Chairman Goodwin called the meeting to order at 1:32pm.

Attendees and Introductions:

Dr. Stefan Goodwin, Chair
Dr. Emmett Burns, Commissioner (arrived after introductions)
Ms. Agnes Callum, Commissioner
Dr. Charles Christian, Commissioner
Dr. Iris Ford, Commissioner
Mr. Rodney Little, Commissioner
Dr. Edward Papenfuse, Commissioner
Ms. Nikki Smith, Commissioner (arrived after introductions)

Mr. Raymond Connor, Maryland State Archives, Archivist III/Photographer
Mr. David Terry, Maryland State Archives, Research Associate in the History of Slavery
Ms. Emily Oland Squires, Maryland State Archives, Director of Biographical Research

Mr. and Mrs. John Bear, public visitors
Mr. Jerry Hynson, genealogist/volunteer

1. Action on Minutes of Commission Meeting of November 30, 2001

There was a motion by Dr Christian to approve the minutes of the November 30, 2001 commission meeting as is. The motion was seconded by Dr. Ford. The commission voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the November 30, 2001 meeting.

2. Reports of Standing Committees (Note: presentation and discussion of each report and related matters should preferably not exceed 15 or 20 minutes)

A) Resources, Staff, and Budget

Commissioner Goodwin reporting as chair of the committee:

1) Legislative Session

On behalf of the Resources, Staff, and Budget Committee, Dr. Goodwin reported that the fiscal year 2003 budget request for administrative support for the Commission was not approved. He clarified that the funding dedicated to the research of slavery in the Maryland State Archives’ budget remained in tact. Dr. Papenfuse elaborated that the Archives was able to retain one staff position dedicated to research which is filled by David Terry, as well as some funding for internships this summer. This appropriation constitutes a continuation of the funds from last year, not an increase.
2) Preparation of FY Budget for the Commission

Mr. Little stated that the fiscal year 2003 budget was a reasonable one, and suggested that this was not the time for submission of a “pie in the sky” budget. Dr. Goodwin asked Dr. Papenfuse and Mr. Little about a timeline for the fiscal year 2004 budget submission. Both concurred that the time is now. On the advice of Mr. Little and Dr. Papenfuse, Dr. Goodwin asked that the Maryland State Archives recycle the fiscal year 2003 request and to resubmit the request for administrative support as part of the Archives’ baseline budget for fiscal year 2004. Mr. Little elaborated that initial budget submissions are due at the end of May. Dr. Goodwin asked Dr. Papenfuse to e-mail the budget document to Commissioners with a timeline for response. The deadline for Commissioner responses was set at mid-May. Dr. Papenfuse agreed.

3) Managing for Results Proposal

After polling of the Commissioners present, Dr. Goodwin reasserted that the current Managing for Results (MFR) statement of the Commission was a good document. Dr. Goodwin asked Dr. Papenfuse to correct the document for outdated priorities or incorrect dates and to e-mail MFR statement to Commissioners with a timeline for response. The deadline for Commissioner responses was set at mid-May. Dr. Papenfuse agreed.

4) Proposed Operational Procedures

Dr. Goodwin handed out a proposed draft of operational procedures for the Commission. (A copy is attached to these minutes as APPENDIX 1.) After reviewing the suggested procedures, Dr. Burns asked about who would be providing staff support to the Commission, as outlined in Procedure #2. Dr. Goodwin stated that this question be deferred until an executive session was convened at the end of the meeting. Dr. Papenfuse asked for clarification about the role of the Committees in gaining approval for research agendas and priorities. Dr. Goodwin agreed that Commissioners should work through the Committees to gain approval for research goals.

The discussion concluded, Ms. Smith made a motion to accept the proposed operational procedures. Ms. Callum seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the operational procedures as presented by Dr. Goodwin and discussed by the Commission.

Dr. Goodwin moved on to discuss the by-laws of the Commission. He suggested that the by-laws be included in the folders for each meeting. Dr. Goodwin pointed out that the Commission does not have a provision for voting in absentia. Furthermore, the Commissioners have no means of voicing an opinion on a relevant bill before the legislature, unless they plan to meet while the legislature is in session. It has been previously stated by numerous Commissioners that the legislative session is too busy a time to schedule a Slavery Commission meeting.

