DOCSLIB.ORG

Bernard, Joseph A. During the Debate on 2040, There Were

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bernard, Joseph A. During the Debate on 2040, There Were Bernard, Joseph A. From: Kaia Svien <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 1:07 PM To: Wittenberg, Jason W.; Baldwin, Lisa M.; 2040; Cano, Alondra (External) Subject: [EXTERNAL] City Zoning Standards Planning Commission Members, Staff, and Councilperson Cano, Please take a strong stand against the proposed changes to the city zoning standards. Analysis that I‘ve read makes this sound very much like a gift to developers who most likely do not hav the vision and vlaues needed to construct housing for low income people. I fully endorse the statement below. Please enter my submission into the Public Record. Thank You, Kaia Svien 3632 13th Ave S, Mpls During the debate on 2040, there were many confirmations and promises related to Built Form for Interior 1-2- 3. Just like in the email confirmation from a Council Member, we were assured "the expectation that two- and three-family homes in low-density areas must meet the same height, setback, and massing requirements as single-family homes." I remind you of this now, as it seems certain special interest groups are claiming "Minneapolis 2040 did not go far enough" and have gone so far as to suggest our tax dollars go to fund a named consultant (Opticos) to "evaluate our existing neighborhoods" and "restart the research of Interior neighborhoods." This can be found in a streets.mn post on October 2nd by Janne Flisrand. There should be NO CONSIDERATION of further movement in these areas: 1 - Approval of ADUs to be built on lots where the principal residence is non-owner-occupied. NO! This only turns over more of our NOAH properties to investors instead of local owners, making it impossible for first time homebuyers to have a shot. Investors will clamor to turn one small house or duplex into 3-4 unit property and regular residents won't be able to compete. It also stuffs more people and impervious surface on a lot and eats up greenspace. 2 - Elimination of off-street parking minimums and re-evaluation of parking maximums. NO! This is a gift to developers with the livability of our neighborhoods at risk. The ONLY place this should be a possibility is transit corridors. 3 - Shoreland Overlay Districts - These must be respected, I have seen way too many variances handed out as if there is no protection for the fragile ecosystems adjacent to our precious lakes and waterways. I want to see much stronger language propping this up, and a requirement for a public hearing each and every time there is any request to violate the SOD. 4 - Adding "premiums" to Interior neighborhoods. NO! Our neighborhoods are the jewels of our city and letting developers get premiums to make their projects more profitable, at the cost of less greenspace, more height, shadowing, more impervious surfaces, more lot coverage, more urban heat island effects is 1 unnecessary. Premiums on transit corridors is appropriate, and that provides adequate density without destroying interior neighborhoods. 5 - Current Interior 1-2-3 building envelope must be maintained as promised: - Floor Area Ratio - Setbacks - Lot Coverage - Building Height Kaia Svien, MS Spiritual Guide, Meditation Instructor, Program Designer Mindfulness for Changing Times www.mindfulnessforchangingtimes.com [email protected] 612-722-2650 pronouns: she, hers [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the City of Minneapolis. Please exercise caution when opening links or attachments. 2 Bernard, Joseph A. From: steven Verdoorn <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 10:17 AM To: Wittenberg, Jason W.; Baldwin, Lisa M.; 2040 Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposed to Prroposed changes to Zoning Dear Planning Commissioners and Council Members ‐ Please make these comments a part of the PUBLIC RECORD. During the debate on 2040, there were many confirmations and promises related to Built Form for Interior 1‐2‐3. Just like in the email confirmation from a Council Member, we were assured "the expectation that two‐ and three‐family homes in low‐density areas must meet the same height, setback, and massing requirements as single‐family homes." I remind you of this now, as it seems certain special interest groups are claiming "Minneapolis 2040 did not go far enough" and have gone so far as to suggest our tax dollars go to fund a named consultant (Opticos) to "evaluate our existing neighborhoods" and "restart the research of Interior neighborhoods." This can be found in a streets.mn post on October 2nd by Janne Flisrand. There should be NO CONSIDERATION of further movement in these areas: 1 ‐ Approval of ADUs to be built on lots where the principal residence is non‐owner‐occupied. NO! This only turns over more of our NOAH properties to investors instead of local owners, making it impossible for first time homebuyers to have a shot. Investors will clamor to turn one small house or duplex into 3‐4 unit property and regular residents won't be able to compete. It also stuffs more people and impervious surface on a lot and eats up greenspace. 