►
From YouTube: July 8, 2020 Minneapolis Charter Commission
Description
Minneapolis Charter Commission Meeting
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Agenda/Charter/1753
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/
D
Good
afternoon
welcome
to
this
live
broadcast
of
our
virtual
meeting,
the
regular
July
meeting
of
the
Minneapolis
Charter
Commission.
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
Minnesota
statute,
section
13
D
point:
oh
two,
one
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic,
my
name
is
Barry
Clegg
and
I'm.
The
chair
of
the
Charter
Commission
I'll,
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
E
E
D
Have
a
quorum
will
now
proceed
to
our
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
was
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
available
at
Lim's.
L
ims,
minneapolis
MN
gov.
The
agenda
is
before
us.
I
would
also
like
to
add
to
the
agenda
receipt
and
filing
of
substitute
amendments
proposed
by
Michener's,
Abbott
and
Errol
Isaacson.
That's
two
separate
amendments
and
I'll
put
that
right
after
the
chairs
report.
If
that's
okay
with
everybody
can
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
and
as
amended
so.
E
D
D
G
D
D
J
Yes,
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
think
the
the
body
is
obligated
to
move
as
quickly
as
I
can
to
meet
this
August
5th
deadline,
and
you
know
in
the
spirit
of
approaching
this,
the
question
is
not
you
know.
How
do
we
address
this
I
think
the
question
is:
how
do
we
make
this
better?
You
know
the
proposal
that
we've
gotten
from
the
council.
J
There
are
certainly
different
ways
to
approach
the
problem
and
kind
of
in
the
spirit
of
promoting
discussion
about
alternatives
in
trying
to
address
some
of
the
public
comments
that
we've
all
gotten
over
the
last
week
or
so
I
decided
to
introduce
a
substitute
amendment
that
I
submitted
to
the
clerk
last
week.
My
amendment
gives
the
council
the
explicit
authority
to
conduct
a
pilot
project
in
part
of
the
city
in
which
it
could
adopt
the
the
new
procedures
and
Department
that
it
has
proposed
in
the
main
amendment
the
difference
between
the
council
proposal.
J
My
proposal,
of
course,
is
that
my
proposal
does
not
lock
the
city
in
to
the
results
of
any
particular
proposal.
What
I
propose
is
that
for
two
years
the
city
adopts
this
pilot
project.
At
the
end
of
two
years.
The
city
can
decide
whether
or
not
it
has
generated
enough
information
in
order
to
fully
commit
to
the
alternative,
whether
or
not,
for
example,
the
in
the
in
the
old
situation
outside
the
pilot
project.
J
Enough
improvements
have
been
made
to
consider
the
Hat,
and
my
concept
is,
although
I
didn't
include
it
in
the
specific
text
of
my
amendment,
my
concept
is
at
the
end
of
the
pilot
project.
We
would
revisit
this
charter
referendum
and
have
the
public
vote
either
to
adopt
the
new
proposals
or
not
having
been
I,
think
much
more
fully
informed
about
the
situation.
The
proposals
that
come
over
from
the
council
I
think
are
quite
startling.
J
They
may
be
necessary.
I,
don't
think
anybody
I
think
everybody
can
agree
that
significant
structural
change
is
necessary
in
the
way
that
we
operate
public
safety
here
and
when
I
asked
did
that.
There's
also
I
think
no
reasonable
disagreement
that
we
are
in
a
crisis
and
that
the
public
should
have
some
voice
in
how
we
shape
our
response
to
that
crisis.
That
voice
should
be
expressed
as
soon
as
possible,
which
of
course,
is
the
general
election
coming
up.
This
November
I
think
the
question
is:
how
can
we
make
whatever
proposals?
J
We
have
the
best
available
option
for
for
the
the
residents?
There's
been
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
lack
of
evidence
in
terms
of
the
alternative
and
how
effective
it
is.
I
mean
it
is
a
really
radical
concept.
I
mean,
although
the
Charter
excuse
me,
the
council
proposal
doesn't
necessarily
require
polishing.
The
police
I
think
that's
more
rhetoric
than
reality.
It
is
true
that
the
approach
would
be
very
different
from
anything.
J
That's
been
done
before
and
I'm
getting
a
lot
of
emails
from
people
who
are
genuinely
quite
concerned
about
what
the
world
will
look
like
in
after.
If
this
council
proposal
is
adopted,
the
issue
I
have
is,
if
you,
if
you
adopt
the
council
proposal
in
order
to
fix
it,
you
end
up
having
to
amend
that,
amend
the
Charter
again
and,
of
course
amending
the
Charter
is
a
very
difficult
proposition.
J
We
could
be
stuck
with
this
for
a
while
I
think,
and
even
the
advocates
of
very
radical
concepts
would
agree
that
we're
gonna
have
to
do
some
mid-course
Corrections
here,
given
the
kind
of
uncharted
territory
that
we're
plowing
so
I've,
just
mostly
for
purposes
of
discussion,
but
I
also
think
I.
Think
I
also
think
it
gives
us
some
flexibility.
I
proposed
an
idea
of
like
well.
J
Let's
take
a
two-track
strategy:
let's
not
let's,
let's
get
a
pilot
project
up
and
running,
let's
gather
some
data
on
what
the
new
system
looks
like
and
when
the
public
starts
asking
questions
about.
How
much
is
it
cost?
How
many
of
these
new
public
safety
officers
are
going
to
be
hired?
How
are
we
going
to
cover
9-1-1
calls
all
the
nuts
and
bolts
practicalities
I
think
that
the
people
are
really
entitled
to
answer
to
get
answers
on.
J
We
will
have
some
data
to
give
to
them
to
kind
of
assure
them
that
public
safety
is
still
a
priority
I've.
Basically,
what
I've
done
is
added
a
new
article
to
the
Charter
that
basically
authorizes
the
pilot
project.
Section
10.1
of
my
amendment
gives
the
council
the
authority
to
do
so.
I've
established
some
criteria
for
what
the
project
pilot
project
would
look
like.
I'm,
certainly
open
to
suggestions
on
better
timing
or
better
parameters
and
I'm,
certainly
not
wedded
to
any
concept
here.
J
That's
why
I
also
added
section
10.2,
which
gives
the
council
that
legislative
authority
inside
the
pilot
project
to
do
that.
My
proposal
differs
a
little
bit
from
the
council
in
the
sense
that
I
think
we
have
a
separation
of
powers
problem.
The
current
situation
is
the
mayor:
has
both
the
legislative
and
executive
authority
over
the
police,
the
mayor
gets
to
set
both
the
rules
and
gets
to
enforce
the
rules
as
he
or
she
might
see
fit.
My
I
think
that
creep.
J
You
know
that
obviously
creates
a
separation
of
powers,
for
as
in
there,
there
isn't
any
separation
of
powers.
There's
no
ability
for
another
branch
of
government
to
check
what
the
mayor
does
with
the
police.
The
council
proposal
is
essentially
the
exact
mirror
image
of
that
only
on
the
council
side.
In
other
words,
the
council,
under
their
proposal,
gets
all
the
executive
power
and
all
the
legislative
power,
and
it
eliminates
the
ability
of
the
mayor
to
check
any
kind
of
use
or
abuse
of
that
power
by
the
council.
J
I
think
both
alternatives,
both
of
those
alternatives,
I,
think
have
kind
of
the
same
flaw
to
them.
So
I've
drafted
10.2,
which
gives
looks
legislative
authority
to
the
council,
but
which
gives
executive
authority
over
law
enforcement
to
the
mayor.
Of
course,
it
obligates
the
mayor
to
enforce
the
rules,
as
adopted
by
the
council
I
just.
J
I
would
just
say
that
the
10.2
is
kind
of
inspired
by
the
proposal
that
councilmember
Gorton
made
two
years
ago
and
and
I
think
I
really
do
think.
The
separation
of
powers
issue,
along
with
the
delegation
of
legislative
authority
of
the
council,
are
the
key
issues
that
we
have
to
address
as
we
work
through
these
issues
before
August
5th,
and
that's
that
is
that
my
proposal
is
designed
to
provoke,
produce
that
discussion.
Thank
you.
K
Thank
You
mr.
chair,
my
substitute
amendment
is
an
effort
to
find
some
middle
ground
and
compromise
that
I
think
would
would
gain
a
positive
vote
in
November
or
next
year.
My
proposal
would
create
two
new
charter
departments,
the
Department
of
Community
Safety
and
violence
prevention
and
a
law
enforcement
department,
the
two
departments,
the
Department
of
Community
Safety
and
violence
prevention,
I
pretty
much
carry
over
most
of
the
City
Council's
language,
except
I.
Add
that
the
responsibility
for
this
department
will
be
non
law
enforcement,
public
safety
services,
the
department.
K
The
second
department
is
the
department
of
law
enforcement
services
and
kept
pretty
much
the
same
language
we
have
currently
in
the
Charter.
With
regards
to
the
police.
This
would
be
the
Department
of
Law
employment
enforcement
services.
I
I
did
add
some
powers
to
the
civilian
police
conduct
/
oversight,
Commission,
where
they
would
have
approval
process
for
any
of
the
mayor's
rules
or
regulations
that
the
mayor
wants
to
propose
for
the
law,
enforcement
division
or
services.
K
Department
I
have
changed
the
funding
requirements
to
half
of
what
it's
currently
at
for
law
enforcement,
licensed
police
officers
and
I've
added
a
director
of
law
enforcement
services,
really
the
chief,
a
law
enforcement
officer
of
the
city
and
would
report
to
the
mayor
and
this
process
of
nominating
or
hiring
someone
would
include
a
consultation
to
the
civilian
police
conduct
oversight.
Commission
I
am
also
open
to
any
edits
or
changes
and
I
hope
that
the
council
members
who
are
listening
will
give
us
some
feedback
first,
if
even
they're
open
to
any
alternative
language.
Thank
You.
Mr.
K
D
D
L
Hi,
this
is
Commissioner
Perry
I.
Think
I'm
going
to
do
that
since
Commissioner
Rubinstein
has
her
hands
full
with
Wonder
workgroup,
so
we
met
on
June
25th.
That
was
our
first
meeting.
We
have
to
work
products,
one
is
an
updated
rules
document
and
the
second
is
an
updated
procedures
document
for
our
timeline
at
our
last
worker
meeting
and
our
that
are,
we
put
together
a
timeline
where
we
would
first
through
the
rules
update
which
we
did
and
then.
Secondly,
we
would
look
at
the
procedures
document.
L
It
turns
out
there's
a
lot
of
overlap
between
the
advisory
members,
selection,
workgroup
outcomes
and
the
rules
work
girl
outcomes.
