Daily Archives: August 2, 2022

Loren Taylor, a third-generation Oakland resident, has a background in biomedical engineering and management consulting. He joined the City Council as the District 6 representative, defeating incumbent Desley Brooks in 2018.

In an interview with The Oaklandside, Taylor looked back on his first term and discussed the major issues facing District 6 and Oakland, from public safety to the Oakland As Howard Terminal ballpark project, which he views more as a real estate deal than a stadium proposal. He also addressed the fact that hes a landlord, his association with Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, and expressed a desire to get more community members involved in City Council meetings.

This is part of our series of Q&As with councilmembers. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

You are nearly done with your first term. Looking back over the past three years, what are some moments you are most proud of?

Weve had a number of accomplishments. Weve transformed the work and the feel of District 6 and the opportunities that exist there. Examples include the creation of Liberation Park in partnership with the Black Cultural Zone collaborative, more than 30 community organizations, my office having been at the center of envisioning what could be, and supporting and guiding that development. It was an eyesore and a blight on the community and now its an urban oasis, with an outdoor roller-skating rink, turf field, recurring farmers market, and healing place. All of that is indicative of what weve done partnering with the community to transform spaces into positivity.

Another thing Im extremely proud of and grateful for is the establishment of the ESO Ventures Entrepreneurship program, where we partnered with Merritt College to create an entrepreneurship accelerator. Weve got four cohorts who have graduated through that. We are talking about businesses and entrepreneurs anchored to East Oakland tapping into their own innovation, to create value and giving the tools, competence, confidence, and the capital to do so. And going as far to get $8 million from the state budget to invest in Oakland businesses who traditionally struggled to get capital.

When it comes to public safety, I am proud of standing up for a deliberate process of reimaging public safety to make sure we not only redesign and transform the system we have around public safety and criminal justice but do so in a way that protects folks, ensures their continued safety, and that we uphold the need for strong support for residents who call 911 looking for help.

How do you strike that balance when it comes to the question of how many officers are needed to patrol Oakland vs. the communitys call for a non-police response, such as MACRO?

I am connected to the communities that have the highest amounts of crime, violence, and calls for service. Those who are making those calls say absolutely we need to reimagine and transform, and they say if we take away police right now without an alternative in place we know what will happen. It will cost lives. That will disproportionately impact Black and brown communities.

The way to move forward is to acknowledge that what weve had is framing that its either police and enforcement or violence prevention and focuses on root causes. It has to be both. I often describe the analogy of its just like when we built the eastern span of the Bay Bridge. We didnt annihilate and get rid of the old bridge before the new bridge was up, running, tested, and demonstrated to be effective. That new bridge we know had some faults that needed to be worked on and fixed, like the cracks in bolts and suspension cables. Just like as we move from one bridge to the next one, we have to have a transition and keep the old one in place as a backup and sustain the need it serves we have to do the same with public safety.

That means our current public safety system is the solution when it comes to violent crimes, calls for services, investigations, community policing, partnership, and that is exactly what we need to maintain while we also build up the alternative models as we deploy the violence prevention efforts that we all are hoping will set us up for a reimagined state of less punitive, more intervention root cause investment.

I asked about some of your proudest moments. Are there any moments you regret? Anything you havent been able to get done?

I dont know necessarily if I have regrets. I stand with all the decisions Ive made. I think I engage and approach policy and decision-making very deliberately with intentional analysis, community engagement, and that has been reflected in the decisions Ive made. There are some areas I wish I could have gone further. There is a next step to advance when you look at some of the economic opportunities and challenges.

One thing my district has been yearning for is an additional grocery store. Right now, we only have two grocery stores and they are smaller, family-owned grocers. We are still a food desert in District 6. We dont have a single bank for 64,000 residents. Its great we were able to get some additional ATM service stations, but that is something when you look at the lack of amenities in District 6 we are building the groundwork to get there, its something we havent been able to close on yet.

There are still significant infrastructure gaps and disparities that exist when you go into East Oakland versus other parts of the city versus other neighboring cities. When you look at the blight, illegal dumping, and litter. We have done a yeomans job of responding and creating some alternative investments adding programs like the Beautification Council to put our unhoused residents to work, helping to clean our streets and our areas. We have invested in surveillance technology and brought in more environmental enforcement officers to keep people from dumping in our city. There is still a way to go. You see the disparity.

One of the things I pushed for when I got in was to push for transparency and a true performance management system in the city. While that was one of my first resolutions I pushed for on the council, we still havent gotten a response from the administration. I lay that at the mayor and city administrators feet. Its fundamental for us to have performance dashboards for every department, having transparency to where we can all be held accountable.

On an eight-person council, its important to build consensus. In what ways do you think the council has found consensus to accomplish its goals?

When I look at the council, where we are able to make progress and alignment, in general theres alignment on values where we wanna go. The issue comes in when you talk about the execution of the path to get there. Where we align is around some of the investments. We agree we have got to be able to prioritize more investments toward homelessness and housing, to more alternative solutions to a gun and a badge response where its not needed and not as effective. I dont think the misalignment is on where we are going, it is on how we get there.

