►
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).
A
A
B
B
D
Begin
good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
this
virtual
meeting
of
the
charters
commission's
public
safety
work
group.
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
state
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
endemic
for
the
record.
My
name
is
tony
newborn
and
I
am
one
of
the
co-chairs
of
the
charter
commission's
public
safety
work
group,
tony
newborn
and
andrea
rubenstein.
We
are
the
chair
of
this
committee.
I
will.
E
F
A
D
C
B
D
Let
the
record
reflect
that
we
have
a
quorum.
We
will
now
proceed
with
our
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
was
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
available
at
lens.minneapolismn.gov.
D
D
That
we
have
a
proper
motion
before
us.
Is
there
any.
D
F
C
D
D
C
First
of
all,
I
realized
that
this
is
the
a
new
beginning
of
an
old
project,
and
so
I
wanted
to
take
this
opportunity
first
to
thank
very
much
the
members
of
the
city,
clerk
staff
and
the
members
of
the
city
attorney
staff,
who
have
been
so
incredibly
helpful
to
us
in
the
past
few
weeks,
and
we
expect
we'll
be
off
asking
a
lot
more
of
you
as
we
go
forward.
C
I
also
if
it's
not
too
presumptuous
want
to
thank
the
members
of
the
charter
commission.
This
has
been
a
rather
intense
and
difficult
few
weeks
and
I
hope
it
will
ease
up
a
little,
but
in
any
event,
it's
a
bit
intense
and
difficult.
C
So
thank
you
is
due
to
all
of
you,
as
you
may
have
noticed,
we
have
a
guest
at
our
meeting
today,
deputy
chief
eric
force
of
minneapolis
police
department
has
graciously
agreed
to
serve
as
a
liaison.
G
C
From
the
web
oops
sorry
about
that
to
service
a
liaison
with
this
work
group
and
he
will
be
attending
our
meetings,
he
agreed
at
the
request
of
casey
carl
to
come,
help
us
with
our
evaluation
and
research
and
review
process
as
we
go
forward,
and
mr
carl
had
also
pointed
out
that
there
are
a
couple
of
items
of
responsive
data
or
information
that
we're
looking
at
and
there
may
be
more
in
the
future.
C
C
Fifth,
there's
a
key
suggested
that
we
receive
a
presentation
about
the
police
department's,
current
operating
structure,
divisions
and
the
function,
services
of
each
division,
funding
and
funding
sources,
staffing
levels
and
so
on
and
finally
details
about
the
outcome
and
effects
of
the
2019
co-responder
pilot
program,
and
I
listed
all
those
things
just
to
give
us
that
information,
but
also
to
suggest
that
we
may
have
other
requests
in
the
future.
C
Meanwhile,
deputy
chief
force,
if
there's
anything
you
want
to
address
from
us
today,
you
will
be
most
welcome,
we'll
put
that
in
the
agenda,
but
we'll
be
meeting
for
a
while,
and
so,
if
you
feel
you
need
more
time
to
make
those
presentations.
That's
fine
too,
and
I
also
wanted
to
ask
the
other
commissioners
that
they
have
questions
or
data
requests
to
add
to
the
list.
This
is
something
that
we
will
leave
open.
C
With
help
from
mr
carl,
we
calculated
that
the
60
days
initially
to
review
a
proposed
charter
amendment
which
began
on
july
1st,
is,
is
still
ongoing,
essentially,
and
the
fact
that
we
had
to
cut
off
that
initial
part
of
the
review
early
was
because
of
the
printing
deadline,
not
because
60
days
it
needed
to
be,
and
at
that
point
otherwise,
and
so,
if
you
take
those
60
days
and
then
add
the
90
extension
which
we
have
now
requested
and
are
acting
on,
that
takes
us
to
november
27th.
C
As
for
the
work
to
be
done,
we're
still
essentially
working
on
the
city
council
amendment
and
we
should
expect
to
have
a
report
and
recommendation
by
that
november
27th
deadline
and
also
at
that
time,
to
recommend
stops
that
we
might
take
to
lead
up
to
the
to
the
november
2021
ballot.
Should
we
decide
to
make
a
proposal
about
that?
D
Thank
you
so
much,
commissioner
rubenstein,
commissioner
rubenstein,
and
I
had
a
discussion.
You
know
in
preparation
for
this
meeting
about.
You
know
our
desired
outcomes
of
this
public
safety
work
group
and
when
we
discussed
at
our
last
large
commission
meeting,
you
know
there
are
some
discussion
points
about.
You
know
are
what
what
will
our
role
be?
What
will
be
the
outcome
of
this
report
and
how
can
we
make
sure
that
it's
it's
going
to
be
meaningful?
D
You
know
one
from
from
my
perspective.
You
know
what
I
would
like
to
see
and
I
hope
that
the
group
concurs
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
have
a
discussion
about
this.
Is
that
you
know
we
have
this
this
time
period
to
create
a
report
and
and
not
have
something
that
is.
D
You
know
just
a
report
that
the
the
council
will
file
and
maybe
the
mayor
will
file
and
somewhat
do
a
cursory
review,
but
a
report
that
would
be
meaningful
and
helpful
to
the
city
council
to
the
mayor's
office
to
the
city
as
a
whole,
and
you
know
ultimately
to
our
residents
that
could
be
potentially
used
as
a
part
of
creating
that
structure
for
what
public
safety
would
look
like
for
the
the
city
of
minneapolis.
D
And
so
you
know
for
from
my
perspective,
hoping
that
this
this
report
would
be
one
that
would
would
be
valuable.
And,
of
course,
I
think
that
all
of
our
interest
is
is
there
and
alliance,
and-
and
we
want
to
all
see
that
I'm
grateful-
that
we
have
a
police
liaison
here
to
help
inform
us
about
the
the
work
of
the
police
department.
D
But
I
one
of
the
the
topics
that
and
points
of
discussion
that
commissioner
rubenstein
and
I
mentioned-
was
some
opportunity
to
hear
from
other
key
department
staff
across
the
city
that
have
touch
points
with
the
police
department,
such
as
the
civil
rights
department,
the
office
of
police
conduct,
review
the
the
office
or
division
of
race
and
equity.
D
I
also
see
this
as
an
opportunity
for
us
to
you
know:
there's
been
a
lot
of
tension
around
with
the
city
council
members,
especially
the
ones
that
authored
the
proposal.
This
could
be
a
place
where
we
take.
You
know-
and
these
are
my
words-
a
higher
road
in
in
establishing
partnerships
and
relationships
with
the
the
council
and
inviting
them
also
to
this
to
speak
at
this
work
group
to
help
us
in
putting
a
report
together.
D
So
we
wanted
to
save
some
time
to
get
some
some
feedback
about
that
and
find
out.
You
know
from
the
rest
of
the
this
commission
on
this
work
group.
You
know
what
your
interest
level
is
as
well,
and
your
desired
outcome
so
wanted
to
open
up
the
the
discussion
about
and
briefly
about
what,
how
we
envisioned
this
working
and
how
and
what
outcomes
we
intend
in
with
this
report,.
C
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Newborn
I'm
going
to
move
us
if
there's,
if
there's
no
other,
no
comments
to
item
two
of
the
agenda,
which
is
a
discussion
of
the
charter,
commission's
role
and
responsibilities.
C
H
I'd
be
happy
to
start,
as,
as
I
think
everyone
knows,
there
are
basically
four
ways
to
amend
the
charter,
all
of
them
flow
through
the
charter
commission,
and
I
think
our
role
is
slightly
different
for
each
route.
H
I'm
going
to
set
aside
for
a
minute
the
amendment
by
ordinance
and
that's
an
amendment
where
the
charter
commission
approves
it
all
13
city
council
members
approve
it
and
the
mayor
approves
it.
Usually
those
are
technical
in
nature
and
to
conform
with
state
law.
So
I'm
going
to
set
that
aside.
There
are
three
other
ways
the
charter
can
be
amended.
The
first
is
by
citizen
petition.
H
If
a
petition
is
signed
by
five
percent
of
the
people
of
the
voters
in
the
last
general
election
citizen
petition
can
forward
an
amendment
to
the
ballot.
Our
role
is
very
limited.
As
the
charter
commission
for
citizen
petitions,
we
basically
accept
the
petition
we
transmit
it
to
the
clerk's
office
and
the
clerk
verifies
the
number
of
signatures,
and
it
then
for
gets
forwarded
to
the
city
council
to
be
put
on
the
ballot
we
have
taken
it
upon
ourselves.
H
H
The
second
way
that
amendments
can
be
put
on
the
ballot
is
by
the
charter
commission,
acting
on
its
own
motion.
That
is
perhaps
where
we
have
the
most
discretion
and
also
the
most
responsibility
to
ensure
that
a
charter,
a
charter
amendment
is
consistent
with
good
standards
and
is
appropriate
to
go
on
the
ballot
and
an
example
of
that
would
be,
for
example,
the
plain
language
charter,
when
the
charter
commission
over
11
years,
rewrote
the
entire
city
charter
and
placed
it
on
the
ballot
in
2013,
where
it
was
overwhelmingly
approved.
H
The
third
way
an
amendment
can
get
on
the
ballot
starts
at
the
city
council
and
that's
what
this
is.
The
city
council
can
propose
an
amendment
if
the
city
council
proposes
an
amendment,
it
goes
first
to
the
charter,
commission
and
the
charter
commission
has
up
to
150
days.
I
think
we
all
know
how
this
works
by
now
up
to
150
days
to
either
approve
that
amendment
to
propose
a
substitute
amendment
or
to
reject
that
amendment
notwithstanding
what
the
charter
commission
does.
H
Even
if
the
charter
commission
rejects
a
proposed
amendment
by
the
city
council,
the
city
council
can
nevertheless
put
that
amendment
on
the
ballot
after
the
charter.
Commission
makes
its
determination
the
city
council
can.
If
the
charter
commission
has
proposed
a
substitute
amendment,
either
put
the
substitute
amendment
or
its
original
amendment
on
the
ballot.
H
If
the
charter
commission
either
approves
or
rejects
the
proposed
amendment
of
the
city
council,
the
city
council
can
put
it
on
the
ballot
subject
to
the
veto
of
the
mayor.
That's
when
it's
after
the
charter
commission
review
that
a
proposed
amendment
would
go
back
to
the
city
council
and
then
would
be
subject
to
possible
veto
and
possible
override
by
the
mayor.
So
that's
where
we
are
with
respect
to
this
particular
amendment.
H
We
are
in
the
position
where
we've
elected
to
take
our
full
150
days,
and
our
conclusion
at
the
end
will
be
an
explanation,
but
also
we
will
either
approve
the
amendment.
We
will
propose
a
substitute
amendment
or
we
will
reject
the
amendment
if
we
propose
a
substitute
or
reject.
I
imagine
we
would
file
a
written
report
explaining
our
action.
C
C
We
already
talked
about
this
in
the
first
phase
of
our
review,
but
we
don't
really
have
the
means,
for
instance,
to
conduct
a
survey
of
the
voters
of
minneapolis
to
see
how
they
feel
we
do
have
the
means,
of
course,
to
have
public
hearings,
and
we
did
that
we
probably
don't
have
the
budget
or
the
means
to
hire
consultants
to
tell
us
what
to
do,
although
we
certainly
have
the
means
and
authority
and
have
done
so
to
request
information
from
various
departments
of
the
city
to
collect
research
and
that
sort
of
thing.
C
H
No,
it's
a
good
segue
in
my
remarks
that
I
made
on
august
5th.
I
talked
about
what
I
thought
were
some
of
the
considerations.
The
charter
commission
should
take
into
account
when,
when
deciding
whether
or
not
an
amendment
is
appropriate
for
the
general
election
ballot-
and
I
came
up
with
five-
and
there
may
be
more
than
that
for
any
particular
proposed
charter
amendment-
and
there
may
be
unique
considerations
for
for
unique
proposals,
but
I
think
every
proposal
to
go
on
the
ballot
has
to
pass
these
five
tests.
H
The
first
one
being.
Is
it
germane
to
the
charter,
and
by
that
I
mean,
is
it
dealing
with
the
form
and
substance
of
city
government?
You
remember
that
the
15
an
hour
minimum
wage
was
determined
not
to
be
germaine
to
the
charter.
Can
the
city
regulate
the
conduct
of
private
employers?
Yes,
but
not
in
the
charter,
that's
appropriate
for
an
ordinance.
So
that's
what
I
mean
by
that.
H
The
second
consideration
that
I
have
anyway
is:
is
the
proposal
well
considered
or,
as
we
sometimes
say,
on
the
charter
commission?
Is
it
fully
baked?
Has
the
proposal
undergone
significant
public
discussion
and
has
there
been
significant
input
both
from
the
public
and
all
stakeholders
with
respect
to
the
proposed
amendment?
Third,
is
the
amendment
clear
and
concise?
H
An
amendment
should
not
be
vague.
For
example,
I
would
oppose
a
charter
amendment
that
would
say
the
city
must
adequately
fund
x
because
adequately
is
not
clear
and
concise
and
would
be
the
subject
of
endless
litigation.
