►
From YouTube: November 4, 2020 Charter Commission
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Good
afternoon
welcome
to
the
live
broadcast
of
our
virtual
meeting.
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13
d
.021
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic
for
the
record,
I'm
barry
clegg,
I'm
the
chair
of
the
charter
commission.
E
F
F
C
B
B
A
C
F
A
F
C
B
E
A
A
F
F
B
B
B
Second,
I
note
that
the
vote-
the
total
vote
for
the
city
of
minneapolis,
was
approximately
and
will
casey
carl
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong
235
000
votes.
B
B
So
we'll
move
on
to
item
five,
and
that
is
the
government
structure
work
group
report
I'll
turn
it
over
to
the
co-chairs,
commissioner
abbott
and
commissioner
garcia.
Do
you
have
a
report
for
us
today.
A
Yes,
I
think
commissioner,
garcia
has
put
together
a
document
if
she
wants
to
proceed.
D
We
had
our
last
meeting
in
which
we
presented
a
draft
work
plan
with
some
dates:
the
clerk's
office,
the
city
clerk,
put
together
the
a
date
timeline
of
what
of
the
implications
of
putting
forth
a
charter
amendment
next
year.
D
So
we
then
went
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
revised
the
work
plan
according
to
those
dates
provided
then
we
at
our
last
meeting.
We
also
had
a
discussion
about
values
that
we
would
like
to
uphold
when
looking
at
a
structure
concerning
the
the
mayor
and
the
city
council,
and
we
will
be
presenting
those
values.
F
D
Adoption
at
tomorrow's
meeting,
as
well
as
the
revised
work
plan
and
the
revised
work
plan,
has
a
little
bit
more.
Oh
just
a
little
bit
more
of
a
description
of
what
we
would
cover
at
each
meeting.
B
Garcia
commissioner,
garcia
for
those
who
are
listening,
would
you
tell
us
expressly
when
the
the
next
meeting
is?
You
said
you
mentioned
it
was
tomorrow.
D
P.M
and
the
agenda
in
everything
that
speaks
to
that
meeting
will
go,
will
be
out
on
limbs
and
where
is
the.
F
F
E
I'll
start
with
mentioning
that,
since
our
last
full
commission
meeting,
we
had
some
other
guests
join
us
at
the
work
group
meeting.
One
was
the
commissioner:
the
division
of
the
minnesota
department
of
human
rights,
who
gave
a
presentation
on
the
status
of
their
investigation
of
the
city
of
minneapolis
police
department
and
the
following
week.
We
had
guests
from
the
division
of
racial
equity
in
the
city
of
minneapolis,
and
so
those
were
our
last
guests.
E
In
view
of
the
fact
that
our
90-day
review
period
is
just
about
up
you'll
see
in
the
chat,
a
memo
which
I
I
think
you
all
got,
but
it
was
just
to
summarize
what
happened
in
our
meeting
on
monday
and
essentially
what
we
we
started
discussing
the
two
substitute
amendments.
One
was
a
proposal
to
eliminate
the
minimum
funding
provision
from
the
charter
and
the
other
was
to
create
a
new
charter
department
of
community
safety
and
violence
prevention
similar
to
the
city
council
amendment.
E
But
with
more
clarity
regarding
the
separation
of
powers
and
of
course
you
could
go
into
detail,
but
instead
I'll
just
say
that,
with
after
noting
our
great
appreciation
of
two
commissioners,
commissioner
abedin
and
chair
clegg
who
brought
forward
these
proposed
substitute
amendments,
we
decided
not
to
go
forward
with
those,
but
simply
to
exercise
the
other,
the
other
option
in
our
statutory
obligation,
which
was
to
approve
or
reject
the
city
council
amendment.
E
We
voted
to
reject
the
city
council
amendment
and
in
terms
of
these,
to
propose
substitute
amendments
rather
than
vote
on
those
or
present
those.
At
this
time,
we
felt
that
there
was
there
were
pieces
of
information
that
we
would
need
and
and
events
happening
in
the
next
few
months,
that
could
greatly
affect
any
work.
We
did
on
a
an
amendment
to
the
charter
regarding
public
safety.
E
The
work
of
the
government's
structure
work
group,
a
lawsuit
against
the
city
regarding
the
minimum
funding
provision
in
the
charter,
a
staff
study
which
was
had
not
yet
been
completed,
and
potentially
either
a
petition
by
citizens
or
further
city
council
action.
So
with
all
those
options
before
us,
it
seems
that
we
would
rather
reconvene
if
needed,
perhaps
in
the
spring
in
time
to
propose
an
amendment
for
the
november
2021
ballot.
F
No
chair
rubenstein,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
the
written
report
that
you
provided
in,
providing
the
the
update.
I
have
nothing
else
to
add.
We
provided.
Yes
thank.
E
F
Okay,
are
there
any
police
on
this
public
safety
work
group
or
is
it
just
charter?
Commission
members.
F
E
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
failed
to
mention
that
we
will
have
the
the
summary
that
we
provided
for
today's
meeting
was
just
a
brief
summary
to
describe
our
meeting
on
monday.
We
do
intend
to
provide
a
full
report
for
the
commission
at
its
december
meeting
and
we
shall
have
another
meeting
of
the
work
group
on
november
17th
at
4
30
to
go
over
a
draft
report
at
that
time.
B
Thank
you.
Does
everyone
understand
that
the
plan
is
that
we
would
formally
respond
to
the
council
proposal
this
evening
that
our
response
would
be
conveyed
to
the
council
and
that
our
rationale
would
be
set
forth
in
a
written
report
which
the
work
group
is
working
on
and
will
be
before
us
at
our
december
meeting.
F
B
I'm
going
to
take
that
as
a
motion
by
the
work
group,
which
does
not
require
a
second
as
it's
a
motion
of
the
committee
and
now
would
be
the
time
if
anybody
would
like
to
propose
either
that
the
commission
accept
the
council
proposal
or
that
the
commission
substitute
propose
a
substitute
for
the
council
proposal.
B
B
F
F
F
F
B
Eyes
that
motion
is
adopted
and
the
charter
commission
has
rejected
the
proposed
city
council
amendment.
I
would
ask
the
clerk
the
clerk
to
forward
notice
of
our
rejection
to
the
city
council
in
accordance
with
the
statute.
B
B
C
C
Okay,
so
we
we
don't
have
anyone
else
other
than
charter
commissioners
and
staff
who
are
with
us
in
this
meeting.
I
am
not
aware
of
anyone
who
had
signed
up,
so
I
don't
have
anyone
in
queue.
Mr
chair,
great.