►
From YouTube: June 21, 2021 Civil Rights Commission
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
A
Sorry
can
I
also
ask
if
you
are
not
speaking
just
to
mute
your
mic
for
us,
please.
I
will
start.
I
want
to
welcome
everyone
for
joining
us
this
evening.
As
we
begin,
I
will
note
for
the
record
that
this
meeting
has
remote
participation
by
members
of
the
community
by
members
of
the
commission
and
city
staff
as
authorized
under
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
public
health
emergency.
A
A
D
E
E
F
C
D
B
E
D
G
A
A
H
H
H
A
A
E
D
F
B
D
J
D
G
J
A
E
E
H
K
E
F
D
D
A
M
A
M
M
How
about
now?
Let's
see
yes,
okay,
wonderful!
Thank
you!
Apologies
for
the
technical
difficulties.
Well,
thank
you
again
for
to
everybody
for
being
here
tonight
and
thank
you
to
the
commission
for
hosting
this
discussion.
My
name
is
julia
decker.
I
am
the
policy
director
for
the
american
civil
liberties,
union
or
aclu
of
minnesota.
M
So
I'm
here
tonight
to
talk
to
you
about
qualified
immunity,
which
is
a
very
big
topic.
You
may
have
heard
it
being
thrown
around
in
the
media
and
the
news
in
the
arena
of
policing
and
public
safety
right
now
and
understanding
what
it
is
and
isn't
what
can
be
done
about
it.
What
changes
are
going
on?
It
can
be
kind
of
a
maze,
so
my
job
tonight
is
to
break
this
topic
down
for
you
and
try
and
explain
it.
M
I
am
also
a
lawyer,
but
I
don't
have
litigation
expertise
in
qualified
immunity,
so
I
just
want
to
sort
of
put
out
there
in
full
disclosure
that
there
are
lawyers
here
who
want
to
sort
of
dig
into
the
dig
further
into
the
weeds
on.
You
know:
qualified
immunity
case
law.
I
am
maybe,
fortunately
or
unfortunately,
depending
on
your
perspective,
not
your
main
person
for
that.
So
a
quick
road
map
we'll
talk
about
what
qualified
immunity
is
and
what
it
isn't.
M
So
what
is
qualified
immunity,
so
qualified
immunity
is
not
a
statute
or
a
law
in
the
way
that
we
often
think
about
it.
It
wasn't
you
know,
created
by
congress
or
a
state
legislature.
This
is
sort
of
a
rule
that
was
created
by
federal
courts
and
it
limits
when
a
government
official,
such
as
a
police
officer,
can
be
held
civilly
liable
for
violating
a
person's
rights.
M
So
in
essence,
it
limits
the
ability
for
somebody
to
sue
a
government
official
now
to
be
clear,
we're
talking
about
civil
liability,
not
criminal
liability.
So
we're
not
talking
about
you
know,
for
instance,
derek
shogun's
charges
and
ultimately
conviction
for
murder
in
the
death
of
george
floyd,
we're
talking
about
a
civil
case
that
happens
separately
independently.
Apart
from
that,
and
it's
not
about
jail
time,
but
is
about
damages
often
in
the
in
the
form
of
money.
M
M
First,
courts
have
said
we
don't
want
to
hamper
the
government's
ability
to
do
their
jobs
to
reasonably
do
their
duties,
such
as
law
enforcement.
So,
in
other
words,
we
don't
want
police
officers
during
a
split
second
decision
to
be
second
guessing
themselves
because
of
the
fear
of
a
lawsuit.
We
don't
want
to
punish
good
faith
efforts
by
government
officials
to
do
their
jobs.
M
M
How
does
it
do
this?
So
this
is
where
we
get
into
some
of
the
sort
of
lawyer
talk,
and
so
I'm
going
to
really
try
to
explain
this
in
a
way
that
is
not
not
lawyer,
speak
one
of
the
biggest
barriers
to
getting
around
qualified
immunity.
Is
this
what's
called
the
clearly
established
concept,
clearly
established
interpretation
sort
of
whatever
we
want
to
call
it
and
in
the
next
slide
I'll
present
some
examples
of
this.
M
There's
no
liability,
qualified
immunity
kicks
in
and
prevents
there
from
being
any
liability
in
practice.
This
has
come
down
to
interpretations
of
really
my
new
details,
really
small
details
such
as
whether
a
person
was
sitting
down
and
surrendering
versus
lying
down
and
surrendering
and
again
I'll
go
into
that
example
a
little
bit
more
on
the
next
slide,
and
this
is
also
a
pretty
extreme
interpretation
of
the
idea
of
notice.
You
know
I
mentioned
that
notice.
M
Government
officials
needs
to
know
what
they
can
and
can't
do,
but
this
is
pretty
extreme
because
you
know
the
principal
having
noticed,
isn't
inherently
wrong,
but
there
are
things
that
really
probably
should
be
considered
they're
so
egregious
that
they
should
at
least
be
considered
as
to
whether
they're
violations
of
rights,
even
if
a
previous
case
didn't
deal
with
it
before
and
that
gets
to
the
second
barrier,
which
is
sort
of
this
pre-trial
cut
off.
That
often
happens
with
qualified
immunity.
M
Qualified
immunity
kicks
in
before
a
lot
of
extensive
trial
stuff,
and
I
apologize
to
the
litigators
there's.
Obviously
lots
of
complex
and
complicated
stuff
that
goes
into
trial
and
I'm
sort
of
condensing
that
down
into
stuff.
But
you
know,
courts
have
said
we
don't
want
to
burden
governments
with
all
of
these
excessive
litigation
costs
right.
M
But
I
did
link
to
an
article
in
forbes
about
is
whether
a
previous
case
was
in
fact
published
or
not,
and
for
those
of
you
who
are
attorneys,
you
know
you,
you
know
the
difference.
Their
a
published
case,
you
know,
has
has
binding
presidential
value,
whereas
an
unpublished
case
just
sort
of
sits
out
there,
and
you
know,
maybe
you
can
cite
it
in
a
footnote
or
something,
but
it
doesn't
generally
have
any
presidential
value
and
in
qualified
immunity
sort
of
juris
prudence.