In light of this situation, Dr. Goodwin recommends that the Commission draft a procedure for the polling and voting of members outside of a regularly scheduled, public meeting, either by phone, mail, or e-mail. This procedure would be applied only in exceptional situations, not on a routine basis. Mr. Little noted that a procedure of this nature must adhere to state laws and policies to be considered a legal vote. He suggested that the Commission seek the opinion of the Attorney General’s office on what votes are allowed. Dr. Burns questioned whether this was a necessary step, and Mr. Little confirmed that his personal experience with other Commissions leads him to believe that consulting a legal authority is the most prudent course of action.

Dr. Papenfuse suggested that the Commission draft a policy regarding voting in absentia that it feels comfortable with, and then send it to either the Maryland Historical Trust’s Assistant Attorney General or the Maryland State Archives’ Assistant Attorney General for review, since the Commission has not been assigned its own Assistant Attorney General. Dr. Christian noted that it would be helpful to find out if there are any other policies or legal frameworks already established for other Commissions that would govern the Slavery Commission. Dr. Goodwin concurred with Dr. Papenfuse’s suggestion and volunteered to work with the Maryland Historical Trust and the Attorney General’s office to draft an acceptable policy. Dr. Christian made a motion to allow Dr. Goodwin to draft a policy on voting in absentia with the Maryland Historical Trust and the Maryland Attorney General’s Office. Ms. Smith seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the motion.

Finally, Dr. Goodwin passed out an announcement to all Commissioners. (A copy is attached to these minutes as APPENDIX 2.) He asked that Commissioners make an effort to attend the dedication of the Kunta Kinte-Alex Haley Phase III Memorial at the Annapolis City Dock on June 12, 2002, at 11:00am. Dr. Goodwin has been asked to prepare remarks to be included in the ceremony’s program. The Commission will remember that the President of the Kunta Kinte-Alex Haley Foundation, Mr. Leonard Blackshear, made a presentation to the Commission about ongoing projects at the November 30, 2001 Commission meeting. In light of his presentation, Dr. Goodwin has also sent several letters on behalf of the Commission to Mr. Blackshear in support of grant applications made by the Kunta Kinte-Alex Haley Foundation.

B) Historic Sites Committee - Commissioner Little:
1) African Americans and Slavery Sites Presently Open to the Public

On behalf of the Historic Sites Committee, Mr. Little distributed a list of “African American Museums and Related Institutions in Maryland” compiled by the Maryland Historical Trust. (A copy is attached to these minutes as APPENDIX 3.) The list includes any museums with African American inclusive collections or themes as a significant part of their ongoing program. Mr. Little highlighted that of the four history museums in the state, two are state funded (the Jefferson Patterson Park and the Banneker-Douglass Museums) and two are quasi-public (Historic St. Mary’s City and the Museum of African American History and Culture to open in 2004). The Commission discussed the idea of placing the list with links to the museums’ webpages on the Commission’s website (http://www.mdslaverycomm.net). Dr. Papenfuse volunteered to undertake this responsibility. Mr. Little said that he could get the electronic file of the list to Dr. Papenfuse to facilitate with that process.

Dr. Ford, chair of the Equity and Oversight Committee, inquired how much funding does each museum get and if the African American themed institutions get an equal share? Dr. Burns followed up by asking Mr. Little which museums get funding from the Maryland Historical Trust. Mr. Little responded that in the last 5 years, out of all the applications for grants received by the Trust, 30% were awarded grants. Off the top of his head, he said that roughly 75% of African American proposals are funded. To be more precise, Mr. Little volunteered to make a report available regarding a study of funded grant applications from Baltimore. At the next meeting, Mr. Little will bring a breakdown of all grant awards in the last 5 years. Overall, Mr. Little said that African American museums, sites, and interest groups need to be encouraged to submit proposals to one of the 3 grant programs that the Trust offers: for museums, for capital historic preservation, for non-capital historic preservation.

