.
COMMISSIONERS/COMMITTEE REPORTS—Olga Tamar
Housing Committee—Commissioner Tamar,Committee Chair
Commissioner Tamar informed the Commissioners that she and her Committee met for nearly three(3)hours on February
11, 1999. She said that it was the Committee's responsibility to develop housing hearing policies and procedures,for the
Commissions approval, before being submitted to the City Council for adoption. Commission Tamar told the
Commissioners that they looked at the Housing Ordinance,Administrative Hearing Process,the HUD Guidelines,and the
use of a Hearing Officer vs.an Administrative Law Judge.
Commissioner Tamar also told the Commissioners that the Committee looked at Ordinance 20839 and compared it to the
HUD Guidelines. The Committee had a long discussion on Pre-Hearings and how to handle these pre-hearings and
discovery, how to define whom would participate, guidelines, etc. Also there was discussion on how to handle the
Conciliation phase,prior to issuance of a charge by the Administrator.
The Committee's goal is to try to come into compliance with HUD and federal guidelines,come up with something that
would work within the City and be acceptable to those parties. The Committee also discussed the issue of the Open Records
Act and how that would have a bearing here or not. There was further discussion on development of an Administrative Pool,
the Administrative Law Judge or outside Attorney. The Committee discussed the possibility of have a pool of outside
Attorneys or individuals who were retired Judges or from outside the community and/or outside the City. In essence,the
Committee discussed keeping pages 1-6 of the existing ordinance and on page 5 to include Article III. Mr.Lopez was going
to conduct some research for the Committee regarding depositions and interrogatories.
A lot of questions were raised during the course of the meeting. At the end of the meeting,the Committee came to the
conclusion that most of the answers to the questions would be answered by essentially following the HUD guidelines for
what they do when they have a Hearing for their procedures. It was concluded that Mr.Lopez would go back and draw out
the critical points that would be needed to run a Hearing.
Mr.Lopez was not able to have that information ready for this meeting. Mr.Lopez is working on what HUD procedures
would not be needed within the Ordinance. Clearly the majority of them are needed, however,they need to be tailored
specifically for our situation. It shouldn't be too difficult to do, however, it is very time consuming. There are some
fundamental rights and procedures that any litigant is entitled to and they are spelled out in the HUD procedures. The
Committee is basically going to barrow them and incorporate them into our own procedures. Mr.Lopez would have liked
to have had a rough draft,but did not have one at this time.
Rev.Davila asked Commissioner Tamar if there was a written report on the meeting? He did not have one in his packet.
Dr. Gurley indicated there were minutes, however, they were not signed. They were going to be distributed to the
Commission once they were reviewed and signed. (Commissioner Tamar reviewed and signed the original during the
monthly Commission Meeting and staff made and distributed copies of the minutes to the Commission.)
Commissioner Tamar indicated that there was a summation on the last page,after the three(3)hours of meeting—which
was to take a revision before the City Council,Pages 1-6 with some minor modifications to the existing ordinance. The rest
of the intentions for modification of the remaining portion of the Ordinance were spelled out in the meeting minutes. Of
course,additional information was needed,which would come from Mr.Lopez.
Rev. Davila asked for clarification, on where the Committee was in the process? On the initial report, looking at the
information Mr. Lopez is going to research and then supply additional information to the Committee, and then the
Committee is going to bring a draft revised Ordinance to the Commission for review and then pass on to the City Council.
Rev.Davila asked for clarification about when the Commission would have the minutes of the meeting. Dr.Gurley clarified
that they were letting the Committee Chair review the minutes first,to ensure everything that was covered during the meeting
was included. Once approved, then provide the Commissioners with final copies of the minutes, as approved by
Commissioner Tamar. Also, once ready,they will be provided a copy of what Mr. Lopez has prepared regarding the
Hearing process.This will be presented in a rough draft,and then the Commission will proceed with making the necessary
corrections on that. Mr.Lopez clarified to Rev.Davila that he has not finalized a draft yet. This was just provided as
information for the report.
Commissioner Tamar asked for clarification on task for the Committee—were they suppose to provide a draft at the March
Meeting? Dr.Gurley provided clarification,in that the Committee was suppose to provide a report to the Commission in
March. The Housing Committee did meet, and are in the process of developing information. The above referenced
information is provided as an initial report to the Commission. Next,the Committee will to provide a copy of the meeting
2
minutes and a copy of the rough draft of the proposed Ordinance Revision being prepared by Mr.Lopez.
Rev.Davila indicated this then will be accepted as an Interim Report,then at the next meeting in April,or prior to it,the
Commission will receive a copy of the Report,plus Mr.Lopez's findings. Then they'll be prepared for the next meeting.
