Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Human Rights Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff present targeted revisions to human rights ordinance; 30‑day non‑response rule proposed
Summary
An Office of Human Rights staff presentation recommended procedural changes to the city’s human rights ordinance, including a rule to administratively close complaints after two consecutive 30‑day non‑response periods and added recusal language for commissioners; council did not vote on the revisions at the meeting.
Charlottesville — City staff presented proposed amendments to the city’s human rights ordinance on June 15 that emphasize procedural clarity and operational continuity, and council discussed next steps for scheduling formal action.
Mr. Neer, presenting the package adopted by the Human Rights Commission on April 16, described the changes as a refinement of existing policy rather than a comprehensive rewrite. He said the revisions update membership criteria wording, add the word "inquiries" to clarify intake language, and tighten procedures for complainant and respondent non‑response during investigations.
Under the proposed rule, the office would send a 30‑day notice when a complainant fails to respond to a requested next step; if the complainant remains unresponsive for another 30 days after that notice, the office would administratively close the case to avoid an accumulation of inactive dockets. "If we send a 30‑day notice that says, 'Hey, we haven't heard from you. Please respond within the next 30 days,' If another 30‑day period goes with no response, we'll be we'll administratively close your case," Neer said.
The amendments also clarify how a complainant can request a public hearing or file an appeal following a finding of "no reasonable cause," and they add a conflict‑of‑interest clause directing commissioners to recuse themselves from public hearings where a relationship with a party creates a conflict.
On housing complaints the draft adds flexibility for the city to contract for mediation, investigation or cause findings when Charlottesville is not operating under a federal Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) agreement; if the city is in an FHAP agreement, FHAP centralization rules would apply.
Council members asked whether the office tracks intake referrals and whether there are existing mediation resources for landlord‑tenant disputes; staff said referral and navigation data appear in the annual report and that mediation resources are limited in the community. Staff also said they are exploring ways to identify repeat respondents with systemic issues and may provide a memo to the city manager with recommendations.
No vote was taken; staff asked council whether it wanted the ordinance amendments placed on a future consent or action agenda for formal consideration.
