The proposed Minneapolis city Charter amendment appears to be in trouble. Commissioner Andrea Rubenstein had lots of questions for Minneapolis City Council members “Jeremiah Ellison, Alondra Cano, Steve Fletcher, Cam Gordon and Council President Lisa Bender.” Commissioner Rubenstein “noted that they have heard the ‘pain and grief’ that exists in the community.” She essentially accused the 5 City Council members of rushing the process without thinking things through.

That isn’t difficult to imagine. From the start, these activist Democrats have essentially said what they wanted as a final outcome should be for the Minneapolis Police Department, aka MPD, without saying what they wanted to replace it with. Most of the fear that Commissioner Rubenstein talked about comes from the neighborhoods’ worries:

She added later in the meeting that she was particularly concerned about the most vulnerable communities in Minneapolis. “They are very, very divided. I fear that if they remain divided, this amendment as it’s structured now may fail. And we want a change in the culture, and the way we do things in this city, as much as you do, but we want to make sure we’re doing what’s right.”

These Democrat activist councilmembers are polemicists more than they’re interested in serious governance. It’s obvious that they didn’t think this through because they would’ve noticed that eliminating the MPD was stupidity on steroids. These activist Democrats didn’t notice that their proposal didn’t protect their fellow Minneapolis citizens.

Protecting the people is the first affirmative responsibility of any government. Councilmembers Cano, Ellison, Fletcher and Gordon, Council President Bender and Mayor Frey failed Minneapolis residents in that respect. This video is especially damning:

It says “The proposal, which comes following widespread criticism of law enforcement over the killing of George Floyd, would replace the police department with a new ‘Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention’ that has yet to be fully defined.” That’s spin on steroids. I’m betting that this bunch hasn’t even gotten past what to call the new department. I’m confident that they haven’t figured out what’s going to go in it. That isn’t how Bender, Cano, Ellison, Fletcher and Gordon think.

Spin vs. reality

Opponents, including Mayor Jacob Frey, have blasted the proposal, saying they feel it is too vague for voters to make an informed decision. Council members, during Wednesday’s meeting, said that was intentional, because they wanted to gather more input from the public and wanted to make it easier for future generations of leaders to make changes to public safety.

That’s 100% spin from the Council. First, it’s apparent that they reached their verdict before they conducted the investigation. What happens if the public opposes the Council’s plan? Would the Council admit that they’d made a mistake? Next, this is spin because they aren’t thinking about the future. From what I’ve seen, next month is the future to this bunch.

The Charter Commission could, if it wanted, choose to take up to 150 days to review the council members’ proposal, overshooting an Aug. 21 deadline for adding items to the November ballot. At the end of the review process, City Council members are not required to comply with the commissioners’ recommendations.

That would deal a death blow to the Council’s amendment petition. Finally, there’s this:

Some Charter Commission members pushed back on that notion Wednesday night, asking why they hadn’t already dropped the police force to its minimum levels or why they hadn’t already further boosted additional funding for violence prevention efforts. The Minneapolis Police Department had 892 sworn officers as of June 1, while the charter requires closer to 730, based on the latest census data.

The City Council doesn’t want to cut police forces if it can help it. They want the political cover of a vote.

Leave a Reply