As
somebody
who
wanted
more
funding
would
say,
that's
not
adequate
and
others
would
say
it's
it's
in
excess
of
adequate.
So
I
would
want
an
amendment
to
be
clear
and
concise.
H
H
H
Finally,
is
the
proposal
consistent
with
state
law?
Obviously,
everything
in
the
charter
has
to
be
consistent
with
state
law
and
we
need
to
undertake
a
review
of
proposed
amendments
to
ensure
that
they
are-
and
I
think
I
would
consider
adding
a
sixth
plank
the
gender
plank
to
that,
which
is,
is
the
amendment
necessary
to
accomplish
the
intended
objective?
H
If,
if
we
can
accomplish
the
intended
objective
without
amending
the
charter,
I
would
prefer
to
do
that
generally
than
amend
the
charter
if
it's
not
necessary.
So
those
are
the.
Those
are
the
elements
that
I
would
consider
when
making
our
decision
and
I
think
to
for
us
to
accept
an
amendment
proposed
by
the
city
council.
The
amendment
would
have
to
pass
all
of
those
tests
if,
if
we
reject
an
amendment
proposed
by
the
city
council,
because
it
fails
one
of
those
tests,
we
should
lay
that
out
in
our
report.
H
D
Question
for
for
sure
clegg,
with
so
kind
of
thinking
out,
commissioner
rubenstein
and
I
were
talking
about
how
we
were
envisioning
this
the
standard
or
practice
that
you
just
laid
out,
and
I
see
it
kind
of
as
an
attorney
similar
to
creating
a
prima
facie
case.
So
a
a
test
or
a
standard
that
we
follow
when
reviewing
decisions
like
this
and
usually
you
know
whether
it's
codified
in
the
law
or
it's
a
standard
of
review
for
the
for
the
court.
D
I
I
would
be
really
interested
in
in
writing
this
out
and
making
this
a
part
as
an
appendix
or
supplement
to
our
rules
so
that,
as
we,
you
know
for
us,
it's
a
helpful
tool
but
also
as
new
commissioners
come
in,
and
there
may
be
some
confusion
around
the
our
role
and
kind
of
standard
of
review.
We
could
have
that
as
a
tool
to
refer
back
to.
D
H
H
Maybe
there's
another
work
group
in
our
future
to
go
through
these
and
make
sure
we're
not
missing
anything,
make
sure
that
we're
all
thinking
along
the
same
lines,
but
one
reason
this
is
difficult
is
because
the
statute
doesn't
give
any
reasons
for
doesn't
give
us
any
factors,
so
we're
basically
on
our
own
here
to
decide
what
we
think
is
relevant
in
determining
whether
to
move
an
amendment
forward
or
not.
I
think
these
are
the
best
standards
to
use,
but
these
would
be
our
standards.
C
C
I
also
had
been
again
talking
with
commissioner
newborn
about
how
this
maybe
well
now
it
will
be
another
work
group
putting
together
the
standards,
but
as
some
as
some
of
the
lawyers
in
the
room
know
when
we
have
rules
of
court,
we
have
the
the
black
letter
rules
and
then
we
have
advisory
notes
that
follow
that
add,
more
clarification
or
explanation
or
source
of
these
rules,
and
obviously
we
don't
have
source
other
than
our
own
common
sense
at
this
point,
but
it
would
also
be
useful
not
only
in
preparing
the
standards,
but
in
our
discussion
last
week
during
our
full
commission
meeting,
we
had
a
lot
of
people
raised
other
or
connected
or
related
thoughts
about
applying
these
standards,
and
those
could
be
in
some
kind
of
advisory
comments
to
follow
it.
H
H
I
think
that
every
amendment
would
have
to
pass
these
tests,
but
a
new
amendment
on
some
completely
different
topic
might
cause
us
to
think
and
say:
hey
here
are
some
things
that
are
particular
to
this
topic
and
we
need
to
add
additional
tests
to
consider.
So
I
think
this
would
be
sort
of
a
universal
group
of
standards,
but
there
could
be
more
specific
standards
for
different
amendments
down
the
road
as
well.
H
C
C
C
J
C
D
Thank
you.
No
there's,
no
other
discussions
on
that,
not
sure
if
we
needed
to
to
formally
create
a
a
work
group
or
if
that's
a
larger
group
discussion
around
this.
But
I
I
really
like
the
the
this
idea
and
and
movement
towards
creating
standards
of
review.
K
Let's
go
ahead.
Okay,
I
wanted
to
talk
a
little
bit.
Is
that
I
think
that
at
times
we
may
need
to
have
more
information
on
what
the
city
can
provide
for
us,
or
some
other
group
could
provide
for
us,
and
I
think
that
you
know
if
we
really
need
to,
we
could
ask
other
foundations
or
other
groups
to
fund
something
that
we
may
need
in
this
particular
case.
K
When
I've
been
talking
to
many
consultants
through
the
international
city
managers,
which
I'm
a
member,
they
point
out
that
not
only
do
we
need
to
talk
about
what
is
going
on
as
to
the
type
of
public
safety.
We
want
the
future,
but
we
really
need
to
find
out
where
the
prison
police
department
is
and
there's
a
study
going
on.
I
think
I
don't
know
if
it's
starting
yet
or
not,
but
we'll
do
that.
K
We've
had
already
a
9-1-1
study
which
gives
us
some
ideas
of
that,
and
but
there's
no
study
really
or
any
getting
it
right
down
to
the
public
and
finding
out
where
they're
coming
from
we've
seen
recently,
some
some
opinion
polls
in
the
minneapolis
newspaper,
but
that's
not
really
talking
to
the
people,
and
so
I
thought,
if
we
needed
to,
we
could
go
and
ask
foundations
for
money
to
go
ahead
and
provide
such
a
standard,
as
would
be
recommended
by
some
of
the
consultants
that
I've
talked
to
anyway.
Thank
you.
C
Do
you
think
that
if
we,
if
we
pursued
that
suggestion
that
might
be
more
appropriate
for
going
forward
after
november
27th
to
consider
what
we
might
do
for
the
2021
ballot.
K
L
C
Should
we
talk,
should
we
talk
about
the
item
2.3
on
the
agenda?
First
substitute.
D
Yes!
Sorry
about
that!
So
we're
moving
to
item
2.3
potential
for
substitute
or
alternative
proposals.
D
Sorry
and
my
phone
just
went
on
mute.
I
think
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
this
before
and
commissioner
interior
rubenstein.
Is
this
a
discussion
to
to
go
into
more
detail
about
the
substitute
proposals
or
the
the
the
type
of
report
that
we
want
to
submit.