So
we
are
looking
to
have
a
joint
meeting
sometime
in
perhaps
August
or
September,
depending
on
how
other
things
go
for
timing
purposes,
and
then
we
would
clean
up
any
drafts
in
October
and
then
have
our
work
presented
in
the
maternal,
amber
fourth
meeting
of
a
full
Charter
Commission,
a
quick
update.
L
Just
on
the
update
on
what
we
did
with
rules
document.
It
turns
out
that
we
all
felt
that
the
way
the
process
worked
in
2010
2012
was
a
good
one
and
we
did
not
feel
we
needed
to
make
wholesale
changes,
but
we
did
need
to
make
some
updates
to
the
current
rules
document
and
they
include
typos.
We
removed
reference
to
an
Operations
Committee
that
doesn't
make
sense
anymore.
L
We
tightened
up
some
corner
cases
and
we
addressed
communication
and
the
pandemic
era.
And
finally,
we
gave
weight
to
two-way
communication
during
this
process.
So
those
are
the
kinds
of
changes
that
we
made
to
the
Rules
Committee
that
what
I
envision
seeing
happen
now,
you
certainly
will
defer
to
Commissioner
Rubinstein
on
this
as
well.
Is
that
we
update
these
and
then
present
them
one
at
our
November
4th
meeting
for
adoption
by
the
full
commission.
That's
my
status,
update,
Thank.
K
M
G
N
N
So
our
work
group
is
going
to
meet
with
them
later
this
month
and
talk
through
kind
of
what
they
suggest
and
then
any
other
revisions
or
changes.
We
would
like
to
make
to
this
documents.
We
will
make
and
put
forth
to
the
Charter
Commission
so
recommend
and
adopt,
and
that
meeting
where
we
have
will
invite
city
staff.
It
is
July
21st
and,
in
addition,
the
city
clerk
is
the
City
Clerk's
office
is
revising
the
timeline.
D
F
Yes,
this
is
commissioner
Sandberg.
If
it's
okay
with
Commissioner
newborn
I,
can
sort
of
update
you,
you
have
the
report
in
front
of
you.
They
came
from
our
committee,
our
workgroup
meeting.
In
addition,
commissioner,
Sandberg
Commissioner,
Newport
and
I
met
last
Monday,
and
the
reason
for
that
is
that
she
was
elected
co-chair
of
the
workgroup,
so
there'll
be
two
of
still
and
we
we
have
some
issues
that
we
need
to
have
resolved
before
we
can
finalize
our
work
plan
and
timeline.
Specifically,
we
need
to
figure
out
the
calendar,
although
it
sounds
like
that's
in
process.
F
F
It
was
not
clear
to
us
if
we
were
supposed
to
be
working
on
outreach
issues
for
selection,
for
the
advisory
group
or
not,
and
as
soon
as
we
can
make
sure
we
know
what's
going
on
with
that,
we
will
be
able
to
finalize
a
work
plan
finalize
the
calendar
and
get
it
to
you
within
the
next
two
months,
I'm
not
going
to
guarantee
it's
going
to
be
next
month,
but
we'll
see
we
need
to
meet
with
the
committee
again.
Obviously,
and
that's
how
I
have
commissioner
newborn
may
have
other
things
to
add.
O
F
Oh
and
one
last
thing,
I
forgot,
commissioner,
newborn
kindly
accepted
responsibility
for
leading
our
outreach
efforts
and
I
will
kind
of
hang
around
and
deal
with
documents
and
so
forth.
We
thought
it
made
sense
to
kind
of
divide
up
and
then
we'll
work
with
the
committee
to
figure
out
how
they
want
to
align
with
one
part
or
the
other,
and
that's
it.
Thank.
D
You,
commissioner,
so
without
objection,
those
three
reports
are
received
and
filed.
Our
main
item
on
the
agenda
tonight
is
hearing
from
our
visitors
from
the
City
Council
I,
believe
we
have
council
president
bender
councilmember,
Allison
and
councilmember
Fletcher.
Those
are
the
only
ones
I
heard
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting.
Are
there
any
others
joining
us
today?
D
Cano,
thank
you
and
we'll
hear
from
the
council.
First
with
a
brief
introduction
and
overview
of
the
amendment.
10
minutes
tops
please
you
can
divide
up
the
time
as
you
choose
to
among
yourselves,
then
we'll
have
questions
from
charter.
Commissioners
charter
commissioners
tend
to
give
speeches
when
they
ask
questions,
so
questions
can
be
up
to
one
minute
in
length
and
no
speeches.
Then
we'll
have
three
minutes
for
council
members
to
answer
again.
You
can
divide
it
up
any
way.
D
Q
You
to
clegg
I'm,
Lisa,
bender
I'm,
the
president
of
the
Minneapolis
City
Council
and
I
represent
Ward
10
on
the
City
Council,
so
I'm.
Here
with
my
colleagues
who
are
authors
of
the
charter,
amendment
which
the
City
Council
unanimously
forwarded
to
this
body,
the
Charter
Commission
on
June
26th,
the
proposed
charter
amendment
would
create
a
new
charter
department
focused
on
community
safety
and
violence
prevention,
remove
the
police
department
as
a
separate
charter
department
and
remove
the
provision
added
to
the
Charter
in
1961.
Q
That
requires
a
police
force
of
0.001
7
employees
per
resident
before
I
turn
it
over
to
my
colleagues
to
speak
more
specifically
about
the
charter
amendment.
They
wanted
to
level
set
and
reiterate
what
chair
Clegg
said
after
last
meeting,
particularly
for
the
public
about
the
rules
of
the
City
Council
in
the
Charter
Commission.
In
this
process
of
putting
an
issue
to
the
voters
of
Minneapolis
in
Minneapolis,
each
City
Council
member
is
elected
to
represent
a
specific
Ward
for
a
four-year
term
and
that
election
last
took
place
in
2017.
Q
The
city
is
currently
responding
to
hundreds
of
complaints
of
police
behavior
during
the
protests
that
followed
and
is
cooperating
with
legal
action
initiated
by
them
against
the
Minneapolis
Police
Department
by
the
Minnesota
Department
of
Human
Rights
to
investigate
patterns
of
racial
discrimination
in
the
department.
In
the
wake
of
George
Floyd's
death,
we
received
an
unprecedented
number
of
contacts
from
our
constituents
calling
on
us
to
not
only
address
specific
issues
within
the
police
department,
but
to
take
a
wholly
different
approach
to
public
safety.
Q
All
twelve
members
of
the
City
Council
unanimously
supported
a
resolution
committing
the
city
to
taking
a
holistic
approach
to
public
safety
and
outlining
a
process
for
community
engagement
and
all
12
members
of
the
City
Council
unanimously
for
the
charter.
Amendment
to
this
body
is
one
part
of
that
work.
My
colleagues
will
speak
more
about
some
of
the
work
upon
which
the
partner
proposed
her
amendment
rests
and
how
it
fits
into
the
broader
work
to
address
racial
inequity
in
every
aspect
of
our
city's
work
that
the
council
has
undertaken
in
recent
years.
R
Thank
You
council
president
and
thank
you,
chair
Clegg,
for
the
opportunity
to
speak.
I'm,
Steve
Fletcher,
the
councilmember
for
Ward
3
and
one
of
the
co-authors
I
wanted
to
give
a
little
bit
of
context
about
what
we've
been
doing
in
the
lead-up
to
this,
both
to
describe
what
brought
us
to
the
place
where
we
think
such
an
action
is
called
for
and
justified
and
is
the
right
course
of
action,
and
also
what
kind
of
planning
and
community
input
has
gone
in
to
consideration
of
this
work.
R
So,
first
I'll
note
that
we
have
a
long
track
record
of
implementing
reforms,
the
policies
and
strategies
deployed
by
the
mayor
and
the
chief
over
many
mayors
and
many
chiefs
in
the
current
term,
with
Mayor
Frye
and
chief
Arredondo.
That's
included
a
ban
on
warrior
training,
know
your
rights
placards
placed
in
squad
cars
d,
prioritizing
low-level
marijuana
enforcement
and
many
other
incremental
reforms
that
have
made
some
positive
changes,
many
of
which
have
supported,
and
we've
also
seen
this
firm.
R
In
the
last
half
of
the
term,
we
have
seen
the
chief
stepping
up
and
disciplining
and
firing
officers
when
they're
involved
in
misconduct
in
a
way
that
is
a
little
bit
unprecedented
and
important
the
at
the
same
time.
Well,
the
council
doesn't
have
a
direct
role.
Of
course,
complete
control
is
given
to
the
mirror
in
the
Charter.
R
Regarding
law
enforcement,
for
example,
the
data
prior
work
that
I've
had
the
opportunity
to
lead
on
the
less
successful
moments
have
been
when
we've
been
asking
harder
questions
where
we
run
up
against
misalignment
with
the
mirror
and
the
chief
and
how
they
want
to
proceed.
So,
for
example,
we've
been
asking
difficult
questions
prompted
by
community
around
traffic
stops
and
racial
bias
and
traffic
stops
and
after
being
promised
a
report
many
times
over,
have
still
not
received
it
and
have
received
some
incremental
policy.
R
So
what
we
have
mostly
focused
on
in
the
lack
of
direct
power
over
the
police
department
is
add-on
projects,
and
so
we've
been
very
focused
on
pilot
programs
in
the
office
of
violence
prevention,
for
example,
which
we
established
this
term
and
have
invested
in
to
get
community
safety
strategies
be
on
policing,
implemented
and
investments
in
community
partners
like
mad
dad's
and
next
step
and
and
so
on.
For
the
escalation
work,
we've
worked
in
local
collaborations,
I've
been
involved
in
the
downtown
collaborative
work
working
with
the
first
Precinct,
and
also
with
the
DI
D
and
st.
R
Stephen's
and
youth
link
and
all
of
the
other
players
that
work
together
and
sort
of
worked
on
those
collaborations
around
nightlife
issues.
And
there
are
things
like
that
happening
in
neighborhoods
all
over
the
city.
We
passed
a
policy
in
the
2040
plan
policy
84
that
I
think
is
noteworthy
because
it
articulates
a
clear
desire
and
a
clear
set
of
action,
steps
that
we
all
voted
on
together
and
that
were
part
of
that
extended
community
engagement
process
to
identify
a
holistic
approach
to
Public
Safety,
that
included
community
safety
strategies
beyond
policing.
R
And
then
we've
been
laying
the
groundwork
to
explore
those
alternatives,
both
through
pilot
projects
that
have
been
tested
in
the
field
that
are
ready
to
be
stepped
up
and
also
through
studies,
that
we've
ordered.
We
formed
a
911
workgroup,
that
is,
a
mix
of
city
staff
and
appointees
from
the
community.
We
have
engaged
and
funded
a
workforce
study
to
look
at
the
way
staffing
operates
within
MPD.
