►
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
B
Good
afternoon
welcome
to
this
virtual
meeting
of
the
charter
commission's
government
structure
work
group.
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic.
For
the
record,
my
name
is
greg
abbott.
I
am
one
of
the
co-chairs
of
the
charter
commission's
government
structure
work
group.
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
D
A
E
B
Let
the
record
reflect
that
we
do
in
fact
have
a
quorum.
We
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
limbs.minneapolismn.gov
commissioners.
The
agenda
for
today's
meeting
is
before
us.
May
I
please
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the.
F
B
There
is
a
motion
and
a
second
is
there
any
discussion
before
the
clerk
calls
the
role
on
the
agenda.
F
F
B
That
motion
passes
and
the
agenda
is
adopted
item
three
on
the
agenda,
which
we
have
we've
obviously
gotten
through
items
one
and
two
I'm
getting
some
feedback.
B
We've
obviously
gotten
through
items
one
and
two,
the
roll
call
and
the
adoption
of
the
agenda
item
three
on
the
agenda
is:
is
the
purpose
and
parameters
of
the
government
structure,
work
group
we're
going
to
review
the
purpose
and
parameters
opportunities
to
improve
the
government
structure
of
the
city
of
minneapolis?
B
And
let
me
just
give
you
kind
of
a
I
think
for
this
item
on
the
agenda.
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
two
things,
which
is
the
scope
of
our
review
and
the
timing
and
deadlines
that
we
face
for
our
review.
B
As
I
understand
it,
this
was
referred
to
us
by
the
commission
as
a
whole
in
response
to
some
discussions
that
came
out
of
the
public
safety
work
group,
specifically
with
respect
to
the
question
of
the
the
balance
between
the
mayor
and
the
city
council
with
respect
to
some
of
the
government
structure
and
operations,
and
so
we
are
we've
had
some.
You
know
I
had
some
preliminary
discussions
with
commissioner
garcia
about
you
know
kind
of
a
larger
scope,
but
I
don't
know
that
we
have
the
mandate
to
do
that.
B
So
I
don't
know
that
we
have
a
mandate
to
talk
about
a
city
manager
or
city
coordinator
option
or
some
of
the
other
more
exotic
structure,
proposals
that
have
kicked
up
in
the
past.
We're
we're
looking
at
kind
of
the
balance
between
the
mayor
and
the
council,
and
I
don't
know
if
chair
clegg,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
any
thoughts
on
this
or
anything
to
add.
A
B
Okay,
so
at
the
moment
we
are
working
on
a
mayor
council
element,
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
make
I'll.
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
that
effect.
The
scope
of
this
review
is
to
evaluate
the
the
relationship
between
the
mayor
and
the
city.
D
B
B
Absolutely,
and
I
think
that
I
think
that
a
motion
to
do
something
like
that
would
be
in
order
pretty
much
at
any
point
in
the
in
the
business
as
we
conduct
it.
So
with
that
caveat,
is
there
any
other
discussion
on
the
motion.
B
Okay,
hearing
no
discussion:
I
think
we
should
vote
on
the
motion.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
role.
G
F
C
E
B
Okay,
we
have
established
established
our
scope.
The
next
question
is
the
question
of
timing.
How
long
do
we
have
to
work?
What
is
the
deadline
for
our
work
product?
Presumably
our
work
product
will
be
either
a
recommendation
and
a
final
report
to
the
the
charter
commission
as
a
whole.
I'd
like
to
recognize
chair
clegg,
who
has
his
hand
up.
A
C
Chair
clegg,
yes,
I
believe
you
are
correct.
I
can't
commit
to
a
firm
date.
I
haven't
looked
out
that
far
ahead
at
this
point,
but
I
would
be
happy
to
put
pencil
to
paper
and
come
up
with
a
calendar
based
on
next
year's
general
election
in
november
and
have
that
available
to
members
prior
to
the
next
work
group
meeting,
so
that
there
is
a
known
timeline
to
address
as
part
of
the
work
plan.
A
B
Let
me
I
have
a
question
for
the
city
clerk,
which
is
we
have
there's
a
the,
as
I
understand
the
process
for
a
charter
amendment
that's
proposed
by
the
charter
commission
itself.
The
the
city
council
is
the
body
that
determines
the
final
language
that
goes
on
the
ballot
in
terms
of
description.
Is
that
correct?
B
C
B
B
If,
in
fact,
we
produce
a
proposed
charter
amendment
and
if
we
have,
if
we
include,
say
three
public
hearings,
that
would
probably
be
a
minimum
of
roughly
three
scheduled
meetings
or
three
months
for
the
charter
commission
as
a
whole
to
process
this,
which
would
take
us
back,
I
believe
to
maybe,
let's
see
june
may
april
so
april,
1st.
B
E
Commissioner
abbott,
I
think
at
this
point
it's
been
so
early.
That
sounds
fine.
I
think
we
can
have
something
pretty
pretty
open
and
just
keep
these
benchmarks
in
mind.
B
Okay,
I
mean,
and
obviously
this
is
tentative-
I
don't
think
we
need
to
have
a
motion
to
formally
adopt
a
a
tentative.
I
just
wanted
to
you
know,
for
the
purposes
of
trying
to
structure
what
we're
doing
here.
I
just
want
to
get
a
sense
of
what
the
schedule
looks
like.
I
personally
would
like
to
get
this
done
before
april
1st.
B
You
know
my
my
internal
clock.