On public safety, it seems you have a number of folks who want to move more aggressively without taking into account the safety concerns that many if not the majority of Oakland residents have. With housing and homelessness, we all agree we want to get people housed and stop people from becoming unhoused. The dichotomy that is happening is when it comes to how much we invest in the ultimate solution of getting people into housing. And how much of those dollars we take away from long-term housing in order to make the unfortunate reality of those living on the streets invest there. You see that coming into play in terms of creating a kitchen or commissary in encampments versus should those dollars be invested into creating long-term solutions. The challenge is when we dont come together and talk in substance about these differences and at least call the question so we can call the vote and move forward. Instead, we talk around each other and above each other.

If you could change one big thing about the way Oakland government works, what would it be. Dont be afraid to take a big swing here.

What we are missing is we have a small fraction of people who have the time, the resources, and some are professionally paid or incentivized to come to council meetings to advocate. That voice crowds out others. Their voice has a disproportionate weight and impact on decision-making.

What I would change is creating a better representative voice at these critical decision-making moments. Obviously, its on each of us as councilmembers to be in touch with the breadth of our constituency and not simply react to the louder voices in the room. But Ive seen that occur to what I believe is the detriment of the collective voice of Oaklanders are wanting and needing.

The other thing is I think we have to come back in person to having at least the councilmembers together. Having the interaction between elected officials where we have to look each other in the eye, where we have to come together, it can force us to get out of our echo chambers, and engage each other as people and counterparts. I see the benefit of being in closer proximity.

When was the last time the full council was in the same room together?

Before the pandemic. Because of the Brown Act, the only time we come together is in a public meeting and we havent had an in-person public meeting. We have two councilmembers who are new and have never been in an in-person meeting with the full council. In my experience on the council, prior to the pandemic, theres the humanity of seeing your colleagues in person and having coffee and seeing each other at the water cooler.

Youre running for mayor. How do you feel about the fact that a lot of people associate you with Mayor Schaaf, seeing your candidacy as a continuation of her legacy?

That is a naivety of lazy analysis and not really paying attention to facts and activities on the ground. Anybody who sees my record knows I have been driving an agenda that I have established based on the engagement with my constituents. When you look at my major accomplishments none of them have to do with Mayor Schaaf. When you look at the policy positions that Ive had, they are independently driven and at times opposite of the mayors. When you look at the decision to not support Measure AA revenue collection until the courts ruled, that was a clear stance on the opposite side of the mayor.

My push to establish City Hall East, which still hasnt happened, but I am pushing for it because I do think we have to have a satellite presence of City Hall in East Oakland, thats something the mayor is not supportive of but I am extremely passionate about. Look at where I have sided with others on the council on the opposite side. There are folks who simply want to fill their own narrative and arent actually paying attention to whats happening. Its unfortunate thats a narrative thats been adopted since Ive been on council but when presented with facts folks dont have much to say or counter. The only way that I can counter that is with what is actually happening and those who pay attention will see and acknowledge that, and those are the ones who are supporting me.

How would you define your existing base of support? And who are you working to convince next?

I am not a typical politician. We have Sheng Thao who grew up as an intern staffer and chief of staff, career politician and corporate ladder politics. Treva Reid is also running for mayor and the majority of her career has been working in and around government, as a staffer to legislators and as a lobbyist. I am a kid from Oakland, born and raised here, who has been successful outside in corporate America as an engineer, as a management consultant, and as an entrepreneur. If you see something that is broken in your town you have a responsibility to extend the blessings and experiences youve had to benefit others. And that is what draws me here. I am making decisions for Oakland first and not for career growth. When I look at the opportunities to serve and what Oakland needs now, Oakland needs someone who is going to be all in.

Howard Terminal. What commitments from the As do you need to feel comfortable approving a deal and community benefits package?

I see Howard Terminal as a real estate transaction deal. Only 10% has to do with a baseball stadium. I am looking to get out of this deal the best possible options for the city of Oakland. When I look at an investment opportunity, I am looking at what we are putting in and asking, are we going to get significant multiples of value in return? If Im looking at getting 10 times the return that we as a city invest from the public, then we should be looking at how all of the value that comes back to us aggregates to that. That includes affordable housing. We have already established a 35% affordable housing target for whats expected in the deal. Job creation.

It has to do with additional revenue created, year over year, moving from less than $100,000 in property taxes moving to tens of millions of dollars in tax revenue per year. It has to do with the workforce development opportunities, with cultural arts, investments into our aging infrastructure.

All of those benefits have to be added up in a way that shows we are getting 10 times what we are investing. In that situation, we are getting a win, even when the party on the other side of the table also gets a benefit. I dont see why just because the other side of the table is benefiting that we have to say, no we are against the project, because we are not worried about their financials, we are worried about ours. In most cases, you need to have a win-win in order to make that work. I know I am working hard to make sure the city gets that win and I know that the As are working on their side to do the same. I see light at the end of the tunnel to create that win-win that sets Oakland up for greater success and more revenues to invest in the problems we face.

You are a landlord, correct?

Yes.

As a landlord, do you see any conflict on issues that either help or hurt landlords? Where do you draw the line?