Mr.Lopez indicated that the draft would be in such a form that it would be able to be edited by the Commission. Rev.
Davila indicated he didn't know if the Committee would be meeting again,however,if they did,to bring any further changes
to the April Meeting.Commissioner Tamar indicated that if they need to meet again,they certainly would,but at this point
there was no need.Mr.Lopez indicated the delay was due to time restrictions on his part,one of the Attorneys left in his
office. Rev.Davila said that was fine,they'll look to find the final report in April.
Rev.Davila asked if there were any other comments? Dr.Gurley indicated she had some comments related to Housing.On
Tuesday,March 2, 1999,she spoke to HUD from Ft.Worth(Jamie Jamison,Director)who informed her that Washington
had sent our City ordinance back to Ft.Worth,asking them to go ahead and make recommendation on it. On talking about
it to Garry Sweeney,Mr. Sweeney did inform Dr.Gurley that since their Attorney had already reviewed it. Washington
doesn't have an Attorney,so since Ft.Worth's Attorney has already reviewed it,they are going to make recommendation
to accept it. Therefore the City's request for substantial equivalency could come anywhere from the end of this month until
no later than May. Mr. Sweeney is expecting the City to receive it. If that happens,then the City of Corpus Christi will
receive a grant for$100,000 in May,than another$100,000 on October 1, 1999. This means the City would receive two
(2)years of funding in one year,which will allow for only one other year(Year 2000-2001),then after that the City would
be on its own.
Rev.Davila,in terms of the accounting within the City structure—they would know that this is a pre-pay amount for the
work of the Department? Dr.Gurley indicated that the first three(3)years of Grant is for the City of Corpus Christi to get
its policies and procedures,training program and everything in order. That is the purpose for the$300,000. After that,the
City would contract with the HUD. The contract would be based on the last year's resolution of Housing complaints. In
example,if the City completed twenty(20)cases,then the City's contract would be for$35,000.
Rev.Davila indicated he understood that,but that his concern was that those funds were not earmarked for this Department
and how things are done. Dr.Gurley said,"No". Rev.Davila indicated he wanted some assurance that there would be
monies next year. Dr.Gurley indicated that the ordinance specifically indicates that the monies received from EEOC or
HUD or any other governmental agency are not to be specifically used to subsidize this Department. It will go into the
General Fund of the City of Corpus Christi. Therefore the Department will be funded out of the General Fund.
NEW BUSINESS
Rev.Davila and Commission welcomed the three(3)new Youth Commissioners— Daniel Carmona;Kelly Garza;and
Blaire Pittman. Each Youth Commissioner indicated the school they represented. Commissioner Pittman attends Flour
Bluff High School;Daniel Carmona attends West Oso High School;Kelly Garza attends West Oso High School. They are
all Juniors. This allows for an opportunity to serve two(2)years
OLD BUSINESS
In order to address ADA questions raised in last month's meeting,Art Sosa,Corpus Christi Building Official,was asked
to attend the Commission Meeting and give a presentation.
Mr.Sosa provided a brief professional resume—currently Building Official for City of Corpus Christi;previously the City
Architect and Facilities Manager. He dealt with a great deal of accessibility issues,many of them in the context of grant
funding through CDBG (Community Development Block Grant Program). He spoke directly to two (2) issues on
accessibility: 1)What the City has done since 1992;2)Applicability to which facilities. (Mr.Sosa provided a handout for
the Commissioners. See attached.)
The City took on a pro-active agenda on accessibility prior to Mr.Sosa coming to the City in 1993. Prior to his coming to
3
the City,Mr.Sosa was the Accessibility Officer for CCISD(Corpus Christi Independent School District). They had other
issues to address,as they were educational based,whereas the City is public based. The City has a number of facilities,
which require accessibility to be correct. When you speak in terms of what buildings or facilities apply in the need for
accessibility,the following is the standard definition:
Place of Accommodation means a facility operated by a private entity,whose operations affect commerce which fall in at
least one of the following categories: residential,multi-family,an inn,hotel,motel,or other place of lodging,except for an
establishment located in a building that contains not more than five(5)rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied
by the proprietor of the establishment; a restaurant, bar or other establishment serving food or drink; a motion picture
theatre,theatres,concert halls,stadiums other places of exhibition or entertainment;an auditorium,convention center,lecture
hall,or other place of public gathering;bakery,grocery,store,clothing store,hardware store,shopping center or other sales
or rental establishments;laundromat,dry cleaner,bank,barber shop,beauty shop,travel service,shoe repair service,funeral
parlor,gas station, office of an Accountant or Lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care
provider,hospital or other service establishment;terminal depot or other station used for specified public transportation;
museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection; park, zoo, amusement park or other place of
recreation;nursery,elementary,secondary,under-graduate,post-graduate,private school or other place of education;day
care center,senior center,senior citizen center,homeless shelter,food bank,adoption agency or other social service center
establishment;and gymnasium,health spa,bowling alley,golf course,or other place of exercise or recreation.
