>> GOOD AFTERNOON. WELCOME TO THIS LIVE BROADCAST OF THE MINNEAPOLIS CHARTER COMMISSION. MY NAME IS PETER GINDER AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE COMMISSION. BEFORE WE BEN THE MEETING, I WANT TO OFFER A FRIENDLY REMINDER TO ALL MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC THAT THESE MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE TO
ENABLE GREATER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. THESE BROADCASTS INCLUDE REAL-TIME CAPTIONING AS A FURTHER METHOD TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR PROCEEDINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE, ALL SPEAKERS NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THE RATE OF THEIR SPEECH SO THAT
OUR CAPTIONERS CAN FULLY CAPTURE AND TRANSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL SPEAKERS T MODERATE THE SPEED AND CLARITY OF THEIR COMMENTS. AT THIS TIME I WILL ASK T CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO WE CAN VERIFY A QUORUM R THIS
MEETING. >> COMMISSIONER BOONE. >> PRESENT. >> CLEGG IS ABSENT. COOPER. >> PRESENT.
>> HOLQUIST IS ABSENT. DEMELLO. >> HERE. >> DOHERTY. >> HERE. >> GARCIA. >> PRESENT. >> ZAK. >> HERE. >> NEY. >> PRESENT. >> PERRY. >> HERE.
>> SANDBERG. >> PRESENT. >> SCHNEIDER. >> PRESENT. >> SMITH. >> HERE. >> RUBENSTEIN. >> PRESENT. >> CHAIR GINDER. >> PRESENT. >> WE HAVE 13 PRESENT. >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE A QUORUM. AND I REMIND MY
COLLEAGUE WE'LL BE USING SPEAKER MANAGEMENT TODAY. PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF YOUE SIGNED UP. >> MY APOLOGIES, CHAIR GINDER, THAT IS INCORRECT. THERE IS NO SPEAKER MANAGEMENT.
>> CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA? >> SO MOVED. RUBENSTEIN. >> NEY, SECOND. >> WE HAVE A PROPER MOTION BEFORE US. ANY FURTHER
DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION, SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THAT MOTION IS ADOPTED. THE NEXT IS ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES FROM OUR SEPTEMBER MEETINGS BOTH SPECIAL AND REGULAR. MAY I
PLEASE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? >> MOVED. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. BOONE. >> OKAY. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NO
DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THAT MOTION PASSES. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE CHAIR'S REPORT. I HAVE JUST VERY BRIEF. I WOULD NOTE THAT WE HAD FIVE COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE TERMS
THAT WERE ENDING THIS YEAR. FOUR OF THEM REAPPLIED. COMMISSIONERS BOONE, GARCIA, SCHNEIDER AND KOZAK. AND THOSE COMMISSIONERS HAVE BEEN REAPPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUDGE. COMMISSIONER SANDBERG CHOSE NOT TO REAPPLY.
AND HER POSITION IS BEING FILLED -- HAS BEEN FILLED. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER SANDBERG'S LAST MEETING. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK HER FOR WHAT'S ACTUALLY MANY YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE CHARTER COMMISSION, INCLUDING TIME ON THE LEADERSHIP AS VICE-CHAIR AND
OTHERS. SO I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH HER BOTH WHEN I WAS IN CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND ON THE COMMISSION ITSELF. SO I REALLY WANT TO THANK HER FOR HER SERVICE. >> THANK YOU. >> THAT IS WHAT I HAVE FOR THE
CHAIR'S REPORT. AND FIRST -- LET'S SEE. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE CHARTER AMENDMENT TIMELINE. I BELIEVE WE HAVE COPIES OF THAT. AND MR. CARL,
GIVE US A LITTLE INFORMATION ON THIS. >> YEAH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND TO THE COMMISSIONERS, I WILL SAY THIS SHOULD BE IN YOUR STAPLED PACKET OF THE AGENDA. IT'S THE SECOND TO LAST. THIS IS THE TIMELINE WE BRING FORWARD AND ASK FOR YOUR FORMAL
ACCEPTANCE EACH YEAR. IT OUTLINES THE PROCESS AND TIMELINE ASSOCIATED WITH STATE W WITH A CITIZENS' PETITION TO AMEND THE CHARTER. I WON'T READ ALL OF IT TO YOU. IT REFERS TO THE PROPER SECTION IN STATE LAW. AND AT THE BOTTOM, SETS FORWARD THE BASIC TIMELINE MEETING FROM
JANUARY 1ST OF MAY 1ST OF NEXT YEAR IN 2026, THE CHARTER COMMISSION THROUGH THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK WOULD BE OPEN TO ACCEPT ANY FILINGS OF CITIZEN PE PHYSICIANS FROM MAY 1ST TO JULY 6TH, THE CHARTER AND CITY COUNCIL WOULD EVER TO DO ANY
WORK FOR PETITION THAT IS FOUND TO BE SUFFICIENT. VALIDATED BY THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK IN ORDER TO FINALIZE THE ACTUAL BALLOT LANGUAGE FOR IT TO BE SUFFICIENT AND VALID. AND THE
DEADLINE IS 17 WEEKS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE GENERAL ELECTION. AND NEXT YEAR, THAT MEANS WITH THE DATE OF THE GENERAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, THE DEADLINE FOR US TO SUBMIT THAT QUESTION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY AND TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE WOULD BE JULY 7TH. SO THAT'S THE BASIC TIMELINE THAT WOULD BE IN
PLACE FOR ANY PETITION BY A CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO REQUEST AN AMENDMENT THE CITY CHARTER. AGAIN, THE PREVIOUS PARAGRAPHS ABOVE THE ACTUAL TIMELINE SIMPLY POINT TO THE STATUTES AND WHAT THE STATUTES REQUIRE TO BE DONE. HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS. BUT ASK FOR YOUR FORMAL APPROVAL
OF THAT TIMELINE. >> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. CHAIR AND MR. CLERK, IS THAT THE SAME
TIMELINE, NOT IN TERMS OF A PETITION AND SIGNATURES, BUT IF WE THE CHARTER COMMISSION WANT TO GET SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT? >> MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER DOHERTY, NO. THIS APPLIES TO THE CITIZENS PETITION TO SUBMIT A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO THE
ELECTORATE. THERE ARE DEADLINES THAT MIGHT BE GENERATED BY THIS BODY, THE CHARTER COMMISSION, WHICH ALWAYS HAS THE RIGHT TO OPPOSE AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER, OR THOSE THAT MIGHT COME FROM THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. I SHOULD GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPLANATION. BECAUSE WE
HAVE TO VALIDATE THE SIGNATURES PROCESS OF ASSURING THAT THE SIGNATURESRE VALID BY VOTERS WITHIN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. THERE'S A TIMELINE THAT HAS TO BE ALLOWED FOR THAT. AND THEN THERE HAS TO BE THE PROCESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ACTUALLY SETS THE LANGUAGE THAT GOES TO THE BALLOT, NOT THE CITIZENS
PETITION. SO THERE HAS TO BE ENOUGH TIME FOR THE CLERK'S OFFICE TO COMPLETE THE VALIDATION OF SIGNATURES AND F THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION THAT IS ADVISED BY THE OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY IN TERMS OF THE LEGALITY OF THE
LANGUAGE THAT ENDS IN ON THE BALLOT. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. CHAIR. >> YES, COMMISSIONER NEY. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MR. CARL, HOW WILL THIS BE PUBLICIZED? HOW WILL CITIZENS BE MADE AWARE? >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. WE
HAVE A WHOLE PAGE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. AND WE UPDATE THAT WITH THE TIMELINE THAT'S SHOWN AT THE BOTTOM. WE ALSO HAVE PRODUCED SEVERAL YEARS AGO, I BELIEVE I'VE GIVEN THIS TO ALL OF YOU. THE CHAIR HAS ASKED US TO WORK TO AN ORIENTATION NEXT YEAR
BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN SO MUCH TURNOVER. THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE HAS PRODUCED A GUIDE TO AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER. IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THAT, IT'S FAIRLY ROBUST. IT TAKES THE DETAILS SET FORTH IN STATUTE FOR THE TWO MAJOR PRIMARY PATHWAYS
FOR AMENDING EITHER BY A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE OR BY AN ORDINANCE. AND IT TAKES ABOUT THE TIMELINES, THE STEPS, THE ROLES, THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND ALL OF THAT. THROUGH OUR WEBSITE IS THE PRIMARY MEANS IN ANSWER TO YOUR DIRECT QUESTION ABOUT H WE MAKE THAT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. WE PUT THE TIMELINE OUT THERE AND THEN WE HAVE AIRECT
LINK TO THE GUIDE. >> OKAY. COMMISSIONER COOPER. >> THANKYOU, MR. CHAIR. MR. CLERK, WHAT'S THE 10 DAYS THAT THE COMMISSION HAS TO APPROVE SUMMARIES OF PETITIONS OVER 1,000 WORDS, WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR THAT IF YOU HAVE MORE
DETAIL? >> CERTAINLY, THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE STATUTE SAYS THAT FOR A CITIZENS PETITION -- LET ME START OVER. THIS BODY TOUCHES EVERY AMENDMENT PPOSAL TO THE CHARTER. WHETHER THAT'S INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL, CITIZENS PETITION OR BY THIS OWN
BODY, THEY HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY, THIS BODY. IF IT'S OVER 1,000 WORDS, THE FIRST RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS BODY IS TO MAKE SURE YOU APPROVE THE -- REGISTERED VOTERS. SO THAT IF IT'S OVER 1,000 WORDS, THAT WOULD BE
IMPOSSIBLE TO TAKE A ROUND ON A CLIPBOARD AND HAVE PEOPLE SIGN. THE STATUTES ALLOW PETITION COMMITTEE TO COME UP WITH A SUMMARY. THEY CAN SUGGEST THEIR OWN SUMMARY. YOU ALL GET TO SAY YES, THAT'S A FAIR AND ADEQUATE SUMMARY OF THAT OR IT'S NOT.
>> SEEING NOTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. CARL, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE 2026 CHARTER AMENDMENTS SUBMISSION TIMELINE? >> SO MOVED, NEY. >> SECOND, RUBENSTEIN. >> WE HAVE A PROPER MOTION BEFORE US. IS THERE ANY
DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THOSE OPPOSED? THAT MOTION PASSES AND THE TIMELINE IS ADOPTED. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE 2026 CALENDAR
WHICH SETS THE PROPOSED DATES FOR OUR REGULAR MEETINGS IN 2026. THERE ARE FOUR DATES THAT ARE SCHEDULED AS THE REGULAR MEETINGS THE FIRST WEDNESDAY OF EACH MONTH OF JANUARY, MAY,
SEPTEMBER, AND DECEMBER. MR. CARL, ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT? >> NO, CHAIR. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE GET THE CALENDAR ADOPTED NOW SO WE CAN PUBLISH ALL OF THE RULAR MEETINGS FOR NEXT YEAR. OBVIOUSLY, C CALL ANY SPECIAL MEETING. WE WENT
FROM A REGULAR MONTHLY STAS TO A QUARTERLY. THIS REFLECTS THAT TREND RECOGNIZING THAT IF AND AS NECESSARY THERE CAN BE ADDITIONAL MEETINGS CALLED BEYOND THESE THAT ARE QUARTERLY. >> COMMISSIONER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SO BEING I'M RELATIVELY NEW COMMISSIONER TO THIS GROUP, GOING INTO A -- I MEAN, IT FEELS LIKE EVERY YEAR IS AN ELECTION YEAR, RIGHT? BUT GOING INTO AN
ELECTION YEAR, LIKE THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS, DO YOU FORESEE THE NEED TO MEET MORE BASED ON THE CALENDAR THAT WE JUST ADOPTED, ESPECIALLY THE FIRST PART OF THE YEAR? OR I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE. BUT WHAT ARE YOU THINKING IN TERMS
OF MORE THAN JUST FOUR TIMES NEXT YEAR? >> I THINK TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND, HISTORICALLY THE CHARTER COMMISSION HAD MEETINGS SCHEDULED EVERY MONTH. A HISTORICALLY A NUMBER OF THOSE MEETINGS WERE CANCELED OR PEOPLE
SHOWED UP FOR A 5-MINUTE MEETING, THEY DISCUSSED SOMETHING BRIEFLY AND THEY LEFT. I BELIEVE IT WAS TWO YEARS AGO WE CHANGED IT TO A QUARTERLY MEETING SO THE IDEA WHEN WE SHOWED UP, WE ALL TOOK THE TIME TO COME DOWNTOWN, THAT THERE WAS SOME MEAT ON THE AGENDA TO TALK
AND DISCUSS. THE CITY CLERK DOES RESERVE THESE FIRST WEDNESDAY AFTERNOONS FOR US IN THE EVENT WE WANT TO CALL OTHER MEETINGS. I ANTICIPAT THAT AT SOME POINT THROUGHOUT THIS COMING YEAR WE WILL HAVE A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL
MEETINGS. WHEN? I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT WILL BE IT COULD BE THE MAY, JUNE, JULY PART. IF IN FACT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT PUTTING SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT, THEN WE MAY HAVE MORE MEETINGS IN THE SUMMER THAN WE WOULD OTHERWISE,
OR EARLY SUMMER BASED ON WHAT THE LIKELY TIME FRAMES WILL BE FOR US TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT IF WE SO CHOOSE TO DO SO. SO AS I SIT HERE TODAY, I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT THERE WILL BE A CERTAIN NUMBER, BUT I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF THERE IS.
>> THANK YOU. >> AND I'VE LOST MY -- HAVE WE HAD THE MOTION? MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED CALENDAR? >> SO MOVED. SANDBERG. >> AND A SECOND. >> SECOND, COOPER.
>> WE HAVE A PROPER MOTION. IS THIS ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THAT MOTION PASSES. THE CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. AND I'L DIRECT THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH AND PASS
THE CALENDAR -- OR POST THE CALENDAR TO PUBLIC NOTICE OF OUR REGULAR MEETINGS. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORK GROUP TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. TECHNICALLY, THIS WAS STILL WITH
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORK GROUP. CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THROUGH ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY ANDREA NEFF HAS BEEN WORKING ON THESE AMENDMENTS. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF NEW PEOPLE IT'S KIND OF A TIME FOR US TO SIT BACK IN AND HAVE A
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT IS COMING FORWARD ON SOME OF THESE PROPOSED TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER. AND WHEN I SAY "TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS" WE ALWAYS GET IN DISCUSSIONS WHAT IS SUBSTANTIVE AND WHAT IS TECHNICAL. BUT THESE ARE
INTENDED TO BE MORE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS AND NOT LARGELY SUBSTANTIVE. SO WITH THAT, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY NEFF, WOULD YOU KINDLY LEAD US THROUGH THIS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR GINDER AND
COMMISSIONERS, I'M ANDREA NEFF, I'M THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT ADVISES THIS BODY. AND I'VE BEEN ASKED TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT WORKING DRAFT OF THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CHARTER. THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO PROVIDE A BROAD OUTLINE OF THE DOCUMENT AND THE WORK THAT IS CURRENTLY IN
PROGRESS IN THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORKING GROUP. FIRST, BRIEFLY BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, SINCE I KNOW WE HAVE SOME NEWER FOLKS TO THE COMMISSION. THE CHARTER AMENDMENT ADOPTING T EXECUTIVE MAYOR LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT WERE
APPROVED BY THE VOTERS IN NOVEMBER OF 2021. FOLLOWING THE VOTERS ADOPTION OF THIS NEW FORM OF GOVERNMENT, THE CITY BEGAN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT IT. THIS CULMINATED IN THE CITY
COUNCIL'S ADOPTION OF THE OMNIBUS GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE ORDINANCE IN THE FALL OF 2022. THIS ORDINANCE PLACED THE STRUCTURE AND NECESSARY DETAILS TO IMPLEMENT THE NEW FORM OF GOVERNMENT INTO THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. HOWEVER, THERE
WERE SOME GAPS BETWEEN THE CITY CHARTER AND THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE ORDINANCE. AND THEREFORE, A DRAFT OF TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER WERE BROUGHT FORWARD IN ORDER TO ALIGN THE CHARTER WITH THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. A DRAFT OF THE
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THIS BODY AT A MEETING ON HALLOWEEN OF 2023. IN JANUARY OF 2025, THIS BODY VOTED TO REFER THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS WITH ONE EXCEPTION TO THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORKING
GROUP. THE EXCEPTION IS THAT THIS BODY DID NOT REFER THE DRAFT OF A PROPOSED ARTICLE 10 DEALING WITH COMMISSIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORK GROUP. AND I WILL SAY MORE ABOUT THAT LATER. THE WORKING GROUP HAS MET
SEVERAL TIMES THROUGHOUT 2025 TO DISCUSS AND MAKE CHANGES TO THE DRAFT. THE BOOKLET THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY IS JUST THAT. IT IS A DRT. IT IS STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION BY THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORKI GROUP. TODAY, I'LL BE WALKING
THROUGH SOME KEY PARTS OF THE DRAFT TO PROVIDE A SNAPSHOT OF THE WORK THAT IS IN PROGRESS. NO ACTION IS BEING REQUESTED TODAY. THIS IS SIMPLY AN UPDATE PRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD HAVE ALL RECEIVED A BOOKLET. IT'S
PART OF YOUR MATERIALS FOR THIS MEETING. AND I'LL JUST TAKE A MOMENT TO ORIENT YOU TO THE DRAFT THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS TEXT IN SEVERAL COLORS. THE RED IS FROM THE PROPOSED TECHNICAL
AMENDMENTS FIRST PRESENTED IN 2023. THE BLUE IS CHANGES BY THE PLAIN LANGUAGE WORK GROUP OF THIS BODY. AND THE PURPLE TEXT HAS BEEN ADDED DURING DISCUSSION OF THE GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE
WORK GROUP. YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE ARE ALSO COMMENTS IN THE MARGINS. THESE INDICATE MATTERS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED BYHE WORK GROUP AND MAY CONTINUE TO BE DISCUSSED BY THE WORK GROUP.
DEFERENCE TO THE SIZE OF THE AGENDA, I WILL JUST GO THROUGH SOME OF THE KEY PROVISIONS THAT YOU SEE THROUGHOUT THE DRAFT, NOT EACH AND EVERY DETAIL.
