►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
D
D
F
E
E
E
I
D
E
D
D
Thank
you.
Let
the
record
reflect
that
we
do
have
a
quorum,
and
you
know
at
the.
D
Suggestion
of
fire
chief
brian
tyner-
I
will
open
this
meeting
with
a
moment
in
black
history
month
and
and
that
the
challenge
was
to
start
each
meeting
with
a
historical
fact
tied
to
black
history
month.
So
in
that
spirit,
on
this
day
in
black
history
in
1964,
the
landmark
civil
rights
act
was
passed
by
the
united
states
house
of
representatives.
D
The
proposal
was
originally
brought
forward
by
president
john
f
kennedy
and
the
report
to
the
american
people
on
civil
rights,
which
was
delivered
june.
11
1963
kennedy
delivered
that
speech.
D
In
the
aftermath
of
the
birmingham
campaign
and
the
growing
number
of
demonstrations
and
protests
in
the
americas
south
that
year,
following
the
march
on
washington
on
august,
28th
organizers
met
with
the
pres
with
president
kennedy
to
discuss
his
civil
rights
bill.
They
were
concerned
that
such
a
bill
did
not
go
far
enough
in
the
number
of
essential
provisions,
such
as
protection
against
police
brutality
or
ending
discrimination,
discriminatory
employment
practices
after
kennedy's
assassination,
president
johnson
carried
passage
of
the
civil
rights
act
forward.
D
D
D
It
was
on
this
date
57
years
ago
in
black
history,
that
the
first
major
step
in
the
enactment
of
that
legislation
was
taken
by
the
house
of
representatives,
and
I
will
just
note
that,
while
that
act
was
a
a
crowning
achievement,
we
still
struggle
for
protections
against
police
brutality
to
this
day
to
protections
in
the
workplace
to
this
day,
and
so
it
really
just
and
and
housing
and
health
care
and
and
almost
every
other
measurable
impacts
that
we
have
in
our
society.
D
African
americans
are
still
lagging
behind,
and
so
we
still
have
a
lot
of
work
today
and
to
do
today
and
some
of
that.
Hopefully,
we
can
accomplish
with
the
work
that
we're
doing
on
this
city.
Council.
D
Colleagues,
we
have
17
items
on
today's
agenda,
including
a
public
hearing,
and
we
will
begin
with
item
1
on
this
agenda,
which
is
an
ordinance
amending
title,
2,
chapter
41
of
the
minneapolis
code
of
ordinances
related
to
administration,
information,
governance,
adding
a
new
article
entitled
facial
recognition
technology,
and
we
will
begin
with
a
presentation
which
will
be
given
by
council
member
steve
fletcher.
J
Thank
you,
council
vice
president
jenkins,
and
it's
fitting
that
we're
discussing
an
ordinance
that
will
protect
people
from
harm
from
racial
bias,
on
the
anniversary
of
the
passage
of
the
civil
rights
act.
J
So
I'm
glad
to
present
this
ordinance
today,
especially
and
appreciate
that
introduction
to
the
meeting
I'll
try
to
move
through
the
slides
very
quickly,
because
I
know
we
have
a
number
of
speakers
and
I
don't
want
to
take
too
much
time,
but
I
wanted
to
start
off
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide
with
just
a
reminder
to
ground
us
in
the
data
privacy
principles
that
we
passed
last
year
and
that
at
that
time
we
discussed
putting
into
ordinance
rules
that
would
strengthen
these
data
privacy
principles
and
actually
enact
these
data
privacy
principles.
J
So
this
is
the
first
of
what
I
imagine
will
be
many
over
the
life
of
this
policy.
J
You
know
sort
of
rulemaking
to
bring
us
into
greater
alignment
with
the
principles
that
we've
already
adopted,
saying
that
we
value
and
prioritize
our
data
privacy
and
that
before
adopting
new
technology
or
services
or
processes,
we'll
consider
the
impact
on
data
privacy.
Let's
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
so
today
we're
talking
about
a
ban
on
facial
recognition
technology,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
we
understand
what
it
is
both.
So
we
understand
what
it
is
and
also
what
it
isn't
so.
J
Facial
recognition
technology
is
specifically
using
computer
algorithms
or
machine
learning
to
analyze
video
evidence
or
to
analyze,
photographic
evidence,
and
it
can
be
used
for
widespread
automated
surveillance
to
create
searchable
databases
of
people's
faces.
That
can
be
tracked
over
time
without
their
knowledge
or
consent.
So
it's
an
important
technology
to
make
sure
that
we
have
some
rules
around
how
it's
deployed
in
the
city
next
slide.
Please.
J
One
of
the
biggest
reasons
to
proceed
with
a
ban
on
the
technology
for
city
use
is
that
it
shows
significant
racial
disparities
and,
in
fact,
the
further
you
get
away
from
the
middle
aged
white
men
who
are
sort
of
centered
in
the
creation
of
the
algorithms.
The
more
likely
you
are
to
have
errors,
which
means
for
both
older
and
younger
people.
You'll
have
errors
for
women
and
non-gender
binary
people.
J
You'll
have
errors
for
people
of
color,
you'll
have
a
greater
error
rate
and
in
fact
it's
43
times
higher
for
women
of
color
than
it
is
for
light-skinned
men,
and
that
has
led
to
false
arrests.
It's
led
to
significant
scrutiny
for
people
who
were
misidentified
by
the
technology,
and
so
it's
something
that
we
need
to
take
very
seriously.
We
are
exposing
people
disproportionately
to
harm
based
on
their
race
and
gender
by
using
this
technology.
So
we
should
take
that
into
account
next
slide.
Please.
J
And
just
to
show
the
results
of
the
study
from
gender
shades.
This
is
this
will
be
a
repeat
for
those
of
you
who
participated
in
in
the
last
presentation
from
the
aclu,
but
we
just
wanted
to
show
the
outcomes
as
they
tested
this.
J
You
know
you
see
between
88
and
94
accuracy
for
darker
skinned,
males
as
low
as
65
percent
accuracy
for
darker
skin
females
and
very
high
accuracy
for
lighter-skinned
males
and
so
the
there's
a
huge
gap
in
the
effectiveness
of
this
technology.
Let's
go
ahead
to
the
next
slide
and
we
wanna
just
show
how
this
works,
so
computer
learning
can
adopt
the
biases
of
the
photos
that
are
fed
to
it.
J
I
just
want
to
point
out
these
are
two
images
of
people
holding
a
thermometer
to
someone's
forehead,
to
take
their
temperature
and
in
the
one
with
the
darker
skin
man,
the
google
app
thought
it
spotted
a
firearm.
J
So
this
isn't
that
isn't
facial
recognition,
it's
identifying
a
weapon
in
this
case,
but
it's
a
good
example
of
how
this
works
and
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide-
and
this
was
a
test
done
by
even
solomon
from
the
postmate
coalition-
who
I
I
think
will
probably
be
testifying
in
a
moment,
but
he
played
with
the
quality
of
the
photo
image
to
lighten
the
skin
to
see
if
it
continued
to
find
the
same
result
and
as
you
can
see
when
they
lighten
the
exposure,
so
that
it's
a
lighter
skinned
hand,
it
no
longer
thought
it
saw
a
gun.
J
And
so
these
are
the
kinds
of
lessons
the
kinds
of
ways
that
machine
learning
and
these
algorithms
develop
a
bias
they
from
the
images
that
they
receive
and
from
the
ways
that
they're
tested
and
trained.
And
so
it's
important
for
us
to
bear
that
in
mind
that
that's
often
how
this
technology
is
proceeding
next
slide.
Please
so
to
get
into
specifics
of
what
the
ordinance
does.
It
prohibits
the
procurement.
It
prohibits
third-party
contracts
for
access
to
facial
recognition,
technology
and
it
prohibits
the
use
of
data
obtained
from
facial
recognition.
J
Technology
by
city
staff
next
slide,
it
does
not
impact
the
private
use
of
facial
recognition.
Technology
and
there's
been
some
confusion
when
people
have
heard
about
this,
so
I
want
to
just
clarify
this:
it
does
not
restrict
the
use
of
cameras
or
the
use
of
video
evidence
from
cameras
other
than
the
ability
to
use
these
facial
recognition
technology
algorithms.
So
this
is
not
telling
people
they
can't
have
cameras
or
that
the
city
can't
use
cameras.
It
is
saying
we
can't
use
this
algorithm
on
the
video
gathered
by
those
cameras.
J
There
are
exceptions
built
in
for
individual
user
authentication
for
unintentional
or
unknown
use
on
social
media
platforms
for
some
automated
redaction
software
that
we
use
and
you'll
note
that
the
common
thread
through
these
exceptions
is
that
the
stakes
are
very
low
if
the
technology
fails.
J
So
if,
if
you're,
using,
for
example,
facial
recognition
identification
to
turn
on
your
phone,
the
the
harm-
that's
done
to
you
if
it
fails,
if
it
mis-identifies,
you
is
that
you
would
have
to
enter
in
your
password,
because
the
facial
id
didn't
work,
there's
you're
not
exposed
to
any
additional
risk
or
harm
in
these
exceptions.
So
these
are
things
that
made
sense
for
us
to
carve
out
as
exceptions
as
we
wrote
this
ordinance
next
slide.
Please.
J
We
also
created
a
process
for
adding
additional
exceptions,
and
I
think
that's
important
for
people
to
be
aware
of
this
is
an
emerging
technology.
J
We
are
guessing
that
over
time,
we're
going
to
see
new
implementations
of
this
that
we're
going
to
want
to
consider
and
we're
going
to
want
the
opportunity
to
consider
whether
they're
consensual,
whether
they
are
exposing
people
to
harm
whether
they
can
be
used
in
a
way,
that's
consistent
with
our
equity
goals,
whether
they
can
be
used
in
a
way
that's
beneficial
to
the
city,
and
so
we've
created
a
process
where
a
city
department
can
bring
forward
a
new
process
for
using
facial
recognition
technology
to
create
an
exception
to
this
ban,
the
city
council
will
hold
a
public
hearing
and
will
vote
to
approve
it,
and
then
the
proposed
exceptions
need
to
be
consistent
with
the
goals
of
our
data
privacy
policies.
J
Next
slide
for
enforcement.
We
are.
J
This
creates
a
rule
that
no
data
or
information
obtained
through
facial
recognition
technology
can
be
received
as
evidence
in
any
proceeding
under
the
city's
jurisdiction
it
and
that,
upon
the
discovery
of
a
violation,
we'll
delete
the
data
and
provide
a
summary
of
the
nature
of
the
violation
to
the
city
clerk
for
their
annual
report.
We
created
a
process,
so
this
creates
a
law.
J
So
anybody
can
use
the
courts
to
enforce
if
they
see
us
not
following
the
law
that
we've
created
to
govern
ourselves,
but
we
did
create.
We
wanted
to
create
a
more
accessible
path
to
getting
resolution
on
these
issues,
and
so
we
created
a
30-day
notice
of
an
alleged
violation
so
that
anybody
can
bring
a
notice
and
we
have
30
days
to
resolve
it
and
not
find
ourselves
in
the
courts
next
slide.
J
And
then,
finally,
we
created
a
reporting
requirement.
So,
as
we
create
exceptions
over
time,
the
city
clerk
will
provide
a
written
annual
report
about
our
compliance
with
the
article,
including
a
summary
of
violations
and
remedies,
and
a
summary
of
any
exceptions
and
departments
will
be
asked
if
they've
obtained
exceptions
to
annually
provide
a
summary
of
how
they're
using
the
technology
and
how
they're
staying
within
those
exceptions.
So
that's
the
proposal.
It
creates
a
ban.
J
It
creates
a
process
for
creating
exceptions
as
the
technology
evolves
and
it
creates
public
transparency
and
reporting
around
how
we're
complying
with
the
ordinance,
and
I
hope
that
you'll
support
it,
and
I
hope
that
this
summary
was
helpful
in
informing
the
public
hearing.
That
is
about
to
happen.
D
I
will
begin
to
open
up
the
public
hearing
and
I
do
want
to
just
note
that
each
speaker
will
have
two
minutes
to
speak
and
we
will
be
timing.