I
feel
like
like
the
middle
of
january
or
middle
of
february,
might
be
a
more
realistic
goal.
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
be.
I
mean
I,
I
feel
some
sympathy
for
the
public
safety
work
group
because
they're
on
the
90-day
deadline,
I
mean
the
commission
as
a
whole
is
on
the
90-day
deadline
to
respond
to
the
council's
proposed
amendment.
We
don't
have
that,
but
I
don't
think
that
means
that
we
should
kind
of
loiter
around
aimlessly
until
the
last
minute.
B
So
so,
unless
anybody
has
any
further
comments
about
kind
of
adopt
that
as
kind
of
a
a
rough
guide
and
and
when
we
get
the
information
from
the
city
clerk,
I
think
we
can
kind
of
establish
a
more
more
direct
schedule.
B
I
think
that
covers
everything
under
purpose
and
parameters
of
the
government
structure.
Work
group,
the
item
three
on
the
agenda
is
anybody
else,
have
any
discussion
or
comment
on
item
three
of
the
agenda.
B
Okay,
I
think,
with
unanimous
consent
here
I
think
I'm
gonna
move
on
to
item
four
on
the
agenda,
which
is
a
work
plan
and
a
timeline
to
guide
the
review
evaluation
report
to
the
full
charter
discussions
about
the
overall
timing-
and
let
me
my
concept
on
a
work
plan
and
and
commissioner
garcia
and
I
have
kind
of
kicked
us
around
a
little
bit
in
preparation
for
the
meeting
and
cher
clegg.
Of
course,
we
is
also
kicked
around
with.
B
We
have,
I
think
some
I
I
think
we
have
some
areas
that
we
should
examine
and-
and
I
don't
know
if
we
should
dedicate
a
specific
session
to
each
of
these
topics
but
and
I'll
just
throw
these
out
as
topics
of
discussion.
In
terms
of
how
I
I
think
we
should
approach
this,
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
we
should
do
is
get
some
get
some
information
on
the
history
and
background
of
the
charter
as
it
exists.
B
B
As
I
understand
the
history
of
the
charter,
it
was
a
whole
bunch
of
state
statutes
were
governing
the
operation
of
minneapolis,
and
there
were
several
efforts
trying
codified
into
a
single
document
which
all
failed,
which
resulted
in
in
1920
an
adoption
of
a
of
a
charter
which
basically
just
took
all
the
language
from
the
state
statutes
and
threw
it
into
a
charter
and
was
therefore
adopted
as
the
as
the
city
charter
without
any
rhyme
or
reason
or
or
particular
forethought.
B
And
that
happened.
You
know
100
years
ago,
apparently
on
september
24th,
and
since
that
time,
we've
had
obviously
amendments
back
and
forth.
And
of
course
we
had
the
plain
large
plain
language
charter
amendment.
What
about
10
years
ago
now
and
seven
or
eight
years
ago?
I
guess
and
the
plain
plain
language
charter
amendment-
did
a
wonderful
job
of
of
cleaning
things
up
and
dealing
with
a
lot
of
the
archaic
craft
left
over
from
this
chaotic
historical
process.
B
But
I
I
do
think
the
one
the
one
issue
with
the
plain
language
charter
amendment
is,
it
I
think,
look
more
organized
than
it
really
is
and-
and
I
think
the
question
of
as
we
examine
the
balance
between
the
mayor
and
the
city
council
in
terms
of
legislative,
executive
authority
and
whatnot,
I
think
we
should
have
some
some
get.
Some
information
about
you
know
was
this
balance
that
we
have
now
intended.
What
was
the
purpose
of
it?
What
is
the
back?
You
know
how
you
know,
what
what
are
we
changing?
B
Are
we
interfering
with
some
sort
of
scheme
that
we
that
we
should
be
aware
of
before
we
propose
anything?
I
should
add.
Commissioner.
Metke
has
her
hand
up
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
recognize
commissioner
mecke
at
this
point.
D
Thank
you,
chair
abbott.
I
don't
mind
coming
in
after
you're
done
with
your
whole
presentation
if
you
want,
but
I
was
just
going
to
suggest
that
maybe
we
bring
in
former
commissioner
brian
melendez
to
talk
about
the
process
of
the
plane
charter
that
was
a
nine
to
ten
year
process
by
the
charter
commission
and
having
served
during
that
entire
time.
D
It
was
pretty
thorough
and
investigative,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
made
a
decision
on
was
whether
or
not
to
make
any
substantial
charter
changes
and
we
decided
not
to
to
just
focus
on
the
plane
charter
amendment
rewrite
with
non-substantial
changes,
but
we
also
said
that
we'd
be
willing
to
open
it
up
for
substantial
changes
and
public
hearings
once
we
were
through
and
that's
sort
of
like
where
we
are
now
looking
at
some.
Some
substantial
changes,
but
I
think
an
overview
by
brian
melendez
would
be
really
helpful.
B
Yeah,
I
agree
completely
and,
as
a
matter
of
fact
he's
he
was
on
my
list.
There
are
some
other
folks,
I
have
in
mind
too,
and
we
can
go
through
that.
I
I
mean,
obviously,
if
anybody
wants
to
propose
witnesses
feel
free
to
send
an
email
to
to
commissioner
garcia
and
myself
and
we're
gonna.
I
mean,
I
think,
we're
gonna
witness
this
information.
It's
not
really
sworn,
I
guess
from
a
legal
standpoint
but
yeah
let's.
I
think
I
think
there
are
a
number
of
people.
B
E
Yeah
I'd
like
to
perhaps
this
is
to
find
a
point
but
say
history
and
background
with
a
focus
on
the
mayor
council
structure,
because
we
could
go
down
a
rabbit
hole
I
think,
potentially,
because
it
could
be
potentially
very
fascinating,
but
to
look
at
it
to
keep
the
focus
on
the
mayor
council
structure.
E
Is
that
what
it's
always
been?
Have
other
options
been
considered
and
why
things
like
that.
B
Sure,
absolutely
I
I
think
that
is
a
good
clarification.
Commissioner,
ginder
you've
got
your
hand
up.
H
But
we
have
a
mission
who
were
present,
that
project
went
on
and
my
personal
experience
before
I
was
on
the
commission.
I
represented
the
city
for
the
entire
time
that
we're
putting
together
the
plain
language
charter,
so
the
putting
together
of
the
plain
language
charter.
H
I
think
you
know,
members
of
the
commission
can
explain
that
that's
different
from
the
history
of
the
relationship
between
the
mayor
and
the
city
council
and
when
we
did
our
work
a
couple
of
years
ago,
on
the
first
council
amendment,
we
did
some
work
on
relationship
and
the
amendments
that
touched
upon
the
relationship
between
the
city,
council
and
the
mayor,
but
there
is
also
a
long
history
of,
for
example,
the
league
of
women
voters
and
work
that
they
did
20
years
ago.
H
Proposing
a
strong
mayor
system
is
the
history
of
when
don
frazier
was
in
and
changed
the
executive
committee.
So
there's
a
long
history
of
how
that
relationship
plays
out.
That
is
probably
this
is
much
a
research
topic
is
trying
to
have
somebody
explain
the
various
factions
of
what
went
on
during
the
last
100
years.
It's
so
I'm
just
kind
of
throwing
that
out.
B
No,
and-
and
I
should
say
I
agree
completely
with
the
idea
that
we
should
talk
about
some
of
the
proposals.
You
know,
I
think
some
of
the
additions
and
amendments
that
were
done
in
the
fraser
era.
I
think,
are
worth
talking
about
too.
So
I
think
that's,
I
think.
That's
all
all
should
be
included.
Commissioner
excuse
me,
chair
clegg
has
his
hand
up
chair
clegg.
A
Yes,
thank
you.
I
was
going
to
suggest
that
we
all
take
a
look
at
eric
nathanson's
book
minneapolis
in
the
20th
century.
The
first
chapter
or
two
is
all
about
the
history
of
the
charter.
A
When
that
book
was
first
published,
I
got
permission
to
reproduce
the
first
chapter
and
give
copies
to
all
charter
commissioners,
and
some
of
you
who
have
been
serving
long
enough
will
remember
getting
copies,
but
I'm
going
to
take
that
permission
as
still
existing
and
I'll
I
can
print
out
more
or
or
we
can
all
share
copies.
A
But
that
is
a
very
detailed
history
of
what
went
on
leading
up
to
1920
about
the
various
proposals
that
failed
and
about
charter
history.
Since
1920,
including
mayor
frazier's,
effort
to
to
change
a
charter
in
the
early
80s
successfully.
Ultimately,
I
think
there
might
be
limited
value
in
talking
about
the
plain
language
charter,
because
we
were
very
careful
during
that
entire
process,
not
to
affect
the
relationship
between
the
mayor
and
the
council.
A
So
I
I
don't
think
there
were
any
substantive
changes
as
it
relates
to
the
relationship
between
the
mayor
and
the
council.
But
I
think
we
would
all
learn
something,
even
if
we've
read
it
before
from
taking
a
look
at
the
history
of
the
charter,
because
there
was
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
some
of
the
efforts
that
failed
before
1920
were
basically
a
strong
mayor
system.
So
I
think
it
would
help
us
to
gain
some
perspective.
B
Yes,
that
sounds
excellent.
I
I
would.
I
would
imagine
that
we
should
get
some
copies
of
that
printed
out
distributed
is,
is
the
book
available
for
sale
shark
leg,
I
mean?
Is
it
amazon?
Can
you
get
it
on
amazon
or
is
it.
A
I
just
called
it
up
and
apparently
it's
15
and
84
cents.
Yes,.
A
B
Well,
if
any,
I
would
suggest
if
any
members
of
the
work
group
or
other
commissioners
want
to
review
a
copy
and
and
don't
want
to
buy
the
whole
book
that
they
contacted
chair
clegg
and
see
if
we
can
generate
a
few
copies
of
our
own.
But.
B
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
actually
had
a
very
similar
suggestion,
so
I
that
is
when
I
joined
the
charter
commission.
I
found
a
number
of
articles
by
eric
nathanson
in
mnpost
on
the
the
hennepin
county
at
hennepin
history,
museum
magazine
and
other
places
that
also
talk
about
the
history
of
the
charter.
So
I
just
wanted
to
add
that
to
chair
click's
suggestion
I
just
googled
him
and
those
those
articles
are
available
online.
B
Very
good,
we'll
we'll
make
that
a
point
of
getting
those
articles
for
ourselves
online.
B
Okay,
that
is
item
one.
I
think
for
my
work
group
plan
item
two
on
my
my
work
group
concept.
We
should
get
some
information
about
the
current
operation
of
the
sit
structure
of
the
city.
I
think
it
would
be
useful
to
talk
to
both
current
city
staff
and
elected
officials
on
how
the
current
structure
works,
how
the
current
balance
between
the
council
and
the
mayor
works.
