►
From YouTube: February 26, 2020 Intergovernmental Relations Committee
Description
Minneapolis Intergovernmental Relations Committee Meeting
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
Good
afternoon,
everyone
I'm
going
to
call
to
order
this
regularly
scheduled
meeting
of
the
intergovernmental
relations
committee.
My
name
is
Andrew
Johnson
I'm,
the
chair
of
the
committee
and
I'm
joined
today
by
a
quorum
of
our
committee
members,
councilmember
Schrader
vice
chair
Jenkins,
council,
member
Reich
and
council
president
bender.
We
have
before
us
six
items
today,
three
of
which
are
on
consent.
So
I
will
note
that
item
number
three
on
consent.
A
A
Item
number
one
read
those
off
for
those
that
are
watching
is
some
amendments
to
our
legislative
positions
regarding
our
supports
for
the
funding
to
stay
and
remain
with
the
US
Bank
Stadium
reserve
funds
so
that
it
enables
future
options
for
refinancing,
increasing
our
support
for
the
transit
projects,
from
50
million
to
80
million
and
as
well
supporting
some
great
nonprofit
projects
that
are
seeking
either
cash
or
bonding
funding
this
year
at
the
legislature.
So
I've
made
that
motion
and
wanted
to
see.
A
A
B
B
You
know
I
think
we
could
potentially
check
in
about
whether
or
not
it
needs
to
go
back
to
tpw
as
well,
but
I've
I
know
comes
Maura,
Mike
and
I.
Both
have
conversations
with
the
two
council
members
from
wards
four
and
five
and
just
there's
a
desire
to
have
more
time
to
make
sure
that
the
resolution
just
really
says
very
clearly
what
the
city's
position
is.
So
in
my
mind
it
seems
fine
to
just
come
back
to
igr,
but
thought
I'd
make
that
comment.
Thanks.
D
A
C
Afternoon
mr.
chair
is
noted,
my
name
is
KC
Carr
I've,
the
privilege
of
serving
as
clerk
for
the
city
of
Minneapolis
I'm
here
today
to
continue
the
initial
discussion.
What
we
began
at
the
committee's
last
regular
meeting,
which
was
February
12th.
This
is
about
redistricting
and
its
impact
on
future
municipal
elections.
I'm
joined
here
with
the
inter
governmental
relations
director,
mr.
Ranieri
and
assistant
city
attorney
Carolyn
bassoon
as
a
general
refresher
for
the
committee
redistricting
is
the
legally
required
process
of
redrawing
electoral
boundaries
every
ten
years
after
a
federal
census.
C
An
important
objective
of
redistricting
is
to
ensure
fair
political
representation
in
all
levels
of
government.
As
a
consequence,
the
sequencing
and
the
timing
of
redistricting
is
important
because
of
its
impact
on
the
conduct
of
elections.
The
formal
process
begins
when
official
census
results.
Data
is
received
on
April
first
in
2021
and
in
all
cases
new
boundaries
must
be
redrawn
no
later
than
19
weeks
prior
to
the
date
of
the
statewide
primary
in
the
year
that
ends
in
after
each
census.
C
C
A
further
complication
is
that
this
rule
applies
only
to
half
of
our
municipal
ballot.
It's
just
to
the
thirteen
members
of
the
City
Council.
The
rule
does
not
apply
to
the
mayor,
who
is
popularly
elected
from
a
single
district
which
encompasses
the
entire
population
likewise
and
unique
to
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
This
rule
does
not
apply
to
the
Minneapolis
Park
Board,
nor
to
the
board
of
estimate
of
Taxation.
So
that's
roughly
half
of
our
ballot.
C
That
is
not
subject
to
the
Kahn
rule
and
that
creates
an
additional
hurdle
for
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
since
it's
the
only
local
jurisdiction
in
Minnesota
have
an
elected,
Park,
Board
and
a
board
of
estimate
of
Taxation
and
under
current
law.
There
is
a
separate
timeline
for
redrawing
the
subordinate
political
boundaries
tied
to
those
other
entities.
So
while
the
Charter
Commission
is
responsible
for
drawing
City
wards
and
Park
District's,
the
City
Council
is
responsible
for
establishing
precincts,
and
so
the
statutory
deadline
for
the
creation
of
precincts
is
the
same
as
that
for
redrawing
city
wards.
E
C
So
mr.
chair
I
understand
the
question
from
the
president
is
for
those
that
have
districts
much
like
the
council
has
wards.
Those
populations
would
be
drawn
from
numbers
from
a
decade
ago,
because
they're
not
subject
to
the
Khan
rule,
which
requires
a
faster
redistricting
using
the
new,
updated
census
numbers
that
does
not
apply
to
the
board
of
estimate
taxation.
Both
of
those
seats
are
elected.
At-Large
like
the
mayor,
so
population
changes
do
not
affect
the
board
of
estimate
a
taxation.
C
C
C
E
C
Through
the
chair
to
the
council,
vice
president,
it
doesn't
apply
to
any
of
the
other
municipal
offices
in
Minneapolis,
including
the
six
part
commissioners
elected
by
district.
It
does
only
apply
to
the
13
council
members
and-
and
there
might
be
some
additional
conversation
about
why
the
distinction
between
those
the
City
Council
is
the
legislative
body
of
the
city,
and
it
is
the
chief
policymaking
body
of
the
city.
The
Park
Board
is
a
governing
body
of
a
very
specific
district.
C
Park
board
has
taxation
powers,
but
our
Charter
is
actually
a
grant
of
statutory
or
I
shouldn't,
say
statutory.
It
is
a
grant
of
the
state's
power
to
be
exercised
at
the
local
level
and
it
vests
that
power
in
the
City
Council
primarily.
So
there
is
a
difference
in
terms
of
the
bodies
that
are
elected
by
the
people
and
then,
furthermore,
there
is
a
difference
in
the
composition.
The
council
is
13
members,
each
elected
from
separate
Ward's.