FIRST, BEGINNING WITH ARTICLE 1, ON PAGE 2, YOU WL SEE THERE IS A PROVISION ON LAWS SUPERSEDED. THIS WOULD REGARD THE LAWS THAT ARE NOW OUT OF DATE, UNNECESSARY OR CONFUSING AND ALLOW THE CITY
TO START FRESH WITH CIVIL SERVICE POSITIONS. THE SECOND SECTION OF THIS WOULD ALSO SUPERSEDE SPECIAL LAWS THAT ARE NOW INCONSISTENT WITH OUR CITY CHARTER. MOVING ALONG TO SECTION
1.4 ON PAGE 3, THIS IS A CLARIFICATION THATHE CITY IS CLAIMING THE BROADEST POSSIBLE SCOPE OF POWERS PERMISSIBLE FOR A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION UNDER E LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. THE CHARTER ALREADY
SAYS THIS, BUT THE UPDATED LANGUAGE IS INTENDED TO FURTHER CLARIFY THIS TO REMOVE ANY DOUBT THAT WE WANT TO CLAIM THE BROADEST POSSIBLE POWERS PERMITTED BY THE STATE. MOVING
ALONG TO ARTICLE 4. IN ARTICLE 4, YOU'LL SEE NO NOTABLE LINE EDITS UNTIL PAGE 3. OF THAT ARTICLE. AND LOOKING FIRST AT
SECTION 4.2D, WHICH IS ABOUT VACANCIES. THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE CITY COUNCIL. THIS PROVISION CLARIFIES THE PROCEDURES THAT WOULD BE USED FOR FILLING A SEAT IN THE EVENT THAT A CITY COUNCIL SEAT BECOMES
VACANT. ON THE NEXT PAGE, 4.2E PREFERS TO REMOVAL. THIS PROVISION IS BEING MOVED FROM ARTICLE 8 WITH CLARIFICATIONS IN ORDER TO BETTER ALIGN WITH STATE
LAW. NEXT, TURNING TO PAGE 6, 4.2H2 IS RELATING TO THE CITY AUDITOR. THESE AMENDMENTS FIX AN
INCONISTENCY WITHIN THE CHARTER, AND MORE SPECIFICALLY SPELL OUT PROCEDURES FOR THE REMOVAL OF AUDITOR, INCLUDING BEING EXPLICIT ABOUT DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES. AND THEN FINALLY, IN
SECTION 4.4A, AND THIS IS ON PAGE 9, THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATIONS OF PROCEDURES. AGAIN, PROVIDING DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS IN THE EVENT OF A
REMOVAL PROCEDURE. MOVING ALONG TO ARTICLE 7, THIS ARTICLE DEALS WITH THE CITY'S ADMINISTRATION. BEGINNING ON PAGE 3, THERE IS A PROVISION RELATED TO THE MAYORAL
STAFF. THIS ADJUSTMENT RECOGNIZES THAT THE MAYOR'S STAFF NEEDS MAY CHANGE FROM TIME TO TIME, AND THAT FIX ROLES AND TITLES MAY BE OUT OF DATE. SO THE DRAFT NOW JUST PROVIDES FOR PROPERTY STAFF RATHER THAN SPECIFIC TITLES OF SPECIFIC
PERSONNEL. ON PAGE 4, AND CONTINUING THROUGH PAGE 5, YOU WILL SEE SECTION 7.2, WHICH IS ENTITLED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS. IN THE CURRENT VERSION OF THE CITY
CHARTER, SECTION 7.2 LISTS DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY. THIS DRAFT REPCES A LIST OF DEPARTMENTS WITH A LIST OF EXECUTIVE OFFICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS CREATED BY THE GOVERNMENT
STRUCTURE ORDINANCE. THE THREE OFFICES ARE THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC SERVICE HEADED BY THE CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER, THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SAFETY HEADED BY THE COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMISSIONER, AND THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY HEADED BY THE
CITY ATTNEY. THESE THREE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS ARE NOMINATED BY THE MAYOR AND CONFIRM BY THE CITY COUNCIL. ON PAGE 8, YOU
WILL SEE THAT THERE'S A SECTION -- TWO SECTIONS, ACTUALLY, D AND E, WHICH ARE ALSO CURRENTLY PART OF SECTION 7.2 OF THE CHARTER. THESE SECTIONS WHICH RELATE TO THE
CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE STRUCK THROUGH IN THIS DRAFT, BUT THESE COMMISSIONS ARE NOT GONE, THEY ARE SIMPLY MOVED IT A DFERENT PART OF THE DRAFT. TURNING TO PAGE 10, YOU'LL SEE A SECTION ON
POLICE. THERE ARE A FEW THINGS TO HIGHLIGHT HERE, NAMELY, THE RED TEXT WHICH SAYS THAT THE MAYOR NOMINATES AND THE CITY COUNCIL CONFIRMS THE POLICE CHIEF. THIS IS NOT A CHANGE FROM CURRENT PRACTICE. THIS IS SIMPLY
LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN MOVED BUT NOT A CHANGE. THE CIVIL SERVICE -- UNDER THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES CONTAINED WITHIN
THE CHARTER. AND FINALLY, AT THE BOTTOM OF 7.3 IN SUBSECTION C, AND YOU'LL FIND THIS ON PAGE 11, THERE'S A STRIKE THROUGH OF THE FUNDING PROVISION RELATED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THIS PROVISION HAS NOT BEEN DELETED.
IT HAS BEEN MOVED INSTEAD TO ARTICLE 9, WHICH RELATESO FINANCE. NEXT UP, WE HAVE A SECTION ON THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. MY COMMENTS HERE ARE VERY MUCH THE SAME AS ABOUT THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT. AGAIN, FOR THE FIRE CHIEF, THE MAYOR NOMINATES AND THE CITY COUNCIL CONSENTS TO THE NOMINATION OF THE FIRE CHIEF. AGAIN, ALTHOUGH IT APPEARS TO BE ADDED LANGUAGE, IT IS SIMPLY MOVED LANGUAGE. THIS IS THE CURRENT PRACTICE, NOT A CHANGE.
CIVIL SERVICE PROVISIONS ARE QUIET SPECIFIC AND HAVE BEEN REMOVED AS PART OF AN OVERALL SIMPLIFICATION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES THATRE CONTAINED IN THE CHARTER. AND THEN
FINALLY, THIS TAKES US DOWN TO PAGE 13. SUBDIVISION E. THE FUNDING PROVISION AGAIN IS STRUCK THROUGH. BUT THIS HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED. IT HAS SIMPLY BEEN
MOVED TO ARTICLE 9. BELOW THE FUNDING PROVISION, YOU'LL SEE A NEW SECTION 7.4 RELATING TO MMISSIONS. IN THE ORIGINAL DRAFT OF THE TECICAL AMENDMENTS, THE COMMISSIONS WERE CONSOLIDATED INTO A PROPOSED NEW ARTICLE 10. I NOTED EARLIER THAT
THIS BODY OPTED NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ARTICLE 10. AS A RESULT, THIS DRAFT MOVES THE THREE COMMISSIONS THAT ARE CREATED BY CHARTER BACK INTO THE OTHER ARTICLES OF THE CHARTER. THIS IS ONE OF THE KEY CHANGES
FROM THE DRAFT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THIS GROUP IN OCTOBER OF 2023. HERE, IN THE NEW SECTION 7.4, WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH ARE
MOVED FROM EARLIER IN THE ARTICLE WITH MINOR CHANGES AS INDICATED IN THE DRAFT. MOVING ALONG TO ARTICLE 8, THIS ARTICLE
RELATES TO OFFICERS. STARTING IN SECTION 8.1 ON PAGE 1, THIS IS A CLARIFICATION OF THE DIFFERENT ROLES AT ARE OFFICERS WITHIN THE CITY NOW INCLUDING THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED BY THE NEW
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE. MOVING ALONG TO PAGE 2. YOU WILL SEE AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE THROUGH AND CONTINUING TO PAGES 3 AND 4, THAT THERE ARE STRIKE THROUGHS
OF VARIOUS SUBSECTIONS REGARDING TERMS, HOLDING OVER, VACANCY A REMOVAL. THESE MATTERS HAVE BEEN MOVED ELSEERE AS APPLICABLE. FOR ELECTED OFFICERS, THEY'VE BEEN MOVED TO ARTICLE 4 OR
SECTION 8.3. FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, THEY HAVE BEEN MOVED TO SECTION 8.4. SO RATHER THAN COMBINING MATTERS FOR DIFFERENT KINDS OF OFFICERS WHICH PROVES CONFUSING AND UNCLR, THEY HAVE
BEEN SEPARATED SO THAT ELECT OFFICERS ARE HANDLED IN A SEPARATE SECTION FROM EXECUVE OR APPOINTED OFFICERS. NEXT,
TURNING TO SECTION 8.3, BEGINNING IN THE MIDDLE OF PAGE 5 YOU'LL SEE AN EXAMPLE OF THAT COMMENCENT OF OFFICE RESIGNATION DETERMINATION OF VACANCY AND HOLDING OVER ARE ALL ADDITIONS OF SOME OF THE MATTERS
THAT WERE MOVED FROM SECTION 8.2. IN SECTION 8.4, WE HAVE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS. NOW AS I NOTED EARLIER, TO MATCH THE ORGANIZATIONAL SCHEME ESTABLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT
STRUCTURE ORDINANCE, THREE EXECUTIVE OFFICES ARE CREATED. THIS SECTION DESCRIBES HOW THE HEADS OF THOSE THREE OFFICES, WHICH ARE THE CITY OPERATIONS OFFICER, THE COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMISSIONER, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, HOW THEY ARE TO BE
APPOINTED. AND THEN ON PAGE 7, AT THE VERY BOTTOM YOU'LL SEE A NEW SECTION 8.5 ENTITLED ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS. AND THIS ADDRESSES THE APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS WHO ARE NOT ONE OF
THE THREE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OR THE CLERK OR THE AUDITOR. IN SECTION 8.6, YOU'LL SEE A FAIR AMOUNT OF REVISION FOR SIMPLIFICATION PURPOSES. AGN,
I'VE NOTED SEVERAL TIMES THERE'S AN OVERALLIMPLIFICATION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE PROVISION. BECAUSE SOME DETAILS CAN BE ADDRESSED IN THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES. ALSO, PARTS OF SECTION 8.6 WERE
RESTORED FROM ARTICLE 10. ONE THING I WOULD DRAW ATTENTION TO IS ON PAGE 10 BEGINNING WITH SUBSECTION E AND CONTINUING THROUGH SUBSECTION H, THESE
SECTIONS ALLOW FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ADDITIONAL UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS. AND THIS WORKS IN TANDEM WITH THE PROVISION OF ARTICLE 1 THAT SUPERSEDES SPECIAL LAWS REGARDING CIVIL SERVICE. TOGETHER, THESE PROVISIONS ALLOW FOR CLEAN UP OF OUT OF DATE
SPECIAL LAWS AND A FRESH START RELATING TO UNCLASSIFIED POSITIS. FINALLY, JUST A BRIEF LOOK AT ARTICLE 9. THE PRIMARY
CHANGES THERE ARE FOUND ON PAGES 4 AND 5. I SAY CHANGES, THEY REALLY ARE NOT. THEY'RE JUST TEXT MOVED FROM OTHER PLACES WITHIN THE CHARTER. WERE MOVED FROM OTHER PLACES IN ORDER TO
CENTRALIZE FUNDING MATTERS IN THE ARTICLE ON FINANCE. THIS CONCLUDES MY SUMMARY OF THE CURRENT WORKING DRAFT OF THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. AGAIN, NO ACTION IS REQUESTED FROM THIS BODY TODAY. THE DRAFT REMAINS IN
THE WORK GROUP FORONTINUING DISCUSSION AND FURTHER REFINEMENT. AND WITH THAT, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU, MS. NEFF. I KNOW THAT FOR THOSE OF US, PARTICULARLY FOR ME THAT HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THIS FOR A WHILE,
THERE'S A LOT OF KIND OF GETTING BACK UP TO SPEED IN WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. AND I'M SURE IT'S KIND OF OVERWHELMING FOR NEWER MEMBERS WHO HAVE NOT LOOKED AT ANY OF THIS BEFORE. BUT ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR MS. NEFF AT THIS STAGE? AS SHE INDICATED,
WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION ON THIS TODAY. BUT IT WILL BE RECEIVE AND FILE AS KIND OF AN UPDATE STATUS REPORT OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN AND WHERE WE'RE GOING ON THESE CHANGES. SO WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER COOPER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT ARTICLE 4 ON PAGE 4 ABOUT THE REMOVAL PROVISION THERE. YOU'D MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE SOME EDITS TO ALIGN WITH STATE LAW. COULD YOU PAND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.
LIKE THE SPECIFIC CHANGES THAT WERE MADE AND THE BASIS FOR THAT CHANGE. >> CERTAINLY. THERE'S A PROVISION IN THE MINNESOTA CONSTITUTION THAT RELATES TO THE REMOVAL OF LOCAL OFFICERS.ND
SO MAKING OUR CHARTER ALIGN WITH THE STANDARDS SET BY THE MINNESOTA CONSTITUTION IS -- THAT'S THE WAY THAT THE STANDARD S CONSTRUCTED.
>> COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. ATTORNEY NEFF, IS IT YOUR HOPE THAT THIS BODY WILL GET TOGETHER WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND MOVE
THESE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS BY ORDINANCE? IN A PERFECT WORLD. >> CHAIR GINDER, COMMISSIONER DOHERTY, I DON'T HAVE A PARTICAR PATHWAY OR A HOPE
RELATING TO THAT. >> COMMISSIONER DOHERTY, MAYBE -- WHAT I ENVISION IS WE WENT THROUGH SOME OF THIS SUBSTANTIVE AS WE GOT TALKING ABOUT THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS. AND SO THAT IS NOT A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW. SO SOME OF THAT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED IN MY
MIND PART OF THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. IT'S A DRAFT THAT'S OUT THERE. SOME OF THIS OTHER STUFF IS TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. AND TO THE EXTENTHAT WE THINK THAT IS NOT CONTROVERSIAL, I
WOULD ENVISION ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR TO DO THIS BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. THAT'S ONE OF THE WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN AMENDMENT THE CHARTER. IT'S OFTEN REFERRED TO AS TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS GO THAT WAY. BUT
ANYTHING CAN GO THAT WAY BY UNANIMOUS CONSENTF ALL THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. SO THERE ARE SOME THINGSHAT HOPEFULLY ALL 13 OR ALL 14 ELECTEDS WOU AGREE ARE MERELY TECHNICAL AND COULD BE DONE WITHOUT HAVING TO
GO ONHE BALLOT. AND SO WHETHER THAT ENTAILS ANOTHER MEETING OR WHETHER IT ENTAILS JUST SOME DISCUSSION WITH INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS HASN'T BEEN DETERMINED. AND AS WE GO FURTHER DOWN THE LINE, WE'LL HAVE TO DECIDE WHICH DO WE REALLY THINK ARE THE LEAST CONTROVERSIAL, IF
SOME OF THEM ARE MORE CONTROVERSIAL, WHICH WOULD WE PROPOSE TO GO TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. I HOPE THAT GIVES YOU SOME AT LEAST ENLIGHTENMENT ON HOW THIS MIGHT WORK. >> YES, THANK YOU. IT'S
OBVIOUSLY A HOPE THAT THE MORE CHANGES THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON THEY CAN GO BY ORDINANCE AND LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF BALLOT INITIATIVES. THE BETTER OFF WE'LL ALL BE. >> I WOULD AGREE. AND SO THAT'S
WHERE WE'RE MOVING AT SOME POINT GOING BACKO THE COUNCIL WITH TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. NEFF? COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THIS
ISN'T A QUESTION BUT SORT OF AN ADENDOM. I JUST WANTED TO ADD. WE HAD A PROPOSAL ON REMOVAL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. RECALL AND REMOVAL. AFTER DOING CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT
OF RESEARCH AT THE TIME, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT SOME OF THE TERMS THAT ARE IN THIS PROVISION WERE DEVELOPED BY CASE LAW. COURT DECISIONS THAT ARE STILL STATE LAW, OBVIOUSLY. BUT HELP EXPLAIN WHAT THE MEANING OF
THIS PROVISION IS. THAT'S NOT A QUESTION. >> OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> MR. CHAIR. >> COMMISSIONER COOPER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I TOO DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, MORE OF A
COMMENT, ATTORNEY NEFF. I WILL SAY AS A NON-ATTORNEY ON THIS PANEL, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP ON BRINGING ME UP TO SPEED RATHER QUICKLY OVER THE LAST YEAR. I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT I UNDERSTOOD EVERYTHING AT THE BEGINNING AND I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING AT THIS POINT. BUT I
UNDERSTAND MORE THAN I DID AT THE BEGINNING. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP AND FOR PUTTING TOGETHER A GREAT PACKET FOR US TO REVIEW. SO THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.
>> I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR MS. NEFF OR JUST KIND OF A POINT OF INQUIRY. IF WE HAVE THINGS THAT ARE NOT APPROVED BY THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, SO IT'S NOT BY ORDINANCE AND IT GOES TO AN ELECTION, IS IT ONE SET OF
CHANGES AND IT'S EITHER A YES OR A NO? OR IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE LIKE MULTIPLE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE DIFFERENT CHANGES? DO WE KNOW? >> CHAIR GINDER, COMMISSIONER SMITH, I BELIEVE HOW IT'S PLACED
ON THE BALLOT IS WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THIS GROUP. WE WOULD NEED TO OBVIOUSLY DO QUITE A BIT OF HOMEWORK TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHINGLACED ON THE BALLOT WAS IN -- WAS PLACED ON
THE BALLOT IN WAYS THAT WERE COMPATIBLE WITH ANY POTENTIAL RESULT THAT MIGHT BE RECEIVED, AND THAT COULD BE CHALLENGING.