2 ‐ Elimination of off‐street parking minimums and re‐evaluation of parking maximums. NO! This is a gift to developers with the livability of our neighborhoods at risk. The ONLY place this should be a possibility is transit corridors. 3 ‐ Shoreland Overlay Districts ‐ These must be respected, I have seen way too many variances handed out as if there is no protection for the fragile ecosystems adjacent to our precious lakes and waterways. I want to see much stronger language propping this up, and a requirement for a public hearing each and every time there is any request to violate the SOD. 4 ‐ Adding "premiums" to Interior neighborhoods. NO! Our neighborhoods are the jewels of our city and letting developers get premiums to make their projects more profitable, at the cost of less greenspace, more height, shadowing, more impervious surfaces, more lot coverage, more urban heat island effects is unnecessary. Premiums on transit corridors is appropriate, and that provides adequate density without destroying interior neighborhoods. 5 ‐ Current Interior 1‐2‐3 building envelope must be maintained as promised: ‐ Floor Area Ratio ‐ Setbacks ‐ Lot Coverage ‐ Building Height 3 Thank you, Steven Verdoorn [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the City of Minneapolis. Please exercise caution when opening links or attachments. 4 Bernard, Joseph A. From: Jan Morse <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 9:16 AM To: Wittenberg, Jason W.; Baldwin, Lisa M.; 2040; Fletcher, Steve Subject: [EXTERNAL] 2040 plan / no more concessions to developers Greetings, As a long‐time resident of the Marcy‐Holmes neighborhood I write to strongly object to further accommodations to developers who are looking to further damage our community while reaping greater profits. Our community has had more than its share of tear downs and the resulting loss of architectural fabric. Formerly landscaped lots are cleared to the borders and gravel replaces grass. No trees are planted. The identical looking nondescript buildings proliferate, have the same flimsy construction, with cramped rooms and cheap finishes. Nonetheless, most of these buildings are advertised as 'luxury' apartments with many amenities and high rental costs. The effect of these buildings has been to leave lots of the older and more affordable buildings with vacancies, who then turn to anyone they can find to rent their units. We've seen a significant increase in: ‐ traffic problems, greater number of cars moving at high speeds ‐ trash on our streets ‐ noise ‐ crime, theft from/of vehicles to car‐jackings and armed robbery The 2040 plan has brought an overall degradation to our so‐called 'historic' community that has lost far too many interesting historic buildings, don't make it any worse than it already is. Enough is enough. Sincerely, Jan & Andrew Morse 518 7th St SE [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the City of Minneapolis. Please exercise caution when opening links or attachments. 5 Bernard, Joseph A. From: Stephanie Belseth <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 6:12 AM To: Wittenberg, Jason W.; 2040; Baldwin, Lisa M.; Palmisano, Linea Subject: [EXTERNAL] Reject changes to 2040 plan Dear Minneapolis Planning commission, council members and whomever else this may concern, I am a 25+ year resident of southwest Minneapolis and I care very much for our amazing city and its residents. Please make these comments a part of the PUBLIC RECORD. During the debate on 2040, there were many confirmations and promises related to Built Form for Interior 1-2-3. We were assured "the expectation that two- and three-family homes in low-density areas must meet the same height, setback, and massing requirements as single-family homes." I remind you of this now, as it seems certain special interest groups are claiming "Minneapolis 2040 did not go far enough" and have gone so far as to suggest our tax dollars go to fund a named consultant (Opticos) to "evaluate our existing neighborhoods" and "restart the research of Interior neighborhoods." This can be found in a streets.mn post on October 2nd by Janne Flisrand. MN 2040 DID go far enough, the voice of residents should NOT be ignored, and there should be absolutely NO CONSIDERATION of further movement in these areas: 1 - Approval of ADUs to be built on lots where the principal residence is non-owner-occupied. NO! This only turns over more of our NOAH properties to investors instead of local owners, making it impossible for first time homebuyers to have a shot. Investors will clamor to turn one small house or duplex into 3-4 unit property and regular residents won't be able to compete. It also stuffs more people and impervious surface on a lot and eats up greenspace.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ill-Defined 'Defunding' Pitch Ill-Advised