It really covers a broad spectrum of facilities and sometimes,when as an architect,we didn't always understand how they
came up with the definition. But it basically opens up facilities to the people with disabilities,giving them access to all levels
and ranges of activities.
Mr.Sosa then reviewed the information from the handout,itemizing various modifications the City made since 1992-1993.
The City made substantial modifications in a current cumulative approximate total of$1.6 million on ADA issues. This
is a high profile project. The State has recently amended their statutes to mirror the Dept.of Justice statutes. Art 9102 of
the revised Texas Statutes have substantial differences in the mechanisms. Federal standards are basically driven by
litigation,where someone finds an inaccessible facility that qualifies,their recourse is through the Courts. The Texas statutes
(9102) have an active plan review process and they do inspections. So you are obligated to bring the new facility into
compliance anytime you build it or renovate it. It is interesting to note that an Architect or Engineer that fails to do that can
loose his/her license and that's something that the City does not take real lightly. When working with outside firms for City
contracts,and this was something that was very tough to deal with. The City does not cut any slack on accessibility.
Mr.Sosa indicated,"You need to keep in mind that the accessibility standards,both Federal and State are identical and
minimum standards. Just as the Building Codes are and the other Codes are." Mr. Sosa said he wasn't telling the
Commission that the standards work or that they work reasonably well. And he's been working with these standards since
1978.
They work fairly well,however you will come into some situations where a facility will comply,but it may not be totally
accessible.The high dollar things that the Feds and State look at are accessible routes in and around the facility,accessible
drinking fountains and restrooms. Those are the key elements that tend to draw the most attention. Where you see a lot of
consternation is in restaurants,when patrons can't get in,can't park,and they can't get to the restrooms. The restaurants
are obligated to comply.
The City took on a high profile attempt to make as many of the high profile City facilities comply. City Hall was the
flagship,so they've put a lot of money into City Hall. It has made a big difference and the effort continues. There are
approximately three(3)projects in the current funding budget proposal for this coming year that if they make,will continue
the process. One project that the City applied for two(2)years ago,which was funded,was bringing the fire alarm system
up to handicap standards. You wouldn't think of that as an accessibility issue. But it is a life safety issue because the strobe
lights are extremely bright and the horns(audibles)are extremely loud. They will almost knock you out of a chair when a
fire alarm initiates. So the effort is on-going. Mr.Sosa doesn't believe that there is any effort on the City's part to back off
of it.
4
Those are the broad topics Mr.Sosa wanted to bring to the Commission. He has held conversations with Dr.Gurley and
it was clearly demonstrated that the Department is committed to continuing that with Engineering.
Rev.Davila indicated that one of the reasons he asked Mr.Sosa to come,was due to the new Ordinance that was passed,
which indicates the Commission will enforce those rules,especially with buildings. His concern had to do with renovations.
When a company comes to the City and asks for a Building Permit,are those plans reviewed and how specific are those
guidelines?
Mr.Sosa said the guidelines as written in 9102 are a part of our Code by reference. They do not enforce,only because the
State has an active on-going program.A decision was made at Staff level how the City would handle this. In the 1991
Building Code,they were in by reference. In the 1997 Building Code,which the City is soon to adopt,(Council will begin
reviewing in April, 1999)the standards are in the Code as a Chapter. But the City is continuing to maintain the posture that
they're a part of the Code,but the State has an on-going program to plan,review and inspect. It is up to the entity to pay
for those services. The City will continue to maintain them,but not inspect them because the City knows it's taken care of
at the State level and it is a very active program.
Rev.Davila asked to clarify—If someone comes to the City for renovations,they just look at the plans? Mr.Sosa indicated
that they review the plans for Building Code issues,but not for accessibility issues or compliance. Now simultaneously the
Architect or Engineer is obligated to send them to Austin,to the Texas Department of Licensing Regulations. They review
them and send back an extensive comment sheet and the Architect or Engineer has to modify the plans and then it goes to
construction. Throughout the course of that there are no inspections. However,the end result will be that TDLR will send
an Inspector from the Houston Office and they will inspect. If they don't have compliance,they will not issue the letter,and
they will have a period of time in which to bring it into compliance.
Rev.Davila asked if this was something they do at random?
Mr.Sosa indicated it was his understanding that they do inspect every building.
