Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFH Inclusion and Policing Task Force Agenda Packet_2-07-17_AmendedCITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS Falcon Heights Task Force City Hall 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue AGENDA February 7, 2017 7:15 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. I. Call to Order II. Review Agenda III. Discussion of Community Values for Policing IV. BREAK (5 Minutes) V. Discussion on features of the Current Police Contract VI. Updates on Community Conversations VII. Next Meeting – February 7, 2017 VIII. Announcements and Updates IX. Adjourn BLANK PAGE  Tuesday January 31, 2017 Falcon Heights Task Force on Inclusion and Policing Meeting Minutes Attendance: Melanie Leehy, Randy Gustafson, Sack Thongvanh, Mayor Peter Lindstrom, Michael Wade, Kate Thompson, Kathy Quick, Ken Morris, Amy Johnson, Kay Andrews, Jim Ballentine, Peter Demarath and Dan Johnson-Powers. Jay Colond was absent due to an illness. I. Call to Order Meeting was called to order at 7:19pm. II. Review Agenda There was agreement on the agenda with no changes needed. III. Review Meeting Minutes Minutes from the Jan. 10, 2017 meeting were reviewed. Two changes were needed. One was in section 3 where "my" should be changed to "by" and the other was in section 4 where the community meeting should be described as multiple groups of 8-10 people. IV. Discussion of Draft Statements of Falcon Heights Community Values Provisional statements were made available prior to the meeting for members to read and use to develop language for the community meetings. Four small groups were formed to discuss the draft statements. Draft statement topics: Trust and Transparency Equity and Justice Welcome and Inclusion Safety Active Citizenship Regarding the process of communicating values there should be no dead ends or surprises meaning there should be no values that do not have actions and no free floating suggestions that are not rooted in community values. Members reconvened and shared thoughts from the small group discussion. Falcon Heights is often an example for other cities hopefully this can be the case with policing. One value to consider is courage particularly courage to speak up if you see something. What is our definition of community? If a white officer doesn't see a black man as a member of the community then he might not receive equal treatment. Many pass through the city and the task force will need to do the best it can to represent everyone in the larger community. Everyone owns some responsibility in relationships. An example of community policing was given but the black person felt singled out from the group of mostly white people. Other experiences were shared and how interactions with police can be interpreted. Police may have good intentions but the impact of an experience can be more important to the person and larger community. Random and planned community engagement by police is needed. 1 of 10 People in the community need to engage each other as well. There appears to be a lack of understanding of the history that has led to the current circumstances for many. We need to see ourselves in each other and the importance of working inter-generationally. There is a need to work on history and the future. There was agreement that the value categories were accurate although more may be needed. They will serve as guard rails that can be tightened up with further discussion. Active Citizenship needs to include the entire community. Engagement among community members can't be legislated but needs to be aspired to. Other values suggested were leadership, service and courage. Policing directives were mentioned. Do we have directives we want the police to follow? Life safety, property and environment are examples from firefighting. Protection is certainly important. Sack described the experience with the protest at Falcon Heights City last summer. Requests were made of the protesters that were respected. Eventually the protesters left but the city did not tell them to leave. Another suggestion was having respect being a category by itself. Perhaps this is covered in Equity and Justice or Welcome and Inclusion but could be called out more. V. Break - meeting continued at 8:42pm. VI. Community Engagement Planning - Design Team Members of the design team introduced themselves and described the process of the community conversations. The structure of the meetings enables a collaborative problem solving. People engage more deeply when asked to solve a problem and relationships are formed in this process. We want people to attend as many meetings as they can. Meetings will use the draft value statements to encourage community responses along with possibly generating new statements. The process is not