►
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
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
my
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
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
C
A
B
B
C
D
B
Moving
to
the
discussion
on
the
agenda
items,
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
work
plan
and
timeline.
It's
item
three,
but
it's
really
listed
as
item
four
in
the
in
the
agenda
document.
So
the
the
consideration
of
the
work
plan.
B
We
have
been
kicking
this
around
a
bit
and
let
me
to
kind
of
describe
a
bit
of
what
we're
thinking
about
in
terms
of
the
work
plan
we've
we
wanted
to
do
some
work
on
the
history.
In
the
background
of
the
city
city
charter,
which
we
did
in
our
meeting
of
october
20th,
we
want
to
identify
and
adopt
a
values
matrix
to
serve
as
criteria
against
which
to
evaluate
any
proposals
for
alternatives
or
options
that
may
be
recommended
for
charter
amendments,
and
we
hope
to
discuss,
discuss
that
today.
B
That's
on
our
agenda
for
today,
november
5th,
we
also
are
considering
reviewing
evaluations
of
select
comparable
jurisdictions
as
they
may
meet
our
values
and
priorities.
B
That's
going
to
be
looking
at
other
cities
with
comparable
mayor
council
structures,
we're
we've
tentatively
scheduled
that
for
november
18th,
which
is
a
wednesday
not
the
usual
tuesday
group.
A
Getting
that
mr
chair,
I'm
muting
out,
commissioner
kozak.
B
The
the
fourth
element
is
assessment
of
the
current
structure
and
operations
of
the
city
as
they
relate
to
our
values
and
priorities,
as
well
as
a
feedback
compared
to
other
jurisdictions.
We
have
that
tenantly
scheduled
for
december.
First
fifth,
would
be
based
on
the
values
and
priorities
we
identify
the
other,
comparable
cities
and
taking
the
survey
data
from
our
current
stakeholders,
considering
alternatives
that
the
work
group
believes
would
uphold
these
values
and
characteristics.
So
that
meeting
is
technically
scheduled
for
december
15th
to
look
at
alternatives.
B
We
are
then
considering
having
a
panel
of
people
in
addition
to
the
survey
we
would
like
to
maybe
have
a
panel
with
people
who
could
provide
first-hand
testimony
with
respect
to
their
experience
and
structure
of
minneapolis
city
government
related
anything
we're
going
on.
B
We
should
have
a
final
meeting
where
we
should
make
a
a
discussion
of
where
all
of
this
has
taken
us,
we'll
review
drafts
or
prepare
our
preliminary
position
statement.
That's
tentatively
scheduled
for
january
19th
and
then,
lastly,
we'll
do
a
formal
submission
of
a
final
report
with
any
recommendations
to
the
full
charter
commission,
which
we
have
tentatively
scheduled
for
february
3rd.
B
So
I'm
we're,
obviously
you
know
it's
all
of
this
is
a
work
in
progress
and
we're
open
to
any
discussions
that
people
want
to
have
about
the
possible
work
plan.
Any
concerns
about
the
contents.
Let
me
pull
up
my
calendar
here.
Our
concerns
about
the
timing.
B
We
want
to
make
sure
the
dates
work.
I
know
that
we've
got
thanksgiving
and
the
end
of
the
year
holidays
to
work
around,
so
I
don't
want
to
if,
if
people
have
some
times
where
they're
not
going
to
be
able
to
work
on
this,
I
think
we
can
accommodate
that
at
this
point.
Given
our
schedule
co-chair
garcia,
do
you
have
anything
to
add
to
that.
A
Did
we
lose,
she
might
be
on.
A
Mute
commissioner,
garcia,
are
you,
are
you
hearing
us,
you
might
be
on.
B
Mute,
let
me
see
here,
oh
she's,.
B
B
Do
you
have
any
comments
to
add
to
the
discussion
on
the
work
plan,
the
timing
or
the
content
of
it?
I
mean
I
should
I
should
say
I'm
working
from
a
document
that
you
prepared
so
I'd.
Imagine
that
you,
you
find
it
to
be
to
be
be
a
good
plan.
So
anything
you
want
to
add.
B
Okay:
okay:
go
ahead,
commissioner
clegg,
our
chair
clegg:
you
have
your
have
your
hand
raised.
E
Yes,
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
the
timing
of
the
the
consideration
of
the
survey,
given
that
we
have
to
draft
the
survey
we
have
to
get
out
whatever
we're
putting
in
writing,
give
people
a
reasonable
period
to
answer
that
and
then
assuming
we
do
oral
interview
follow-ups
I,
with
with
all
the
people
involved
and
everyone
so
busy.
I'm
sure
it'll
take
a
long
time
to
get
those
scheduled.
B
I
think
that's
a
wise
caveat,
and
certainly
you
know,
certainly
in
a
body
like
this-
we're
not
getting
we're
not
putting
any
of
this
in
stone,
so
I
think
we'll
definitely
be
able
to
make
some
adjustments
if
that,
if
that
comes
to
pass,
you
know
the
schedule
as
we've
proposed
here
is
actually
we.