C
The
park
board
is
a
board
that
is
constituted
out
of
three
at-large,
meaning
every
voter
in
the
city
gets
a
chance
to
elect
those
three
seats
and
then,
in
addition
thereto,
there
are
six
districts,
so
the
composition
of
the
park
board
is
different
than
it
is
of
the
council.
This
is
also
why
the
Kandra
as
an
example,
the
city
of
Duluth,
the
city
of
Duluth,
elects
council
members
by
wards,
but
they
also
have
a
mix
of
at
large
and
they
stagger
their
elections
because
of
those
factors,
Kahn
does
not
apply.
C
A
B
B
You
know
we
are
really
the
first
city,
that's
I
mean
the
law
was
written
to
apply
only
to
City
Council
members
in
Minneapolis.
Essentially,
but
you
know,
I
hope
is
that,
as
this
conversation
proceeds
over
the
years,
if
the
real
goal
is
to
make
sure
that
every
Minnesotan
is,
you
know,
is
represented
in
their
local
government
that
that
law
would
apply
to
all
of
our
communities
and
that
and
that
we
would
still
maintain
local
control
over
our
own
election
cycles,
as
does
every
other
community
in
the
state.
B
So
I
think
these
underlying
questions
around
you
know
how
our
voters
are
represented
in
their
local
democracy
are
really
important
and
I
think
we
are
going
to
do
our
very
best
to
reach
the
goals
that
we
have.
Are
you
know,
while
working
on
setting
out
this
time,
but
I
suspect
that
this
conversation
will
continue.
Past
2021
in
2023
I
suspect
that
there
may
be
issues
and
challenges
that
are
experienced
by
voters
or
folks.
B
C
The
chair,
I,
will
say
my
presentation
is
a
continuation
of
the
presentation
that
began
on
February,
12th
and
I'm
sort
of
bringing
us
up
to
speed
and
talking
about
the
two
plans.
The
next
presentation
is
also
a
continuation
of
this
and
assistant
city
attorney.
Carolyn
bassoon
will
be
in
front
of
you
to
really
walk
through
all
of
those
specific
details
of
the
number
of
charter
changes.
What
are
they?
The
statutory
changes,
we'd
recommend
and
so
that
presentation
will
provide
a
lot
of
that
depth
or
context
that
you're
asking
for
okay.
C
E
C
The
first
statutory
deadline
for
completing
local
redistricting
is
60
days
after
action
by
the
state
legislature.
So
that's
the
default
is
sixty
days
in
the
state
legislature
acts.
The
city
must
complete
redistricting.
If
the
city
is
to
complete
its
redistricting
work
in
2021,
as
has
been
discussed,
then
all
final
actions
to
draw
new
ward
boundaries
and
to
establish
precincts
within
those
boundaries
must
be
done
no
later
than
fourteen
days
before
the
opening
of
candidate
filing
for
that
year's
election.
C
C
But
in
order
to
complete
that
entire
scope
of
work
in
order
to
publish
those
new
political
boundaries
and
to
ensure
that
all
of
that
information
is
widely
circulated
throughout
the
community,
especially
to
voters
and
candidates
alike,
I
have
suggested
to
the
Charter
Commission
that
any
effort
to
complete
redistricting
in
2021
should
be
done
no
later
than
June
30th.
That
gives
us
a
little
extra
buffer.
Should
any
challenges
occur?
C
If
redistricting
cannot
be
completed
by
no
later
than
July
13th,
then
we
will
be
moving
forward
to
complete
redistricting
in
the
year
ending
and-
and
in
that
case,
all
registration
must
be
completed
no
later
than
19
weeks
before
the
statewide
primary
in
that
year.
So
again
that
hard
deadline,
in
which
point
all
redistricting
has
to
be
completed
shown
on
this
slide,
is
March
29th.
C
So,
as
I've
noted
at
the
previous
committee
meeting
staff
have
tracked
various
plans
to
address
a
municipal
elections
within
the
requirements
of
the
Kahn
rule,
as
well
as
other
both
Charter
and
statutory
requirements.
As
the
president
of
Council
has
noted,
the
short
answer
here,
as
I
said
before,
is
there
are
no
easy
answers.
C
So
as
a
related
action,
we're
requesting
feedback
from
the
committee
and
ultimate
approved
by
the
council
to
approve
a
policy
framework
that
would
guide
our
just
our
discussions
and
decisions
around
a
final
plan
and
remembering
again
that
we
need
to
ensure
alignment
between
the
Charter
Commission,
which
draws
the
wards
and
the
City
Council,
which
draws
the
precincts.
So
this
slide
presents
the
five
policy
objectives
that
were
identified
by
staff.
They
work
in
tandem,
they're,
listed
in
priority
order
and
again
I
will
say
here
that
these
were
developed
by
staff.
C
They
were
presented
for
the
very
first
time
to
the
committee
at
its
last
meeting
on
February
12
I,
believe
that
we've
covered
the
major
issues,
but
certainly
we
would
be
open
to
considering
any
additional
factors
that
should
be
added
as
part
of
this
policy
framework
quickly
to
review.
We
think
that
any
redistricting
proposal
should
focus
on
the
following
options.
First
and
foremost,
of
course,
we
need
to
ensure
compliance
with
all
applicable
laws,
both
for
redistricting
and
elections,
and,
of
course
that
includes
the
Kahn
rule.
C
Second,
we
believe
that
the
city
should
ensure
a
consistent
and
predictable
election
cycle
for
municipal
elections,
so
that
voters,
candidates
campaigns
and
others
can
depend
on
that
schedule
that
it's
not
subject
to
frequent
change
or
irregularity
and
with
as
few
deviations
as
possible.
Third,
we
believe
it's
important
to
preserve
to
the
extent
possible.
The
existing
unified
municipal
ballot
that
encompasses
all
25
offices
includes
the
mayor,
13,
council,
Ward's,
6,
Park,
District's,
three
at-large
Park
seats
and
two
at-large
seats
for
the
board
of
estimate
and
Taxation,
then
relatedly.
C
The
fourth
objective
we
identified
was
to
minimize
any
additional
expenses
for
separate
elections
that
would
cover
only
the
13
council
Ward's,
not
to
mention
the
potential
for
lower
vote
turnout
with
a
limited
election.
