►
Description
View Marked Agenda
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/MarkedAgenda/Charter-RR/2419
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
B
The
city
will
be
recording
and
posting
this
meeting
to
the
city's
website
and
youtube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
public
access
and
transparency.
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
the
minnesota
open
meeting
law.
For
the
record,
my
name
is
matt
perry
and
I
am
co-chair
along
with
andrea
rubinstein
of
the
charter
commission's
redistricting
rules,
work
group.
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role,
so
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
quorum.
D
B
B
E
E
D
B
B
That
motion
passes
the
in
the
agenda
is
adopted.
Next
on
the
agenda
is
acceptance
of
the
minutes.
We
have
one
set
of
minutes
to
accept
from
our
regular
meeting
on
april
15th
2021..
May
I
please
have
a
motion
to
accept
the
minutes
so
moved
forward.
E
B
B
And
that
motion
passes
so
the
minutes
are
accepted.
The
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
chairs
report.
I
do
not
have
anything
to
add,
except
to
other
than
what's
on
the
agenda
today,
and
I
just
want
to
give
co-chair
rubenstein
an
opportunity
to
ask
you
if
you
have
anything
that
you'd
like
to
add
to
the
to
the
chairs
report.
F
Thank
you
co-chair
I
well.
The
only
thing
I
want
to
add
is
to
thank
ms
bushoon,
christina
kendrick
and
other
staff
for
being
so
helpful
in
our
review
of
these
and
revision
of
these
rules
and
procedures.
B
Thanks
for
those
comments,
I
I
totally
agree
with
that.
I
was
just
noting
that
we
have
quite
a
bit
of
a
number
of
changes
and
a
bunch
of
paper
and
to
keep
this
all
sorted
out,
so
that
we're
operating
efficiently
is
been
largely
due
to
staff
effort.
So
thank
you.
B
So
we
will
proceed
with
our
agenda
and
it's
item
5.1
on
the
agenda,
considering
potential
additions
to
the
procedural
rules
of
the
redistricting
process,
and
if
we
could
pull
up
the
bullet
list
for
this
item,
I
would
appreciate
it
so
that
we
can
go
through
it
to
to
the
to
the
work
group.
What
I've
done
here.
B
B
And
so
I'd
like
to
go
through
this
and
get
comment
back,
so
they
may
be
reflected
as
having
been
changed.
But
this
is
more
a
point
of
where
we
will
agree
or
disagree
or
discuss
and
I'd
like
to
follow
the
same
thing
that
we
did
last
time,
which
is,
if
it's
a
consensus
item
adopted
as
a
consensus
item
and
then
adopt
all
of
the
consensus,
consent,
consensus
items
as
at
one
point
at
the
end
of
going
through
the
list
so
starting
off.
B
B
Where
ms
bashun
is
combined
is
recommending
combining
rules
3
and
12
in
the
with
the
insertion,
the
recommended
principles
for
redistricting
minneapolis
awards
and
park
districts
after
the
2020
census
adopted
by
the
charter
commission.
Does
anybody
have
any
comment
or
suggestions
or
changes
to
that.
B
F
F
And
I
just
realized
that
in
the
principles
we
deleted,
that
phrase
do
their
very
best,
and
so
we
might
want
to
consider
making
that
consistent
with
the
principles
and
while
I'm
at
it.
I
just
wanted
to
say
I
neglected
to
say
deep
thanks
to
nicole
weber
and
maddie,
for
also
all
the
work
that
they've
put
into
this.
B
Okay,
so
you
have
a
suggestion
of
and
number
two
to.
F
F
B
Okay,
does
anybody
have
any
concerns
with
that
hearing?
None
I'll,
take
that
as
a
consensus
item
and
just
a
note
that
maddie
is
taking
notes
for
us,
so
she'll
be
updating
the
document
in
addition
to
her
other
duties
today,.
B
B
Item
number
four
ms
bushoon
suggested
inserting
who
is
a
charter
commission,
commissioner,.
B
That
and
I'm
not
hearing
anything,
so
I
will
take
that
as
a
consensus
item
we
can.
Okay,
6
is
showing
so
there's
some
questions
here
that
we
might
want
to
discuss,
but
does
anybody
have
any
issue
with
including
the
rules
that
are
basically
extracted
from
the
minneapolis
charter
commission
for
absences
rule
2.1.6.
A
G
On
the
are
you
talking
about
on
the
actual
language
I
added
or
on
the
ex
for
the
24
hour
limit.
G
I
mean
I
I
didn't
have
any
changes
to
that.
I
wasn't
sure
exactly
what
it
meant.