It's
the
same
way
if
it's
an
unpublished,
court
opinion.
A
D
N
A
M
M
So
the
so
I
hopefully
explained
those
concepts
clearly
established
and
sort
of
the
pre-trial
cutoff
in
a
in
a
understandable
sort
of
non-legalese
way,
but
to
flesh
it
out
even
more.
I
wanted
to
present
a
few
examples
of
how
this
has
actually
played
out,
and
the
first
example
is
a
case
of
a
person
named
andrew
scott
and
the
link
goes
to
actually
a
cato
institute.
Write-Up
of
this
case.
Basically
it's
a
you
know.
The
police
showed
up
erroneously
at
his
house.
It's
the
wrong
wrong
house.
M
There
was
no
warrant,
no
identification,
no
announcement
that
it
was
police
and
when
mr
scott
answered
the
door,
the
police
shot
and
killed
him,
and
this
seems
pretty
egregious
right.
I
mean
it
seems
like
there
should
at
least
maybe
be
a
trial
about
like
whether
there
was
a
violation
of
rights.
But
in
this
case
the
courts
held
that
qualified
immunity
prevented
a
lawsuit
against
the
police
from
going
forward
because
the
police
it
wasn't,
there
was
not
a
clearly
established
right
from
previous
case
law
that
the
police
were
alleged
to
have
violated.
M
The
second
example
is
a
situation
that
I've
linked
to
another
again
another
write-up
about
this
case
baxter
versus
bracy,
where,
as
I
sort
of
referenced
earlier,
it
really
came
down
to
a
distinction.
So
it's
about
when
the
police
can
use
a
police
dog
on
a
person
who
is
surrendering,
and
it
essentially
came
down
to
whether
surrendering
by
sitting
down
and
raising
one's
hands
up
over
their
head
was
close
enough
to
surrendering
by
lying
down.
M
And
the
reason
is
because,
in
a
previous
case,
courts
had
said
had
found
that
person
surrendering
by
lying
down
and
then
of
the
police,
use
a
police
dog
on
them.
That
is
a
clearly
established
right.
The
the
person's
rights
were
clearly
via
it
was
clearly
established,
and
that
was
a
right
that
was
violated
when
the
person
surrendered
by
lying
down
and
then
had
a
police
dog
used
on
them.
In
this
case,
the
person
surrendered
by
sitting
down
and
raising
their
hands
over
their
head
and
a
police
dog
was
used,
and
the
court
said.
M
M
M
So
these
examples,
I
think,
really
demonstrate
kind
of
how
out
of
whack
this
qualified
immunity
concept
has
become
because,
while
the
reasoning
for
qualified
immunity
may
have
had
some
merit
the
way
it's
been
interpreted
over
time,
you
know
the
cato
institute
actually
and
one
of
their
write-ups
points
out,
and
they
have.
This
really
interesting
quote.
I
think
they
say
quote
the
more
outrageous,
an
officer's
actions,
the
less
likely
it
will
be
that
anyone
else
has
behaved
similarly
and
the
harder
it
will
be
to
find
a
case
on
point.
M
Okay,
so
maybe
you
agree
with
me
that
qualified
immunity
is
a
problem,
maybe
not,
but
you
know,
let's
say
that
qualifying.
We
really
want
to
try
and
do
something
about
this.
What
can
we
do
about
it?
There's
a
lot
of
changes
afoot
in
this
area.
We've
actually
seen
a
couple
states
now,
colorado
and
new
mexico.
M
Both
have
taken
state
approaches
to
this
new
york
city
actually
took
a
very
local
approach
to
it.
I
believe
there
may
be
also
a
congressional
push
on
this
issue,
but
I
do
state
legislative
work,
so
I'm
not
as
familiar
with
the
the
federal
landscape
in
broad
strokes.
What
you
see
at
the
state
and
local
levels
is,
we
call
it
qualified
immunity
reform.
What
it
really
is
is
is
more
of
a
creation
of
an
alternative
path
to
accountability.
M
It
seeks
to
essentially
avoid
qualified
immunity
altogether,
and
so
what
this
does
is
if
you'll
recall
qualified
immunity
was
created
by
federal
courts,
not
state
courts,
and
you
know,
without
getting
into
a
treatise
about
the
entire
american
legal
system.
We've
got
the
you
know
the
federal
court
system,
which
is
one
thing,
but
you've
got
the
state
courts.
M
Now
there
are
alternative
ways
to
do
this,
basically,
both
in
colorado,
new
mexico
and
new
york
city.
What
you've
got
is
some
version
of
creating
a
cause
of
actions.
So,
basically
saying
okay,
you
can
you
can
sue
for
this
rights
violation
and
in
some
places
it
might
be.
You
can
sue
a
peace
officer
in
other
places.
It
might
be.
M
You
can
sue
a
public
body
such
as
the
you
know,
the
government
body
in
some
places
it's
you
can
see
the
peace
officers
and
their
departments,
but
all
are
variations
of
using
the
state
court
system
to
and
creating
the
ability
to
go
into
state
court
and
actually
bring
a
lawsuit
against.
You
know:
a
public
official,
a
government
official
or
a
government
department
that
you
are
alleging,
violated
your
rights.
M
There's
lots
of
other
issues
that
once
you
get
into
the
weeds
of
this,
you
know
who
are
you
holding
liable
for
which
violations
arbitration
attorneys
fees
all
these
much
thornier
issues,
but
the
broad
approach
is
sort
of
starting
to
shake
out
in
these
different
ways.
The
institute
for
justice
model
is
also
a
bill
that
we
have
actually
collaborated
with
institute
for
justice
on
they.
M
M
So
different
approaches
the
overarching
ideas
you
know
using
the
state
courts
to
get
account
real
accountability
for
rights
violations.
The
current
system
is
failing,
has
failed.
Qualified
immunity.
Change
really
gets
at
one
of
these
systems
that
has
really
driven
some
of
that
failure.
It
won't
change
everything.
M
So
with
that,
this
is
my
contact.
Information
is
included
at
the
end,
and
I
just
want
to
thank
you
again
for
your
time.
Thank
the
commission
and
if
there
is
time
for
questions,
I'm
happy
to
take
them.
