pages: CityCouncil/2021-02-16.pdf, 10
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-02-16 | 10 | bakes anti-racism, diversity and inclusion into all future renaming efforts; renters should provide input on renaming; a researcher or professional should be hired to handle situations where the community is asked to provide input; expressed concern about polling issues; expressed support for community members being involved, allowing an application process for each renaming effort and overarching consistencies among all renaming efforts: Amelia Eichel, Alameda. Stated starting a petition is not easy; the petition to rename Jackson Park began in 2018 and never had more than 200 signatures until 2020; renaming processes are an opportunity to define community values, create inclusive public spaces and access public government to feel empowered; there is an opportunity to build relationships should people engage authentically; the rename Jackson Park committee worked to remain transparent and inclusive; processes can be powerful; discussed renaming fatique: Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda. Councilmember Daysog stated any process should be fully compliant with the Brown Act due in part to renaming being of Citywide significance; expressed support for respecting different Commissions and processes; stated Council may provide a framework for expectations; expectations may include Brown Act compliance and a set of two to three criteria; expressed support for the current process; stated that he would have preferred the process to rename Jackson Park to Chochenyo Park process to have come to Council for guidance and criteria; that he is confident the process will fix itself in remaining within the status quo. Vice Mayor Vella stated it is time to look at overarching policy regardless of process; the starting point should ask which questions are to be considered; the process has been multi-year with many dedicated volunteers; meaningful changes will help ensure policy goals are followed; expressed support for reflecting diversity, equity and inclusion in standing criteria and for having an expanded scope; outlined discussions about historical timelines during her time on the Historical Advisory Board (HAB); stated that her interpretation of inclusion and equity is to have a broad historical scope; some local facilities may require a local name or narrower viewpoint; expressed support for allowing flexibility, providing guidance, maintaining that an individual be deceased for a period of time, consulting affected groups, and having a level of defined professional research; stated that she is open to the process; there are existing Committees; that she would like to find a way to allow Committees to establish subcommittees or groups to work on renaming; new projects differ from renaming; the existing process for consideration of new items is fine; however, Council needs to provide a directive and guidelines for Boards and Commissions to review lists frequently; the HAB did not have a specific review timeframe. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for creating a Committee or task force to identify criteria for when renaming should happen or be considered; stated these matters become difficult very easily; having a broad community group consider thresholds would be valuable; the renaming process is part of thinking through history; the community reflects the people of the community; Council needs to ensure there is a Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 February 16, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-02-16.pdf |