The
mayor
and
the
council
collaboratively
have
formed
an
off-duty
task
force.
R
The
audit
looking
at
directed
patrol
and
the
PC
OSI
has
announced
that
they're
launching
a
study
on
self-initiated
police
calls
and
so
we're
getting
a
very
comprehensive
look
at
all
of
the
different
work
that
happens
in
policing
and
laying
the
groundwork
to
make
some
of
the
decisions
that
are
ahead
of
us
now.
The
outcomes
of
that
work
are
extremely
mixed.
R
We
have
done
the
outcomes,
are
that
we've
done
significant
public
engagement
and
that
a
lot
of
people
have
been
involved
in
a
lot
of
different
steps,
and
the
council
has
voted
many
times
over
on
looking
into
alternatives
for
current
model
of
policing
that
pilots
have
been
authorized
and
shown
strong
results
that
we
can
build
on,
but
at
the
same
time
many
of
them
have
not
been
increased
to
scale
and
traditional
policing
has
still
been
the
way
that
we're
approaching
public
safety
crime
has
increased.
Despite
a
continued
increase
to
the
police
budget.
R
Above
and
beyond,
increases
to
current
service
level,
the
discipline
imposed
by
chief
Redondo
has
been
frequently
overturned.
Some
of
the
incremental
policy
introduced
by
the
mayor
and
the
chief
has
been
implemented
and
some
has
produced
observable
outcomes.
The
city
is
facing
a
steady
stream
of
lawsuits
and
complaints
for
violations
of
safety
and
civil
rights.
Our
constituents
report
reduced
trust
in
the
department
and,
by
extension,
the
city
and
a
lack
of
transparency
about
how
decisions
are
made.
The
city
is
under
investigation
by
the
Department
of
Human
Rights.
R
C
I
want
to
thank
the
Charter
Commission
for
having
us
and
I'll
try
to
keep
it
brief.
I
know
we're
going
into
time,
but
I
think
these
are
important
topics.
My
name
is
Jeremiah.
Ellison
I
represent
Ward
5
I'm
here
in
Minneapolis,
so
for
years,
we've
spent
millions
on
the
police
department,
including
on
reforms
and
settlements,
but
I'm
not
going
to
return
on
that
investment.
We
have
been
met
with
the
stark
realization
that
our
Police
Department
in
its
current
form,
has
failed
to
keep
us
safe.
C
We
are
now
looking
to
reimagine
a
system
for
Public
Safety
that
actually
works.
So
here's
the
decision
ahead
of
our
community
right
now.
Our
investment
in
public
safety
is
about
a
hundred
and
ninety
three
million
dollars
in
to
the
police
department,
which
includes
a
sworn
force
of
888
and
non-sworn,
supports
that
engaging
in
activities
ranging
from
community
outreach
data
analysis,
investigation,
support
communications
and
much
more.
C
Investment
in
non
police
response
capacity
to
non
violent
emergency
calls
investment
in
expanding
existing
resources
at
the
county,
including
non
police,
mental
health
response,
investing
in
expanding
expanding
existing
or
creating
new
medical
emergency
response
for
opioid
overdose
or
other
medical
emergencies.
Currently
most
commonly
responded
to
by
police
and
the
consideration
of
the
roles
for
which
armed
police
are
still
the
best
response
and
ways
to
create
accountability
and
oversight
for
the
use
of
that
authorized,
force
and
power
of
arrest.
C
So
whether
you
want
to
keep
some
form
of
police
and
add
an
unarmed
response
to
non
violent
incidents,
or
you
want
to
abolish
the
police
entirely
or
you
simply
have
more
community
control
over
the
current
policing
structure.
Or
you
think
the
community
should
be
funded
to
do
their
own
form
of
violence
prevention,
no
matter
what
change
you
want,
how
a
reminded
minor
or
transformative
none
are
possible
under
our
current
Charter
language.
So
that's
why
we've
proposed
this
Charter
change.
C
It's
important
that
our
city
government
be
able
to
enact
the
changes
residents
believe
will
make
them
safer.
The
proposed
amendment
eliminates
the
Minneapolis
Police
Department,
as
a
charter
department,
taking
several
peculiar
aspects
of
department
in
the
Charter
away
in
the
process
under
the
existing
charter.
The
mayor
has
complete
control
over
the
P
over
the
police
department.
This
results
in
lost
transparency
in
policymaking
and
a
reduced
ability
for
residents
to
advocate
for
changes
under
the
existing
Charter.
The
power
to
discipline
rests
solely
with
the
chief
of
police.
C
Discipline
has
often
bottlenecked
with
every
everything,
including
coaching
and
written
reprimands,
having
to
be
performed
by
the
chief.
This
clause
also
has
prompted
the
state
to
view
sergeants
and
lieutenants
as
non-supervisory
as
discipline
authority
is
defined
as
a
defining
feature
of
management
in
state
law,
and
so
this
has
allowed
lieutenants
and
sergeants
to
stay
in
the
Federation
bargaining
unit
with
their
supervisees
under
the
existing
Charter.
There
must
be
a
minimum
number
of
employees
in
this
department.
C
The
proposed
amendment
states
as
a
qualification
of
the
department
director
that
they
have
Public
Safety
experienced
outside
of
just
law
enforcement
context
in
recognition
of
the
unique
power
instilled
by
the
Post
board
in
post
board
officers.
We
provide
for
the
council
at
mayor
to
approve
the
appointed
leadership
of
the
division
of
law
enforcement
as
well,
and
so,
lastly,
to
close
this
out,
I
will
pass
it
to
my
colleague,
councilmember
Alondra,
econo
and
I'm.
D
Sorry,
but
we're
way
over
time,
so
we're
gonna
switch
to
questions
and
answers
now
we
think
it
would
be
most
productive
if
we
have
a
back-and-forth
with
questions
and
give
you
the
opportunity
to
answer
so
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
Commissioner
Rubenstein.
Who
is
the
chair
of
our
workgroup
on
the
subject?
We
compiled
a
number
of
questions
when
we
met
yesterday
and
I'll.
Let
her
start
off
again
one
minute
for
questions
three
minutes
for
answers.
Thank
you.
Thank.
H
H
Our
first
question
is
the
proposed
amendment
contemplates
that
the
council
may
maintain
a
division
of
law
enforcement
services
consisting
of
licensed
officers,
as
you
just
mentioned,
is
there
currently
consensus
on
the
council
as
to
whether
the
council
will
maintain
such
a
division
and
how
big
the
division
will
be?
How
do
you
intend
to
develop
that
consensus?
If
you
don't
yet
have
one.
Q
Thank
you
for
the
question.
I
can
just
start
and
then
invite
any
of
my
colleagues
to
jump
in
knowing
that
we
intend
to
be
brief.
So
you
know
I
think
one
of
the
questions
that
I
know
this
body
wrestles
with
a
lot,
especially
in
the
lead-up
to
the
2013
plain
language
charter
amendments
is
what
are
the?
What
level
of
detail
belongs
in
a
city's
charter
versus
in
other
documents
such
as
ordinances?
Q
So
this
proposal,
which
would
move
policing
into
this
bigger
Department
as
a
division,
I
think,
would
require
ordinance
to
guide
several
details
related
to
the
functioning
of
that
department,
including
the
command
structure,
including
accountability
mechanisms
clarifying
how
it
reports
through
to
existing
or
if
state
law,
changes,
future
accountability
mechanisms.
So
it's
clear
that
you
know
that
some
of
that
detail
would
need
to
be
in
ordinance.
Q
You
know
I
think
I
can
speak
with
relative
confidence
that
the
consensus
of
the
council
would
be
that
there
needs
to
be
some
level
of
peace
officers
in
the
new
division
of
that
transition
to
this
new
form
of
charter
department
structure
would
take
time
so
and
those
the
you
know,
the
benefit
of
having
things
come
through.
The
City
Council
process
is
that
we
have
a
transparent
public
process
for
each
of
our
decisions
for
ordinances,
for
budgets
that
all
have
public
hearings
and
thorough
vetting
at
the
council.
R
R
How
are
we
responding
and
and
what
are
the
ways
that
were
providing
an
appropriate
city
response
to
each
category
of
9-1-1
call
is
at
the
heart
of
our
work,
we're
very
committed
to
public
safety
and
to
creating
a
system
that
provides
better
Public
Safety
in
the
end
and
I
think
that's
important
for
people
to
hear
I
also
think
in
the
difference
between
may
versus.
Shall
one
of
the
examples
that's
come
up
frequently
as
Camden
New
Jersey
and
the
interesting
thing
about
Camden
in
New.
Jersey
is
not
that
I
necessarily
think
it's
a
terrific
model.
R
I
actually
don't
want
to
lift
it
up
as
the
example
that
I
would
to
go
to,
but
in
many
ways
what
it
what
they
had
to
do
ultimately
was
that
they
had
a
department
that
they
did
not
feel
they
could
reform
and
they
shut
it
down
and
they
had
the
county
hire
a
police
department.
So
the
city
did
not
operate
a
police
department
and
the
difference
for
us
between
May
versus
Shell
is
is
that
option
on
the
table
is?
R
Is
there
the
opportunity
in
May
versus
shall
for
future
city
leaders,
whether
it's
this
term
next
term
or
ten
terms
from
now
to
decide
that
there
would
be
a
better
configuration
of
the
provision
of
law
enforcement
that
could
solve
administrative
and
management
problems
by
outsourcing
to
another
jurisdiction
by
merging
with
another
jurisdiction,
as
many
municipalities
do
around
the
state
and
as
many
have
proposed,
that
we
do
in
Minneapolis
we'd
like
to
leave
that
option
on
the
table?
Member
thank.
H
You
I
just
have
a
follow-up
question
then
to
councilmember
Fletcher.
If,
if
what
I
heard
you
say
is
that
we
could,
by
the
language
that
you
proposed
for
the
Charter,
we
could,
if
we
wanted
to
shut
down
the
police
department
and
have
and
move
it
to
some
other
request,
another
jurisdiction
to
take
over
I
guess:
I,
don't
understand
how
that
will
address
the
structural,
the
the
structural
racism,
that's
inherent
in
any
Police
Department,
it's
just
not
just
the
Minneapolis
Police
Department!
Well,
then,
just
get
us
back
where
we
were
maybe.
M
I
can
jump
in
it
and
say
that's
absolutely
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
think
councilmember
Fletcher
wasn't
necessarily
looking
at
Camden
as
an
alternative.
So
what
we
have
to
do
is
start
imagining
the
possibilities
and
in
fact
what
if
there
was
some
agency
that
had
solved
that
problem,
that
we
wanted
to
contract
with.
Wouldn't
it
be
nice
if
we
had
a
charter
that
would
allow
us
to
do
so.
