Jill Schramm/MDN Wendi Baggaley addresses the City of Minot’s ad hoc human relations committee Tuesday in city hall. Shown are members Travis Zablotney and Christine Staley.

If the Minot City Council chooses to keep a human relations committee, an ad hoc committee is recommending it adopt its ordinance revisions drafted over the past few months. However, the committee was divided on whether the council should simply repeal the ordinance and scrap a human relations committee.

The committee had difficulty finding agreement to make more changes to the ordinance draft before taking public input from residents both for and against either the draft ordinance or the human relations committee concept. The committee then considered more draft changes.

After more than two hours of testimony and discussion, ad hoc committee member Mike Blessum moved to recommend the council eliminate the ordinance for a human relations committee, which failed on a 4-5 vote. A motion to recommend the revised ordinance to replace the existing 1970s ordinance also failed 4-5.

“I still have a real hard time with the council pushing a group of volunteer citizens to be the ones – to be the people in the community – to make this decision,” said committee member Miranda Schuler.

Schuler offered the recommendation that the council adopt the revised ordinance version but only if it deems a human relations committee needs to be in effect.

“That puts the council back on the hot seat to determine what they want to do with this ordinance. We’ve done the work. We’re presenting them the revised ordinance. It eliminates the existing ordinance, which we all know is flawed, and it gives the public the ability to come before the council members, who they have elected, and hold them accountable for how they vote on this,” she said.

Committee member Travis Zablotney favored a stronger stance by the committee.

“This motion does not accomplish what they asked us to do,” he said. “I get that it is complex. I will give them the fact that it’s not something that’s easily discussed and figured out in a short period sitting at the council podium here.

“But at the same time, let’s not do what they did. Let’s be convicted on what it is we want to reccommend,” he added.

Council member Lisa Olson, who served on the ad hoc committee as co-chair, also questioned whether the motion meets the council’s directive to come back with a recommendation for keeping, changing or eliminating the ordinance.

“However, I think it does give the city council the opportunity to be able to voice our opinion, to vote,” Olson said. “Although it is not exact, I think it is really our only path forward. While others may think that they’re somehow pushing this back on the city council, I relish the opportunity to get to vote on this one more time because, all along, I just wanted the discussion, and we’ve had the discussion. We’ve had good, meaty, beneficial discussion.”

Council member and committee co-chair Scott Burlingame said the committee has broken the issues down to a point where no one really likes the result.

“But at least it’s moving forward,” he said. “We’re having these debates. We’re having this discussion. We’re going to push forward a recommendation.”

Schuler’s motion passed 6-3.

The recommendation will go to the city council Dec. 18. Any changes to the original ordinance require two readings for final passage. The current ordinance is under a moratorium until Dec. 31. The ordinance has long been inactive, with no human relations committee in place.

The proposed revisions to the ordinance establish an advisory committee to the city council to “promote education, support diversity and quality of life for all residents.” It will be responsible for “promoting communications between all parties, leading to equal opportunity and treatment for all persons.”

Objectives are listed as providing leadership in human relations, promoting respect for all people and making recommendations to the city council when issues of concern are identified.

The nine-member committee would be appointed by the mayor, with confirmation by the council, to three-year terms. One member is to be a city council member, who would serve as chair. The city manager or designee would serve in an advisory capacity.

Gone would be language establishing procedures for handling grievances of individuals, groups or organizations.

The ad hoc committee also narrowly rejected amendments proposed by Blessum that would have barred the committee from spending any funds and from making official public statements.