>> IF I COULD ADD ON TO THAT, THE ATTEMPT WOULD BE TO GET AS MUCH INTO A SINGLE QUESTION AS YOU COULD. OBVIOUSLY, THE MORE THAT THEY ARE REALLY TRULY TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS, THE EASIER IT IS TO HAVE A QUESTION THAT IS, DO YOU AGREE WITH MAKING
CERTAIN TECHNICAL CHANGES THAT ARE NON-SUBSTANTIVE TO THE CHARTER, AND JUST HAVE -- AGAIN, IT'S A FOCUS OF DO WE BELIEVE THEY'RE REALLY TECHNICAL, IN WHICH CASE I WOULD HOPE THEY
WOULD BE DONE B UNANIMOUS CONSENT. BUT IF THEY'RE NOT, THEN WE MAY END UP HAVING TO SPLIT SOME OUT INTO DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. THAT WOU NOT BE A FAVORED WAY OF DOING IT BECAUSE IT MUDDIES UP A BALLOT. AND WE HAVE ENOUGH ISSUES WITH A BALLOT
IN THE FUTURE WITH RCV AND STATE LAW AS IT IS. WE WOULD TRY AND KEEP IT AS MODEST AS WE COULD AS FAR AS A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS. SO THAT WOULD BE THE ART IN DEVISING QUESTIONS AND FIGURE OU WHAT WE WANT TO PUT ON THE
BALLOT. THERE MAY BE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS THAT WE'D LIKE TO MAKE AND WE JUST SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM BECAUSE THE ISSUES IN TRYING TO PRESENT IT TO THE ELECTORATE, FOR EXAMPLE. COMMISSIONER GARCIA. >> MY UNDERSTANDING, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IS THAT THE
COUNCIL IS THE ONE THAT DEVELOPS THE WORDING. WE CAN COME UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION. BUT THEY ULTIMATELY DEVELOP THE WORDING THAT GOES ON THE BALLOT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE PROPOSE LANGUAGE THAT THEY'RE FREE TO ADOPT. HISTORICALLY, THEY HAVE
OFTEN ADOPTED OUR LANGUAGE. BUT ERE HAVE BEEN OCCASIONS WHERE THEY HAVE NOT. SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS, THANK YOU, AGAIN, ANDREA. AND I'LL ASK THE CLERK
TO FILE THAT REPORT. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS COMPARABLE RESEARCH ON MUNICIPAL COUNCILS. AND WE'LL BE HEARING FROM MR. CARL, THE CITY CLERK, AS WELL AS ANDREW HAWKINS WHO IS THE
DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT IN THE CITY. I'LL ASK MR. CLARK TO GET US STARTED. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'LL INTRODUCE ANDREW HAWKINS. --
IT'S A NEW DIVISION THAT WE HAVE CREATED JUST THIS PAST YEAR. ITS PURPOSE UNDER THE CITY CHARTER IS TO BE THAT CENTRAL NONPARTISAN STAFF THAT SUPPORTS AND INFORMS THE WORK OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS COMMITTEES AS LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY MAKING
BODY. IT'S SOMETHING YOU'LL HEAR MORE ABOUT IN OUR PRESENTATION. I KNOW HEON'T BE ABLE TO STAY ALL NIGHT LONG BUT ASKED HIM TO BE HERE BECAUSE PART OF MY PRESENTATION TODAY IS RELATED TO
OTHER MUNICIPAL COUNCILS. MR. HAWKINS IS WITH US AND AVAILABLE TO US GOING FORWARD IN TERMS OF THE WORK THIS BODY MAY BE DOING. WITH THAT, I'LL DIVE RIGHT IN, MR. CHAIR. THE CITY CHARTER AS
YOU ALL KNOW SERVESS THE CONSTITUTION OF OUR CITY GOVERNMENT. THE CHARTER COMMISSION IS LIKE THE CITY'S STANDING CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. IT IS THE CHARTER COMMISSION WHICH HOLDS THE CHARTER IN TRUST FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY. AND ONE OF THE COMMISSION'S PRIMARY DUTIES IS TO STUDY LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS IN THE FORM OF CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD APPROVE THE LONG-TERM -- CHAIR GINDER DID NOTE THAT THIS YEAR MARKED FOUR YEARS SINCE THE
VOTERS HAVE ADOPTED THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. I'LL PAUSE AND NOTE THAT THE LEGALLY EFFECTIVE DATE OF THAT WAS THIS DATE IN 2021. TODAY MARKS FOUR FULL YEARS OF THAT BEING IN PLACE. -- GENERAL
ELECTION PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON SPECIFICALLY DEFINING THE MAYOR AS BEING THE CITY'S CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND THE HEAD OF ITS ADMINISTRATION. SO AS THE CHAIR INDICATED IN JANUARY, WE WANTEDO TAKE THIS YEAR TO CONSIDER POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE
BRANCH. THAT IS THE CITY COUNCIL, THE COUNTER BALANCE TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE. THIS REPORT IS IN RESPONSE TO THAT DIRECTION. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS OF THE COMPARABLE CITY COUNCILS, THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK ENGAGED GUIDE HOUSE THIS YEAR AND
PROVIDED A LIST OF COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS TO BE EVALUATED. GUIDE HOUSE IS A GLOBAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRM WHICH PROVIDES ADVISORY, TECHNOLOGY, AND MANAGE SERVICES TO BOTH COMMERCIAL AND GOVERNMENT SECTORS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A IR AND BALANCED ANALYSIS, THE SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH WAS
CONFINED TO LARGE CIES IN THE UNITED STATES THAT OPERATE UNDER A HOME RULE CHARTER WITH AN EXECUTIVE MAYOR MODEL THAT INCLUDES A FULL-TIME LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SIMILAR TO THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. IN ADDITION TO THE STUDY BY GUIDE HOUSE, THE CLERK'S OFFICE HAS PULLED FROM
RESEARCH THAT WAS PRODUCED IN-HOUSE BY OUR LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT TEAM UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF MR. HAWKINS. THAT RESEARCH WAS VERY SIMILAR IN SCOPE AND WAS FOCUSED ON THE STRUCTURE AND OPERATION -- COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS.
BECAUSE THESE TWO INQUIRIES SHARED MANY OF THE SAME COMPONENTS WE'VE PULLED FROM THOSE TWO EVALUATIONS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE COMPREHENSIVE REPORT WITH FINDINGS. THAT IS WHAT I'LL BE PRESENTING TO YOU THIS EVENING. JURISDICTIONS THAT
WERE SELECTED AS COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS IN THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED BY GUIDE HOUSE. OBVIOUSLY EVERY CITY IS UNIQUE. NO TWO CITIES ARE EXACTLY ALIKE. WHAT ALL THESE CITIES FEATURE IS THE MAYOR WHO IS THE ELECTED CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THAT JURISDICTION. AND THERE IS IN
THAT JURISDICTN A FULL-TIME CITY COUNCIL, THAT IS THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE BODY. MANY OF THESE JURISDICTIONS, YOU'LL NOTE, HAVE LARGER POPULATIONS THAN MINNEAPOLIS. SOME ARE NOT PURELY CITY GOVERNMENTS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE CASE OF WASHINGTON D.C., UNIQUE IN THE
UNITED STATES. IT IS A ONE-GOVERNMENT FORM A CITY, STATE AND COUNTY ALL WRAPPED UP IN ONE AND OPERATES UND THE DIRECT THUMB OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS. HAS NO COMPARISON REALLY. AND OF COURSE DENVER, WHICH IS A CONSOLIDATED CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT. SO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM US.
BUT BOTH D.C. AND DENVER DO FEATURE AS THE CORE ASPECT OF THEIR GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AN EXECUTIVE MAYOR AND A LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. SO THEY HAVE BEEN INCLUDED HERE FOR COMPARISON. YOU'LL SEE KANSAS CITY IS ALSO LISTED ON THIS LIST. KANSAS CITY HAS REALLY A WEAK EXECUTIVE MAYOR MODEL
BECAUSE THEY ALSO HAVE A FULL-TIME CIT MANAGER. BUT THE MAYOR IS IN THEIR CHARTER REFERRED TO AS ANEXECUTIVE. AND THEY HAVE SOME DUTIES THAT GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE POWER THAN THE TRADITIONAL WEAK MAYOR. THEY HAVE A 12-MEMBER COUNCIL.
THE MAYOR VOTES TO BREAK TIES. THEY CAN VETO. CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY MANAGER AND I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY. IT'S NOT A PURE WEAK MAYOR BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A STRONG MAYOR. SO IT'S BEEN INCLUDED HERE. AT LEAST TWO COMPARABLE
JURISDICTIONS HERE HAVE UNDERGONE SIGNIFICANT RESTRUCTURINGS IN THEIR GOVERNMENT FORM AT THE SAME TIME AS MINNEAPOLIS. THOSE INCLUDE PORTLAND, OREGON, WHICH MANY OF YOU MAY KNOW WAS THE LAST SURVIVING COMMISSIONER -- THE YEAR AFTER WE MOVED TO AN
EXECUTIVE MAYOR, PORTLAND MOVED TO -- AND ALSO COLUMBUS, OHIO, WHICH RECENTLY HAS HAD A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT FOR MANY YEARS. BUT WHAT IT DID WAS CHANGE A FORM OF ELECTION FROM
CITY COUNCIL ALL AT LARGE TO A VERY UNIQUE HYBRID DISTRICT SYSTEM WHICH I'LL TALK ABOUT IN DETAIL LATER. THE FIVE ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED ON THIS SLIDE. JURISDICTIONS THAT I'VE INCLUDED FROM BOTH THE GUIDE
HOUSE EVALUATION, AND FROM OUR INTERNAL TEAMS EVALUATION. FOR THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION, I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON MINNEAPOLIS AND THOSE FIVE COMMUNITIES SO THAT WE'VE NARROWED DOWN THE COMPARATIVE POOL. BASED ON INPUT THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THIS COMMISSION,
THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORK GROUP, WE ASKED GUIDEHOUSE TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS A SET OF INDICATORS FOR ALL THE COMPARABLE CITIES. THESE INDICATORS ARE SHOWN ON THE SLIDE. THEY INCLUDE ELEMENTS TIED TO ELECTIONS AND REPRESENTATION, COUNCIL STRUCTURE, THE USE OF COMMITTEES
AND RESOURCES DEDICATED EXCLUSIVELY TO SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL AND PERFORMANCE OF ITS DUTIES. I THINK THESE ARE EXCELLENT INDICATORS TO CONSIDER SINCE THEY ALIGN VERY CLOSELY. AND ON THAT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE
A FEW COMMENTS. POLITICAL SCIENTISTS ALAN ROSENTHAL DEDICATED HIS PROFESSIONAL LIFE TO THE INSTITUTIONS AND BECAME THE FOREMOST EERT IN THE UNITED STATES IN THIS REGARD. IN HIS WORK, PROFESSOR ROSENTHAL
IDENTIFIED THE CORE CHARACTERISTICS TO BE A "GOOD LEGISLATURE." THREE ESSENTIAL TASKS. FIRST, THEY REPRESENT CONSTITUENTS.
SECOND, THEY -- TO PROFESSOR ROSENTHAL NOTED -- SECOND, INSTITUTIONALISM. IN THIS REGARD, CAPACITY REFERS TO RESOURCES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO ENABLE A LEGISLATIVE BODY TO DO ITS WORK. AMONG OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, CAPACITY WOULD
INCLUDE THINGS LIKE A BUDGET FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, FACILITIES AND ROOMS DEDICATED TO THE FUNCTIONS OF A LEGISLATURE. STAFFING THAT'S DEDICATED TO THE LEGISLATURE AND UNDER ITS CONTROL. AS WELL AS ACCESS TO DATA AND THE ANALYZATION AND
CONTEXTUALIZATION OF DATA IMPORTANT FOR MAKING LAWS. AND THEN OTHER SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE THAT ADDRE THOSE FUNCTIONS, INCLUDING REPRESENTATION, THE MAKING OF LAWS, AND THE BALANCING OF GOVERNMENT POWER WITH THE EXECUTIVE. INSTITUTIONALISM, THE OTHER FACTOR, IS A BIT HARDER TO
DEFINE. BUT THE WAY PROFESSOR ROSENTHAL DESCRIBED IT, IT COMBINED SEVERAL THINGS. FIRST, A CONCERN. CONCERN BEING THE KEY WORD HERE, BY LEGISTORS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE INSTITUTION. SECOND, A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. COMMUNITY MEANING THEVERALL CULTURE AND THE OPERATING NORMS
AND VALUES UPHD BY THE LEGISLATIVE INSTITUTION. AND THIRD, CONTINUITY OF THE LEGISLATIVE INSTITUTION DESPITE CHANGES OVER TIME. LOOKING AT OUR ORIGINAL LIST OF INDICATORS
ON THE SLIDE, I THINK WE HAVE INCORPORATED MANY ASPECTS OF WHAT WOULD BE REFERRED TO AS A -- I'M GOING T IN THE INTEREST OF TIME SPARE YOU ALL OF THE SLIDES THAT DEAL WITH MINNEAPOLIS BECAU IF YOU
NOTICE I GO RIGHT BACK INTO MINNEAPOLIS IN COMPARISON TO THE OTHER COMMUNITIES. IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ADDRESS THEM. WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I'D LIKE TO MOVE RIGHT FORWARD INTO COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS. SO THE
COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS LOOKING AT CITIES WE HAVE, MY NEXT STEP IS TO GO THROUGH A SERIES OF SLIDES THAT INCLUDE MINNEAPOLIS AND THE FIVE COMPARABLE COMMUNITIES. THEN I WILL PRESENT SOME FINDINGS BASED ON THAT
ANALYSISAND THEN STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. DOES THAT SOUND FINE? >> YES, MR. CARL. >> SLIDE 15 IN YOUR PACKET. THIS IS THE FIRST INDICATOR. TIMING OF ELECTIONS, THE ELECTION
METHODOLOGY, TURNOUT AND ELECTIVE TERMS. THIS FIRST SLIDE SHOWS THE CITY'S ESTIMATED POPULATION BASED ON THE ESTIMATED POPULATIONS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. CENSUS BUREAU. I'LL NOTE HERE THAT BASED ON THESE ESTIMATES, MINNEAPOLIS AND
MILWAUKEE HAVE EXPERIENCED POPULATION DECLINES SINCE THE 2020 CENSUS. WHILE THE OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED POPULATION INCREASES OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT MINNEAPOLIS HAS THE SMALLEST POPULATION OF THE POOL WE'VE IDENTIFIED OF COMPARABLE CITIES. COLUMBUS HAS
MORE THAN DOUBLE THE POPULATION OF MINNEAPOLIS. WHILE SAN DIEGO HAS MORE THAN THREE TIMES THE POPULATION. I'VE INDICATED WHERE EACH COMPARABLE CITIES RANK. AS YOU CAN SEE, S DIEGO IS RANKED AS THE EIGHTH MOST POPULATED
CITY IN THE UNITED STATES. COLUMBUS IS THE 15th. SEATTLE AND DENVER ARE 18th AND 19th. THEN YOU JUMP DOWN TO MILWAUKEE WHICH IS THE 31st. AND FINALLY, MINNEAPOLIS, WHICH IS THE 46th MOST POPULATED CITY IN THE
NATION. AGAIN, ACCORDING TO STATISTICS PUT OUT BY THE U.S. CENSUS BUREAU. THIS SLIDE ALSO CAPTURES EACH CITY'S REGISTERED VOR POPULATION BASED ON THE JURISDICTIONS MOST RECENT ELECTION TURN OUT IN 2024. YOU
CAN SEE THE POPULATION AND THE POPULATIONF REGISTERED VOTERS AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. IN THE FOURTH COLUMN OVER WHICH IS LABELED TURNOUT, YOU'LL FIND DATA ABOUT EACH OF THESE CITY'S TURNOUT IN THE MOST RECENT ELECTION. NOT NECESSARILY THIS
YEAR OR LAST YEAR. -- WHEN THE JURISDICTION CONDUCTED A CITY ELECTION. AND SO OF COURSE THAT ALSO GIVES US AN IDEA ABOUT THE TIMING OF ELECTIONS FOR THOSE JURISDICTIONS WHETHER IN ODD OR EVEN NUMBER OF YEARS. MINNEAPOLIS AND SEATTLE TOP THE
LIST IN TERMS OF TURNOUT F JURISDICTIONS CONDUCTED IN ODD NUMBERED YEARS. HOWEVER, SAN DIEGO HAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER TURNOUT OF ALL THE COMPARABLE CITIES. I THINK THAT'S LIKELY A COMBINATION OF EVEN-YEAR ELECTIONS AND A SIGNIFICANTLY
HIGHER POPULATION. THIS SLIDE ALSO SHOWS US THE ELECTION METHODOLOGYHAT'S USED IN EACH OF THESE COMPARATIVE JURIICTIONS. YOU'LL SEE MINNEAPOLIS IS THE ONLY CITY THAT USES EXCLUSIVELY RANK-CHOICE VOTING AND DOES NOT
CONDUCT A PRIMARY. ALL COMPARATIVE JURISDICTIONS CONDUCT PRIMARIES. -- THE SECOND SLIDE SHOWS ALL OF THOSE SAME CITIES, WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT ELECTIONS. THIS IS SPECIFIC TO COUNCIL MEMBERS AND WHAT KINDS OF TERMS THEY SERVE
AND WHETHER CONCURRENT OR STAGGERED. YOU CAN SEE THAT ALL THE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS ELECT THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO FOUR-YEAR TERMS. FOUR-YEAR TERMS ARE PRETTY MUCH THE NORM FOR THE MAJORITY OF CITIES ACROSS THE NATION. AS THIS BODY IS AWARE