D
Those
comments,
and
we
will
ask
that
you
respect
the
the
time
limits
as
we
try
to
get
everybody's
voice
included
in
this
conversation,
and
so
our
first
speaker
and
I
do
want
to
I'm
looking
down
the
list
and
there
are.
There
are
many
names
that
appear
challenging
to
to
pronounce,
and
so
I
just
want
to
ask
for
your.
D
As
for
your,
I
guess
I'm
sorry,
I'm
I'm
in
a
loss
for
words
right
now,
but
for
your
just
appreciation
for
the
challenge
and
understanding
as
I
try
to
pronounce
your
names.
But
the
first
name
is
the
first
speaker
is
pretty
easy.
Peter
ireland
are
you
there,
okay
and
you
need
to
press
star
six
to
un
mute
yourself,
hi
hi.
This
is.
K
Peter
I
live
in
longfellow,
I'm
just
calling
to
urge
you
to
pass
it
down
the
use
of
facial
recognition
technology
in
minneapolis,
I'm
an
engineer
and
as
part
of
my
work,
I
use
machine
learning,
algorithms
and
some
of
them
are
actually
very
similar
to
the
ones
using
facial
recognition
systems
that
I
know
from
experience.
K
These
algorithms
have
great
power
and
can
be
used
in
both
positive
and
negative
ways.
For
my
work,
I
use
algorithms
to
improve
energy
production
on
wind
farms,
which
I
hope
is
a
positive
way,
but
facial
recognition.
Technology
is
one.
K
I
hope
it's
city,
council
members
this
summer
has
taught
you
that
safety
comes
not
through
tear
gas
or
rubber
bullets
or
huge
national
guard
presence,
but
it
comes
through
actually
providing
resources
to
people
instead
of
unconstitutionally
surveilling
them.
So
I'm
asking
you
to
support
a
ban
on
the
use
of
facial
recognition
technology
and
to
demonstrate
a
commitment
to
safety
through
providing
for
your
residents.
Thank
you.
D
L
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
on
behalf
of
the
electronic
frontier
foundation
and
our
over
35
000
members.
The
electronic
venture
foundation
strongly
supports
legislation
banning
government
use
of
face
recognition
technology,
and
we
thank
council
member
fletcher
and
each
of
you
for
your
attention
to
this
critical
issue.
Face
surveillance
is
profoundly
dangerous
for
many
reasons.
First,
in
tracking
our
faces
a
unique
marker
that
we
cannot
change,
it
invades
our
privacy
and
safety.
L
L
D
Thank
you.
Our
next
speaker
is
muthale
nakandi.
M
Okay,
I'm
going
to
be
quick,
I'm
one
of
the
I'm
part
of
the
group
that
led
the
introduction
to
the
no
biometric
barriers
to
housing
act.
My
name
is
natalia
conde.
I
lead
an
organization
called
ai
for
the
people
that
looks
at
racial
justice
and
technology
using
art
and
culture
to
advance
policy.
M
During
my
role
as
an
ai
policy
advisor,
we
found
that
in
the
in
the
portal
of
housing
that
facial
recognition
was
being
used
in
new
york
city
and
local
residents,
black
residents
were
being
asked
to
replace
keys
with
their
faces.
They
were
also
being
told
by
their
landlord
that
this
data
set
could
be
shared
with
police,
putting
them
under
danger,
and
I
present
myself
today
to
support
the
to
support
the
ordinance
under
consideration.
D
D
N
Great,
my
name
is
wilbur
ins,
I'm
a
minneapolis
area
resident
in
ward
8.,
I'm
also
a
volunteer
with
amnesty
international
and
the
minnesota
area
coordinator.
N
N
So
I
applaud
the
thoughtfulness
of
this
ordinance,
how
it
provides
a
flexible
approach
for
us
to
move
forward
in
the
future.
I
think
it's
an
excellent
move
in
the
right
direction
in
trying
to
remove
or
create
a
framework
that
helps
people
of
color
and
everyone
in
minneapolis
enjoy
happy
and
safe
lives.
N
Planning
to
pass
this
ordinance
and
show
the
nation
that
we're
reacting
to
what
people
have
said
and
that
we're
putting
that
into
our
code.
Thank
you.
D
O
Hello,
yes,
my
name
is
aaron
tovo,
I'm
also
with
amnesty
international,
with
a
volunteer
with
the
local
group
here
in
the
twin
cities,
and
I'm
also
calling
in
support
of
this
ban
on
facial
recognition
technology
by
the
police,
and
I
have
a
few
main
points
that
I
want
to
make.
O
O
Imagine
a
bob
kroll
type
coming
to
power
and
then
minneapolis
police
department
getting
his
hands
on
this
technology,
so
so
the
so
the
maybe
the
biggest
concern
is
just
the
the
potential
for
abuse
when
there's
a
when
there's
this
data
on
every
citizen
who
goes
out
in
public,
it's
also,
as
the
point
has
been
made
earlier,
that
it's
often
this
technology
is
often
inaccurate
and
has
been
shown
to
produce
disproportionately
many
false
positives
on
non-white
and
female
faces,
and
so
this
is
likely
to
exacerbate
racially
discriminatory,
policing
and
further
erode
community
trust
in
the
police.
O
Amnesty
international
has
has
documented
a
number
of
cases
where
facial
recognition
technology
was
abused.
You
can
find
that
at
our
website
at
bandthescan.amnesty.org,
and
so
also
the
police
have
have
a
lot
of
crime
fighting
tools
already
at
their
disposal,
and
I
don't
think
this
significantly
adds
to
to
their
abilities
really
and
finally,
I
guess
I
would
like
to
add
a
caution
to
the
writers
of
this
legislation
to
be
wary
of
loopholes
in
similar
legislation
in
other
cities
around
the
country.
O
D
D
P
You
awesome,
my
name
is
chris
weyland.
I
am
a
freelance
cyber
security
consultant
and
penetration
tester.
I
am
also
the
co-chair
of
restore
the
fourth
minnesota
most
of
the
members
of
our
local
chapter
work
in
the
technology
industry
and
all
of
us
share
a
very
similar
concern
that
this
technology
is
simply
not
ready
to
be
used.
P
It's
been
shown
by
independent
researchers,
it's
been
shown
by
the
national
institute
of
standards
and
technology.
It's
not
ready.
It
has
significant
racial
biases
that
seem
pre-built
into
the
software
itself,
and
these
biases
can
be
very
difficult
and
time
consuming
to
fare.
It
out-
and
I
say
this
as
a
white
guy
who
some
who
dabbles
in
writing
software
my
biases
carry
over
into
the
creation
of
it,
and
so
I
would
encourage
the
council
to
simply
put
simply
ban
the
tech
it
doesn't.
P
D
Thank
you
chris.
Our
next
speaker
is
jared.
D
C
Hello,
my
name
is
albert
foxconn
and
I'm
the
executive
director
of
the
surveillance
technology
oversight,
project,
we're
a
new
york-based
civil
rights
and
privacy
nonprofit,
and
we
are
committed
to
banning
facial
recognition,
particularly
government,
dual
use
of
facial
recognition
and
states
and
localities
around
the
country
and
we're
very
grateful
to
see
minneapolis,
taking
this
vital
step
to
protecting
your
residents
from
this
bias,
broken
and
really
undemocratic
technology.
Facial
recognition,
as
we've
heard,
puts
communities
of
color
at
risk,
puts
them
at
risk
not
simply
of
being
wrongly
accused
of
a
crime.
C
They
haven't,
commit
not
simply
being
falsely
arrested
by
police,
but
this
technology
puts
so
many
people
at
risk
of
the
very
type
of
police
violence.
We
saw
so
tragically
unfold
this
past
year
and
on
countless
occasions
before
and
when
we
are
talking
about
the
need
to
ban
the
scan,
it
is
a
need
to
protect
the
residents
of
minneapolis
and
all
americans
from
this
discriminatory
technology.
C
That
is
how
it
will
be
continued
to
be
targeted
in
the
months
and
years
ahead.
We
believe
that
a
categorical
ban
on
this
technology
is
necessary
because
any
loophole
any
caveat.
Any
exception
that
ever
allows
facial
recognition
to
be
used
will
be
exploited
systematically
to
perpetuate
these
same
forms
of
injustice
and
inequality.
C
Q
And
thank
you
city,
council
hi.
My
name
is
david.
I'm
a
renter
in
ventura
village,
in
ward
6.,
I'm
also
a
technologist
by
training.
I
hold
a
graduate
degree
in
computer
science,
specifically
artificial
intelligence
from
stanford
university,
and
I'm
calling
in
support
of
the
ordinance
and
to
ask
city
council
to
look
into
accountability
and
technology
use
across
more
than
just
facial
recognition.
Q
So
the
idea
behind
garbage
in
garbage
out
is
that
if
you
have
flawed
input
for
a
process,
then
the
output
will
be
similarly
flawed.
So,
for
example,
when
I
was
first
learning
to
cook,
I
accidentally
made
a
dish
using
sugar
instead
of
salt
for
a
rice
dish
and
the
end
result
obviously
was
garbage
and
it
ended
up
in
the
garbage
as
well.
Okay,
so
like.
Why
does
this
matter
right?
So
we've
talked
about
how
bias
and
data
sets
can
lead
to
very
erroneous
results
in
facial
recognition
for
women
and
communities
of
color.
Q
But
I
also
want
us
to
consider
how
this
plays
out
in
other
realms.
So
chief
ardanda
over
the
summer
mentioned
using
data
to
identify
and
intervene
with
officers
who
are
engaged
in
problematic
behavior.
So
the
data
is
going
to
be
based
on
past
behavior
right
and
so
when
we
look
at
the
minnesota
reformer
report
from
two
weeks
ago.
Talking
about
how
no
disciplinary
action
has
been
taken
against
any
officers
for
misconduct
during
the
protests.
Q
I'm
thinking
of
sergeant
anna
hedberg,
who,
over
the
summer
said
she
didn't
want
to
put
her
two
beautiful
little
girls
in
danger
by
going
to
a
cub
food
in
minneapolis
because
of
the
other
folks
who
shot
there.
Who
do
you
think
is
going
to
use
an
algorithm
to
justify
the
ways
they
want
to
casually
demonize
and
dehumanize
the
people
they
have
sworn
to
serve
and
protect?
Q
D
Thank
you
david.
I
will
point
out
that
the
the
dish
that
you
referred
to,
where
you
use
sugar
instead
of
salt,
is
actually
a
cultural
dish
called
sticky
rice.
So.
D
R
R
Good
afternoon
cbb
jenkins
minneapolis
city
council,
my
name
is
elizabeth
adams.
I'm
a
member
of
post
me
coalition,
I'm
a
native
minnesotan,
a
current
stanford
university
race
and
technology.
Fellow,
a
former
member
of
the
racial
equity
community
advisory
committee
and
a
resident
of
ward
7..
I've
led
technology
initiatives
for
over
20
years.
I
know
good
technology
and
I
know
bad
technology
technology
impacts
every
facet
of
our
lives,
so
we
implore
our
leaders
to
quickly
grasp
the
connection
between
the
government's
use
of
technology
and
the
impact
on
a
community's
ability
to
thrive
or
not
thrive.
R
R
R
S
S
S
T
Hello,
my
name
is
cassie
horch.
I
live
in
ward
12
and
I
support
this
ordinance.
The
first
reason
is
because
privacy
is
important
to
me
and
it's
not
because
I
have
anything
to
hide
those
in
power.
Whether
government
or
corporation
have
shown
repeatedly
that
they
cannot
be
trusted
to
responsibly
use
technology.
T
T
Second,
mass
surveillance
discourages
participation
in
protests,
protests
against
those
in
power
impacting
our
first
amendment
rights.
I
don't
want
to
live
in
a
city
where
this
is
discouraged.
Last
technology,
outpaces
regulation,
there's
a
reason.
Clearview
ai
was
made
illegal
in
canada
just
last
week.
T
T
D
Thank
you
so
much.
Our
next
speaker
is
benicius
gucci.
U
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
vinicius
gucci
and
I'm
the
president
of
the
twin
cities,
chapter
of
the
japanese
american
citizens
league
we're
the
oldest
and
largest
asian-american
civil
rights
organization
in
the
u.s.
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
our
local
chapter,
I
myself
am
a
resident
of
ward
3
along
with
two
other
board
members,
and
we
have
several
members
who
live
within
minneapolis.