Otherwise,
if
there
are
questions
that
can
be
sent
to
the
commission,
it
can
be
forwarded
on
to
me,
I'm
also
happy
to
to
handle
those
afterward.
A
Thank
you,
miss
decker.
I
do
wonder
if
you
could
put
your
contact
information
in
the
chat
the
slide
wasn't
showing,
but
I
think
if
you
want
to
put
that
over
sure
and
then
yeah,
we
can
take
questions
from
the
commissioners
so
mark.
Do
you
have
a
question
or
a
commissioner
sunyani?
Do
you
have
a
question.
K
M
M
It
was
not
included
in
any
of
the
omnibus
bills
that
are
now
being
discussed
in
the
the
current
special
session.
So
it's
unlikely
to
to.
There
won't
be
any.
You
know,
legislative
movement
on
it
this
session,
but
you
know
we.
It
continues
to
be
a
priority,
certainly
for
aclu
of
minnesota,
and
I
think
for
for
many
other
groups
as
well
at
the
legislature,
so
we'll
certainly
continue
those
discussions.
M
Sure
so
it's
I'm
not.
You
know
the
the
organizations
that
I
can
definitely
say
are
interested
in
the
issue
right
now.
The
institute
for
justice,
americans
for
prosperity,
and
then
us,
of
course
I
know
representative
thompson,
I
believe,
was
the
one
who
introduced
the
bill
this
session,
and
you
know
I
think
the
the
house
dfl
caucus
in
general
has
been
interested,
of
course
in
the
in
issues
around
policing
and
public
safety.
M
A
A
H
Report
you,
commissioner,
may
just
to
give
the
commission
a
little
back
track
of.
Why
are
we
talking
about
the
african-american
family
preservation
act?
Commissioner,
hurts
and
rants,
and
I
have
been
meeting
and
completed
a
document
to
have
voted
on
today.
That
has
been
sent
ahead
and
it's
included
in
the
agenda.
So
hopefully
everyone
got
to
review
it,
and
just
to
recap
is
just
minnesota's.
African-American
youth
are
removed
from
homes
at
alarming
rate,
and
large
numbers
are
crossing
over
from
child
protection
into
the
juvenile
justice
system.
H
Racial
disparities
are
found
in
entire
processes.
From
initial
reporting.
Screening
assessment
to
discharge
from
the
system,
healthy
families
are
are
vital
to
the
success
of
our
children
and,
ultimately
our
state.
So
I
just
want
to
recap
on
the
importance
of
why
we're
voting
for
this
african-american
family
preservation
act,
and
this
would
be
sent
to
our
legislature
basically
saying
that
we
support
supported
mr
commissioner
rance
and
commissioner
hearts.
Do
you
have
anything
to
add
on
gentlemen.
F
This
is
commissioner
rance.
I
also
had
a
conversation
with
miss
ellison
with
the
minneapolis
public
schools
and
made
her
aware
that
we
were
considering
drafting
a
letter,
and
she
said
that
she'd
be
interested
in
and
taking
a
look
at
us
well
and
and
having
an
opportunity
for
the
mccr
to
present
at
a
minneapolis
school
board
as
well.
H
A
J
H
Well,
sir,
I'm
not
sure
about
the
recording.
However,
there
was
a
email
that
miss
kel,
khalees
houston,
provided
so
that
was
sent
out
to
the
commission
because
miss
houston,
who
is
a
community
partner
in
writing
this
and
executive
director
of
village
arms.
She
might
be
one
of
the
callers
on
the
line
who
sent
the
powerpoint
out.
So
hopefully
that
answers
your
question,
commissioner
ferrar.
H
J
L
L
As
a
point
of
reference,
I
prosecute
child
abuse
cases
at
the
county
level.
While
I
am
by
no
means
an
expert
in
this
area,
I
do
have
some
familiarity
so
on
a
high
level,
this
legislation
seeks
to
accomplish
very
important
objectives.
I
think
the
oversight,
committee
and
cultural
sensitivity
training
is
extremely
important.
However,
after
consulting
with
other
professionals
in
the
field,
including
judges
and
child
protection
attorneys,
I
have
concerns
regarding
other
implications
of
this
legislation.
L
When
you
have
separate
standards
for
individuals
based
on
race,
the
courts
apply
a
strict
scrutiny
analysis
when
determining
if
there
is
an
equal
protection
clause
violation.
So,
for
instance,
in
this
legislation,
the
appeal
parent
period
for
parents
of
color
is
proposed
to
be
six
months.
I
believe,
while
for
white
parents
is
21
days
in
order
to
survive
a
strict
scrutiny
analysis,
the
state
must
show
that
this
is
necessary
in
order
to
achieve
a
compelling
state
interest
and
it
is
narrowly
tailored
to
achieve
the
compelling
interest
in
the
least
restrictive
means.
L
So
in
this
case,
both
parents
will
be
represented
by
attorneys,
who
would
do
the
litigation
for
them
so
there's
no
basis
to
differentiate
an
appeal
period
based
on
race
and
that's
one
example
from
the
legislation,
and
I
know
you
might
be
wondering
how
iqua
has
survived
equal
protection
clause
challenges.
As
I
know,
commissioners
have
assimilated
this
legislation
iqa
the
difference
is
the
courts
recognize
indian
american
as
a
political
style
status
and
not
a
race-based
classification,
so
these
statutes
only
need
to
survive,
rational
basis,
scrutiny
and
not
strict
scrutiny.
L
I
know
this
is
very
legalese,
but
I
just
wanted
to
provide
an
explanation
as
to
my
concerns
for
this
legislation.
Are
there
a
lot
of
great
things
about
this
legislation
which,
in
isolation
are
super
important
and
necessary,
such
as
oversight
commissions
such
as
training,
however,
as
a
whole,
as
it
is
currently
written?
I
do
not
support
this
legislation.
I
do
thank
the
commissioners
for
their
hard
work
on
that.
I
just
want
to
provide
an
explanation
as
to
my
reservations.
Thank
you.
H
Q
C
Q
It's
race-based,
but
it's
really
a
form
of
a
reparations
bill
to
restore
the
harm
that
this
system
has
caused
to
black
families
specifically,
so
we
have
to
focus
for
a
time
on
black
families,
specifically
both
of
the
legislative
authors.