There is absolutely no conflict. I think its important to acknowledge that property ownership is the primary vehicle that wealth has been created in the Black community and other underserved communities over the past couple of generations. It is not something to shy away from or feel as though its a negative. We have been at a deficit since slavery and when you talk about creating inter-generational wealth opportunities in the Black community, real estate ownership has been a vehicle for that.

So I dont see a conflict of interest with someone who understands all sides of the real estate equation. I see that as a huge benefit that is missing with a lot of the decision-making thats occurring. I have been a property owner, I have been a renter, and I am a current homeowner. Understanding all three of those vantage points is important to make sure we strike the right balance in whats needed with respect to our policies. Its lopsided perspectives that set us up for longer-term frustration, pain, and challenges. I do believe that when you are looking for the sweet spot in policy, where you are supporting all sides in a way that ensures longterm effectiveness, youve gotta make sure that rental property owners are incentivized to keep properties on the market, to be positive members of the community.

When policies swing too far and disproportionately put a heavier burden on property owners, the property owners who suffer are the Black, brown, low-income property owners who have had this as a pathway to actually moving from lower class to middle class and building some inter-generational wealth. Black communities still have, I think, somewhere on the order of 10 to 20% of the wealth in terms of asset value in their families as their white counterparts. Equity means we have to look at everyone.

This whole thing about a conflict of interest is an issue that we need to get around. Theres no conflict of interest just by being a property owner and having that perspective. A lot of the policies being created push us small mom-and-pop landlords out and who buys it? Its investors who no longer live in the community and treat it more corporate and therefore as less lenient and less understanding and more value extracting as opposed to community building. So the downside of having weighted policies is we end up creating more of a divide between the property owners and the community and that makes things worse for everybody. I think its better to support local mom-and-pop property owners like me and many West Oakland, East Oakland residents who care without being required to do so.

Is there anything else you wish I had asked?

You didnt ask about the fact that I am from Oakland, born and raised here. When you look at the other mayoral candidates they came here as adults, at least the ones who are frontrunners. I think that has a huge impact on the ability to represent and the connectivity within the community. My grandparents, when I was growing up, lived in North Oakland, 65th Street and Shattuck. I grew up and went to Joaquin Miller Elementary and Montera Middle School in District 4.

My first job was on San Leandro Street in East Oakland at a glass packing factory where I earned enough to pay for my own drivers ed. My mom was a bilingual teacher in Oakland Unified and taught in the Fruitvale District. When you talk about the connection to different communities that is something that has a strong value and benefit as we move forward and make sure we are pulling together different communities. That is a perspective that is necessary in order to help solve the challenges we have as a city.

Continued here:

Oakland City Hall in conversation: Loren Taylor - The Oaklandside

Wisconsin Public Education Network announced Jennifer Black as its 2022 Changemaker of the Year during the 8th Annual Summer Summit on July 21.

Jennifer Black is a parent and advocate for public schools in Tomahawk, Wisconsin, a small city in Lincoln County situated between Wausau and Rhinelander. As her home school districts budget tightened and two referendum efforts narrowly failed, Jen founded and chaired a community advisory committee, the Champions of Tomahawk School District, to support a remarkable referendum effort in the spring of 2022. By engaging with her local community, local businesses, educators union members, school administrators, professionals and board members, Jen was able to educate her community, rally them to support their public schools, and pass the latest referendum with Tomahawks largest-ever voter turnout in a non-presidential election. The effort, under Jens leadership, was an incredible show of support for public schools in rural Wisconsin.

There is no dollar amount that can be placed on the efforts and value of Jen Blacks advocacy for our public schools, our kids and our community, said Deb Velleux, a Tomahawk School Board member. Jen has the uncanny ability to reach all types of mindsets and viewpoints and arrive at a mutual understanding of the needs of our school district and students. Not only is the School District of Tomahawk blessed to have the advocacy efforts of Jen Black, but the community as well.

Jen Black said: Despite many obstacles, our focus remained on the children of our community and the fact that we can all agree that all children should have access to a safe, quality education with exceptional teachers and staff in a well maintained school. And when schools are successful, communities thrive.

Wisconsin Public Education Networks Northeast Regional Organizer, Denise Gaumer Hutchison, who has closely followed Champions of Tomahawk Public Schools work, praised the 2022 Changemaker of the Year selection: Jennifer Black fully represents what community organizing and support for public education looks like. She did not shy away from hard conversations and was willing to discuss the importance of supporting strong public schools with every faction of the community.

Black added: [One] thing Im most proud of, and that I believe that other champions across Wisconsin can do in achieving similar goals, is to continue to focus on the nonpartisan nature of education. Our children should not be pawns or transactions in political warfare.

Jennifer Black is the fourth recipient of this annual award recognizing local advocates who make a transformative impact for students and their public schools. Past recipients are Chris Hambuch-Boyle (2019, Eau Claire), Tara LeRoy (2020, Palmyra-Eagle), and Martha Siravo (2021, Madison).

