Minutes

Safer Schools Sexual Assault Task Force Meeting

Friday, November 4, 2016

1:30 pm -3:30 pm

City Hall, Room 305, 1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place

San Francisco, CA  94102

 

Participants:

Task Force Members

Denise Caramagno

Gena Castro Rodriguez

Amelia Gilbert

J. Ocean Mottley

Leslie Simon

Julia Weber

Janelle White

Stacey Wiggall

Denise Sicat Wong

Minouche Kandel, on behalf of the Department on the Status of Women

 

Consultant

Julia Weber

 

Members of the Public

Emberly Cross, Elise Hansell, Eri G. Johnson, Sophie Raynor, Rachel Sutton

 

Action Item: [move/second]

*Meeting starts at 1:32 pm

1. Call to Order/Welcome/ Overview of Agenda
   1. Action:  Approved the meeting agenda [Kandel/Mottley]
2. Member Introductions and Priorities
   1. Members introduced themselves and shared individual thoughts on priorities for the task force.
   2. Topics and priorities included: primary prevention and information, communication, middle school and high school component, coordination with SART (Sexual Assault Response Team), dissemination of resources, identifying gaps, finding additional funding sources for unfunded mandates, criminal justice system response, benchmarks for schools, aftermath of assault, ensure compliance with laws, change attitudes of administrators.
   3. Minouche Kandel explained the purview of the task force.
   4. Julia Weber encouraged members to be cognizant of voices not at the table and to be thinking about how we can incorporate other stakeholders as the task force moves forward.
3. Review of Task Force Ordinance and Task Force Processes
   1. Open Meeting Requirements
      1. Minouche Kandel explained open meeting requirements, building on what members had reviewed in the video provided prior to the meeting.
   2. Review ordinance establishing Task Force
      1. Julia reviewed that the ordinance requires a written report to the Board of Supervisors by November 4, 2017.  The report must 1) analyze state and federal laws on campus sexual assault, 2) recommend best practices for colleges and universities in the City to reduce sexual assault and 3) recommend any steps the City could take, including changes in law or policy to assist those institutions toward that goal.
      2. The plan is to have a draft of the report in August 2017, discuss how to refine recommendations in September 2017, and have the task force finalize the report in October 2017.
      3. Amelia Gilbert suggested members read the Penn State Task Force on Sexual Assault Report, published in 2015 (to be provided).
      4. The group agreed to have members rotate as chair and establish, as needed, subcommittees, so long as those subcommittees adhere to open meeting requirements.  Julia introduced the use of a “fist-five” in meetings as a way to indicate support or concerns for positions and concepts being proposed [Mottley/ Simon].
      5. For decision-making, the group will use consensus process until such time that it becomes obvious that the group is unable to resolve an issue. If there is a stalemate, the group will move to a formal voting process. Non-seat members can participate in the informal consensus; however, in the event of a formal voting process the vote will be restricted to seat members [Simon/ Mottley].

 

3. Identifying additional meeting locations and requirements
   1. December 13, 2016 meeting confirmed as the next meeting date.  Location and details to be announced subsequent to this meeting.

 

4. Developing Task Force Work plan
   1. Action: To decide on meeting priorities, dates, and tasks to be accomplished by members and staff The group discussed best recurring day of the month for meetings. Tentative December 13, 2016 meeting from 2 pm -4 pm, location to be determined. Consensus for recurring meeting is the 4^th Tuesday of the month from 2-4 pm.  Meeting dates for 2017 are as follows: January 24, February 28, March 28, April 25, May 23, June 27, July 25, August 22, September 26, October 24 [Mottley/ Kandel].
      1. Gena will share MOUs between SFPD, DPH, DA and Colleges/Universities.
      2. Denise Caramagno will look for a list of Title IX coordinators for each college and university in San Francisco.
      3. Minouche mentioned capacity for intern involvement in the Task Force; please let Julia or Minouche know if you have ideas for assistance with this effort.  
      4. Leslie will send a one pager with relevant legislation.
      5. Stacey described the Sexual Assault Response Team (SART), a coalition that has been around since the late 1980s. Members of SART include SF Women Against Rape, Rape Treatment Center, Trauma Recovery Center, DA victim services, crime lab, and SFPD. Members meet on a monthly basis to identify issues and problem-solve. The group would be open to a SART coordinator to write reports and assist with coordination but currently, there is a lack of funding for this position. Julia suggested that Stacey could be a liaison between SART and the Task Force; the group discussed the possibility of recommending that a SART coordinator be a position that the City and County supports going forward.
      6. The group discussed that establishing coordination between all of the different institutions as well as with existing community resources would be valuable.
      7. Areas for further inquiry included: DOJ-RFA has funded campuses to work on sexual assault issues, what are the mandates that DOJ has developed from these grants?
      8. How can CALCASA be a resource?
      9. Data gathering might include interviewing students on existing policy and procedure, what is currently working/needs improvement.
      10. Proposal for a landscape analysis across all colleges and universities – prevention and education, law enforcement, legal, recovery and healing services. Consider issuing a standard survey to the schools and request minimum participation.  Perhaps the final product could include information identifying what policies different schools already have in place and where there are gaps.  Julia agreed to work on providing an initial version for the task force to review at its next meeting.
      11. Identify innovative solutions that are in place at certain schools – Stacey brought up example of online reporting system.
      12. What resources does the Task Force have?  Julia noted that while she is available as a consultant, staff resources are limited so we will need to establish priorities.
      13. There are conflicting interests within the field at times: 1) improving criminal justice system response and 2) focusing on transformative justice approaches, alternative resources and creative solutions for survivors. Gena brought up the fact that a very small number of campus sexual assault cases are pursued through criminal justice system.
      14. The importance of prioritizing education about the definition of sexual assault, including for international students.  Possibility of mandating training and orientation was discussed.
      15. What options are available to survivors who don’t want to, or can’t, report? (i.e., undocumented students). Do these survivors have any input for us – what resources do they take advantage of, if any?
      16. San Francisco data – how can you get data for sexual assault incidents and then legal outcomes of cases?
      17. Question about the scope of Task Force – can we frame campus sexual assault in the greater context of sexual assault? Julia – yes.
      18. Task force is interested in why decisions may be made not to charge. May be in part because when assaults happen on campus, SFPD may have limited involvement in the cases.  Action: develop a flow chart of process and investigation with campus police versus SFPD for education purposes.
      19. Invite administrators and campus police to future meetings. 
5. General Public Comment: None.
6. Adjournment
   1. Adjourn meeting [ Mottley/ Simon]