static and will draw on wisdom of the members. A wide net will be cast into the community to gather input. Invitations will be sent to community groups and activist groups. Personal invitations are also needed. Task force members will need to reach out to their networks. By sitting in dialog in small groups people tend to engage more productively. Facilitators will work to set a productive tone. Others can be brought in to help if needed. Someone may be asked to leave if the meeting is not productive. Format has been successful in the past. People realize when they have the talking piece they have the privilege of speaking. Refreshments and childcare could help attendance. What will the ethnic makeup be among the facilitators? The pool of mediators is somewhat diverse but the final makeup will depend on who signs up. People with childcare ideas should talk to Sack. High school students could be involved with groups and provide childcare. Task force members were encouraged to reach out to young people as they can feel left out of the community. The first general invitation will be sent out tomorrow Wednesday Feb. 1. Perhaps childcare can be added to future invitations. Location will be just for the first meeting. The role of the task force in the five sessions is to be involved and observe. One of the co-facilitators will take notes during the small group discussions. 2 of 10 Will police be involved? Sack is reaching out to them. There was some disagreement about police involvement and whether they should be in uniform or not. Participation could help them be better officers. Facilitators can help guide difficult conversations. The design team has a protocol in place for meetings for foster these interactions in a safe way. Members were encouraged to embrace courage. People of color deal with challenging situations on a frequent basis and courage is needed to say what is happening. VII. Next Meeting Feb. 7, 2017 Discussion will continue regarding the community meeting on February 16. VIII. Announcements and Updates Melanie and Randy gave an update on the task force to the city council. Thank you's were extended to the design team for their attendance and the work they have done. IX. Adjournment Meeting adjourned around 9:40pm. Actions: Task force members to invite community members to the meeting on Feb. 16. Email Sack your thoughts around policing and what you would like to discuss at the next couple of task force meetings. Members have a copy of the Falcon Heights police contract. 3 of 10 BLANK PAGE  4 of 10  1   To:   Falcon  Heights  Task  Force  on  Inclusion  and  Policing   From:   Kathy  Quick,  Task  Force  Co-­‐Facilitator   Date:   February  5,  2017   Re:   Resources  for  Moving  into  Assertions  of  Community  Values  for  Policing     At  the  January  31  meeting,  the  Task  Force  worked  on  articulating  values  for  the  community  of   Falcon  Heights  residents  and  guests.  At  the  February  7  meeting,  you  will  be  working  to   elaborate  those  statements  into  community  values  specifically  about  policing  and  public  safety.         To  support  these  discussions,  I  am  writing  to  convey  three  resources  for  your  consideration.  To   be  clear,  I  am  offering  these  on  my  individual  behalf  as  resources  that  I  believe  you  may  find   useful.  These  are  not  instructions  from  me,  nor  are  they  statements  on  behalf  of  the  task  force.     1)  Process  diagram  connecting  problems,  values  assertions,  implementation  guidelines,  and   accountability.     This  diagram  may  be  a  useful  orienting  device  for  holding  all  of  the  pieces  of  your  work   together.  Clearly,  these  pieces  are  related.  When  Task  Force  or  Community  Conversation   discussions  focus  on  a  part  of  this  bigger  picture,  the  facilitation  teams  are  paying  close   attention  to  all  of  the  ideas  and  input.  We  will  continue  to  work  to  support  momentum  and   integration  between  concerns,  action,  and  accountability.       ! Recognition:*What! problems!and!issues! need!to!be! addressed?!What! values!need!to!be! renewed!or! sustained?! Values :!What! community!values!or! core!principles!do!we! want!to!uphold!in! community! relationships!and! government? Implementation:! How do!we! implement!those! values ,!for!example! through!performance! standards,!our use!of! resources,!policies,! programs,!or!other! mechanisms? Accountability :!What! transparency! mechanisms,! assessment! measures,!and! feedback!systems!do! we!use!to!ensure! accountabilty!and! progress?   2)  Example  of  translating  community  values  into  policy  guides.  Moving  from  statements  of   values  into  guidelines  for  implementation  and  accountability  measures  is  tricky.  