And,
finally,
our
fifth
objective
is
a
preference
to
pursue
alternatives
that
reduce
the
number
of
substantive
legislative
changes
both
at
the
state
and
with
the
Charter.
That
would
be
necessary.
By
this
we
mean
we
want
to
prioritize
alternatives
that
have
a
realistic
chance
for
success,
but
which
also
satisfy
all
of
those
other
objectives.
C
C
This
first
alternative
plan
staff,
essentially
modified
I
call
it
the
no
change
approach,
there's
little
chain
in
terms
of
its
effect
to
voters.
Under
this
scenario,
there
is
a
provision
that
would
allow
for
an
additional
election,
if
necessary
in
a
year
ending
in
3,
when
the
regular
election
cycle
ends
in
the
year
ending
1
following
a
census.
This
option
would
only
be
exercised
if
the
city
was
unable
to
complete
redistricting
in
time
for
that
regular
election
in
the
year
ending
in
1.
C
So
I've
referred
to
this
extra
election
in
the
year
and
again
3
as
a
midterm,
because
its
effect
is
to
cut
short
the
election
and
create
a
2
two-year
cycle
to
two-year
term
if
required,
that
midterm
election
would
be
limited,
as
I
mentioned,
to
a
single
two-year
term.
Council
members
would
then
stand
for
election
again
in
the
regular
municipal
election
ending
in
2025,
along
with
the
rest
of
the
municipal
ballot.
This
option
does
not
avoid
extra
costs
for
the
midterm
election.
C
If
we
can't
get
redistricting
done,
if
we
get
rid
of
sting
done
in
the
earning
and
one,
then
we
avoid
the
election
in
the
year
ending
in
3,
so
there
is
the
potential
for
an
additional
cost.
That's
why
I've
put
the
fourth
criteria
of
minimising
the
expense
in
yellow
here
under
this
alternative,
there
are
some
technical
Corrections,
both
at
the
state
level
and
with
the
city
charter
that
we
would
recommend
again.
This
machine
will
going
over
going
over
those
to
help
clarify
the
legal
intent
and
principles.
C
So
that
again,
is
why
that
is
yellow
on
the
fifth.
So,
as
you
can
see,
two
of
the
five
factors
that
we
identified,
our
policy
objectives
are
green.
They
fully
satisfy
those
objectives.
Three
of
them
are
yellow.
They
partially
satisfy
the
objective,
but
not
fully,
and
that's
because
the
unified
ballot
could
be
broken
if
we
had
to
have
an
election
in
the
earning
and
three
that
would
include
an
additional
approximate
three
million
dollars
for
an
election
and
the
changes
are
still
required,
but
they're
not
extensive
at
the
law,
with
both
the
Charter.
C
In
the
statute,
the
second
alternative
shown
here
plan
2
is
much
more
substantive.
So
if
the
first
option
is
what
I
call
no
significant
change,
this
is
pretty
significant
change.
This
would
change
the
set
terms
for
all
offices
on
the
ballot
to
specific
years,
so
regular
elections
would
be
conducted
in
the
years
ending
in
1,
3
and
7.
C
If
this
cycle
were
in
place,
then
we
would
well
live
within
the
chondral,
because
it
would
we
would
have
the
elections
both
in
one
and
three.
So
we
would
have
satisfied
that
the
difficulty
here
is
that
over
a
twenty
I
shouldn't
say
difficulty.
The
reality
is
that
it
doesn't
minimize
our
expense,
because
over
the
twenty
year
period
you
would
for
sure
have
a
sixth
election
under
the
first
plan,
you're
guaranteed
five
with
a
possibility
of
six.
C
The
mayor,
the
entire
Park
Board
and
the
B
et
would
be
fairly
significant
and
extensive
to
achieve
five
mark
that,
as
read
on
the
fifth
objective,
I'd
note
again,
as
I
did
at
the
February
12th
committee
meeting,
the
Charter
Commission
is
pursuing
alternative
number
one
and
they
are
considered
not
considered
an
alternative
number
two.
The
Charter
Commission
also
is
formulating
a
potential
charter
amendment
to
address
the
impact
of
the
Kahn
rule
within
the
city
charter,
so
that
doesn't
necessarily
address
statutory
changes.
C
The
Mythbusters
will
be
discussing,
but
it
would
resolve
and
address
the
chondral
within
our
Charter.
The
intent
is
that
that
ballot
question
could
be
submitted
to
voters
this
November
in
the
presidential
general
election
of
November.
Third,
they
have
scheduled
a
public
hearing
on
that
ballot
question
at
their
next
regular
meeting,
which
is
next
Wednesday
March
4th
in
this
chamber
at
four
o'clock.
C
So
that
completes
my
summary
of
the
alternatives
that
we've
presented
in
the
policy
objective
framework.
Mr.
chair,
we're
hoping
to
get
us
some
direction
from
the
Committee
on
that
policy
framework
that
was
presented
does
the
model
that
staff
prepared
meet
your
expectations.
Are
there
other
factors
that
we
should
add
going
forward?
C
Also,
then,
if
the
committee
has
any
input
on
a
preferred
alternative
again,
remembering
that
we
need
to
stitch
the
Charter
and
the
city
council
together
in
terms
of
completing
the
entire
scope
of
work
and
I
did
mention
that
the
Charter
Commission
has
a
hearing
at
its
next
meeting
on
March
4th.
That
completes
my
presentation
as
it's
been
prepared
feedback
from
last
time.
As
I
mentioned,
myth
machine
is
next
with
a
fuller
legal
analysis.
I
would
like
to
end
mr.
chair
just
by
saying
publicly
in
to
the
committee,
with
your
support.
C
We've
talked
about
bringing
forward
regular
reports
to
this
committee
so
that
we
can
ensure
that
stitching
together
and
alignment
between
the
Charter
Commission,
which
meets
once
monthly
and
this
committee,
which
meets
twice
monthly.