A
D
Great,
it
looks.
H
If
I
could
yes,
I
would
just
say
that
it's
entirely
possible
that
we
would
consider
a
substitute,
and
so
I
think
that
is
just
as
likely
as
any
of
the
other
alternatives
and,
for
example,
what
comes
to
mind
to
me
is
right.
Now
the
department
or
the
division
of
violence
prevention
is
not
a
city
is
not
a
charter
department.
H
We
may
we
may
decide
that
a
worthy
substitute
would
be
to
make
that
a
charter
department
which
we
could
propose,
but
I
imagine
that
whether
we
approve
substitute
or
reject
we're
going
to
write
a
report
explaining
our
decision
and
conclusion.
H
D
M
You
know,
as
I
indicated
on
august
5th,
I
have
some
issues
with
the
council
proposal
that
actually
really
don't
go
to
the
question
of
its
authority
over
over
police
matters
more
to
the
division
of
power
between
the
mayor
and
the
council
and
some
of
the
specific
details,
and
I'm
I'm
I'm
actually
kind
of
contemplating
working
on
a
substitute
with.
M
Basically,
I
think
of
it
as
the
juror
isaacson
amendment
plus,
in
the
sense
that
it
would
structurally
give
the
council
the
power
to
to
do
what
it
wants
to
do,
but
but
leave
some
of
the
some
of
that.
What
I
view
as
kind
of
extraneous
subject
matter
out
of
it
and
kind
of
strip
it
down
to
its
to
its
essence,
and
I
think
I
would
like
to
introduce
that
at
some
point
and
related
to
that,
I
think
you
know
we.
M
One
of
the
questions
that
we
should
address
is
how
central
the
council
part
of
this.
You
know
the
relationship
between
the
council
of
mayor.
How
central
is
that
to
the
council's
proposal?
I
think
we
ought
to
have
some
public
hearing
on
the
council
versus
the
mayor
issue
as
opposed
to
some
of
the
general
police
reform
stuff,
and
if
we
could
build
that
into
the
schedule,
I
think
that
would
be
a
good
thing.
M
I
would
like
to
get
my
substitution
relatively
soon
and
if
we
can,
I
mean
I
think,
if
we
leave
the
substitute
discussion
to
the
end,
it's
going
to
get
jammed
up
and
won't
get
discussed,
which
is
unfortunately
what
happened
in
the
initial
process.
We
only
had
35
days
from
you
know,
july,
1st,
to
august
5th,
and
I
just
and
that
just
there
wasn't
really
any
time
to
discuss
substitutes
at
that
time
and
I
think
the
earlier
we
build
in
the
process
or
substitutes
the
better.
D
Commissioner
abbott,
thank
you
so
much.
I
have
a
a
clarifying
question
just
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
your
substitute
amendment
or
proposal
that
you're
discussing
would
that
be
a
part
of
and
with
the
police
structure.
That
would
be
directly
connected
to
the
the
council's
proposal,
or
I
know
there's
been
some
talk
about
having
that
discussion
about
the
roles
of
council
and
the
mayor
and
the
sort
of
the
government
structure
and
the
powers
to
be
a
separate
discussion
of
the
of
the
commission.
D
M
Well,
I
I
think
the
the
the
council
mayor
issue
is
something
that's
important
to
me.
It's
one
of
the
reasons
that
I
got
under
the
charter
commission.
To
begin
with.
Why
I
applied-
and
I
think
it's
I
think
it's
I
mean
I
think
the
council
proposal
kind
of
bites
off
more
than
it
can
chew
when
it
kind
of
takes
on
both
of
the
both
of
the
elements
in
the
room
at
once.
So
my
concept
is
to
kind
of
script
the
police
part
down.
M
I
mean
I,
I
think
it's
a
legitimate
issue
for
the
people
to
be
able
to
vote
on
on
allowing
police
reform.
I
mean
to
me.
I
view
the
council
proposal
essentially
like
two
giant
proposals
in
one
thing
and
I
and
I
want
to
separate
them,
I
think
it'd
just
be
easier
to
deal
with
both
politically
and
as
a
matter
of
democracy,
and
you
know
so
I
mean
I,
my
substitute
would
be
a
kind
of,
I
think,
a
leaner,
meaner
version
of
the
council
proposal.
M
I
guess
is
what
I
would
say:
I'd
like
to
have
some
some
some
runway
for
that
proposal.
So
great.
D
Thank
you
that
was
helpful.
Thank
you
so
much,
commissioner.
I
believe
that
commissioner
sandberg
has
a
comment.
G
Thank
you
not
necessarily
about
commissioner
abbott's
proposal,
but
just
in
general,
I'm
assuming
we
will
leave
the
door
open
to
possible
substituted
amendments.
I
mean
we
can
either
say
yes,
no
or
substitute.
G
C
I
just
wanted
to
add
to
what
you
just
said
this
this
the
general
subject
of
the
shift
in
power
that
was
proposed
in
the
city
council
amendment
and
what
we
might
do
with
that
is
still
kind
of
a
burning
issue,
as
as
commissioner
abbott
has
noted,
and
we
we
talked
about
that
and
consulted
with
casey
carl
and
chair
clegg
about
how
we
might
handle
that
this
in
the
in
the
next
three
months
or
going
forward.
I
Certainly,
madam
chair
and
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
clarify,
check
me
if
I'm
off
track,
but
during
our
initial
discussions
about
the
results
of
the
feedback
from
the
full
charter
commission
at
its
special
meeting
last
week,
where
this
question
of
the
structure
or
form
of
government
was
raised
as
a
possible
supplemental
or
secondary
issue
that
was
raised
by
the
current
proposal
submitted
by
the
council.
It
seemed
like
this
subject
matter.
I
A
form
of
government
certainly
would
be
something
that
this
work
group,
which
is
focused
on
the
current
proposal
about
the
future
of
public
safety
submitted
by
the
council.
This
work
group
could
certainly
propose
back
to
the
full
commission.
Yes,
something
should
be
looked
at
or
evaluated.
That
question
is
something
that
has
merit,
and
the
charter
commission
is
a
larger
body
should
consider
if
it
wishes
to
have
that
discussion
itself.
I
I
It's
obviously
open
to
to
substituting,
but
that
the
nature
of
the
substitute
might
be
very,
very
large
if
it
is
getting
into
the
form
of
government,
and
that
might
be
a
larger
question.
The
charter
commission
wishes
to
take
up
separate
from
this
current
issue
somewhat
akin
to
the
idea
that
the
standards
chair
clegg
and
others
have
identified
both
in
the
august
12th
discussion
and
today,
again
are
something
that
are
relevant
to
this
group's
work,
but
are
also
beyond
and
continuing
past
it
and
that
that
might
be
a
recommendation.