Excuse
me
champion
and
agbaje
are
also
attorneys,
so
we're
preparing
for
that
argument.
Once
the
bill
is
passed.
G
Thanks,
you
know
I'm
an
attorney,
and
I
I
see
what
commissioner
shepard
is
mentioning.
I'm
just
wondering
what
the
actual
arguments
were.
Sorry,
not,
commissioner
shepard,
but
if
our
guests
could
speak
on
what
some
of
those
arguments
were
against
against
that
point,
that
would
that
would
help
me
a
lot.
Q
Well
documented,
there's
plenty
of
research
and
data
to
show
what's
been
occurring
once
our
children
are
placed
in
foster
care,
they
languish
there
and
they're
the
highest
population
moving
from
child
protection
to
juvenile
detention.
So
this
bill
is
written
in
such
a
way
that
it
would
address
those
disparities
at
every
point
of
contact
with
the
child
protection
system.
G
G
You
know
voted
on
again,
so
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
had
a
specific
answer
to
to
commissioner
shepard's
question
about
the
constitutionality
of
this
order,
because
again
I
I
support
everything
you're
doing,
but
if
it's
going
to
be
deemed
unconstitutional,
then
I
could
see
that
being
you
know,
sort
of
one
step
forward.
Two
steps
back.
Q
So
I'm
not
an
attorney
but
based
on
the
conversations
that
we've
had
so
far.
What
we're
going
to
do
is
outline
the
disparities
and
how
it's
impacted,
this
population
unfairly
and
unjustly
we're
going
to
outline
and
highlight
the
inequity
and
the
decision-making
process
and
use
that.
But
again,
I'm
not
an
attorney.
So
I
can't
say
specifically
what
the
argument
is
going
to
be
because
it's
going
to
have
to
come
from
one
of
the
attorneys.
K
Raised.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
I
you
were
you're
kind
of
going
down
to
what
I
was
looking
for,
so
I'm
just
looking
for
how
disparate
the
treatments
are
of
african-american
families
versus
is
there?
Is
there
an?
Is
there
another
way
to
adjust?
You
know
the
the
the
statistically
bad
treatment
that
they're
getting.
F
You
know,
human
services.
You
know
modifying
some
of
their.
You
know
existing
practices
that
are
going
to
address.
You
know
some
of
these
some
claims.
When
we
take
a
look
and
it's
it,
you
know
saying
that
80
percent
of
the
mandatory
reporters
are
on
filing
these
claims
and
the
the
far
majority
of
them
are
are
white.
F
I
think
the
fact
that
we're
looking
at
disparities-
and
you
can
see
that
you
know
there's
a
higher
proportion
of
you-
know
black
children
that
are
being
placed
in
the
foster
care
system
and
parents
losing
their
parental
rights
in
relation
to
the
numbers
that
they
have
here
in
the
the
state
and
the
city
of
minneapolis.
I
mean,
I
think,
that
that's
something
that
you
know
definitely
needs
to
be
needs
to
be
addressed,
and
I
think
this
bill
is
heading
the
right
direction
in
regards
to
I'm
working
to
to
rectify
that.
H
P
This
is
commissioner
hearts.
I
wanted
to
speak
to
commissioner
shepard
and
commissioner
kovya's
questions
about
strict
scrutiny,
but
actually
I
think
that
commissioner
rants
just
said
just
about
everything
I
was
going
to
as
well,
so
I
I
would
take
for
those
of
you
with
strict
scrutiny,
questions
for
the
lawyers
in
the
crowd.
I
would
take
what
commissioner
rants
said
and
think
about
the
the
compelling
government
interest
at
play
there,
and
also
think
about
you
know
is:
is
there
a
way
to
tailor
the
law
as
narrowly
as
possible
to
address
those?
H
I
I
P
Yeah,
so
this
is
commissioner
hearts
again.
The
the
constitution
has
different
ways
that
it
well,
the
courts
interpreting
the
constitution
have
different
levels
of
scrutiny
that
they
apply
to
laws
that
discriminate
between
people
and
what
I
mean
by
discriminate
is
treat
people
differently
based
on
their
race,
so,
for
example,
a
law
that
gives
one
standard
to
black
families
in
a
different
standard
to
families
that
aren't
black
would
be
considered.
P
P
Basically
what
the
the
courts
have
said
about
it
in
the
past
and
that's
been
the
the
dominating
perspective
in
in
the
american
legal
system
about
laws
that
treat
people
differently
based
on
race.
For
I
don't
know
how
old
strict
scrutiny
is
like
75
years,
or
something
like
that.
So
hopefully
that
answers
your
question
and
wasn't
too
filled.
I
I
You
know
a
woman
of
color
of
our
commission
and
also
miss
houston,
so
I
feel
like
they
have
a
lived
experience
and
I
am
definitely
in
support
of
it.
I
guess
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
so
because
we
are
pretty
white,
we
are
diverse,
but
we're
pretty
white
body,
and
I
just
want
to
be
mindful
of
folks
who
are
bringing
legislation.
J
Thank
you
very
much,
commissioner
devenish.
The
the
comment
I
have,
and
maybe
miss
houston
could
address
this-
is
that
I
worry
about
the
practicality
as
well
as
the
constitutionality
of
what's
being
proposed
and
what
I
was
going
back
to
try
and
look
at
when
I
couldn't
find
the
presentation
originally.
J
J
Is
this
because
somehow
african-american
families
treat
their
children
worse
and
that's
why
they
get
different
outcomes
and
clearly
that
wasn't
the
case
either
and
they
went
through
that.
But
one
thing
that
I
thought
might
underlie
what
we're
seeing
is
that
people
who
have
access
to
fewer
resources
are
able
to
afford
fewer
lawyers
and
fewer
people
to
represent
them
and
are
less
able
to
articulate
their
case
or,
like
poor
people
in
general,
come
out
with
worse
outcomes
because
they're
not
able
to
present
themselves
better.