B
B
Let
me
ask
our
clerk
or
our
esteemed
clerk
here:
do
we
need,
should
we
adopt
the
work
plan
formally
at
this
point,
or
should
we
submit
a
type
this
up
and
then
have
it
approved
at
the
next
meeting?
Do
you
have
a
preference.
A
To
me,
mr
chair,
I
would
suggest
that
if
the
work
group
is
or
the
work
group
is
ready
to
adopt
the
plan
now
we
should
go
ahead
and
do
that.
It
can
always
be
amended
and
changed
to
meet
the
needs,
as
the
group
goes
forward.
But
at
least
this
gives
us
some
structure
and
from
not
only
the
work
group
from
the
public
monitoring
our
work.
A
It
sort
of
sets
that
expectation
of
of
what
will
come
forward
at
what
point
and
provides
that
that
outline
of
our
work,
both
for
ourselves
and
also
for
the
public
who
are
watching.
B
Great
well,
I
will
I
will
take
a
motion
then,
to
adopt
the
the
work
plan
and
the
time
frame
associated
with
it.
Is
there?
Is
there
a
motion
to
do
that.
C
B
It's
been
moved
and
seconded
on
the
work
plan
and
for
those
of
you
it's
been
a
copy
of
the
draft
work
plan
has
been
attached
to
the
chat
here
in
the
meeting.
I
don't
know
if
people
have
seen
that,
but
if
is
there
any
discussion
on
the
on
the
work
plan,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded.
A
A
D
B
All
right,
our
work
plan
has
been
adopted.
We've
got
ourselves
a
structure
which
makes
as
a
lawyer
I
like
structure.
That
makes
me
happy
so
that
will
move
us
on
to
the
next
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is
a
values
matrix
for
proposals.
B
One
of
the
things
that
we
have
to
do
is
evaluate
alternative
structures
or
proposals
about
how
to
change
the
charter
and
cochair
garcia.
I
think
raised
this
and
it's
very
appropriate,
which
is
what
what
values
do
we
use
to
to
rank
the
possible
alternatives?
What
problems
are
we
trying
to
solve
for?
How
does
it
fit
into
our
matrix,
and
she
has
produced
a
document
listing
some
values
which
has
been
attached
to
the
chat
here
by
by
mr
carl
and
I'll?
B
B
What
are
the
barriers
to
our
current
structure,
or
I
would
perhaps
what
are
the
disadvantages
of
our
current
structure
and
there
are
several
values
we
can
consider
invalid
in
responding
to
those
questions,
equity,
responsiveness,
accountability,
effectiveness,
we
need
to
evaluate
the
foundation
for
accountability,
such
as
simplicity,
transparency,
etc,
and
then,
of
course,
the
question
of
separation
of
powers,
which
I
think
is
also
part
of
transf
transparency
and
accountability.
B
B
B
All
right,
that's
that's!
What
we've
got
everyone's
got
a
copy
of
the
document.
I
think
we
should
put
that
in
our
files
and
as
we
proceed
along
reference,
those
as
values,
we
don't
have
anything
else
on
the
agenda
items.
At
this
point,
I
would
just
take
an
open
open
it
up
for
any
other
discussion
or
points
that
any
of
the
work
group
members
want
to
make
co-chair
garcia.
Do
you
have
anything
to
add.
C
Yes,
I'm
wondering
if
we
have
ideas
of,
or
suggestions
for
people,
for
your
for
you
to
interview.
Do
I
just
do
I
just
email
them
to
you
and
commissioner
garcia,
or
how
do
you
want
that
process
to
be
commissioner,
abbott.
B
I
think
you
know,
and
obviously,
commissioner
garcia-
you
can
correct
me
if
you
have
a
different
perspective,
but
I
think
I
think
emailing
us
is
fine.
I
would
also
include
chair
clegg
in
that
email
since
he's
working
with
us
on
the
survey.
So
if
you
just
email
the
three
of
us,
I
think
we
can
put
together.
I
I
think
we've
got
a
kind
of
a
list
in
mind,
but
I
think
we
can
definitely
we
want
to
have
a
broad
approach.
B
I
mean
obviously
we're
not
going
to
interview
the
entire
city
government,
but
but
I
I
think
that
that
would
be
appropriate.
So.
C
And
can
you
can
you
again
just
overview
what
you,
what
the
purpose
of
the
interviews
and
the
hope
for
outcome
are.
B
Well,
we
want
people
who
are
actually
working
in
the
current
government
structure
to
give
us
their
view
of
what
works
well
and
what
doesn't
work
and
we
need
if
we
need
to
figure
out
what
problems
we're
trying
to
solve
and
and
what
pro
or
or
what
good
things
that
we,
which
we
should
preserve.
B
I
I
think
it's
I
think
it's
incumbent
on
us
before
we
propose
any
changes
to
get
some
real
feedback
on
what
works
and
what
doesn't
work.
I
don't
wanna,
we
don't
wanna
kind
of
blindly
go
in
here
and
and
and
make
changes
without
reference
to
you
know
the
current
structure,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
you
know.
Minneapolis
has
some
really
excellent
employees.
