Although I have little faith in politics, I always vote in local elections. The Minneapolis election that happened today was somewhat important. While it doesn't matter to me who gets elected, three big ballot questions were in play. The first one was an easy no. The third one was an easy yes. But the second question, about whether or not to replace our police department with a new Department of Public Safety, was more complicated. Here are the questions and my responses to them:
Government Structure: Executive Mayor-Legislative Council
Shall the Minneapolis City Charter be amended to adopt a change in its form of government to an Executive Mayor-Legislative Council structure to shift certain powers to the Mayor, consolidating administrative authority over all operating departments under the Mayor, and eliminating the Executive Committee?
The whole point of this is to reduce the governing power of the elected council. This is in line with a larger trend of executive consolidation of power. I dislike this trend, and think mayors and city managers already have too much power. If I had my way, the city council wouldn't have just 13 members, it would have 83 members, which is one for each of our city's residential neighborhoods.
Department of Public Safety
Shall the Minneapolis City Charter be amended to remove the Police Department and replace it with a Department of Public Safety that employs a comprehensive public health approach to the delivery of functions by the Department of Public Safety, with those specific functions to be determined by the Mayor and City Council by ordinance; which will not be subject to exclusive mayoral power over its establishment, maintenance, and command; and which could include licensed peace officers (police officers), if necessary, to fulfill its responsibilities for public safety, with the general nature of the amendments being briefly indicated in the explanatory note below, which is made a part of this ballot?
Explanatory Note:
This amendment would create a Department of Public Safety combining public safety functions through a comprehensive public health approach to be determined by the Mayor and Council. The department would be led by a Commissioner nominated by the Mayor and appointed by the Council. The Police Department, and its chief, would be removed from the City Charter. The Public Safety Department could include police officers, but the minimum funding requirement would be eliminated.
This was a tough question for me. The MPD is involved in the early stages of a comprehensive reform process that has the potential to improve the public safety situation, particularly in communities of color. This process could produce good results if it's allowed to play out.
It's also true that I watched my city burn last year as a result of structural racism in policing. In the chaos, police attacked journalists, sprayed chemical irritants on innocent bystanders, and shot people in their yards with crowd control rounds. In the wake of the civil unrest, the police abandoned neighborhoods like mine to gangs of armed robbers. These things suggest to me that policing in my city is broken to such a degree that structural reforms are called for.
Another factor in play here is the possibility that police would retaliate against city residents if this measure passed. People are already getting carjacked at gunpoint constantly, sometimes at a rate of more than once per hour. If police slow down service again like they did last year, the city will suffer.
And finally, there is the issue of the anti-police coalition that's been pushing for a yes vote on this question. I don't really buy everything they're selling. A public health approach to policing does seem better than the current situation, where police act like an occupying army. But in a societal moment when medical fascism is starting to be a thing, I'm not at all convinced that public health is the right framework to use for policing.
Authorizing City Council To Enact Rent Control Ordinance
Shall the Minneapolis City Charter be amended to authorize the City Council to regulate rents on private residential property in the City of Minneapolis, with the general nature of the amendments being indicated in the explanatory note below, which is made a part of this ballot?
Explanatory Note:
This amendment would: Authorize the City Council to regulate rents on private residential property in the City of Minneapolis by ordinance. Provide that an ordinance regulating rents on private residential property could be enacted in two different and independent ways: a. The City Council may enact the ordinance. b. The City Council may refer the ordinance as a ballot question to be decided by the voters for approval at an election. If more than half of the votes cast on the ballot question are in favor of its adoption, the ordinance would take effect 30 days after the election, or at such other time as provided in the ordinance.
We should have passed rent control 20 years ago. My main concern is that this is too little, too late.
(Feature image from Pixabay.)
Read my novels:
Check out the comic I wrote:
