Totally forgot there was another item, bc there was no notes for it and no presentation: A quick discussion on racial equity training for city council.
Brockett: The racial equity guiding coalition has been talking for months about how we hold ourselves accountable for the work we've committed to do, specifically the bias and microaggression training we've been assigned.
The coalition is recommending that council members write a couple sentences about what the training meant to them, Brockett says. Those will be posted online, on the council's page.
Due date for this homework: Over the next couple weeks.
New electeds would be expected to do this moving forward as part of being on council.
Friend: What is the purpose of us writing these sentences? To demonstrate that we attended? That we learned something?
Brockett: "The idea is to have some accountability and that we've engaged in this work we've committed to do. ... Not just checking a box. "
Aimee Kane, equity program manager: It's really to demonstrate how the workshops have helped you in your role as a council member.
Friend: If someone does not write these sentences, is it an indication that someone did not attend these trainings?
Yes, Kane says.
Wallach: "I would prefer if this were prospective instead of retrospective." Like Friend, he feels he could have written better soon after the trainings. (He's attended two)
"I'd be hard-pressed" to recall the meetings and what I've learned now. "There's a little bit of artifice to this," Wallach says. "I'm just not sure this is a useful exercise many, many months later."
Weaver agrees. "I attended the sessions and found them interesting, informative and thought-provoking." But they "blend" with "all the work" council is doing on equity and police reform.
"It would be awfully hard for me to tease out how my thinking has evolved just on those sessions as opposed to holistically and how the convo nationally has me thinking on these issues," Weaver says.
Maybe we should do check boxes now and have future council members do the writing part, since we're so far out.
Brockett: "There were 1-2 ppl on the coalition who were concerned that a checkbox was too stark. They were concerned it would not feel good for some people."
Friend: Could we do a combo? Checkmark if you attended, and then invite us to share? I can prob cobble together something if you're giving me the prompts.
Swetlik, who was in the group that made this recommendation: "The checkbox felt like it really wasn't living up to the work." I get that "recalling specific things that changed your opinions from months and months ago" is hard.
But "it's very rare we sit in this room and talk racial equity," Swetlik says. We're trying to get at how you view this work, what it means to you, where we're going with it.
Friend: I do think it's really important we do get something out to the public. It's overdue; Sam and I attended trainings "practically in 2020" (January 2021)
"I certainly hope racial equity is inherent in all my votes and all I'm doing on council," Friend says. While I appreciate the invitation to write, "it also should be part of all we're living and breathing."
Just wants "space" for "if it doesn't feel right" to try and "distill something" from so long ago.
Wallach: "At this point, going back this year is going to be a bit artificial bc of the passage of time. To me, it's not valuable to just try and make it up."
Yates concurs. He did his training in February. "I'm struggling with ... how to recreate some of the things I learned at that point in time ... as compared to other things we've learned along the way."
So this council won't write anything, but new ones will, it sounds like.
My suggestion: Have Brockett and Swetlik write their own things, since they were in the group, and anyone else who wants to.
Also really fighting the urge to recap this thusly, "What did council learn from anti-racist training? They can't remember."

But I won't. Because that's mean.
I mean, I might. Haven't decided yet.
Anyway, that's it for this one and the meeting. I'll see you in a couple hours for your Wednesday morning recap!
@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thank you!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Shay Castle

Shay Castle Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @shayshinecastle

11 Aug
Last order of biz: Deciding if DAB/TAB should get a say on development projects?

Staff presentation:…
DAB = Design Advisory Board
TAB = Transportation Advisory Board
Council brought this up at their retreat. DAB sometimes weighs in on projects, if council asks them to. TAB doesn't.

Both are actually excluded from touching on land use in their charters.
Read 42 tweets
11 Aug
Moving into the study session now, which Brockett is leading. Lucky you, facilities master plan is up first!

Yates and Joseph have joined us, and Young is out.
omg NRV is a woman after my own heart. I am "geek-ily excited that we're talking about facilities," she says.
Read 90 tweets
11 Aug
Young is here. She previously emailed to say she wouldn't be, and even shared her thoughts on tonight's study session (and annexation agreement). Not sure what prompted the change.
Joseph is not here, tho.
And Yates. Bc they're not allowed to be here for this, per charter rules. Since they've recused.
Read 25 tweets
10 Aug
It's Tuesday, Twitter. City council study session, preceded by the first reading vote of the CU South annexation.

The big news, of course, being the recusal of two council members: Yates and Joseph. (Also, Young is absent tonight.)
Study session should be pretty standard. Two topics:
- Facilities master plan (yay!)
- Council will weigh whether DAB/TAB should play a role in development projects?
I have been waiting for this facility master plan (Boulder's first) ever since facilities and fleet was broken into a new department and I got a look at all the data they got.

Reader, this plan did not disappoint.
Read 4 tweets
7 Aug
The mystery of Bob Yates' recusal from CU South Annexation the other night has been solved: Yates just emailed to say the "prior work" he did with the law school warrants a recusal.

"I do this out of an abundance of caution and to avoid any appearance of impropriety."
This holds true for "upcoming council decisions" as well, Yates wrote, meaning (presumably) the annexation vote itself.
2 Planning Board members were switched out for subs (former members) bc of their affiliations with CU.

Lupita Montoya is a researcher and former assistant prof at CU; Lisa Smith also appears to be faculty at CU Denver.
Read 12 tweets
4 Aug
Moving on: When will council ever be back for in-person meetings? It was supposed to be July 13, but there were technical difficulties.

Those are fixed, so here we are.
But, as NRV says, now we've got rising COVID cases and new CDC recommendations.…
"My position on coming back ... has evolved as we've seen some of these changes in the COVID variant rise," NRV says.
Read 25 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!