    GARY JOHNSON EDITOR RANDY RICKMAN PUBLISHER LIAM MARLAIRE ASSISTANT EDITOR 1C L-TOpinionEmail Voice of the People letters to [email protected] SUNDAY, JUNE 14, 2020 LeaderTelegram.com Include your name, address, daytime phone number LOCAL VIEW Ill-defined ‘defunding’ pitch ill-advised rotests likely were inevitable — and war- ranted when peaceful — after a Minne- P apolis police officer’s inexcusable actions on May 25 resulted in the death of George Floyd. However, just as riots and lootings cannot be condoned, neither can defunding police depart- ments. Yet that’s precisely what a majority of Minneapolis City Council members are pursu- ing in their market. “We committed to dismantling policing as we know it in the city of Minneapolis and to rebuild with our community a new model of public safety that actually keeps our community safe,” Lisa Bender, council president, told CNN. Added Jeremiah Ellison, a city councilman, via Twitter: “We are going to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department. And when we’re done, we’re not simply gonna glue it back together. We are going to dramatically rethink how we approach public safety and emergency response.” VOICE OF THE PEOPLE What “defunding” means varies widely. For many it’s allocating some resources away from City Council on wrong There are only a few simple rules healthy coping skill. Retailers are for controlling the spread of the one of the most important lines of policing and toward social services. Other side of chicken issue virus now. Social distancing, wear- defense in keeping tobacco out of groups are promoting more drastic measures.
    [Show full text]
  • CVE and Constitutionality in the Twin Cities: How Countering Violent Extremism Threatens the Equal Protection Rights of American Muslims in Minneapolis-St
    American University Law Review Volume 69 Issue 6 Article 6 2020 CVE and Constitutionality in the Twin Cities: How Countering Violent Extremism Threatens the Equal Protection Rights of American Muslims in Minneapolis-St. Paul Sarah Chaney Reichenbach American University Washington College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, President/Executive Department Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Reichenbach, Sarah Chaney (2020) "CVE and Constitutionality in the Twin Cities: How Countering Violent Extremism Threatens the Equal Protection Rights of American Muslims in Minneapolis-St. Paul," American University Law Review: Vol. 69 : Iss. 6 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr/vol69/iss6/6 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CVE and Constitutionality in the Twin Cities: How Countering Violent Extremism Threatens the Equal Protection Rights of American Muslims in Minneapolis-St. Paul Abstract In 2011, President Barack Obama announced a national strategy for countering violent extremism (CVE) to attempt to prevent the “radicalization” of potential violent extremists. The Obama Administration intended the strategy to employ a community-based approach, bringing together the government, law enforcement, and local communities for CVE efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Maintaining First Amendment Rights and Public Safety in North Minneapolis: an After-Action Assessment of the Police Response To
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES CRITICAL RESPONSE INITIATIVE MAINTAINING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND PUBLIC SAFETY IN NORTH MINNEAPOLIS An After-Action Assessment of the Police Response to Protests, Demonstrations, and Occupation of the Minneapolis Police Department’s Fourth Precinct Frank Straub | Hassan Aden | Jeffrey Brown | Ben Gorban | Rodney Monroe | Jennifer Zeunik This project was supported by grant number 2015-CK-WX-K005 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement by the author(s) or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues. The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the date of publication. Given that URLs and websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity. Recommended citation: Straub, Frank, Hassan Aden, Jeffrey Brown, Ben Gorban, Rodney Monroe, and Jennifer Zeunik. 2017. Maintaining First Amendment Rights and Public Safety in North Minneapolis: An After-Action Assessment of the Police Response to Protests, Demonstrations, and Occupation of the Minneapolis Police Department’s Fourth Precinct. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Published 2017 CONTENTS Letter from the Director . .vi Executive Summary . vii Summary of events vii Implications and challenges vii Public safety response vii Key themes of the review viii Conclusion ix Part I .