H
Thank
you.
Our
next
question
is
the
proposed
amendment
essentially
strips
away
from
the
mayor,
his
authority
over
law
enforcement
in
the
city,
one
of
his
primary
charter
duty.
Are
you
concerned
that
this
creates
or
confirms
that
Minneapolis
was
a
weak
mayor
system
and
why
do
you
think
such
a
system
is
in
the
best
interests
of
the
city?
This
is
a
long
question,
I
apologize
and
how
will
this
shifting
of
power
changed
the
police
culture?
And,
finally,
would
you
accept
breaking
down
the
amendment
into
two
or
more
ballot
questions
to
separate
those
issues
for
the
voters.
C
Don't
think
anyone
here
has
an
interest
in
micromanaging
the
day
to
day,
but
I
think
that
what
we're
interested
in
is
knowing
that
when
the
people
of
Minneapolis
elect
city
leadership
and
when
the
City
Council
feels
that
a
policy
needs
to
be
passed
by
in
order
to
that,
the
police
department
should
follow
that
that
the
police
department
have
to
follow
it
right.
As
of
right
now
and
I
think
that
councilman
Gordon
can
sort
of
speak
to
a
his
whole
experience
with
regulating
Tasers
the
use
of
Tasers.
C
We
don't
have
that
authority
over
the
police
and
I
think
that
a
lot
of
our
constituents
are
under
the
impression
that
we
have
that
authority.
The
new
language
I
think
is
designed
to
to
give
us
that
authority
and
again
not
to
micromanage
the
day-to-day
of
what
the
department
head
would
do,
but
but
does
allow
us
to
pass
an
ordinance
and
to
be
transparent
about
what
the
policies
are,
that
the
police
should
and
shouldn't
follow.
M
Just
note
that
the
city
has
a
hybrid
system,
it's
not
a
strong
or
a
weak
mayor.
At
this
time
we
have
our
unique
system,
it's
more
democratic
than
many
other
cities.
This
small
change
wouldn't
take
away
any
of
the
other
significant
powers
and
authority
that
the
mayor
has,
including
to
Beto
any
action
on
the
part
of
the
City,
Council
and
also
the
mayor,
also
proposes
the
budget.
The
so
is
there
at
the
executive
committee
and
brings
forth
all
the
department
heads
and
would
still
be
doing
so
with
these.
M
So
I
don't
want
somebody
to
and
start
expanding
this
into
doing
something
that
it
does
not
do.
It
would
I
think
preserve.
In
fact,
it
would
make
more
consistent
the
unique
form
and
balance
that
we
have
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
and
take
this
one
department,
that's
an
anomaly
and
make
it
consistent
with
the
other,
highly
professional
departments
that
are
managed
very
effectively
through
the
council
and
the
mayor
and
their
cooperation.
H
H
For
example,
one
thing
that
we
thought
of
was
a
community
safety
and
violence
prevention
personnel
could
be
added
either
in
another
department
or
in
a
new
non-charter
department.
The
number
of
police
department
employees,
including
sworn
and
MADD
sworn
personnel,
could
be
reduced
by
30%
and
I.
Think
one
of
you
mentioned
that
why
can't
the
city
take
these
steps?
That
would
then
inform
us
all
overtime
as
to
what
and
whether
charter
changes
necessary.
P
Councilmember
Allen
Darko,
no
I'm,
the
councilmember
for
Ward
9,
as
well
as
the
chair
of
our
Public
Safety
Committee,
and
have
been
working
on
these
issues
for
seven
years
now.
As
a
city
council,
member
I'll
say
that,
first
and
foremost,
we
have
to
acknowledge
and
recognize
and
give
due
respect
to
the
thousands
of
Minneapolis
residents
who
took
to
the
streets
to
respond
to
the
cruel
and
cold
murder
of
mr.
George
Floyd
and
to
give
them
the
right
and
the
space
to
vote
on
this
Charter
question
in
November
as
such.
P
Take
up
the
the
mandate
that
so
many
of
our
residents
have
stated
they
want,
which
is
they
want
to
be
able
to
respond
to
safety
issues
outside
over
and
of
an
armed
police
officer
and
many
of
the
people
on
on
one
side
of
the
spectrum,
who
don't
want
more
armed
police
officers
responding
to
their
community
and
many
of
the
community
members?
Who
would
like
more
officers
to
take
care
of
homelessness
and
opioid
overdoses
and
prostitution?
They
all
agree
with
the
fact
that
our
system,
right
now
it
doesn't
work.
It's
not
so.
H
R
There
would
not
be
a
structure
for
such
a
vote
to
be
a
literal
vote.
The
way
a
ballot
initiative
would
be
at
the
end
of
a
year-long
engagement
process,
but
the
way
City
engagement
works.
It
happens
in
a
lot
of
different
ways
and
in
a
lot
of
different
registers
and,
frankly,
having
an
option
for
people
to
weigh
in
on
the
ballot
partway
through.
R
The
truth
is,
you
know,
I,
think
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
fear
and
a
lot
of
confusion
and
I
think
that
makes
them
with
what
our
city's
been
through,
but
we're
actually
describing
is
a
much
more
planful
and
intentional
process,
then
I
think,
what's
often
been
portrayed
and
I
think
it's
important
that
we
continue
to
communicate
that
continue
to
invite
people
into
that
process
in
a
whole
lot
of
ways.
We've
instructed
staff
to
come
back
on
July
24th
with
a
report
on
what
that
engagement
is
going
to
look
like.
R
So
that
people
start
to
understand
where
their
voices
fit
into
that
process
and
will
continue
to
stand
up
pilot
programs
and
to
stand
up
opportunities
for
people
to
actually
see
what
we're
talking
about.
As
we
propose
different
solutions
so
that
people
can
get
a
more
tangible
idea
of
what
we
might
mean
by
alternative
responses.
H
How
you've
probably
answered
this
but
I
wanted
to
ask
it
anyway?
How
will
this
amendment
change
the
culture
of
law
enforcement
in
Minneapolis,
the
law
enforcement
division
will
still
have
a
union
will
still
have
arbitration
and
most
of
the
license
often
officers
will
still
live
outside
the
city.
How
does
this
amendment
actually
accomplish
culture
change
within
the
law
enforcement
officers,
community.
C
My
college
dorm,
have
you
address
this.
You
know
I,
think
that
we
see
that
there
are
basically
three
major
barriers
to
to
in
the
way
of
some
of
the
transformational
change
that
constituents
are
asking
for
here
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
One
is
the
state
legislature,
the
other
is
the
Police
Federation
and
the
last
one
is
the
Charter
I
think
the
first
two
are
kind
of
non-starters.
They
require
that
we
that
we
plead
with
Republican
leadership
that
are
not
willing
to
come
to
the
table.
C
The
Police
Federation
recently
went
on
a
media
campaign
to
say
that
I
believe
one
of
them
was
quoted
as
saying
they
view
accountability
as
an
attack,
and
so
those
two
pathways
are
sort
of
non-starters,
but
those
would
more
I
think
pointedly
address
law
enforcement
specifically
what
the
Charter
allows
us
to
do
is
reimagine
Public
Safety
entirely
and
this,
and
we
have
heard
from
enough
constituents
that
say
that
they
are,
but
they
are
interested
in
reimagining
public
safety
to
pursue
to
pursue
this
pathway.
So
you
asked
about
how
this
could
change.
You
know.
C
Law
enforcement,
in
particular
I
think
mostly
what
it
does
is.
It
changes
the
culture
of
of
Public
Safety,
more
importantly,
and
and
to
some
of
my
colleagues
points
will
be
able
to
de-emphasize
the
role
of
armed
use
of
force,
response
to
every
issue,
which
I
think
will
go
a
long
way,
but
and
so
that's
sort
of
how
we
would
address.
Law
enforcement,
but
mostly
I
think
that
we
address
Public
Safety
as
a
whole
and
we
remove
the
monopoly
on
Public
Safety
away
from
the
police
department.
A
R
I
may,
if
I
might
add,
I,
think
there's
an
important
structural
element
here
and
I
think
it's
important
that
we
be
clear-headed
about
how
difficult
culture
change
is
it's
not
something
you
can
change
with
a
few
policies
or
even
with
a
charismatic
leader,
it's
something
where
you
have
to
where
you
have
a
culture
that
isn't
working.
You
have
to
change
the
structure
and
one
of
the
things
that
doesn't
work
about
our
current
Police
Department
and
that
creates
the
structure
the
culture
that
we
have
is
that
it
operates
on
an
island.
R
It
operates
very
separate
from
the
rest
of
the
city,
and
a
lot
of
that
is
actually
enshrined
in
charter.
Its
independence
is
is
very
clear
in
the
unique
way
that
it's
described
in
charter
in
the
unique
way
that
it
reports
to
Authority
and
doesn't
report
to
some
authority,
and
that
has
led
to
a
department
that
doesn't
integrate
with
the
rest
of
the
city,
particularly
well
as
we're
making
citywide
policy
changes.
R
It
has
its
own
communication,
its
own
data
management,
its
own
finance,
its
own
sort
of
infrastructure
and
doesn't
particularly
interact
with
the
rest
of
the
city
and
creating
a
new
structure
that
actually
places
it
within
a
department
that
has
normal
reporting,
Authority
and
that
would
be
interacting
with
the
rest
of
the
city.
I
think
is
one
of
the
elements
that
would
create
culture
change
over
time.
The
relational
work
that
we
would
need
to
do
across
the
entire
city
Enterprise
to
really
change
how
people
view
public
safety
and
how
MPD
views
their
role
within
it.
H
D
A
R
K
You
mr.
chair
we've
heard
from
a
couple
of
the
council
members
and
first
thank
you,
council
members
for
being
here
and
engaging
with
the
Charter
Commission.
I
really
do
appreciate
that
and
I
know
the
public
does
as
well
a
couple
of
Commissioners
mentioned
the
alignment
of
the
police
department
back
into
removing
the
police
department
of
Charter
Commission.
So
they
could
realign
it
with
the
rest
of
the
departments
of
the
city
and
how
they
can
control
those
departments,
and
this
was
the
conversation
very
similar
to
what
we
had
in
2018
and
back
in
2018.
K
The
city
attorney
issued
a
memo
to
the
Minneapolis
Charter
Commission
on
September
20
18th,
which
was
in
response
to
our
questions
to
the
Gorter
Gordon
charter
amendment
the
city
attorney
said
at
the
time
that
quote
other
than
the
Charter
language
provided
for
the
executive
committee
and
its
powers
to
a
point,
suspend
and
remove
officers.
The
Charter
gives
the
City
Council
has
no
direct
control
over
the
officers
and
employees
of
any
department
in
the
city.