J
And
in
this
case
I
wondered
if
the
socio-economic
circumstances
of
the
african-american
people
who
have
worse
outcomes
might
also
be
partly
explained,
because
they
have
less
money
and
less
economic
resources
to
be
able
to
get
a
better
outcome
through
the
system.
And
the
reason
I
bring
that
up
is
that
it
seems.
If
the
underlying
problem
is
that
people
have
fewer
access
to
resources,
then
the
solution
is
to
give
people
better
access
to
resources,
not
to
provide
different
standards
for
people
according
to
race.
Q
I'm
I
am
here,
and
that
could
be
a
part
of
it,
but
it
isn't
the
underlying
issue,
nor
would
it
solve
the
disparate
treatment,
because
racial
bias
and
practice
is
the
main
cause
of
the
disparate
treatment
that
we
see.
We
have
wealthy
families.
Actually
one
on
my
list
right
now
with
a
black
mother
and
white
father
who
can
both
afford
private
attorneys
and
mom
is
still
getting
the
short
end
of
the
stick.
Q
Q
P
Is
that's
what
this
deal
does.
This
is,
commissioner,
hearts.
You
know,
there's
there's
also
ways,
and
I
I
don't
know
if
this
has
been
done
already,
but
you
can
control
for
stuff
like
like
income
and
socioeconomic
status,
and
you
know
it's
it's
I
think
possible
and
likely
I
mean
again.
I
don't
know
if
these
studies
have
been
done
or
not,
but
it
would
not
surprise
me
at
all.
If
even
controlling
for
those
things,
there
was
disparate
treatment
for
black
families.
Again,
I
don't.
P
H
I
would
just
like
to
add
something:
that's
okay.
The
reason
why
this
african
american
family
preservation
act
is
so
important
is
the
numbers
don't
lie.
I
think
a
lot
of
lawyers
on
this
commission
go
by
numbers.
Go
by
data
go
by
information.
The
fact
is,
the
african-american
children
are
two
more
are
twice
as
much
likely
to
be
removed
from
homes.
We
talk
about
the
constitution
and
I'm
not
a
lawyer,
but
doesn't
that
seem
against
the
constitution
when
you're
talking
about
treating
people
equally
when
you're
talking
about
treating
people
fairly?
H
So
that's
why
that's
just
part
of
the
reason
why
miss
houston
is
here
and
why
commissioner
hearts
and
commissioner
rants
and
I
came
together
and
wrote
this
letter
and
we
actually
talked
to
hennepin
county
staff,
who
gave
money
supporting
this
and
put
initiatives
into
the
county
and
we're
in
hennepin
county.
So
I
just
want
to.
I
just
want
to
say
that
that
the
numbers
don't
lie,
and
I.
O
H
And
that's
the
main
point
of
this
conversation
of
why
we
wrote
this
letter
and
why
we
are
pushing
for
this.
I
know
that
this
is
not
an
unconstitutional,
sorry
issue.
However,
it's
an
important
issue
and
the
racial
disparities
speak
for
themselves
in
the
numbers
and
that's
what
I
think
we
should
focus
on
and
the
children
impacted
in
the
families
impacted
just
because
of
the
color
of
their
skin,
which
is
which
is
what
this
is
about,
and
I
think,
as
civil
rights
commissioners.
P
H
F
No
problem
man
this
commissioner
rants,
I
I
was
just
agreeing
with
commissioner
definition
that
and
when
you
take
a
look
at
the
you
know
some
of
the
over
views
of
the
bill.
You
know
it's
it's
to
ensure
that
african
americans
have
that
that
the
human
services
for
the
state
has
culturally
competent
training.
You
know
for
individuals
that
work
in
child
protection,
including
child
welfare
workers,
supervisors,
attorneys,
juvenile
court
judges
and
family
judges.
F
You
know
the
office
shall
be
appointed
by
a
director
and
that
they
will
have
resources
for
it,
and
the
commissioner
shall
establish
direct
grants
to
african-american-led
organizations,
service
providers
and
programs
that
serve
african-american
children
and
their
families
to
provide
primary
support
for
african-american
children.
Welfare
programs
to
implement
this
act
and-
and
the
the
last
point
I
want
to
make
is-
is
that
it's
also
talking
about
the
the
training
of
the
people
that
work
and
and
file
these
cases
and
work
within
this
system.
R
Oh,
thank
you.
You
know
I.
I
guess
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
started
in
you
know
going
back
to
the
initial
presentation
made
a
little
bit
skeptical
about
this
because
of
some
of
the
concerns
about
the
unconstitutionality
and
just
the
the
differences
being
solely
on
race
and
kind
of
was
like
gosh.
Why?
R
H
H
Q
Q
H
K
L
Yes,
this
is
commissioner
shepard.
I
just
wanted
to
share
the
department
of
humor.
Human
services
did
a
legislative
report.
This
was
done
in
october
2020
and
it
deals
with
out
of
home
placement
care
and
permanency
and
it
shows
by
race
and
if
I'm
just
scrolling
quickly
to
find
where
I
found
to
be
very
helpful.
K
G
C
K
E
F
L
C
D
J
D
G
A
H
Thank
you
I'll
try
to
be
sensitive
of
our
time
in
the
agenda.
There
was
a
proclamation
for
gun
violence.
Commissioner
gold.
Well,
let
me
just
back
up
and
say
thank
you
to
commissioner
hearts,
commissioner
rants,
commissioner
herkman
and
some
other
commissioners
who
helped
put
together.
This
proclamation
has
been
changed
in
legalese
a
few
times.
The
most
recent
update
is
in
the
agenda
under
proclamation
and
we
removed
the
children's
names
because
we
needed
permission
to
use
the
children's
names
from
the
families
and
they're
still
grieving.
H
So
I
didn't
feel
appropriate
to
you
know,
reach
out
to
them
and
talk
to
them
at
this
time,
so
we
removed
their
names.
This
is
important
because
our
community
is
being
plagued
with
gun
violence
at
an
alarming
rate.
What's
scary,
to
me,
is
that
we're
only
in
june,
and
I
think
we
should
have
a
gun,
accountability
task
force.
H
We
could
work
with
other
departments
to
help,
for
example,
at
juneteenth
we
had
a
mother's
love,
we
could
use
them
and
I
got
an
accountability
task
force
and
asking
for
a
gun
violence
month,
which
was
brought
to
me
by
commissioner
herkman.