    [Show full text]
  • Public Comment: Contracts with Hennepin County Sheriff's
    From: Seamus Flynn To: Council Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] "Defund the Police" means actually defunding the police Date: Thursday, November 12, 2020 6:03:55 PM Dear members of the Minneapolis City Council, This past June, I was thrilled when a majority of you publicly committed to work towards abolishing the Minneapolis Police. I thought that politicians were finally taking seriously the idea that police as an institution do more harm than good, endangering our most vulnerable community members through their violence. I thought that perhaps Minneapolis could be a national leader in showing us that getting rid of police is not only possible, but preferable and necessary. Sadly, your actions since then have spoken louder than your words, and I no longer trust that your promises from June were more than political posturing. I'm angered by your plan to allocate nearly $500,000 tomorrow for MPD's contract with the county sheriff's department and the transit police. This will put more police on the North Side, where they will hurt people. I'm particularly frustrated with the three of you who both support this initiative and agreed in June to defund the police. You can't have it both ways: This motion would quite literally fund the police. Imagine what else we could do with that $500K. We're going into the winter, the pandemic is worse than it's ever been, and homeless people in Minneapolis have nowhere to sleep. Get your priorities straight. I'm also concerned by your proposed appointments of Lyannia Jacobsen and Malaysia Abdi to the Police Conduct Oversight Commission, and I urge all members of the city council to vote against them.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 HUD Disaster Ho
    Volume 24, Issue 37 September 30, 2019 In This Issue: Membership Month • NLIHC Exceeds 2019 Membership Month Goals! Budget and Appropriations • Stopgap Spending Bill Enacted to Fund Government through November 21 Congress • California Members of Congress Propose Solutions to Homelessness in Letter to President Trump • Representative Ocasio-Cortez Releases Ambitious Proposal to Address Poverty Housing Trust Fund • NLIHC and Other Groups Send Letters to Treasury and FHFA Urging Continued Funding to the HTF and CMF Our Homes, Our Votes: 2020 • Presidential Candidates Continue to Address Homelessness and Affordable Housing on the Campaign Trail • CommunityVotes Turns Out Voters in New York • Take Action! Sign Letter to Debate Moderators Urging Questions on Housing Solutions • Now Available: Recording of First Webinar in Our Homes, Our Votes: 2020 Series HUD • HUD Designates Difficult Development Areas and Qualified Census Tracts for 2020 Disaster Housing Recovery • Two Tropical Storms Strike U.S. States and Territories • Government Accountability Office Releases Two Reports Criticizing Federal Disaster Recovery Efforts • Additional Disaster Housing Recovery Updates - September 30, 2019 Opportunity Starts at Home • New Study Finds Medicaid Expansion Can Significantly Reduce Evictions Research • Study Examines First-Year Implementation of Small Area Fair Market Rents Resources • Census Bureau Releases Data from 2018 ACS on Cost-Burdened Households Fact of the Week • Large Percentages of Households with Lowest Incomes are Housing Cost-Burdened
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA $12,975,000* General Obligation Parking Assessment Refunding Bonds, Series 2020
    PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 2020 REFUNDING ISSUE $12,975,000* RATINGS: NOT BANK-QUALIFIED Fitch Ratings: AA+ Requested from S&P Global Ratings See “RATINGS” herein. In the opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Bond Counsel, based on present federal and Minnesota laws, regulations, rulings and decisions (which excludes any pending legislation which may have a retroactive effect), and assuming compliance with certain pletion or amendment. Under no covenants set forth in the resolutions approving the issuance of the Bonds, interest on the Bonds is not includable in gross income for federal income tax purposes and, to the same extent, is not includable in the taxable net income of individuals, estates, and n in which such offer, solicitation or sale trusts for Minnesota income purposes, and is not a preference item for purposes of computing the federal alternative minimum tax or the Minnesota alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals, estates, and trusts. Such interest is subject to Minnesota franchise taxes on corporations (including financial institutions) measured by income. No opinion will be expressed by Bond Counsel regarding other state or federal tax consequences caused by the receipt or accrual of interest on the Bonds or arising with respect to ownership of the Bonds. See “TAX EXEMPTION” herein. information is subject to com CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA $12,975,000* General Obligation Parking Assessment Refunding Bonds, Series 2020 Proposal Opening: September 17, 2020 until 10:00 a.m. Central Time ver, the pricing and underwriting Consideration of Award: Subsequent to Proposal Opening. See “OFFICIAL TERMS OF PROPOSAL” herein. shall there be any sale of these securities in any jurisdictio Dated Date of Bonds: Date of Delivery Interest Payment Dates: Each June 1 and December 1, commencing June 1, 2021 The General Obligation Parking Assessment Refunding Bonds, Series 2020 (the “Bonds”), of the City of Minneapolis (the “City”) will mature as shown on the inside front cover of this Official Statement.