Rev.Davila indicated the reason he asked was that he belonged to a Health Club that did substantial renovations,and he
thinks they complied with everything. Then at the last minute,they changed something in the entrance,and it seems that
now it appears that an individual in a wheelchair would be hard pressed to go through the door they built. So he was
wondering how those things are inspected.
Mr.Sosa indicated that to the extent possible,TDLR Inspectors will do their work after the renovations are complete. The
obvious dilemma there is that once they have their letter of compliance and they are cleared. And again the City doesn't
withhold certificates of occupancy,pending receipt of that letter. But if they still have workers on-site and they see what
they think is a better way to do it, and they have their compliance letter, then it is up to them to not go in and make
modifications that would decrease accessibility. He can't say that that hasn't happened,and can't say that it will,but those
potentials are there.However,they are given the benefit of the doubt. In some cases,it is human error,they think they are
improving something when they are not.
Mr. Sosa gave an example of the City Hall Sam Rankin ramp, which has been complained about as not being easily
negotiable by persons in wheelchairs. It meets the compliance standards. It is a little bit difficult,because it is a long ramp.
None of runs are in excess of the statutes,but there are differences in that some people can easily manipulate wheelchairs,
some can't. So the standards are the standards,and all-be-it that they are minimum standards. Those standards have to do
with spacing,height,clearance,incline,surface texture,notification coming on to a hazardous situation,grasping,turning
radiances,clearances to bottoms of lavatories,bottoms of desks,it is a broad spectrum—and they are good standards.
Rev.Davila indicated he just wanted to know what happened when someone renovated. Mr.Sosa indicated that the reality
of it is with ADA that the issue could be brought to the attention of the appropriate agency—Dept. of Justice. (The
Commission could check this out with Mr.Lopez.) They would investigate it and send letters,starting a long process,to
5
approach a determination if it was correct or not correct. But it is never a quick process.
Rev.Davila asked if there were any other questions? No further questions were put forward.
ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
Dr.Gurley indicated that before she proceeded with the Administrative Report,she would like to go over one specific thing
she discussed with the City-wide Area Coordinator for ADA,today before she came in. She explained to David Ramos
(Coordinator),that the Commission is concerned with the number of restaurants that are not in compliance with ADA. And
the fact that the Commission might want to go out and do what may be called a survey,talk with the individuals,try to get
them to want to come into compliance. All agencies or businesses should have been in compliance by 1994. And the City
still has a lot of them that are not in compliance. What the Commission wanted to talk with him about is going out and doing
the surveys and trying to work with him. Mr.Ramos indicated that because he is only one individual,he would be more than
willing for the Commission to join in and help out and enforce our City Ordinance. The Commission's
authority/responsibilities supercedes anything that he is currently doing. Because the Commission is empowered by the City
Ordinance,and his authority/responsibilities is by policy—so there is a slight difference. He was happy that the Commission
would even consider working and trying to help the City bring people into compliance,as far as being able to accommodate
individuals with disabilities.
Rev.Davila indicated that he had noticed this discussion in the minutes of last month's meeting. He asked if it would be
a good idea for him come and give the Commission an idea of what process they would undertake? Or what did Dr.Gurley
foresee? Dr.Gurley indicated that she didn't believe Mr.Ramos had a process at this point. Mr.Ramos is looking for the
Commission to give him some direction. Also,the Commission works with the Mayor's Committee on Disability. Dr.
Gurley believes they will want to meet with the Commission in April,to talk about how they can all work together. In
talking with the Chair,at the Mayor's Committee,Roland Guzman,he also said that he would welcome the Commission
giving them some support and assisting them. Because of the Housing grant the City is going to receive,that is one of the
first things the Commission were going to do with some of the monies—specifically dealing with the housing processes and
everything.
Commissioner Coleman put forward the name of Mr. Johnson, whom she believes was a former Chair of the Mayor's
Committee. She said she believes he heads another Committee that specifically goes out into the community to look at
businesses not meeting the codes,etc. He is in a wheelchair also,and he goes in to see if they are accessible.
Dr.Gurley indicated that she had not spoken to Mr.Johnson. When Dr. Gurley met with the Colonel and several other
people last week,Mr.Guzman was there. They discussed the Mayor's Committee.
Dr. Gurley briefly reported on the Human Relations department's monthly activities. (See attached copy.) Dr. Gurley
indicated that during the month of February 1999,there were 566 inquiries, either by telephone or walk-in,to discuss
something they felt was not right. It was a complaint in the area of employment,housing,public accommodation or other
areas that we do not have responsibility or jurisdiction to deal with. Of the 566 inquiries—318 of those were individuals
who were having problems with employment within the City limits of Corpus Christi; 100 of those were housing. (She will
discuss later the reason for the number of housing calls received.) 2 calls on Public Accommodation and 146 Other Calls,
giving us a total 566 inquiries.