So,
hopefully,
y'all
read
this.
It
is,
is
there
any
discussion
at
this
time.
H
O
I
didn't
read
this
comments:
commercial
commissioner
burke
was
they're
just
like
really
minor
things
that
don't
change
the
substance,
but,
like
the
third
paragraph
I
assume
it's.
The
second
sentence
should
be:
americans
are
25
times
more
likely
and
then
like
the
first
sentence
in
the
fourth
paragraph,
should
be
under
the
second
amendment.
So
just
like
minor
things,
it
seems
like
at
the
end
of
the
fourth
paragraph,
the
sentence
repeats
itself.
Minnesota
has
the
21st
highest
rate
of
gun
deaths
in
the
usa.
O
Minnesota
has
the
21st
highest
rates
again
like
they're,
just
like
some
really
minor
things,
and
I
don't
know
what
the
best
way
is
to
move
forward
on
this
in
an
expeditious
way.
But
it's
just
like
seems
like
there
are
some
really
minor
tweaks
that
we
could
change
to
clean
it
clean
it
up
a
little
bit.
H
Thank
you,
commissioner
bergquist
commissioner
chair
may.
Is
there
any
way
you
could
edit
it
on
live
screen
and
share
your
screen
with
commissioner
burke
west
recommendations,
because
we
did
that
before
when
miss
burques
had
her
human
rights
discussion,
we
did
a
live
edit,
so
we
could
treat
this
as
the
same
and
do
a
live
edit
as
well.
A
H
O
F
E
K
H
A
A
A
K
S
Hi
there
thank
you
for
your
question,
commissioner
sagnani.
You
know
if
you
want
to
do
things
like
delete
spaces,
change,
capitals,
add
commas
and
so
forth.
I
I
think
that
would
be
reasonable
changes
to
be
made
after
the
fact,
but
changing
any
of
the
meaning
of
the
resolution
would
be
inappropriate
after
the
commission
has
already
voted
on
it.
All
the
substance
should
be
in
front
of
the
group
before
they
decide
whether
or
not
to
adopt
it
as
their
own.
A
A
C
C
Yes,
commissioner,
herkman,
where
it
says,
whereas
three
children,
10
and
under
have
been
killed
in
reference
to
the
three
children
in
north
minneapolis,
la
davian
is
still
fighting
for
his
life
in
the
hospital.
So
I
think
that
would
be
important
and
substantive
to
change
that,
whether
we
say
three
children
have
been
shot
and
two
have
been
killed,
but
I
think,
especially
with
sensitivity
to
the
families.
We
would
need
to
amend
that.
H
Hercman,
commissioner
herkman,
could
you
make
those
edits
and,
along
with
commissioner
bergquist,
I'm
sorry
herkman,
commissioner
herkman,
if
you
could
take
an
account
commissioner
bergquist
edits
and
your
edits
and
resubmit
it
for
next
time
that
we
meet,
because
I
want
to
be
sensitive
of
our
time.
Can
you
do
that?
Commissioner?
Herkman.
G
H
G
That's
just
a
that's
a
minor
change,
the
the
the
one
I
wanted
to
ask
if
you
had
like
a
reference
for
just
was
the,
whereas,
with
the
colon
the
illegal
gun
mark
in
minneapolis,
was
readily
supplied
by
local
minnesota
straw
buyers.
Do
you
have
like
something
that
or
I'm
just
wondering
where
that
came.
F
G
D
G
H
H
R
E
H
E
A
Commissioner
herkman
I,
as
far
as
the
comment
that
you
made
regarding,
let's
see
three
children
and
under
have
been
killed.
What
is
your
preferred
language?
Because
I
was
just
making
the
updates-
and
I
missed
that-
and
I
want
to
share
it
with
the
commission,
so
we
can
approve
this
right
now,
but
I
don't.
I
want
to
confirm
the
language.
A
What
I
put
was
three
children,
10
and
under
have
been
victims
of
vic
have
been
victims
of
gunfire,
but
I'm
wondering
like
because
I
already
did
the
edits,
because
I
had
already
pulled
it
up,
so
it
was
easy.
I'm
wondering
if
that's
okay,
if
we
just
make
this
last
change
and
approve
this
letter,
because
it
is
a
as
commissioner
devinish
and
I
have
spoken
a
few
times.
A
C
Yeah,
I'm
fine
with
the
change
you
made.
I
I
just
think
then
three
did
not
die,
so
just
I
think,
maybe
we
just
say
comma,
with
two
two
deaths.
You
know
or
two
two
that
have,
I
guess
without
thinking
about.
I
have
a
condition.
Let
me
see
if
I
can.
I
have
here
just
the
recognition
that
they're
not
all
in
the
same
situation
I
think
to
the
parents.
It
would
be
important
as
we
talk
about
their
children
to
honor,
where
they're
at
and
so
with.
O
This
is
commissioner
bergquist.
I
had
suggested
in
the
chat
they're
just
two
minor
edits,
but
they
are
substantive.
The
third
paragraph
and
the
second
to
last
paragraph,
make
use
of
the
term
citizens
and
I
think,
as
a
civil
rights
commission,
we
want
to
be
as
inclusive
as
possible
in
our
language
and
there's
no
prohibition
on
non-citizens
possessing
firearms
and
of
course
we
want
to
encourage
not
only
citizens
but
non-citizens
to
take
action
in
the
second
last
paragraph.
So
we
could
change
that.
O
A
A
Thank
you
for
that,
so
I
actually
can't
share
my
screen
because
I
have
to
give
permission
in
order
to
do
that.
I
have
to
leave
the
meeting,
but
I
did
make
that
change
the
I
took
out
that
the
whereas
comment
that
was
regarding
the
gun:
stop
the
gun
violence
day.
That
was
the
resolution,
so
I
took
that
line
out.
I
think
that
was
commissioner
cobia's
comment
and
then,
whereas
three
children,
10
and
under
have
been
victims
of
gunfire,
one
of
which
is
still
fighting
for
their
life
in
minneapolis
minnesota.