I
This
group
makes
back
to
the
full
charter
commission
that
a
group
should
be
established
to
look
at
that
and
report
back.
C
Thank
you,
mr
carl,
and
I
would
add
it
is
such
a
big
question,
an
issue
that
I
would
feel
very
uncomfortable
about
trying
to
fit
it
into
these
three
months.
When
there's
no
good
reason.
We
have
to
include
that
in
our
report,
in
response
to
the
city
council
amendment
and
every
good
reason
to
spend
more
time
on
it,
if
we
so
choose
to
do
so
and
have
ample
time
for
public
hearings
and
the
like,
knowing.
A
D
All
right,
I
believe,
thank
you
so
much
chair,
rubenstein,
chair
clay,.
H
Thank
you,
I
was
gonna,
say
some
of
what
chair
rubenstein
just
mentioned,
and
that
is
that
to
respond
on
the
council's
proposed
public
safety
amendment,
we
have
to
respond
by
the
end
of
november.
If
we're
considering
something
dealing
with
the
form
and
structure
of
government
that
is
not
subject
to
that
november
deadline.
H
We
would
not
propose
as
a
substitute
amendment.
I
don't
think
something
dealing
just
with
the
form
and
structure
of
government.
I
think
any
proposed
substitute
would
be
on
the
same
subject
as
the
council's
proposed
amendment,
and
if
we
want
to
talk
about
form
and
structure,
I
would
recommend
starting
another
work
group.
You
can
volunteer
for
two.
If
you
want
to
discuss
this
subject
and
continuing
that
discussion
as
long
as
we
need
to.
J
Perry,
yes,
I
just
want
to
quick
say
that
I
think
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
get
in
the
same
bind
that
we
did
before
when
we
had
much
less
time
to
work
with
because
of
the
council's
timeline,
where
we
start
working
on
substitute
motions
before
we've
done
the
all
the
research
that
commissioner
rubenstein
talked
about
at
the
top
of
this
meeting,
I
mean
we
have
a
long
list
of
stuff
that
we
need
to
look
into,
and
I
think
that
should
inform
what
we
what
come
comes
out
of
a
substitute
motion.
J
If
there
is
one
I
mean
we
may
end
up
not
doing
one,
but
if
there
is
one,
I
think
it's
informed
by
the
the
research
work
that
we
do,
and
that
was
one
of
my
arguments
for
voting
to
extend
the
time
that
we
we
were
going
to
take
as
a
commission.
D
D
Okay,
carry
on
should
we
move
to
the
next
portion
of
the
agenda.
Commissioner,
rubenstein.
C
The
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
a
timeline
and
initial
work
plan
and
of
course,
we've
already
talked
about
our
november
27th
deadline
for
review
of
the
city
council
amendment,
our
brainstorming,
and
particularly
in
the
in
the
full
commission
meetings
as
well
as
our
other
work
group
meetings,
has
led
to
a
daunting
list
of
items
for
research
and
data
collection,
and
on
top
of
that
we
have
a
long
list
and
we
still
haven't
even
developed
it
to
any
extent
of
the
people
that
we
should
speak
to
or
consult
with
all
the
way
from
city
staff
and
different
departments
to
to
other
jurisdictions,
to
community
groups
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
C
C
The
time
is
just
too
short
to
do
that,
and
so
one
thing
we
need
to
do
is
make
a
list
of
of
people
or
our
roles
that
as
people
positions
of
people
we
want
to
consult
with,
and
then
we
need
to
decide
on
which
ones
might
have
priority
on
which
ones.
We
would
like
to
ask
to
come
to
our
workgroup
meetings
to
talk
with
all
of
us.
C
C
That
was
the
process
we
followed
when
we
looked
at
the
2018
amendment,
at
least
in
part,
and
also
when
we're
working
on
the
plain
language
charter.
We
divided
up
and
talked
to
various
members
of
the
city
council,
in
particular
to
get
their
feedback
and
their
ideas
about
moving
the
plain
language
charter
along.
So
it's
something
we've
done
in
the
past
and
can
do
and
it's
a
way
of
accomplishing
all
the
tasks
that
we
want
to
accomplish
by
november
27th.
C
So
I
wanted
to
ask
the
members
of
the
work
group
first
of
all
to
for
suggestions
as
to
if
to
the
extent
we
don't
have
them
yet,
and
we
have
many
as
to
whom
we
want
to
ask
to
speak
and
then
also
which
people
are
more
appropriate
for
coming
to
our
work
group
meetings
and
and
others
for
whom
we
can
contact.
C
You
know
mostly
on
our
on
our
own
time
offline.
As
long
as
we
report
back
everything
that
we
discovered
and
just
to
get
us
started.
C
We
might
also
want
a
meeting
in
the
work
group
about
the
legal
barriers
to
police
reform
and
and
what's
what's
what
can
be
accomplished
by
a
charter
change
of
any
and
that
might
involve
the
new
city
attorney
who's
just
come
on.
I
think,
is
just
coming
on
next
week
and
maybe
somebody
from
the
police
conduct
oversight,
commission,
those
are
just
ideas
and
that
those
seem
to
be
people
that
we
want
to
meet
with
as
a
group.
But
then
there
are
others
that
we
may
not.
H
I
think
we've
got
a
pretty
good
group
who
can
do
legwork
as
needed,
but
it
would
help,
I
think,
move
things
along
and
we
don't
have
enough
time
not
to
move
things
along
to
have
the
two
co-chairs
say:
okay,
clegg,
you
go
update
the
research
that
we
did
in
2018
and
have
it
done
by
next
thursday
seriously.
Not
tomorrow,
and
you
know
we
it's
fine
to
say
well.
The
here
is
a
discreet
task
and
we'll
put
it
out
and
see
who
volunteers.
H
But
if
nobody
volunteers,
we
still
need
to
get
the
work
done.
A
C
I'm
certainly
willing,
if
commissioner
newborn
is
and
by
some
strange
coincidence,
we've
already
made
a
big
list
of
names
and
and
organizations.
So
we
can
work
in
that,
but
we,
I
would
still
leave
it
there
way
it's
open
to
suggestion
right.
If
there's
anything
people
want
to
add,
and
we
could
get
that
out
to
everybody.
F
K
The
reason
I'm
talking
about
the
legal
barriers,
somehow
we
need
to
know
what's
in
the
union
contract,
I
think
the
contract
is
going
to
be
a
major
legal
barrier
and
the
more
we
know
about
that
contract
and
how
it
might
be
changed
would
be
very
helpful.
