participation, opportunity, and dignity across race, ability, income, gender, and origin, so
every person in Columbia could thrive by design and everyone knew they belonged.
Traci Wilson-Kleekamp,
a
representative of Race Matters, Friends, explained her
interpretation was that the City was disassociating itself administratively from public
policy as there would be a mission for DEI but no objectives, expressed concern with the
process of tabling this issue at the May 5 meeting, holding the retreat, approving a
motion for
a potential amendment at the May 19 meeting, and the outreach being
conflated to council office hours, felt the strategic plan was the bare minimum and did not
violate any anti-discrimination laws, believed that by subverting the City’s policy to
support an executive order would cause trust issues with the public as it indicated they
did not want to do the hard work to push back, and suggested they work with other cities
to resist.
Alphia Hightower indicated she wanted to understand how they got to this point and
wanted to ensure they did not get there again, felt the language change did not have a
direct impact at the time it was proposed, wondered what options the Council was given
in terms of compliance, pushing back, or conducting business as usual, felt the
indemnity language addressed in a resolution at a prior meeting should have been a part
of the employment contract versus its own resolution and that it was based on the false
claims act which had not been used to investigate governments, questioned why this was
being voted on if they were not changing the language since it had previously been tabled,
asked why it included rescission language and why, if the only change was for the
metrics to no longer be attached to policy resolutions, did it not just state that, and
commented that more information was needed in the resolution, memo, and amendment.
Rachael Krall, 126 Redwood Road, understood this was in response to an executive order
and not a law, noted it was the viewpoint of one person, and questioned whether the City
would react every time there was a new executive order with a change to the strategic
plan wording.
Susan Renee Carter,
a Second Ward resident, stated language was important and
equality was not equity nor inclusion, felt the organizational excellence goal was
significantly better than the inclusion and equitable goals, noted there were racial
disparities in police stops, poverty, employment, and wages, which was not addressed in
the strategic plan, and suggested they rework the goals and have measurable outcomes
if they were going back to the original equity statement.
Jeff Krall, a First Ward resident, felt the concerns he expressed at the May 5, 2025
meeting would be addressed by both of the amendments as it would keep the language
as it was today and would clarify the administrative aspect, thought the City had made
good use of its time from May 5 to now with the indemnification resolution and holding
office hours for people to talk and learn, expressed his hope that something good would
come from this process, and urged the Council to approve both of the proposed
amendments.
Eugene Elkin, 3406 Range Line Street, believed a lawsuit was in order.
Harry Castilow, a Fifth Ward resident, thought it would be amazing if the impact of the
executive orders for Columbia was the opposite of what was desired and they decided
they were not doing enough versus submitting to it.
The Council asked questions and made comments.
Mayor Buffaloe made a motion to amend PR56-25 per the amendment sheet
provided with the agenda packet. The motion was seconded by Council Member
Foster, and approved by voice vote with only Council Member Waterman voting
no.
Mayor Buffaloe made a motion to amend PR56-25 per the amendment sheet
handed out that evening. The motion was seconded by Council Member Foster,
and approved unanimously by voice vote.
PR56-25, as amended, was read by the City Clerk, and the vote was recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: PETERS, BUFFALOE, CARROLL, SAMPLE, FOSTER.
VOTING NO: WATERMAN. Policy resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
B122-25
Rezoning property located on the south side of Clark Lane and west of St.