    [Show full text]
  • Safe District 3B
    5th PRECINCT COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION PHONE RESOURCE LIST—2020 (All area codes are 612 unless otherwise noted) 5th Precinct Numbers 5th Precinct Main Number ........................ 673-5705 Online police report: 3101 Nicollet Ave S, 55408 www.minneapolismn.gov/police/report/index.htm th 5 Precinct Inspector: Amelia Huffman ... 673-3678 th [email protected] City Council in 5 Precinct Abdi Warsame, Ward 6 .............................. 673-2206 5th Pct. Community Response Team (CRT) Lisa Goodman, Ward 7 .............................. 673-2207 Report drug dealing, prostitution .......... 673-5716 Andrea Jenkins, Ward 8 ............................. 673-2208 Lisa Bender, Ward 10 ................................ 673-2210 CRIME PREVENTION Jeremy Schroeder, Ward 11 ...................... 673-2211 CPS Jessica Kawas....................................673-2819 Linea Palmisano, Ward 13 ......................... 673-2213 [email protected] Lowry Hill, Kenwood, East Isles, Steven Square, Email Alert Networks Whittier, Lowry Hill East, Cedar Isles Dean, West Crime Alerts: www.minneapolismn.gov/police/ Calhoun, ECCO, Carag.. **For a free commercial or residential security check, CPS Jennifer Waisanen ............................. 673-5407 contact your Crime Prevention Specialist (call 311) [email protected] Lyndale, Kingfield, East Harriet, Linden Hills, Fulton, Lynnhurst, Tangletown, Windom, Kenny, Armatage. Cultural Outreach Spanish: CPS John Reed .......................... 673-5579 COMMUNITY ATTORNEY
    [Show full text]
  • GROCERY Has Arrived
    NORTH NEWS November 30, 2017 • Serving the neighborhoods of North Minneapolis • www.mynorthnews.org Your NEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOOD GROCERYGROCERY has arrived North Market is set to open Dec. 13 at 44th and Humboldt. Page 12 North Market project leaders from Pillsbury United Communities, Adair Mosley and Vanan Murugesan, have spent three years bringing the store to life. Minneapolis, MN Minneapolis, Folwell overhauls its neighborhood Postal Customer Postal association Page 4 ******************ECRWSSEDDM**** New city council representation for PERMIT NO. 92977 NO. PERMIT Minneapolis, MN 55411 MN Minneapolis, North Minneapolis Page 5 TWIN CITIES MN CITIES TWIN 125 West Broadway Ave. Suite 130 Suite Ave. Broadway West 125 PAID US POSTAGE US ECRWSS ECRWSS Your guide to shopping local this NON-PROFIT ORG NON-PROFIT holiday season Page 10 2 • North News • November 30, 2017 NORTHnews Seeing us in new places? That's by design, and we need your feedback! get information about North Mar- Huddle in October. MPR is rent- an examination of the rental mar- publication is for you. ket into many homes. Address- ing a small space at UROC with ket over here. es in all of 55412 and parts of the intention of exploring how to We're hoping to begin running Until next time, 55430, and 55422 (the zip codes better connect with a Northside these pieces in our next issue. If immediately surrounding the audience. this edition of the paper feels a Kenzie O’Keefe store) have received the paper at Moos and Laura Yuen, MPR's little light on the student stories, Editor/Publisher, North News home.
    [Show full text]
  • Stop the Minneapolis 2040 Plan!