A
K
E
A
Q
A
Okay,
there's,
I
just
changed
the
wording,
but
somebody's
probably
gonna
have
to
edit
that,
because
I
it
didn't
make
sense
to
have
the
minneapolis
at
the
end,
the
way
that
it
was
worded
so,
but
that's
the
where
I
just
copied
that
last
sentence,
but
it
probably
doesn't
sound
right
where
it
says
children
in
minneapolis.
Since
april
10.
A
A
A
A
G
A
E
K
E
F
J
D
G
A
H
H
I
N
S
Hi
there
chairmai
and
commissioners
I
apologize
for
interrupting.
I
could
have
waited
to
raise
my
hand,
I
didn't
mean
to
interrupt
the
commissioners
with
regard
to
the
idea
of
presenting
certificates.
That
is,
you
know.
I
think
that
sounds
like
a
great
idea.
When
we
look
at
gift
cards.
I
have
some
concerns
about
whether
that
will
survive
scrutiny
with
our
state
auditor,
and
so
I
would
request
and
ask
that
you
delay
any
gift
card
decisions,
at
least
until
next
month,
to
allow
us
to
analyze
whether
that's
going
to
be
possible.
S
J
H
Yes,
sir,
we
just
came
together,
recognize
people,
I
think
mostly
a
lot
of
these
people
are
are
volunteers
at
the
george
floyd
square,
for
example,
eliza,
wesley
gatekeeper
and
there's
some.
If
you
click
on
those
links,
it
tells
you
some
background
about
these
individuals.
They
don't
get
some
of
them
don't
get
paid.
Some
of
them
are
non-profit
working
day
and
tirelessly.
In
fact,
the
gatekeeper
eliza.
She
she's
been
on
the
news
several
times
because
she's
there
every
day
working
hard
to
the
for
the
community,
michael
smith,
communities,
community
he's
doing
the
same
thing.
H
He's
feeding
people
at
george
floyd
square
was
for
free.
You
know,
non-profit,
not
making
much
money,
but
just
doing
it
for
the
betterment
of
our
community
and
recognizing
those
people
during
this
tumultuous
time
who
have
worked
tirelessly
and
asked
for
nothing
in
return.
Just
you
know
just
to
do
the
basically
the
right
thing,
and
I
think
that
embodies
what
the
civil
rights
department
stands
for
is
to
form
inclusive
inclusiveness,
I'm
sorry,
equity
and
just
providing
services
to
the
community.
I
H
N
T
I
J
And
if
I
may,
since
you
said,
does
that
answer
my
question?
I
don't
think
it
does.
Actually
I'm
not
disputing
these
are
worthy
individuals.
I
in
fact
think
these
are
good
people.
I
think
they
should
get
a
certificate
happy
with
that,
but
I
just
heard
a
couple
of
different
criteria
by
which
they
made
it
to
the
list,
and
I
think
that
we
should
probably
formalize
those
criteria
and
the
process
if
they
have
to
be
volunteers,
if
they
have
to
be
recognized
for
community
service
or
what
other
standards
you
want
to
put
in
place.
J
I
I
J
E
O
Thanks
yeah,
I
wanted
to
provide
a
little
context
and
this
predates
my
time
on
the
commission,
because
I
joined
the
commission.
I
think
in
2013,
and
maybe
commissioner
fine
was
on
the
commission
in
2012,
I'm
not
sure,
but
in
2012
the
commission
created
a
new
award
called
the
martin
luther
king
jr
award
and
awarded
it,
and
I
think
that's
the
only
time
that
award
has
been
given
in
2013.
O
Like
months
later,
the
person
who
received
that
award
began
a
campaign
for
public
office,
and
I
think
there
were,
I
think
one
of
the
commissioners
was
involved
with
that
person's
campaign,
and
there
was
some.
There
were
some
sensitivities
that
giving
this
award
seemed
kind
of
like
an
endorsement
of
that
person's
campaign
for
office
and
that
person
to
this
day
lists
that
award
on
his
public
website
and
all
of
that,
this
person
happens
to
be
the
mayor
of
minneapolis.
So
this
was
like
before
he
was
elected
to
any
public
office.
O
You
know
it's
on
his
sort
of
it's
on
his
website
is
something
he
still
publicizes
to
this
day
that
he
received
that
award
from
this
commission.
So
I
I
see
andrea
has
raised
her
hand,
and
maybe
she
has
more
context
about
this
as
well,
because,
as
I
said,
this
is
before
I
was
on
the
commission
and
things
things
have
changed.
H
S
I'd
be
happy
to,
I
don't
mean
to
to
jump
over
anyone
else
who
is
already
in
queue,
however,
but
I'll
be
I'll.
Be
quite
brief,
then
I
I
do
appreciate,
commissioner
burquist
raising
the
question
of
whether
there
could
be
a
political
aspect
to
this.
I
was
not
supporting
the
commission
in
2012
and
was
not
aware
of
that
story,
but
I
would
know
that
the
commission
is
a
non-political
body
and
it
is
required
to
continue
being
non-political
and
by
under
our
ethics
code.
You
know
simply
cannot
be
involved
in
politics.
S
So
if
any
of
these
nominees-
and
I
know
this
was
not
the
intention
of
anyone
in
compiling
this
list,
but
if
any
of
them
is
currently
or
you
know-
has
made
public
an
intention
to
run
for
office
this
november,
they
should
not
receive
this
award.
That
would
raise
some
concerns
about
the
ethics
code
and
again
I
recognize
that
I
I'm
sure
no
one
had
any
intention
of
doing
that,
and
I
do
think
commissioner
bergquist
just
for
raising
that
caution.
T
T
I
believe
commissioner
herkman
brought
up
the
point
of
just
being
very
clear
that
that
this
is
an
endorsement
for
their
not
endorsement.
Sorry.
This
is
in
recognition
of
their
involvement
in
the
community
and
and
making
it
clear.
It
is
not
an
endorsement
for
you
know
any.
We
can
make
it
clear
that
it's
not
endorsement
for,
like
anything
political
if
they
were
to
have
a
political
career
in
the
future.
T
I
don't
think
anyone
on
the
commit
on
the
list
currently
is
running
for
politics,
but
if
it
is
a
concern
in
the
future,
we
can
say
this
is
not
like
a
political
endorsement
of
any
sort.