Jennifer Black was selected from a group of nine finalists working courageously to support students across the state. Read about our other finalists in these paraphrased excerpts from their nominators below:

Diana Delbecchi, Green Bay

Community Schools Coordinator, Green Bay Area Public School District

Diana works tirelessly for the children and families in her school including writing grants, coordinating student community projects, and building community partnerships.She spends hours working to provide kids with experiences that would otherwise be impossible for their families.

Andrea Gumbel, Sun Prairie

Educator, Sun Prairie Area School District

Andrea strives to make her classroom a welcome space for ALL students. She is intentional in all she does to support diversity, inclusion, equity, and social-emotional learning. Andrea participates on her schools equity team, personalizes her curriculum to meet the needs of her students, stays abreast of best practices, and makes meaningful connections with her students and families.

Mike Jones, Madison

President, Madison Teachers Incorporated

Mike has played an active role in supporting students, teachers, and the community, going above and beyond to unify and uplift folks. He has worked to bring together various community groups to work collectively to support equity in education. All that he does uplifts and works to create real change.

Christopher Jorgenson, Eau Claire

Director, UW-Eau Claire Gender and Sexuality Resource Center

Chris has provided powerful insights and instruction for Eau Claire Area School District staff on issues of equity and diversity that have both challenged and strengthened teachers practices. He has courageously supported teachers through a challenging year, as they work to support their students.

Ray Mendez, Madison

Disability Advocate and Madison Metropolitan School District Parent

Ray has a passion for bringing issues concerning special education into a public space and networking with leaders and community members. He is working to shift the language in Madison to Equity, Access, and Inclusion, and is an innovative advocate for the community.

Megan Miller, Beloit

Vice President, Beloit School Board

Megan is in her second term on the School District of Beloit School Board. She is a lifelong advocate for public education as a teacher, parent, and board member. Megan continues to be a positive, pro-public school, pro-student, and pro-educator voice in the face of powerful challenges and opposition.

Tim Nordin, Eau Claire

President, Eau Claire Area School Board

Tim has served as president of the Eau Claire School District School Board through challenging times and continues to provide leadership to best serve all students. Tim leads equity work with board members, including the development and adoption of district-wide equity policy. Tim is committed to serving each and every child in the ECASD.

Cendi Tena, Milwaukee

Co-Executive Director, Leaders Igniting Transformation (LIT)

Cendi has been a strong advocate for public education for years. As the Director of Organizing at Leaders Igniting Transformation, Cendi led LIT organizers and chapters of Milwaukee Public High School students to shift MPS culture and redefine safety. Her efforts were significant steps towards ending the school-to-prison / deportation pipeline, divesting from failed practices, and investing in making public schools a place for all students to thrive and feel supported.

See the article here:

Wisconsin Public Education Network: Jennifer Black announced as 2022 Changemaker of the Year - WisPolitics.com

A proposed set of conduct and discipline standards applicable to all law enforcement agencies in Oregon were published Monday.

In several instances, the commission charged with establishing the new rules left room for officers found to have committed serious, often illegal offenses to keep their jobs. For example, officers who commit sexual assault or intentional physical assault may not be fired if there are mitigating factors.

Members of the Commission on Law Enforcement Standards of Conduct and Discipline discuss discipline for officers who intentionally target someone based on them belonging to a protected class on July 12, 2022 in a screenshot during a Zoom meeting.

Screenshot from YouTube / OPB

The butt is considered a sexual part of the body, said Mark Makler, a former prosecutor who represents police unions and officers, at a meeting on June 30. So grabbing somebodys butt in gest or horseplay could be considered a sexual assault.

Defense attorney Laura Fine, another member of the commission, retorted that that would be sexual harassment, not assault.

Makler and seven other commissioners who were present at that meeting voted against making sexual assault an automatically fireable offense.

There are things like state of mind or absence of intent that could come into play. Or degree of harm, Portland Police Association attorney Anil Karia said. There are nuances in this.

The commission was formed with the passage of HB 2930 in 2021, one of several pieces of legislation passed last year tackling police accountability and reform.

The goalwas to have clarity, bill sponsor Rep. Janelle Bynum, D-Clackamas said in an interview with OPB. Officers like to have clarity, some level of certainty about what the standards are.

By having one statewide set of guidelines, Bynum explained, officers who have discipline problems in one local department cant transfer to a different agency that has lower standards. She said the kinds of people the community wants working in law enforcement, dont want to work for agencies with low standards.

The interesting thing about these commissions and how they have these conversations and come up with draft rules you can tell where peoples values are, Bynum said. Why would you have rules that just say you could potentially just get a slap on the wrist for sexual assault. Whos going to want to work there?

The commission has 13 voting members and two non-voting members. Members include a representative from the Oregon Department of Justice, two police chiefs, a sheriff, two lawyers who represent police unions, a defense attorney who also represents police, the former president of the Salem-Keizer NAACP, the executive director of the Oregon District Attorneys Association, and a civil rights investigator at Oregon State University.

Over the course of 13 meetings since early March, the group hammered out standards on a range of issues from unjustified use of force to assault to targeting someone based solely on their race, gender or other protected status.

Some of the most notable draft rules are:

The full list of proposed rules, including moral character violations, is available online.