K
Each
department
head
has
the
authority
to
write
policies
and
procedures
for
the
respected
department
generally
sets
the
standards
for
the
department,
employees
and
controls
the
operations
of
the
department.
The
City
Council
approves
business
plans
and
ultimately
concept
a
budget,
but
does
not
have
the
authority
to
direct
the
internal
operations
of
any
city
department.
That's
current
practice
in
the
conclusion
of
the
memo.
K
The
city
attorney
states,
the
powers
and
authority
of
the
mayor
and
the
City
Council
are
distinct
with
the
mayor
having
clear
executive
authority
over
the
internal
operations
of
the
police
department,
the
City
Council
has
the
same
authority
over
the
police
department,
as
it
does
over
all
city
departments,
its
authority
to
legislate
and
set
enterprise
policies,
goals
and
strategic
direction,
hold
hearings
and
require
accountability
of
any
reports
and
information
from
the
PD.
According
to
this
memo,
the
City
Council
already
has
the
same
control
over
the
police
department
as
it
does
with
every
other
department.
K
One
of
the
main
arguments
in
support
of
this
amendment
is
that
the
City
Council
does
not
currently
have
control
over
the
police
department,
as
it
has
over
other
departments.
Many
of
you
told
the
public
that
that
you
need
the
police
department
moved
out
of
the
Charter
department,
so
it
can
be
treated
the
same
way
as
other
departments.
How
does
this
amendment
eliminate
the
police
department
and
creating
a
public
safety
violence
prevention
department?
Give
you
more
control
over
policies
and
procedures,
ensuring
the
safety
of
all
residents
and
the
accountability
over
the
service
providers.
I.
Q
Q
Some
examples
of
way
that
we
direct,
not
the
individual
employees
themselves,
but
the
work
of
departments
are
some
policy
directives
that
we've
given
to
other
departments
in
the
city,
for
example
the
Complete
Streets
policy
that
directs
some
work
of
the
Public
Works
Department,
the
renters
first
policy
that
directs
the
work
of
the
regulatory
services
department
and
sets
policy
priorities
for
those
departments
that
the
employees
are
expected
to
follow
for
the
direction
of
policy
makers.
I.
Q
Think
another
example
is
the
difference
between
setting
use
of
force
policy
internally
within
the
department,
through
the
mayor
and
the
chief
versus
having
a
transparent
public
discussion
about
policies
that
the
department
has
like
it's
use
of
force
policy.
So
poor,
the
member
of
the
City
Council,
could
ban
all
employees
who
work
for
the
city
from
using
chokeholds,
for
example.
But
that's
like
a
disingenuous
way
to
really
talk
about
our
authority
over
employees
and
I.
Think
is
a
confusing
way
for
us
to
engage
as
a
department
that
we
do
not
have
policy
authority
over
her.
K
Q
K
Yep
so
do
I.
The
second
question
that
I
have
is-
and
this
is
the
last
one
mr.
chair-
why
are
you
not
taking
the
time
to
create
the
details
of
the
plan
now
presenting
it
to
voters
for
next
year?
Why
not
take
a
year
now
to
hash
out
the
details
asking
the
voters
to
trust
you
on
the
details
is
like
the
president
asking
us
to
defund
Obamacare
first,
and
we
can
worry
about
the
replacement
details
later.
There's
not
much
trust
in
that
process.
Why
should
we
have
trust
in
this
one
yeah.
C
The
other
thing
that
I'll
say
is
that
a
lot
of
the
things
that
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we
plan
to
do
with
the
arm
the
office
of
violence
prevention
is
we're
already
doing
but
they're
hard
to
take
up
the
scale
and
they
and
they
and
they
are
not
coordinated
with
our
with
our
mage,
with
our
main
source
of
Public
Safety,
which
is
the
police
department.
This
allows
us
to
sort
of
consolidate
all
things.
D
A
It's
gonna
take.
None
of
us
are
police
officers.
None
of
you,
our
police
officers,
this
proposal,
these
proposals
all
affect
the
lives,
careers,
well-being,
families
of
at
least
800
police
officers.
Don't
you
think
we
should
at
least
hear
from
the
rank
and
file
police
that
we
are
discussing
here
and
their
representatives
before
we
take
any
action.
P
I'd
be
happy
to
take
that
question.
This
is
council
member
in
London,
O'connell
and
I've
had
the
privilege
to
work
with
police
officers
on
the
ground,
responding
to
specific
shootings
and
other
activity
in
our
neighborhoods
I
will
say
that
they
are
welcome
to
be
a
part
of
the
conversation
as
many
of
them
as
want
to
be
as
long
as
we
continue
to
Center
the
voice
and
impact
of
police
violence
on
communities
of
color,
indigenous
community
communities
and
communities
that
have
been
coming
to
us
for
many
many
years
asking
for
change.
So
I
I.
P
Don't
think
that
this
should
be
framed
as
an
anti
police
initiative.
I.
Think
that
if
you
look
at
the
language,
we
say
that
we
want
to
enact
the
changes
by
May
21st.
We
know
that
the
approach
has
to
be
thoughtful,
inclusive
and
intentional.
No
one
is
claiming
that
the
department
will
disappear
tomorrow
or
in
a
month.
In
fact,
this
is
why
we
are
asking
the
voters
of
Minneapolis
to
go
to
the
ballot
box
on
in
November
and
I'm,
hoping
that
you
almost.
P
Part
of
this
discussion,
please
do
not
speak
over
me
when
I'm
trying
to
respond
to
your
question.
If
you
didn't
hear
it
I'm
happy
to
respond
again.
Police
officers
are
welcome
to
be
a
part
of
this
process
as
long
as
they
Center
the
voices
of
people
of
color
and
the
victims
of
police
brutality.
I
will
also
like
to
remind
you
that
this
is
a
conversation
that
should
be
led
by
Minneapolis
voters.
P
The
people
who
live
in
this
community,
the
people
who
have
to
take
care
of
the
traumatic
events
here
at
home,
while
85
percent
of
our
police
force
goes
home
to
the
suburbs
or
another
city.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
honoring
respecting
and
authentically
centering.
The
voices
of
Minneapolis
voters.
A
D
A
C
Thank
you,
Thank
You,
Commissioner
Cohen
for
the
question
and
a
follow
up.
I
think
that
the
views
of
Bob
Kroll,
who
you're,
maybe
not
naming,
but
that's,
who
you're
talking
about,
are
well
documented
in
the
public
course
and
and
if
I
may
I
think
that
I
don't
think
that
we
should
wait
to
take
action.
But
I
do
agree
with
councilmember
Cano
that
the
police
are
invited
into
this
discussion
and
absolutely
should
be
I.
C
C
B
Have
a
kind
of
a
question
that
goes
back
that
several
council
members
have
raised
is
that
they
are
prohibited
by
the
Charter
from
taking
significant
action
with
the
police
department.
Part
of
that
confusion
is
with
the
power
of
the
budget
that
that
the
City
Council
has
yet.
For
example,
the
Charter
requires
17
police
officers
per
thousand,
that's
roughly
710
police
officers.
We
currently
have
I
think
somebody
said
earlier
888
police
officers.
Why
hasn't
the
City
Council
in
any
of
its
previous
budget
settings
just
simply
defunded
up
to
180
police
officers?
P
Peter
justice,
a
councilman
McConnell
good,
to
see
you
again
thanks
for
your
service
to
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
For
so
many
years,
I
will
say
that
I
think
that
keeping
that
relationship
intact
and
in
the
Charter
really
continues
to
codify
and
solidify
the
type
of
culture,
abusive
culture
we
saw
out
on
the
streets
of
Chicago
in
30
and
I.
Think
you've
known
me
for
a
few
years
now
and
we
had
the
opportunity
to
work
together
on
the
council.
P
I
was
a
reformist
I
thought
that
we
could
fix
that
old,
broken
system
if
we
just
dumped
enough
money
into
it
and
honestly
when
I
woke
up
and
I
saw
that
video
on
Tuesday
morning,
I
completely
changed
my
framework.
My
thinking,
my
analysis
of
all
of
that
work,
where
you
and
I
and
Susan
Siegel
and
many
others
spent
countless
hours
trying
to
fix
and
redeem
this
system
that
has
been
handed
down
to
us
from
generation
to
generation.
P
It
just
felt
to
me
like
it
just,
was
not
going
to
be
possible
and
I
couldn't
I,
couldn't
in
under
any
guys
or
circumstance
face
my
voters
and
say
you
know
what
we're
going
to
issue
a
their
training
and
that
will
fix
it.
You
know
mud
we're
going
to
issue
another
Memel
and
that's
gonna
get
at
it.
You
know
what
we're
gonna
give
them
more
gadgets
and
that's
gonna
get
to
it.
That's
not
what's
gonna
get
to
it
going
after
the
architectural
composition
of
our
policing
system
is
at
the
heart
of
this
deep
transformation.
P
We
must
begin,
and
that
is
key
here.
It's
the
beginning
of
a
process.
It's
it's,
not!
Okay,
to
have
everything
figured
out
right
now,
in
fact,
that's
why
we're
in
the
problem
oriented
a
this
is
why
it's
so
important
to
allow
our
voters
to
take
that
vote
in
November
to
renew
that
social
contract
that
we
have
lost.
We
have
a
verb
city
burned
down,
because
there
is
no
trust
in
these
systems,
so
I
think
it's
really
important
Peter
to
to
recognize
and
Commission
your
ginder
I
apologize.
I.
P
Just
remember
working
with
you
so
much
that
the
the
ability
to
create
a
new
charter
department
that
has
a
an
overarching
framework
that
leads
with
Public
Health.
That
leads
with
solutions
above
and
beyond
and
armed
officer
are
extremely
important
to
get
at
that
policing
culture
that
otherwise
we
would
leave
intact
by
just
poking
at
the
budget
and
the
budget
changes
if
we
leave
them.
The
way
that
they
are
in
the
Charter
will
only
take
us
so
far.
It
will
never
really
let
us
materialize
and
and
fully
spread
out.
You
know
this.
P
This
I
would
say
grassroots
energy
that
we
have
where
there
are
thousands
of
ideas
in
our
inbox
about
how
to
do
better,
Community
Safety.
We
are
not
going
to
be
in
a
place
where
we
don't
have
ideas
about
how
to
do
it.
Better.
We're
gonna
be
in
a
place
where
our
community
is
going
to
be
able
to
come
together
in
a
moment
of
abundance,
to
say,
wow,
look
at
all
these
amazing
people
and
energy
and
solutions,
and
let's
prioritize
them.
P
So
I
would
say
that
it
would
be
wrong
to
continue
to
to
codify
the
policing
system,
as
it
is
now,
without
truly
restructuring,
rethinking
and
reframe
the
approach
of
policing
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
meeting
with
armed
officers.
