HOME | CONTACT | WRITE TO THE EDITOR | WORK AT C-VILLE
StellarOne
Issue #24.08 :: 02/21/2012 - 02/27/2012
Five members of Dialogue on Race resign, citing "interpersonal squabbles" and inaction

Mass exodus

BY CHIARA CANZI

City Council’s decision to put off the creation of a human rights commission, and tension within the Dialogue on Race leadership has spurred five members to resign. According to a letter obtained by C-VILLE, the members of the Dialogue’s steering committee resigned last week because they felt their commitment “would no longer be a prudent use of our time.” While they “remain committed” to the mission of the initiative, the former members point to “interpersonal squabbles” among the leadership as one of the most evident reasons for the committee’s ineffectiveness. Additionally, the Government Policy Action Team responsible for the proposal of the Charlottesville Commission on Human Rights, Diversity, and Race Relations dissolved itself.

Walter Heinecke, a vocal supporter of a human righs commission, resigned from the Dialogue on Race Steering Committee after City Council voted to study the “level of need” for the commission. The five resignations, he said, are an “indication that the Dialogue on Race has run its course.” (Photo by John Robinson)

“For me personally, it was a little frustrating to see really, really good ideas and see them not necessarily translated into progress or action,” said Dean L’hospital, local attorney and one of the five members who resigned. “Group dynamics make things like that hard, agreeing on a principle and then getting lost going forward.” L’hospital said as soon as he realized the steering committee was unsuccessful at implementing those ideas, he looked elsewhere “to see where I could help more.”

Bob Gross, the committee’s co-chair along with Gertrude Ivory, called the members’ resignations “unfortunate.”

“I think that in any group of passionate, committed people there is going to be disagreement and different ways of seeing things,” he said. “I think we all have, and we continue to have, including the people who have resigned, a common purpose and that is to make some positive, long-lasting, systemic change in our city, and I think that’s still true.”

Walter Heinecke, vocal human rights commission supporter and one of the steering committee members who resigned, said that his and his fellow members’ resignations are a reflection of the need for the Dialogue on Race to evolve and that the commission was a logical progression.

“We felt that when we proposed the commission, that we proposed an organic evolution of the Dialogue on Race into a permanent, effective entity and I think that the problem with the resignations is that they are an indication that the Dialogue on Race has run its course,” he said.

According to the letter, the Dialogue’s steering committee voted to “endorse” the proposal for the human rights commission, but because of “objections by a few in the leadership team,” the commission was never actively supported.

City Council voted to create a 11-member task force that will spend the next 10 months studying data and preparing an interim report after the five-month mark. The proposal called for City Council to approve an initial investment of $300,000 and an annual $200,000 allocation for the commission’s executive director, an investigator and administrative help.
Charlene Green, program coordinator for the Dialogue on Race, said the committee supported the proposal “in its spirit.”

“Folks were in agreement that we need something in place to address discrimination,” she said. However, as the discussion that ensued among City Councilors demonstrated, Green believes the immediate creation of the commission based on a 25-page report with the request for funding “was not in the best interest of the citizens of Charlottesville.”

“Discrimination happens, we know it happens, but if you are going to create a commission to deal with the discrimination, you want to have a really solid process in place,” said Green.
For Gross, hard data is fundamental.

“We need real data. It’s tempting, but we cannot rely on anecdotal information and we have to gather real, hard information,” he said.

Data obtained by Heinecke from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shows that in the past year 49 charges were filed against respondents in Charlottesville, up from 42 in 2010.

In the two years since the steering committee has been active, there have been 10 resignations, said Green.

Cindy Stratton, an activist and former co-chair of the committee who resigned last year, said the dialogue was productive at first, but “got bogged down” by bureaucracy.

“This was not the first time this type of organization has been proposed and at some point, there has to be a demonstrative commitment on the part of the city to see a change within the social and economic fabric of this community,” she said.

In the meantime, the City of Charlottesville has begun the task of recruiting members for the task force to study the feasibility of a human rights commission. Residents have until March 1 to submit an application for consideration.

For Green, this is an opportunity for residents to come together and actively participate in civic discourse and start doing things around the issue of discrimination. “It’s about creating a town where we are considered one of the best places to live and we want that to be for everyone, not just certain segments,” she said.