The commission based their approach to designing the new rules on the recently created New York Police Department discipline guidelines. The NYPD approach essentially listed the range of potential misconduct along with the default penalty, and more severe or less severe penalties that can be assigned depending on mitigating or aggravating factors.

That approach differs from the Portland Police Bureaus recently adopted discipline guide which requires people in leadership positions to identify the infraction and then rank the severity from A to E, a subjective step critics say creates an opening for arbitrators to effectively overturn discipline decisions.

In the case of sexual assault, the commission ultimately decided that the default proposed penalty should be termination but that could be lessened to suspension without pay, salary reduction, demotion or a written reprimand if mitigating circumstances are identified by an officers chain of command. Potential factors that might lead to a less or more severe penalty include an officers conduct history, whether the conduct was intentional, if the officer is a supervisor and the potential for rehabilitation.

At some points in the six months and 26 hours of meetings, proposed rules were watered down after an initial poll suggested they wouldnt garner the necessary support.

In a meeting on July 7, only five of the 12 present commissioners initially thought officers should be fired without any option for mitigating factors when they use excessive physical or deadly force seriously injuring or killing someone.

Michael Slauson, chief counsel of the Oregon Department of Justices Criminal Justice Division and commission co-chair, tinkered with the wording and removed physical force.

Ultimately, eight commissioners said an officer should be fired for using unjustified or excessive deadly force causing serious injury or death; the minimum number required to pass. Makler, Karia, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Police Chief Timothy Addleman and Keizer Police Chief John Teague held out and voted against the rule.

If, however, an officer uses unjustified or excessive physical force that is, anything other than deadly force they can present mitigating factors and potentially keep their job.

Thats one of the disappointments that I have with the way some members of this commission have looked at this, Benny Williams, former president of the Keizer-Salem chapter of the NAACP, told OPB, explaining that he is disturbed by the notion that anything short of being killed by an officer is not considered severe enough to warrant termination.

Sexual assault, deadly force these are things that have been put in front of us specifically because these are issues that are pervasive across the country, Williams said. And Oregon is not in any way unique.

If an officer intentionally targets someone based solely on a protected class such as their race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, or housing status, the default discipline should be termination, the commission said. But, as with assault, the officer can present mitigating circumstances.

Targeting someone in that way is against state law and a Fourth Amendment violation. Only five commissioners thought the offense should be an automatic termination.

Steven Schuback, the lawyer who represented the city of Portland in police union contract negotiations, said the new protected class of homelessness is not well defined.

We have to recognize that there are cases of implicit bias that are inherent just in our culture that we are dealing with on disciplinary levels, Schuback argued. Exclusive termination is just too tight. Whereas presumptive [termination] allows for some level of mitigation when its appropriate.

Slauson, from the Oregon Department of Justice, pushed back.

I see this as an extraordinarily high burden of proof if youre saying that an officer targeted somebodybased solely on homelessness, Slauson said. Describe a scenario in whichtermination would not be a fair sanction for that.

Teague, the Keizer police chief, said what he saw as reasonable policing decisions could look like targeting.

Targeting may connote some nefarious thought but it hardly demands nefarious thought, Teague said.

He explained his officers would ignore teenagers running around near the river but would likely approach a disheveled guy stumbling down there who is rather apparently a vagrant whos established a camp.

Arguably, it is targeting, Teague said, even if the officers dont take action.

Oregon state law prohibits targeting of an individual by law enforcement officers based solely on certain personal attributes, including homelessness.

But homelessness has been part of the profiling statute for at least four years, Slauson said. He said he hoped officers were trained to identify and know that targeting someone based on their unhoused status is illegal.

Teagues argument won out. The proposed rules now allow for less severe penalties in some cases where an officer is found to have intentionally targeted someone based solely on a protected class. Even Williams, the former NAACP regional president, supported the slightly less severe penalty. He told OPB hes a pragmatist and that if these changes are going to be impactful it is important that there be consensus.

If anybody thought that we were going to have unanimous consent on any and all of these things, they were fooling themselves, Williams said. Sometimes it had to be brought back to Wait a minute, heres why were here. And so we dont have to all agree, but we have to have a real consensus of understanding how important this particular issue is.

The commission opted not to consider what penalties, if any, an officer should face if they join a hate group, prompting pushback from the only two Black members.

Its really disappointing to see all the law enforcement and how this doesnt seem to be an important issue to you, said Tarron Anderson, a civil rights investigator at Oregon State University who said he felt compelled to speak up over this issue. I try to be objective and understand from both sides of the aisle but some of these things are really troubling.

Williams said it is known that there are officers in the state involved with or sympathetic to white supremacist and extremist groups.

OPB previously reported that more than two dozen current and former members of Oregon law enforcement had joined the Oath Keepers militia, a group that recruits people with experience in law enforcement and the military and which played a central role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

If nothing is done to address the close relationship between extremist groups and some law enforcement, trust between the community and the police will never be restored, Williams said.

After only five members voted in favor of taking up the issue, several commissioners expressed the hope they would return to the topic at a later date.

The politics of our nation have trained us to take sides: the police or the criminal, Bynum said. Taking sides I dont think its helpful. And thats why I think the conversations of the commission are very important and, again, it will reveal what the dominant thought is around who gets to be safe in our communities and at work.