I
assume
that
you
can
only
have
excused
absences
if
you
mention
it
after
the
meeting
under
special
circumstances,
and
I
didn't
know
what
those
special
circumstances
were.
I
didn't
make
any
changes
to
that.
The
only
change
I
suggested
is
that
as
to
who
would
make
the
decision
on
whether
the
absence
is
excused
or
unexcused.
B
G
E
B
H
B
F
I
I
did
it
changed
my
mind,
but
then
I'll
just
want
to
say
that
we
had
not
discussed
before
a
limit
on
excused
absences,
and
I
understand
that
that's
to
make
it
consistent
with
the
charter
commission
rules.
So
I'm
fine
with
it,
but
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
we
accepted
it
with
our
eyes
open.
B
If
we
move
scroll
down
a
little
bit,
we
can
see
there
have
been
some
numbering
changes,
but
let's
move
down
to
where
10
is
now
11.
B
F
F
G
The
one
sentence
in
that
paragraph
says
all
neighborhood
organizations
recognized
by
the
city
of
minneapolis
shall
be
notified
of
all
group
meetings.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
do
that.
That
might
be.
G
We
may
have
so
many
group
meetings
a
couple
times
a
week,
maybe
more,
and
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
be
actively
having
to
make
sure
that
we
notify
each
and
every
neighborhood
organization
for
each
and
every
meeting,
and
so
my
thought
is
that
you
could
instead
take
that
out
and
make
a
change
to
suggest
that
the
redistricting
group
should
suggest
to
all
neighborhood
groups
recognized
by
the
city
of
minneapolis,
that
they
should
request
to
be
placed
on
the
city's
clerk's
electronic
distribution
list
right
now.
G
Gov
delivery
is
set
up
with
the
red
so
that
you
can
get
information
from
the
redistricting
group.
I
think
it
would
be
a
more
efficient
process
if
we
would
just
say,
hey
organizations,
please
set
up
set
up
on
this
gov
delivery,
and
then
they
can
automatically
get
those
notifications
of
meetings.
G
It
just
seems
like
an
awesome
task
to
have
to
go
to
every
I
mean
I
guess
you
could
have
one
email
with
all
the
government
government
organizations
all
of
those
neighborhood
organizations
on
the
email,
but
then
somebody
would
have
to
be
in
charge
of
making
sure
that
every
time
a
meeting
is
set,
we
provide
notification
through
that
email.
G
B
Thanks
for
those
comments,
someone
has
their
hand
up,
and
my
team's
display
is
not
allowing
me
to
see
who
that
is.
So.
I'm
sorry.
B
D
D
B
It
does
yeah
okay,
commissioner
ginder.
E
My
only
concern
was,
I
think,
it's.
I
think
it's
quite
easy
for
ncr
to
notify
all
of
these
organizations.
I
mean
they
have
to
listen.
We
have
our
liaison
with
ncr.
It
seems
to
me
that
you
know
when
we
notify
them,
then
they
just
do
an
email,
email
blast
out
to
everyone.
E
I
could
be
wrong
on
that,
but
so
I'm
not
sure
that
there's
the
issue
there
that
ms
bashun
articulated.
I
Thank
you.
I
bet,
commissioner
hawkins
has
her
hand
up
for
the
same
reason,
but
last
time
we
did
in
fact
work
with
ncr
for
this
type
of
communication
to
the
recognized
neighborhoods
understanding.
There
are
some
neighborhoods
that
aren't
recognized
and
that's
another
issue,
but
I
don't
know
if
that
affects
your
language
or
not,
but
I
would
suspect
that
the
outreach
committee
would
be
planning
on
working
with
ncr
for
that
purpose.
B
Okay,
commissioner,
hawkins
hello.
H
You
won't
have
to
recreate
that
list,
that's
already
there.
There
is
a
list
and
they
do
there's
over
70
neighborhoods.
That
on
this
list,
and
all
you
have
to
do
is
get
a
stuffed
ncr
and
they
can
shoot
it
out
for
you.
B
Okay,
it
sounds
like
we,
given
that
we
have
a
list,
do
any
of
the
people
who
were
for
the
change
want
to
reconsider
their
opinion.
B
B
F
Yes,
the
breaking
out
of
that
paragraph,
I
think,
is
an
excellent
idea
and
I
certainly
support
it.
I
had
one
question,
though,
about
what
is
now
paragraph
13
that
says
that
the
redistricting
group
shall
redistrict
the
city
wards
and
the
park
and
recreation
districts
at
the
same
time,
and
I,
as
I
recall
from
last
time
and
I
think
what
this
language
was
before-
we
first
did
the
awards
and
then
we
did
the
park
districts,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
ask
miss
bachoon
the
reason
for
putting
them
place,
stating
it
this
way.