You
know,
and
I
mean
we
all
have
lived
in
minneapolis
for
a
long
time.
B
I
think
we
all
have
kind
of
a
maybe
a
superficial
sense
of
how
it
all
works
or
what
a
strong
council
system
looks
like,
but
I
think
we
should
start,
maybe
with
the
schoolhouse
rock
version
of
of
how
things
happen
in
minneapolis
and
maybe
dive
in
a
little
deeper
from
that.
B
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
to
know
what
we're
what
we're
reacting
to
or
what
we're
what
our
proposals
will
affect
in
the
current
operation,
and
I
don't
know
if
anything,
anybody
has
any
good
ideas
for
people
to
come
in
and
talk
to
us
about
that.
Certainly,
our
city
clerk
would
be
helpful.
I
imagine
if
he
would
wanna
make
a
presentation,
but
any
if
there's
anybody
else,
I'm
more
than
willing
to
listen
to
suggestions.
D
I
was
just
gonna
suggest
that
maybe
maybe
a
few
city
clerks
we
could
talk
to,
because
my
observation
in
working
in
neighborhoods
for
30
years
is
that
that
relationship
is
really
dependent
upon
the
leadership
and
the
folks
at
the
time,
and
so
different
examples
from
different
administrations
might
be
very
helpful
and
interesting.
B
Yeah
I
agree
I
I
I
would
think
that
we
would
want
to
talk
to
people
are
actually
doing
the
nuts
and
bolts
of
this
I
mean,
I
think
it's
easy
to
talk
to
I
mean
I
do
want
to
get
some
feedback
from
elected
officials
because
that's
important,
but
I
do
think
that
how
the
city
runs
is
very
much
kind
of
a
staff
operation.
B
I
think
people
who've
got
their
hands
involved
in
the
day-to-day
on
this
on
the
city,
side
and
staff
side,
I
think,
would
be
very
important
to
talk
to
perhaps
some
people
that
aren't
don't
really
have
a
large
public
profile,
but
probably
really
know
precisely.
What's
going
on,
you
know
inside
the
building,
so,
commissioner
clegg,
you've
got
your
hand
up
as
well.
A
And
if
we
ask,
if
we
want
to
ask
questions
about,
you
know
whether
one
party
or
another
has
interfered
with
their
job
or
if
things
like
that,
that
would
be
sensitive
questions
for
them.
To
answer
that
may
be
problematic.
A
What
I
would
suggest
we
consider
incorporating,
as
part
of
our
process,
is
perhaps
some
sort
of
confidential
written
survey
that
we
would
submit
to
department
heads.
We
would
have
to
ask
probably
the
mayor
to
to
let
department
heads
know
that
they
would
be
authorized
to
complete
that,
but
where
we
could
ask
some
of
the
more
sensitive
questions
and
they
could
the
answers
or
not
the
answers,
but
at
least
the
respondent's
name
could
be
anonymous.
B
I
think
that's
an
excellent
idea
is
there,
would
you
be,
would
there
would
you
or
some
group
of
you
and
others
be
willing
to
draft
such
a
document.
B
Okay,
well,
obviously
feel
free
to
involve
anybody
that
you
need
to,
but
I
think
it
would
be
great
to
get
at
least
a
draft
of
that
for
review
before
we
send
it
out
and
of
course,
I
think,
we'll
have
to
initiate
some
conversations
to
be
able
to
get
permission
to
do
that.
Can
I
ask
a
question
about.
F
F
A
I
mean
we
could
certainly
consult
with
the
city
attorney's
office,
but
at
least
the
way
I
would
envision
it
is
respondents
wouldn't
even
have
to
give
their
name.
They
would
be
able
to
respond
without
identifying
themselves.
So,
even
if
we
did
have
to
make
those
responses
publicly
available,
it
would
not
disclose
the
identity
of
the
respondent.
But
I
I
see
commissioner
ginder
has
his
hand
up,
and
he
probably
knows
more
about
this
than
I
do.
B
Yeah
commissioner
ginder
you're
you're
muted,
commissioner.
H
I
think
commissioner
smith
has
raised
a
good
point
here,
because,
even
though
the
responses
may
come
back
without
a
name
on
it,
it'll
be
public
information
to
whom
we
sent
it
to
so.
If
we
have
a
list
of
you
know,
42
department
heads
deputy
directors,
whatever
that
list
will
be
public
who
we
sent
it
to,
and
then
people
will
be
engaged
in
their
process
of
trying
to
figure
out
who
the
respondents
are.
H
For
example,
if
we
ask
you
know,
do
you
are
you
in
charge
of
a
department
that
has
more
than
500
employees,
or
you
know
what
you
know
summarize
the
nature
of
your
department's
mission?
You
know
people
will
start
trying
to
figure
out
who
said
what
so
I
mean,
I
think
it's
an
idea
worth
exploring,
but
that
there's
going
to
be
a
guarantee
of
confidentiality
is
probably
a
little
strong.
There's
there'll
be
a
hope
of
it
for
the
responses,
but
who
we
send
it
out
to,
I'm
pretty
sure
will
be
public.
B
Well,
I
I
would
think
that
that
would
be
something
we'd
have
to
address
as
we
draft
and
design
the
questionnaire.
I
think
a
lot
of
those
objections
we
can
solve
in
advance,
so
we've
got
a
bunch
of
people.
Our
hands
up.