The commission will hold a series of public hearings throughout August and ending Sept. 16. They will then consider the publics comment and make any changes before the rules take effect on Oct. 1.

Go here to read the rest:

Draft rules to govern police conduct in Oregon leave lots of wiggle room - Oregon Public Broadcasting

Tenaya Taylor is on a mission to help Hartford teens develop into young leaders.

In addition to advocacy work that focuses on racial and health equity, housing justice, criminal justice reform, and offering various community programs, Taylor, who uses they/them pronouns, this summer created a summer camp to help Hartford teens.

The Young Leaders summer program works to provide immersive and educational outdoors experiences for youth ages 13-18, with a chance to learn through science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, along with hiking, camping, exploration, and civic engagement, Taylor said.

The camp evolved from Taylors previous work.

After losing their job two years ago in the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Taylor founded the Nonprofit Accountability Group in 2020, which works to make lasting change within organizations by focusing on people-first programming, basic needs care, and antiracism practices, by disrupting the status quo, comfort, and complacency.

Part of the Nonprofit Accountability Group includes bringing resources to the community and from the community, such as a grocery program that offers free fresh produce, meat, dairy, and perishables for low-income and BIPOC families, a free art, reading, and teaching supplies program that offers free art supply kits, creativity stations, and open mic events, and safety, participation accountability, creativity, education, a housing justice initiative to provide stipends to tenant organizers.

As Taylor became a grant writer for other organizations, they decided to begin writing grants for their own organization. This led to obtaining funding that allowed Taylor to put together the Young Leaders camp.

Camper Malabi Neal said that she is enjoying the different activities that the camp offers and is learning a lot.

I feel like its very inclusive. Its very self-surrounding around accepting all genders; non binary, transgender, cisgender. Everybody is very diverse in that way, Malabi said.

Story continues

It makes everybody feel included, Malabi said. Theres different activities of going to the movies, learning about nature, going camping, and meeting other friends...I also learned that a lot of people are struggling in communities and need camps and other outlets to do stuff, because theres not really a lot to do out here.

Malabi said there is also specific and intentional education offered.

They make activities for the youth, then they make us actually learn about plants and nature, Malabi said. [We] learn about different types of foods, that we didnt even know about, learn about how the government in this system is working. And yes, very informational, very intellectual, and I love it. Im having a great time here.

Taylor noted some of the community partnerships that have helped their youth to make long-lasting memories include Connecticuts Sierra Club Chapter, Bushnell Park, CT Youth Food Program Alliance, Sunrise Connecticut, Save The Sound, and others.

One of their highlighted activities this summer was at the Connecticut State Capitol in Hartford, where Speaker of the House Matt Ritter was able to connect Taylor and their campers with a tour of the building, by his staff and help them learn about the inner workings of local government.

Matt Ritter let us tour the back rooms at the Capitol and really get a firsthand view of it. So you know, in that sense, I was [saying to the youths], you know, this is our power. This is our house, you belong here. You belong in a decision making process. You are important, Taylor said.

An element that Taylor hopes that campers will take away from their summer program is that they feel empowered, not exploited.

Another community partner that Taylor has teamed up with for the summer is Hartfords Proud Drill, Drum, and Dance Corp and CEO Terry Starks said that she can definitely see the benefit the camp has for participants.

The program definitely has positive impact. They also learn about recycling and painting and be exposed to the outside life, instead of the inside, Starks said. Last night, they learned about climate change. They were really, really excited because No.1, its in 3D.

So, definitely having a wonderful impact on these kids, Starks said.

While the camp has community partners and staff who help, Taylor said that they are solely responsible for making the camp possible, including making and accepting applications, filling out proper paperwork, contacting parents, and conducting payroll, which includes paying her campers $100 for each outing that they attend.

About paying campers to participate in outings, Taylor said that is done to be fair to the youths.

People just dont realize how powerless kids are in this in the grand scheme of things. Im just here to support and Im actually an adult that likes kids, Taylor said. So thats one of the main differences in our program. We are really just trying to understand and put youth into leadership. Some of the adults I work with, I have to remind them.

As an example of how the camp works to help create youth autonomy, Taylor noted that a camper was given a blank signup sheet for the day. One of the adult staff intervened and wanted it done a certain way, but Taylor told the staffer to allow the youth camper to start the sign in sheet their way.

Let him learn how to do the paper. People just try to take away youth autonomy so much, Taylor said. My purpose is civic engagement, an environmental lens, [along with] empowerment and autonomy for these kids. They will spend their whole lives being told no, you cant do this, and you cant do that. How do you expect somebody to be a leader after 18 years of their life? Theyve been told no, and then all of a sudden, I can do what I want. No.

Taylor said the camp also aims to keep participants engaged in a positive way.

A lot of crimes stem fromI dont want to pinpoint young people but like, when they say young people get into stuff, Im like, [they are just] trying to have money, trying to keep busy. My whole thing is youth being in trouble and being bad is just them not having anything to do, Taylor said. Its important to just keep them engaged. The other daywe were in a park and all our phones died. It was hot. They were complaining, but Im like, its better than being in the house just looking on your phone, honestly. So sorry. We [are] all hot and mad, but Id rather be here, than in the house for sure.