AND AS THIS CITY HAS RECENTLY EXPERIENCED, COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE MY THEE AS DOES ELECTION STAFF -- RECURRING 20-YEAR PATTERN TWO-YEAR TERMS BY WHAT
WE CALL THE CON RULE. THATTATE LAW FOCUSES ON ASSURING THAT THERE IS EQUAL REPRESENTATION AND TIMELY REDISTRICTING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. NONE OF THE COMPARABLE CITIES --S YOU
KNOW, EVEN WITHIN MINNEAPOLIS THAT PROVISION OF STATE LAW ONLY AFFECTS THE COUNCIL. IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE MAYOR. IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE PARK BOARD. IT ONLY AFFECTS THE CITY COUNCIL. AS I'VE NOTED, IT IS A RECURRING 20-YEAR PATTERN. EVERY 20 YEARS
WE'LL HAVE BACK-TO-BACK -- BEFORE RETURNING TO OUR NORMAL FOUR-YEAR TERMS. THE NEXT OCCURRENCE OF THE CON RULE WILL
BE IN 2032 AND 2033. HALF OF THE CITY'S HAVE CONCURRENT TERMS FOR ALL THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS. MINNEAPOLIS IS INCLUDED IN BOTH OF THOSE. WE HAVE CONCURRENT FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND WE CONDUCT OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS IN THE ODD NUMBER YEARS. CURRENTLY, THE
MAJORITY OF AMERICAN CITIES, APPROXIMATELY 65% OF ALL AMERICAN CITIES USE AT-LARGE ELECTIONS FOR THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS. AS FOR OFF YEAR, THE USE OF AT LARGE ELECTIONS TO CHOOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS WAS PART
OF THE REFORM MOVEMENT OF THE EARLY 20th CENTURY. FEDERAL AND GUBERNATORIAL YEARS, THESE WERE SEEN BY REFORMERS AS POSITIVE WAYS TO COMBAT CORRUPTION,
POLITICAL MACHINES AND THE INEFFICIENCY OF WARD BASED SYSTEMS THAT WERE VERY PREVALEN LARGE ELECTIONS WERE ALSO AN ATTEMPT TO ELEVATE MUNICIPAL POLICY MAKING BEYOND VERY PAROCHIAL TIES TO NEIGHBORHOODS,
AN ATTEMPT TO HAVE A CITY WIDE PERSPECTIVE OF POLICY MAKING. ALL OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO ALL OF THE VOTERS SINCE EVERY VOTER IS ENTITLED TO CAST A VOTE REGARDLESS OF
WHEREVER THE VOTER LIVES WITHIN THE CITY. DESPITE THIS AND THE ADVANTAGES AS I HAVE PRESENTED THEM TO YOU, THERE IS AS I HAVE REPORTED TO THIS BODY IN PREVIOUS YEARS, GROWING NATIONWIDE TREND INTO MOVING
CITY ELECTIONS TO EVEN NUMBERED YEARS. THE MOVE IS PRIMARILY A RESPONSE TO THE EXTREMELY LOW AND UNREPRESENTATIVE VOTER TURN OUT THAT RESULTS IN OFF CYCLE TIMING OF MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. THAT ONCE WAS CELEBRATED BY
PROGRESSIVE REFORMERS. THIS CONTEMPORARY PUS BACK TO EVEN YEAR ELECTION CYCLES IS PRIMARILY MOTIVATED BY THE TWIN, A GOOD GOAL IN LOCAL ELECTIONS, AND COST FOR ADMINISTERING ELECTIONS IN BOTH EVEN AND ODD
YEAR CYCLES. MULTIPLE MULTI-YEAR RESEARCH CONSISTENTLY FINDS THAT EVEN-YEAR ELECTIONS GARNER HIGHER PARTICIPATION RATES THAN OFF SITE ODD YEAR ELECTIONS. -- RESEARCH IN SOME CASES HAS EVEN
SHOWN THAT TURN OUT FOR LOCAL ELECTIONS CAN MORE THAN DOUBLE WHEN CONDUCTED IN A EVEN-YEAR CYCLE. IN ADDITION, HIGHER TURN OUT IN EVEN YEA ELECTIONS MEANS YOU'RE ENGAGING IN MORE REPRESENTATIVE
ELECTORATE,ESPECIALLY AMONG YOUNG VOTERS AND VOTERS OF COLOR. FINDING TWO STATES, CALIFORNIA AND NEW YORK HAVE ENACTED LAWS THAT EITHER OUTRIGHT MANDATE OR STRONGLY IN ELECTIONS TO EVEN-NUMBERED
YEARS. YOU'LL SEE THE MAJORITY OF CITIES ARE TAKING THOSE MOVES NOW OR HAVE BEEN OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. IN MINNESOTA, CITIES CAN CHOOSE ODD OR EVEN BUT NOT BOTH. THE PROCESS FOR
ELECTING A CHANGE IS PROVIDED IN MINNESOTA STATUTES 205.07. AND IN MINNESOTA, CURRENT STATE ELECTION LAW LIMITS THE USE OF RANK CHOICE VOTING TO- THERE IS ANOTHER PRESENTATION ON YOUR
AGENDA TONIGHT ABOUT ELECTIONS. PREFERENCE TO THE EXPERTS, I WON'T PUSH FURTHER ON THAT POINT RIGHT NOW. I WILL ALSO ONLY NOTE ON THIS SLIDE THAT SAN DIEGO AND DENVER HAVE TERM LIMITS IMPOSED ON THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE
OTHER CITIES HAVE NO TERM LIMITS. AND FOR CLARITY ON THIS POINT, I'LL END BY SAYING THE STATE OF MINNESOTA DOES NOT PERMIT TERM LIMITS FOR ELECTED OFFICES. IN 1995, THE MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT CONCLUDED THAT TERM LIMITS WERE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THE
TERM LIMIT SERVES AS AN ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT AND NOT A QUALIFICATION FOR PUBLIC OFFICE. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNDER THE STATE CONSTITUTION AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE GUARANTEE OF UNERSAL ELIGIBILITY. MOVING ON TO
REPRESENTATION. THIS SLIDE SHOWS HOW COUNCIL'S IN COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS ADDRESS REPRESENTATION. IN TERMS OF THE MANNER OF HOW COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE ELECTED, AND ALSO THROUGH A MEMBER TO CONSTITUENCY RATIO. AS YOU CAN SEE OF ALL THE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS, ONLY
SEATTLE AND DENVER HAVE AT LARGE ELECTIONS ON THEIR COUNCILS. AT ONE TIME BOTH -- WVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS TREND FROM MOVING AWAY FROM AT LARGE ELECTIONS. USE THIS METHOD TO ELECT
COUNCILS. THAT TREND IS MORE OBVIOUS IN THE NATION'S LARGER, DENSER CITIES. I THINK THAT COLUMBUS PRESENTS ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING CASES. AND SO I'LL SPEAK AUT THIS A LITTLE BIT HERE. IN 1916, AS PART OF
THAT PROGRESSIVE REFORM ERA THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE CITY OF COMBUS ADOPTED A NEW CITY CHARTER WHICH ESTABLISHED THEIR CITY COUNCIL AS BEING SEVEN MEMBERS ALL BEING ELECTED AT LARGE. REDUCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD BASED POLITICAL MACHINES THAT HAD DOMINATED THAT CITY'S
ELECTIONS IN PREVIOUS YEARS AND TO CREATE A STRONGER CITY WIDE FOCUS IN POLICY MAKING. THE CITY'S ALL AT LARGE SYSTEM WAS CRITICIZED FOR DILUTING THE STRENGTH OFINORITY COMMUNITIES, FOR MAKING IT DIFF
ELECTIONS BECAUSE THEY HAD TO RUN CITY WIDE INSTEAD OF BY SMALLER WARDS. AS OFFICE HAPPENS WITH AT LARGE, THE REPRESENTATION COMES FROM THE
WEALTHIER WIDER HOME -- STILL OVER THE YEARS DESPITE MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO OVERTURN ITS AT LARGE SYSTEM, COLUMBUS VOTERS REJECTED THOSE EFFORTS. BUT IN 2018, COLUMBUS VOTERS APPROVED A CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT CHANGED TH STRUCTURE OF CITY COUNCIL.
THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT CREATED A UNIQUE HYBRID AT LARGE SYSTEM THAT TOOK EFFECT IN 2023 ELECTION. THE CITY WAS DIVIDED INTO NINE DISTRICTS, AND THE COUNCIL ITSELF WAS INCREASED FROM 7 TO 9 SEATS. COUNCIL MEMBER NOW IS ELECTED FROM EACH OF THOSE NINE DISTRICTS, AND
THEY MUST BE A RESIDENT OF THE DISTRICT FROM WHICH THEY'RE ELECTED. HOWEVER, THE UNIQUE TWIST HERE IN COLUMBUS IS THAT ALL NINE DISTRICT SEATS ARE VOT IN THE CITY. IT'S UNIQUE WHAT THEY CALL A HYBRID AT LARGE BY
DISTRICT FORM OF ELECTING THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS. ACCORDING TO THE PROPONENTS WHO PUT THAT QUESTION ON THE BALLOT, THE GOALS OF MOVING TO THIS SYSTEM WERE TO BALANCE THE HYPER LOCAL, NEIGHBORHOOD FOCUSED REPRESENTATION OF A DISTRICT SYSTEM, LIKE WARDS, WITH CITY WIDE POLICY MAKING PERSPECTIVES
AND FULL ACCOUNTABILITY TO ALL VOTERS WHICH IS ACHIEVED BY AN AT LARGE SYSTEM. IN THE LEAD UP TO THE 2018 ELECTION, THE PROPONENTS SAID THAT THIS PROCESS OF ELECTING COUNCIL MEMBERS PRODED LOCALIZED FOCUS WITH CITY WIDE ACCOUNTABILITY.
ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PRESENTATION TONIGHT, KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI -- THE 12 COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE ELECTED IN
TWO SEPARATE CLASSES. SIX OF THEM ARE ELECTED FROM EACH OF THE CITY'S SIX DISTRICTS. AND SIX OF THE MEMBERS ARE ELECTED AT LARGE BUT THEY HAVE TO BE RESIDENTS OF THE SIX DISTRICTS. SO MUCH LIKE COLUMBUS, IT'S A LITTLE AWKRD IN TERMS OF HOW THEY'RE NOT REALLY AT LARGE BUT
ARE CHOSEN IN AN AT LARGE FASHION. IN BOTH OF THESE CASES, THE INTENT OF THAT HYBRI SYSTEM IS TO SECURE IN A SINGLE LEGISLATIVE BODY THE ADVANTAGES OFFERED BY NEIGHBORHOOD BASE DISTRICT SYSTEM LIKE OUR WARDS, WITH THE ADVANTAGES OF A BROADER
CITY WIDE PERSPECTIVE ACHIEVED THROUGH AT LARGE REPRESENTATION. IRONICALLY, THE MOST POPULATED OF THESE CITIES SHOWN HERE, SAN DIEGO, CHICAGO AND COLUMBUS. THEY HAVE THE FEWEST NUMBER OF
COUNCIL MEMBERS ELECTED. DENVER IS A CONSOLIDATED CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT. COUNCIL MEMBERS THERE HAVE THE FUNCTION. HERE IT WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF HAVING BOTH HENNEPIN COUNTY AND CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS RESPONSIBILITIES. MILWAUKEE HAS
THE LARGEST SIZE ON THIS LIST IN THE PRESENTATION WITH 15 FULL-TIME COUNCIL MEMBERS. THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS PER MEMBER IS SHOWN ON THE FAR RIGHT COLUMN. AS WOULD BE EXPECTED, MINNEAPOLIS AND MILWAUKEE HAVE THE SMALLEST MEMBER TO CONSTITUENCYRATIO. TO
PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, CONSIDER THAT YOU COULD DOUBLE THE SIZE OF A WARD IN MINNEAPOLIS AT ABOUT 32,000 PEOPLE AND IT WOULD STILL BE LESS THAN THE SIZE OF A COUNCIL MEMBER DISTRICT IN DENVER. WHERE THE COUNCIL MEMBER AS I SAID HAS BOTH CITY AND COUNTY
RESPONSIBILITIES. AT THE EXTREME END, EVEN IF YOU WERE TO QUADRUPLE THE POPULATION OF ONET BE EQUAL TO THE POPULATION IN A SINGLE WARD IN SAN DIEGO WHICH RANKS AMONG THE TOP 10 MOST
POPULATED CITIESN THE UNITED STATES. HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER AND STRUCTURE. -- HALF OF THE JURISDICTIONS HAVE EIGHT STANDING COMMITTEES. AND THAT INCLUDES MINNEAPOLIS. SOME WHAT. AND I'LL GET TO THAT IN A
BIT. SAN DIEGO AND COLUMBUS BOTH HAVE 11 COMMITTEES. THE COMPOSITION, THE LEADERSHIP, THE ASSIGNED JURISDICTIONS OF COMMITTEES AND ET CETERA, VARY SIGNIFICANTLY BETWEEN JURISDICTIONS. THESE A NOT SPECIFIC DATA POINTS THAT ARE CAPTURED IN MY SUMMARY. SOME OF
THE CITIES HAVE RULES THAT REQUIRE ALL OF THEIR COMMITTEES TO INCLUDE A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF MEMBERS. SOME HAVE RULES THAT -- OTHERS PROVIDE THAT THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT IS AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEES.
BECAUSE OF THAT VARIABILITY AND ALL OF THE MEMBERSHIPS AND OPERATIONS ARE DETERMINED, I HAVEN'T CAPTURED THAT DETAIL HERE. SIMPLY TO SHOW THESE COUNCILS OPERATE WITHIN CITY SYSTEMS. AND THE AVERAGE NUMBER IS EIGHT. THE KEY POINT IN MY OPINION IS THAT THE CITIES IN
OUR LIST MUCH LIKE MINNEAPOLIS RELY ON A STANDING COMMITTEE SYSTEM TO CONDUCT THE BULK OF ITS LEGISLATIVE DUTIES. THAT INCLUDES THE RESPONSIBILITY AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL FOR DEVELOPING, REVIEWING, REFINING AND RECOMMENDING THE FULL RANGE OF MATTERS THAT FALL WITHIN THE
PURVIEW OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY. COMMITTEES ARE ALSO THE PRIMARY FORUM -- THEY ARE THE PRIMARY MEANS FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN PUBLIC HEARINGS AND PUBLIC MEETINGS, THAT'S HOW THE PUBLIC ENGAGES WITH THE COUNCIL IS
PRIMARILY THROUGH ITS COMMITTEES. ALL OF THESE FACTS APPLY TO THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AS WELL. FINALLY, THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE NUMBER OF STAFF MEMBERS PER COUNCIL MEMBER. THE FARTHEST RIGHT HAND SLIDE
COLUMN. THESE ARE AIDES FOR INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS. MOST JURISDICTIONS IN OUR POOL PROVIDE TWO AIDES PER COUNCIL MEMBER AS IS DONE IN MINNEAPOLIS. YOU CAN SEE SAN DIEGO HERE IS THE MAJOR OUTLIER WHERE EACH MEMBER HAS A PERSONAL STAFF OF BETWEEN 7 AND 12 AIDES.
HOWEVER, I THINK THIS IS PARTLY EXPLAINED BY THE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER CONSTITUENCY RATIO PER MEMBER, WHICH IS ABOUT QUADRUPLE THAT OF EACH WARD IN MINNEAPOLIS. IF WE WERE TO ELEVATE THE POPULATION OF OUR WARDS, OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD
HAVE TO ESCALATE AS WELL TO PROBABLY SEVEN OR EIGHT AID AIDES. -- LARGELY BY SPECIAL ACTS OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE STTING IN THE LATE 1960s.
ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO THE DATA PRESENTED TONIGHT, IT DOES UNDERSCORE A THEME THAT RUNS ACROSS ALL THESE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS AND IS TRUE OBVIOUSLY FOR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATURES. THE GREATER INVESTMENT YOU PUT INTO STAFF THAT WORK AT THE LEGISLATIVE
INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL, THE LESS NEED FOR POLITICAL STAFF. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE BOTH ENDS OF THAT SPECTRUM AND THERE ARE TRADE OFFS. MINNEAPOLIS AND IN THESE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS, THE COUNCILS HAVE ACCESS TO BOTH
POLITICAL AIDES AND TO PROFESSIONAL STAFF. WHICH IS A GOOD SEGUE INTO THE NEXT SLIDE WHERE I'M PROVIDING DETAILS ABOUT STAFF RESOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED TO COUNCILS IN OUR LIST OF COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS. THESE SH THE STAFF POSITIONS THAT ARE
SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE POLITICAL AIDES DESCRIBED IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE WHICH ARE FOCUSED ON SUPPORTING INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS. HERE, WHAT WE'RE TRACKING ARE T PROFESSIONAL CENTRALIZED STAFF THAT PROVIDE THAT INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE COUNCIL IN COMPARABLE
JURISDICTIONS. IN EACH CASE, THERE IS A CADRE FOCUSED ON INSTITUTION AND PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES. EACH CITY IS STRUCTURED DIFFERENTLY, ALL
PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF STAFF REPORT FOR COUNCILS THAT INCLUDE THESE FUNCTIONS. AND I'LL HIGHLIGHT THEM. THIS INCLUDES POLICY LEVEL RESEARCH, REFERENCE AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOCUSED
ON POLICIES AND OTHER PROPOSALS. EMERGING ISSUES AND TRENDS. OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS. LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT WHICH INCLUDES THE FULL RANGE OF SECRETARIAT SERVICES REQUIRED BY ALL LEGISLATIVE
BODIES, INCLUDING CODIFICATION OF ACTS AND PROCEDURAL GUIDAN. OPERATIONS WHICH COVERS DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS, BUDGET, FINANCIAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS AND SUPPORT AND OUTREACH COMMUNICATIONS. OUTREACH AND
ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES. A MYRIAD OF CONSTITUENT SERVICES AND SIMILAR FUNCTIONS IN SUPPORT OF BOTH THE COUNCIL AND ITS MEMBERS. THE MINNEAPOLIS COUNCIL AND ITS MEMBERS HAVE ACCESS TO BOTH TYPES OF STAFF RESOURCES.