U
Government
surveillance
leading
up
to
the
war
had
developed
a
registry
of
japanese
americans
allowing
community
leaders
to
be
systematically
arrested
following
the
bombing
of
pearl
harbor
in
this
age
of
post
9,
11
islamophobia
and
racialized
policing.
We
simply
cannot
allow
the
mistakes
of
of
our
past
to
continue
to
be
repeated.
U
B
D
Kenneth,
if
you
are
there,
please
press
star
6
to
unmute
yourself
and
if
not,
we
will
move
to
our
next
speaker,
julius
hernandez.
K
Hear
you
yeah,
okay
sounds
good.
Thank
you.
First
of
all,
thank
you
so
much
for
giving
time
for
the
community
to
speak
on
this.
My
name
is
julius
hernandez.
K
I
am
a
member
of
the
institute
for
digital
humanity,
a
organization
based
out
of
downtown
minneapolis
in
the
elliott
park
neighborhood,
and
we
specifically
work
on
digital
ethics
issues.
We're
also
a
part
of
the
post
me
coalition,
and
I
just
want
to
call.
I
really
just
want
to
call
in
to
urge
that
all
the
members
of
this
of
this
body
would
ban
or
would
vote
in
favor
of
the
ordinance
to
ban
facial
recognition
technology
for
a
couple,
different
reasons
and
I'll
just
go
through
them
quickly.
The
first
being
this
technology
is
inherently
racist.
K
It's
inherently
bad
for
communities
of
color,
and
it
has
proven
time
and
time
again
that
this
technology
isn't
successful.
It
isn't
regulated
and
it's
moving
too
quickly
for
people
to
keep
up
with,
and
so
I
think
that
this
ordinance
to
ban
the
technology
is
key
to
keeping
our
communities
of
color
safe
in
the
city
as
a
man
of
color
and
as
a
resident
of
minneapolis.
K
The
more
I've
learned
about
this
technology
through
the
organization
that
I
work
with
the
more
I
feel
unsafe
in
the
city
living
somewhere,
where
we
have
this
technology
on
hand
specifically
on
hand
for
the
police
department's
views
with
that
being
said.
Also,
consistency
is
one
of
the
things
that
I
believe
is
key
here
when
we,
when
the
members
of
this
body
talk
about
a
defunding
of
the
police
or
a
reallocation
of
funds,
I
think
it
also
goes.
K
It
goes
to
show
that
the
members
of
the
body
are
committed
to
this
when
they
do
actually
do
these
things
and
when
they
actually
put
in
ordinances
and
bans
that
will
enhance
the
experiences
of
the
people
in
the
city
by
not
allowing
this
technology
to
be
in
the
hands
of
anyone
that
can
use
it
in
harmony,
and
so
I
thank
you
guys
again
for
that,
and
I
hope
that
this
will
be
banned
and
yeah
have
a
great
day.
Thank
you.
D
V
Awesome,
I'm
stanhari
venour
and
I'm
the
founder
of
enco
justice,
a
global
youth-led
coalition,
advocating
for
the
ethical
use
of
artificial
intelligence.
I'm
here
to
speak
in
favor
of
this
ban
time
and
time
again.
Facial
recognition
technology
has
been
abused
to
violate
fundamental
civil
liberties.
It's
racist
invasive
and
it
puts
us
closer
to
a
surveillance
day
in
which
privacy
rights
are
non-existent.
Space
surveillance
has
been
linked
to
three
wrongful
arrests
in
the
u.s.
All
three
victims
were
black
men.
It's
been
used
to
target
and
surveilled
matter
protesters
exercising
their
constitutional
rights.
V
It's
been
used
by
ice
to
target
and
round
up
undocumented
immigrants
for
deportation,
and
the
witness
used
makes
us
all
feel
less
safe
because
we
could
be
falsely
blabbed
and
wrongfully
arrested
while
merely
walking
down
the
street.
The
detroit
is
chief,
even
approximated,
that
his
department,
software
failed
percent
of
the
time
and
in
sixty
eight
out
of
seven
places
in
2019
that
software
was
used
on
black
people
here
in.
V
Police
have
run
nearly
1
000
facial
recognition,
searches
through
the
sheriff's
office
since
2018,
which
is
what
brings
me
to
you
today.
We
have
an
array
of
other
investigative
aides
at
our
disposal
and
one
facial
recognition.
Technology
is
up
to
100
times
more
likely
to
fail
on
black
brown
and
asian
faces.
We
cannot
play
with
fire
and
with
jeopardizing
minneapolis
residents
basic
civil
rights
if
we're
going
to
reimagine
policing
that
what
happens
to
george
floyd
never
happens
again
on
this
anniversary
of
the
u.s
house.
V
Finally,
approving
the
landmark
civil
rights
act,
I
urge
the
minneapolis
city
council
to
demonstrate
commitment
to
racial
justice
and
digital
privacy
to
fault
the
lead
of
boston,
san
francisco,
portland
oakland,
new
orleans
and
other
major
u.s
cities
by
taking
action
against
facial
recognition,
surveillance
technology
and
barring
its
use
by
law
enforcement.
Thank
you.
D
Q
X
Can
you?
Oh
hey,
I'm
a
community
organizer
with
aclu
of
minnesota,
a
member
of
the
post
me
coalition,
and
I'm
also
a
resident
of
ward
6.
I'll.
Keep
this
brief,
calling
just
like
everyone
else
here
in
support
of
this
ordinance.
The
police
do
not
need
this
technology,
and
it's
not
news
to
anyone
here
that
the
police,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
they
use
this
technology,
do
not
prevent
crime,
and
the
data
clearly
shows
the
racial
biases
associated
with
the
use
of
this
technology.
X
I
trust
that
you
all
make
the
right
call
and
as
a
black
man
living
in
the
city
with
an
already
racist
police
department,
I
can't
imagine
how
it
would
feel
knowing
that
the
police
are
just
freely
that
our
city
council
will
let
the
police
use
this
technology
when
clearly
we're
all
in
the
fight
to
defund
the
racist
police
and
and
make
sure
that
we
have
a
fair
community
for
everyone
and
a
fair
sense
of
public
safety.
So
I
trust
that
you
all
make
the
right
call
for.
Yes,.
D
Generic
tearing
them
and
I'm
so
sorry
that
I
really
butchered
that,
but
man
junan
if
you're
on
the
line,
please
press
star
six
on
mute
yourself.
Thank
you
very
much.
Can
you
hear.
A
A
A
My
approach
or
my
perspective
that
I'd
like
to
bring
your
attention
to
is
on
something
called
the
technology
stack.
The
technology
stack
is
something
that
serves
the
application
and
the
application
that
we're
discussing
today
is
facial
recognition.
Software,
the
technology
stack,
has
hardware
middleware
and
software,
and
the
algorithms
and
the
processing
is
on
the
software
side
that
we're
discussing,
however,
to
support
it.
We
need
hardware,
middleware
and
all
infrastructure,
and,
as
I
see
it
from
my
perspective
in
my
research,
there
are
multiple
vulnerabilities
in
the
stack
that
supports
any
facial
recognition.
A
A
Service
will
be
located,
we
don't
know
who
the
vendors
are,
how
many
vendors
will
be
participating
in
this
so
before
we
can
even
get
to
the
stage
of
turning
the
switch
on
to
use
the
facial
recognition.
Software,
maybe
clear
view
ai,
maybe
anything.
A
D
Thank
you
manju.
Our
next
speaker
is
tessa
wetjin
tessa,
please
press
star
six
to
unmute.
Y
Hi,
this
is
tessa
watson
good
afternoon,
I'm
in
ward
8..
I
just
wanted
to
join
in
the
crowd
of
people
that
are
urging
you
to
vote
for
the
ban
on
facial
recognition.
I
want
to
point
out
there
is
a
lot
of
research
actually
by
harvard
that
they
put
out
a
big
report
on
this
in
2020
about
the
variety
of
problems
with
facial
recognition,
including
the
divergent
rates
which
actually,
they
consistently
found
the
poorest
accuracy
among
females
who
are
black
between
18
and
30
years
old.
Y
They
also
point
out
that
it
can
be
used
to
potentially
target
marginalized
populations,
particularly
undocumented
immigrants
and
potentially
muslim
citizens,
and
just
the
best
basic
effect
that
african-american
people
are
over
represented
in
mugshot
data,
which
the
face
recognition
uses
to
make
predictions
which
leads
again,
like
the
previous
speaker,
spoke
to
the
concept
of
garbage
and
garbage
out
with.
Not
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
make
unracist
artificial
intelligence
right
now,
because
the
people,
the
systems
that
are
making
the
artificial
intelligence,
are
based
on
racist
information
and
racist
practices.
Y
K
Okay,
thank
you
afternoon,
chair
jenkins
and
members
of
the
committee.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
voice
my
concerns
of
the
ordinances
current
forum.
My
name
is
drake
jamal,
I'm
with
the
security
industry,
association
or
sia
retreat
association
that
represents
businesses
that
provide
security
and
life
safety
technologies,
including
more
than
a
dozen
members
our
headquarters
minnesota.
I'd
just
like
to
start
off
by
saying
that
sia
firmly
believes
that,
while
any
technology
has
potential
for
misuse,
we
support
policies
that
ensure
facial
recognition
is
only
used
in
appropriate
and
non-discriminatory
ways.
K
However,
the
blanket
ban
included
in
the
ordinance
strips
away
the
opportunity
to
address
both
potential
use
of
concern
and
preserve
its
proven
benefits
as
a
useful
tool
for
law
enforcement
and
fighting
identity.
Fraud
is
fuel,
criminal
activity,
forwarding
malicious
attacks
against
the
public,
solving
hate
crimes
against
the
lgbtq
community,
cracking
cold
cases
and,
of
course,
rescuing
over
15
000
children
from
human
sex
trafficking
in
just
the
past
couple
years,
which,
as
the
ordinance
has
drafted
now,
would
eliminate
these
long-standing
uses
of
the
technology
and
critical
public
safety
applications
and
also
just
to
address
this.
K
I
also
think
it's
crucial
to
understand
the
state
of
the
science
of
facial
recognition,
accuracy,
which
is
unfortunately
been
widely
misconstrued
in
media
accounts.
Overall,
the
highest
performing
technology
is
reaching
the
accuracy
of
fingerprint
technology
on
many
measurements,
which
is
the
gold
standard
for
identification.
K
This
would
simply
be
impossible
if
the
technology
is
less
accurate
across
the
board
for
certain
groups
or
developing
using
non-diverse
data
sets
and
finally,
on
behalf
of
sa
and
its
members,
we
share
the
goal
of
ensuring
responsible
use
of
advanced
technologies,
and
we
urge
you
to
consider
ways
to
address
these
issues
that
would
limit
potential
use
of
concerns
without
imposing
a
blanket
ban
that
eliminates
all
mentioned
benefits
as
well,
and
we've
outlined
that
in
our
written
testimony.
Thank
you
for
the
chance
and
hope
you
have
a
good
day.
D
Thank
you.
Drake
next
speaker
is
joe
facklin
joe.
If
you're
on
the
line,
please
press
star
six
to
unbeat
yourself.
Z
Hi,
my
name
is
joe.
I
am
the
program
associate
for
restore
the
force
and
I
live
in
ward
6
and
I'm
calling
today
to
ask
city
council
to
vote
in
favor
of
banning
facial
recognition.
Tech
studies
have
shown
that
facial
recognition,
tech
is
biased,
misidentifying
black
faces
tend
to
100
times
more
than
white
faces.
Z
It
also
misidentifies
women's
faces
more
than
men.
I
think
that
this
bias
and
error
rate
is
completely
unacceptable
for
technology
that
can
be
used
as
evidence
to
arrest
people
and
worry
that
its
use
contributes
to
police
violence
and
the
already
disproportionate
policing
of
bipod
communities.
I
think
if
this
council
is
truly
committed
to
racial
justice
and
equity,
they
will
vote
to
ban
facial
recognition,
tech
in
minneapolis.
AA
All
right
I'll
try
to
be
quick.
We
need
a
complete
ban,
including
a
ban
on
corporate
use
of
frt
target
and
walmart
should
not
be
able
to
use
and
weaponize
frt
against
customers
or
shoplifters.
