Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Ms. Smith said she was concerned that the last sentence of (d) in that same section will <br />mean the complainant will go straight to the H uman R ights C ommission if they do not agree to <br />mediation , and this is n o t how this was designed. Mr. Huja said allowing and requiring are two <br />different things. Ms. Smith decided not to pursue the point . <br /> <br />Ms. Smith asked if we should spell out what happens when someone walks through the <br />door in terms of jurisdiction. Ms. Szakos said if the dir ector develops central intake , that should <br />be reflected in th eir policy. Ms. Galvin said this is more regulatory language , and Council <br />should have the opportunity to review that language once it is available . <br /> <br />Ms. Smith and Ms. Szakos said i f the ordinance is going to allow for either party to <br />deter mine probable cause , we should be consistent. Mr. Brown said the concept of mediation is <br />premised on the parties to willingly negotiate in good faith. Section 2 -439.1 was changed to say <br />"either party". <br /> <br />Ms. Smith confirmed that it i s legal to meet behin d closed doors on matters brought forth to <br />the Commission before the public hearing . <br /> <br />At Ms. Galvin’s request, Mr. Brown said he would add a sentence to end of Section 2 -434 <br />(d) regarding m aterials used and communications made during a mediation remaining <br />confidential. Also, he will add a paragraph to Section 2 -434 (e ) to state that the execution of a <br />written agreement is solely for the purpose of settling a disputed claim and does not constitute as <br />an admission that the law has been violated. Ms . Galvin added that Council asked that a violation <br />of Section 2 -440 shall be a C lass 3 misdemeanor, which needs to be reflected in the ordinance. <br /> <br />Ms. Galvin asked to add a sentence under final reports stating that it will expire at the end <br />of every third fiscal year absent further action from the Council. There was not support for this <br />change. <br /> <br />On motion by Ms. Szakos , seconded by M s. Smith , the proposed amendments passed <br />unanimously. <br /> <br />Mr. Norris suggested we direct staff to put out an RFP to see what kind of options there are <br />to contract with a third party. Mr. Huja said we should adopt the ordin ance first and then address <br />this issue at a later time . Ms. Szakos said this seems premature. Mr. Norris said staff needs to <br />know if they are hiring two people or j ust one. He said this would create a less adversarial <br />approach. There was n ot support for this at the current time. <br /> <br />The Human Rights Commission ordinance passed as amended on the second reading. <br />(Ayes: Mr. Norris, Ms. Smith, Ms. Szakos; Noes: Ms. Galvin ; Abstain: Mr. Huja.) <br /> <br />Mr. Huja said he abstained because there are good things about the ordinance and he i s not <br />opposed to it , but he does not wish to vote for it in its current form. <br /> <br />Ms. Galvin said this needs to be explained fully to the public.