Dr. Christian asked what other grants are available? Mr. Little responded that the only other opportunities are from private foundations or federal agencies such as the National Endowment for the Humanities. Dr. Goodwin hopes the Commission will be a conduit of information on such matters and would like to make links online from the Commission webpage to grant opportunities. He also hopes the Slavery Commission will coordinate with the Commission on African American History and Culture on such issues. Drs. Burns and Ford had additional questions about grant opportunities that Dr. Goodwin asked be saved for a later date, so that Mr. Little could continue with his Committee report.

As an aside to Mr. Little’s report, Ms. Smith offered to distribute a media package about the Museum of African American History and Culture. At which point, Dr. Goodwin asked Dr. Christian to circulate a copy of his Op Ed piece published during African American History Month. He hoped that any Commissioners would share their related works with the balance of the Commission.

2) Historic Markers

Mr. Little distributed a list of “Maryland Roadside Historic Markers with African American Themes or References.” (A copy is attached to these minutes as APPENDIX 4.) He reported that African American sites have a low representation level among existing historic markers. He stated that prior to 1998 when markers became publicly funded, any marker erected required private funding provided entirely by the special interest group proposing the marker. The good news is that Mr. Little currently has enough funding budgeted for approximately 40 to 50 markers to be erected (at an average of $1500 per marker). He would encourage the Commission to identify sites where markers could be placed.

Mr. Little agreed to supply the Commission with the rules for placing a maker. For example, they need to be placed in a state right-of-way, in a park, or on a building. If they cannot be on a state road, the Trust will need to collect matching funds to erect the marker. Mr. Little also volunteered to meet with the Historic Sites Committee to take the lead in identifying and prioritizing sites deserving of markers. Dr. Papenfuse noted that the Maryland State Archives already has some valuable research within its “The Road from Frederick to Thurgood: Black Baltimore in Transition, 1870-1920” project which could be helpful in choosing sites. Dr. Papenfuse suggested that 301 W. Preston Street particularly be explored for recognition. Dr. Goodwin encouraged the Commission to pursue private funding from local groups to help erect the markers and remarked that this project has strong ties to the work of the Tourism Committee as well.

Dr. Papenfuse made a motion to accept the volunteer efforts of Mr. Little and the Historic Sites Committee to identify possible sites for makers for consideration by the Commission. Ms. Smith seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the motion.

Concluding his presentation, Mr. Little handed out a memo dated April 17th summarizing further work of the Historic Sites Committee. . (A copy is attached to these minutes as APPENDIX 5.)

At 2:57 pm, both Dr. Burns and Dr. Christian inquired as to how long the meeting was scheduled to run. After discussion, Dr. Goodwin decided that the Commission would have time to hear one more Committee Report with a time limit of 10 minutes.

C) Historical Research and Resources Preservation - Commissioner Papenfuse

Dr. Papenfuse passed out a proposal on behalf of the Historical Research and Resources Preservation Committee. (A copy is attached to these minutes as APPENDIX 6.) He noted that since the only funding the Commission currently has is the Archives’ research position, staff has been hard at work seeking opportunities for matching funds and grant money from other institutions. Dr. Papenfuse remarked that this search for outside funding often means that research goals must be driven by the relevant partnerships that are formed by the funding process.

For example, in Research Committee communications Dr. Burns had indicated that the Underground Railroad in Maryland was a priority research goal. To that end, the Archives has been working with Maryland Public Television on the groundbreaking educational website, “Pathways to Freedom: Maryland and the Underground Railroad.” In addition to its Underground Railroad research, staff is also working on establishing a cooperative internship program with Goucher College and Hampton National Historic Site to study the largest slave population in the state at the time of emancipation. Also, Salisbury State University and the Edward H. Naab Center for Delmarva History and Culture have approached the Archives about a cooperative NEH grant proposal resulting in a study of slavery in Somerset County. These examples are a sampling of a few of the research proposals that Dr. Papenfuse outlined in the Committee draft report. In the interest of time, Dr. Papenfuse concluded his report, but stated that he would be happy to address any questions once Commissioners had time to read the written proposal.

Dr. Goodwin announced that there will be a need to meet again in mid- to late- May. He asked Dr. Papenfuse to have his staff canvas the Commissioners about an appropriate date and time. At 3:06pm, Dr. Goodwin adjourned the public meeting and the Commission went into executive session.