So
hopefully,
we
can
have
those
meetings
added
as
a
regular
feature
to
the
IGR
committee
meeting
and
bring
back
to
you
more
information
both
from
the
Charter
Commission
and
from
staff.
As
we
continue
down
this
path,
excellent.
A
Well,
thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
covering
again
all
the
reasons
why
we're
here
and
the
options
available
before
us
on
this.
It's
a
big
deal
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
staff
time
that
has
gone
into
even
coming
to
this
point.
To
have
these
recommendations
and
all
the
thought
that
went
into
the
policy
framework
I
would
venture
to
say
hundreds
of
hours,
perhaps
more
than
that,
but
it
just
goes
to
show
the
complexity
of
this
and
how
technical
this
is
so
I'll
go
ahead
and,
oh,
yes,
council,
moisture,
Jenkins,
Thank.
E
C
A
You
mm-hmm
I
appreciate
that
vice-chair
Jenkins
I
think
that's
a
great
point
to
add
to
this.
So
I'll
go
ahead
and
move
that
we
approve
the
policy
framework,
as
recommended
by
staff,
along
with
alternative
number
one,
as
the
recommended
redistricting
alternative
and
see.
If
there's
any
discussion
or
questions
or
thoughts
on
that
council
president
bender
Thank.
B
You
mr.
chair
I
support
without
any
hesitation
the
staff
identified
policy
objectives
and
really
appreciate
the
you
know:
clarity
and
the
work
that
went
into
really
drilling
down
and
and
and
also
the
kind
of
nuance
added
with
these
layers
of
of
how
we're
using
them
as
a
guiding
tool.
I
do
see
the
you
know
direction
that
this
is
heading
and
it's
pretty
clear
that
it
is
toward
alternative.
One
I
do
think
that,
for
the
you
know,
kind
of
to
my
earlier
comments,
I
think
for
this
first
pass
that
complying
with
the
law.
B
You
know
it's
worth
trying
this
approach,
which
allows
the
opportunity
to
read
district
in
the
way
that
st.
Paul
did
when
they
complied
in
time
for
their
election.
That
will
require
some
shifts
that
I
think
might
come
as
a
surprise
to
voters
or
potential
candidates.
Like
we
talked
about
last
time,
I
suspect
that
having
a
special
election
in
2023
is
a
you
know,
pretty
likely
scenario
and
I
I
think
voters
are
gonna.
B
You
know
have
I'm
not
sure
how
voters
experience
will
be
with
that
that
cycle,
so
I
suspect,
depending
on
this,
goes
that
the
conversation
will
be
revisited
after
the
2021
or
2023
election.
I
still
think
there
are
a
lot
of
benefits
to
plan
number
two
in
terms
of
clarity
in
terms
of
to
the
council.
Vice
president
point
consistency
across
the
different
elected
bodies,
I
think
it
creates
a
clear
pattern
for
voters
that
reflect
some
of
the
patterns
at
the
state,
so
they're
not
unfamiliar
to
voters.
B
So
you
know
I'm
I'm
willing
to
support
option.
One
again,
I
think
that
that
is
the
direction
that
you
know
that
this
body
and
the
Charter
Commission
are
clearly
heading
I'm.
A
little
disappointed
that
we
haven't
had
more
willingness
from
some
of
the
other
potentially
affected
offices
in
collaborating.
B
You
know
the
City
Council
is
going
to
have
change,
no
matter
what
the
question
was.
Will
it
affect
the
mayor's
election,
the
park
board
and
the
board
of
estimate
and
Taxation
and
again
I?
Think
for
the
amount
of
benefit
that
it
could
have
had
to
voters?
It
was
a
little
disappointing
not
to
see
more
open-mindedness
from
those
other
bodies
and
collaborating
on
a
schedule.
B
So
those
are
my
thoughts
about
this
again.
I
appreciate
you
moving
this
forward
and
appreciate
your
leadership
along
with
staff
in
the
council.
You
know
shepherding
the
council
with
taking
a
position
on
this
important
issue,
because
we
were
at
the
stage
where
we
really
need
to
start
getting
to
work
if
the
Charter
Commission
is
kind
of
taking
up
at
their
next
meetings.
The
discussion
they've
been
having
they're
really
raying.
B
The
pros
and
cons
of
you
know
doing
more
community
engagement
around
redistricting
and
therefore
making
it
less
likely
that
they
would
hit
that
2021
deadline
and
making
it
more
likely
there'd
be
a
2023
election.
You
know
versus
moving
faster
in
order
to
keep
that
2021
election
a
four
year
term,
so
that
will
be
an
important
conversation
that
I'm
sure
council
members
will
want
to
wait
and
I
hope.
B
Our
constituents
will
weigh
in
on
I
know
it's
pretty
in
the
weeds,
but
we
do
have
some
great
organizations
who
I
think
are
paying
attention
to
legal,
but
women,
voters
and
others
that
I
think
will
be
able
to
bring
some
of
that
voter
voice
to
the
table,
which
I
think
is
really
helpful.
So
this
is
a
big
deal
and
just
final
thought.
I
do
want
to
just
re-emphasize
again
that
in
order
to
do
plan,
one
requires
a
lot
of
changes,
including
to
the
state
law
itself.
So
this
relies
on
the
legislature.
B
You
know
offices
after
that
in
perpetuity
having
the
City
Council
offset
from
those
other
offices
on
the
ballot
and
I
think
that
would
be
the
worst
case
scenario
for
our
voters
and
have
real
impacts
on
governance
at
the
city.
At
the
very
least,
if
that
change
happens,
we
need
to
have
significantly
more
community
engagement
and
more
community
conversation
about
what
that
governance
change
would
be
like
for
for
our
community.
B
A
You
for
the
comments,
additional
comments
from
committee
members.
I
just
think
you
have
highlighted
and
I
appreciate
the
comments.
A
lot
of
the
different
challenges
with
this
there's
really
trade-offs
with
each
one
of
these
things
and
I
think
it
is
very
likely
that
we
will
end
up
having
to
go
with
plan
number
one
depending
on
how
things
go
with
redistricting,
but
I
think
aspirationally.