Ms
bushoon
has
her
hand
up.
You've
got
some
thoughts
on
the
topic.
I
Yeah
there
is
a
the
data
practices
that
does
look
at
surveys,
but
it
is
citywide.
I
don't
know
if
just
going
to
department
heads
would
be
city-wide,
it
does
protect
that
data.
If
it's
city-wide
we've
also
lost
a
department
of
administration
issue,
because
we
we
tried
to
protect
survey
data
and
it
was
not
city-wide
and
we
were
told
we
could
not
protect
it
completely.
I
So
I'd
have
to
look
I'd
have
to
look
at
what
happened
in
the
past,
and
I
know
that
there
I
think
there
was
a
lawsuit
where
we
were
sued
based
on
a
person
actually
putting
in
some
words,
and
those
words
were
provided
to
the
public
without
a
name
attached
and
based
on
how
that
person
worded
the
sentences
they
could.
I
Management
could
tell
who
said
it,
and
there
were
some
claims
of
retaliation
based
on
answering
the
survey.
So
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know.
There
are
some
issues
surrounding
surveys
and
I
can
look
into
them
and
I
could
work
with
this
work
group
to
make
sure
that
we
try
to
do
it.
The
best
that
we
can,
without
going
awry
of
the
data
practices
act
and
to
try
to
protect
the
anonymity,
but
as
as
commissioner
ginder
said,
it
might
be
not
a
hundred
percent
possible
to
protect
anonymity.
I
B
D
Nope
it's
down
it
just
was
answered.
I
was
going
to
ask
a
question
and
refer
to
a
past
survey,
so
it
was
answered.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
and
our
esteemed
city
clerk,
mr
carl,
had
his
hand
up
briefly.
Is
there
anything
you
need
to
add.
C
Not
on
this
subject,
mr
chair,
I
was
going
to
suggest
that
in
the
last
two
elected
cycles,
I
have
coordinated
and
produced
an
elected
official
orientation
manual,
the
contents
of
which
may
be
instructive.
I'm
not
going
to
say
that
what
we've
outlined
there
in
terms
of
how
the
government
is
structured
is
necessarily
how
it
operates.
C
But
in
theory
the
orientation
manual
lays
out
the
relationship
between
mayor
and
council
between
mayor
council
and
staff
and
talks
about
the
different
at
a
high
level
roles
and
responsibilities
between
those
different
parties
of
the
city
government
and
it
might
be
sort
of
a
grounding
document
to
to
refer
to.
B
I
I
think
that's
an
excellent
idea
is,
and
I
don't
if
you've
got
a,
I
know,
you've
probably
got
some
sort
of
virtual
folder
to
collect
documents
related
to
to
this
work
group.
If
you
wanted
to
just
kind
of
put
that
document
in
there,
that
would
be
helpful,
so
we
could
all
access
it
sure.
Thank
you
all
right.
Any
other
comments
on
information
on
the
current
operation
element
of
our
information
gathering.
B
Okay,
it
seems
to
me
the
third
element
of
the
information
we
need
to
gather
or
the
third
part
of
the
work
plan
would
be
gathering
information
about
comparable
cities
and
the
government
structure
for
comparable
cities
and
we've
informally
kicked
around
some
examples.
The
only
one
I
think
that
we're
all
relatively
comfortable
with
in
terms
of
examining
its
comparison
would
be
our
sister
city
across
the
river
st
paul.
B
My
understanding
is,
they
went
to
a
strong
mayor
system
in,
I
think
the
late
60s
and
then
15
years
later
went
to
a
part-time
council
structure,
and
I
think
it
would
be
useful
to
talk
to
them
about
their
experience,
since
that
they
obviously
operate
in
the
same
statutory
and
regulatory
environment.
That
we
do
so,
I
think
some
of
their
experience
would
be
useful,
for
us
is,
there
are,
are:
are
there
any
other
cities
that
anybody
thinks
would
be?
B
We
should
ought
to
look
at
as
a
as
a
peer
or
a
comparable
in
terms
of
what
their
government
structure
is.
Like,
commissioner,
clegg
has
got
to
stand
up.
A
A
In
2018,
we
looked
at
a
number
of
comparable
cities
in
terms
of
size.
Basically
looking
for
what
kind
of
authority
the
council
had
over
police
departments,
so
it's
slightly
different
analysis,
but
we
did.
A
I
think
we
could
I'm
not
volunteering
you,
commissioner
ginder,
but
but
that
would
be
a
good
place
to
start.
Since
we've
looked
at
those
before
we
know
they're
of
comparable
size.
I
think
mayor
council
systems,
so
it's
and
we
have
some
familiarity
with
them
already
from
our
previous
work.
So
that
might
be
a
good
list
to
start
with.
H
H
That
list
was
split
somewhere:
50
50
between
city
manager,
cities
and
strong
mayor
cities,
portland
being
a
commissioned
city,
the
only
one
of
its
kind
in
in
the
country,
but
I
would
be
willing
to
take
that
on
and
just
kind
of
go
through
that
list
of,
I
think
it's
approximately
nine
or
ten
comparator
cities
that
have
strong
mayor
systems
and
just
kind
of
a
little
more
detail
about
what
the
language
is
in
their
charters.
H
B
Are
we
aware
of
any
city
that
has
a
government
structure
which
is
comparable
to
minneapolis?
Are
we?
Are
we
just
a
unique
entity.