B
H
G
Yes,
commissioner,
perry,
I
think
this
language
was
just.
I
just
kept
this
language
from
the
last
time.
There
are
different
deadlines
for
the
park
districts
and
for
the
re
and
the
city
wards.
Technically,
we
could
redistrict
the
park
districts
later,
there's
a
little
bit
more
leeway
in
our
time,
but
last
time
we
just
did
it
all
at
once.
G
We
finished
all
at
once
and
when
we
had
the
public
hearings,
it
was
for
both
the
both
the
the
awards
and
for
the
park
districts,
and
so
we
were
pretty
much
doing
everything
together
at
once,
and
so
I
think
that's
what
that
reflects.
It
reflects
how
we
did
it
last
time.
I
don't
know
if
we
started
with
ward
maps
and
then
went
to
park
district
maps
or
what
we
did,
but
a
lot
of
the
public
hearings,
a
lot
of
public
hearings.
G
Well,
the
public
hearings
were,
I
think,
probably
both
the
park
district
and
the
awards,
and
you
know
somebody
could
tell
me
otherwise,
but
I
think
we
always
had
both
the
park
district
and
the
ward
maps
at
the
four
public
hearings,
and
we
could
change
this.
This
was
language
left
in
and
it
was
language.
It's
not
really.
I
don't
think
it's
technically
in
our
charter,
but
it's
kind
of
processed.
B
D
My
recollection
is
the
same
as
our
councils
that
we
did
do
these
both
at
the
same
time
the
last
time,
the
the
reason
it
might
seem
different
is
because
we
only
went
through
one
round
of
changes
with
the
park
board,
because
there
was
only
one
line
that
needed
to
be
redrawn
and
the
part
board
was
okay,
with
our
very
first
effort
to
redraw
the
lines.
So
we
then
set
it
aside
until
the
end,
but
they
were
both
approved
at
the
same
time
and
the
public
hearings
were
for
both
at
the
same
time.
B
This
so
I
think,
and
unless
I
hear
otherwise
I'll-
put
13
the
item
of
13
being
changed
13
through
16,
to
keep
the
concept
separate
and
to
keep
the
change
in
if
the
language
at
13,
the
redistricting
group
shall
redistrict
the
city
wards
and
park
and
recreation
districts.
B
G
Yes,
I
just
changed
the
language.
A
little
bit
to,
I
think,
reflect
what
could
be
reality.
G
The
redistricting
group
really
doesn't
technically
approve
a
plan.
They
recommend
a
plan
to
the
charter.
Commission,
I
don't
know
if
you
prefer
the
language
approve,
but
if
the
charter
commission
doesn't
like
what
the
redistricting
group
recommends
or
or
if
you
want
to
use
the
term
approves,
I
would
assume
they
can
do
a
couple
different
things.
They
can
send
it
back.
G
If
there's
time
to
the
redistricting
group
to
say
hey,
could
you
look
at
this
issue
or
that
issue
or
they
can
develop
their
own
plan
and
then
vote
on
their
own
plan
with
input
from
the
advisor
group?
So
we
didn't
have
to
go
to
the
point
last
time
where
the
charter
commission
had
to
develop
their
own
plan,
but
I
just
thought
that,
realistically
the
charter
commission
might
be
able
to
send
it
back
and
say:
hey
redistricting
group,
can
you
look
at
this
other
issue?
G
So
it's
it's
just
a
proposed.
Maybe
I
I
think
it
might
be
a
better
approach
because
it
really
probably
reflects
reality,
although
we
have,
we
didn't
have
to
get
to
this
point
last
time.
G
G
I
get,
I
guess
this
is
more
wording
change.
Of
course
we
took
out
any
other
election
districts
throughout
the
document,
but.
G
It's
just
more
specific:
it
will
dissolve
once
the
charter
commission
approves
the
maps,
so
it
gives
a
specific
timeline
because
there's
a
specific
date
by
which
the
charter
commission
approves
the
maps
and
and
and
then
it
leaves
in
unless
the
court
finds
the
plan,
improper
and
returns
it.
So
it
gives
a
specific
finite
date
to
when
the
redistricting
group
would
resolve
absent
court
court
appeal.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Co-Chair
rubenstein.
F
Yes,
I
just
had
one
question
the
word:
unless
or
unless
a
court
finds
the
plan
improper
suggests
that
then
we
could
undissolve
the
redistricting
group.
But
I
wondered
if
we
need
to
say
it
in
other
words,
that
we
don't.
G
I
respond
please,
sir.
Yes,
I
mean
I
considered
that
we
could
change
that
language
too.