AA
Collaboration
in
2004
minneapolis
was
the
pilot
city
to
launch
the
safe
zone,
safe
city
initiative
initiative
by
target
corporation.
The
goal
was
to
target
the
low
lowest
level
crimes
in
downtown
minneapolis
using
the
broken
windows
theory
that
target
corporation
believed
would
increase
the
desirability
of
the
shopping
and
cultural
district.
They
declared
the
safe
zone
in
no
time
target
corporation
was
training
law
enforcement,
including
fbi,
counterintelligence
agencies.
AA
It
was
clear
from
the
beginning.
They
were
targeting
homeless
populations
in
downtown
minneapolis
and
we're
looking
to
the
city
and
county
as
partners
in
declaring
war
against
the
undesired
elements
that
stunned
it
growth
and
made
white
suburbanites
feel
unsafe
from
the
inception
of
the
safe
city
program,
the
goal
was
to
eliminate
human
hours
manning
the
downtown
cameras
on
the
lookout
for
petty
crime.
Police
did
not
want
to
pay
their
officers
to
sit
behind
a
desk
long
story.
Short
china,
innovated
frt
to
eliminate
the
human
hours
again.
AA
D
D
Our
next
speaker
is
eliza
darris,
but
I
received
a
message
stating
that
they
had
to
leave.
So
the
next
speaker,
then,
would
be
cynthia
gomez.
AB
Okay,
council,
council
person
jenkins,
I
noticed
you
allowed
other
people
to
exceed
the
time
just
saying
due
to
the
entrepreneurial
spirit
at
target
corps.
Minneapolis
is
already
ground.
Zero
of
the
global
surveillance
state,
which
is
so
profoundly
undemocratic
and
which
we
already
have
so
little
say
is
we
don't
want
black
brown
native
and
asian
youth
to
be
criminalized
further
in
the
sketchy
gray
area
where
most
of
the
policing
in
the
city
and
other
cities
are
done.
AB
This
is
not
where
we
ever
want
policing
to
take
place
in
this
first
amendment
adjacent
area,
people
who
want
police
actually
want
them
to
investigate
and
gather
evidence
to
solve
actual
crimes.
That's
what
my
students
in
north
minneapolis
want
every
time
police
say
they
need
another
tool
in
their
toolbox.
They
abuse
it.
The
police
of
this
city
give
us
no
reason
to
trust
that
they
will
use
facial
recognition
technology
other
than
to
deepen
the
terrible
racial
disparities
the
mpd
continues
to
safeguard.
AB
We
understand
that
the
police's
function
is
to
protect
white
wealth,
even
if
they
don't
understand
it
themselves.
As
a
city,
we
need
to
protect
our
communities
of
color
from
harmful
and
deadly
policing
and
we
need
to
beat
back
each
and
every
attack
on
our
dwindling
civil
liberties.
So
please
vote
ordinance.
Thank
you
very
much.
D
Y
W
Oh
hello,
I'm
sorry,
my
name
is
ruby
cromer
and
I
live
in
ward
7,
which
is
in
the
fourth
police
precinct,
and
I
strongly
oppose
the
use
of
facial
recognition
technology
in
our
city,
I'm
a
photographer
and
I'm
passionate
about
digital
image
ethics,
and
I
believe
that
this
technology
is
not
ethical,
it's
discriminatory
and
very
harmful
to
our
community.
W
Software
is
biased
and
misidentifies
people
of
color
at
a
far
higher
rate
and
its
use
will
contribute
to
racial
disparities
in
policing
and
over
policing.
This
is
the
opposite
of
what
we
need
and
of
what
the
city
council
pledged
to
do
this
summer.
Additionally,
the
mpd
has
historically
not
been
transparent
about
its
use
of
this
oppressive
and
discriminatory
technology.
W
I'm
deeply
concerned
about
its
potential
to
be
used
against
our
undocumented
neighbors
and
our
unhoused
neighbors,
and
I'm
also
concerned
about
its
bias
and
impact
on
lgbt
residents
of
minneapolis.
W
I
don't
want
my
or
anyone
else's
privacy
and
safety
to
be
threatened
by
facial
recognition
technology
and
we
have
a
chance
to
improve
our
city
by
banning
this
invasive
and
harmful
technology
before
it
gets
out
of
control,
and
I
respectfully
ask
you
to
please
vote
for
the
banning
of
facial
recognition
technology
in
our
city
and
if
anything,
this
ban
does
not
go
far
enough
to
limit
corporate
use.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you,
ruby
and
that
concludes
the
speakers
who
have
signed
up
to
speak.
Are
there
any
additional
speakers
on
the
line.
O
D
So
that
does
conclude
our
speakers
who
have
signed
up,
and
I
will
now
close
the
public
hearing
and
see
if
councilmember
fletcher
would
like
to
make
a
motion.
AD
I
do
know
that
mpd
is
here
on
the
line
and
able
to
answer
questions
about
how
we
use
this
technology
today
and
with
your
permission,
I
I'd
like
to
open
it
up
to
have
them
answer
some
of
the
concerns
that
were
brought
today
and
through
this
public
hearing
and
and
through
some
of
the
development
of
this
ordinance.
If
that's
all
right,
I
have
a
few
questions
to
tee
up
for
them,
and
I
understand
deputy
chief
force
is
here.
W
AD
You
know
in
in
local
law
enforcement
efforts
that
are
done.
The
city
doesn't
specifically
own
this
technology
today,
but
we
have.
We
do
work
with
other
jurisdictions
that
do
there
is
some
coordination
there
in
in
law
enforcement.
There's
also
a
lot
of
human
work
done
today
to
assess
any
of
the
results
that
facial
recognition
technology
might
provide.
AD
They
are
not
that
it
does
not
identify
suspects.
Rather,
this
technology
does
help
to
develop.
Investigative
leads
during
the
course
of
an
investigation.
AD
So
a
couple
questions
that
I
have
from
the
police
department
that
I
just
want
clarified
is
is
do,
does
mpd
use
or
do
we
have
the
capacity
today
to
use
real-time
facial
recognition
technology,
for
example,
at
public
events?
That's
one
of
the
things
that,
in
reading
about
facial
recognition,
has
been
brought
up
as
a
concern.
L
AE
I
am
council
member
jenkins,
thank
you,
council,
member,
paul
masano
to
answer
your
question.
The
mpd
does
not
have
or
maintain
facial
recognition
technology
and
we
do
not
have
as
we
do
not
have
it.
We
do
not
have
the
capacity
to
do
real-time
monitoring
of
any
of
the
camera
systems.
AD
Yeah
another
thing
is-
and
I
remember
this
from
last
week's
update
to
the
body-worn
camera
policy-
I
think
there
are
limits
to
using
body-worn
camera
video,
that's
recorded
by
mpd
officers.
Even
is
that
accurate.
AE
AE
However,
it
did
leave
some
opening
for
analyzing
recordings
of
specific
incidents
when
an
investigator
has
reason
to
believe
that
a
specific
suspect,
witness
or
person
in
need
of
assistance
was
recorded.
AD
Yeah
the
other
piece-
and
this
is
something
that
was
talked
about
a
lot
in
the
public
hearing
here.
The
potential
identifications
suggested
by
this
technology
are
strongly
reviewed
or
examined
by
by
people
by
analysts.
AE
Yes,
I
can
provide
my
my
feedback
on
that,
as
at
least
in
terms
of
how
that
information
is
utilized
by
our
investigators
today,
often
times
when
we're
investigating
incidents,
there's
an
awful
lot
of
surveillance,
footage
that
we
obtain
images
of
people
who
are
involved
in
these
crimes.
We
and
obviously
want
to
have
these
people
identified
as
as
part
of
the
investigation.
AE
We
we
disseminate
that
around
through
the
usual
methods
of
sharing
it
internally,
and
we
share
it
externally
to
some
of
our
law
enforcement
partners.
The
sheriff's
department
is,
is
an
agency
that,
through
their
intelligence,
does
have
facial
recognition,
software
that's
limited
to
analyzing
images
against
booking
photos,
so
that's
the
the
data
set
that
they
that
they
compare
these
images
to.
AE
We
do
not
provide
them
with
any
images,
nor
will
we
provide
them
with
any
images
in
order
to
to
increase
their
their
data,
pool
that
that
is
their
data
pool
for
booking
photos.
AE
AE
That
is
also
again
looked
at
through
by
an
analyst,
and
if,
if
we
specifically
ask
that
software
to
be
used,
we
need
to
provide
them
with
the
the
police
report
and
everything
else
that
they
can
also
utilize
to
help
in
their.
AE
AE
They
looked
at
other
things
that
then
may
increase
and
bolster
their
opinion
that
this
looks
like
a
solid
investigative
lead.
That
information
is
then
shared
with
our
investigator.
Who
also
looks
at
this
in
the
same
direction
of
this
is
an
investigative
lead.
It's
it's
no
different
on
par
than
if
somebody
called
up
and
said
I,
I
saw
an
a
picture
that
was
circulated
on
television.
That
looks
like
somebody
I
know
and
provides
a
name
we're
going
to
have
to
look
into
that.
AE
Any
information
provided
through
facial
recognition
on
its
own
does
not
constitute
probable
cause
to
make
any
arrests.
It
doesn't
give
the
basis
to
get
search,
warrants
or
arrest
warrants.
It
is
looked
upon
as
an
investigative
lead
that
needs
to
be
verified
and
vetted
by
by
individual
analysis,
much
along
the
same
way
as
fingerprint
hits
and
and
the
same
information.
We
get
back
from
the
analysis
of
discharged,
cartridge
casings
through
nibin.
The
computers
make
that
very
fast
to
identify
potential
matches.
AE
However,
our
forensic
scientists
need
to
verify
that,
in
order
for
it
to
be
considered
something
to
move
forward
on,
and
also
this
this,
this
in
this
software
can
help
us
and
has
helped
us
identify
people
in
in
short
periods
of
time,
both
in
in
violent
crimes
and
also
in
in
instances
such
as
the
identification
of
of
people
from
death
scenes
that
we
don't
know.
AE
We
don't
know
who
who
were
we're
dealing
with,
and
we
needed
to
get
that
information,
human
trafficking
cases
and,
among
other
things,
so
there's
a
lot
of
it
it.
AE
I
think
that
we
understand
the
concerns
that
involve
this
technology,
and
we
want
to
ensure
that
if
it's
something
that
can
can
be
of
assistance
to
help
us
get
answers
and
help
us
get
information
to
move
forward
that
we
want
to
do
so
in
in.
I
would
say
the
most
trustworthy
manner.
AD
Communities,
safe
and
having
really
stringent
measures
in
place
to
protect
people's
rights
are
absolutely
imperative
to
me.
I
think
we
need
to
work
with
the
police
and
not
leave
them
completely
out
of
the
conversation,
but
I
think
we
really
need
a
framework
and
policy
for
how
this
is
used
and
pd
agrees,
and
I've
gotten
involved
in
working
with
the
mayor
and
mpd
on
what
that
framework
should
be.
AD
D
Thank
you,
councilmember,
palmisano
and
deputy
force
for
that
information.
Our
next
eq
is
council
member
asman.
AF
What
my
community
feels
for
any
type
of
surveillance,
I
think
the
chilling
effect
of
government
surveillance
against
minorities
again
as
immigrants
and
against
people
with
muslim
faith.
AF
AF
AF
For
me
there
there
are
so
many.
There
are
numerous
and
very
specific
tools
that
law
enforcement
can
still
use
and
they
can
know
everyone
who
had
a
phone
in
a
pacific
area.
They
know
where
they
are.
I
think
the
shortcoming
of
this
technology
has
been
shown
not
just
the
securities
applications,
but
in
self-driving
cars
and
other
machine
learning
applications.
AF
I
believe
that
it's
better
to
go
far
on
this
and
and
have
to
dial
it
back
and
and
not
go
far
enough
for
this.
We
have.
We
are
here
trying
to
build
a
relationship
with
the
law
enforcement
and,
as
we
listen
to.
AF
Comments
from
conversation
that
we've
been
having
or
expertise
that
were
there,
there
were
people
of
minorities,
people
of
color
that
this
is
affecting,
I
think
the
negative.