HOWEVER, UNLIKE THESE COMPARABLE CITIES, MOST OF THESE FUNCTIONS IN MINNEAPOLIS ARE NEW. WE'VE BEEN CREATING THESE TYPES OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF SYSTEMS FOR THE COUNCIL SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE EXECUTIVE MAYOR
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL IN 2021. MINNEAPOLIS IS ON THE LOWER END OF THE LIST IN TERMS OF OVERALL NUMBER OF DEDICATED STAFF THAT WORK FOR THE BODY. HERE WE HAVE ABOUT 34 FULL-TIME STAFF THAT WORK IN THE SAME OR SIMILAR CAPACITIES AS THOSE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS. EVEN IN
MILWAUKEE, WHICH I WOULD SAY IS THE NEAREST JURISDICTION TO MINNEAPOLIS BOTH IN TERMS OF ITS SIZE, CITY'S POPULATION AND LOCATION IN THEPPER MIDWEST. THE NUMBER OF DEDICATED PROFESSIONAL STAFF THERE FORHE MILWAUKEE COMMON COUNCIL IS ABOUT DOUBLE WHAT WE PROVIDE FOR
THE MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL. THIS SLIDE FOCUSES ON THE BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT. THESE BUDGET NUMBERS INCLUDE TOTAL DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATIONS. AND THEY'VE BEEN ADJUSTED TO PROVIDE
AS MUCH APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON AS POSSIBLE. A BIG DISCLAIMER. FOR THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY COUNCIL, THIS INCLUDES THE CITY COUNCIL,
THE 13 MEMBERS, THE 13 WARD OFFICES, THE TWO AIDES PER WARD OFFICE, THE ENTIRE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK, ALSO INCLUDES ALL MY ELECTIONS AND VOTER SERVICES DIVISION WHICH HAS NOT MUCH TO DO WITH CITY COUNCIL, OUR RECORDS AND INFORMATION
GOVERNANCE DIVISION WHICH SERVES THE ENTIRE ENTERPRISE. WE ALSO HAVE A DOCUMENT SOLUTION CENTER WHICH IS PRINT SHOP, IF YOU WILL. NOT MUCH TO DO WITH CITY COUNCIL. AND THE ENTIRE OFFICE OF CITY AUDITOR. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR BUDGET AND YOU TAKE AWAY ALL OF THE RESRCES THAT AREN'T SPECIFICALLY TIED TO
COUNCIL, IT REDUCES TO THOSE 34 STAFF I TALKEDBOUT UNDER THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK, AND THEN THE 20 -- I THINK IT'S 28 AIDES THAT WORK FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, AND IT WOULD REDUCE OUR BUDGET TO ABOUT 51% OF THIS TOTAL. SO ABOUT $11 MILLION IS WHAT WE
WOULD PUT ON HERE AS WHAT REALLY TIES TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AND THEN WITHIN THAT $11 MILLION, WE GIVE EACH YEAR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER WHAT WE CALL THEIR WARD BUDGET SHOWN ON THE FAR RIGHT COLUMN. CALLED THE MEMBER
BUDGET. WE GIVE EACH MEMBER $10 SUPPORT THEIR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS. PRIMARILY THIS IS GOING TO SUPPORT THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES, TRAINING DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCES, CONSTITUENT SERVICES, COMMUNICATIONS LIKE THEIR NEWSLETTERS AND COMMUNITY BASED
WARD MEETINGS. SO IT IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY. YOU CAN SEE BY COMPARISON. THE BUDGET FOR THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENTS FOR COMPARABLE CITIES, THIS IS MORE THAN JUST CITY COUNCIL. WE'VE DONE OUR BT TO IDENTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OR DEPARTMENTS THAT
SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL IN THESE CITIES. IN SAN DIEGO, IT'S THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY CLERK, IT'S THE OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT ANALYST. YOU CAN SEE HOW I'M ADDING THOSE UP. THEY CAN BE QUITE LARGE DEPARTMENT BUDGETS. YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH THEY ALLOCATE FOR THEIR USE SIMILAR
TO WHAT WE DO FOR OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS. IT'S QUITE A DISPARITY BETWEEN WHAT WE OFFER OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THEIR WARD OPERATIONS AND WHAT THE COMPARABLE CITIES DO. SO WE DON'T HAVE CONFIRMED DATA FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER. AS YOU CAN SEE. AND WHAT WE'VE NOTED FOR COLUMBUS IS THE TOTAL BUDGET FOR THE DEPARTMENT. I
MENTIONED THEY ARE IN TRANSITIONED AFTER CHANGING THE WAY THEY ELECT THEIR COUNCIL. MORE DETAILS TO COME THERE. IN TERMS OF INDICATORS, THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THE LEGISLATIVE BODY UNDER ITS CONTROL. THIS
SLIDE PRESENTS THAT INFORMATION. THAT SUMMARIZES. I KNOW IT WAS LONG AND TEDIOUS, BUT A FAST WALK THROUGH OF COMPARATIVE MINNEAPOLIS AND THE FIVE. THE NEXT SERIE OF SLIDES I HAVE ARE ABOUT FINDINGS. IF YOU'D LIKE, MR. CHAIR, I CAN COMPLETE THE
FINDINGS OR STOP FOR QUESTIONS NOW. >> LET'S STOP FOR QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. ARE THERE QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW? THAT COMMISSIONERS HAVE. >> COMMISSIONER DOHERTY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. MR. CHAIR. MR. CASEY, IN TERMS OF THE RESOURCES BUDGET SUPPORT, THE $11 MILLION, IF YOU CUT OUT THE CLERK AND THE VOTERS AND THE
AUDITORS, DO YOU KNOW IF THE OTHER CITIES MENTIONED HERE HAVE OTHER ASPECTS CONNECTED TO THEIR BUDGETS? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER DOHERTY, YES, THEY DO. THAT'S WHY I TRIED TO PREVIEW OR AT LEAST EXPLAIN
THOSE DEPARTMENT BUDGETS ON THIS SLIDE THAT I'M REFERRING TO. THOSE OTHER DEPARTMENTS LIKE SAN DIEGO, SEATTLE, MILWAUKEE, THAT'S THE ENTIRETY OF THE ONE OR MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS THAT THAT CITY CREATES THAT HAS A TIE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. SO LIKE IN
MINNEAPOLIS, MY OFFICE HAS A DIRECT TIE TO THE COUNCIL. AND I HAVE CERTAIN STAFF THAT WORK FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE CLERKS AND MY ADMINISTRATIVE TEAM, FOR EXAMPLE, WORK WITH AND FOR THE COUNCIL. BUT MY ELECTIONS AND VOTER SERVICES TEAM DO NOT. BUT THEY'RE ALL ACCOUNTED FOR IN
THAT $22.6 MILLION. >> SO WHAT YOU'VE TRIED TO DO HERE THE BEST YOU CAN IS DO APPLES TO APPLES IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY COVER. >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. SHOULD I GO ON TO FINDINGS?
>> IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, LET'S G ON TO FINDINGS. >> SO I'LL START WITH FINDINGS ON ELECTIONS. BASED ON JURISDICTIONS WITH RESPECT TO ELECTIONS, THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS CONDUCTS REGULAR
ELECTIONS IN ODD NUMBERED YEARS. ECIFICALLY FOLLOWING HIGH PRESIDENTIAL YEAR. CONSISTENT WITH MOST OF THE LARGEST MUNICIPALITIES IN THE UNITED STATES ACCORDING TO RESEARCH BY
SITE LINE INSTITUTE. THE PRACTICE DATES BACK TO THE PROGRESSIVE REFORM ERA IN THE EARLY 20th CENTURY AND WAS INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE A GREATER FOCUS ON LOCAL NON-PARTISAN POLITICS AND ISSUES. MINNEAPOLIS
IS THE ONLY CITY TO USE RANK CHOICE VOTING OR RCV FOR A GENERAL ELECTION ONLY. NO PRIMARY. ALL OF OUR COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS STILL USE A PRIMARY D GENERAL FORMAT. THOUGH THERE ARE SLIGHT DEVIATIONS NOTED ABOUT HOW THEY CONDT A PRIMARY OR HOW THEY CONDUCT GENERAL. ACCORDING TO
FAIR VOTE, 39 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES USE RANK CHOICE VOTING IN 2025. THAT IS THE MOST CURRENT DATA I HAVE. IN MINNESOTA, FIVE. MINNEAPOLIS,
SAINT PAUL, BLOOMINGTON, MINNETONKA. MINNEAPOLIS DOES NOT IMPOSE TERM LIMITS ON ITS ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE ONLY COMPARABLE CITIES ARE SAN DIEGO AND DENVER TT DO. SO IN TERMS OF THE ELECTIONS INDICATORS,
WOULD BE THE TIMING OF ELECTIONS WHETHER OR NOT TO TRANSITION TO EVEN YEAR ELECTIONS. I KNOW THAT IS A SUBJECT THIS BODY HAS BEEN RESEARCHING AND DISCUSSING FOR YEARS. IT'S SOMETHING ALREADY ON THE DOCKET. FINDINGS RELATED TO REPRESENTATION. HERE AGAIN BASED
ON THE RESEARCH OF COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS, THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS HAS ONE OF THE LARGEST SIZED COUNCILS. NATIONWIDE THE AVERAGE SIZE IS FIVE MEMBERS. A MAYOR AND FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS. THE SIZE OF A
CITY COUNCIL IS DETERMINED BY A NUMBER OF FACTORS NOT LEAST OF WHICH INCLUDES ANY LEGAL MANDATES, A CITY'S POPULATION, THE COMPLEXITY OF SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED AS WELL AS THE POLITICAL DYNAMICS OF EACH
PARTICULAR COMMUNITY. LARGER CITIES, THAT GROUPING OF 50 LARGEST CITIES IN THE STATE, THEY TEND TO HAVE LARGER SIZE COUNCILS. 13 IS IRONICALLY THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO WE FIT RIGHT IN WITH
THERE. HOWEVER, MINNEAPOLIS HAS THE SMALLEST MEMBER TO CONSTITUENT RATIO AMONG THE COMPARABLE CITIES. AND ONE OF THE SMALLEST AMONG THE TOP CITIES IN THE NATION. THE AVERAGE FOR THE 50 LARGEST
CITIES IS ONE MEMBER PER 76,000 CONSTITUENTS. THOUGH THIS OBVIOUSLY VARIES FROM CITY TO CI. MINNEAPOLIS HAS ONE OF THE LOWEST WHEN YOU CONSIDER FOR US IT'S ONE FOR ABOUT 32,000. THIS LEVEL OF REPRESENTATION OF THE
MEMBER TO CONSTITUENT RATIO IS PARTICULAR AN AREA FOR POSSIBLE CONSIDERATION. IF YOU CONSIDER THOSE HYBRID MODELS THAT WERE LOOKED AT COLUMBUS AS TWO EXAMPLES. FINDINGS ABOUT
COUNCIL'S POWERS AND FUNCTIONS. BASED ON THE RESEARCH OF OUR POOL OF COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS, THE MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL OPERATES IN A GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE THAT INCLUDES A FULL-TIME LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AND A SEPARATELY ELECTED MAYOR WHO IS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER OF THE CITY. -- ALL OF THE COMPARABLE CITIES HAVE COUNCILS LIKE MINNEAPOLIS THAT HAVE THE SAME GENERAL POWERS AND THE SAME CORE FUNCTIONS. THESE INCLUDE POLICY MAKING AUTHORITY, GENERAL OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES, AND OF COURSE KEY TO IT REPRESENTATION OF
THEIR CONSTITUENTS. MINNEAPOLIS IS THE ONLY CITY AMONG THE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS WHERE COUNCIL'S LEGISLATIVE AUTHORI IS DILUTED BY OTHER ELECTED BODIES CREATED WITHIN OUR CHARTER. SPECIFICALLY IN MINNEAPOLIS, POWERS THAT
NORMALLY WOULD BE ASSIGNED BY CITY COUNCIL HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED BY THE -- THE PRESENCE OF THESE TWO ELECTED BODIES DIMINISHES THE CENTRALIZED POLICY MAKING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL IN MINNEAPOLIS. NONE OF THE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS HAVE
SEPARATE ELECTED BODIES TO RIVAL THE AUTHORITY OF THEIR COUNCILS. -- WHICH HAVE THE EFFECT OF DIMINISHING THE AUTHORITY OF THEIR CHIEF EXECUTIVE. THIS COULD INCLUDE
ELECTED CITY ATTORNEYS, TREASURERS, ACCOUNTANTS, THEY'RE USUALLY CALLED COMPTROLLERS. WE'VE CHOSEN TO HAVE LEGISLATIVE OR POLICY MAKING BODIES. THE EFFECT IS TO REDUCE THE OVERALL POWER OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THE
CITY GOVERNMENT -- ACCOUNTABILITY, EFFICIENCY, CLARITY O ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. THESE WERE SOME OF THE KEY ISSUES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED WHICH RESULTED IN THE ADOPTION -- THESE ARE SOME OF THE SAME ARGUMENTS WHICH LED TO
THE ADOPTION OF A STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN PORTLAND IN 2022. THE VALUES OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY, OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND CLARITY ON ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, ALONG WITH A LIMITED SET OF ELECTED
OFFICIALS -- WHICH IS PLISHED BY THE NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE. THE MODEL CITY CHARTER DEFAULTS TO A SINGLE ELECTED BODY THAT HOLDS ALL LEGISLATIVE POLICY MAKING AUTHORITY COMBINED WITH
CENTRALIZED EXECUTIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY EITHER IN A SINGLE OFFICER THAT'S ELECTED CALLED THE MAYOR, OR APPOINTED CALLED THE CITY MANAGER. PUBLISHED IN 2021. THAT MODEL CITY CHARTER STRONGLY
DISCOURAGES DIFFUSING OR DECENTRALIZING -- IN PREFERENCE OF A SINGLE LEGISLATIVE BODY AND A SINGLE CENTRALIZED EXECUTIVE OFFICER. IN TERMS OF THE LIST OF COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS AND ITS VALUATION, MINNEAPOLIS HAS A TOTAL OF 25 ELECTED OFFICIALS,
ONE MAYOR, 13 ELECTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ALL BY DISTRICT, AND NINE BOARD OF COMMISSIONER, AND BOARD OF ESTIMATE AND TAXATION, WHICH INCLUDES TWO COMMISSIONERS ELECTED AT LARGE. AND A PARTRIDGE IN A PEAR TREE.
25 IN MINNEAPOLIS, 10 IN SAN DIEGO, THE BIGGEST JURISDICTION WE COMPARED TO. ONE MAYOR AND A NINE-MEMBER COUNCIL ALL BY DISTRICT. SEATTLE HAS A TOTAL OF 11 ELECTED OFFICIALS. ONE MAYOR, ONE NINE-MEMBER CITY COUNCIL
THAT HAS 7 BY DISTRICT AND TWO AT LARGE. MILWAUKEE HAS A TOTAL OF 19, THAT'S THE MOST OTHER THAN US. WE'RE AT 25. THEY HAVE 19. 15-MEMBER CITY COUNC ALL BY DISTRICT. ONE CITY ATTORNEY.
ONE CITY COMPTROLLER. ONE TREASURER. ONE LEGISLATIVE BODY. COLUMBUS HAS A TOTAL OF 10 ELECTED OFFICIALS. ONE MAYOR AND A NINE-MEMBER CITY COUNCIL. REMEMBER I SAID THEY JUST RECENTLY CHANGED. AND DENVER HAS
A TOTAL OF 16 ELECTED OFFICIALS, ONE MAYOR, A 13-MEMBER CITY COUNCIL ALL ELECTED BY DISTRICT LIKE MINNEAPOLIS, ONE ELECTED CITY AUDITOR, AND ONE ELECTED CLERK RECORDER. OF COURSE THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THERE IS A
CONTINUING BENEFIT TO THE DIFFUSED POWER DYNAMIC IS A POLITICAL ONE AND COULD BE TAKEN UP BY THE CITY CHARTER COMMISSION. IT'S CERTAINLY AN INTERESTING POINT TO ADDRESS THE PERCEIVED LOSS OF POWER AND AUTHORITY BY THE CITY COUNCIL SINCE THE CREATION OF THE
EXECUTIVE MAYOR STRUCTURE. HAVING A PARK BOARD AND BET ELECTED ACTUALLY TAKE AWAY FROM THE -- BET ARE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, NOT SEPARATE FROM IT. HERE, I'M TALKING ABOUT
COUNCIL'S STRUCTURE LIKE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS. THE MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL HAS A PRESIDENT WHO IS A COUNCIL MEMBER CHOSEN BY THE COUNCIL TO SERVE AS ITS PRESIDING OFFICER. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, DUTIES
ASSIGNED BY CHARTER AND COUNCIL RULES. THE CHARTER IS REALLY QUITE SILENT ON THE ROLE OF PRESENT. THERE WAS -- PRIOR TO AND SINCE THE GERNMENT
STRUCTURE REORG, NOTHING CHANGED.ND THE CHARTER DOES NOT DEFINE WHAT A PRESIDING OFFICER IS. AND I'LL POINT OUT THAT IN OTHER CITIES, THEY HAVE CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENTS WHO DO
NOT PRESIDE. THERE ARE OTHERS, EITHER THE MAYOR OR THE ELE . ELECTED. -- OURS IS BUT THAT ISN'T PRESCRIBED BY CHARTER. IT SIMPLY SAYS THEY'RE THE PRESIDENT. I DON'T THINK THE
CHARTER SAYS IT'S THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IT SAYS THEY'RE THE PRESIDENT. IT SAYS THE PRESIDENT IS A VOTING MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF TAXATION, A SEPARATE BODY WHERE THEY'RE ONE OF SIX VOTES. THEY ARE FIRST IN THE FORMAL
CHAIN OF COMMAND OR LINE OF SUCCESSION. THE CHARTER ALWAYS SAID THAT THERE COULD NEVER BE A VACANCY IN THE OFFICEF MAYOR. AND THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT IS FIRST IN THAT CHAIN OFCOMMAND. YOU MIGHT EVEN THINK OF THEM AS
THE DEPUTY MAYOR. LIKE THE COMPARABLE CITIES, THE MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL ALSO OPERATES WITH A COMMITTEE SYSTEM WHERE THE BULK OF ITS LEGISLATIVE POLICY MAKING AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS ARE CONDUCTED. THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF STANDING COMMITTEES IS EIGHT.
AND THAT ALIGNS VERY WELL IN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AT LEAST FOR 24-25 TERM. THESE ARE MATTERS ABOUT THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF THE COUNCIL'S LEGISLATIVE DY. AND IN MY OPINION ARE MATTERS BEST LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNCIL.