Learn more about The Non Profit Accountability Group here.

Go here to see the original:

This Hartford camp is working to build young leaders; it makes everybody feel included - Yahoo! Voices

By Jennifer Stultz Editor

New Pratt Area Chamber of Commerce Director Ashley Smith said she enjoyed visiting with many local business owners and citizens last Thursday on S. Main during a July 28 Welcome Event. She said her position as director and the welcoming response she has received is not something she takes lightly. She said she looks forward to finding ways to grow and foster relationships between the people and businesses who make up the Pratt landscape.

I was very happy with the wide variety of people who turned out, Smith said. I am so happy to be back in my home county after several years away and, long term, my goal is really to find ways to bring young people and families back home to Pratt to live and work here and raise their families.

Smith, who grew up a long-time Pratt County 4-H Club member, said she has learned, through personal experience and education, how important it is to build and maintain networks within communities between all businesses and people.

We have to understand here that if one small business goes down and dies, it affects all of use and we all go down, Smith said. Teamwork, cooperation and communication will really help us all survive.

Smith said her many years in 4-H in the local community helped her build networks as she participated in projects such as leadership, beef and buymanship.

Ive just always loved to buy clothes, she said.

With a degree in agriculture communications from Kansas State University, and another degree in organizational leadership from Fort Hays State University, Smith said she feels well-equipped to lead Pratt businesses and citizens forward in a difficult economic time.

You know, I have an understanding of how a bigger, broader perspective really works, she said. Ive worked retail in clothing stores, helped manage a small restaurant, and set up communications with large organizations; it all comes together here where the people we love most can work together to make something special happen.

Smith, who lived with her husband Nate Smith in Colorado near Denver for several years, said it was important for young people from Pratt to get outside of their community and experience what other places have to offer, and then consider how good they had it in Pratt and come back.

We have a lot to offer here, she said. We need to be intentional about encouraging each other not to drive to Dodge or Great Bend or Wichita to shop or dine. We have great places here for that. We really need to work hard at supporting our local businesses so that others can experience the best of Pratt and we can all make it work.

Smith said the best way to contact her to share concerns and ideas about the Pratt business scene was to call her at the Pratt Area Chamber of Commerce office at 620-672-5501.

Visit link:

Smith brings a bigger perspective to Chamber leadership job Pratt Tribune - Pratt Tribune

Public health leaders in all settings must be intentional in implementing strategies that strengthen our epidemiology workforce and prepare epidemiologists for the future of public health practice.

As public health professionals, we are currently working in an incredibly dynamic era of public health practice. Not only was the field moving forward into Public Health 3.0, which calls for us to work more collaboratively across sectors to address upstream determinants of health, but we have now been confronted with a massive global pandemic that is serving as a significant driver of change. Never has it been more crucial for public health leaders to implement strategies to develop a strong epidemiology workforce that is adaptable to future public health practice. As a subgroup of the larger public health workforce, epidemiologists are key professionals that fulfill core public health science functions. Given the increasing availability of data and the growing recognition that data should drive public health decision making, continued assessment and implementation of workforce development strategies aimed at epidemiologists is essential.

I was a practicing epidemiologist at a state health department when it came time to select a dissertation research topic during my doctoral studies in 2019. I partnered with the national professional association for applied epidemiologists, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE), to explore readiness of state health department epidemiologists to work in emerging areas of public health practice. We analyzed data from the Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey (PH WINS), surveyed the designated state epidemiologist in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, and conducted focus groups with epidemiologists working in state health departments to craft recommendations aimed at improving applied epidemiologist readiness to work in emerging areas of practice.

What We Learned

Epidemiologists identified having organizational support, access to training, learning from others, availability of best practices, dedicated time, and supplemental epidemiology program staffing as key facilitators to improving their ability to work in emerging areas of practice. Correspondingly, epidemiologists identified lack of staffing, time, training, knowledge, organizational support, organizational strategy, and siloed programs as key barriers. Epidemiologists reported not being involved at all in some key areas of practice, such as policy development.

What We Can Do to Improve Future Readiness

There are actions that public health leaders in health departments can take now to improve epidemiology skill sets for the future. This includes providing epidemiologists with dedicated time to work in emerging areas of practice, including time to attend trainings, cross-train within the organization, and to participate in communities of practice, such as those hosted by CSTE. While epidemiologists need to develop and maintain technical skills, public health leaders should also provide opportunities for epidemiologists to develop cross-cutting strategic skills, which support a more nimble and prepared workforce for the future. Finally, public health leaders should promote awareness of the skills epidemiologists offer within their organization to increase their engagement in public health initiatives. Epidemiologists should be engaged early in the planning process so that their expertise in data collection and analysis can be leveraged to improve the value of data collected and the use of that data for public health action.