The  words   used  to  assert  values  can  be  simultaneously  powerful  and  vague.  Sometimes  the  ambiguity   is  productive,  and  sometimes  it  leads  to  misunderstandings,  contradictions,  or  a  lack  of   accountability  in  implementation.  To  help  you  think  ahead  to  how  to  spell  out  values  in   implementation  guidelines  and  accountability  measures,  I  am  attaching  an  example.  The   example  illustrates  how  “equity”  can  be  interpreted  in  multiple  ways  in  government  policies   5 of 10  2   and  programs.  This  example  concerns  equity  in  providing  a  desired  good  (namely  improving   access  and  welcome  for  diverse  cultural  groups  to  enjoy  Carver  County’s  regional  parks  and   recreational  amenities);  in  Falcon  Heights  the  equity  discussion  is  about  both  providing   desired  service  and  avoiding  harm.     3)  Second  draft  of  statement  of  community  values.  These  are  my  notes  of  key  themes  from   the  Task  Force’s  January  31  discussion  of  community  values.  I  apologize  for  omissions  or   misunderstandings.   •  These  statements  will  have  more  meaning  if  we  give  examples  of  how  we  bring  the   values  to  life.  However,  this  discussion  made  clear  that  context  matters  when  giving   examples.  For  example,  waving  –  or  not  waving  –  at  strangers,  neighbors,  police  officers,   etc.  can  be  read  in  many  ways.  Another  example  is  that  activities  that  fall  loosely  under   the  category  of  “community  policing”  can  be  experienced  as  positive  or  hostile.   •  By  “community”  we  mean  residents  and  guests.  We  mean  everyone,  a  united   community,  not  a  community  or  communities  distinguished  or  divided  along  race  or   other  lines.     •  “Leadership”  may  be  another  keyword  or  theme  to  add.  The  city  is  already  recognized   for  its  leadership  in  several  areas.  Now,  we  should  commit  to  learning  and  change  that   will  allow  us  become  known  for  our  leadership  in  creating  community  relationships  of   mutual  respect  and  inclusion,  equity  in  community  service  and  response  to  concerns,   and  in  working  to  recognize  and  heal  historic  patterns  of  disparity  and  exclusion.   •  Accountability  is  an  additional  word  to  accompany  trust  and  transparency.  For  example,   transparency  with  data,  procedures,  and  responsiveness  to  concerns  is  important  for   accountability.     •  We  expect  government  leaders  to  respond  promptly  and  effectively  to  serious  concerns.   •  Equity  needs  to  be  a  core  value  in  government  service,  leadership,  and  responsiveness.   It  is  unacceptable  for  privileged  residents  to  get  attention  if  other  groups  and  serious   issues  are  neglected.   •  Protection  from  discrimination  came  up  several  times.     •  Protecting  individuals  from  harm  applies  to  residents  and  guests.     •  Courage  may  be  needed  to  name,  report,  and  confront  prejudice,  discrimination,  and   hostility.  We  expect  residents  and  guests  to  take  responsibility  to  do  that.     •  Every  person  has  some  place  in  this  work.  We  have  to  get  past  a  culture  of  not  liking  to   be  confronted,  and  instead  take  recognize  that  everyone  has  responsibility  and  some   learning  to  do.     •  Good  intentions  are  important  but  not  sufficient  to  predict,  explain,  or  excuse  the   experienced  impact  of  individual  actions  and  patterns  of  action.   •  Many  need  more  awareness  and  understanding  of  the  historic  experience  of  different   cultures  and  groups  in  this  region.   •    “Respect”  may  be  an  overarching  keyword  for  this  whole  set  of  statements.         6 of 10  3   The  following  is  a  provisional,  second  draft  of  the  community  values  that  I  created  to  integrate   the  major  themes  of  your  discussion.  The  italicized  text  indicates  changes  since  the  last  time   you  saw  this.  Please  regard  this  as  a  resource  for  additional  consideration,  not  as  a  final,   consensus-­‐based,  or  recommended  version.  Indeed,  I  strongly  caution  against  trying  to  revise   and  finalize  these  value  statements  until  you  have  the  benefit  of  the  community  conversations.   I  offer  this  second  draft  to  record  some  of  the  major  themes  of  your  most  recent  discussion.   SECOND  DRAFT,  PROVISIONAL  Statement  of  Community  Values   We  assert  and  uphold  these  values  for  our  community,  including  residents  and   guests,  in  our  relationships  with  one  another  and  in  leadership,  service,  and  policies  of   city  government  (including,  but  not  excluded  to,  policing  on  behalf  of  the  city).     