C
Commissioner,
I
think
it's
already
on
our
research
and
reference
list
in
limbs
right
very
good,
so
that
will
be
helpful.
Thank
you.
J
Yes
now
I
do
have
a
comment,
so
what
I
was
good.
I
know
you
and
commissioner
newborn
have
worked
out
a
schedule
for
us
to
meet.
I
was
going
to
sort
of
suggest
sort
of
a
modification
given
that
chair
clegg
is
suggesting.
You
guys
push
us
around
that.
D
I
and
my
work
schedule
is
picking
up,
and
so
I
I
definitely
hear
that
we
may
need
to
do
that
starting
starting
out
and
then
maybe
for
this
first,
maybe
for
the
first
month.
I
I
for
me
I'd
be
interested
in
that
and
then
taper
off
to
every
other
week,
but
I'm
you
know
it's
not
just
me.
That's
on
the
committee
want
to
hear
from
some
other
folks
some
other
commissioners
about
that,
and
I
see
that
commissioner
kozak
has
his
hand
raised.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chairs.
I
guess
I've
been
listening
and
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
exactly.
E
E
I
don't
think
we
have
the
ability,
as
we
all
know,
to
come
up
with
the
magic
potion,
how
we're
going
to
change
the
culture
of
the
minneapolis
police
department.
That's
beyond
our
our
ken.
We
have
neither
the
resources,
nor
do
we
have
the
power
to
affect
very
much,
and
I
think
we
need
to
confine
our
efforts
to
the
charter
itself.
E
There's
a
lot
of
thing
and,
and
it's
a
hard
thing
to,
because
every
time
you
come
up
with
an
idea,
you
say
now.
That
really
is
something
that
is
really
up
to
the
mayor
or
up
to
the
council
or
up
to
the
for
both
of
them.
But
again
I
don't
know
yet
what
does
the
charter
allow
us
to
do
to
further
the
idea
of
reforming
the
department
changing
the
culture
so
that
it
does
what
I
think
most
everybody
wants
to
do
and
what?
E
E
E
So
I
I'm
I'm
still
tr
struggling
with
trying
to
come
up
with
a
way
to
focus
our
efforts
so
so
that
we
can
get
done
what
we
need
to
get
done
by
november
27th
and
maybe
a
if
we
can
figure
out
a
statement
that
here
are
the
four
three
or
four
things
that
we
need
to
focus
on
that
are
within
the
purview
of
the
chartered
commission.
E
Because
I
have
questions
myself
with
the
chief
here.
We
I'm
still
grappling
what
what
is
the
ideal
size
of
this
department.
We
have
half
the
the
power
on
this
in
city
hall,
saying
we
don't
need,
hardly
any
cops
and
we
have
the
chief
saying,
as
he
did
back
in
2019.
E
We
need
80
new
cops
a
year
and
I
don't
know
how
you
even
begin
to
to
grab
to
come
up
with
some
kind
of
a
solution
to
bring
those
two
sides
together,
but
that
may
not
be
within
within
our
scope
within
our
purview
to
to
be
examining,
because
it's
these
are
budgetary
decisions
so
anyway,
I
I
I
know,
I'm
I
feel
like
I'm
kind
of
rambling,
but
I'm
still
trying
to
struggle
with
exactly
what
are
we
trying
to
accomplish,
and
I
think
a
substitute
amendment,
this
previous
discussion
on
the
substitute
amendment.
E
That
makes
sense,
because
we
have
to
report
something
to
the
city
council
and
I
have
my
own
feelings
about
what
whether
a
substitute
is
appropriate
or
whether,
in
fact
we
have
sufficient
account.
All
we
have
to
do
is
reiterate
the
five
or
six
factors
that
barry
clegg
and
commissioner
ginder
have
laid
out
for
us.
But
anyway
does
it
make
sense
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at.
I
think
we
need
more
focus.
We
have.
E
We
have
too
many
questions
we're
trying
to
we're
trying
to
resolve
all
at
once,
and
we
have
to
confine
our
efforts
to
what
can
we
do?
What's
in
the
charter?
That's
an
obstacle,
and
what
can
we
do
to
make
the
charter
make
it
easier
for
the
mayor
and
the
council
in
in
the
department
to
function
in
a
way
that
we
want
a
reformed
operation,
public
safety
operation.
C
I'm
going
to
guess
that
there's
not
much
disagreement
with
what
you
just
said,
commissioner,
garcia.
L
L
This,
I
don't
want
to
be
too
touchy.
Feely
this.
You
know
I
wanna,
but
can
we
talk
about
the
legal
premise
because
I
don't
think
everything
has
to
be
a
barrier
that
blocks
what
we
want
to
do,
but
there
are
parameters
around
which
innovation
can
occur,
creativity
can
occur
and
collaboration
can
occur.
L
So
that
would
be
just
one
observation
as
far-
and
I
know
that
maybe
you
know
splitting
hairs
for
some,
but
I
think
language
can
convey
a
deeper
meaning,
meaning
as
far
as
the
stakeholders
and
other
people
to
perhaps
get
feedback
from
I'm
thinking
of
the
federation,
the
police
chief
and
the
mayor
specifically-
and
I
can
share
these
questions.
L
L
What
is
their
perspective?
As
far
as
some
good
work
being
done?
Have
there
been
some
really
good
conversations
with
officers
in
the
community?
I
know
a
few
years
ago
officers
were
really
involved
in
the
art
flow
up
on
the
north
side.
Are
there
volunteer
opportunities,
maybe
that
officers
could
have
in
the
community
to
kind
of
build
trust
in
relationships
also
and
from
whatever
point
of
view
they
come?
L
L
Can
officers
feel
her
potential
strategies
or
ideas
that
they
may
have
to
be
to
partner
in
this
program
and
they're
in
this
in
this
effort,
and
when
commissioner
kozak
was
talking
about
the
budget
really
looking
at
the
budget
as
a
holistic
approach,
commissioner
newborn
went
through
a
number
of
departments
that
we
can
you
know
been
to,
but
is
there
a
way
or
a
plan
that
the
budget
allocations
for
these
various
departments
can
all
come
at
this
issue
in
a
complementary
way?
L
L
Let's
have
the
pot
of
money
that
the
city
deals
with,
let's
look
at
it
strategically
and
if
it
gets
gets
divided
up
among
various
departments,
then
what
is
the
plan
or
the
approach
that
those
various
departments
plug
into
for
this
overall
issue?
The
city
council
talks
about
a
holistic
department.
Well,
let's
look
at
the
holistic
budgetary
issue.