It
really
makes
sense
and
that
we
also
recognize
that,
since
the
last
redistricting,
we
have
a
lot
of
data.
A
We
live
in
a
very
data
rich
world
right
now,
and
a
lot
of
that
work
can
be
front
loaded,
and
so
we
can
have
very
extensive
community
engagement
and
people
feeling
very
informed
and
understanding
exactly
way.
Things
are
going
to
land
once
everything's,
officially
in
and
I,
think
that
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
from
that
standpoint.
But
again,
there's
trade-offs
with
all
of
this.
I
was
thinking
about
the
conversation
last
time.
A
It
could
be
even
more
dramatic
than
that
where
they
essentially
go
their
first
term
all
the
way
through
another
election
before
getting
an
opportunity
to
vote
on
their
first
budget.
And
so
you
know,
there's
just
a
lot
of
trade-offs
involved
with
this
and
it's
it's
we're
trying
our
best
to
make
the
most
of
the
situation
so
that
it's
as
positive
for
voters.
This
is
positive
for
the
public
and
for
the
governance
of
the
city
as
possible.
So
any
additional
comments
or
questions
from
colleagues
not
seeing
any.
Oh
comes
the
president
better.
Thank.
B
So
you
know,
I
think
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
point,
that
a
lot
was
learned
and
that
unique
last
redistricting
process
that
I
think
will
carry
forward
and
we'll
see
the
benefits
of
for
a
long
time,
because
it
was
such
a
big
change,
but
also
that
could
be
drawn
on
to
do
the
communication
work
that
I
think
is
even
starting
now
with
staff
talking
about
a
timeline
for
that,
and
so
I
appreciate
it.
Mr.
C
Chair,
if
I
can't
just
on
that
one
screen
and
I
mean
there
is
a
very
large
deep
bench
of
staff
working
across
multiple
Department
on
this
time.
As
the
council
president
just
noted,
we're
hopeful
to
be
able
to
bring
forward
our
recommendations
on
community
engagement,
education
and
outreach
to
the
Charter
Commission
sometime
in
April,
I
think
is
what
we're
looking
at
April
or
May
so
it'd,
be
that
same
timeframe.
C
A
C
A
F
Chair
Johnson
members
of
the
committee
I
would
just
like
to
talk
to
you.
I
did
provide
you
with
a
document
that
I'd
liked
to
be
received
and
filed.
It's
a
summary
of
the
statutory
and
charter
amendments.
I
did
provide
you,
those
possible
amendments
for
both
options,
so
I'll
just
talk
about
the
first
option
since
that's
what
we're
going
to
be
looking
at,
so
the
amendments
I
wanted
to,
let
you
know
those
amendments
applying
not
just
for
right
now,
not
just
for
after
the
2020
census,
they're
going
to
apply
into
the
future.
F
So
there's
a
lot
of
work
being
done
up
front,
but
it's
going
to
be
useful
for
decades.
From
now
and
I
have
worked
on
some
statutory
changes
and
those
are
going
to
be
set
out
so
that
any
City
could
use
it.
So,
whether
a
city
is
you
know,
it
has
elections
in
even-numbered
years
or
odd-numbered
years,
I'm
drafting
that
so
that
it
can
be
useful
to
all
of
the
cities
one
one
of
the
first.
F
This
is
for
the
option,
one
that
you've
chosen
one
one
of
the
first
statutes
I
want
to
talk
about
is
section
205
point:
zero.
Seven,
what
that
does
is
that
that
particular
statute
does
say
that
the
councilmember
term
is
four
years
just
to
let
you
know
the
statutes
say
that
mayor's
term
is
either
two
or
four
years,
but
for
council
members
that
just
appear
four
years
so
I
know
I
did
provide
the
Charter
Commission
with
a
legal
opinion
saying
that
well
under
the
con
amendment.
F
F
I.
Believe
that's
going
to
be
the
case
that
it
would
be
a
two-year
term,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
statute
says
the
same
thing
now
section
205
point
84,
that's
basically
what
we
call
the
con
amendment
I
mean
the
con
amendment.
Is
we
than
that
and
so
I'm
going
to
be
talking
about
some
portions
of
that
con
amendment?
F
That
amendment
says
that
if
a
city
of
the
first
class,
like
the
city
Minneapolis,
has
an
election
and
what
we
find
is
that
there's
been
a
5%
change
of
population
and
any
ward,
then
we
have
to
have
an
election
in
either
that
you're
running
in
two
or
three.
What
I
found
out
after
when
Casey
put
together
a
group
of
people
to
work
on
redistricting?
F
What
I
found
out
in
some
of
those
discussions
was
that
there's
a
difference
of
opinion
as
to
what
the
statute
means
when
it
talks
about
the
5%
change
in
population,
people
had
different
views
as
to
how
you
determine
what
what
the
5%
is.
What
numbers
you
use
to
calculate
so
what
I'm
proposing
is
just
to
make
it
clear
in
the
statute
that
what
we'd
be
looking
at,
for
example,
now,
would
be
the
population
and
award
in
2020
compared
to
the
population.
F
F
Also
I,
like
I,
said,
I
wanted
to
clarify
that,
after
the
20
after
an
election
in
2023,
if
needed,
we
would
have
a
two
year
term
and
then
also
under
the
conmen
minutes.
I
think
it
was
just
an
oversight
by
the
legislature,
but
there
were
changes
that
were
going
on
in
2010
and
2011,
and
a
couple
different
statutes,
and
one
statute
said
that
oh
now,
cities
of
the
first
class
Henry
district
in
the
year
ending
in
1,
but
it
the
Kahn
amendment
didn't
say.
F
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
I
want
to
talk
about
this
particular
section.
204
point
135
I
just
want
to
talk
to
you.
This
is
one
of
those
changes
that
was
made
in
like
2010
2011
it
it
allowed
cities
of
the
first
class
to
do
the
redistricting
in
the
year
ending
in
one.
So
we
would,
if
we
would
do
that,
we
would
establish
the
boundaries
in
2021.