Leadership.  We  aspire  to  become  known  for  our  leadership  in  creating  community   relationships  of  mutual  respect  and  welcome,  for  equity  in  service  and  responsiveness   to  the  community,  and  for  working  to  recognize  and  heal  historic  patterns  of  disparity   and  exclusion.   Trust,  transparency,  and  accountability.  We  value  relationships  of  mutual  trust   among  community  members  and  city  government.  We  value  transparency,   communication,  and  respecting  diverse  perspectives  in  governance.     Equity  and  justice.  We  value  protecting  and  treating  all  residents  and  visitors  equally   and  fairly  under  the  law.  We  value  equity  in  the  provision  of  public  services  and  in  the   city’s  response  to  concerns.  We  recognize  the  persistent  work  we  must  do,   individually  and  collectively,  to  reject  and  remedy  prejudice,  bias,  and  discrimination   within  individuals,  the  community,  and  in  our  government  and  policing.   Welcome  and  inclusion.  We  value  diversity,  welcoming  all  people  with  respect  and   dignity,  and  creating  authentic  relationships  that  recognize  our  shared  humanity   despite  our  differences.  We  recognize  and  working  together  to  heal  and  strengthen   our  community.   Safety:  We  value  safety,  including  protecting  residents  and  guests  from  personal   harm  and  protecting  groups  from  prejudice,  discrimination,  and  hostility.   Active  Citizenship.  We  value  taking  individual  and  collective  responsibility  to  uphold   these  values,  including  by  having  the  courage  to  name  and  confront  problems  and  to   pursue  solutions  and  healing  when  these  values  are  not  upheld.  We  recognize  that   everyone  has  responsibility  and  some  learning  to  do.     7 of 10 Draft Increasing Engagement with Communities of Color: A Toolkit UMN Capstone RCP Project | Fall 2016 Increasing Engagement with Communities of Color A Toolkit for Carver County Parks and Recreation Chuck Demler | Kaela Dickens | Joseph Hartmann | Laurel Nightingale | Kalli Perano MPP Professional Paper In Partial Fulfillment of the Master of Public Policy Degree Requirements The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs The University of Minnesota Submitted May 11, 2016 Signature below of Paper Supervisor certifies successful completion of oral presentation and completion of final written version: ________________________________________________________________________________ May 11, 2016 May 11, 2016 Kathy Quick, Assistant Professor Oral presentation Paper completion ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________ Sam Pertz, Parks & Trails Supervisor Date 8 of 10 Draft Increasing Engagement with Communities of Color: A Toolkit UMN Capstone RCP Project | Fall 2016 Part I: Why is Engagement Important? The original question Carver County posed for this research concerned the equity of its programs, amenities and services. Are they meeting the parks and recreation needs of the communities of color in Carver County? But without knowledge of those communities’ current needs and desires, it is impossible to answer this question. To begin to identify and understand those needs, we recommend you start with engagement. Engagement yields relationships. Relationships foster communication about wants and needs. Only when you have an understanding of someone’s wants and needs can you begin to address them. When you address the needs that the community itself identified, you are beginning to move towards equity. The Role of “Equity” in Parks & Recreation Participation At its core, equity is an appeal to fairness and justice. Public agencies aim to serve their communities as a whole, but defining what is equitable for everyone can become extremely complex. This is partially due to the fact that Minnesota is currently facing economic, educational, and health disparities across the state4, which means different communities have vastly different needs and access to goods and services. While many of the root causes of these disparities lie in historical exclusion and oppression, current systems often perpetuate their existence. Without critically examining how different populations experience these inequities on a daily basis, disparities will surely continue. Carver County Parks and Recreation’s stated mission is to “provide a variety of quality recreational experiences, services, and lands that meet the needs of the residents of Carver County and Carver County Regional Park users"5. As you continue to work toward equitable outcomes, we encourage you to consider what equity means to that mission and how it can be operationalized. It