H
H
It's
more
of
a
modern
take
on
what
people
were
trying
to
do
and
most
of
your
strong
mayor
systems
are
kind
of
tend
to
be
in
the
midwest
and
northeast,
but
there
are
also
in
the
western
and
south.
Also,
like
I
said,
portland
is
the
only
city
with
a
commission
of
any
size
and
we're
kind
of
in
that
in
between
strong
mayor
strong
council
system,
then
we
have
that
little
mix
with
the
city
coordinator
thrown
in
which
is
kind
of
a
a
weak
attempt
at
a
city
manager
right.
C
Commissioner,
yes,
we
do
have
a
list
that
we
look
at
and
most
of
those
are
on
the
list
that
commissioner
ginder
referenced
as
well.
C
I
I
don't
know
and
would
work
with
commissioner
ginder
to
make
sure,
but
as
an
example
as
a
as
a
large
city
in
the
mid
upper
midwest,
milwaukee
also
has
a
council
mayor
structure
of
government,
it's
very
similar
to
ours,
and
so
milwaukee
tends
to
be
one
that
we
would
look
at
and
then
the
other
two
that
we
look
at
frequently
are
ironically
washington
dc
as
a
13
member,
full-time
council,
full-time
mayor
and
denver
same
kind
of
thing.
So
I
think
those
might
be
on
the
list.
B
And
casey,
those
are
those
all
that
information
was
was
the
stuff
that
commissioner
ginder
is
talking
about,
was
analyzed
as
part
of
the
2018
proposal.
Is
that
stuff?
We
can
probably
still
find
that
in
in
the
city's
data
right,
correct.
C
It's
out
in
limbs
today
and
commissioner
ginder
generated
it
all
to
begin
with,
so
I
know
he
has
it
and
if
not,
I
can
certainly
get
him
a
copy
of
his
original
work.
B
Okay,
well,
let's
we'll
we'll
all
part
of
our
homework
assignment
will
for
us
to
dig
that
stuff
out
on
our
own
and
if
we
have
some
problem,
if
we
have
some
problems,
we'll
talk
to
you
or
commissioner
get
here.
B
Is
there
any
other
discussion
on
comparable
cities?
I
mean.
Obviously,
we've
got
some
work
to
do
on
that
and
to
look
at
that,
but
any
any
any
cities.
Anybody
wants
to
add
to
the
list.
B
Okay,
the
net,
the
next
area-
that
I
think
we
should
have
a
part
as
part
of
our
work
plan.
Is
we
obviously
at
some
point
need
to
consider
an
alternative
arrangement
for
many
needs
to
be
some
effort
at
considering
alternatives?
What
would
a
alternative
structure
for
minneapolis?
Look
like
I
mean
this
is
the
point
where
we're
gonna
con.
B
So
that
seems
to
me
to
be
kind
of
a
penultimate
step,
and
I
and
then,
of
course
the
last
step
would
be,
of
course,
putting
together
a
final
report
and
a
formal
recommendation
for
the
for
the
charter
commission
as
a
whole
and
so
those
five
elements.
You
know
the
history,
the
current
operations,
the
comparable
cities,
the
drafting
or
consideration
of
alternatives,
and
then
the
final
report
and
recommendation.
Those
are
the
five
elements:
I've.
E
At
some
point,
I
think
it
may
be
helpful
to
take
a
look
at
what
is
it
about
the
current
structure
that
seems
to
be
not
working
as
well
as
we
would
like
it,
and
what
is
it
we
want
from
a
structure?
E
I
don't
know
that
changing
the
structure
just
to
change
it
is
is
very
prudent,
but
I
think
if
we
can
take
a
look
at
what
is
it
about
the
current
one
that
could
be
improved
and
what
kind
of
structure
would
be
able
then
to
satisfy
those
improvements
for
what
we
are
looking
at
doing.
B
Right
I
mean
I
think
that
comes
up
in
you
know.
When
we
talk
about
the
current
operation
element,
you
know
when
we
have
when
we
develop
information,
you
know,
that's
you
know.
Does
the
current
structure
work,
I
think,
is
kind
of
the
inherent
question
that
goes
into
that
and,
of
course,
obviously
that
also
the
does
the
current
structure
work.
Does
it
not
work?
How
is
it
dysfunctional
if
it
is
that,
obviously,
I
think
is
part
of
the
alternative
consideration
part
two.
B
C
Mr
chair,
this
is
casey,
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
is
in
line,
but-
and
forgive
me
if
I'm
out
of
line
here
might
my
thought
process
that
I
would
offer
to
you
all
is.
I
think,
you've
outlined
a
plan
of
attack
for
action
items
and
I
think
the
one
piece
I
think
that
might
be
missing
for
your
consideration
is.
It
might
be
helpful
when
we
get
to
decision
making
time
if
there
was
a
a
sort
of
framework
or
values
against
which
you
could
make.
C
So,
if
you're,
if
you're
evaluating
the
city
of
milwaukee
and
you
like
something
about
it
or
the
city
of
saint
paul
or
the
city
of
whatever,
when
I
think
about
charter
and
governance,
like
writing
a
constitution,
I
think
about
values
such
as
representation
and
how
much
does
the
question
of
representation
and
how
much
representation
weigh
in
and
how
do
we
ensure
an
appropriate
level?
What
does
that
look
like
leadership
and
direction?
C
Where
does
that
come
from
and
what's
the
value
of
of
leadership
from
a
singular
executive
versus
a
plurality
of
a
body
versus
the
combination
between
the
two?
You
also
have,
I
think,
accountability.