F
Then
the
next
step
that
would
happen
would
be
that
the
legislature
would
do
their
redistricting
after
the
city
gets
those
boundary
lines
for
the
legislature,
then
we
would
have
to
look
at
our
ward
boundaries
against
those
legislative
boundaries
and
see,
if
there's
like
little
slivers
of
precincts,
that
we
would
have
to
have
say.
For
example,
a
legislative
line
is
one
block
away
from
a
ward
line.
Well,
technically,
we
can
have
a
precinct,
but
what's
the
point
of
that,
so
the
statute
allows
us
to
make
those
little
minor
changes.
F
So
we
don't
have
to
have
those
very
small,
unique
precincts.
So
that's
just
what
204
B
point
135
is
all
about,
so
I
want
to
amend
that
I
want
to
allow
Park
District's
to
be
reestablished
in
the
year
ending
in
1.
Also
right
now
that
law
was
created
so
that
you
can
only
assess
reestablish
the
wards
and
the
year
ending
in
1
and
then
after
the
legislature
makes
their
desert
redistricting.
Then
you
can
make
those
small
minor
modifications,
but
I
want
that
to
happen.
F
The
other
thing
I
would
like
to
clarify
is
that
if
we
would
redistricting
the
year
ending
in
2
after
the
look
basically
after
the
or
whenever
the
legislature,
the
legislature,
typically
the
statute
will
say,
there's
a
one-year
part
of
me
one
week
period
to
appeal
that
plan.
So
if
somebody
doesn't
like
how
we've
drawn
the
boards
they'd
have
one
week
to
file
something
in
district
court
to
say
this
is
not
a
proper.
F
These
are
not
proper
boundary
lines
for
the
wards,
but
once
the
condom,
once
the
statute
allowed
things
to
be
redistricted
in
the
year
ending
in
one,
there
wasn't
clearly
language
as
to.
When
can
you
appeal
that
so
I
just
want
to
clarify
that?
That's
also
a
one-week
time
to
appeal,
if
we
redistricting
the
year
ending
in
one
and
we
put
and
the
Charter
Commission
approves
a
plan.
It's
one
week
to
file
in
district
court
and
the
same
would
be
true
for
modification
like
I
said.
F
If
we
were
district
in
the
year
ending
in
one
and
then
the
legislature
redistricting,
we
have
to
make
those
small
minor
modifications
in
the
statute.
There's
nothing
saying
if
somebody
can
appeal
at
those
minor
modifications.
So
let's
clarify
that.
Let's
give
people
again
one
week
to
appeal
that
which
I
think
would
be
highly
unlikely,
but
it's
possible,
but
let's
have
that
in
the
statute.
So
we
know
what
we
can
and
cannot
do
and
then
there
with
option
one
there
would
be
some
changes
to
them
to
the
Charter
provisions.
F
Also,
some
of
these
charter
provisions
you'll
see,
will
kind
of
be
similar
to
the
statutory
changes.
So
this
one
is
similar
to
section
204
B
point
135.
Basically
we
want
to
put
in
the
charter
provision
that
we
would
allow
the
redistricting
early
for
both
wards
and
park.
Districts.
I
know
the
statutes
right
now.
Don't
allow
us
to
do
that
early
with
the
park
districts,
but
we
want
to
have
them
and
sync
and
ready
to
rock
and
roll
when
we
get
those
statutory
changes
done
and
also
the
Charter
Commission
right
now.
F
There's
provisions
in
the
in
the
Charter
about
public
hearings
for
your
basic
redistricting.
There
should
be
four
hearings,
but
it
doesn't
say
anything
about
what
happens
like
if
we
do
redistricting
the
year
ending
in
one
and
then
after
the
legislature
rear
districts.
We
have
to
make
some
minor
modifications.
It
doesn't
say
anything
about
that.
It's
possible.
We
don't
need
any
public
hearings,
it's
possible.
You
could
interpret
the
Charter
to
require
a
couple.
F
Public
hearings
for
changes
to
the
park
districts,
but
I
think
it
would
be
most
appropriate
to
allow
the
Charter
Commission
to
be
able
to
decide.
Well,
we
made
this
one
little
minor
modification.
Maybe
they
even
chat
with
the
park
board.
I,
don't
know,
but
I'm
just
saying
it
I
think
we
need
to
have
something
in
the
Charter
that
says
hey.
Maybe
the
Charter
Commission
can
make
that
determination,
whether
they
want
to
have
another
public
hearing
or
not.
On
those
minor
modifications.
F
And
then
the
next
one
is
section
3.2
of
the
Minneapolis
Charter.
Now
that
that
is
similar
to
the
cott
amendment.
To
section
205
point
eight
four
and
it
also
I
know
yesterday
I
was
with
some
members
of
the
Charter
Commission
and
we
were
looking
at
some
possible
charter
language
because
there,
as
Kasich
karl
said
they're
contemplating
going
possibly
going
to
the
voters
with
a
change
to
the
Charter.
F
The
the
Charter
Commission
wasn't
as
interested
in
putting
details
in
the
Charter
about
how
the
five
percent
change
in
population
would
be
calculated,
but
I
think
it
it's
worthwhile
to
put
in
the
statute.
So
that
probably
wouldn't
be
a
part
of
the
Charter
changes,
but
also
part
of
the
charter.
Change
would
be
that
after
the
2023
election,
then
that
would
be
a
two-year
term
to
clarify
that
and
when
there's
an
election
in
the
year
ending
and
one
and
we
use
new
Ward
boundaries
that
we
created
in
the
year
ending
and
whan.
F
We
don't
have
to
have
that
election
in
the
year
ending
in
two
or
three
in
Section.
Four
point
two
that
is
similar
to
the
statutory
changes
of
two.
Oh
five
point
zero.
Seven,
basically
we
would
want
would
want
to
say
that
you
know
right
now.
The
Charter
says
that
it's
generally
a
four-year
term
for
coffee.
It's
a
four-year
term
for
council
members.