is important to emphasize that there is no one way to define and apply equity; each definition comes with its own advantages and limitations. In the context of the parks planning process, equitable outcomes should reflect the collective values, desires, and needs of the communities that the parks are meant to serve. Concepts like equity of opportunity, resources or results have traditionally been used to determine if parks services are equitable. Other definitions based on needs, preferences, or demands could also be beneficial, provided that Carver County staff have strong partnerships with key stakeholders and open lines of communication with residents to sufficiently understand the needs, preferences, or demands of the community. The Tool: Defining Equity in Multiple Contexts The Equity Table that follows highlights several examples of how equity can be applied in a parks and recreation context and should be used to consider how these varied definitions change what achieving equity looks like. Different initiatives may require different definitions of equity and we encourage you to reference the chart to think about which definition of equity makes the most sense for you in each context, and as the engagement process evolves. Based on our research and interviews with professionals in the field, we recommend that you consider equity of needs, preferences, and demand. These definitions requite robust channels of communication to be successful and the tools included in this report are meant to help you identify key stakeholders and build lasting relationships with the communities you serve to ensure that all communities are equitably served in the future. Relationships Communication about Wants & Needs Improvements, Increased Satisfaction & Equity 9 of 10 Draft Increasing Engagement with Communities of Color: A Toolkit UMN Capstone RCP Project | Fall 2016 What does “Equity” look like in this context? Equity of: Definition Example Advantages Limitations Preferences Those with the most interest in the program should receive the most consideration for services Staff should elicit responses from residents about what park services they desire Parks staff can engage with members from different backgrounds to ensure that diverse needs are being addressed Not all preferences are expressed through the use of a service or through requests or complaints about a service Demand Active interest in a service is shown through use of a service or through requests and complaints for services Producing goods or services to match what park users want or holding elected park officials accountable to the electorate Doesn’t force services on reluctant residents against their wishes Some people will not express their demand for services, so relying on markets ignores some people’s preferences Needs Those needing more of a park service should get more Parks funding to prioritize by greatest need, indicated by median family income or mean housing value Those with the greatest needs will see the greatest benefit when their needs are met Unequal treatment or outcome requires some debatable basis for the inequality Resources Equal amenities should be available to residents who visit parks Regional parks should contain one acre per 800 residents Quantitative metrics like acreage are easier to measure than metrics like satisfaction Financial limitations mean that not all needs for services can be met Results Equal outcomes should be achieved within each park Each regional park should serve approximately the same number of permit holders Comparable activity leads to more consistent expectations and experiences for user across parks Equal level of activity may not lead to equal level of satisfaction for each visitor Funding Funding should be spread equally among all of the parks, regardless of size, need, or preference Proceeds from the Legacy amendment get divided equally among regional parks for infrastructure improvements Funding allocation decisions are transparent and straightforward Equal expenditures for regional parks may not lead to equal conditions, satisfaction, etc. Opportunity Services should be equally available to all residents who visit parks Regional parks should be within a half mile of all residents Quantifiable standards like distance make it easy to assess whether or not equality is being upheld Equal distance to services for all residents impossible in practice due to geography Ability or Willingness to Pay People who use a service should pay for it and nonusers should not pay. Parks and recreation services are handled by private, third-party interest Nonusers are often forced to pay for services for users through taxation in other concepts of equity Even when charges are imposed, the question of how much to charge must be addressed 10 of 10