N
Thank
you.
I
I've
been
looking
at.
You
know
some
of
the
the
requests
that
that
people
would
like
to
see,
and
I
have
been
today.
I've
been
working
with
people
and
trying
to
get
the
message
out
to
to
where
some
of
the
repositories
of
this
information
are
the
subject
matter.
Experts
are
and
and
working
to
to
gather
all
that
into
a
a
manner.
That's
easy
for
people
to
read
and
digest.
N
There's
a
is
kind
of
a
wide
variety
of
informational
asks.
One
of
the
questions
and
as
our
staffing
kind
of
our
staffing
and
departmental
structure
tends
to
be
in
flux
a
lot.
So
when
we
look
at
the
current
operating
structure,
divisions
and
staffing
things
like
that,
that
may
look
different
than
how
it
looked
five
months
ago
in
terms
of
having
to
collapse,
units
or
eliminate
functions
in
order
to
maintain
staffing
on
the
street.
N
So
I
think,
in
that
regard,
I
could
give
you
a
couple
versions
of
that.
I'll.
Give
you
an
idea
of
what
it
is
that
we're
what
what
our
function!
Our
structure
and
functions
look
like
today
versus
what
they
looked
like
at
the
beginning
of
the
year.
That's
going
to
be
somewhat
significant
when
we
talk
about
some
of
the
outreach
functions
that
that
were
performed
by
the
mpd
that
we've
recently
had
to
reallocate
resources
from.
N
We
had
some
fairly
robust
and
dedicated
units
toward
community
outreach
that
we've
had
to
sense
reallocate
resources
from
to
maintain
staffing
in
other
areas,
so
that,
like
I
said
that
kind
of
that
kind
of
flows
a
little
bit.
So
if
I
give
you
a
snapshot
in
time
as
to
what
it
is,
we
have
right
now,
it
may
not
be
indicative
of
what
we
were
doing
or
what
our
what
we
would
like
to
do
in
that
realm.
I
think
in
terms
of
handling
some
of
these
things,
it'd
be
good.
N
You
know,
as
you're
developing
the
meeting
plan,
to
see
if,
if
there's
specific
topics
for
each
different
meeting,
you'd
like
to
to
take
on
one
at
a
time
or
if,
as
as
these
as
this
data
and
this
information
becomes
available,
some
of
the
things
are
are
fairly
are
fairly
complete,
such
as
the
the
2019
co-responder
pilot
program.
I've
I've
talked
with
deputy
chief
weight,
who
kind
of
spearheaded
that
and
have
some
information
on
that
office
of
violence
prevention.
I
think
you
said
you'd
like
to
have
someone
come
in.
N
I've
worked
with
sasha
cotton
in
in
terms
of,
and
especially
around,
our
partnership
with
the
group
violence
intervention
so
that
that's
that's
kind
of
a
fairly
easy
conversation
to
have,
but
some
of
the
other
things
such
as
the
summary
of
reforms
we're
getting
that
together,
because
there's
a
series
of
things
that
the
chief
has
enacted
in
his
three
years
in
office
and
then
also
things
that
we're
enacting
now,
some
in
response
to
the
to
the
the
court
order
from
the
state
to
the
lawsuit
from
the
state
in
some
as
part
of
what
chief
erin
dondo
is,
is
enacting
and
changing
as
we
speak
in
order
to
to
to
move
the
mpd
forward.
N
So
that's
there's
a
lot
of
things
there
that
we
can
get
into
and
discuss
as
I
get
that
information
together
so,
like
I
said
as
we
move
forward,
if
there's
specific
specific
items
you'd
like
me
to
get
ready
for
the
next
meeting
or
to
provide
that
information,
I
can
focus
my
attention
on
those
things.
So
that
way
we
can
move
in
in
whatever
move
forward.
Whatever
process
you
want-
and
I
can
have
that
that
level
of
information
available
for
you.
C
Thank
you
very
much,
commissioner
metchi.
F
F
Just
now
so
moving
out
community
engagement
opportunities
out
of
the
police
department,
it
seems
like
it
might
be
kind
of
interesting
to
listen
to
charlie
adams
or
mark
lieutenant
mark
klutko
talk
about
pals
fight,
cops
for
kids,
the
stuff,
the
structured
stuff
that
they
do
and
the
methodology
behind
it
in
in
the
fact
that
it
is
done
to
build
relationships
with
young
people
to
eventually
diversify
the
police
department.
F
And
so
it
might
be
interesting
to
hear
that
component
at
one
of
our
meetings
and
then
with
commissioner
garcia's
comments.
I'd
like
to
put
out
that
mad
dads,
a
mother's
love
with
lisa,
clemens
and
st
stevens
could
come
as
a
team.
They
work
downtown
and
with
us
in
lorraine
park.
F
As
you
know,
part
of
my
job
in
loring
park
is
police
partnerships,
police,
community
partnerships
and
those
three
have
developed,
really
strong,
interesting
partnerships
with
the
police
that
folks
testified
about
having
and
so
to
listen
to
what
how
they
were
developed
and
what
is
going
on
and
what
they've
learned
through
it,
I
think,
would
be
also
very
helpful.
Just
I
mean
we're
doing
a
public
service
having
these
meetings
open
as
well,
and
so
people
are
listening,
then
they
get
that
firsthand
information
about
questions
that
were
raised
in
the
public
hearing.
Thank
you.
F
E
No,
it's
again,
okay!
Thank
you
go
ahead.
Thank
you.
This
is
something
that
is
kind
of
in
line
with
what
commissioner
metchy
said.
E
It's
clear
to
me,
since
this
whole
discussion
began
after
the
after
the
memorial
day,
tragedy
with
george
floyd
watching
the
city
council
and
the
mayor
and
the
department,
there
seems
to
be
a
struggle
and,
as
the
chief
just
met
reinforced,
the
outreach
functions
that
I
think
we're
growing
in
a
good
way
in
the
department,
because
I
I
know
some
of
the
people
involved
and
but
now
they've
had
to
pull
back
because
of
the
of
the
budget
constraints,
and
I
think
this
I
don't
want
to
contradict
what
I
said
before
about
trying
to
focus.
E
But
it
seems
to
me
that
one
of
the
things
that
a
charter
should
look
at
or
should
consider
is
what
do
we
want
this
department
to
look
like
and
it
goes
hand
hand
I
think,
with
what
the
idea
of
changing
the
culture
we
hear.
E
We
hear
that
all
the
time,
but
what
I
see
is
the
tendency
the
council
is
pulling
stuff
out
because
it
has
the
power
of
the
purse
pulling
stuff
out
of
the
department
sending
it
over
to
the
health
department
to
that
new
division
of
violence
prevention
is
that
something
we
should
be
concerned
about.