I
would
outweighs
the
the
positive.
AF
I
listened
to
the
the
chief
or
the
officer
that
was
speaking
and
yes,
it
could
have
a
benefit,
but
we're
talking
about
human
rights,
we're
talking
about
violations
that
have
been
specifically
targeted
by
minority
and
muslim
communities.
This
this
type
of
surveillance.
AF
Right
now,
the
success
for
these
applications
with
black
faces
might
be
as
well
might
be,
as
well
as
the
internet
detectives
on
twitter.
So
I
believe
that
they
are.
They
are
so
unreal
reliable,
and
I
believe
that
we
should
go
as
far
as
making
sure
loopholes
are
not
allowing
this
type
of
thing.
What
what
is
stopping
the
law
enforcement
minneapolis
going
outside
the
city
governments
and
using
face
recognitions.
AF
We
need
to
make
sure
that
we
are
correcting
the
mistakes
we
have
made
and
and
providing
a
sense
of
security
for
those
minorities
that
have
been
specifically
targeted
by
not
just
the
civil
government
but
federal
government
and
so
on.
That's
my
calm.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you,
councilmember
osman,
and
I
did
put
myself.
Thank
you
just
a
few
comments.
I
will
be
supporting
this
this
ordinance
today
to
to
ban
the
use
of
facial
recognition
or,
more
accurately,
to
limit
the
use
of
facial
recognition.
D
You
know,
but
I
I
will
say
that
you
know,
as
is
listening
to
all
of
the
the
very
compelling
and
and
really
factual,
based
testimony,
a
big
theme
that
I
heard
and
that
I
am
very
much
aware
of.
In
fact,
you
know
the
day
after
george
floyd
was
murdered.
D
I
announced
that
I
would
be
bringing
forth
a
resolution
declaring
racism
as
a
public
health
crisis
and
from
almost
every
speaker
we
heard
from
today
they
cited
racism
and
and
and
even
more
specifically
racism
in
the
human
sort
of
analysis
of
the
data
as
really
the
the
key
problematic
issue,
and
you
know
until
we
resolve
that
issue,
you
know
we
we
are
going
to
continue
to
have
the
same
problems.
D
You
know.
So
it's
easy
to
point
to
technology
or
to
you
know,
individuals
who
may
be
racist
and
and
those
kinds
of
things,
but
we
have
to
stop
the
systemic
racism.
I
believe
that
this
that
this
ban
at
this
particular
point
in
time
is
necessary
because
the
technology,
as
as
many
speakers
noted,
is
just
not
ready,
but
you
know
I
mean
to
be
quite
honest
with
you,
we're
we're
being
surveilled
at
this
very
moment.
D
I
mean
you
know
this
system
that
we're
on
knows
what
time
everybody
logged
into
it,
everybody
who
did
log
into
it
and
what
time
we
logged
off
of
it-
and
so
you
know,
surveillance
technology
is,
is
a
part
of
our
world
that
we
live
in.
We
must
regulate
it
to
make
sure
that
everybody
is
being
treated
equally
equitably
and
fairly
within
that
system,
but
you
know
we're
going
to
continue
to
have
these
really
challenging
conversations
as
as
time
moves
forward
council
member
fletcher.
J
Thank
you,
council
vice
president,
and
you
know
I'll
just
note.
I
think
the
you
know.
I
really
appreciate
your
comments
and
and
councilmember
osman's
comments.
Really.
You
know
acknowledging
the
seriousness
of
this
and
and
appreciate
everybody
who
testified
in
the
coalition
that
worked
on
this.
You
know
in
in
thinking
of
you
know
the
the
comments
from
mpd,
and
certainly
I
remember,
working
with
commander
garlicker
very
early
in
this
process
when
we
were
talking
about
data
privacy
and
his
his
comments
were
consistent
with
those.
J
You
know
that
that
we
heard
today
that
there's
very
limited
use
currently
by
mpd
that
there
is
a
little
bit
of
use
that
they'd
like
to
leave
room
for.
I
think,
as
we
look
at
the
state
of
the
technology
today
that
use
needs
more
scrutiny,
is
not
something
that
I
feel
comfortable.
J
You
know
creating
an
exception
around
based
on
particularly
the
vendor
that
the
county
uses,
which
is
the
one
that
we
heard
public
testimony
testifiers
saying
you
know,
has
been
banned
in
canada
as
recently
as
this
week
and
and
is,
is
really
under
a
lot
of
scrutiny,
but
we
did
very
intentionally
create
an
exceptions
process
for
that
reason,
so
that
if
there
is
a
department-
and
it
was
actually
my
prediction-
that
probably
the
convention
center
would
come
forward
with
some
sort
of
crowd
management
use
before
we
heard
from
mpd-
but
maybe
mpd
will
come
through
first,
but
if
any
department
has
a
use
that
they
want
to
deploy,
they
can
put
together
a
proposal
that
says
here's
how
we're
going
to
manage
the
data
privacy
concerns.
J
Here's,
how
we've
assessed
the
tech
against
our
equity
goals,
here's
the
checks
we're
putting
in
place
into
the
system
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
misusing
it
to
make
sure
that
there's
real
clarity
around
how
that
gets
used.
Nmpd,
you
know,
may
already
have
a
lot
of
that
work
done
internally
that
they,
you
know,
could
share
with
us
in
that
kind
of
a
presentation.
J
But
we
actually
cooked
that
into
the
ordinance
the
ability
for
a
department
to
come
in
and
suggest
to
use
and
for
us
to
decide
if
it's
something
that
we
think
is
acceptable
to
invite
in
and
I'll
just
say,
it
is
on
all
of
us,
as
council
members,
to
take
very
seriously
the
concerns
that
were
raised
in
this
public
hearing,
not
just
now,
but
also
in
the
future,
when
people
are
coming
forward,
asking
for
exceptions
to
make
sure
that
we're
holding
ourselves
to
a
very
high
standard
on
racial
equity
and
and
on
racial,
racial
bias
and
technology
and
on
you
know
what
kinds
of
harm
we're
willing
to
expose
some
people
to
in
order
to
make
some
other
people
feel
safe,
which
is
a
question
that
we
should
be
asking
ourselves
about
all
kinds
of
ways
that
the
city
functions
and
is
an
opportunity
here
with
this
technology.
J
F
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president,
and
I
appreciate
all
the
folks
that
we
heard
from
today
and
this
issue
being
brought
forward.
I
agree
with
my
colleagues
as
a
technologist.
You
know,
I
think
it
is
something
that
we
want
to
be
cognizant
of.
Whenever
we're
utilizing
technology,
I
think
it's
better
to
get
in
front
of
it
to
prevent
problems
from
happening
than
to
try
to
go
back
later
and
fix
problems
that
may
occur
and
as
people
noted,
there
are
imperfections
for
sure
that
exists
with
this
emerging
technology
that
is
really
in
its
infancy.
F
Overall,
you
know
people
are
going
to
connect
with
language
in
different
ways,
and
so
I
know
a
lot
of
people
connected
with
the
word
ban.
That's
used
today
and
I
agree
with
council
vice
president
jenkins.
I
personally
think
that
a
more
accurate
statement
is
saying
limiting
the
use,
and
I
really
want
to
highlight
that,
especially
as
people
are
thinking
about
this
as
the
public
is
thinking
about
this
and
people
have
different
opinions
on
it.
F
I
actually
want
to
reference
the
site
for
post
me,
the
coalition
of
groups
of
different
organizations
that
has
really
been
integral
to
this
work.
You
know
on
their
website.
I
only
see
on
the
front
page
twice
that
they
use
the
word
ban,
but
if
you
go
down
to
what
it
entails,
they
really
offer
a
great
description
of
what
this
is
and
it's
something
that
I
connect
with,
and
so
I
wanted
to
reference
this
and
just
share
this
with
folks,
but
under
what
it
entails
in
bold.
F
It
says:
postme
offers
a
framework
for
acquiring
new
surveillance
technologies
and
using
existing
ones.
Then
it
goes
on
to
mention
the
four
guiding
principles
of
transparency,
oversight,
accountability
and
equity,
and
then
they
describe
the
process
that
would
be
in
place.
First,
the
police
generating
a
public
impact
report
on
the
technology,
and
then
the
city
council
approving
any
ordering
an
acquiring
and
use
of
the
technology,
and
that
would
come
with
clear
rules
for
policies
for
the
any
surveillance
within
the
community,
as
well
as
clear
and
forcible
consequences
for
technology
when
it
is
misused
or
abused.
F
It
ensures
that
there's
public
hearings,
and
so
it
really
offers
that
that
oversight,
that
that
limitation
of
the
technology
and
really
the
intentionality
and
the
accountability
around
it-
and
so
I
think
the
framework
for
proving
how
this
technology
is
used
is
something
that's
really
important
and
really
great
and
is
needed.
F
I
think
it
can
be
a
valuable
tool,
but
I
agree
with
concerns
of
this
is
not
something
that
should
just
be
willy-nilly,
applied
or
used,
and
especially
given
all
the
concerns
and
sensitivities
around
how
we
protect
privacy
and
people's
rights
as
an
emerging
technology
like
this
is
out
there
in
the
in
the
ecosystem
of
municipal
operations.
So
I
wanted
to
highlight
that
and
appreciate
the
thoughtfulness
that
went
into
creating
this
framework
around
this,
how
this
technology
can
be
acquired
and
used.
AD
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president,
I
have
a
lot
of
concerns
about
this
proposed
ordinance
and
how
it
looks
to
me
on
its
face
that
it
violates
the
executive
and
legislative
authority
between
the
mayor
and
the
council,
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
conversation
on
that
as
to
whether
or
not
that
should
change,
but
restricting
the
use
and
requiring
council
approval
of
investigative
tools
to
me
seems
like
a
direct
over
step
in
the
day-to-day
operations
of
mpd.
AD
Again,
I
agree
that
the
department
has
a
policy
gap
regarding
facial
recognition.
Broadly
speaking,
they
acknowledge
that
too,
the
the
use
of
this
technology
or
any
tools
like
it
needs
to
have
really
comprehensive
guardrails
to
protect
privacy,
to
restrict
abuse,
to
have
transparency
and
reporting.
AD
AD
You
know
that
has
yes
a
ban
of
facial
recognition
as
we
define
it
in
this
ordinance,
but
with
those
ex
extinction
circumstances
right
to
prevent
loss
of
life
and
other
kinds
of
things
that
were
talked
about
here.
D
D
May
have
consulted
with
the
city
attorney's
office
prior
to
bringing
this
forward.
Is
there
any
council
vice
president.
AG
AG
Thank
you
committee
members,
council.
Vice
president
jenkins,
the
in
short
to
answer
councilmember
paul
asana's
question.
Yes,
the
american
can
work
on
that
policy
with
mpd
and
flush
out
the
details
of
that
policy.
AG
AG
AG
Yes,
yep,
there's
nothing
that
in
this
ordinance
that
would
prevent
the
mayor
and
mpd
from
continuing
to
work
on
a
policy
that
would
address
the
use
of
this
technology
and
development
of
that
policy
and
consideration
of
the
ordinance
today.
I
do
not
believe
create
an
overt
conflict
in
terms
of
the
charter
language.
AG
You
know
the
council
has
the
ability
to
adopt
regulation
that
has
enterprise-wide
applicability,
which
is
ostensibly
on
its
face.
What
this
ordinance
does,
albeit
we've,
the
testimony
that
we've
heard
today
in
the
discussion
has
focused
on
strictly
on
the
police
and
so,
and
that
ordinance,
as
mentioned
by
the
author,
does
include
a
process
to
request
exceptions
and
so
in
terms
of
development.
AG
Don't
know
what's
it
could
be.
On
my
end
for
all
I
know
I
apologize
so
I
I
I
think
I
answered
the
question,
but
if
I
didn't
you
know,
there
are
prior
examples
of
of
ordinances
that
had
general
applicability
but
did
affect
mpd,
specifically
the
sanctuary
ordinance,
an
ordinance,
for
example,
on
the
use
of
city
vehicles.
AG
There
are
the
ordinances
on
the
pcoc
and
the
opcr,
and
so
you
know
generally
the
city
and
its
elected
officials
have
generally
been
able
to
to
to
sort
of
work
through
where
there
may
be
specific
scenarios
of
over
conflict
and
to
work
through
those,
and
that's
what
I
would
anticipate
happening
here,
but
as
as
the
the
ordinance
currently
sits.