I
kind
of
left
it
a
little
bit
like
it
was,
but
I
mean
if
you
look
at
it
technically,
if
you
say
we're
going
to
dissolve
it
and
as
soon
as
the
charter
commission
approves
the
maps
and
then
you
could
say
we
will
reinstitute
it
if
the
of
the
court
finds
the
plan
improper
and
returns
it.
G
So
we
could
use
that
alternative
language,
and
I
thought
there
was
some
language
similar
to
that
in
some
past
documents,
but
I
I
don't
see
it,
but
basically
that's
what
would
really
happen
if
you
want
to
say
we're
dissolving
it
we're
dissolving
it
at
the
time
the
maps
are
drawn
and
then
we'll
re,
re-const
reinstitute
it
if
we
need
to
and
maybe
dissolve,
is
not
the
best
terminology
either.
But
I
mean
I'm
open
for
suggestions
on
that.
J
Yeah,
that's
exactly
my
my
question
too,
which
is
you
know
if
we
dissolve
you
know,
if
does
the
body
even
exist
to
reconstitute
itself
if
a
court
finds
the
plan
invalid?
So
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
put
in
some
language
like
adjourns
or
adjourns
pending
finalization
of
the
plan
subject
to
recall,
if
a
court
disapproves
the
plan,
I
mean
I'm
just
the
language,
I'm
I'm
sure
it'll
be
fine.
I
mean
I
realize
this
is
an
edge
case,
but
I
I
just
I
thought
dissolve
sounds
permanent
to
me,
which
means.
B
Okay,
I'll
take
that
as
a
consensus
change
and
that
finishes
up
our
rules
document
unless
there
are
other
changes
that
people
have
that
were
not
noted
from
our
past
meeting
anything
else.
B
B
E
Mr
chair,
I
would
like
to
just
amend
that
and
to
further
add
that
and
then
forward
to
the
full
charter
commission
with
our
recommendation
and
that
way
we
can
take
care
of
it
all
at
once.
F
You're
not
over
yes,
yes,
mr
chair,
okay,.
B
J
D
B
Okay,
great
work:
everyone,
let's
move
on
to
item
5.2
on
the
agenda,
which
is
considering
revisions
and
recommendations
to
the
guiding
principles
of
the
redistricting
process,
and
we
have
if
we
can
get
those
up
on
the
screen.
B
Interaction
with
our
work
group
and
with
talking
to
nicole
webber
and
carol
bashoon
attorney
bashoon,
has
reviewed
these
and,
I
think
is
largely
agrees
with
them,
but
let's
go
through
them
and
I
think
there
might
be
some
others
that
have
come
up
since
then.
So
the
first
is
section
one
c.
If
we
could
put
those
back
up
on
the
screen
again,
please.
A
B
Okay,
they
aren't
for
me,
but
if
everybody
else
is
seeing
them,
that's
great,
that's
what's
important.
So
the
first
one
is
section
one
c
consistent
removed
and
disseminated
added.
Is
there
any
comment
on
that.
B
This
next
one
is
section
one
j
and
you
can
see
the
change
that
is
being
recommended.
Does
anybody
have
any
comment
on
this.
B
So
in
section
two
a
added
is
the
proposed
ad.
Is
the
charter
commission
may
appoint
up
to
nine
advisory
group
members
and
that
came
from
christina
as
well?
Any
comment
on
that.
B
I
Thank
you,
you
could
you
I
I
would
take
that
out.
I
would
make
it.
We
expect
the
advisory
group
members
to
participate
on
an
equal
basis.
I
believe
that's
the
expectation
within
the
redistricting
group
should
I
maybe
there's
a
better
word
that
say
are
expected
to
participate
but
or
just
participate.
B
Okay,
commissioner
abbott
and
then
commissioner
rubinstein.
J
Well,
I
think
the
word
that
commissioner
sandberg
is
looking
for
is:
shall
advisory
group
members
shall
participate
on
an
equal
basis?
I
think
would
work.
I
I
hesitate
to
suggest
it,
though
you
know,
subject
to
the
wrath
of
former
commissioner
melendez,
who
you
know.
Obviously
I
know
has
some
feelings
about.
The
word
shall,
but
I
think
either
will
or
shall
would
do
the
trick
here.
That's
my
two
cents.
B
Okay,
commissioner
rubenstein
and
then
commissioner,
gender.
F
F
B
Okay,
do
you
well,
let's
hear
from
commissioner
ginder
first,
commissioner
ginder.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Actually,
I
am
fine
with
christina's
aversion.
The
simple
fact
of
the
matter
is:
they
do
participate
on
an
equal
basis.