And
now
we
are
making
sure
that
we're
leaving
with
public
health
we're
looking
at
the
root
causes
we're
looking
at
violence
interruption
and
that
we're
doubling
down
on
that
body
of
work
that
the
city
has
has
already
started.
P
Has
art
already
germinated
has
already
cultivated
over
many
years
to
really
give
them
and
give
that
body
of
work
a
fighting
chance,
because
so
far
the
funding
efforts
can
only
take
us
to
a
certain
level
and
if
we
reduce
our
police
force
to
whatever
730
officers,
but
continue
to
remain,
it
stays
in
that
same
container.
As
my
colleagues
often
use
that
terminology,
that
container
will
still
be
mouldy
and
it'll
still
be.
Stale
and
it'll
still
be
broken
and
and
we'll
be
stuck
carrying.
Thank.
F
Okay,
let
me
unmute
so
many
issues,
it's
hard
to
address
them
all
by
eye.
I'm,
not
sure
I
have
my
original
question.
Okay.
First
of
all,
if,
in
fact
the
real
issue
is
council
authority-
and
this
kind
of
makes
me
think
a
bit
about
commissioner
Abbott's
suggestion
about
the
legislative
versus
executive,
this
came
up
in
2018.
We
had
some
concerns
with
it.
It
went
back
to
the
council.
It
died
as
far
as
I
can
tell
it
never
came
forward.
F
They
easily
could
have
modified
this
because
I
think
that's
part
of
it
and
put
it
on
the
ballot
for
this
year,
but
I
don't
know
where
it
went.
Perhaps
council
member
Gordon
would
like
to
answer
that
issue.
If
that's
the
primary
issue.
Frankly,
it
kind
of
looks
like
to
some
of
us,
and
some
people
contacted
me
that
this
is
a
great
way
to
get
rid
of
the
Union
you're
going
to
get
rid
of
one
department.
The
police
department
you're
going
to
create
a
new
depart.
F
Everybody
has
to
reapply
if
they
want
to
be
in
the
new
department.
The
unions
God
will
have
to
have
a
new
union,
I
suspect
and
maybe
that's
part
of
the
motivation.
I
am
Not.
Sure
I
haven't
heard
that
discussed
too
much,
but
I
guess.
My
idea
is:
why
didn't
you
continue
with
the
work
to
deal
with
your
authority
that
was
started
in
2018
because
I
think
you,
you
had
a
good
start,
but
it
just
disappeared.
C
Thank
You
Commissioner
Samberg
I'm,
happy
to
jump
in
on
the
early
part
of
that
I
believe
that
the
that
the
issue
is
not
simply
Council
Authority,
although
I,
do
think
that
that's
a
major
roadblock
to
transformative
change,
but
I
also
believe
that
the
design
of
policing
in
and
of
itself
and
the
monopoly
that
policing
has
on
Public
Safety
is
a
major
part
of
the
problem.
And
so
what
you're,
seeing
in
front
of
you
is
is
I
think
something
that
actually
gets
at
a
lot
of
the
root
causes.
C
Maybe
violence
prevention,
which
you
know
we
have
a
framework
for,
and
we
do
in
the
city
is-
is
a
better
place
to
start
and
we
can
move
from
prevention
to
response.
Whereas
currently
we
only
do
response
I
think
to
Commissioner
AG
inder's
point.
You
know
a
lot
of
the
councilmembers
that
you're
talking
to
our
council
members,
who
were
in
favor
of
funding
in
favor
of
funding
the
office
of
violence
prevention
at
much
higher
levels
than
we
did
and
some
of
those
efforts
failed.
Some
of
those
efforts
succeeded.
R
Thank
you
I'll
just
note
that
you
know
that
when
that
came
back
to
us
too
late
to
get
on
the
2018
ballot,
there
then
wasn't
a
2019
ballot
for
us
to
put
us
on.
We
didn't
have
an
election
in
2019,
so
it
wouldn't
have
made
sense
to
ask
people
to
come
to
the
polls
just
for
that
and
I
think
two
years
of
learning
and
frankly,
two
years
of
observation
of
some
really
successful
pilots
and
some
really
encouraging
work
related
to
violence,
prevention
and
I.
D
F
And
maybe
he'll
catch
up
on
it,
because
I
would
be
interested
to
hear
what
he
had
to
say
about
it.
Certainly,
the
issue
of
council
authority
could
have
been
worked
into
what
people
want
to
do
now
and
the
fact.
Yes,
there
was
no
election
in
2019,
but
sometimes
gathering
community
input
and
so
forth
on
these
issues
takes
time.
So.
D
J
There's
a
lot
of
concern
expressed
in
the
in
the
community
comment:
we've
gotten
so
far,
people
don't
know
what
the
future
looks
like.
So
I
would
give
you
guys
an
opportunity
to
paint
a
very
granular
specific
picture,
for
you
know
the
residents
who
might
be
listening
to
this
meeting.
What
happens
I
mean
I
realize
there's
going
to
be
a
debate
about
how
this
all
looks.
Right,
I
mean
I
realize
just
sitting
here
today.
J
You
don't
have
a
final
answer,
but
but
what
can
you
know
like
if
you're
a
citizen
of
the
city
of
Minneapolis
and
you
call
911,
how
does
how
does
that
call
get
diverted
to
Community
Safety
or
the
new
law
enforcement
department?
What
kind
of
preventive
measures
are
you
talking
about?
I
mean.
Did
the
view
you
know
being
do
people
come
out
before
9/11
gets
called
I?
Just
you
know,
from
from
a
from
a
very
concrete
visual
standpoint,
I
think
would
be
helpful
for
people
to
kind
of
understand
what
your
concept
is.
J
R
We
can
limit
the
extent
to
which
people
are
exposed
to
situations
of
unsafety
in
the
first
place,
and
so
that
is
one
area
where
we
can
really
improve
as
a
city
is
in
our
proactive
prevention
and
care
for
each
other.
I
also
think
that
we
can
make
a
much
smarter
response
through
911
dispatch
and
through
a
much
more
intentional
integration
of
the
entire
city
Enterprise
in
the
work
of
Public
Safety,
so
that
we're
sending
the
best
experts
in
each
area
to
respond
to
each
situation.
R
So
as
an
example,
right
now
we
have
police
officers
responding
to
traffic
accidents,
traffic
accidents.
What
really
needs
to
happen
is
three
things.
We
need
to
do
health
triage
for
people
who
might
have
been
injured.
We
need
to
do
logistics
management,
while
the
accident
gets
cleaned
up
and
we
need
to
take
reports,
and
those
reports
would
be
a
lot
better
if
they
were
being
taken
by
somebody
who
knows
something
about
traffic
engineering,
and
so
they
were
taking
accurate
details
so
that
we
can
actually
get
data
about
what
went
wrong
that
caused
the
traffic
accident.
R
R
That
is
polite,
that's
empowered
to
solve
problems
for
people
that
makes
people
feel
like
they're,
better
off
for
having
called,
and
all
of
those
things
are
things
that
we
don't
currently
here
in
many
cases
about
people's
current
experience
with
an
awful
lot
of
911
one
now
at
the
same
time-
and
it
is
worth
saying
when
we
take
apart
all
of
the
different
kinds
of
911
calls
that
we
get.
There
are
types
of
calls
that
I
believe
the
community
is
going
to
say.
R
N
Thank
You
chair
Clegg,
first
I'd
like
to
correct
Commissioner
gender,
in
that
there
is
17
police
officers
for
10,000
residents,
not
one
thousand
residents
as
I've
been
doing
the
math.
Secondly,
Thank
You
Commissioner
Sandberg.
For
your
question
about
the
efforts
we
were
trying
to
advance
in
2018,
like
one
thing,
I
think.
N
Important
to
consider
is
that
if
we
want
to
have
decreased
armed
responses,
what
I'm
hearing
from
people
from
the
public
is
what
about
armed
residents,
who
you
don't
know
if
they
pose
an
imminent
threat
until
the
response
the
first
responders
show
up
because
of
our
gun
laws
and
what
I?
My
initial
question
really
would
like
to
circle
back
to
councilmember
Ellison
about
from
Commissioner
duro
Isaacson's
question
with
regard
to.
N
Why
not
develop
a
comprehensive
plan
before
putting
this
on
the
ballot
and,
while
I
completely
understand
that
the
language
in
the
Charter
and
the
in
the
Charter
itself
is
very
brief.
Nevertheless,
a
plan
that
can
go
into
ordinance
or
a
plan
that
can
be
presented
very
comprehensively.
For
example,
you
had
mentioned
councilmember
Ellison
what
the
office
of
violence
prevention
has
come
up
with,
but
doesn't
have
the
resources
to
take
to
scale
I.
Think
sharing
that
with
the
public
would
be
advantageous,
because
what
we're
hearing
is
that
the
council
is
reactive
courts.
N
C
Thank
You,
Commissioner,
Garcia
I
think
I
also
wanted
that
one
I,
like
sort
of
level,
said
about
the
two
different
I
think
the
two
different
planes
on
which
this
conversation
is
being
had
I
think
on
one
hand,
there's
the
conversation
that
I
think
a
lot
of
community
members
that
I'm,
certainly
hearing
from
and
and
and
a
lot
of
community
members
that
that
the
council
is
hearing
from
there.
There's
that
conversation
sort
of
happening
in
in
detail
on
and
I
think
it's
a
really
more
honest
conversation.
There's
also
I
think
the
media
narrative
that
you
know.
C
Obviously
the
council
is
not
equipped
to
dominate
right
in
the
same
way
that
the
local
paper
is
equipped
to
dominate.
But
when
you
see
a
headline
that
says
the
council
advance
is
planned
to
abolish
the
police.
That
necess,
not
necessarily
true
and
no
council
member,
has
necessarily
said
that.
But
that's
what
people
read
in
the
Star
Tribune
I
think
that
I
think
that
the
discussion
that
you're
talking
about
is
a
discussion
that
can
be
had
over
the
course
of
an
election
cycle.
C
And,
quite
frankly,
while
a
media
narrative
can
dominate
and
persist
in
the
in
the
short
term,
we've
seen
plenty
of
plenty
of
situations
in
which,
when
it
comes
election
time,
the
Star
Tribune
sort
of
influence
is
sort
of
non-existent
right.
The
candidates
they
endorse,
the
the
the
the
concepts
they
endorse,
often
fail
at
the
ballot,
often
don't
go
their
way
at
the
ballot
on
the
ballot.
C
That
helps
folks
understand
exactly
what
the
mental
health
response
at
the
county
does
and
what
they
could
do
if
they
were
brought
to
scale.
Those
things
already
exist
right
now.