F
We
would
like
to
amend
it
so
that
when
we
follow
the
con
rule,
that,
after
like
say,
if
we
have
an
election
in
the
year
ending
and
three
here,
it
would
be
2023
that
that
term
would
be
for
two
years.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
clarified
that
we
can
follow
the
con
rule
and
put
do
it
to
your
term
so
that
all
of
the
council,
all
of
the
offices
are
in
sync
from
that
point,.
F
And
then
there's
only
a
couple:
minor
changes
to
eight
point,
two
and
eight
point
three
just
to
clean
it
up.
Right
now
we
talked
about
a
regular
election.
That's
like
our
regular
every
four
year
election
I'd
like
to
get
that
in
sync,
with
the
language
of
the
statute
and
the
statute
talks
about
general
and
special
elections,
so
I'd
like
to
kind
of
get
that
in
sync,
so
that
it
it
clarifies
that
it's
a
regular
general
election,
not
just
a
regular
election,
because
that's
what
the
that's,
what
the
Charter
is
talking
about.
F
There's
under
8.3
there's
also
some
minor
clean
up
language
just
right
now
it
says
that
the
get
did
it
says
that
redistricting
does
not
affect
the
eligibility
or
term
of
an
incumbent
holding
office.
When
the
plan
takes
a
fact
well,
technically,
the
con
amendment
would
kind
of
shorten
that
term
from
four
years
to
two
years.
If
we
had
that
population
change
of
five
percent
or
more
an
award,
so
is
it
was
just
it
would
just
be
a
minor
cleanup,
so
I
believe
those
are
the
last.
F
That's
basically
it
for
the
statutory
and
charter
changes,
and
you
know
we'll
be
working
and,
and
one
of
the
things
we're
requesting
is
that
you
do
direct
igr
to
go
forward
with
some
statutory
changes,
because
these
changes
need
to
be
done
now
and
we
can't
wait
so
I'd
like
that
to
be
that
direction
to
be
made
and
I'm
working
with
Casey
Carl
and
Jean
Ranieri
to
make
those
to
set
up
some
statutory
changes
that
can
be
used
for
a
bill.
So
the
quicker
we
can
get
that
direction
the
best
that
would
be
for
everyone.
Excellent.
A
F
A
Do
you
have
any
comments
or
questions
from
committee
members
on
that?
Well,
I
just
want
to
express
our
gratitude
for
your
careful
analysis
and
scrutiny
of
all
these
different
ways
that
this
impacts
us
and
that
we
would
need
to
have
modifications
in
order
to
be
in
compliance
and
to
to
make
this
work
so
really
appreciate
it.
Thank
you,
yeah
well
I'll
go
ahead
and
move
both
the
receiving
and
filing
and
direction
that's
listed
on
our
agenda
directing
staff
to
pursue
amendments
to
applicable
statues
and
charter
provisions
related
to
redistricting
in
the
conduct
of
municipal
elections.
E
You,
chair
Johnson,
you
know
I'm
just
really
curious
as
to
their
thoughts
or
consideration
for
how
we
began
to
really
talk
to
our
constituencies
and
communities
about
this
issue.
There
have
been
a
number
of
newspaper
articles
that
have
been
floating
around
around
this
topic
and
in
questions
and
I
feel
like
we
need
a.
D
C
C
But
we
are
working
now
on
updating
that
content,
and
certainly
one
of
the
things
we've
anticipated
is
as
part
of
that
web
content.
A
page
of
frequently
asked
questions,
common
answers,
directing
people
to
the
statutes
and
how
this
will
affect
the
drawing
of
new
political
boundaries
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
So
it
is
on
our
radar,
we're
working
on
that
and
would
anticipate
bringing
that
back
if
council
wishes
to
have
help
with
messaging
I
know
that
the
staff
can
also
provide
that
as
well.
G
C
Chair,
if
you
would
indulge
me
one
one
extra
before
we
leave,
and
especially
because
she's
here,
I
wanted
to
highlight
the
work
of
assistant
city
attorney,
Carol
bassoon,
who
frequently
Labor's
behind
the
scenes.
She
is
the
attorney
assigned
to
the
clerk's
office
for
pretty
much
everything.
She
is
our
expert
in-house
on
open
meetings.
She
does
data
practices,
she
does
elections
redistricting.
These
are.
These
are
key
things
that
the
clerk's
office
brings
Fortin.
As
the
council
president
said,
they
are
very
important
in
terms
of
how
our
governance
operates
at
the
city.
C
It
was
MS
bassoon
who
caught
this
issue
and
raised
it
to
our
attention
and
has
been
really
the
driving
force
behind
I
gr,
the
clerk
and
so
many
of
the
staff
coming
together
in
terms
of
organizing.
We
need
a
strategy.
We
need
to
do
this
now.
This
has
multiple
layers
and
is
a
highly
nuanced
issue.
That's
going
to
require
statutory
change
charter
change,
it's
going
to
affect
how
the
council
has
chosen.
So
this.
This
is
something
that
absent
her
I'm,
not
sure
that
we
would
have
had
the
timeline
to
be
planful.
C
In
this
regard,
it
would
have
been
a
last-minute
whoops.
Now
we
have
to
do
this
so
really
grateful
that
MS
bassoon
keeps
that
close,
careful
eye
on
the
details
that
really
do
matter
and
have
such
a
significant
consequence
and
wanted
to
give
her
that
public
recognition
in
front
of
the
committee,
while
we're
here
thank.
A
A
G
A
G
Chairman
the
first
slide
talks
about
February
issues,
and
some
of
these
are
fairly
dated.
The
first
thing
I
want
to
talk
about
is
the
immigration
public
charge
it's
been
implemented.
There
is
a
task
force
between
state
agencies,
local
agencies,
many
of
our
nonprofit
agencies.
They
get
the
word
out
the
people
about.
What's
in
the
rule,
it's
not
in
the
rule,
because
there's
lots
of
concern
within
our
immigrant
community
about
what
can
we
do?
Why
is
covered?
What
is
not
covered
and
I
know?
