The following is a city report submitted by Ellen Taylor.
CLAREMONT STUDY CIRCLES
A Review and Report of the Process
Spring 2000
DATE: May 26,
2000
TO: Claremont
Community Members
From: Claremont
Study Circles Committee – submitted by Ellen Taylor & Beverly Speak
Study Circles are community forums that draw participants
from as many parts of the community as possible to exchange information
face-to-face, share personal stories and experiences, honestly express
perspectives, clarify viewpoints, and develop solutions to community
concerns.
In undertaking the organization of Claremont Study
Circles, we, the committee, were encouraged by the positive response
from friends, community leaders & city and school officials - both
employed and elected. Their
support buoyed and guided us as we traversed the organization process. The hard working committee devised a list of over 135 organizations
and community’s entities. We
sought funding and other support from those groups; over 30 of them
signed on as "Supporters".”
Some of the letters and comments rejecting our request were enlightening,
for many groups did not see it as their responsibility to discuss community
concerns and issues.
Early on, the committee determined that key to a successful
group discussion would be a facilitator. We knew the choice and training of those facilitators was crucial
to the success of the program. Forty
people received that training from employees of the Western Justice
Center in Pasadena, a non-profit non-partisan organization and employees
of the U. S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service.
Then on Saturday, March 25, Claremont Study Circles
was kicked off at an event attended by more than 200 residents. These residents were people of all ages, all
colors, and of many ethnic groups; they were from all walks of life, connected
by one driving concern: to heal the community.
Joe Hicks, Executive Director of the Human Relations
Commission of the City of Los Angeles, and a long time civil rights
activist, addressed the gathering on what to expect from dialogue sessions. He briefly discussed the Landrum incident that
he felt was the catalyst for the crisis the community was facing. Dubbing it "the elephant in the bathtub”,
he advised the audience not to dwell on Landrum’s death, but to take
the issue of race and ethnic relations to a broader ramification.
We then randomly assigned the larger audience into
16 groups, each guided by one or two of the trained facilitators. The groups retired to a private space, and
they began their Claremont Study Circles “process”. One other group, composed of people who could not attend the March
25th session, convened the following week. Each group determined what time and place was
best to meet, followed the prepared agenda to the extent it wished, and
entered into the mighty grass-root experience.
Each group set its own ground rules (time limits, attendance requirements,
willingness to admit new members, etc.), but one rule was constant:
the circle was a safe and confidential place to discuss personal
thoughts and experiences. After going through the agenda, the groups turned
their talk to formative actions; that is, they each decided what avenues
of changes or recommendations they would make to the various levels of community.
In early May, all the groups came together once more
to share their action plans. Ever
since that meeting, committee members have been collating the oral responses
with the written reports submitted by most of the groups. It has been both a privilege and challenge to review the whole host
of comments, suggestions, concerns and informal conversations that occurred
during and since the Claremont Study Circles Dialogues. We have attempted
to our best ability to synthesize these recommendations and to present them in a format that covers the
multitude of options available.
We present this report to the participants and supporters
of Claremont Study Circles, community leaders, and to the media.
We also give the report to the government officials who
oversee policy in Claremont because we believe strongly that changes need
to take place to assure all the residents of Claremont that Claremont cares. We hope that they will stimulate further discussion
and, more importantly, ACTION by the members of this community in
their multiple roles as individuals, members of groups, employees, elected
and appointed government leaders.
I. Observations
about the Study Circles process and development of these recommendations
What follows
is a compilation of specific recommendations of the 17 Claremont Study
Circle groups, as reported out at the May 3, 2000 gathering and/or provided
in written reports by group facilitators.
The recommendations below range from global to very specific,
addressing a number of areas of community life. Some may already be
implemented, or may be in the process of development. (If they are already
happening, we need to work more on how to communicate better, so everyone
can recognize and benefit from them.)
In the
process of compiling the groups’ ideas, we have identified several clear
themes and messages that resonate throughout, and should be kept in mind
when interpreting the reports:
1. Times
are changing. Claremont is a
very different place, with different demographics and different internal
and external forces at work, than it was 20, 10 and even 5 years ago.
2. Listening
is a good idea and people really do want to talk about these concepts. Two hundred people from all backgrounds turned
out for a new kind of sharing process and committed themselves to meeting
for six weeks with a randomly-assigned group of mostly strangers, often
giving up other high priority activities for the duration of the project. Feedback from participants indicates enthusiasm
for the process and interest in continuing and expanding it. The grassroots,
“non-official” generation of the project, and the safe, accepting “ground
rules” of the process itself, stimulated support, volunteer assistance,
and willing participation. Interest
in additional sessions for current groups and interest in forming new groups
demonstrates a perceived need for open, intimate, interpersonal dialogue
around diversity issues in our lives and our community.
3. Language
can be limiting, as well as freeing.