There
are
a
number
of
things
that
I
think
we
are
looking
to
design
on
in
terms
of
other
types
of
emergency
response
that
don't
currently
exist,
but
it's
not
like
we,
it's
not
like.
We
are
starting
from
Ground
Zero
without
any
idea
of
how
this
thing
would
function.
C
I
think
that
you
know
chemical
members
can
be
as
detailed
as
they
would
like
in
their
newsletters
and
on
Twitter
and
and
and
and
and
on
social
media.
It's
not
going
to
have
the
same
sort
of
immediate
reach
as
the
local
paper,
but
over
time,
I
do
believe
that
the
the
truth
of
the
conversation,
the
more
honest
version
of
this
conversation,
would
bubble
to
the
surface.
N
N
Think
one
thing
that
kind
of
precipitates
this
concept,
that
the
City
Council
is
reactive,
is
that
major
initiatives
seem
to
be
tied
to
election
years,
such
as
what
commissioner
Sandberg
said
about
2018,
it's
I
know
my
own
experience
in
public
policy
tells
me
that
that
could
very
well
be
just
a
coincidence
and
that's
something
that
a
lot
of
that
public
consumption
can
just
spin
off
into
its
own
narrative,
but
I
I
just
wanted
to
to
clarify
that,
notwithstanding
the
media,
any
media
outlets.
Thank
you.
Yes,.
C
Like
I
would
like
just
just
a
90
seconds
to
respond:
Thank,
You,
Commissioner,
Garcia,
I
I,
definitely
hear
that
I
do
want
to
remind
the
public
that
that
the
City
Council
elections
were
the
year
before
so
2018.
When
we
talk
about
getting
something
on
the
ballot
during
an
election
year,
I
think
that
the
sole
purpose
is
for
transparency
and
inclusion
of
many
voices.
C
If
we
were
to
try
to
put
a
single,
a
single
commitment
charter
amendment
on
the
ballot
in
a
non
election
year,
I
think
that
what
you
would
have
is
a
small
No
of
people
lending
their
voice
to
that
initiative
and
that
we
would
miss
an
opportunity
to
get
the
full
opinion
of
the
entire
city.
Especially
if
you
compare
you
know
an
on
an
on
council
non
mayor
year
to
a
to
a
presidential
election
year.
C
It
doesn't
have
to
be
the
sole
way,
but
it
can
be
the
fastest
way,
the
most
google-able
way
and
so
to
have
those
deeper
conversations,
I
think
can
happen,
especially
between
now
and
November,
but
but
they
would
happen
a
little
slower
than
then
a
headline
coming
out
of
out
of
the
starchy.
Be
my
guess,
is
what
I'm
saying
last
sorry.
C
Think
that
you
know
the
the
the
the
competing
narratives
that
you
need
to
have.
Every
every
I
dotted
intern
cross
versus.
We
need
a
systemic
change
and
we
need
the
council
to
prevent
another
police
killing
from
happening.
The
you
know,
so
the
urgency
narrative
versus
the
need
you
to
have
it
all
figured
out
narrative
is,
is
more
representative
of
I
think
what
council
members
are
hearing,
which
is
why
we
think
taking
this
to
voters
is
the
right
approach,
and
not
just
passing.
P
Cherry
Garcia
I'll
just
add
that
I
I
feel
like
there's
us
I
feel
like
we
need
to
be
able
to
call
out
the
privilege
and
waiting.
There
are
many
communities
who
have
been
working
on
this
issue
for
many
many
years
and
they've
held
they've
felt
ignored
on
her
and
welcomed,
and
you
know
we
must
remember
that
this,
the
crises
that
happened
when
mr.
George
Floyd
was
murdered.
P
It's
something
that
we've
never
seen
before
in
in
these
sort
of
lines
of
cases
across
the
nation,
people
resounded
Lee
agreed
that
what
happened
was
horrific
and
should
never
cloud
to
happen
again.
So
I
want
to
have
us
I
want
to
remind
everybody
that
saying
that
we
should
just
wait
until
next
year
to
figure
it
out,
and
we
should
just
take
the
time.
P
The
future
of
this
conversation
to
me
would
be
a
deeply
missed
opportunity
to
both
honor
and
respect
the
voices
of
the
people
of
Minneapolis
and
to
bring
integrity
into
the
conversation
of
Public
Safety
and,
as
the
Public
Safety
chair,
who
believed
in
reform.
I
can
tell
you
today
that
that
is
not
the
way
we
should
be
addressing
this
situation.
We.
O
P
D
P
D
O
O
What
are
your
thoughts
and
sort
of
plans
as
a
relates
to
kind
of
a
plan
being
because
the
issues
that
you
all
about
outline
in
our
community
as
a
result
of
the
the
death
of
a
murder
of
George
Floyd
it
is,
it
won't
go
away
because
the
the
because
it
felt
up
on
the
ballot,
what
would
be
the
the
sort
of
Plan
B
and
and
how
do
we
communicate
that
plan
to
our
community?
So
I.
M
Couldn't
weigh
in
on
that
a
little
bit
if
it's
all
right,
I,
don't
think
that
the
council
has
a
plan
B.
We
have
12
volts
in
unanimous
consent
to
go
along
with
plan
a
but
I'm
sure
that
all
of
our
12
of
us
have
different
plans
and
options.
I
will
note
that
we've
already
opened
up
some
of
the
ordinances
so
we'll
be.
They
have
been
referred
to.
Committee
permanents
on
the
police
department,
I'm
chapter
I
think
it's
a
figure
out
the
title,
but
171
and
also
172
on
police
oversight.
M
So
those
will
be
looked
at
and
those
will
be
studied
and
we
will
see
what
we
can
do
there
we'll
continue
to
use
any
leverage
we
might
have
with
the
police
contract,
which
theirs
were
stymied
along
the
way
because
of
state
law
and
in
a
number
of
ways,
but
also
because
we're
locked
in
to
this
contract
of
having
our
police
department
and
they
already
have
their
union
and
it's
right
there.
So
so
we're
dealing
with
it.
We're
also
going
to
be
looking
at
other
legislative
changes
that
we
could.
M
We
could
advocate
for
I'm
off
into
the
future,
including
right
now,
I
will
say
even
and
hopefully,
as
you
forward
it
back
to
us
and
we
put
it
on
the
ballot
we'll
be
steadily
making
those
changes
all
the
way
up
to
November
3rd
and
we'll
be
been
deeply
into
our
engagement
process.
Talking
to
the
community,
I
will
note
that
we
might
have
Plan
B's,
but
I
think
what
really
really
important
here.
M
O
M
Institute
I'll
tell
you
this.
When
I
first
ran
in
2005,
the
police
charter
problem
was
something
I
ran
on
and
I
was
elected
and
I
ran
on
it
again.
Four
years
later
and
I
ran
on
it
again.
Four
years
later
and
my
voters
have
studied
it,
they've
talked
about
it,
they've
looked
at
it,
they
don't
understand
the
structure
and
they
see
that
it's
a
bad
structure
that
we're
operating
under
with
our
police
department.
M
M
Q
To
head
out,
but
I
did
want
to
just
jump
in
and
just
say
a
couple:
quick
things
impart
response
to
Commissioner
newborn's
question,
but
just
generally
to
that
I
think
how's,
my
record
speaking
specific
to
the
Charter
question,
but
I
think
in
a
lot
of
other
ways.
The
work
that
my
colleagues
have
been
describing
will
absolutely
continue
and
so
that
this
charter
question
is
one
important
piece
of
removing
some
specific
barriers
to
the
change
that
we
have
been
pursuing
and
will
continue
to
pursue
with
very
broad
support
in
our
community
and
I.
Q
Think
the
cup
becomes
council
members
come
for
Ellison
and
Connor
who've
spoken
about
the
ways
in
which
we
engage
with
our
communities
as
elected
representatives
of
our
boards
is
really
important.
I've
heard
a
few
questions
that
that
sound
like
we
haven't
taken
time
or
we
haven't
heard
from
people,
but
we
sit
through
many
many
hours
of
public
hearings.
You
know
on
a
bi-weekly
basis,
hearing
from
our
community
we
attend
neighborhood
meetings.
Q
So
I
like
councilmember
Goren,
who
do
not
expect
that
to
change.
I
do
not
expect
people
to
forget
the
deaths
of
George
Floyd
or
the
death
of
Jamar
Clark.
We
will
continue
to
pursue
change
with
every
mechanism
available
to
us,
even
if
the
Charter
continues
to
limit
our
authority
and
our
ability
to
do
so.
D
D
G
Great
my
question
actually
was
on
for
council
member
bender,
but
if
she
is
leaving,
maybe
councilmember
Gordon
can
answer
it,
but
I
want
to
start
with
a
couple
of
things.
You
know
I'm
a
firm
believer
in
the
office
of
violence
prevention
under
Mayor
Belton
I
ran
a
Southside
initiative
that
focused
on
elements
of
intervention,
prevention,
re-entry
diversion
jobs
and
training,
and
it
led
over
the
eight
years
to
a
73
percent
reduction
of
crime.
G
G
Money
and
I
would
like
to
think
that
you
know
I
would
like
to
see
some
stats
on
the
enterprise,
the
entire
enterprise
and
what
residents
that
is
in
the
entire
enterprise,
because
you
know
the
law
we've
had
to
planning
and
seed
had
people
that
lived
in
st.
Paul
and
I
know
a
lot
of
regulatory
service.
People
live
out
in
Minneapolis,
so
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
look
at
the
entire
enterprise.
As
far
as
that
goes,
are
you
hearing
me
I.
M
G
Didn't
know
if
it
was
going
through,
so
my
question
goes
back
to
an
earlier
conversation
about
the
enterprise
and
business
plans
and
how
you
don't
have
any
input
on
business
plans,
and
so
what
I
was
going
to
ask
councilmember
bender
is
to
describe
the
process
of
working
with
the
chief
to
create
an
annual
business
plan,
and
does
that
happen
with
the
mayor?
Does
it
happened
with
the
mayor
and
councilmember
Connell?
G
M
Well-
and
this
plan
is
nomenclature
that
hasn't
been
that
popular
with
most
recent
mayor.
So
that's
a
sort
of
a
term
that
Steven
Bo
Sakurai
think
brought
forward
or
even
before
that
with
our
tier
I
back
in
the
previous
coordinator,
but
they
also
developed
usually
by
the
departments
and
I,
will
say
it's
very
unique
to
the
police
department
because
they
aren't,
even
when
they
come
in
with
their
plan.
M
There's
no
opportunity
for
the
council
to
give
them
direction
that
they
actually
are
compelled
to
comply
with
to
change
their
business
plan,
unlike
others
and
some
people.
Some
times
years.
We've
been
good
about
having
five
year
plans
to
move
forward
on,
but
those
plans
are
much
more
actively
looked
at
by
the
council,
where
they
can
actually
have
an
impact
and
a
structure
around
them.