Just
as
a
charter,
commissioner
does
how
much
they
want
to
participate
is
always
going
to
be
up
to
them,
but
I
mean
they
do
participate
in
what
what
her
alliance
is.
They
participate
on
an
equal
basis
with
us
and
I
think,
that's
perfectly
fine
and
they
choose
how
much
to
participate.
I
mean
we
can't
mandate,
we're
saying
they
shall
participate
and
they
show
up
at
the
meetings.
E
That's
participation.
Is
there
a
certain
number
of
times
they
have
to
talk
so
anyway,
I'm
perfectly
fine
with
christina
kendrick's
version.
B
Commissioner,
sandberg
abbott
or
rubenstein.
What
do
you
say
in
response
to
commissioner
ginder's
comments
there?
I'm.
I
Fine
with
with
christina
kendrick's
language.
B
And
attorney
bashon,
have
you
dug
up
the
email
that.
G
Yes,
yeah,
yes,
commissioner
perry
so
with
respect
to.
I
did
recommend
that
when
we
first
in
another
meeting
we
discussed
are
and
in
our
we
had
a
discussion
about
once
reconvened
and
I'm
glad
we
use
that
language
in
the
other
document.
Once
we
convene
the
districting
group
shall
revise
the
map
in
compliance
with
the
valid
court
order.
We
had
a
discussion
on
that
and
to
say
what
kind
of
language
should
we
use
there?
We
changed
it
in
r,
but
we
did
not
change
it.
G
In
q,
q
has
different
language
where
it
says,
shall
revise
the
map
in
compliance
with
the
district
court
order
and
again
after
approval
of
the
map
etc.
So
I
was
just
saying
since
we,
this
group
discussed
r
and
came
up
with
that
language.
It
should
also
be
reflected
in
q,
because
q
and
r
are
similar.
C
I
don't
have
the
exact
language
on
that
change,
but
is
it
just
changing
all
of
the
language
where
it
says
district
court
order
within
queue
to
valid
court
order.
G
G
G
G
And
then,
commissioner
perry,
I
can
talk
about
the
other
comment.
Yes,
please
do
under
2d.
G
The
advice
at
the
redistricting
advisory
selection
work
group
2d,
says
the
charter
commission
will
be
looking
for
persons
to
serve
on
the
advisor
group
who
will
bring
diversity
to
the
redistricting
group.
G
There
was
a
discussion
had
at
the
other,
the
redistricting
advisory
selection
work
group
where,
instead
of
saying
who
will
bring
diversity,
we
would
have
alternative
language,
and
that
was
that
was
brought
up
by
christina
because
it's
not
about
the
person
itself.
It's
about
the
what
they
will
bring
forward
in
their
thought
process.
G
So
I
suggested
saying
who
will
bring
instead
of
who
will
bring
diversity
to
the
redistricting
group.
I
said
who
will
bring
a
diverse
perspective
to
the
redistricting
group,
and
that
was
language
that
we
came
up
with
at
the
redistricting
advisory
selection.
Work
group.
B
B
B
I
I
Is
it
that
language?
I
thought
it
was
a
little
squishier
I'll
go
back
and
look
at
the
charter
yeah
I'll
check
the
charter.
Okay.
Most
of
my
other
comments
were
just
consistency,
issues
making
sure
cities
capitalized
when
it
needs
to
be
capitalized
the
term
use
of
the
term
communities
of
interest,
because
in
one
place
somewhere
else,
it's
communities
and
I'm
not
sure
they're
the
same
or
not
in
your
thinking
and
oh,
the
the
the
training
that
the
city
attorney's
office
offers.
I
just
I
assume
we'll
add
more
to
it
than
just
the
city
attorney.
I
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
offer
another
additional
information
to
commissioner
sandberg's
question
about
the
city,
council
and
financing,
and
that
is
only
that.
The
way
we
had
the
language
in
the
past
was
to
say
that
we
as
the
redistricting
group,
would
obtain
financing,
and
we
clearly
don't
do
that
on
our
own,
and
so
that's
why
we
changed
the
language
as
well.
D
B
So
what
item
was
that
again.
D
B
B
So
this
will
be
approving
the
consensus
items.
It's
it's
moved
and
seconded
to
be
approving
the
consensus,
consensus
items
and
recommending
for
approval.
The
document
by
the
full
commission
will
the
clerk.
Please
call
the
role.
J
D
B
B
Great
we're
ahead
of
schedule
unless
there's
any
other
business,
I
think
we've
concluded
all
the
business
to
come
before
the
charter
commission's
redistricting
rules
work
group
and
without
objection
we
stand
adjourned.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time
this
morning.