We're
a
non-political
politically
affiliated
commission
as
well
as
we
just
wanted
to
make
clear
that
it
was
for
their
work
and
support
in
the
community
and
not
necessarily
them
as
a
person
and
if
in
an
individual
and
because
we
know
you
know,
sometimes
individuals
could
maybe
engage
in
something
per
in
their
personal
life.
T
R
Yeah
I
I
guess
I
had
two.
I
had
two
questions,
you
know
one
is
it
does
this?
Does
this
heaven
have
a
name,
I
guess
or
is
it
just?
You
know
the
minneapolis
commission
on
civil
rights
is
recognizing
you
and
second
second
question
is
you
know
I
appreciate
what
was
said
about
recognizing
certain
activities
and
it's
some
of
the
individuals
in
the
list
sent
had
some
clear
activities
listed
in
their
kind
of
their
blurbs.
R
H
A
N
And
commissioner
may,
if
I
could
make
a
comment,
this
is
kayla
from
the
department
yeah,
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
we
don't
necessarily
take
a
position
one
way
or
the
other
as
the
department
on
this
motion.
That's
before
us
it's
up
to
the
commission.
We
would,
however,
encourage
that
if
such
awards
are
going
to
be
given
and
especially
moving
into
the
future,
a
process
that
could
be
replicated
and
have
clear
criteria,
so
that
would
be
the
the
department's
position
on
the
matter.
H
A
E
A
B
T
M
K
K
O
J
D
G
I
I
just
quickly
wanted
to
just
reiterate:
we
are
on
the
community
engagement
subcommittee
and
we're
trying
to
come
up
with
ideas
to
get
out
there
and
to
let
people
know
that
we
exist,
and
so
this
was
one
of
the
ideas,
and
so
when
we
present
the
awards
to
people
we're
going
to
be
taking
pictures,
we're
going
to
be
getting
videos,
we're
going
to
add
them
to
the
social
media
as
a
part
of
the
subcommittee
to
talk
about
civil
rights
in
minneapolis
and
advance.
You
know
all
the
things
we
talk
about
here,
so
that's
it.
A
A
A
N
N
A
I
I
You
know
there
was
health
providers
there
there
was
music,
there
was
food,
there
was
community
vice
chair
folk
and
I
attended
and
we're
going
to
be
meeting
tomorrow
and
we're
just
going
to
continue
on
the
path
of
brainstorming,
more
task
force,
how
to
get
more
community
engagement
and
more,
I
guess,
active
on
our
social
media
and
the
motion
that
passed
tonight
about
the
african-american
family
preservation
act,
the
gun,
violence
proclamation
and
the
nine
nominees
is
going
to
help
us
do
that.
So
that
is
my
update.
I
H
E
G
First
of
all,
this
is
commissioner
cobia,
and
I
will
stop
talking
almost
immediately
because
we
elected
commissioner
rantz
as
the
new
chair
of
our
subcommittee
and
commissioner
stegnani
as
the
new
vice
chair
commissioner
rants.
I
leave
it
to
you,
I'm
happy
to
to
reiterate
anything.
I
have
three
pages
of
notes,
four
pages
of
notes,
but
let
me
know
if
you
want
me
to
talk
otherwise
I'll
leave
it
to
you.
F
So,
hopefully,
we'll
have.
You
know
more
to
report
back
on
our
on
our
next
meeting
in
regards
to
next
steps
on
how
that
information
is
going
to
be
utilized,
and
we
can
then
develop
a
strategy
for
contract
compliance
and
just
the
overall
awareness
of
the
different.
You
know
programs
and
opportunities
that
are
available
through
the
city
of
minneapolis
for
protect
the
class
folks
and
that's
my
report.
A
N
Hi
everyone.
Yes,
I
just
have
a
very
brief
couple
things
that
I
wanted
to
say.
One
was.
I
just
want
to
thank
a
commissioner
devinish
for
inviting
the
department
to
be
involved
in
juneteenth
two
of
my
staff
were
there
john
and
matthew,
and
I
talked
to
both
of
them
today
and
they
had
a
great
time
and
thought
it
was
definitely
a
great
event
and
thought
that
they,
you
know,
really
connected
with
people
and
we're
able
to
share
the
work
of
the
department
and
hopefully
provide
some
resources
and
tools
to
folks.
N
N
I
know
those
conflict
of
interest
forms
came
out
a
little
bit
later,
this
time
around,
so
sorry
about
that,
but
just
make
sure
to
keep
an
eye
on
those
and
then
get
those
cases
scheduled
for
review
feel
free
to
reach
out
to
me
or
matthew.
If
any
questions
arise
in
regards
to
that,
and
then
the
last
update
that
I
was
gonna
provide
was
just
I.
N
I
do
hope
that
we
can
continue
down
the
road
of
partnering
on
outreach
stuff
and
in
that
vein,
I'll
work
with
chair
may
to
schedule
some
sort
of
training,
hopefully
within
the
next
month
or
so,
to
assist
commissioners
who
are
interested
in
learning
more
about
like
the
complaint
filing
process
and
how
to
help
folks
out
in
the
community
potentially
file
complaints.
You
know
if
you're
at
outreach
events
or
other
circumstances
that
might
come
up
where
someone
has
an
issue
that
potentially
could
become
a
discrimination
charge.
N
N
H
N
So
as
of
now,
I
did
check
with
the
clerk's
office
about
this
a
couple
times,
because
a
couple
different
commissioners
have
asked
about
that.
So,
as
of
now,
all
the
boards
and
commissions
need
to
continue
functioning
remotely
and
that's
because
of
the
state
of
emergency.
That's
in
place
we're
not
supposed
to
be
having
commissions
meet
in
person,
yet
I
do
think
that
will
change
relatively
soon.
N
N
A
You
thank
you,
everybody
for
the
updates,
with
that.
We've
concluded
all
items
on
our
agenda
for
this
meeting
and
I
will
see
everyone
back
here
in
a
month
for
the
july
19th
meeting
regular
meeting,
seeing
no
further
updates
to
come
before
us
and
without
objection.
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.