M
So
typically,
I
assume
that
Chiefs
talked
to
the
mayor
and
the
mayor's
office
about
those
plans,
but
they
tend
not
to
reach
out
to
the
councilor
and
talk
to
them,
because
the
Charter
basically
cuts
the
council
out
of
that
process.
So
we
can
use
our
bully
pulpit
when
we
hear
about
it
and
we
can
try
to
get
them
to
come
and
speak
with
us
and
those
things.
But
it's
just
a
little
bit
different.
G
M
R
I
can,
if
I
can
jump
in
I
do
an
offer
a
little
bit
of
a
different
answer
to
that,
which
is
that
we
have
through
the
budget
process,
which
is
the
lever
that
we're
able
to
use
under
the
current
order,
created
a
set
of
metrics
for
each
department,
including
the
police
department.
They
get
reported
in
the
sort
of
initial
run
up
to
the
budget
process.
R
D
I
Currently
the
sixth
Ward
has
no
representation
on
the
council
and
it's
one
of
the
highest
crime
areas
in
the
city
and
right
now,
there's
no
process
for
them
to
give
any
input
or
feedback
other
than
just
writing
an
email
to
you
or
that
and
I'm.
Just
saying,
okay,
I
come
from
the
land
of
NRP.
We
had
to
have
public
hearings
to
move
$10,000
we're
talking
about
defunding,
the
police,
department
and
I.
Think
that
deserves
more
than
one
public
hearing.
I
think
it
deserved.
I
When
they
redesigned
the
community
engagement
process,
they
had
a
huge
meeting
at
the
Armory
and
they
had
the
easels
and
the
dye
that
maquas
see.
They
did
all
of
that
to
redesign
community
engagement,
I
think
redesigning
Public
Safety
and
the
police
department
deserves
at
least
that
effort
at
least
that
effort
before
us.
The
borders
need
a
stamp
perform.
This
and
six
warrant
has
no
representation,
so
whatever
they
think
doesn't
really
matter,
and
it
should
matter
and
I'm
just
saying
I
believe
this
process
is
going
too
fast.
I
I
C
R
R
In
a
rec
center
somewhere,
I
think
that
it's
very
important
that
we
don't
underestimate
the
value
of
actually
asking
the
voters
what
they
think
and
if
we
haven't
done
the
outreach
work
and
if
people
feel
like
they
don't
understand
what
they're
voting
for
and
there's
not
a
plan.
By
the
time
we
get
to
November,
then
many
of
them
will
vote
no,
and
that
would
be
a
logical
outcome
if
it
turns
out
that
we've
rushed
this.
R
But
we
are
not
rushing
the
process
of
redesigning
and
reimagining
the
police
department
we're
going
to
reimagine
the
police
department
over
a
year
long
process
with
extensive
community
engagement,
we're
going
to
announce
the
steps
in
that
on
July
24th.
When
staff
come
back
to
us
with
an
initial
proposal
for
how
to
begin
moving
things
forward,
it's
going
to
be
long.
R
We're
talking
about
so
I'm
agreeing
with
the
spirit
of
your
question
but
I
do
want
to
separate
the
question
of
the
charter
amendment
from
the
question
of
the
transformation
of
the
police
department,
because
we
are
reimagining
Public
Safety,
and
that
is
actually
not
what
we're
asking
the
Charter
Commission
to
consider
today.
Thank.
H
H
But,
like
cameras,
are
what
I'm
hearing
right
now
is
that
and
I'm
mostly
concerned
about
the
vulnerable
communities
that
council
member
kind
of
has
talked
about
that
they
are
very,
very
divided
and
so
I
fear
that
if
they
remain
divided
this
ballot
as
it's
this
amendment
as
it's
structured
now
may
fail
and
we
want.
We
want
a
change
in
the
culture
and
in
the
way
we
do
things
in
this
city
as
much
as
you
do,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
we're
doing
what's
right,
and
so
my
question
is,
which
is
much
more
specific,
is?
H
Are
you
willing?
Might
you
be
willing
to
accept
a
different,
a
substitute
amendment?
I,
don't
know
if
we're
gonna
have
one,
but
just
I
would
just
like
to
know
what
you're
thinking
about
that
in
particular.
Could
we
divide
the
the
big
key
components
of
your
amendment
so
that
the
voters
could
have
a
chance
to
vote
number
one
on
a
new
Department
and
number
two
on
a
change
in
the
power
structure,
the
governance
structure
of
the
police
department
or
the
larger
Department.
C
Thank
you
for
the
question,
commissioner.
I
guess
I'll
keep
my
answer
short.
The
short
answer
is
I.
Guess
it
would
depend
on
on
the
amendment
or
the
substitution
rather
I
apologize,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
so
it'll
depend
on
the
substitution,
but
I
don't
know
that
we'd
be
open
to
any
substitution.
That
is
just
simply
no
longer
the
thing
that
we're
here
to
work
on.
H
R
I
think
I'd
be
reluctant
to
respond.
Commissioner
Rubinstein,
without
you
know,
seeing
how
you
structured
that
question
I.
You
know.
I
certainly
think
that
each
of
the
problems
that
we
set
out
to
solve
our
problems
that
we've
identified
that
we
think
are
significant
and
our
problems
that
we
think
you
know,
need
a
solution
and
that
in
many
ways,
they're
intertwined
and
I'm
not
sure
how
separable
they
would
be.
I.
Think
you
know
if
you
merely
solve
the
you
know
the
the
problem
of
the
supervision
language
without
solving
the
problem
of
the
the
reporting
structure.
R
R
Maybe
we
could
fix
it
by
just
doing
a
half-measure,
make
sure
that
you
really
have
thought
through
the
consequences
of
that
and
and
certainly
anything
that
the
Charter
Commission
brings
forward.
I
think
will
give
careful
consideration
just
as
you're
giving
us
careful
consideration
in
this
process
and
I
appreciate
your
work.
Could.
M
I
just
note
on
that
issue
in
terms
of
what
we've
presented,
we
worked
long
and
hard
on
the
pieces
and
the
elements
of
that.
So
the
items
that
we
chose
to
repeal
were
really
important
to
the
whole
design
and
the
items
that
we
decided
to
put
back
were
really
important
and
we
were
able
to
get
12
of
us
to
reach
consensus
over
that
after
hours
and
hours
of
discussion
and
actually
consultation,
while
so
internally
with
other
staff
and
with
representatives
from
the
community.
M
D
K
Mr.
chair
I'm,
sorry
this
is
Jurek's
and
the
the
council
members
have
have
answered
questions.
What
they've
also
added
some
commentary
and
I
I
would
just
ask
for
an
opportunity
to
to
clarify
some
things
as
I
asked,
early
and
I
think
other
commissioners
that
may
want
to
clarify
some
things
should
have
an
opportunity
that
we
don't
we
rarely
get
to
at
meet
with
the
council
members.
So
I
would
just
ask
you
for
a
few
minutes
so
that
I
could
do
that.
K
K
Thank
you,
so
I've
been
working
on
police
oversight
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
since
2012,
so
my
conscious
is
pretty
clear
and
I
think
I'm
pretty
level-headed
and
knowing
the
pain
that's
out
there
and
knowing
what
the
situation
is
with
really
bad
cops
that
we
have
in
Minneapolis
and
what
has
happened
to
George
Floyd
and
the
murder
of
George.
Floyd
has
also
put
a
pit
in
my
stomach
and
I
know
the
the
pain.
So
our
you
know,
I
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
know
that
was
mentioned.
K
That
was
that
we
have
to
check
our
privilege
and
I
struggle
with
that,
because
not
with
checking
privilege
but
I
struggle
with
saying
that
we
need
to
check
our
privilege,
because
we
have
we
have
to
have
this
election
now
if
we
wait
till
next
year
that
that's
somehow
privileged
well.
If
in
the
year
we
spend
meeting
with
the
community
doing
the
things
that
you've
all
talked
about,
barbecues
and
and
other
events
that
is
helping
the
community
process
through
this
and
helping
us
get
to
the
details,
that's
going
to
be
helpful.
K
P
Mr.
clay
I
believe
that
that
was
a
specific
comment,
I
made
about
making
sure
that
we're
checking
our
privilege
when
we
say,
let's
delay,
let's
wait
their
response
and
the
answers
and
the
actions
can
happen
next
year
or
the
year
after
the
year
after
that,
I
think
it's
actually
not
a
question
of
why?
Why
not
now?
But
it's
more
of
like
why.
Why
should
we
wait
a
year
when
we
know
that
people
are
hungry
for
the
change
and
when
we
know
that
so
many
people
are
dissatisfied
with
our
system,
so
hungry.
P
We
want
them
to
take
that
vote
with
us
in
November
as
a
community.
It
is
the
deepest
move
in
democracy
to
allow
our
residents
to
consent
to
a
new
system.
That's
what
this
process
is
about
consent.
We
want
our
community
to
make
this
choice
affirmatively
with
us
for
us
and
together.
It
would
not
make
sense
for
us
to
delay
a
year
to
ensure
that
we're
having
all
of
the
privileged
conversations
that
people
feel
they
should
have
in
a
moment
where
communities
are
feeling
that
the
change
is
now.
P
The
time
is
now-
and
you
know
what
I'm
not
afraid
of
the
question,
not
passing
in
November-
that
it's
not
something
I'm
afraid
of
that
is
a
communal
decision.
We
will
make
as
a
community,
and
if
that
is
the
answer,
then
that
is
the
answer,
and
then
we
take
different
a
different
set
of
decisions
and
a
different
process
that
you
know
will
ensue.
Afterwards.
We
shouldn't
be
afraid
of
anything
failing
in
November.
P
We
should
be
actually
feeling
empowered
that
our
community
is
being
invited
to
vote
on
a
very
important
and
significant
issue
this
year
and
I
would
say
that
many
communities
are
ready,
that,
for
many
of
our
residents
are
voters
and
our
constituents
they
are
looking
at
us,
as
this
is
overdue.
This
is
delayed.
What
has
taken
you
so
long
to
get
here,
and
that
is
actually
a
lot
of
the
messages
that
I
get
as
the
chair
of
Public
Safety.
Who
again
was
deeply.
P
D
You
I'm
gonna
say
we're
done
for
tonight.
People
can
follow
up
as
they
see
fit
with
individual
council
members
or
that
our
workgroup
can
go
ahead
and
ask
a
more
formal
list
of
questions
later.
If
we
have
follow-up,
this
is
this.
Is
it
for
our
business
tonight?
Our
next
meeting
is
a
public
hearing
which
is
July
15th
a
week
from
tonight
at
5
p.m.
to
receive
public
comment
on
the
proposed
amendment.