You
know
who's
in
charge
who
makes
the
decision
and
and
what's
the
check
and
balance
against
those
things
and
then
from
a
staff
perspective.
I
think
one
of
the
values
would
be
sort
of
operational
efficiency
and
professionalism
and
balancing
that
operational
efficiency
and
professionalism
against
political
representation
and
political
effectiveness.
C
What's
the
right
mix
and
I'm
not
saying
those
are
the
only
values,
but
those
are
sort
of
as
I'm
off
the
top
of
my
head
thinking
about
it,
things
that
I
I
would
suggest
this
group
might
want
to
put
some
initial
thought
into
and
then,
as
you
are
gathering
that
data
and
reviewing
how
other
jurisdictions
have
framed
their
constitution,
their
charters,
you
can
evaluate
what
what
points
you
like
against
that
framework.
B
Okay,
I
think
it's
a
that's
very
well
taken.
I
agree
with
you
completely.
I
think
the
larger
question
is:
where
do
we
put
it
into
our
process?
Chair
clegg,
you
had
your
hand
up
briefly
or
you
still
do
actually
go.
A
B
So
if
I
I've
got
my
five
elements
here,
do
we
want
to
do?
We
want
to
break
out
a
separate
work
group
session?
Let's,
let's
you
know,
start
with
history
and
background
specific
to
council
mayor
issues
and
then
perhaps
the
second
session.
We
should
devote
on
criteria
for
evaluation.
The
value
question
kind
of
insert
that
between
one
and
two
and
then
then
proceed
as
with
the
issues
I've
outlined.
Does
that
seem
like
a
reasonable
addition.
E
That
makes
sense
to
me
because
I
think,
as
we
look
at
the
history
and
background
and
learn
from
the
past,
we
may
see
some
themes
that
can
help
clarify
those.
B
No,
I
think
we
got
the
we
have
the
visual
thumbs
up
from
chair
clegg,
so
I
think
he
agrees
with
the
idea.
I
mean
I'm,
I'm
not.
The
most
skilled
person
in
interpreting
hand
gestures,
but
I
think
that
was
a
positive
one.
Any
other
discussion
then.
So
what
we've
got
then
is
a
work
work
plan
and
in
order
our
work
plan
is
number
one.
History
background
relative
to
council
mayor
issues.
Number
two
would
be
criteria
for
evaluation
and
kind
of
the
values
that
we
want
to
promote.
B
B
Number
five
would
be
then
a
consideration
of
alternatives
or
an
effort
to
draft
some
kind
of
proposal
that
would
address
what
we've
discovered
up
to
that
point
and
then
the
sixth
and
final
element
of
the
work
plan
would
be
to
produce
a
final
report
and
a
formal
recommendation
to
the
charter
commission
as
a
whole
is
that
does
that
seem
reasonable
for
everyone?
B
Any
discussion
on
that
at
all,
commissioner,
garcia.
E
I
think
another
thing
that
casey
brought
up-
and
we
can
put
this
when
it
comes
to
gathering
information
from
similar
size
cities
is
if
and
as
we
look
at
the
list
that
commissioner
ginder
had
and
the
city
clerk
have
put
together.
If
there
are
national
organizations
that
focus
on
local
governments,
that
could
be
particularly
useful,
not
just
a
lit
review,
but
something
that
could
really
speak
to
the
core
of
what
we're.
What
we're
going
for.
B
Okay,
absolutely
we'll
we'll
put
that
into
the
you
know
the
hopper
in
terms
of
information
requests.
I
think
the
next
item
is
what
I
propose.
I
I
don't
know
that
we
need
to
do
a
formal
motion
on
a
work
plan
right
now.
What
I
suspect
I
will
do
is
is
that
commissioner,
garcia
and
I
will
put
together
a
a
draft
work
plan
and
at
our
next
meeting
the
first
item
of
the
agenda
will
be
go
ahead
and
approve
the
work
plan
that
we've
just
discussed
here.
We
obviously
can
amend
it.
B
Obviously,
at
that
point,
but
without
having
a
written
document
in
front
of
us
to
really
pivot
off
of
I
don't
know,
a
vote
right
now
would
be
a
useful
exercise
which
brings
the
next
question
or
the
last
question
I
think
for
the
for
the
afternoon
is:
when
should
our
next
meeting
be
and
does
it
make
sense?
Should
we,
I
know
the
public
safety
work
group
for
a
while
was
meeting
every
week?
B
I
don't
know
that
we
need
to
do
that,
given
that
we
have
a
we're,
not
quite
under
the
deadline
that
they
were
under,
but
should
we
go
ahead
and
maybe
schedule
the
next
meeting
for
a
couple
of
weeks
from
now
and
does
tuesday
afternoon
still
work?
I
think
we
need
to
talk
to
the
clerk
and
chair
clegg
about
about
if
we
get
our
own
day
of
the
week
or
if
we
have
to
work
around
public
safety
or
not.
I.
B
Right,
no,
I
I
definitely
don't
want
to
overlap
with
public
safety.
I
do
we
do
we
what's
the
what's,
the
current
public
safety
work
group
schedule
right
now.
Are
they
going
back
to
every
tuesday
at
this
point,
or
I
know
they
were
off
today,
which
is
why
we
grabbed
this
date,
but.
B
G
Yeah,
I'm
just
trying
to,
I
think,
we're
meeting
we're
meeting
next
week
and
I
think
we're
meeting
two
weeks
after
that.