We find that we often do not mean the same thing when we say the
same words, especially about issues that touch us as deeply as race, personal
identity, and interpersonal relations.
We recognize that there are subtle differences between programs identified
as sensitivity training, diversity education, anti-bias curriculum, multicultural
appreciation, racism elimination, human relations development, communication-building,
and just plain old “common courtesy.” Each has its proponents, and each has its place
on the continuum of action possibilities for individuals, groups, government
entities, and communities at large. We
must start where we are, be open to learning and exploring new possibilities.
4. People
want the whole truth, whatever that is.
They value honest communication, full disclosure. We honor those
who can admit their shortcomings and mistakes, and we can support those
who ask for help in learning, growing, and changing.
5. The
issues are broader than racism. Discrimination on the basis of class, economics,
religion, gender and sexual orientation, age, ability/disability are present
in Claremont, and all limit opportunities for everyone in our community
to achieve full potential.
6. We need
to be pro-active rather than simply reactive in our approach, explore
concepts of prevention vs. intervention before we experience further
community crises.
7. Claremont
has many positive assets — we should build upon them, use them to advantage
in addressing our needs and concerns.
We have
attempted to sort concepts first by the group or groups to whom the recommendation
might apply, then by the nature of the recommendations themselves.
Groups include: 1) Municipal Government; 2) Claremont Schools;
3)Business Community; 4) Faith Communities; 5) Individuals; and 6) Community
At Large.
Recommendations are divided roughly into the following
categories of action: 1) Vision and Values; 2) Policy-making, Leadership,
and Citizen Participation; 3) Communication;
4) Staffing/Personnel; and 5) Programs, Services, and Activities.
We recognize that there are overlaps in these categories
and these distinctions are somewhat arbitrary, but they represent an
effort to organize for public action the ideas of a very diverse set
of folks.
The entire
200-participant Study Circles group did not attempt to prioritize these
recommended actions. However, the
italicized number in parentheses (x __) indicates the number
of groups (not individuals) that presented the same suggestion. Some groups sought an internal consensus prior
to reporting out, while others reported on all ideas represented within
their diverse membership. The group
reporter’s original wording may not be directly quoted here, since similar
recommendations have been combined, paraphrased, and/or grouped together
to shorten this summary. Recognizing
these limitations and qualifiers, we are pleased to share with you the recommendations
of the first phase of the Claremont Study Circles project.
I. The Recommendations
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT
Vision, Values
Develop
and implement a comprehensive, pro-active “diversity initiative”
to guide community decision-making and action agendas for all levels of
government and all city departments
Create
and adopt a powerful community statement on zero tolerance for racism
to be implemented at all city levels and in all municipal departments; create
citywide consistent criteria for non-discrimination practices
Review
all City department policy and procedure manuals for evidence of
institutional racism; revise as needed
Policy-making, Leadership and Citizen Participation
Reconstitute,
strengthen Committee on Human Relations (x 4). Suggestions: independent, no City staff
on Committee, report directly to City Council
Move to broaden representation on city commissions
and committees to include ethnic diversity, students, geographic/neighborhood
representation (x 5); clarify and communicate selection process
and opportunities to all citizens to encourage their interest in applying
to serve. (e.g., post commission/committee
openings with faith communities)
Create system of seasoned committee/commission/council
members actively mentoring one-on-one new members
Look
into district representation or other alternate system for election
of governmental officials (City Council and School Board) (x 2)
Study
city charter; see how we can strengthen City Council (x 4),
limit power of City Manager
Don’t
reinvent the wheel; see what’s working elsewhere, how other cities
have addressed these issues.
Have
offices opened after 5 p.m. and on Saturday mornings to accommodate working
residents.
Staffing/Personnel Issues:
Ensure/enforce
policy of recruiting, hiring “highest quality” city staff (x 5);
representative of diverse groups in community
Implement
comprehensive program of mandatory and ongoing training (not token
or occasional voluntary workshops) for city employees and elected/appointed
officials; include multicultural/cross-cultural sensitivity, anti-racism,
positive interpersonal communication skills, history of diversity in our
community/region, human relations, conflict management. (x 5) (Require police and other city
employees to participate in Study Circles).
Recognize
positive actions, “good jobs” done by city employees in area of race/human
relations
Rescind
employee of the year awards; reprimand city manager
Communications:
Create
citizens’ advisory committees for elected officials to “keep them
in touch” with citizen opinion
Work
to project more open, cooperative communication style/sharing of
information without being asked
Create
position(s) of citizen ombudsman or citizen advocate for all city
departments, including police (x
7 -- this was defined variously by different groups; some suggested staff
position, others voluntary, elected, or appointed individual, or citizens’
committee. Empower to investigate
complaints, recommend redress.)
Develop
and/or clarify complaint procedures, other city procedures for redress
of perceived problems (x2)
Maintain
records of all interactions/contacts between city officials and members
of the public (contact logs); monitor for evidence of discrimination or
inappropriate behavior.