IN TERMS OF COUNCIL EXECUTIVE INTERACTIONS.HIS IS A SENSITIVE BUT VERY -- SEPARATION OF POWERS IS UNUSUALLY STRONG BUT VERY SPECIFIC. ACCEPT AS
THIS CHARTER OTHERWISE PROVIDES NEITHER THE CITY COUNCIL NOR ANY COUNCIL COMMITTEER MEMBER MAY USURP -- FOR WHICH THIS ARTICLE 7 PROVIDES. THOSE WORDS ARE
QUITE SEVERE USURP, INVADE OR INTERFERE. THE MODEL CITY CHARTER I REFERENCED EARLIER DOES NOT CONTAIN SIMILAR LANGUAGE. NOR DO STATUTES OF MINNESOTA WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT. WHICH IS CALLED THE OPERATIONAL PLAN B
CREATED UNDER THE STATUTORY CODE. IN BOTH OF THOSE CASES, THE LANGUAGE IS LESS EXTREME OR HARSH. IT MERELY PROVIDES THAT EXCEPT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INQUIRY, THE COUNCIL SHALL DEAL WITH AND CONTROL THE ADMINISTRATI SERVICE THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER DISP NEITHER THE COUNCIL NOR ITS MEMBER
SHOULD GIVE -- EITHER PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY. IT'S A LITTLE BIT FRIENDLIER. A LITTLE SOFTER. THE MINNEAPOLIS PROVISION ABOUT SEPARATION OF POWERS USING STRONGER, STRICTER, AND HARSHER
LANGUAGE WHICH SETS UP POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT BETWEEN THE BRANCHES. ALTHOUGH WE DID ASK GUIDEHOUSE TO INCLUDE IN ITS EVALUA EVALUATIONS. SO TOOLS, METHODS,
SYSTEMS THAT MIGHT BE IN PLACE TO HELP SUPPORT EFFECTIVE LEGISLATIVE INTERACTIONS AND COLLABORATIONSSADLY, THERE WERE NO CONSISTENT FINDINGS IN THAT REPORT. THE THEME IS THIS, THAT THESE MATTERS TEND TO BE BASED ON THE PERSONALITIES AND
REFERENCES OF INDIVIDUAL ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND IN THE ABSENCE OF FORMALIZED STRUCTURES, SYSMS OR PROTOCOLS, SUCH ACTIONS WERE THE RESULT OF DETERMINED EFFORTS BY THOSE ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO WERE INVOLVED. IN MINNEAPOLIS,
THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL HAVE ADOPTED -- WHILE RESPECTING THE SEPARATION IMPOSED UNDER THE CITY CHARTER. THAT ENTERPRISE POLICY PROVIDES TWO PATHWAYS FOR ENGAGEMENT, INFORMAL INQUIRIES AND LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVES. SOME
COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS HAVE SIMILAR POLICIES OR PROCEDURES TO ADDRESS HOW THEIR COUNCIL IS ABLE TO INTERACT WITH AND RECEIVE SUPPORT FROM THECITY'S BUREAUCRACY UNDER THE MAYOR. BUT HERE AGAIN, THE EECTIVENESS OF THOSE TYPES OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IS HEAVILY DEPENDENT
ELECTED OFFICIALS INVOLVED TO MAKE USE OF THEM APPROPRIATELY AND TO FOLLOW THEM CONSISTENTLY. HERE ON LEGISLATIVE RESOURCES, AS WE'VE INDICATED, MINNEAPOLIS LIKE COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS PROVIDES ITS COUNCIL AND ITS
MEMBERS WITH DEDICATED STAFF RESOURCES TO SUPPORT OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS AS A BODY. THAT INCLUDES A SMALL TEAM OF AIDES THAT SUPPORT EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND A DEDICATED APOLITICAL PROFESSIONAL TEAM TO PROVIDE INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE
WORK OF COUNCIL AND COUNCIL COMMITTEES. AND THE COUNCIL HAS CONTROL OVER ITS OWN BUDGET TO SUPPORT THEIR OPERATIONS. WITH THAT, I EVER EXHAUSTED ALL OF YOU AND COMPLETED BY PREPARED
PRESENTATION. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT MY SUMMARY TONIGHT MPLY SCRATCHES THE SURFACE OF THE RESEARCH DONE BOTH BY GUIDEHOUSE AND RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT TEAM. MY GOAL WORKING WI YOU, MR. CHAIR, WAS TO SIMPLY GET THIS PRESENTATION BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. TOOK
A LONG TIME TO GET IT. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WAITING ON IT. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE YOU CONSIDER AND GIVE SOME FURTHER DIRECTION ON PRIORITIES OR POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS BASED ON THE DATA THAT I'VE PRESENTED. I ALSO THINK THAT IF YOU ARE AMENABLE TO THIS, MR. CHAIR, WE MIGHT GET
SOME FEEDBACK ON WHICH POINTS ARE OF MOST INTEREST AND PRESENT NEXT YEAR ON THOSE SPECIFIC ITEMS OF INTEREST. THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE A VERY BROAD BRUSHED APPROACH. OBVIOUSLY, I
DON'T THINK WE CAN ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE ISSUES I'VE COVERED. BUT IF THERE ARE CERTAIN ONES THAT ARE OF PARTICULAR INTEREST, I THINK WE WOULD TAKE YOUR LEAD ON THAT. >> MR. CARL, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS AND THE
EFFORT YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS. THESE ARE YOUR SLIDES BASED ON A ROUGH DRAFT REPORT OR PRELIMINARY REPORT DONE BY GUIDEHOUSE. WHEN WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE HAVING A COMPLETED REPORT FROM GUIDEHOUSE?
>> MR. CHAIR, THE REPORT FROM GUIDEHOUSE CAN BE FINISHED IMMEDIATELY. IT WAS MY HOPE THAT HAVING HAD SORT OF THAT BROAD OVERVIEW OF ALL OF THE DATA BUT LIMITING IT TO SIX JURISDICTIONS
THAT THIS BODY WOULD SAY, AS AN EXAMPLE, WE'RE VERY INTESTED IN PURSUING SOME OF THIS INFORMATION OR REPRESENTATION OR COUNCIL RESOURCES. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE INFORMATION HERE AND THERE. AND THEN WE COULD FINALIZE THAT WITH GUIDEHOUSE AND ASK THEM TO COME
BACK JANUARY SORT OF TIMELINE. >> WHICH SEGUES INTO ANOTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE. I TAKE IT THAT THEIR REPORT HAS MUCH MORE DETAIL AND IS MUCH LARGER THAN WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. AND SO IS
THERE VALUE IN HAVING THEM SHOW UP? WE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO GET THE REPORT PRIOR, SAY FOR EXAMPLE, OUR JANUARY MEETING TO GO THROUGH THAT REPORT AND THEN HAVE GUIDEHOUSE PRESENT. SO WE WOULD HAVE SOME TIME TO FORMULATE QUESTIONS. THAT'S ONE
THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS TO ACTUALLY HAVE A REPORT AND THEN HAVE GUIDEHOUSE COME IN AND WE COULD ASK THEM SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. AND SO IF THAT IS POSSIBLE, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A
REPORT DONE, FINALIZED AND THEN HAVE THEM AVAILABLE IF POSSIBLE FOR JANUARY MEETING. AND YOU WERE GOING THROUGH WHAT WE ASKED THEM TO LOOK AT, I NOTICED SOMETHING WE DIDN'T ASK, WHICH
IS THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA ON DEPARTMENT HEADS, WHICH COMMISSIONER CLEGG IS NOT HERE TO GIVE HIS REPORT. BUT I THINK MOST OF US WHO WERE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THAT
REPORT IS. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK GUIDEHOUSE IN THESE COMPARATIVE CITIES IF THEY COULD DO THAT IN THIS TIMEFRAME TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD APPOINTMENT, CONFIRMATION PROCESS IN THESE CITIES. SO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION TO KINDA LOOK AT WHAT DO THESE CITIES DO AS FAR AS THEIR OWN APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION PROCESS. WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON WHAT WE THINK IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE. I THINK IT WOULD BE VALUABLE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION FROM OTHER CITIES. HOW DOES THEIR
WORLD PLAY OUT AND WHO DO THEY, WHO DOES THE MAYOR APPOINT HIM OR HERSEL WHEN DOES THE COUNCIL GET TO WEIGH IN, WHAT ARE THEIR POSITIONS. IF THAT IS SOMETHING YOU THINK THEY COULD INCLUDE EITHER AN ADDENDUM TO
THIS REPORT BUT HAVE THAT ALSO AT OUR JANUARY MEETING. >> MR. CHAIR, YES. AND I WOULD HASTEN TO ADD I ALSO THINK THERE WOULD BE A BENEFIT IN ASKING MR. HAWKINS TO COME AT THE SAME TIME. HIS REPORT THAT WAS DONE
AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL ABOUT COMPARATIVE COUNCILS AND DEPARTMENTS WAS ACTUALLY DONE FIRST. WE ACTUALLY SENT THE REPORT TO GUIDEHOUSE. -- TO ADDRESS BOTH THE RESEARCH BOTH THAT'S BEEN DONE THAT YOU
HAVEN'T SEEN, THE FULLER SCOPES OF THOSE, AND ANY FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> OKAY. LET'S TAKE THAT AS A DIRECTIVE IF WE COULD FOR YOU TO HAVE THEM COMPLETE THE CURRENT REPORT, DO THE ADENDA, AND THEN
HAVE THEM APPEAR FOR OUR JANUARY MEETING. >> YEAH. HAPPY TO DO. >> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR AND MR. CARL. THIS IS AMAZING. THIS IS I BELIEVE IN MY OPINION RESOURCES AND TIME WELL SPENT ON GETTING
THESE NUMBERS. SO THANK YOU TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND GUIDEHOUSE. WHAT I'M CURIOUS AND WHAT I THINK IS MISSING FROM THE FINDINGS UNDER ELECTIONS. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS DATA IS POSSIBLE, BUT I AM VERY CURIOUS
TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY COST SAVING BENEFITS TO HAVING OUR LOCAL ELECTIONS LINE UP WITH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEARS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M VERY CURIOUS ABOUT. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE REALLY
INTERESTED IN SEEING IF GUIDEHOUSE CAN PULL THAT INFORMATION OR IF YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION TO HOW MUCH DOES AN ELECTION COST THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS TO RUN. THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE AS A PART OF
THIS REPORT. THANK YOU. >> NOTED. >> COMMISSIONER COOPER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MR. CARL, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE POWERS AND FUNCTIONS SLIDE 2 WHICH FOCUSED ON THE PARK BOARD
AND BET. YOU MENTIONED THAT IN OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES THAT GENERAL PRACTICE IS TO HAVE PARK FUNCTIONS FOLDED INTO THE CITY COUNCIL. DO YOU HAVE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THA WORKS FUNCTIONALLY? LIKE IF IT'S A COMMITTEE STRUCTURE OR IF
THERE'S SOME OTHER STRUCTURE FOR HOW THAT WORKS INTHER CITIES. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER COOPER, I DON'T. I DO KNOW PERSONALLY FROM SOME JURISDICTIONS WHERE I HAVE PERSONAL CONTACTS THAT THINGS LIKE THE PARK BOARD UNDER THE
COUNCIL MEANS THERE'S A DEPARTMENT THAT'S UNDER THE PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTRATION. AND THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE A PARKS COMMITTEE SO THAT THAT PROVIDES THE CONNECTION. BUT THAT'S NOT UNIVERSAL. AND I CANNOT SPEAK TO COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS MIGHT HAVE.
>> THANKS. >> I FORGET MY OWN NAME, TOO. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MR. CASEY, THIS HAS BEEN A REALLY INSIGHTFUL AND ENLIGHTENING PRESENTATION. AND I WOULD AGREE
WITH WHAT WAS SAID EARLIER THAT THIS IS RESOURCES WELL SPENT. AND I WOULD ECHO THE CHAIR IN SAYING THAT I WOULD ABSOLUTELY APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE REPORT AND -- THE FULL REPORT. AND I COME TO THIS
QUESTION AS A FORMER LEGISLATIVE STAFFER. I WORKED FOR THE SENATE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS A SPECIAL PLACE IN MY HEART FOR STAFFERS. IN ANY
OF THE DATA, WAS THE DIFFERENT TASKS OF MEMBER STAFF SIMILAR TO WHAT MINNEAPOLIS DOES? I MEAN, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, WAS IT SCHEDULING? WAS IT CONSTITUENT
SERVICES, WAS IT ENGAGEMENT? I ASK BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN I WAS A MINORITY STAFFER IN THE SENATE, I WAS THE ONLY STAFFER FOR A SENATOR WHO REPRESENTED 85,000 PEOPLE. AND IT WAS JUST ME. AND SO I DID IT ALL. SO I'M JUST
CURIOUS, SO WHAT DOES -- LIKE IN SAN DIEGO, A STAFF OF 7 TO 12 PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR ONE MEMBER. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, I WL SAY THAT OUR RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT POLITICAL AIDES AT A MUNICIPAL LEVEL TEND TO HAVE A BROAD ARRAY
OF TASKS AND FUNIONS THAT I THINK CAN BE SORT OF BUCKETED OR CLASSIFIED INTO FIVE BIG GROUPS. ONE, MOST IMPORTANTLY, THEY DO IS CONSTITUENT SERVICE. LIKE THE POLITICAL AIDES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR INTERACTING WITH, BEING THAT
CONNECTION BETWEEN THE ELECTED CONSTITUENT SERVICES IS A HIGH PRIORITY YOU FIND. THE SECOND ONE THAT PROBABLY EQUALS THAT IS THE SCHEDULING AND CALENDAR MANAGEMENT OF THE MEMBER'S TIME.
RUNNING THE OFFICE MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULING TOGETHER. CONSTITUENT SERVICES, COMMUNICATIONS MAYBE AS AN OUTGROWTH OF CONSTITUENT SERVICES. COMMUNICATING ON BEHALF OF THE MEMBER BOTH IN FORMAL WAYS SUCH AS MAINTAINING
THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA, WEBSITE. BEING THAT VOICES BETWEEN ESTABLISHED GROUPS, NEIGHBORHOODS, BUSINESSES, NONPROFITS. PROJECT MANAGEMENT I WOULD SAY IS BROADLY AN UMBRELLA
TERM. PROJECT MANAGEMENT COULD INCLUDE SPECIAL PROJECTS IN THE WARD. EVENT PLANNING. TRACKING AND MAINTAINING PROPOSALS FOR RESOLUTIONS THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER IS SPONSORING. THOSE TEND TO BE THE BIG BUCKET LEVEL THE
WORK OF POLITICAL STAFF. IT'S REALLY FOCUSED ON THE WORK OF THE MEMBER THEMSELVES. AND THE PREREQUISITE FOR HIRING POLITICAL STAFF AS OPPOSED TO THE INSTITUTIONAL STAFF TENDS TO BE AROUND POLITICAL AGREEMENT AND ALIGNMENT BETWEEN THE AIDE
AND THE MEMBER. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. ONE FOLLOW UP I HAD. SO AGAIN, THE MEMBERS THAT I WORKED FOR HAD REQUIREMENT THAT ANY CONSTITUENT WHO REACHED OUT, I
NEEDED TO RESPOND TO THEM WITHIN 24 HOURS. IN THIS RESEARCH, SPECIFICALLY AGAIN AROUND PARTISAN MEMBER STAFF, WAS THERE
ANY STUDY ON HOW LONG IT TOOK FOR A CONSTITUENT TO GET RESPONDED TO? WAS MINNEAPOLIS SORT OF GOOD IN TERMS OF CONSTITUENT RESPONSE TIME WHERE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, YOU KNOW, SAN DIEGO AGAIN WITH 7 TO 12, EVEN THOUGH THEY REPRESENT SIX
TIMES THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT WE DO HERE. H WERE RESPONSE TIMES COMPARATIVELY? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER NEY, YOU'VE ASKED SOME GOOD POINTS. I WANT TO BE
CIRCUMSPECT AND CAREFUL IN MY RESPONSE. AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, ASKING POLITICIANS AND POLITICIANS STAFF DO YOU HAVE PERFORMANCE METRICS FOR YOUR JOBS AND CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THE AVERAGE TURNAROUND TIME, NO ONE IS TRACKING THAT. OR AT LEAST THEY'RE NOT GOING TO TELL
US THAT. WE'VE ASKED. WE'VE ALSO ASKED DO YOU HAVE CERTAIN STANDARDS, MANUALS, RESOURCE GUIDES. THOSE ARE THINGS THAT ARE KEPT REALLY CLOSE TO THE VEST BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL ELECTED OFFICIAL AND THEIR STAFFS. THOSE ARE NOT SHARED RESOURCES. >> I APPRECIATE THAT AND I CAN
CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND HOW ELECTED OFFICIALS MIGHT NOT WANT TO PUBLICIZE IF THEY ARE NOT ADHERING TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS. I WILL SAY AGAIN I RESPONDED TO 95% OF THE CONSTITUENTS WITHIN 24 HOURS. I THINK THERE PROBABLY COULD BE A FEW OUT THERE
PROBABLY NOT LISTENING BECAUSE I DID NOT REPRESENT A MEMBER FROM THIS AREA WHO SAID THAT JOSH DID NOT GET BACK TO ME WHIN 24 HOURS. SO I'M NOT GOING TO SAY EVERYONE. I'M CERTAINLY NOT SAYR OTHER FOLKS THAT I'VE REACHED
OUT TO AT THE CITY HAVE TAKEN LONG TO GET BACK TO ME BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL FANTASTIC. I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF RESPONSE TIMES ARE IMPACTED. I WOULD HOPE THAT THE BIGGER THE STAFF, THE QUICKER A RESPONSE WOULD BE. I GUESS I WILL JUST HAVE TO HOPE
THAT THAT IS TRUE. >> AS DO WE ALL. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. TO YOUR
POINT, COMMISSIONER, I'LL JUST MENTION THAT ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO THE CITY INSTITUTED THE 311 SYSTEM. AS MANY CITIES HAVE ACROSS THE CITY. AND THAT SYSTE
DOOR FOR CONSTITUENT COMPLAINTS AND QUESTIONS AND TO TAKE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR. I WAS PART OF THE TEAM THAT HELPED TRAIN THE CITY
DEPARTMENTS ON THAT. I WAS NOT A LEADER BUT I WAS A TEAM MEMBER. WE OUGHT NOT TO FORGET THAT THIS CITY HAS A 311 SYSTEM THAT IT RECEIVES THOUSANDS OF CALLS EVERY YEAR. AND IT WAS PUT IN
PLACE IN PART TOAKE THE BURDEN OFF OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. NOW COUNCIL MEMBERS AT THE TIME I CAN TELL YOU WERE NOT ALL THAT ENTHUSED ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE DIRECT CONTACT. BUT THE ULTIMATE CITY DECISION WAS TO PROCEED WITH THIS, WHICH HAD
BEEN IN OTHER CITIES. WE WERE NOT THE FIRST. AND IF YOU TALK TO, YOU KNOW, THAT GROUP, THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY RECEIVED THOUSANDS OF CALLS. THEY'D FUEL THEM TO THE RIGHT DEPARTMENTS. THEY TYPICALLY NOTIFY COUNCIL MEMBERS. BUT THA
CONSTITUENT OPERATION. SO THE OTHER -- IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, I HAD JUST SORT OF A QUESTION FOR MR. CARL. I CAN'T HELP NOTICE THAT OUR TWIN CITIES SAINT PAUL IS NOT IN THIS GROUP. I KNOW THAT AT THE BEGINNING YOU SAID
WELL YOU LOOKED AT CITIES WITH FULL-TIME COUNCILS. I CAN'T HELP BUT THINK THERE ARE CITIES OUR SIZE THAT FUNCTION OKAY WITHOUT FULL-TIME COUNCILS. CAN YOU SAY
A WORD OR MORE WHILE SAI PAUL WAS NOT INCLUDED. WE ARE CONSTANTLY COMPARING OURSELVES WITH HOW DID SAINT PAUL DO, ET CETERA. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER, A GOOD POINT. AND I SHOULD BE CLEAR,
SAINT PAUL WAS INCLUDED. IT JUST WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE SELECT GROUP OF FIVE THAT I PULLED. THAT'S BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A FULLIME COUNCIL. SO THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPLES TO APPLES. HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE DA ON THEM. I CAN SHARE AT A HIGH
LEVEL, AS I'M SURE MOST OF YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A FULL-TIME MAYOR. THEY HAVE A PART-TIME COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO LOOK FOR HELP. THIS IS MY LIFE LINE. I THINK IT'S SEVEN OR NINE COUNCIL MEMBERS. SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS. EACH COUNCIL MEMBER HAS TWO
AIDES, JUST LIKE OURS, WHO ARE POLITICALLY APPOINTED AND REPORT TO THEM. AND THEY ALSO HAVE A VERY SMALL CENTRAL STAFF THAT SUPPORTS THE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONS. THEY HAVE A CHIEF OF STAFF. THEY HAVE A CITY CLERK. THEY HAVE A BUDGET ANALYST. BUT MUCH MORE MODEST
STAFF RESOURCES THAN DOES THE MINNEAPOLIS COUNCIL. AND I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE MODEST RESOURCES. BUT IT IS A PART-TIM COUNCIL. AND FOR THAT REASON, I DID NOT PUT THEM IN HERE BECAUSE OUR GUIDENESS WAS IT HAS TO BE A CHIEF EXECUTIVE MAYOR WITH A
FULL-TIME COUNCIL UNDER A HOME RULE CHARTER. BUT IT IS A GOOD POINT. >> COMMISSIONER GARCIA. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. MR. CARL, I ALSO WANT TO SAY THIS IS GREAT INFORMATION. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE WHOLE REPORT. I HAVE TWO
QUESTIONS. ONE IS ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL RESOURCES, COUNCIL SALARY. AND TO CROSS REFERENCE FULL-TIME PART-TIME. I THINK THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING. AND THEN MY QUESTION SIMILAR TO
COMMISSIONER COOPER'S, ABOUT THE PARK BOARD AND BET, WHAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN WAS WHAT FUNCTIONS DO THEY HAVE THAT OUR CURRENT COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE? I MEAN, I'M SURE THEY HAVE, YOU
KNOW, CONSTITUENCY PEOPLE THAT THEY DO BUDGETING. THEY DO THEIR CERTAIN FUNCTIONS THAT BODIES HAVE. BUT WHAT DO THEY SPECIFICALLY DO THAT WOULD BE
NEW TO OUR COUNCIL SHOULD OUR COUNCIL HAVE HAD THOSE FUNCTIONS? >> HAPPY TO ADDHOSE TO THE LIST AS WELL. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AND THEN I'LL INV >> IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MR. HAWKINS, I DON'T HAVE A PLANNED PRESENTATION. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR
EITHER MR. HAWKINS OR MR. CARL ON HIS PRESENTATION? THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION. MR. HAWKINS, APPARENTLY WE'LL GET TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS NEXT MONTH. WITH THAT, THE CLERK WILL RECEIVE THAT
REPORT. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE REPORT FROM THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE WORK GROUP. COMMISSIONER CLEGG HAD A CONFLICT TODAY. SO I DISCUSSED
WITH CO-CHAIR GARCIA. I'LL JUST GIVE THE SHORT UPDATE BECAUSE EVERYBODY PRETTY MUCH WAS THERE EXCEPT FOR ONE OR TWO OF US. BUT AT THAT MEETING LAST TIME, THEY CONSIDERED THE APPOINTMENT OF DEPARTMENT HEADS. AND THERE WERE THE THREE OPTIONS THAT WERE
PRESENTED. THE ONE OPTION WHICH WAS KIND OF THE STATUS QUO WHERE
COUNCIL -- WE ENDED UP VOTING ON OPTIONS ONE AND TWO. THE MAYOR'S PROPOSALHICH WAS THE THREE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND POLICE AND FIRE. THE MIDDLE GROUND ICH WAS THE MAYOR'S PROPOSAL PLUS PUBLIC WORKS AND CPED. THEN WEUST TOOK A VOTE ON THAT. IT
ENDED UP THAT THE MAYOR'S PROPOSAL 6 IN FAVOR AND 5 IN FAVOR OF THE OTHER METHOD. SO KIND OF A SPLIT ON WHERE WE WERE EXACTLY ON THAT. SO THAT'S THE
REPORT. AT THIS TIME, I'M JUST GOING TO RECEIVE THE REPORT BECAUSE THE HOPE IS WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO RECEIVE INFORMATION BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD ON ANY FINAL DECISIONS ON DEPARTMENT HEADS. AND SO AT THAT POINT, WE'LL HAVE HOPEFULLY THE IORMATION FROM GUIDEHOUSE.
AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A FULLER DISCUSSION AND TRYING TO FINALIZE WHERE WE END UP ON WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH COUNCIL MEMBER APPROVAL OF DEPARTMENT HEADS. THAT MOVES US THEN TO
EVEN-YEAR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. AND WE'RE HEARING FROM KATIE SMITH. IS THIS THE CITY CLERK? AND DIRECTOR OF ELECTIONS VOTER SERVICES, AS WELL AS JON MARTIN.
JUST A STATUS OF WHAT'S GOING ON. >> YES, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR GINDER, AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS KATIE SMITH. HAPPY TO BE JOINED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR MARTIN. WE ALSO HAVE THE NEXT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11 WHICH TALKS ABOUT THIS YEAR'S MUNICIPAL ELECTION. TOGETHER, WE'VE PREPARED A PRESENTATION THAT WILL ADDRESS BOTHF THOSE TOPICS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR MARTIN IS GETTING TOGETHER OUR PRESENTATION. HE'S GOING TO SPEAK FIRST A BIT ABOUT TURNOUT AND NUMBERS AND THE DATA FROM
THIS YEAR'S MUNICIPAL. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO EXPRESS HOW IMMENSELY PROUD I AM OF OUR TEAM, AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR MARTIN'S LEADERSHIP AS WELL. ALL THE WORK THAT WENT IN TO THE OUTREACH, THE ACCESS TO THE BALLOT BOX AND THE ACCESSIBILITY
THAT ATTRIBUTED TO THE NUMBERS WE SAW AT THISYEAR'S ELECTION. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TURN IT OVER TO YOU. >> THANK YOU, DIRECTOR ALL RIGHT. SO THIS SLIDE PROVIDES A NATIONWIDE COMPARISON OF MUNICIPAL TURN OUT AMONG THE
FOUR LARGEST CITIES HAVE HAD MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS THIS NOVEMBER. MINNEAPOLIS, SAINT PAUL, SEATTLE, AND NEW YORK CITY. MINNEAPOLIS HAD A TURN OUT OF 55% REPRESENTING 147,702 VOTES. THIS TURN OUT MARKS THE
HIGHEST TUR OUT THE CITY HAS HAD FOR ITS MUNICIPAL ELECTION IN ABOUT 50 YEARS. MINNEAPOLIS TURN OUT WAS ONLY SLIGHTLY LESS THAN ATTLE'S 55.5%. STILL FAIRLY IMPRESSIVE SINCE SEATTLE MAILS OUT BALLOTS TO EVERY VOTER IN THE CITY WHICH IS A WAY THEY
HELP INCREASE THEIR TURNOUT. BY COMPARISON, SAINT PAUL WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER WITH ABOUT 40% TURN OUT. NEW YORK CITY SAW A LOWER ENGAGEMENT AT 40.3%.
MINNEAPOLIS CONTINUES TO PERFORM -- THE AVERAGE OF WHICH IS ABOUT 37.1% TURN OUT AVERAGE NATIONWIDE FOR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. THAT'S BASED ON SOME RESEARCH THAT THE UNIVERSITY O CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO DID IN
2024. THIS SHOWS TURNOUT TRENDS IN MINNEAPOLIS ACROSS THE LAST THREE MUNICIPAL CYCLES FROM 2017, 2021, AND 2025. FM 2017 TO 2025, THE CITY HAS SEEN AN
INCREASE IN BOTH OVERALL TURNOUT. ALSO AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF VOTES CAST. TURNOUT IN 2017 WAS 42.5%, WITH ABOUT 105,000 BALLOTS CAST IN 2021 SAW
A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE TO 54% WITH ABOUT 145,000 VOTES CAST. ANOTHER SLIGHT INCREASE THIS YEAR. 55% TURNOUT WITH ADDITIONAL 2,000 MORE PEOPLE VOTING. ABOUT 147,000 VOTES CAST. TH AGAIN CONTINUES TO
SHOW THE UPWARD TRAJTORY OF THE PAST THREE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS IN BOTH TURNOUT AND VOTES CAST. THIS W THE HIGHEST TURNOUT FOR THE CITY IN THE LAST 50 YEARS. THIS SLIDE COMPARES
THE METHOD OF VOTING ACROSS THE LAST THREE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. FOR 2025, 82% OF VOTERS CAST BALLOTS ON ELECTION DAY. AN ADDITIONAL 18% OF BALLOTS WERE CAST EARLY THROUGH THE VARIOUS
METHODS OF EARLY VOTING. THAT CLUDES ABOUT 15,000 VOTES CAST AT 980 EAST HENNEPIN AVENUE. 9,000 VOTES CAST BY PEOPLE BY MAIL. POP-UP LOCATIONS. TWO
LOCATED IN NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. ONE IN SOUTH CENTRAL MINNEAPOLIS. ONE ON THE U OF M CAMPUS. AND ONE AT THE PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING. 1200 PEOPLE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THOSE ONE-DAY
POP-UPS. VOTERS CAST BALLOTS EARLY THROUGH THE OTHER METHODS OF EARLY VONG. COMPARED TO 2021. ABOUT 20% OF PEOPLE CAST A BALLOT EARLY. THIS WAS STILL SOME RESIDUAL LEFT OVER FROM THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC. PEOPLE WERE
STILL TENDING TO VOTE MORE BY MAIL IN THE 2021 ELECTION. IN 2017, ONLY 11% OF VOTERS CAST BALLOTS EARLY. INCREASING TREND OF YEAR AFTER YEAR OF VOTERS VOTING MORE OFTEN EARLY AND
SHIFTING AWAY FROM ELECTION DAY. THIS SLIDE PROVIDES A WARD LEVEL COMPARISON BETWEEN THE 2021 MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND THE 2025 MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF NUMBER OF
VOTES CAST AND PERCENTAGES. THE CAST ON ELECTION DAY CAST EARLY. THE VOTER TURNOUT IN EACH WARD. AND THEN THE CHANGE IN RAW VOTE COMPARED TO THOSE ELECTIONS IN EACH WARD. CITY'S TURNOUT INCREASED SLIGHTLY FROM 54% TO
55% AND THAT EQUED TO ABOUT 2,365 MORE VOTES CAST THIS YEAR COMPARED TO 2021. A FEW HIGHLIGHTS FOR THIS COMPARISON. WARD 2 SAW THE BIGGEST DECREASE IN VOTES CAST DROPPING 2,844
VOTES CAST. WARD 9 SAW THE LARGEST GAINS IN VOTES CAST GAINING ABOUT 1400 VOTES. THIS IS PRIMARILY DUE TO THE REDISTRICTING. WARD 2 LOST A VERY HIGH TURNOUT PRECINCT IN
REDISTRICTING. WARD 9 GAINED TWO HIGH TURNOUT PRECINCTS. SO THAT'S THE MAIN REASON FOR THAT FLUCTUATION IN VOTES. ONCE AGAIN THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST MINNEAPOLIS WARDS, WARD 12, 11 AND 13 REMAIN THE HIGHEST
TURNOUT WARDS ACROSS BOTH ELECTIONS ALL SEEING TURNOUT ABOVE 64%. THIS SLIDE IS THE SAME AS THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. INSTEAD IT JUST COMPARES TURNT
FROM 2017 TO 2025. COMPARED TO EIGHYEARS AGO, OVER 41,000 MORE VOTERS CAST THE BALLOT THIS YEAR COMPARED TO THE 2017 ELECTION, WHICH IS ABOUT A 28% INCREASE IN VOTES CAST. INCREASE
IN TURNOUT OF ABOUT 12.5%. THE OVERALL WARD 12 SAW THE GREATEST NUMBER OF VOTES CAST. WARD 7, 1, 8, 11 AND 13, ALL SAW ABOUT 4,000 ADDITIONAL VOTES CAST COMPARED TO EIGHT YEARS AGO. THE
REASON WHY WARD 12 SAW THE MOST VOTES CAST IS AGAIN DUE TO REDISTRICTING. IT GAINED THE HIGH TURNOUT PRECINCT THAT WARD 2 LOST WAS SHIFTED INTO WARD 12, WHICH IS THE COOPER NEIGHBORHOOD. WHICH IS ONE OF OUR HIGHEST TURNOUT
NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE ENTIRE CITY. ONCE AGAIN, EVERY WARD SAW INCREASE IN TURNOUT IN RAW VOTES CAST COMPARED TO EIGHT YEARS AGO, EXCEPT WARD 2, AGAIN, DUE TO REDISTRICTING. THIS SLI MAY
BE FAMILIAR TO SOME OF OUR PREVIO CONVERSATIONS ABOUT EVEN YEAR ELECTIONS. SO THIS SLIDE REVIEWS HISTORICAL TURNOUT AND MODELS POTENTIAL IMPACT. SHIFTING TO THE EVEN YEARS. 30%
REDUCTION OR ROLL OFF FOR DOWN BALLOT MUNICIPAL RACES HELD IN EVEN-YEAR ELECTIONS. THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN 2024 W 78.1% TURNOUT, WHICH WOULD
IMPLY A MUNICIPAL TURNOUT OF 54.7% IF YOU APPLIED -- WHICH IS ROUGHLY EKWQUIVALENT TO WHAT WE
HAD THIS YEAR. 2020, TURNOUT WAS 81.3. AROUND 57%. LOOKING AT MUNIPAL CYCLES, 2025 TURNOUT
WAS 55%. PAST ELECTIONS SUCH AS 2013, 33%. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS ARE ISOLATED TO ODD YEARS YOU SOMETIMES WILL HAVE VERY LOW TURNOUT ELECTIONS. THE TAKEAWAY CAN BE IF YOU ALIGN
MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS IN EVEN YEARS, YOU DO GET HIGHER TURNOUTS. HIGHER TURNOUT IN AN EVEN YEAR ELECTION. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO DIRECTOR SMITH TO TALK ABOUT EVEN-YEAR ELECTIONS AND SAINT PAUL'S IMPLEMENTATION AS WELL. >> THANK YOU.
>> MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION OF MR. MARTIN. >> GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER. >> WHAT DO YOU ATTRIBUTE TO THE GENERAL TREND OF INCREASING TURNOUT IN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS?
>> CHAIR GINDER, COMMISSIONER PEY, YOU SEE TURNOUT IS OFTENTIMES BASED ON THE COMPETITIVENESS O RACES. I THINK WE'VE SEEN REALLY SINCE 2013, THAT BOTH THE MAYORAL ELECTIONS HERE, PLUS CITY
COUNCIL ELECTIONS. AND THEN IN 2021 WITH THE THREE BALLOT QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAVE SHOWN TO BE VERY COMPETITIVE RACES WHICH BRINGS PEOPLE OUT TO VOTE MORE OFTEN THAN IF THERE WAS NOT A COMPETITIVE RACE LIKE WE'VE
SEEN IN LIKE IN 2009, WHEN MAYOR HAD TOKEN OPPOSITIO WHEN MAYBE THE MAYOR'S RACE WAS NOT AS EXCITING. PEOPLE ARE LESS INCLINED TO VOTE. >> THANK YOU.
>> GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> THE NUMBERS WHERE YOU SAID 55% VOTER TURNOUT. THAT'S 55% OF THE PEOPLE -- >> CORRECT. >> IS THERE NUMBER OF PEOPLE NOT REGISTERED TO VOTE?
>> YES. CHAIR GINDER, COMMISSIONER, SO THE CITY HAS ROUGHLY NOW ABOUT 260,000 REGISTERED VOTERS. THERE'S ABOUT 320,000 PEOPLE ELIGIBLE BUT SOME MAY NOT BE REGISTERED. ROUGHLY,
THERE'S ABOUT 70,000 PEOPLE IN THE CITY WHO COULD VOTE, WHO ARE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE BUT WHO ARE NOT REGISTERED TO VOTE FOR WHATEVER REASONS. THEY MAY NOT CHOOSE TO REGISTER TO VOTE.
>> MS. SMITH. >> THANK YOU. CHAIR GINDER AND COMMISSIONERS, I WANTED TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON SAINT PAUL AND THEIR TRANSITIONVER TO AN EVEN-YEAR CYCLE. THIS NOVEMBER MARKED SAINT PAUL'S FINAL ODD-YEAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION AS THEY ARE NOW TRANSITIONING TO
ALIGN THEIR MUNICIPAL RACES WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL CYCLE. TO ENABLE THAT SHIFT, SAINT PAUL CHOSE TO SHORTEN THIS YEAR'S TERM FROM FOUR YEARS TO THREE TO GET THEM ON ALIGNMENT. WE SAW
RAMSEY COUNTY ALSO MAKE SOME CHANGES THIS YEAR THAT I WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT, INCLUDING UPDATE THEY MADE TO THEIR BALLOT DESIGN. RACES THAT WILL HAVE TO APPEAR ON THE SAME BALLOT. I'LL
ALSO SPEAK ABOUT RAMSEY COUNTY'S IMPLEMENTATION OF USING RCV TABULATION. SOFTWARE TO PRODUCE THEIR RESULTS. FIRST, WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT BALLOT DESIGN. RAMSEY COUNTY SHIFT TO
A MORE COMPACT LAYOUT OF THEIR RCV RACES TO FIT WITH THE OTHER RACES. THAT'S IN AN EFFORT AS WE TALKED ABOUT THERE'S SEVERAL CHALLENGES TO MERGING RCV RACES ON TO A BALLOT CARD WITH THE
REGULAR STYLE RACES AS WELL. AND THERE YOU HAVE IMPLEMENTED THIS NEW MORE COMPACT DESIGN IN AN EFFORT TO CONTAIN IT TO ONE BALLOT CARD. I WILL NOTE THEY USE A DIFFERENT VENDOR THAN IS UTILIZED BY HENNEPIN COUNTY.