D
Thank
you,
mr
nielsen
councilmember,
gordon.
AC
Well,
thank
you,
and
I
appreciate
that
erica
nielsen
weighed
in
and
articulated
that
as
well,
I'm
very
supportive
of
this
ordinance
and
I
could
also
think
of
the
ethical
practices
code
and
maybe
that's
where
we
were
getting
into
even
with
the
use
of
vehicles
that
applies
to
all
city
employees
and
the
americans
certainly
veto
this
and
try
to
have
an
override.
I
mean.
Maybe
that's
one
of
the
way,
how
our
separation,
ordinance
or
you
know,
are
not
cooperating
with
federal
lice
agents.
AC
Ordinance
has
its
powers
because
the
mayor
in
fact
signed
it
and
so
was
on
board
with
that,
because
I
certainly
do
admit
that
the
charter
makes
it
very
confusing
and
very
difficult
to
set
city
policy.
J
Yes,
very
very
briefly,
thank
you,
council
vice
president
I'll
just
add
two
additional
things,
which
is
that,
like
any
ordinance,
the
mayor
can
suspend
it
under
a
declared
state
of
emergency,
and
so
if
there
was,
for
example,
a
multi-jurisdictional
collaborational,
you
know
collaborative
search
for
somebody
and
another
jurisdiction
was
using
data
from
facial
recognition.
J
The
mayor
would
always
have
that
executive
option
under
a
declared
state
of
emergency,
and-
and
finally,
I
will
just
say
this-
was
written
in
the
spirit
and
obviously
with
the
city
attorney's
advice,
and
I
appreciate
eric
nelson's
response.
You
know
here.
J
You
know
it's
no
secret,
that
I
think
the
charter
should
change,
and
one
of
the
arguments
against
that
was
a
suggestion
that
the
council
wasn't
fully
using
its
authority
because
we
have
the
authority
of
writing
ordinances
that
apply
enterprise-wide
when
we
discussed
this
last
year,
and
so
this
was
written
very
much.
J
In
that
spirit
to
say
you
know,
this
is
a
power
that,
when
we
held
the
charter
up
to
scrutiny
in
conversations
with
the
charter
commission
and
the
clerk
and
the
city
attorney
that
we
were
told,
we
had
this
authority,
and
so
this
is
written
very
much
in
that
spirit,
and
I
think
that
you
know
working
through
these
issues
in
public
to
make
sure
that
we
all
understand
what
the
council's
powers
are
and
are
not
under
the
current
charter
and
what
the
mayor's
powers
are
and
are
not
under.
J
The
current
order
is
one
way
that
we
help
create
clarity
for
people
who
are
assessing
whether
we
need
to
change
the
charter.
But
certainly
this
is
brought
forward
in
a
in
a
spirit
of
really
trying
to
use
the
power
that
it
is.
My
understanding
is
the
council's
legislative
power
to
write
ordinances
that
apply
to
the
entire
enterprise.
D
Thank
you,
councilmember.
Are
there
any
more
speakers
on
this
issue.
D
Any
more
discussion
see
none.
We
have
a
motion
before
us
and
I
will
now
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role.
E
O
G
F
D
D
Thank
you
and
that
item
carries
and
that
recommendation
will
refer
to
the
city
council
meeting
for
final
action
this
coming
friday
and
next
on
our
agenda,
the
consent
receive
and
file
agenda.
We
have
items
2
through
15,
as
well
as
the
receive
and
file
portion
of
the
agenda,
which
is
which
are
item
16
and
17..
D
D
Item
number:
four:
is
various
appointments
to
the
transgender
equity
council
item?
Five
through
seven
are
various
legal
settlements,
the
details
of
which
are
on
listed
on
the
agenda
items
8
through
10
are
various
contract
amendments
related
to
the
public
service
building
project,
details
of
which
are
again
listed
on
your
agenda
item
number
11
is
a
contract
amendment
with
wold,
architects
and
engineers
for
the
fire
stations.
D
Amending
the
2020
2021
wage
freeze
and
number
16
is
a
strategic
and
ratio,
equity
action
plan
or
street
update,
and
I
do
encourage
all
of
my
colleagues
to
please
read
that
update
item
number
17
is
the
2020
annual
report
of
the
minneapolis
ethical
practices
board.
D
G
Yes,
I
was
just
I'm
curious
if
we're
going
to
be
getting
presentations
for
items
16
and
17,
or
if
we
just
have
that
material
in
the
pack
in
our
agendas.
D
Item
number
16:
I
can
speak
to
directly.
We
will
have
that
information
in
our
agenda
on
this
cycle.
We
are
postponing
the
physical
presentation
but
we'll
be
figuring
out
ways
to
resume
that
moving
forward.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up
and
item
number
17
will
be
a
a
report,
but
we
can
also
figure
out
if
council
members
are
interested
in
having
a
presentation
on
that
as
well.
D
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
just
had
a
comment.
Slash
question
on
item
number,
two:
around
studying
this
public
hearing
on
the
24th.
I
know
on
the
23rd.
We
have
the
presentation
of
the
independent
study
on
this
topic
and
then
the
next
day
we
would
have
based
off
of
this
schedule
the
public
hearing
set,
and
then
I'm
wondering
if
the
expectation
is
immediately
after
the
public
hearing
that
we
would
be
voting
on
the
item
and
then
two
days
later,
it's
at
full
council.
F
I
guess
you
know
I'm
not
necessarily
recommending
any
sort
of
change
that
it's
just
maybe
putting
it
out
there
that
it's
a
big
topic
and
there's
not
going
to
be
a
lot
of
turnaround
time
to
consider
information
in
the
independent
study
and
then
from
the
public
hearing.
Before
voting
on
that.
So
I
guess
it's
just
more
of
a
process
question
and
then
kind
of
throwing
that
comment
out
there,
because
I'm
not
sure
if
anyone
else
is
thinking
the
same
thing
around
that
and
so
maybe
more
so
an
advisory.
D
Yes,
well,
we
do
have
quite
a
queue
in
front
of
you,
but
go
ahead.
Council
president.
F
It'd
be
good
if
council
president
knows
the
answer
to
that,
or
can
kind
of
help
put
it
out
there
publicly
what
the
expectations
are.
I'd
appreciate
it.
D
I
Yes,
happy
too,
madam
chair,
so
I
think,
as
councilmember
johnson
points
out,
we
have
a
two
hour
long
scheduled
study
session
that
will
be
hosted
by
council
member
ellison,
which,
on
february
23rd,
will
get
a
chance
to
hear
the
results
of
a
study
that
we
first
authorized
a
little
over
a
year
ago
in
our
budget.
I
That
study
was
delayed
because
of
the
coronavirus
cuts.
The
mayor's
office
had
originally
proposed
to
potentially
cut
that
study,
and
so
we
had
to
wait
until
after
the
mid-year
budget
cuts,
so
that
did
shift
the
schedule
and
we
had
hoped
that
the
study
would
be
available
and
done
well
before
we
might
be
discussing
a
charter
amendment,
it's
just
part
of
one
of
the
realities
of
this
past
year.
I
But
you
know
that
said
the
the
charter
question
in
front
of
the
council
and
ultimately
the
public,
if
it
does
proceed,
is
in
the
future.
Should
the
city
have
the
authority
to
consider
a
potential
policy.
I
So,
while
I
think
all
of
us
collectively
policy
makers
and
members
of
our
community,
it
will
be
helpful
to
have
more
information
about
our
rental
market
about
you
know:
policies
around
the
country
that
kira
has
looked
into
as
model
policies
for
rent
stabilization
they've
had
conversations
with
landlords
in
our
community.
I
think
all
that
all
that
will
help
inform
you
know
the
direction
or
the
approach
the
city
might
take,
really
that
that
detailed
policy
development
is
is
far
down
the
line.
I
So
I
hope
that's
helpful.
I
I
do
think
we
can't
delay
a
vote
on
any
charter
questions
that
are
initiated
by
the
council
in
and
also
make
the
deadlines.
You
know,
assuming
that
the
charter
commission
would
take
the
full
five
months
that
they're
allowed
under
state
law
to
review
and
comment
and
send
it
back
so
in
order
to
have
a
chance
to
be
considered
to
put
on
the
ballot
it,
it
needs
to
stay
on
this
schedule
and.
F
I
appreciate
that
and
that's
the
context
I
was
looking
for
and
it's
very
helpful,
and
I
guess
I
would
just
say
then
you
know
I
know
personally
and
I
think
for
colleagues
too,
to
be
aware
of
that
tight
timeline
to
the
degree
that
that
information
may
or
may
not
be
factored
into
their
own
decision
making.
I
know
every
council
member
looks
at
these
charter
questions
differently.
F
Some
view
it
as
like
every
no
matter
the
issue,
let's
put
it
out
there,
for
voters
to
decide
and
others
weigh
more
the
policy
questions
at
hand,
and
so
everybody's
process
is
different
and
I
would
just
say
if
there
is
any
report
available
before
the
23rd,
even
if
it's
a
day
or
two
beforehand,
the
sooner
that
council
members
can
get
access
to
that,
the
sooner
that,
to
the
degree
that's
helpful
for
them
and
their
decisions.
F
That
would
be
great
to
have
so,
hopefully,
it's
available
even
a
day
or
two
before
that
study
session.
So
I
appreciate
the
answers
and
having
this
out
here.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you
and
thank
you,
council,
president
bender.
For
that
context.
Next
we
have
councilmember
schrader,
but
if
councilmember
goodman's
comments
are
related
to
this
item,
maybe
you
might
want
to
go
before
council
membership.
AH
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair.
I'm
not
sure
what
councilmember
johnson's
opinion
is
anymore
after
hearing
council
member
bender,
but
I
would
say,
having
a
study
session
then
having
a
public
hearing
then
voting
to
put
it
on
the
ballot.
All
within
three
days
is
exactly
the
kind
of
chaos
that
people
are
telling
us.
They
don't
want
any
more
of
so.
AH
AH
I've
already
gotten
like
12
emails
just
today
when
people
saw
it
on
the
agenda,
didn't
understand
what
it
was
so
to
have
a
public
to
have
a
study
session
which,
unfortunately,
I
won't
be
able
to
attend,
followed
by
committee
of
the
whole
meeting,
followed
by
the
council.
Voting
on
it
all
in
four
days
in
not
two
weeks,
seems
very
rushed
and
chaotic
to
the
public,
and
that's
who
we
work
for
so,
I
feel
like.
We
actually
should
be
changing
the
timeline.
AH
AH
We've
made
on
charter
amendments
and
turned
it
into
a
unanimous
vote
to
support
x,
y
or
z,
rather
than
a
vote
to
follow
the
process,
and
so
now,
I'm
concerned
that
any
vote
to
put
this
on
the
ballot
will
be
perceived
as
a
vote
in
favor
of
rent
control,
and
so,
as
we
rush
this
through
on
this
very
tight
timeline
in
order
to
get
it
on
the
ballot.
What
that's
doing
is
creating
kind
of
chaos
and
confusion
in
the
community,
not
with
activists.
AH
They
understand,
what's
going
on
they're
the
ones
pushing
this,
but
with
the
silent
majority
of
people
in
the
community
who
are
overwhelmed
with
charter
amendments.
At
this
point
and
hearing
that
we're
going
to
now
rush
through
a
rent
control
policy,
it's
really
hard
for
them
to
understand.
This
is
really
whether
or
not
the
city
council
has
the
right
to
do
this
under
the
law.
I
mean
it's
so
confusing
to
us
that
we're
even
saying
things
like
well,
maybe
if
the
public
says
it's
okay,
then
we
can
do
it
by
ordinance.
AH
But
if
we
get
struck
down
by
law,
then
we'll
have
to
have
a
second
vote
and
by
the
way
the
public
might
want
a
charter
change.
So
now
we
should
also
have
initiative
and
referendum
just
in
case
people
want
to
have
their
own
charter
amendment.
This
is
confusing
to
people
folks,
it's
confusing
to
us
and
so
to
rush
this
through.
I
have
a
serious
concern
about
and
although
council
member
johnson
might
be
satisfied
with
that
answer,
I
for
one
am
not.