B
Okay,
so
I
think,
does
it
make
sense
for
us
to
go
ahead
and
meet
next
on
the
20th?
Then.
B
We've
got
the
visual
indication
from
chair
clegg.
That
is
positive,
so
I
think
we're
right
about
that.
B
Well,
if
somebody
wants
to
make
a
motion
for
to
schedule
our
next
meeting
for
the
20th,
I
think
that
motion
will
be
in
order.
B
H
B
Gender
motion's
been
made
and
seconded
any
discussion
on
the
motion
and-
and
I
think,
by
the
way
it
goes
with
4
30
as
the
usual
time
would
be
part
of
the
motion
as
well
all
those
in
favor.
Well,
I
guess
I
should
have
the
clerk
call
the
role
to
on
the
on
the
question
of
the
of
the
motion.
C
E
B
Then
I
think
the
last
question
is-
and
I
think
this
is
more
just
an
informational
point,
because
I
do
think
we
need
to
schedule
meetings.
You
know
to
the
extent
that
we're
going
to
get
people
coming
to
talk
to
us
about
history,
background
and
whatnot.
Do
we
want
to
try
and
schedule
that
for
our
next
meeting
or
should
we
go
ahead
and
talk
to
folks
other
people,
I've
gotten
some
emails
from
some
folks
suggesting
it?
There
apparently
was
a
presentation
at
the
humphrey
school.
That
was
very
useful.
B
That
has
been
recommended
to
me
and
I
can
certainly
try
and
schedule
schedule
that
for
the
the
next
meeting
on
the
20th
or
do
we
want
to
wait
and
then
start
start
the
informational
parts
of
the
work
plan
after
the
next
meeting?
Is
there
any
discussion
or
opinion
on
that.
D
Yeah
I
I
would
suggest
that
we
move
ahead
with
the
informational
part
and
save
the
presentation
from
the
humphrey
a
little
bit
later.
B
B
Okay,
so
let
me
ask
you,
I
mean:
do
you
think
that
we're
our
next
meet?
We
ought
to
ourselves,
go
back
and
look
at
the
material.
We
have.
You
know
the
book
and
the
other
articles
online
and
then
discuss
amongst
ourselves.
What
information
we
want
or
do
we
want
not
to
have
anybody,
come
and
talk
to
us
on
the
20th?
I'm.
D
I
I
think,
maybe
you
could
ask
for
people
to
text
you
those
ideas
and
between
you
and
co-chair
garcia.
You
could
probably
come
up
with
maybe
a
couple
of
people
that
could
come
in
and
talk
to
us.
B
Okay,
well,
why
don't,
commissioner
garcia,
and
I
talk
to
some
people
and
see
if
see
if
we
can
get
some
people
coming
in
on
the
20th
and,
if
not
we'll
see
if
we
get
them
scheduled
for
a
later
date?
Commissioner,
excuse
me
chair
clegg
has
got
his
hand
up.
A
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
I
will
try
and
get
out
eric
nathanson's
first
chapter
in
the
next
few
days
to
everyone.
So.
B
Yeah,
so
there
was
a
you
know,
one
of
the
people
in
the
chat
I
think
was
has
indicated
it
might
be
worthwhile
to
get
mr
nathanson
to
come
in
himself.
I
think
that
would
be
excellent.
An
excellent
idea,
we'll
work
on
that.
Commissioner
metke,
you
have
your
hand
up
still.
Is
that
a
is
that
a
duplicate
or
do
you
have
a
new
new
question
nope?
B
So
all
right,
I
think
the
the
sense,
then,
is
that
we
will
make
some
inquiries
and
see
if
we
can
get
some
people
in
for
our
informational
meeting
in
two
weeks
and
see
what
we
can
gather
together
information
and
we're
all
going
to
do
some
homework
and
reading
between
now
and
then
that's
all
I've
got,
commissioner
garcia.
Is
there
anything
that
you
want
to
add.
B
Okay,
last
round
of
ms
bushoon
has
her
hand
up
go
ahead.
I
Hi
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
I
did
find
a
minnesota
department
of
of
administration
advisory
opinion.
I
sent
you
the
link
in
the
chat,
so
you
can
look
at
that
that
relates
to
surveys.
I
Basically,
I
can
let
you
know
that
the
mayor
and
the
city
council,
members
and
department
heads
they're
all
considered
to
be
employees
under
for
purposes
of
the
data
practices
act.
So
any
kind
of
survey
data
that
they
would
provide
would,
you
know,
would
likely
be
private
data.
B
You
know
one
point
that
occurs
to
me
is
that
we
should
probably
before
we
talk
to
the
mayor's
office
and
see
about
getting
permission
for
this.
We
should
probably
get
our
questionnaire
drafted
so
that
we
have
a
specific
document
for
them
to
react
to
as
opposed
to
I
mean
I
don't
know
that
we've
really,
I
mean
I
mean
I
suppose
we
could
just
kind
of
vaguely.
B
Let
them
know
that
something's
coming,
but
I
really
don't
think
we
could
have
a
productive
discussion
unless
we
actually
have
a
document
with
an
actual
with
actual
questions
on
it.
So
anything
else.
B
All
right
seeing
no
further
discussion.
I
think
a
motion
to
adjourn
until
the
20th
of
october
would
be
in
order.
C
B
Okay,
if
there's
no
objection,
I
will.
I
will
adjourn
the
today's
meeting
of
the
government
structure.
Work
group
thanks.
Everybody.