The Human Relations Department took 26 Employment Charges of Discrimination. That means that someone has walked
into the Human Relations Office and was able to give enough information to give a prima facie case. So that,based upon
what they told the Compliance Officer,it was believed that there was possibly discrimination. However,the Investigator
will not know that until after an investigation is completed. Of those 26 cases,6 cases are to be investigated by the Human
Relations Office,the remainder will go to EEOC in San Antonio. The Human Relations Office took 2 formal Housing
Complaints,from the Housing calls/contacts that were received. Those 2 complaints have already been resolved. Working
with representatives from the State of Texas and the Lawyers for the Apartment Complex,the staff was able to resolve the
complaints. The Department took a total of 28 Charges for the month of February.
6
Dr.Gurley reviewed Page 3 of the Monthly Report. Year To Date—the Department accepted a total of 128 Charges of
Discrimination against various employers within the city limits of Corpus Christi. Of those charges,49 remained with the
City and 79 have been forwarded for investigation by San Antonio Regional District Office of EEOC. Then of course the
Housing Complaint,the 2 just talked about. Giving the Department 130 charges. The Department has closed to date—57
Employment Complaints(beginning October 1, 1998)and 1 Housing Complaint—giving us 58 closures.
Dr.Gurley reviewed Page 5 of the Monthly Report. The City's contract with EEOC requires staff to investigation 118
claims of discrimination within our area. The Department has completed 57 of those 118 cases. The Department also has
6 cases pending in the office,because once a case is closed,the Department has to maintain those cases in the office for at
least 15 days before the Department can completely close the case. So at this point, the Department has completed
approximately 48%of the City's contract. (The City has until September 301 to complete its contract.)
The Department's Intake(that is where the person comes in to make their allegation of discrimination and staff meet with
them and hear what they have to say,write up their affidavit,as well as their Charge of Discrimination)contract is for 232.
The Department has completed 79 of those. Those are the cases taken here and forwarded to San Antonio. San Antonio
is then responsible for the investigation of those cases.
There are instances where a potential charging party will come into the office. The Department normally will not take their
case if they do not present sufficient information to make a prima facie case,unless they insist upon filing a case. If the
Department does take their case upon their insistence,it will dismiss their case immediately. A lot of the time if a person
is saying the Department is just taking cases here,that is no true. The Department does take them,but if they do not have
prima facie,it will dismiss them at the initial stage of the investigation.
On the last page of the Report-last year at this same time,the Department had talked to 3,504 individuals. This year,the
Department has talked to 2,900 individuals,therefore,it has a minus of 604 from last year. So that means,"Are we working
ourselves out of a job?" The Department doesn't know,but it is good if we are.
Dr.Gurley discussed Ms.Ida Castro,new EEOC Chairperson. She is newly appointed and assumed her role in December
1998. She replaced the Chair that went out during the time President Bush was in office. They are just now beginning to
appoint a full Chair. There have been interim Chairs,but not full Chairs since then. Dr.Gurley provided the Commissioners
a copy of Commissioner Castro's bibliography,to give an idea of her background. If anyone has any questions,Dr.Gurley
indicated she would be glad to respond to them.
Dr.Gurley asked if everyone had received a copy of the Annual Report? When June Shultz came.on board,she and Dr.
Gurley reviewed the Annual Report. There were some things Dr.Gurley wanted to make changes on. Those changes were
incorporated,then the report was finalized and distributed to the Commissioners. If anyone did not receive one,let the
Human Relations office know and one will be provided. A few corrections were made,but nothing that would take away
from the text of what had been shown. The Department wanted to ensure it had a good report going through.
The next item discussed was the Fair Housing Brochure. The Housing Brochure was distributed through the Caller Times
—it went out to 46,000 individuals within the City of Corpus Christi. What the Department/Commission wanted to do,was
after the City Ordinance was passed last August,was to try to write a brochure to give an idea as to what are some of the
kinds of things that go on during our investigative process. Needless to say,the brochure looks beautiful. However,there
was one mistake,there was a transposition of one number—a 9 for a 6. This was in the 1-800 number that people were
dialing went to a sexually oriented business. The Department found out that a lot of people called—not because of the trying
to reach the sex line,but because of the fact that they received this brochure and did not know that City of Corpus Christi
had an agency like this in place,since 1963.
The Human Relations Department was trying to get this information out and will continue to do so. The Department,
received a call today from a lady who was concerned she would be charged for the 1-800 call,when she had called for
information. It was clarified that she would not be charged as she didn't call the 1-900 number,and appropriate assistance
7
was provided.
On February 19th,Commissioners Training was provided by Dr.Gurley. Four commissioners attended. It went quite well.