D
Thank
you,
councilmember
goodman,
very
valid
points,
I'm
getting
a
little
confused
by
what's
happening
in
the
chat
and
it
seems
like
no
counselor
trader.
You
want
to
jump
to
another
topic
and
absolutely
happy
to
do
that,
but
I'm
getting
a
sense
that
there
is
more
dialogue
around
this
issue.
B
Council
vice
president,
I'm
happy
to
concede
my
time
and
once
this
issue
is
resolved
I'll,
please
put
me
back
in
cube.
Thank.
D
I
I
feel
it's
important
to
point
out
that
we
don't
have
study
sessions
about
every
issue
that
is
considered
before
the
city
council,
that
going
through
the
extra
time
and
expense
of
hiring
an
outside
institution
to
do
a
study
on
a
policy
topic
well
before
we
are
even
through
this
step
that
is
required
under
state
law
is
actually
a
huge
extra
layer
of
due
diligence
that
we
committed
to,
and
we
being
those
city
council
members
who
do
want
to
address
the
massive
housing
instability
issue
that
are
facing
many
of
our
constituents
in
a
city
where
more
than
half
of
people
rent
their
homes.
I
Calling
something
rushed
depends
on
how,
when
you
start
the
clock
and
how
much
you've
personally
fought
against
a
policy
that
will
help
keep
people
in
their
homes.
Many
of
us
have
been
working
on
this
policy
for
many
years,
and
others
have
been
fighting
against
it
for
many
years
and
when
there
is
resistance
and
opposition
to
change,
it
certainly
takes
longer
much
longer
I'll
say
to
you
that
feel
free
to
forward
questions
to
me
or
the
other
authors.
I
I
have
been
very
happily
responding
to
questions
that
I've
gotten
from
landlords
and
helped
explain
the
process
to
them.
That
again
is
required
under
state
law.
Because
of
how
state
law
is
written
on
this
issue,
it
helped
explain
to
folks
that
you
know
step.
One
is
considering
a
charter
question
step
two.
Would
that
be
sometime
in
the
future?
I
I
We've
been
very
clear
about
that
from
the
beginning,
and
but
it
is,
I
mean
it
is
complicated,
because
the
way
that
state
law
is
written
and
like
many
of
the
changes
that
we
make
in
service
of
our
constituents,
those
who
contact
us
from
for
many
of
us
constituents
who
are
facing
housing
and
stability
are
not
silent.
They're
not
part
of
some
organized
group,
they're,
just
regular
people
calling
our
offices
because
they
don't
have
anywhere
to
live
okay,
because
they
got
two
weeks
notice
that
the
rent
is
going
to
double.
I
They
have
kids
in
the
school
and
they
don't
know
where
they're
going
to
live,
and
that
was
before
the
pandemic
and
the
economic
crisis
that
is
facing
our
community.
So
folks
don't
want
to
support
this
policy.
That
is
okay.
You
have
a
no
vote,
but
please,
you
know,
I
mean,
let's
just
be
like
real
and
clear
about.
You
know
the
standards
that
we're
setting
for
different
kinds
of
policy
change,
and
this
one
has
significantly
more
investment
in
research
and
due
diligence.
D
AI
Vice
president,
I
had
a
I
wanted
to.
D
Just
chime
in
councilmember,
ellison,
yeah
and-
and
I
I
just
gotta
just
I'll
admit,
the
chat
is
really
confusing
at
this
point,
but
councilmember
ellison.
AI
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
think
that
I
can
appreciate
that
folks
want
as
much
information
as
possible.
I
think
that
we're
doing
a
great
job
of
providing
that
information
to
our
colleagues
and
willing
to
have
any
conversation
that
folks
want
to
have
and
and
happy
to
provide
that
context.
You
know
the
study
session.
AI
I
am
looking
forward
to
the
study
session
because
to
the
council
president's
point,
you
know
we're
we're
looking
at
getting
folks
information
on
the
nuts
and
bolts
of
a
policy
that
we
won't
even
be
able
to
pass
until
we've
gotten
through
this
first
you
know
charter
provision
and
so
and
so
we're
getting
the
information
about
the
nuts
and
bolts
of
the
policy
out
there
early.
I
you
know,
with
all
due
respect
to
councilmember
goodman,
who
I
know
is
a
tireless
champion
for
her
award.
AI
I
think
it's
easy
for
us
to
sit
up
here
and
and
make
you
know,
sort
of
frivolous
claims
about
what
the
silent
majority
thinks
or
who
the
silent
majority
is.
But
the
truth
is,
is
that
none
of
us
really
know
what
the
quote-unquote
silent
majority's
opinion
is
and
that's
why
we're
proposing
to
put
this
to
the
ballot?
AI
You
know
we
also
have
to
put
this
to
the
ballot
per
state
statute,
and
that
will
give
us
some
clarity
on
the
direction
the
policy
direction,
that
the
community
wants
to
go
in,
that
the
city
that
our
city
residents
want
to
go
in,
and
I,
lastly,
I
would
say
that
you
know
typically,
when
we
have
a
policy
that
we're
putting
directly
to
the
voters.
AI
I
don't
think
that
any
of
us
have
had
to
really
spend
a
lot
of
time
before
this
year
prior
to
this
year,
seeing
the
seeing
the
charter
commission
as
a
biased
political
actor,
but
the
truth
is
is
that
they
are
and
that
we
do
have
to
anticipate
that
they'll.
Take
that
they
will
attempt
to
run
out
the
clock
on
a
policy
simply
because
they
personally
don't
like
it
doesn't
matter
the
vetting
doesn't
matter
whether
or
not
the
community
wants
to
vote
on
this.
They
will.
AI
They
will
prevent
the
community
from
voting
on
a
policy
they've
proven
that
simply
because
they
personally
don't
like
the
policy,
and
so
we
do
have
to
build
in
space
for
that,
and
we
do
have
to
account
for
that
and
while
I
think
that
it's
well,
I
think
that
I
hope
that
they
treat
this
policy
fair
and
do
put
it
to
voters
again.
It
is
not
any
of
our
responsibility,
you
know,
speaking
of
who
we
work,
for
it
is
not
any
of
our
responsibility
to
sort
of
play.
AI
The
the
the
parental
figure
to
voters
we're
talking
about
putting
something
to
voters.
Not
us,
not
the
charter,
commission
should
get
to
say
you
know.
Sorry,
we
don't
like
this.
We're
not
even
going
to
take
a
take
a
look
at
it.
We're
doing
our
due
diligence,
we're
happy
to
provide
that
context.
I
think
that
you
know
the
the
the
the
state
preemption
questions
are
well
known
by
almost
everyone
on
this
council.
AI
I
don't
think
they
come
to
a
surprise
to
anyone
and
so,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
set
that
that
context
and-
and
let
folks
know
we're
here-
to
have
a
conversation
and
and
to
the
council
president's
point.
AI
You
know
we
all
have
our
individual
election
certificates
and
and
and
nobody's
going
to
be
forced
or
or
required
to
vote
any
way
that
it's
impossible
for
us
to
do
that
to
each
other
anyway,
and
so
I
respect
all
the
opinions
of
my
colleagues,
but
I
also
think
that
again,
you
know
whether
or
not
this
is
rushed
and
processed
and
blah
blah
blah.
All
of
that
is
really
subjective
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
talking
about
getting
a
policy
to
voters.
That'll
tell
us
what
voters.
AI
D
D
We're
we
are
really
disrupting
the
the
processes
that
we
have
placed
for
ourselves.
So
no,
we
are
not
breaking
rules,
sir.
We
are
really
circumventing
systems
that
we
have
put
in
place
ourselves.
Councilmember
johnson,.
F
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president,
and
I
know
councilmember
goodman
referenced
me
and
whether
I'm
I'm
satisfied
with
this
or
not-
and
you
know
I
I
am
somebody
that
believes
in
nuance
on
things.
I
think
that
this
is
different
by
moving
along
something
in
the
process
over
to
the
charter.
Commission
is
different
than
if
we
were
to
actually
approve
the
process,
and
also
this
is
an
authorization
and
compared
to
other
charter
amendments
being
considered.
F
This
isn't
necessarily
something
at
least
for
my
current
understanding
that
we
would
really
be
modifying
the
language
on
because
it's
authorization
related,
but
it
does
tie
in
to
policy,
and
so
you
know
I
raised
the
point
because
I
think
it's
something
that
should
be
discussed
clearly
there's
different
opinions
on
this.
I
would
say
for
me
it's
less
than
ideal
that,
especially
to
council
member
goodman's
point
around
the
public
in
their
ability
to
access
and
understand,
track
this
information
and
then
bring
that
into
the
conversations
I
mean.
F
I
don't
think
any
of
us
would
call
it
ideal
that
the
study
session
will
be
complete
and
there
will
be
less
than
24
hours
for
members
of
the
public
to
watch
a
two-hour
study
session
and
then
incorporate
that
into
their
comments,
and
I
imagine
that's
by
the
way,
a
lot
of
people
in
favor
of
rent
control
and
rent
stabilization,
who
want
to
be
both
aware
of
all
of
that
content
and
then
bring
it
into
conversations.
F
That
said,
I
also
know
we've
been
in
situations
too
from
a
process
standpoint.
Our
budget
that
we
recently
passed
was
one
of
those
where
the
timeline
was
less
than
ideal
as
well
and
where
there's
very
little
turnaround
time
on
these
matters,
so
I
don't
think
it's
ideal,
but
I
also
don't
think
it's
knowing
all
the
kind
of
different
checkpoints
along
the
way
here.
I
don't
know
that
there's
much
of
a
choice
as
well.
F
If
this
is
to
be
something
that
is
considered,
you
know
this
year
and
I
don't
think
at
least
for
me.
That
is
something
I'm
going
to
say.
I
want
to
rule
out
this
being
considered
in
the
year.
Take
a
step
that
very
likely
would
rule
this
out.
I
am
looking
at
this
study
session
with
an
open
mind.
I
am
very
interested
in
the
information
that
would
be
shared
as
well,
and
you
know
just
with
colleagues.
I
know
these
policies
are,
that
are
being
discussed,
are
big
ones.
F
I
just
hope
we
can
have
these
conversations
around
process
or
concerns
as
well,
without
people's
positions
being
guests
or
conflated
like
that,
because
I
think
there's
legitimate
questions
here
around
public
access
inability
to
weigh
in
and
the
information
being
shared,
and
it's
not
perfect
and
and
people
can
have
opinions
about
that,
and
I
I
don't
think
that
should
be
taken
as
where
they
stand
on
a
particular
issue.
But
I
appreciate
the
conversation
around
what
this
looks
like
in
the
timing
and
all
of
that.
So
thank
you.
AC
Thank
you
and
I
can
try
to
be
brief
because
I
think
maybe
a
lot
of
this
was
said,
but
there
seemed
to
be
some
confusion.
You
know
they
the
sending
something
over
to
the
charter.
Commission
is
really
what
the
hearing
is
about,
and
this
is
the
rent
stabilization
language
that
has
been
published
and
it's
out
there
for
a
long
time.
AC
The
study
session
is
actually
one
piece
of
a
much
longer
process
in
terms
of
what
the
details
of
an
ordinance
in
the
future
might
look
like
if
we
were
to
get
the
authority
granted
to
us
in
november.
So
I
actually
think
our
timing
is
excellent
here,
we're
having
the
conversation,
I
actually
had
a
community
meeting
about
this,
where
there
was
lots
of
engagement
about
it.
AC
Some
people
didn't
speak
up,
so
they
may
have
been
part
of
the
silent
majority,
I'm
not
sure,
but
they
at
least
attended,
and
it
was
well
discussed
and
people
are
interested
in
it
and
they're
understanding
that
this
is
a
big
two-step
process
and
within
each
step,
there's
many
steps,
and
I
would
say
that
the
public
hearing
is
actually
a
step
about
what
are
the
details
and
what?
What
research
have
we
found
about?
AC
Is
this
a
language
appropriate
for
something
that
we
could
put
before
the
voters
and
we've
learned
that
we
have
to
get
that
to
them
150
days
ahead
of
time?
