At the June 26, 2020, meeting of the City Council, you said the proposed
Charter amendment will not decide the ultimate outcome of what changes might
result from the year-long process of public engagement about public safety in
Minneapolis. You said it merely will remove some of barriers to several
possible outcomes.
But you also said, "If we want to maintain the status quo, we can do that under
either version of the Charter" (meeting video at 44:28).
Is that really true? If we vote to approve the Charter changes you support, can
we still have a police department with a chief who reports to the Mayor? Will
the Mayor still be able to have "complete power over the establishment,
maintenance, and command of the police department," as is the status quo? Can
we still have a police force staffed with a minimum of .0017 employees per
resident, as is the status quo? Will Minneapolis elected officials still be
required to provide a law enforcement agency, with licensed police officers, as
is required under the status quo? Will the Mayor still nominate and the Council
still appoint a police chief, whose term will be three years? Will the City
still be able to have the same departments it now has?
I do appreciate your position on the proposed amendment. But in support of that
position, we shouldn't claim that it doesn't require significant changes in the
status quo.
The eleven other members on the Council who heard you make that statement on
June 26 knew, or should have known, it was not accurate and potentially very
misleading. But none of them spoke up and made the correction. They did not
intervene to correct a clear misstatement of fact. That's one of the problems
with government by unanimity, especially on issues as substantively important
as this one is.
Stay cool; keep safe; stay healthy.
Yours,
Chuck Turchick
Chuck Turchick
Phillips