 
Comments
Goodness gracious. Imagine that. Bogged down by bureaucracy and internecine differences. Can't we all just get along? Paging Mr. City Manager! He's a take charge guy.
DahmiusFebruary 21st 09:45am
Prediction: the Commission Task Force is stacked with people who will water down the original Commission proposal until there is no anti-discrimination ordinance and no Commission with enforcement powers, exaclty what the DOR Study Circle and Action Forum participants and the justice community organizations insisted be in the Proposal for a Commission. This is how the white and middle class power structure does its work of stopping change. It works by having key leaders control the democratic process. Meanwhile the discriminated are too fearful to come forward and fight for their rights. The DOR co-chairs work with the City manager who gives the Councilors thier out. The Councilors just participated in that.The buck stops there. Remember that at the next election. Notice all the sources above that are supporting the DOR have a vested interest. Green wants another year of funding for her job that expires this july. Gross wants another year of funding to maintain control of his committee and doesn't want the world to know what a disaster it has been. City Manager just doesn't want egg on his face. The other sources don't have any vested interests but the good of the Community. The are gullty of wating a commission to ensure that all people in Charlottesville are treated fairly. When politiciains want to not do something they kickit down the road with a study that undoes all the work that had been done in the past by citizens. How many times will citizens of Charlottesville let this happen?
WaltFebruary 22nd 12:30am
A complaint receiving and investigating office is a good idea - generally - so long as it receives and investigates all complaints equally, to include all categories known from evidence to experience discrimination, harassment, and other targeting for disrespectful behavior. That certainly includes categories of race, color, and national origin; it also includes age and ability/disability; it also include political belief and religious belief; it also includes sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, marital status, pregnancy status, etc. A credible plan must discuss how the office will receive and handle any and all complaints - whether of not protected under federal law, or state law. This office would be the voice and image of the City on these issues. Failing to include any and all complaints is profoundly offensive to those excluded. Further, people seem to sway between a complaint office, or a human relations office. It should be both: e.g. receiving any and all complaints, and doing evidence-based education in schools, in the community, etc, and consulting with local agencies, businesses, and organizations with evidence-based information and strategies to become fully respectful and inclusive of 21st diversity. It is good to see that various people quoted in the piece understand and respect that inclusive point of view. If the office adopts a very constrained model - such as only protecting a handful of categories - or not spending at least 50% of time on education and consultation - it would likely be a poor use of money, and fail everyone's expectations. And speaking of money: the plans that the public have seen, so far, is way overboard in times of fiscal responsibility, public participation, and shared funding. The plan should have identified streams of money - education and consulting fees, education grants, etc - and not just City government money. It is shameful to 'tell' taxpayers to pay for it, without presenting a restrained, and well described budget. Further, expectations appear to be raised too high for reality of receiving and handing complaints: to adequately receive and handle a complaint might take weeks, or months. To properly respect complainant and respondent, much attention to detail, documentation, evidence, testimony, and deliberation is required. This takes time - sometimes much time. Each complaint - from any and all categories, as we've noted above - must get equal attention. So, how has the plan described how it will handle any and all complaints? How has the plan described how it will tell complainants that it will take weeks of months? How has the plan described starting up and readiness to receive any and all complaints? How has the plan described its community awareness and community education plan? How has the plan described its daily operations? its fiscal accountability? its public disclosure and public accountability? How has the plan described how it will handle what might quickly become a backlog of complaints? Such an unexamined plan deserves much more public disclosure and public discussion. Otherwise, the City will have created something bound to fail, contrary to the critics of more discussion.
666February 22nd 07:14am
Sadly, arguments that are ad hominem - attacking persons, rather than addressing issues - is unlovely and unproductive. Anyone who argues about his or her motive, must sustain arguments about he or her own motives. And, it would a civil to state the claims about motives in person with that person to allow re-statement, clarification, and defense. That's just simple fairness, and plain spoken common sense. And, of course bureaucracies act like bureaucracies. That is established through history, social science, and organizational psychological. If there are experts - and there may be - in Charlottesville in ways to change how bureaucracies think and act, they should run for City Council, join public bodies, etc. And, certainly should seek to join the take force proposed to discuss the issues at stake. And, regarding the 'discriminated too fearful' to come forward: if communities of color are fearful, if sexual and gender minority communities are fearful, if communities enduring disabilities or old age, or other targets of discrimination are fearful, shouldn't they combine in common cause? Analysis might ask: why is that not happening? how can that happen? Can a Human Rights discussion process help make that happen?
albemarleFebruary 23rd 07:05am
Have your say
*
*
*
Your comment will be displayed after it has been reviewed by our editors. Please refer to our comments policy if you have any questions, or email editor@c-ville.com.
C-VILLE site search by Charlottesville's Best News and Entertainment

www.Marketstreetwine.com
Cathcart
www.theparamount.net/
Charlottesville Business Innovation Council Awards
www.facebook.com/BristlesHairDesignandDaySpa
www.ladiff.com/ladeals-c-82.html
Circulation VerifiedCopyright © 2012, C-VILLE Holdings
Powered by PLANet w3 CMS Content Management System
PLANet Systems Group 2012