So
there's
still
time
for
us
to
do
our
work
with
it
and
that's
what
we're
doing
now,
because
that's
the
requirements
that
we're
meeting
we're
right
on
schedule,
we're
following
every
bit
of
our
process
and
our
rules
that
are
out
there
and
we're
having
our
hearing
on
that
charter
language
before
it
goes
to
the
charter
commission.
Just
like
we're
supposed
to
it
just
happens.
AC
AJ
Thank
you,
council.
Vice
president,
I
I'm
sorry.
I
wasn't
in
the
meeting
at
the
time
this
issue
came
up,
but
it's
my
understanding,
there's
a
question
about
the
process
and
how
a
study
session
would
fit
within
the
timeline
for
the
actual
drafting
submission
to
the
charter
commission
and
then
ultimately,
transmittal
to
voters.
So,
as
you
know,
we
do
have
a
guide
to
the
preparation
and
submission
of
charter
amendments,
and
I
can
share
that
with
all
of
you
very
briefly.
AJ
I'll
just
say
a
study
session
is
is
not
anticipated
as
part
of
that
process,
meaning
that
a
study
session
is
not
a
requirement
of
that
process.
It
would
be
an
in
addition
to
to
help
educate
the
council,
the
public
departments,
even
the
charter
commission,
on
the
intent
of
the
scope
of
what's
being
proposed.
So
it's
neither
a
requirement,
nor
is
it
prohibited,
and
the
timing
of
that
study
session
doesn't
interfere
with
or
affect
the
entire
timeline.
AJ
That's
required
under
state
law,
city
charter
and
council
rules,
provided
that
the
timeline
that
is
mandatory
or
is
required
subject
to
statutory
requirements
isn't
affected.
It's
my
understanding
from
looking
at
the
schedule.
The
study
session
that's
been
proposed
does
not
impact
in
any
way
the
timeline
that
is
required
related
to
the
rent
stabilization
charter
proposal.
I
hope
that
answers
that
question.
AJ
I'm
sorry,
I
didn't
hear
the
whole
conversation,
so
I
feel
I'm
a
perhaps
a
little
bit
out
of
the
full
knowledge,
but
in
terms
of
the
question
of
a
study
session
and
its
relevancy
to
the
work
of
preparing
a
question
that
might
ultimately
be
submitted
to
voters
as
a
ballot
question
that
does
not
have
an
effect
on
the
timeline
that
I
have
prepared
with
council
members
who
are
authors
of
that
proposal.
AJ
D
Thank
you,
mr
clerk.
Are
there
any
other
questions
or
concerns
around
that
clarification.
D
See
none.
I
think
we
will
move
next
to
councilmember
schrader
on
item
number
14.
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
questions
for
staff.
I'm
not
moving
to
take
this
off
consent.
Just
this
is
the
issue
of
a
contract
with
a
company
to
do
the
after
action
report
for
the
uprising
after
george
floyd.
My
question
for
staff
is
really
just
you
know
what
has
kind
of
taken
so
long
for
this
to
happen.
B
B
You
know
what
we
can
improve
on
and
be
able
to
tell
all
of
our
constituents
how
we're
going
to
keep
them
safe
going
forward.
So,
if
there's
staff
on
the
line,
it
would
be
good
to
kind
of
get
get
that
background
about.
You
know
one
again
what
what
is
taking
so
long
and
also
I
know
this-
this
has
been
a
little
bit
different
process
than
normal.
So
I
think
it'd
be
helpful
to
get
that
on
the
record
as
well.
Thank
you.
AK
Hi,
this
is
ryan,
patrick
I'm,
the
director
of
internal
audit,
and
I
am
the
contract
manager
for
this
project.
I
can
speak
to
that
if
you'd
like
so.
AK
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
council.
Vice
president
jenkins
and
committee
member
schrader.
I
the
process
that
we
followed
first
was
making
sure
that
we
had
the
budget
allocation
for
the
contract
that
was
going
to
exceed
the
funds
that
we
had
an
internal
audit
budget
and
getting
approved
for
our
2021
budget.
And
then
we
did
pull
in
a
variety
of
stakeholders
to
go
through
an
extensive
vetting
process
and
interview
process
to
make
sure
that
we
selected
the
right
vendor
for
this
project,
and
it
has
certainly
taken
longer
than
we
would
have
liked.
AK
But
part
of
what
we've
requested
from
the
contractor
is
that
they
hit
the
ground
running
and
are
working
with
stakeholders
and
providing
continuous
updates
and
feedback
back
to
the
city,
so
that
we're
not
waiting
for
a
report
at
the
end
to
get
quality,
information
and
feedback.
So
I
do
anticipate
this
being
an
ongoing
process
where
we're
regularly
communicating
information
back
to
policy
makers
and
stakeholders
and
not
not
just
simply
waiting
until
a
final
report
is
prepared.
B
I
think
thank
you,
director
practice.
I
really
appreciate
that.
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
from
constituents
just
a
very
big
concern
of
just
wanting
to
know
more
about
what
is
the
plan
of
the
mayor
and
the
police
chief
for
the
upcoming
trial,
and
one
of
the
questions
I
always
get
is
just
how
is
how
how
is
the
learnings
from
what
we
saw
last
summer
being
incorporated.
B
D
Yeah
and
thank
you
for
raising
that
question
and
mr
patrick,
I
hope
that
this
study
will
include
the
the
use
of
less
than
lethal
weapons.
As
as
a
part
of
the
report
we
we've
been
getting.
There
is
a
report
that
was
already
conducted
by
the
university
of
minnesota
that
states
that
there
were
some
really
significant
overreaches
in
the
use
of
less
than
lisa
ford.
So
I
I'm
hoping
that
that's
a
part
of
this
review
as
well.
D
AL
E
A
O
E
I
F
D
That
item
carries,
and
next
we
will
have
the
reports
from
our
standing
committees.
We
will
begin
with
the
business
inspections,
housing
and
zoning
committee,
given
by
that
report,
will
be
given
by
its
chair,
councilmember
goodman.
AH
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president,
the
business
the
biz
committee
is
bringing
forward
15
items
for
approval
on
friday.
Item
number
one
is
a
land
sale.
Two
is
granting
an
appeal
with
regard
to
the
heritage
preservations
commission's
decision
to
prevent
the
demolition
of
21
washington
avenue
north.
So
we
overturn
the
decision
of
the
hpc
item.
Three
are
the
liquor
license
approvals
and
for
the
liquor
license
renewals
item
five
is
a
grant
application
to
deed
for
youth,
employment
and
training
services
item
six
is
property
management
at
the
upper
harbor
terminal
item?
AH
Seven
is
a
bid
to
demolish
and
remove
debris
at
a
property
at
810,
east
lake
street
and
there's
also
a
bid
to
demolish
and
remove
debris
at
2941
chicago
avenue.
Item
number
nine
is
creating
a
policy
to
waive
assessments
to
related
to
properties
damaged
during
the
declared
emergency
item.
Number
10
is
a
contract
amendment
with
ryan
companies
in
the
sports
facilities
commission.
Regarding
the
parking
agreement
for
downtown
east
item
number
11
is
a
contract
amendment.
AH
It
has
to
do
with
real
estate
records
in
hennepin
county
item.
12
is
a
utility
easement
for
the
university
of
minnesota
item.
13
is
a
rezoning
at
broadway
and
washington
item.
14
is
also
a
rezoning
on
minnehaha
avenue
and
item
15
as
a
rezoning
at
636,
22nd
avenue
north
east.
I
would
be
happy
to
stand
for
questions
on
any
of
those
items.
D
Are
there
any
questions,
see
none?
We
will
move
to
the
public
health
and
safety
committee
and
that
report
will
be
given
by
councilmember
cunningham.
The
chair
of
that
committee.
G
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president.
The
public
health
and
safety
committee
is
bringing
forward
three
items
for
approval
on
friday.
The
first
is
directing
staff
in
the
labor
standards,
division
of
the
civil
rights
department
to
work
with
the
workplace
advisory
committee
to
form
a
downtown
workers
subcommittee
to
identify
options
for
safeguarding
the
health
and
safety
of
downtown
of
the
downtown
workforce,
as
it
returns
from
the
shutdown
due
to
covet
19
pandemic
and
to
report
back
to
the
public
health
and
safety
committee.
G
With
initial
recommendations
no
later
than
july,
31st
2021
item
number
two
is
accepting
a
additional
grant
funding
and
the
amount
of
75
000
from
the
cdc
for
services
related
to
youth
violence
prevention.
I
would
recommend
for
folks
to
check
that
information
out.
It
is
on
the
agenda.
G
There's
some
really
cool
work
that
the
office
of
violence
prevention
is
leading
related
to
young
people
and
violence
prevention
and
item
number
three
is
passage
of
a
resolution
appropriating
funds
for
2021
from
the
public
safety
staffing
reserve
to
the
police
department
to
fund
two
additional
hiring
training
classes
and
the
community
service
service
officers
program.
AL
Thank
you,
madam
president.
Our
vice
president.
We
will
be
forwarding
26
items
to
full
council
item.
One
is
the
passes
of
resolution
ordering
the
work
to
proceed
and
adopting
special
assessments
for
the
17th
avenue
northeast
northeast
river
ridge
street
resurfacing
project
item
2
is
the
54th
street
east
57th
street
east
street
resurfacing
project.
AL
Three
is
the
contract
amendment
with
pci
roads
llc
for
the
first
street
north
over
bassett
creek
tunnel
repair
four
is
the
contract
amendment
with
custom
product
services
for
streetscape
maintenance
services
for
special
service
districts?
Five
is
the
grant
application
to
minnesota
department
transportation
for
the
2021
local
road
improvement
program?
AL
Six
is
the
I-35w
solutions
alliance,
joint
powers,
agreement,
seven
is
the
48th
street
east
and
chicago
avenue.
South
special
service
district
advisory
appointments,
actually
7
8
9
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20
21
are
all
our
listed
special
service
districts.
AL
The
details
and
names
are
provided,
I
believe,
are
familiar
with
these
various
districts
and
item.
22
is
the
austria
road
street
reconstruction
project
layout
23
is
the
bid
for
traffic
marking
thermoplastic
material
24
is
the
bid
for
the
hennepin
avenue
sanitary
sewer
replacement
project.
25
is
the
bid
for
the
fourth
street
storm
street
reconstruction
project.
In
26
we
had
a
discussion
which
was
a
green
fleet
policy
update,
and
we
did
approve
that
update
to
move
forward
as
drafted
with
that
I'll
stand
for
questions.
Madam
vice
president.
D
Thank
you
chair
right.
Are
there
any
questions,
any
questions
towards
your
right
before
we
move
to
the
next
committee
report?
I
just
I
just
got
a
note
from
councilmember
cunningham
that
he
wanted
to
mention
something
related
to
the
public
safety,
public
health
and
safety
committee
report
that
he
just
gave
councilman
cunningham.
G
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
vice
president,
my
apologies,
because
it
wasn't
on
the
something
that
we
need
to
bring
forward
for
full
council,
but
I
do
want
to
also
just
note
that
we
set
the
public
hearing
related
to
the
transforming
public
safety
charter
amendment
for
thursday
february
18th
at
1
30..
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
that
I
named
that
here.
So
we
have
it
on
the
public
record
and
we
can
create
as
much
space
as
possible
for
folks
to
participate
in
that
public
hearing.
G
So
again,
at
our
last
meeting,
we
set
a
public
hearing
for
february
18th
related
to
the
transforming
public
safety
charter
amendment.
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president,
for
that
additional
space.
AD
Thank
you,
council.
Vice
president
jenkins,
at
our
regular
audit
committee,
that
was
on
february
8th
this
cycle.
We
went
through
in
detail
our
auditor's
enterprise
risk
assessment
and
approved
a
new
2021
annual
risk-based
audit
plan
for
that
work.
AD
Effort
also
notable
is
that
in
the
regular
report
of
the
internal
auditor,
we
heard
from
ncr
staff
about
some
of
the
ongoing
audit
practices
and
efforts
that
they
are
undertaking
in
regards
to
neighborhood
organizations,
and
none
of
this
will
actually
go
as
a
motion
to
council,
because
it's
an
independent
committee
without
any
reports
that
were
issued
and
published
this
time
around.
Thank
you.
D
I
D
Thank
you,
madam
president.
Are
there
any
questions.