Dr.Gurley was able answer a lot of questions for those individuals who were not familiar with the duties of the Commission.
Dr.Gurley will provide another training session for the new Commissioners. She will provide written notice when the
training will be held. Dr.Gurley indicated she had requested the Youth Commissioners be Sophomores or Juniors,to allow
for opportunity for longer service with the Commission,if they enjoy what they are doing and want to be actively involved
in what the Commission is doing. Dr.Gurley was glad to learn they were all Juniors.
The next item discussed the Human Relations Commission Brochure. Dr. Gurley provided copies of a draft brochure,
requesting input and/or suggestions from the Commission. The Commissioners were asked to look at Ordinance 023411,
the last ordinance passed, when reviewing it, as this outlines the Commissions areas of responsibility. If the Youth
Commissioners don't have it,then it will be provided when they come for training. Several days will be put forward for the
training, as it is understood the Youth Commissioners are still in school. However, once the Commissioners have an
opportunity,please review the draft. It will be a Commissioners Brochure,basically letting the community know what the
Commission's responsibilities are. All input was requested to be submitted by the end of next month,then Dr.Gurley will
finalize for publication to the community.
Dr. Gurley then discussed the 1999-2000 Departmental Goals and Objectives (handout provided in Commissioner's
packets). At the Department Head Retreat, the City Manager requested each department to develop their goals and
objectives for the next fiscal year. The Human Relations Department and Commission's items centered around the
Commission and the things we need to look at getting done. Dr.Gurley reviewed the Mission Statement,then the Goals
and Objectives. The first goal regarded conducting a Fair Housing Study—there had never been one done in Corpus Christi.
The Human Relations Department/Commission does not know the actual hard data.
Rev.Davila indicated that there was a"Housing Assessment"done,and he wanted to know the difference from it and what
the survey would address? Dr.Gurley indicated that the"Housing Assessment"conducted in 1991,was basically measured
on what happened in San Antonio,and not on what was occurring within the city limits of Corpus Christi.
Rev.Davila indicated that the"Housing Assessment"dealt with affordable housing,subsidized housing,what need was,
etc. There had been a study conducted in San Antonio that included testing. Dr.Gurley indicated that when they began
developing the new ordinance,testing was one of the things that the City Council would have problems with. So what the
Department intends to do is form a committee,made up of City staff and define the areas we want to address and bring it
back to the Commission in proposal form. Dr.Gurley indicated that the Commission would need to go community by
community within the City to determine the affordable housing. The Department knows that there is not enough affordable
housing in the community,because it receives telephone calls regarding this matter. So the Commission will have to find
a way to determine if the City has affordable housing and still be able to do what is necessary,but yet deal with the concerns
of the City Council.
Rev.Davila indicated that they had not said they would not,and the Commission could not write that into the Ordinance,
so he was just curious in the difference between the assessment and the study. Dr.Gurley indicated they wanted to look at
pretty much the same thing,but they want to determine how they would gather the information,so it would be a true study.
Rev.Davila asked how the Commission would be a part of it? Dr.Gurley indicated she was looking at getting with Texas
A&M University to devise a program for us,possibly hiring students to do our field work,as there is only June Shultz and
myself at this point to begin to do the study. There is a possibility that the City Manager has suggested that the Department
hire two additional people,once the Department knows it has the HUD contract. Once a proposal is put together,certainly
she would want to pass everything by the Commission and utilize the Commission wherever the Department can,to assist.
Rev.Davila indicated that Commissioner Summerlin indicated that his agency did something like this. Dr.Gurley clarified
that Commissioner Summerlin's agency is more involved in the ADA area. Dr.Gurley indicated she didn't want to mix
apples with oranges. Because of the nature of Coastal Bend Legal Services—what they do and what the City does,the
8
Commission doesn't want the Council to say that they are trying to mix both agencies.
Another goal is to provide training in Fair Housing,which is one of the requirements of HUD. This will involve developing
the training and providing it to the community. Another area is to provide training for the Commissioners. Dr.Gurley
indicated that under the first grant that is received by HUD,she would like to send the Commissioners and staff and 2 or
3 people out of Legal to Chicago,to John Marshall School of Law for training. This is a one week training program. That
means that when they have a program,the federal government pays for the Commission and staff to get the training. So she
will want to send as many of the Commissioners as she can,particularly those commissioners on the Housing Committee,
because they will be dealing with the Hearings,or helping in that area.
Another goal is developing the Housing policies and procedures. There are policies and procedures now on investigating
claims of housing discrimination. But we will need to make them to be substantially equivalent to the federal government,
so we will be redeveloping those.
Item 4,is to begin use of Mediation at the initial stage of the investigation. The Department has already started this process.