THIS WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE AN OPTION FOR MINNEAPOLIS. BUT THERE ARE DESIGN OPTIONS AVAILABLE THROUGH OUR VENDOR. THIS WOULD TRY TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT I SPOKE ABOUT BEFORE ABOUT A MULTI-CARD BALLOT AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONSEQUENCES.
SO THINGS LIKE BALLOT RECONCILIATION ISSUES, EQUIPMENT PROGRAMMING, PRINTING AND TRANSPORTATION -- THE COMPLEXITY OF TRANSPORTIN AN ACCOUNTING FOR THOSE EXTRA BALLOT CARDS. AND THIS REDESIGN WAS AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT FITS ON
ONE BALLOT CARD. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IT GOES AWAY FROM WHAT WE'RE USED TO OF TRADITIONAL COLUMN STYLE WHERE EVERY CANDIDATE LISTED OUT THREE DIFFERENT TIMES FOR THE THREE SELECTIONS AND GOES CLOSER TO A
COMPACT GRID STYLE WHERE ONE CANDIDATE IS LISTED ONCE. AND SELECTIONS. THEY GET UP TO FIVE RANKINGS IN SAINT PAUL. SECONDLY, THEY BEGAN UTILIZING THE RCTAB'S SOFTWARE. KEY
OBSERVATIONS FROM THEIR EXPERIENCE THIS YEAR, THEY WERE ABLE TO REPORT THEIR FIRST ROUND RESULTS AT AROUND 10:49 P.M. ON ELECTION NIGHT. AND THEY DECLARED THEIR UNOFFICIAL WINNER WITHIN THEIR MAYORAL RACE JUST AFTER MIDNIGHT. THERE WOULD BE
CHALLENGES WITH UTILIZING RCTAB IN MINNEAPOLIS THAT WEREN'T PRESENT THIS YEAR IN THE ELECTION THAT SAINT PAUL HOSTED. RIT NOW WE'RE USING RCTAB AS A VALITION TOOL CONFIRMING THE OUTCOMES THAT WE PRODUCE
MANUALLY TOUGH OUR MANUAL TABULATION PROCESS. BUT IT IS NOT USED AS OUR OFFICIAL TABULATOR. TO ADOPT RCTAB WE WOULD NEED CHANGES TO CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT WOULD ALIGN OUR
PROCESSES WITH THE ABILITIES OF TH PIECE OF SOFTWARE. AND WITHIN THAT EXPERIENC THAT SAINT PAUL HAD THIS YEAR AND WHAT THEY WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE , THERE ARE FACTORS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT HERE IN
MINNEAPOLIS. THOSE INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THE FILE SIZES AND THE JUST VOLUME OF CONTESTS COMPARED TO WHAT THEY HAD THIS YEAR WITH WHAT WE HAVE NORMALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE OFFICES. AND THEN ALSO BECAUSE IT WILL BE
IN AN EVEN YEAR IN THE FUTURE. THE FILE SIZES THEY'RE DOWNLOADING TO PRODUCE THOSE FILES THAT THEY'RE USING TO TABULATE WITH WIL BE A MUCH LONGER PROCESS. THEY ALSO HAVE JUST ONE SINGLE COUNTY RAMSEY THAT'S DOING ALL OF THE REPORTING. IT'S NOT A PROCESS
THAT'S SPLIT BETWEEN THEIR COUNTY AND THEIR CITY. AND LIKE I HAD MENTIONED WITH THE EVEN-YEAR PROCESS, IT'S ALSO MORE HEAVILY LOADED WITH OTHER BACKGROUND PROCESSES. SO OUR
TIMELINE AND OUR WORK FLOW WOULD NECESSARILY LOOK DIFFERENT. THE TO WOULD HELP MODERNIZE. WE DO STILL HAVE THE SAME OUTSTANDING ISSUES THAT WE HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT
PREVIOUSLY WHEN IT COMES TO LEGAL CONCERNS. SO THOSE INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THE LIMITATION TO ONE BALLOT CARD THAT EXISTS WITHIN STATUTE. WE DID SPEAK A
LITTLE BIT HOW RAMSEY HAS ADDRESSE THAT WITH THEIR BALLOT LAYOUTS. ALSO THE STATUTE IN RULE WHICH REQUIRES THE STATE BALLOTSO FOLLOW THE STATE'S EXAMPLE BALLOT. THAT EXAMPLE
BALLOT DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE RCV. IF WE WERE EVER TO RUN OVER ON TO A SECOND BALLOT CARD, IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO REVISIT THE BALLOT RECONCILIATION STATUTES. FINALLY, ANY TABULATION SOFTWARE
MUST COMPLY WITH VOTING SYSTEMS CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS WHICH ARE GOVERNED UNDER STATUTE AND RULE. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING ADMINISTRATIVELY AT OUR OFFICE WHEN IT COMES TO EVEN-YEAR ELECTIONS AND RANK CHOICE VOTING IN GENERAL, I HAVE AN UPCOMING
MEETING THAT IS YET TO BE SCHEDULED WITH OURSELVES AND RAMSEY COUNTY TO REVIEW PROCESSES MORE IN DETAIL AND PROCESSES THEY USED THIS YEAR. AND WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON AS
FAR AS PROCESSES AHEAD OF SWAP OVER IN THE PRESIDENTIAL YEAR. WE'RE ALSO PRIORITIZING RCTAB AGENDA IN THE UPCOMING SESSION. THAT'S WHERE WE STAND AS OF TODAY. DEPUTY DIRECTOR MARTIN
AND I ARE HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> DOES MINNEAPOLIS HAVE ANY LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES TO TRY TO GET SOME OF THESE STATUTES CHANGED THAT WOULD MAKE SOME OF THESE ISSUES OR PROBLEMS GO AWAY?
>> S. GREAT QUESTION. CHAIR GINDER AND COMMISSIONER SMITH. THIS HAS LONG BEEN ON OUR LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM. AND EACH YEAR WE'VE WORKED ON THIS AS FAR AS THE SOFTWARE PIECE OF IT
GOES. SINCE THERE'S NO STATUTE GOVERNING RANKED CHOICE VOTING AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS ALLOWED FOR IN THE STATUTORY CITIES, IT'S JUST IN THE CHARTER CITIES AND LIVES AND RESIDES WITHIN CHARTER, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME SORT OF SOMETHING
PASS AT THE STATUTORY LEVEL FOR THE STATE TO CERTIFY THE EQUIPMENT BASED OFF OF. SO WE HAVE TESTIFIED, WE'VE WRITTEN LETTERS IN SUPPORT ANY TIME THERE'S BEEN ANY SORT OF
LEGISLATION BROUGHT FORWARD REGARDING STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT RCV OR PIECE THAT ADDRESSES THAT. AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO THAT THIS LEGISLATIVE CYCLE. >> ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION. YOU SAID YOU USED THE RCTAB TO
VALIDATE THE RESULTS. I WAS WONDERING DID IT EQUAL WHAT YOUR TABULATIONS WERE? >> CHAIR GINDER AND COMMISSIONER SMITH, YES, IT CONSISTENTLY MATCHES. THERE ARE PROCESSES THAT WE DO BECAUSE OF MANUAL
TABULATION THAT I SPEAK OF NEEDING CHANGED WITHIN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. BUT THE RC SOFTWARE CAN'T DUPLICATE. WHILE THE OUTCOMES ALWAYS SHOW THE SAME, THE POINTS IN TIME WHEN SOMEONE IS ELIMINATED DON'T
NECESSARILY MATCH UP. THAT'S BECAUSE THE SOFTWARE DOESN'T BATCH ELIMINATE. WE BATCH ELIMINATE FOR TIME SAVINGS REASONS. >> COMMISSIONER COOPER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
REGARDING THE BALLOT DESIGN, WOULD MINNEAPOLIS STILL HAVE A CHALLENGE WITH THE LENGTH OF OUR -- LIKE IF WE WERE ABLE TO ADOPT THAT COMPACT GRID, I THINK IT'S MY UNDERSTDING THAT THERE WOULD STILL BE A BALLOT DESIGN ISSUE BECAUSE OF ELECTIONS FOR
BET AND PARK BOARD WOULD LIKELY MAKE AN EVEN-YEAR BALLOT OVER ONE CARD, IS THAT RIGHT? IS THAT NOT RIGHT? >> CHAIR GINDER AND COMMISSIONER COOPER, THERE ALWAYS COULD BE CHALLENGES WITH IT, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE START THINKING ABOUT
WHAT IF WE RUN INTO QUESTIONS AND THINGS THAT WE HAVEN'T CONTEMPLATED AS FAR AS LENGTH GO. WE'VE HAD SOME VENDORS THAT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PRODUCE OUR SAMPLES WITH OUR MUNICIPAL PLUS PRESIDENTIAL YEAR AND FIT
THEM ON TO ONE CARD. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I'VE SEEN FROM OUR CURRENT VENDOR. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT I'VE SEEN OUT THERE. I THINK THERE STILL WOULD BE A LOT OF BACKGROUND WORK TO BE DONE TO ENSURE WE COULD STAY WITHIN ONE CARD. ALSO, THAT EQUIPMENT AND THAT PROCESS
RESIDES AT THE COUNTY LEVEL VERSUS AT OUR OWN LEVEL. SO DEFINITELY SOMETHING ADMINISTRATIVELY I CAN CONTINUE WORKING ON. >> THANKS. >> COULD I ASK A FOLLOW UP ON THAT QUESTION?
>> YES. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER. >> MR. CHAIR, DIRECTOR, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THE LEGISLATURE WAS GOING TO LOOK IN
TO CHANGING THAT LAW REQUIRING THE ONE CARD, AND IT JUST DIDN'T GET ADDED INTO AN OMNIBUS BILL AT THE END. IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OF CHANGING THAT? >> CHAIR GINDER AND COMMISSIONER
DOHERTY, IT DEFINITELY DID NOT GO THROUGH AND IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING TO CONTINUE TO BE ON ONE OF OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES TO ALLOW -- TO ALSO TO ALLOW A DIFFERENCE IN THE ORDER SPECIFICALLY TO WHERE IF WE EVER DID GO ON TO TWO CARDS,
WE COULD HAVE AN RCV CARD AND A NON-RCV CARD. RIGHT NOW IT ONLY ALLOWS FOR THAT SECOND CARD TO BE JUDICIAL RACES. ITS CERTAIN SOMETHING THAT'S ON OUR RADAR AND I HOPE WILL BE TAKEN UP AGAIN.
>> AS A REMINDER, SAINT PAUL PASSED THIS BY, IT WAS PETITIONER INITIATED CHARTER AMENDMENT. SO THEY DID NOT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF ADVISING THEM ON THE ISSUES THAT MIGHT ARISE OR LEGAL
ADVICE ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT MIGHT ARISE, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST. STUDIED THIS. SAINT PAUL IS IN FACT GOING TO BE -- UNTIL THE LAW CHANGES, THEY'RE GOING TO BE THE
GUINEA PIG THIS UPCOMING ELECTION. IF THERE ARE NO LAW CHANGES, WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO? I'M ASSUMING THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN ELECTION. BUT IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEEHAT THE STATE DOES, THE SECRETARY OF STATE OR INDIVIDUALS, IF THEY
SUE, ABOUT WHAT THEY PUT FORWARD. IF THERE ARE THESE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES. FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE'RE STILL, IN SPITE OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING, WE'RE STILL IN A
POSITION WHERE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE ISSUES. COMMISSIONER KOZAK. >> I BELIEVE THE LEGISLATURE CONSIDERED IT. BUT IF I RECALL, I THINK IT WAS THE LAST DAY OR THE LAST TWO DAYS OF SESSION
THERE WAS A VOTE I THINK IN THE HOUSE AND THEY REJECTED IT. SO IT WAS CONTROVERSIAL. >> COMMISSIONER NEY. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THANK YOU FOR THIS PRESENTATION.
I WILL SAY I VOTED ON THE FIRST DAY OF VOTING THIS YEAR AND IT TOOK ME I THINK LONGER TO DRIVE TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY POLLING PLACE THAN IT DID TOVOTE. OR HENNEPIN COUNTY CENTER IN MINNEAPOLIS. I'M NOT SURE I'M DESCRIBING IT RIGHT. BUT IT WAS
VERY QUICK AND A VERY EASY PROCESS. SO THANK YOU FOR MAKING THAT SO. MY QUESTION IS ABOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN FORMERLY INCARCERATED.
AS OF 2023, MINNESOTA HAS RESTORED THE VOTE AS LAW SO PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN RELEASED FROM PRISON BUT ARE STILL ON PAPER CAN VOTE. DO WE HAVE DATA TH SHOWS WHETHER OR NOT THOSE
INDIVIDUALS HAVE BEEN REGISTERING TO VOTE, AND IF SO, WHAT SORT OF ENGAGEMENT OR WHAT SORT OF TURNOUT HAVE THEY BEEN VOTING? >> CHAIR GINDER AND COMMISSIONER NEY, I DON'T HAVE DATA ON IT. I'M HAPPY TO ASK THE OFFICE OF
THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND SEE WHAT I CAN FIND. I THINK IT WAS ABOUT 30,000 INDIVIDUALS WHOSE RIGHTS WERE RESTORED. FROM MINNEAPOLIS' RSPECTIVE, WE DID DO AN OUTREACH CAMPAIGN AND FOLLOWING THE PASSING. WE DID
THINGS LIKE BILLBOARDS, SPEAKING AT COMMUNITY EVENTS. OUR VOTER OUTREACH TEAM CREATED MATERIALS, ADDITIONAL TRAINING FOR OUR ELECTION JUDGES AND STAFF. I CAN ONLY SPEAK QUALITATIVELY AND NOT QUANTITATIVELY. SO I'LL REFRAIN. BUT I'LL SEE IF I CAN FIND
ACTUAL NUMBERS. WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NUMBERS, I FAILED TO MENTION WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE RCTAB SOFTWARE, AND I WILL JUST INTERJECT, WHEN WE DID OUR TABULATIONS THI YEAR IT TOOK ABOUT FIVE HOURS FOR US TO TABULATE THE OFFICE OF MAYOR.
THAT WAS ABLE TO BE TABULATED USING THE RCTAB SOFTWARE IN ABOUT 20 SECONDS. JUST FOR COMPARISON AND DATA INFO. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MS. SMITH. I SEE NO OTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU
BOTH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION ON THIS. AND THAT, MR. CLERK, I BELIEVE COVERS ITEMS 10 AND 11. SO IF WE COULD JUST RECEIVE THOSE REPORTS. AND THE FINAL ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS PUBLIC COMMENT. AND IS THERE ANYBODY THAT IS REGISTERED FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT, MR. CLERK? >> MR. CHAIR, THERE ARE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SIGNED UP. >> IS THERE ANYONE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? MR. CARL. >> WHY NOT HAVE MORE COMMENTS FROM ME TONIGHT. I SHOULD HAVE SAID THIS EARLIER, BUT I'M
ACTUALLY HAPPY TO SAY AT THE END, I FAILED TO TRACKITH EVERYTHING ELSE GOING ON THAT COMMISSIONER SANDBERG'S LAST MEETING WAS TORRENT. TONIGHT. AND COMMISSIONER SANDBERG I BELIEVE WAS ON THE COMMISSION WHEN I CAME TO THE CITY,
CORRECT? AND SO HAS BEEN A MEMBER OF THE CHARTER COMMISSION THROUGHOUT MY TERM AS CITY CLERK. ALSO HAS BEEN A MEMBER OF OUR ELECTION JUDGE TEAM AND HAS BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THAT REGARD. AND OF COURSE ELECTION JUDGE IS THE BEST PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED. BOTH SERVICE AS
CHARTER COMMISSION AND ELECTION JUDGE, IT'S BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH YOU. YOU'VE BEEN A STEADY, CONSISTENT, CALM PRESENCE ON THE COMMISSION. AS SOMEBODY WHO WORKS CLOSELY WITH THIS BODY AND HAS ALSO WORKED CLOSELY WITH YOO
SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, THE CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY. YOUR WORK LARGELY TENDS TO BE BEHIND THE SCENES BUT OFTEN BECOMES FRONT ROW AS YOU KNOW WHEN YOU MAKE
MAJOR CHANGES. YOU HAVE BEEN BOTH A CONSISTENT MEMBER BUT A QUIET AND DETERMINED MEMBER WHO HAS OFTENTIMES SORT OF BEEN THE SWAYING INFLUENCE ON BIG AND
IMPORTANT THINGS. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE] >> ANY COMMENTS, JAN? >> NO. I AM GLAD TO SEE THERE ARE NEW FACES COMING ON THE CHARTER COMMISSION. I THINK IT'S
GREAT. I THINK THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE ON THE COMMISSION REMEMBER A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN I BELIEVE WE GOT A FEW COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC THAT THE OLD GUARD OR WHATEVER THEY WERE CALLING US NEEDED A LITTLE NEW BLOOD. AND I THINK WE'VE GOT NEW BLOOD WHICH
I THINK IS ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIC. I LOOKED AT MY SCHEDULE FOR NEXT YEAR WHEN MICHAEL REMINDED ME ABOUT THE APPOINTMENT, AND REALIZED I WAS PROBABLY GOING TO MISS AT LEAST THREE OF THE FOUR SCHEDULED MEETINGS. AND THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING. SO THIS WILL
WORK OUT VERY, VERY WELL. AND MY GRANDDAUGHTER IN VANCOUVER WILL BE HAPPY. I GET TO GO TO MORE SOCCER GAMES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THANK YOU, CASEY. >> THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE BUSINESS BEFORE THE CHARTER
COMMISSION. AND WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION, WE STAND ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.