There's
a
lot
of
good
staff
work.
That's
done
here,
there's
a
lot
of
very
smart
people.
I
think
that
can
give
us
some
feedback
about.
B
You
know
how
the
current
structure
works.
If
they
had
a
wish
list
for
things.
That
would
be
better.
I
think
I
very
much
like
to
hear
kind
of
you
know
the
people
who
are
actually
working
in
this
system
in
this
organization
to
give
us
some
some
feedback
on
what
they
think
could
work
better.
What
improvements
can
be
made.
So
I
think
that
I
think
that's
our
goal
and
then
kind
of
incorporate
those
comments
and
that
feedback
into
whatever
proposals
we
bring
to
the
the
the
entire
charter
commission.
C
And
as
a
follow-up,
so
will
the
city
clerk
be
involved
with
this,
because
I
would
think
that
casey's
sort
of
the
center
of
so
much
stuff
that
he
might
have
a
lot
of
great
ideas.
B
We
are
talking,
yes,
we
are
talking
to
casey
about
all
of
this.
Yes,
he's
been
he's
been
included
in
these
discussions,
so.
D
I
would
also
add,
in
addition
to
what
co-chair
abbott
mentioned
about
the
information
we
wish
to
together
is
also.
Are
there?
Is
there
something
about
the
structure
that
people
think
inhibit
innovation
or
inhibit
being
efficient,
that
that
can
be
improved
as
well.
B
Commission,
chair
clegg's,
got
his
hand
up.
I.
E
Would
just
also
note
what
casey
posted
in
the
chat-
and
that
is
our
our
focus-
is
not
only
current
city
officials
but
also
former.
So
there
may
be
former
department,
heads
or
former
key
city
staff
that
it
may
be
a
good
idea
to
interview
as
well.
So.
B
B
B
A
I
know
that
you
and
co-chair
garcia
and
I
have
had
the
opportunity
to
also
discuss
sort
of
best
practices
and
and
to
follow
up
on
what
she
mentioned,
which
I
I
really
appreciate
and
agree
with,
and
that
is
sort
of
are
there
components
of
the
structure
or
systems
that
are
dictated
by
the
charter
that
inhibit
or
would
prevent
innovation,
change,
better
partnership,
better
operations,
better,
more
efficient
and
effective,
responsive
governance,
and
to
that
extent
we've
had
a
conversation
but
just
to
clue
in
your
colleagues
about
the
opportunity
to
possibly
reach
out
to
some
other
organizations
that
study
government
so,
for
example,
the
national
league
of
cities,
the
league
of
minnesota
cities
and
other
good
government
types
who
have
in
the
past,
studied
minneapolis
and
and
maybe
who
haven't
studied
minneapolis,
specifically
but
cities
in
general
and
so
bringing
in
that
sort
of
larger
perspective.
A
More
an
academic
perspective
as
well
as
real-world
experience
of
governments
like
ours
across
the
united
states,
how
their
structures,
structures
and
charters
operate
and
how
those
pertain
to
opportunities
for
us.
So
that
would
nicely
dovetail
with
some
of
the
research.
I
know
that
commissioner
ginder
has
already
done
in
terms
of
structure
with
comparable
cities,
so
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
we've
talked
about
some
of
those
other
larger
organizations
that
we
could
reach
out
to
and
benefit
from
do.
B
We
have
a
do.
We
have
a
time
frame
on
that.
Some
of
the
some
of
that
conversation,
I
think,
will
be
useful
at
our
next
meeting
on
the
on
the
18th
so
and.
A
And
mr
chair,
thank
you.
I
I'm
hopeful
to
finish
up
reaching
out
contacts
to
those
organizations
which
I
started
right
before
the
election,
and
then
there
was
this
little
thing
that
sort
of
took
up
some
of
my
time
this
week
and
I
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
follow
up
on
some
of
those
initial
phone
conversations,
but
I
both
had
email
and
phone
conversations
with
those
organizations
that
I
mentioned,
and
I
just
need
to
reach
back
and
connect.
A
D
I
I
would
like
to
just
concur
with
the
clerk
and
and
chair
abbott
that
I
think
it
would
be.
D
I
mean
it's
may
not
be
considered
a
whole
lot
of
fun
for
most
people,
but
it
would
be
nice
to
see
if
we
can
get
some
reports
or
studies
and
then
share
them
on
limbs
prior
to
the
meeting
at
which
they're
discussed
to
so
we
can
have
a
full
and
a
bit
more
robust
conversation.
B
Let
me
let
me
get
to
the
last
call
again:
are
there
any
other
comments
or
feedback
on
the
operation,
the
work
group
or
anything?
We
should
be
doing
differently
in
the
opinions
of
our
members
here
all
right,
given
the
completion
of
our
agenda,
I
believe
adjourning.
The
meeting
would
be
in
order
and
I
think,
without
objection,
I'll
just
declare
the
meeting
has
has
concluded.
Thank
you
everyone
for
your
time.
Thank
you,
casey
for
your
excellent
help
and
we
will
obviously
be
in
contact.
So
thanks.