This will continue to speed this process up. The Investigators in the department are beginning to use Mediation.
The Disparity Study is expected to be complete by the University of Texas at the end of May. In the event the City has to
develop a Compliance Program,the Compliance Program would be monitored from the Human Relations Department. Next
• week,Dr.Gurley will find out pretty much where the study is. According to the Attorney for Disparity Study,she said the
study was 3 percent completed. Then the City will have a better idea as to whether we will have to have an Affirmative
Action Program or an Equal Opportunity Program providing equal access to all persons within the community.
Objective 6, the Human Relations Department wants to complete 150 charges of discrimination, as broken out in the
itemization. Objective 7,completion of the number of Intakes as shown in the EEOC contract. Objective 8 is to begin a
survey on apartment complexes—hopefully to be completed by the Year 2001. Objective 9,is to develop a survey regarding
accessibility,which is an area the Commission has already been discussing—which we hope to complete by the Year 2001.
The last objective is to hold our annual training conference,which will be held August 6th this year. There have been several
attorneys who have already confirmed they would be attending as guest speakers. Also Judge Hayden Head will be the
Plenary Speaker. Also Dr.Gurley spoke this week with Jamie Jamison,who will be assisting in responding on behalf of
Assistant Secretary Eva Plaza—so the City hopes to have Assistant Secretary Plaza here as one of guest speakers.
Dr.Gurley indicated that she would like any suggestions or input on these Goals and Objectives,although these have been
presented to the City Manager as our preliminary information for budgetary purposes. These goals and objectives are used
in determining how the Human Relations Department will build their budget. Budget training begins next Monday,and the
budget process begins next Friday,March 12`s.
Rev.Davila indicated that he had one question,which pertained to the area of automation and computers and so forth.
Especially when the Commission would get into the area of Housing discrimination. Would some of the monies be
earmarked for that?Will the City fully automate the office in terms of housing and employment and so on? Dr. Gurley
indicated that everything would be automated. The Department just received new computers and computer equipment from
EEOC,to upgrade the computers to be in compliance with Y2K. Also,the City has also given the office 2 new computers
that meet the standards for the Year 2000. There are 3 others on order. In talking with HUD the other day,it was learned
that HUD will automatically figure into EEOC. So the Department will be able to take EEOC charges through to
Washington,and HUD charges through to Washington,on the same computer. Hopefully,that will be in compliance and
fully automated. Next week,EEOC will send their computer people down to set up all the new computer equipment and
take the old back to Washington or leave it for us to dispose of. Dr. Gurley said, "So, yes, we will be completely
automated."
Dr.Gurley also informed the Commission,that the Department completed a survey for the City of St.Petersburg,Florida.
The City and Department get these types of surveys when they are getting ready to start a new Human Relations
Commission. They will pick out several Human Relations Commissions throughout the United States,and they ask the
9
Department to respond to questions and provide information on how they do business here,so they can determine how they
are going to put their program together.
Rev.Davila indicated that the only item he noticed missing from Dr.Gurley's report was the meeting with the Commander
at CCAD(Corpus Christi Army Depot). The possible change in terms of personnel. Rev.Davila indicated it is important
for him to mention it,in terms of CCAD having to be more competitive and what that may mean to the Depot. Dr.Gurley
indicated from her understanding of the meeting,the Commander is explaining that they will now be bidding on their jobs,
which could cause a problem for a lot of people. There are approximately 232 positions that were involved in this bidding,
and if the base doesn't get them,then it will go to the lowest bidder or person with the best program. So now the Army
Depot is going to have to become very competitive in being able to get out and maintain the people they currently have on
staff.
One of the other things we discussed with them, were a lot of problems they were experiencing with employees they
currently have on staff,and their perceptions. Dr.Gurley offered to work with them as a disinterested third party. To come
in and mediate some of the cases they may have,so they can hold their work force together—not having a group here and
a group there,etc. They basically told Dr.Gurley and Rev.Davila to explain to the individuals if they start coming to our
office filing claims of discrimination,that the jobs and everything on the base now are going to have to be just as competitive
as anyone else,looking for the job. In order to keep the 232 people employed,they are going to have to start producing a
lot more and being able to show that the Army Depot can compete fairly.
Rev.Davila indicated that several things that were mentioned. One is that if BRAC is re-instituted(that is the Base Closing)
that this year would be the base year. They have visits the first year,when they begin to evaluate these types of bases. The
Commander pointed out that when Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio was evaluated,their efficiency was at 20%and that
there was more discussion about relocating a Reserve Training Unit,than about closing Kelly. So he really brought it to
our attention,that we really need to be competitive,that our work force had to be efficient. He indicated that we have to put
the product out,or else we may be facing a base closure hearing. So it's very important,and he wants the community to
be aware and especially Commissions such as ours.