Require
all city employees, other officials, to provide identification when
dealing with public (e.g. business cards to hand out, so citizen can remember,
re-contact official later if necessary) (x 3)
Make
city officials available at regularly scheduled times for members
of public to meet and talk
Make
sure all local newspapers print time/place/agenda items
for all City meetings
City Programming and Services:
Police
Department:
Review, revise as appropriate, communicate to
public and consistently implement non-discriminatory policies and procedures.
Review, revise police academy training; eliminate
racism, incorporate multicultural anti-bias curriculum
Establish independent Citizen Review Board.
(x 6)
Make complaint
process less intimidating; protect privacy of all citizens.
Extend study
on racial profiling beyond 6 months (x 3); make it permanent,
release data to public
Institute/further develop community-oriented
policing (x 7) (e.g. out of cars, walk the beat, get to know
constituents personally; encourage ride-alongs, rotate assignments through
different neighborhoods)
-- Hold open house at Police Department
at least 2x per year.
-- Hold public forums/communicate clearly
with public re: changes being instituted by interim police chief, process
and progress toward hiring of new permanent chief. (x 2)
Human
Services Department: Work to develop
and support multi-racial, multicultural sports and arts programs
Community Development Department: Explore perceived economic discrimination
and practices. (e.g., why
is Habitat for Humanity not allowed to build in Claremont?)
Provide language translation services
for citizens dealing with city departments (inc. police)
Be sure all services are accessible to
those with disabilities, language limitations, transportation/geographic
barriers, and schedule challenges (e.g., city offices only open 9-5, some
work out of town or hours not conducive to doing business with city.)
*****
CLAREMONT SCHOOLS
Vision, Values
Zero
tolerance for discrimination: review all policy and procedure manuals
for evidence of institutional racism; revise as needed; implement.
Policy-making, Leadership and Citizen Participation
Explore
district representation system for election of School Board) (x
2)
Encourage
additional broad based “visible” volunteerism at school sites, especially
among persons of color, to enhance diversity education for children and
families
Staffing/Personnel Issues
Continue
efforts to recruit and retain high quality, ethnically diverse staff
at all sites and at all levels.
Provide
regular ongoing in-service training on diversity issues, sensitivity,
communications, conflict management to all staff
Expect/help
teachers to learn student names (including pronunciation) (x 2)
Communications:
Emphasize
PFA outreach to include minority families.
Offer
training and programs for parents/families in diversity issues.
Reduce
language barriers, offer translators, to facilitate parent/school communication
for limited or non-English-speaking families.
Educational Programming/Services:
Offer
a specific class at CHS (mandatory 7th period) on diversity.
Encourage
student drama, video, writing projects with diversity themes (self-expression,
positive identity, communicate about experiences and feelings with others
while learning marketable skills)
Emphasize
high school outreach/mentoring programs to connect youth with role
model adults.
Collect
and make available to all classrooms and families high quality diversity/anti-bias
education resources (e.g., Southern Poverty Law Center’s Teaching
Tolerance materials and others)
Address
“self-segregation” by ethnicity of quads at the high school
Encourage
school district inter-school exchange programs to link “north Claremont”
with “south Claremont” schools
Add
Adult School courses on diversity, multicultural understanding
Incorporate
“what to do if stopped by police” lesson into DARE program.
*****
BUSINESS COMMUNITY
Vision, Values
Implement
zero tolerance for discrimination in all city businesses
Policy-making, Leadership and Citizen Participation
Develop/enhance
leadership training for under-represented groups (subsidized tuition
to reduce economic barriers to participation) (x 3)
Chamber
of Commerce should take leadership role in educating merchants to understand
cultural differences, eliminate stereotyping and discriminatory practices.
Chamber of Commerce office should remain open after 5 p.m. and Saturday
mornings to accommodate working people.
Staffing/Personnel Issues
Develop
specific diversity/multicultural sensitivity training for personnel
working at local businesses
Identify
Claremont as a “living wage” city — require living wage to be paid
by all employers (colleges, food service vendors, businesses, retirement
communities, etc.)
Business Services:
Address
housing discrimination issues — work with realtors and landlords
to ensure that they follow city philosophy (no “steering”)
Ensure
that services are accessible for people with disabilities and other
under-served groups.
****
FAITH COMMUNITIES
Hold
assemblies or forums for faith communities around race/diversity
issues (x 4)
Post
commission, committee, and other involvement opportunities and encourage
participation
Continue/expand
interfaith exchange programs/opportunities to work together and learn
about each other
*****
INDIVIDUAL/PERSONAL ACTIONS
Vision, Values
Explore
questions such as
Which should come first, healing or change?
Is
the primary issue really classism or racism?
Challenge
individuals to make personal commitment on a daily basis to take extra
steps to promote harmony
(x
5)