The pandemic response has reinforced the needs and exacerbated the challenges identified through our research. In particular, the pandemic has made visible the effects of underfunding public health services. It is very difficult for health department leaders to support enhanced training and capacity building initiatives within their organizations when they do not have enough staffing to carry out daily essential functions. The most recent Epidemiology Capacity Assessment (ECA) conducted by CSTE in 2021 found that major gaps exist in the applied epidemiology workforce despite recent growth due to pandemic response surge staffing. Health departments need increased, sustainable, and flexible funding to support epidemiology practice. Categorical or restricted funding reinforces programmatic siloes, making it more challenging to promote cross-training and to adapt activities and job skills to emerging areas. A new federal funding opportunity (CDC OE22-2203) has recently been made available to health departments to support workforce infrastructure needs broadly and we are hopeful this type of flexible funding will be sustained long after the pandemic, as the public health workforce had significant needs long before.

The pandemic also reinforced the need for a robust and flexible epidemiology workforce with both specialized and strategic skill sets. Typically accustomed to working behind the scenes, the pandemic shined a spotlight on the work of epidemiologists epidemiology even became a household term and an increasing number of people decided to pursue epidemiology as a future career. According to the Association of Schools & Programs of Public Health (ASPPH), public health graduate programs saw a 40% increase in applicants in the first year after the start of the pandemic, with epidemiology being the top area of study. At the same time there is renewed interest in entering the public health workforce, according to recent survey data, the existing workforce is experiencing significant stress, fatigue, and serious mental health impacts exacerbated by the extended pandemic response. We must act now during this remarkable time period for our profession to strengthen epidemiology workforce capacity for the future. Our research resulted in recommendations across the workforce development continuum, from updating the Applied Epidemiology Competencies (currently underway), to enhancing health department relationships with academic institutions (ie, cultivating the pipeline), investing in training and fellowship programs, increasing on-the-job training, fostering partnerships, and implementing organizational change principles. It will take public health leaders in all settings working together intentionally to strengthen workforce capacity and readiness for the future of public health practice.

Read the Report in the Journal of Public Health Management and Practice:

Related Articles:

Like Loading...

Related

See the rest here:

Readying the Applied Epidemiology Workforce for the Future of Public Health Practice - JPHMP Direct

Evergreen School District Director of Special Services Mary Meehan has been named the 2022 Outstanding Administrator of Special Education, by the Montana Council of Administrators for Special Education.

The 2022-23 school year marks Meehans 13th year with Evergreen School District. In addition to special education programming, Meehan oversees the Flathead Crossroads Program, which is a specialized academic and behavior intervention school housed at Evergreen and is open to eligible students across the valley. She is also contracted to provide special services for Helena Flats School. About 1,000 students and 200 staff members across the valley are served by Meehan, according to Evergreen School District Superintendent Laurie Barron, who nominated her.

An award like this is not for the work that youve personally done, Meehan said. Its for the work of the people you supervise, the organization you work for, the commitment of the individuals to continue to do the work even in the face of failure.

Barron described Meehan as a dedicated employee whom staff and parents seek support from in finding success for students when other avenues have not worked.

She is personally and professionally invested in helping to improve outcomes for students, no matter the circumstances, no matter the effort it takes. Whether she is conducting a difficult IEP (individualized education plan) meeting, delivering clean laundry (that she did at her home on her own time) to a family experiencing homelessness, or celebrating a student at a promotion ceremony, she always cares, Barron wrote in her letter nominating Meehan.

Barron also noted the additional time Meehan puts in to meet student needs giving an example of working one-on-one with a student until nearly 5 p.m. Barron also highlighted Meehans involvement in the districts strategic focus to create an inclusive learning environment for students with disabilities, which started at Evergreen Junior High in 2013 and now extends through kindergarten.

Through very intentional implementation of co-teach practices, including professional development, we have made it the norm to provide true least restrictive learning environments for our students, including providing generalized opportunities for all students in special education, even those in our specialized special education programs, Barron wrote.

Meehan believes achievement, which looks different for everyone, comes with increased participation and expanded access to services. Barron said Meehan has helped lead efforts to provide teachers with training in intentional planning and scheduling for students with IEPs; monitoring student progress consistently; providing intervention support in addition to, not in place of, regular content instruction; and providing direct resources to mental health and behavioral support to keep students in class. Barron also noted Meehans willingness to present at conferences and host school administrators who visit to learn about the districts best practices and experiences in seeing academic growth among students with disabilities.

Meehan earned a bachelors degree in special education and psychology from Carroll College in 1984. She obtained advanced degrees in school psychology from the University of Montana in 1990 and 2000. She completed her special education supervisor endorsement from Montana State University.

Meehan started her career working with people with disabilities in various roles as a classroom aide, a school and hospital habilitation aide, a live-in group home parent, a sheltered workshop service provider, a teacher, a school psychologist, a special education director and a preschool coordinator.

My work has always been in special education, all of those roles have been working with and supporting individuals with learning challenges be successful in community settings and educational settings, Meehan said.

I think that I was raised and always believed that all people have a place at the table and that includes a plan within the context of our communities and our educational environment, Meehan added of why she got into special education.

Reporter Hilary Matheson may be reached at 406-758-4431 or hmatheson@dailyinterlake.com.

Go here to read the rest:

Evegreen administrator honored for work in special education - Daily Inter Lake