Networking California's Local Human Relations Commissions
by Dennis Downey, Doctoral Candidate, UC Irvine

In towns and cities and counties throughout California, people are working to develop local human relations commissions (HRCs) into institutions to help our state meet the challenges of its transformation into one of the most diverse societies in the world. Over the past several months I have been attending HRC meetings and interviewing commissioners and staff representatives–to learn about the challenges that they face and the ways they are meeting them.  I have mostly visited HRCs in northern California, but eventually I plan to talk with representatives from all of the 60-plus HRCs in the state. This is a part of the research which I am undertaking as a Sociology graduate student at the University of California, Irvine, and part of an effort by CAHRO to find out how it can serve local HRCs and create stronger statewide human relations networks.

California's human relations renaissance

The organizational predecessors to HRCs were established in American cities during the World War II era. At that time, they were generally private committees organized by community leaders to deal with problems of racial discrimination and conflicts which frequently led to race riots and were most often known as "race relations" or "civic unity" councils. The American Council on Race Relations, based in Chicago, was instrumental in promoting these organizations which expanded into the hundreds around the country. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, with the decline in wartime race riots and the onset of the McCarthy era, most of the councils disbanded.

In the 1960s, as the Civil Rights movement gained momentum and the threat of urban disorders again emerged, HRCs became a common attempt to address racial conflicts. Increasingly they were organized as formal municipal (or county) commissions, promoted by the federal government (via the new Community Relations Service of the Department of Justice). Their main responsibilities were dealing with discrimination in the fields of employment, education, and housing, and also to address the tensions and conflicts which accompanied the transformations of the era. But once again, following the decline of the civil rights movement HRCs again contracted. That was exacerbated in the 1980s by a broader retrenchment of government programs—particularly dramatic in California with the passage of Proposition 13.

In the 1990s, California has experienced a third wave of human relations expansion, due to several factors. First, the 1980s brought basic demographic transformations with the increase in Latino and Asian immigration. Second, the events in Los Angeles in the spring of 1992 signaled that conflicts in race relations were bubbling beneath the surface. Finally, following the recession of the early 1990s, California entered a period of economic growth and expansion, reversing the deficits faced by local governments and allowing some opportunity for proactive measures. All of which has resulted in a "human relations renaissance" in our state, visible in the establishment of new commissions and the increased activity of many established ones.

The work of local HRCs

Contemporary HRCs throughout California are facing many common challenges and undertaking similar projects. HRCs continue to spend much of their time on traditional activities: investigating specific complaints of discrimination; making recommendations to city councils and county supervisors on general human relations issues; and evaluating applicants for municipal or block grant funding. HRCs are also becoming more proactive, however, indicated by a wide array of projects: developing programs to improve police-community relations and to deter hate crimes (often with the help of CAHRO); initiating a variety of educational and school-based programs (an area with an increased sense of urgency since the tragedy in Littleton, Colorado); sponsoring "unity day" celebrations to bring diverse residents together in a positive environment; recognizing and honoring community members who make special contributions to human relations; and many others.

HRCs are also facing similar challenges in building organizational capacity in the face of the constant scarcity of adequate resources. While public funding restrictions have eased somewhat, the general political climate continues to place limits on the capacity and willingness of cities and counties to fund human relations activities. In response, many commissions are creating parallel private non-profit organizations to allow them to solicit additional funding sources--such as foundations, businesses, private individuals, etc. In some instances, such as Orange County, the results have been a rapid expansion of funds, leading to new programs and more proactive human relations efforts.

While there are many commonalities among commissions, there are also tremendous differences among them arising in part from the enormous regional differences throughout California. The differences translate into very different types of HRCs.  Some of the larger commissions (e.g. San Francisco, Santa Clara, Los Angeles City, Los Angeles County, Orange County) have large staffs and complex programmatic divisions.  Smaller commissions, in contrast, often struggle to operate with neither their own staff nor their own budget (although they generally receive staff and budget assistance from a city department or office--such as human services, the city manager, or the police). There are also differences in the issues which they address: the Humboldt County Human Rights Commission, for example, devotes a large part of its time to dealing with conflicts between environmentalists and loggers—something unimaginable to most residents of Southern California.

Strengthening the human relations network

For those involved in efforts to construct an equitable and diverse society, California's human relations renaissance represents an opportunity. The incremental expansion of HRCs has important implications, as a whole, the human relations network is potentially much greater than the sum of its parts, and they have reached a critical mass which might have significant statewide influence. However, that is unlikely if each works in isolation. While the focus of activities has to be local, many of the issues which HRCs address are impacted by issues far beyond their borders. Consequently, the effectiveness of each to achieve its goals might be increased dramatically by forging stronger links between them.

There is a more practical purpose for such networks as well. They would allow commissions to pool expertise and to provide mutual assistance in dealing with common issues, rather than doing so in isolation and forcing each commission to reinvent the wheel. For example, several commissions have been struggling with the legal and ethical conflicts involved in Boy Scouts' use of municipal facilities, not knowing that other commissions are independently trying to sort out the very same issues.

One of the questions which I have been asking HRC representatives is how CAHRO might better serve local HRCs throughout California and help to create stronger statewide human relations networks. Most agree that while CAHRO presently plays an important role, the potential exists to do much more.

One of CAHRO's greatest successes in recent years has been in facilitating the development of hate crimes networks, which now represent some of the strongest human relations-based institutions in the state. CAHRO's training and skill-development programs in various aspects of human relations assist in the diffusion of the expertise, skills, and programs which can help to build effective commissions. Some of which are organizational development, conflict resolution, providing assistance to victims of hate crimes and taking hate-violence reports.  HRC representatives have expressed interest in programs addressing areas such as strategic work plan development, handling discrimination complaints, developing educational programs, negotiating conflict resolutions, and creating private non-profit organizations.

Training conferences have proven to be effective at skill-building, but can also serve as a medium for building relationships between human relations representatives in various regions. CAHRO's annual conference (in November) accomplishes a similar goal at the statewide level. Another effort to strengthen the HR network is the compilation and distribution to all HRCs of a complete directory of HRCs throughout California with up-to-date contact and program information which I will assist CAHRO in developing.  I hope that CAHRO will continue to forge the links that are necessary for stronger human relations networks in California.