Commissioner Coleman indicated that,"When Dr.Gurley mentioned different ones coming to file EEOC things,I have a
question in reference to this,because this is pretty much the same as what I am talking about. I have contracts on NAS,and
one of my contracts is through the National Industries for the Blind and Handicapped through NISH." "It is kind of a unique
type of job,because I hire people with disabilities(MR's,mental health and physical disabilities),that have to be supervised
by a job coach(one on one)." "I receive a commensurate wage certificate from DOL,to pay these people and provide jobs
for them. Time studies are done and they are paid based upon what they make. It may take 2 or 3 people to do one job."
"Some have come to your office(the Human Relations office)and filed an EEOC suit." "It is my understanding that you
are not looking at those cases here,simply because I am on the Human Relations Board. It is referred to San Antonio. Then
they send someone in to talk to me,and after I talk with them and explain what is happening,they wonder why they are
there."
Commissioner Coleman said,"One gentleman came in,and I asked him and said,"here are my records". He looked at them
and he looked at the wages and he said,"well this is not right". Then I said,"wait a minute",and went to the wall and pulled
down the commensurate wage certificate and laid it in front of him. He said,"What is this?" I said,"You aren't familiar
with this? It comes from DOL. It allows people to work with disabilities,so they can be in the community and live like we
do. However,it is a unique situation,because they have to have job coaching and they can't really do the job." He said,
"I never heard of that". I gave him some literature on it,and he read it and said,"I don't know what I'm doing there",and
he left."
Commissioner Coleman indicated,"I am wondering Dr.Gurley,just like the other people who come,can't you look into
this and explain,after this has been done,and tell these people? Because it is taking up a lot of my time,when they decide
to come.What's happening? I mean,I think,"Yes,I am on this Board,but I think you could be fair and equitable with
anybody." "I give you(Dr.Gurley)that credit." "And when they come to your office,you need to look at these cases."
10
"And,if they are on a commensurate wage,maybe you need to look at the time studies that are being done,and not refer
these cases to San Antonio. Because these people take up a lot of my time." "And then they send me letters saying that I've
been cleared,there's nothing wrong with what you are doing." "But look at the time that I'm spending and it is costing me
dollars. When it could be done. Just like the Colonel has asked you to tell them,"There's no point in coming because we
are going to look at productivity." You can tell them,"You're on commensurate wage. I'll look at the time studies. If
there's anything wrong,I'll cite Ms.Coleman,just like you would anyone else."
Dr.Gurley indicated she understood what Commissioner Coleman was saying and her frustration. As I said earlier,"We
will tell individuals that they do not have a prima facie case. If they insist,we are required by EEOC regulations that we
take the charge." "If they are in my area,I will dismiss the charge as soon as the Investigator comes to me with it." "But,
(and that is what EEOC is suppose to be doing)we have A,B,and C—those 3 areas." "A—Is if we believe that this is
going to be a lawsuit. That is-the area where they have presented everything there,and it says on its face that this is a good
lawsuit." "Then that goes into the"A"category." "Then there is the"B"category—which is a maybe." "Then you go into
the"C"category." "That is the category where I say,"if they come in and want to file this charge of discrimination—we
have to take it." "We have no choice."
Commissioner Coleman said,"That's not what I'm trying to say. Let me correct you. I am fully aware of the three steps
of which you are talking about. Maybe I am misunderstanding,because it was my understanding that when someone comes
in and says that they have a complaint against one of my companies—you, it is my understanding that you don't even
consider what it is about. You just referred to the San Antonio."
Dr.Gurley indicated,"No,that is ...". Commissioner Coleman said,"That's what I'm talking about". Dr.Gurley said,"No
that is not the case." Commissioner Coleman said,"I'm asking you to look at it." Dr.Gurley again stated,"No,that is not
the case." "We look at any charge that is filed against you,the same way we do as in any other case that is coming in."
"However,we do not investigate any claims against members serving on this Commission. The same as I do not investigate
claims filed against the City of Corpus Christi." "That is in the Work Sharing Agreement with EEOC,so I cannot investigate
your claim."
Commissioner Coleman said,"I was not aware of that." Dr.Gurley said,"Okay". Commissioner Coleman said,"Then I
have some decisions to make."
Rev.Davila asked if there were any other comments?
PUBLIC COMMENTS-Limited to two(2)Minutes
Rev.Davila asked if there were any public comments?
None
Mo '6 n was made to adjourn and was seco ded. The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:30 p.m.
0 / ,
The Rev.Willie N,vila,Ch.1;erson Date Minutes Approved
7 ,,,4_,Z___4„-- --- „..,__7(
11