G
G
G
They
also
concerned
about
the
outlook,
maybe
improving
slightly
for
2021,
but
maybe
having
a
first
quarter
in
2020
being
a
little
bit
lower
and
given
the
fact
of
the
tariffs
and
the
coronavirus
that
maybe
be
come
to
fruition,
and
tomorrow,
the
MMB
Office
of
Management
and
Budget.
The
state
is
going
to
announce
the
projection.
The
revenue
projection
at
about
11
o'clock.
That
will
really
tell
how
the
rest
of
the
session
will
go.
G
Everyone's
thinking,
it
would
maybe
flat
we're
not
certain,
but
there
is
a
surplus
now
I
think
some
people
were
counting
one
more
by
about
noon
tomorrow.
We'll
get
you
an
email,
letting
you
know
what
happened
at
the
state
yesterday
was
rather
unusual.
The
legislature
actually
took
the
afternoon
off
to
go
to
caucuses
around
the
state,
because
many
members
are
to
300
miles
away,
and
so
they
took
yesterday
afternoon
off
and
they
took
the
morning
off
today,
so
they
can
get
back
and
by
doing
that
and
a
couple
other
things
that
are
occurring.
G
They
decided
to
extend
the
deadlines
by
a
week,
so
we
don't
need
to
get
things
out
of
committees
now
until
the
March
20th
and
the
second
deadline
is
March
27th.
So
because
there's
more
time
to
get
things
done,
another
factor
was
but
the
revisor
or
statute
was
swamped
and
couldn't
get
things
done
as
quickly
as
I.
Usually
do
it
it's
just
as
a
possible
aside.
There
could
be
nearly
5,000
bills
introduced
this
biennium,
which
would
be
a
record.
G
You
only
passed
a
couple
hundred
and
many
of
those
include
other
but
many
bills,
but
5,000
introduced,
and
maybe
a
couple
hundred
wind
up
getting
adopted
at
the
state.
But
you
see
the
priorities,
priorities
of
the
House
Majority
and
the
Senate
Majority
Social
Security
benefits
and
the
majority
and
the
Senate
that
this
is
yes,
the
Republican
caucus,
the
House
Majority
they're.
G
Looking
for
early
childhood
learning
for
additional
funding,
trying
to
make
insulin,
affordable,
paid,
Family,
Medical
Leave
as
statewide
Gun,
Violence,
Prevention
and
bonding,
you
can
see
that
maybe
the
only
thing
that's
really
common
between
both
bodies
is
bonding.
But
when
you
look
in
the
details,
the
house
probably
will
spend
more
proposed
to
spend
more
than
the
Senate
Senate
numbers
are
closer
to
a
little
bit
less
than
a
billion.
The
house
was
over
two
million
when
we
meet
when
they
meet
in
24,
hopefully
finish
a
bill.
G
It'll
probably
be
closer
to
a
million
seven
to
two
billion.
We
are
delegation
we
did
meet
with
council
president
and
County
Council,
our
chair
and
the
mayor
on
February
7th
I'm,
going
through
several
issues.
They
then
asked
us
to
leave
so
they
collect
a
chair.
The
chair
is
representative
Gomez
Nisha
Gomez,
chair
of
the
delegation,
also
representative
Gomez,
was
appointed
to
the
property
tax
division
of
the
property
care
of
the
tax
committee
she's
a
member
of
the
full
committee,
but
was
not
a
member
of
the
property
tax
division.
G
She
is
taking
the
place
of
Representative
Loffler
in
terms
of
state
government
issues
that
we're
working
on
housing
and
lots
of
things
dealing
in
the
housing
issue:
affordable,
housing,
shelter,
housing,
there's
lots
of
discussion
about
shelter,
there's
a
shelter
bill
moving
along
and
it
would
not
just
build
shelters-
would
be
to
a
comprehensive
approach.
The
shelter
basically
starting
to
continue
a
continuum
of
housing.
There's
also
a
the
builders
or
chart,
are
arguing
about
municipal
fees
and
trying
to
take
some
authorities
away
from
the
cities.
G
Metro
cities
in
the
League
of
Cities,
working
on
that
Nero
and
his
renters
rights
issues
and
many
of
our
delegation
members
were
carrying
that
legislation
in
both
the
house
and
in
the
Senate.
Hopefully
we
can
see
some
movement
there's
also
some
ideas
of
maybe
renters
rights
and
some
of
these
benefits
that
people
are
asking
for
could
be
married
together
and
so
and
then
in
climate
and
change
and
energy.
The
stretch
coat
discussion
is
still
going
on.
There's
a
lots
of
discussion
about.
Can
we
make
our
goals
by
2036
in
terms
of
carbon
reduction
in
taxes?
G
Last
year?
The
legislature
said:
if
you
want
to
have
a
local
sales
tax,
you
need
to
have
a
referenda.
You
need
to
also
pass
a
resolution
and
you
need
to
come
to
them
and
get
it
approved.
So
for
the
last
two
sessions
of
the
local
tax
committee,
local
property
tax
division,
they've
been
hearing
local
tax
bills
from
from
around
the
state
about
ten
communities
have
already
presented.
Many
are
arguing
that
there
are
regional
aspects
to
their
tax
and
the
regional
aspects
are
that
many
tourists
come
to
their
community
or
their
students
in
their
community.
G
Major
issue
of
being
discussed,
at
least
in
the
last
two
weeks,
has
been
light.
Rail
excuse
me:
metro,
transit,
particularly
light
rail
safety
to
count
misters
le
has
chair,
Azealia,
spoke
and
talked
about
a
plan
that
they're
working
on
they've
had
most
of
the
hearings
in
the
house,
nothing
in
the
Senate.
Yet
that
should
be
coming
within
the
next
week
or
two,
so
that
I
think
the
big
news
will
be
tomorrow.
What
will
be
the
forecast?
Mr.
chairman
I'll
stand
for
questions,
excellent.
A
Well,
thank
you
for
all
the
updates.
Do
we
have
any
questions
from
committee
members
not
seeing
any
so
I
will
go
ahead,
move
that
we
received
and
file
that
report.
All
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries.
Thank
you
very
much
with
no
further
business
before
us.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.