Is
that
something
that's
within
the
purview
of
the
minneapolis
charter,
trying
to
define
what
we
want?
The
police
department
has
such
to
do
what
I
fear
the
more
stuff.
E
What
we
consider
community
policing
outreach,
the
pro
the
things
that
jana
mentioned,
the
the
police
athletically
the
bike
program.
E
All
these
things,
the
more
we
pull
out
we're
going
to
end
up
with
a
very
department
that
a
lot
of
its
critics
say
we
don't
want
and
that's
the
only
function
is
going
to
be
the
warrior
function
and
the
more
you
get
outside
the
department
these,
where
they're,
going
to
share
responsibilities,
whether
it's
responding
to
the
the
correspondent
idea.
E
That
I
know
is,
there's
a
program.
That's
going
right
now,
but
those
kinds
of
things
are
we
going
to
keep?
Are
we
going
to
keep
them
within
the
department
or
is
all
that
stuff
going
to
get
shipped
out
to
this
new
department?
The
new
division
in
which
some
people
want
to
make
into
a
charter
department,
and
then
you
have
two
different
lines
of
authority,
sometimes
with
the
same
incident,
and
is
that
is
that
the
right
way
to
go
or
not?
I
and
the
answer
to
that.
E
I
don't
know
I
have
some
suspicions,
but
is
that
the
kind
of
thing
we
should
be
discussing,
because
it
seems
to
me
that
is
the
fundamental
issue
we're
facing
right
now
in
this
in
this
city,
is
what
the
department
is
going
to
look
like,
and
that's,
at
least
in
part,
should
be
our
responsibility
to
look
at
because
otherwise
it's
and
it's
going
to
be
a
dynamic
between
the
mayor
and
the
council
at
all
anyway,
no
matter
what
we
decide,
but
is
that
something
we
should
look
at
in
that
we
can
subsume
a
lot
of
these
other
questions
into
that
one,
big
question,
and
so
we
a
meeting
we
can
combine
some
of
these
questions
and
that
would
be
the
overall
thing.
E
What
do
we
want?
What
kind
of
department
do
we
want?
What
are
the
functions
we
want
in
the
police
department
and
what
functions
can
be
moved
should
be
moved.
Someplace
else.
L
Thank
you,
commissioner,
rubenstein
to
commissioner
kozak's
statement
about
what
the
what
the
department
will
look
like.
I
think,
president
of
what
is
listed
in
the
charter
about
other
charter
departments
would
be
appropriate,
but
invoking
the
commissioner's
app
commissioner
abbott's
theory
is
that
the
charter
does
does
not
hold
it's.
It's
not
a
method
for
ordinance
or
policy.
L
So,
looking
at
what
the
department
would
look
like.
Yes,
as
perhaps
part
of
the
reports,
but
realizing
that
whatever
is
in.
However,
it's
listed
in
the
charter,
it's
listed
the
same
relative
to
all
other
charter
departments.
If
that
makes
sense,
so
I
think
we
ought
to
keep
policy
recommendations
such
as
what
the
department
will
look
like
in
the
appropriate
format.
As
in
the
report,
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that.
L
F
It's
the
charter
commission
meeting,
but
I'm
it's
I'm
I'm
on
nate.
Oh,
make
sure
that
your.
D
D
Oh
hi,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
everyone's
phones
or.
D
Uh-Oh
is
it
if
there
is
a
way
for
us
to
to
mute
one
of
our
commissioners
using
teams.
D
Great,
thank
you
so
much
so.
The
last
item
on
our
agenda
is
next
steps
and
I
think
there's
some
decision
points
that
we
need
to
make.
As
far
as
how
often
we
we
meet
and
it
sounds
like
there
are
some
commissioners
who
are
open
to
meeting
on
a
weekly
basis.
D
I
put
into
the
chat
that
I
would,
if
we
did,
we
need
to
meet
at
a
slightly
later
time,
just
because
of
of
work,
and
so
I
think
possibly,
commissioner
rubenstein
and
I
could
connect
and
and
figure
out
how
the
the
next
meeting
structure
and
time
is
going
to
take
place.
But
we
have
some
interest
in
folks
being
available
to
meet
on
a
weekly
basis,
and
we
want
to
be
cognizant
of
that.
D
We,
you
know,
there
are
folks
who
are
our
commissioners
who
are
working
and
and
don't
want
to
take
up
too
much
of
your
time
and
making
commit
the
commission
try
to
commission
your
life.
But
this
is
an
important
topic
and
we
are
close
on
a
timeline.
So
I
think
we
will
decide
how
the
how
often
in
the
the
kind
of
flow
of
that
or
battle
rhythm,
so
to
speak,
of
what
we're
going
to
do
moving
forward.
D
As
far
as
the
meetings,
it
seems
that
that
there
may
need
to
be
a
discussion
and
commissioner
and
chair
rubenstein,
and
I
could
have
a
discussion
around
the
scope
of
of
this
work
and
and
and
the
role
again
a
little
bit
of
that
conversation
around
the
role
of
this.
This
work
group
and
the
charter
commission,
and
what
our
desired
outcomes
will
be.
D
We
have
we
have
a
long
list
and
and
a
lot
of
stakeholders
that
we
want
to
include
in
this
work,
and
so
it
seems
as
if
we
need
to
you
know,
talk
about
narrowing
the
the
scope
or
just
figuring
out
what
the
scope
should
be,
and
I
think
the
the
next
steps
of
this,
along
with
how
often
we're
meeting
is
who
we
are
inviting
to
the
meetings
to
to
provide
presentations.
A
D
Those
are
the
things
that
I
have
listed
as
as
sort
of
next
steps.
Commissioner
rubenstein,
do
you
want
to
add
to
that
as
well?.
C
Thank
you,
I
think
you've
covered
it
pretty
well,
I
would
add
only
that
this
meeting
was
sort
of
meant
to
be,
although
we've
been
meeting
up
for
the
last
few
months
or
month
anyway,
we,
this
is
kind
of
a
new
beginning
and
it
seemed
important
to
put
down
some
parameters,
and
I
think
we've
done
that
and
it's
very
helpful,
a
lot
of
the
things
that
have
been
raised.
We've
already
thought
about,
and
we
will
we
will
put
it
to
paper
so
that
people
can
see
it
and
we
can
go
from
there.
D
D
Great
hearing,
no
objection
given
that
it's
5
27
during
this
meeting.
Thank
you
all
so
much
for
your
input
and
insight
and
have
a
good
night.
Thank.