    Save Our Neighborhoods! Stop the Minneapolis 2040 Plan! Many of the changes the Mpls 2040 Plan promotes will likely go into effect next year (2019) -- e.g. fourplexes, etc. What's wrong with the 2040 plan? * Fourplexes Everywhere The Mpls 2040 Plan allows fourplexes on virtually every block and every neighborhood in the entire city. This radical change will destroy the character and feel of our beautiful single-family/residential neighborhoods. * Much More Density Everywhere The Mpls 2040 Plan promotes A LOT MORE density and development in our residential neighborhoods and around our city lakes. This radical change will greatly hurt the look and feel of our neighborhoods, and our lakes. To make matters worse, it doesn't address related transportation and infrastructure needs. Density for density's sake, without a well thought out transportation and infrastructure plan, is very shortsighted and irresponsible. * Taller Buildings Everywhere The Mpls 2040 Plan calls for 'upzoning' the entire city. This will allow developers to build up to 6 and 8 story buildings and high-rise apartments in many of interior neighborhoods and around our city lakes. This radical change will be end up being very harmful. What Can You Do? 1. Call and email Mayor Jacob Frey, Lisa Bender (City Council President), Jeremy Schroeder (Zoning and Planning Chair), your own city council person, and as many other city council members as you can. Tell them you strongly oppose the Mpls 2040 Plan. The mayor and a majority of the city council support the plan, and unless a majority change their mind and vote "No" -- it will pass! Contact information is on the back of this flyer.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee Report
    EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE October 6, 2020 A regular meeting of the committee was convened at 10:01 am on this date. Members Present: Mayor Jacob Frey (Chair), Lisa Bender (Vice-Chair), Cam Gordon, Andrea Jenkins, and Andrew Johnson (Quorum - 4) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13D.021, the meeting was held by electronic means and Committee Members and staff participated remotely due to the local public health emergency (novel coronavirus pandemic) declared on March 16, 2020. Matters listed below are hereby submitted with the following recommendations; to-wit: 1. Adoption of the agenda. Frey moved to adopt. On roll call, the motion passed. Aye: Frey, Bender, Gordon, Jenkins, and Johnson (5) Nay: (0) Abstain: (0) Absent: (0) 2. Acceptance of minutes of Sep 22, 2020. Frey moved to accept. On roll call, the motion passed. Aye: Frey, Bender, Gordon, Jenkins, and Johnson (5) Nay: (0) Abstain: (0) Absent: (0) 3. Hiring freeze waiver report (EX2020-00024) Receiving and filing a report relating to hiring freeze waiver exemptions from Mar 31, 2020, through Sep 2, 2020. Staff presentation by Deb Krueger, Human Resources Department. The report was received and filed. City Attorney Jim Rowader stated that the meeting may be closed for the purpose of discussing labor negotiations and strategies. At 10:15 am, Frey moved to adjourn to a closed session of the committee as permitted by Minnesota Statutes Section 13D.03 to discuss labor negotiations and strategies related to the IBEW Electricians. On roll call, the motion passed. Aye: Frey, Bender, Gordon, Jenkins, and Johnson (5) Nay: (0) Abstain: (0) Absent: (0) 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Maintaining First Amendment Rights and Public Safety
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES CRITICAL RESPONSE INITIATIVE MAINTAINING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND PUBLIC SAFETY IN NORTH MINNEAPOLIS An After-Action Assessment of the Police Response to Protests, Demonstrations, and Occupation of the Minneapolis Police Department’s Fourth Precinct Frank Straub | Hassan Aden | Jeffrey Brown | Ben Gorban | Rodney Monroe | Jennifer Zeunik This project was supported by grant number 2015-CK-WX-K005 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement by the author(s) or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues. The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the date of publication. Given that URLs and websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity. Recommended citation: Straub, Frank, Hassan Aden, Jeffrey Brown, Ben Gorban, Rodney Monroe, and Jennifer Zeunik. 2017. Maintaining First Amendment Rights and Public Safety in North Minneapolis: An After-Action Assessment of the Police Response to Protests, Demonstrations, and Occupation of the Minneapolis Police Department’s Fourth Precinct. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Published 2017 CONTENTS Letter from the Director . .vi Executive Summary . vii Summary of events vii Implications and challenges vii Public safety response vii Key themes of the review viii Conclusion ix Part I .
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Remarks As Prepared for Delivery: Minneapolis 2020
    REMARKS AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY: MINNEAPOLIS 2020 BUDGET RECOMMENDATION AUGUST 15, 2019 MAYOR JACOB FREY MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Introductions & Acknowledgments Thank you, Council Vice President Andrea Jenkins. Your friendship, collaboration, and commitment to progress has meant a great deal to this city and to me. Thank you to our City Council Members for your input. Having met with each of you individually, your feedback was informative and constructive, and has helped shape this budget. It’s good to be joined by leaders from across our city and region, including a city hall alum Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. I want to thank leaders from across our departments, our finance team, and my staff for the long nights and major sweat equity they invested in making this budget happen. Your patience and persistence have been invaluable in building an exceptional budget for 2020 and developing important groundwork for years ahead. We also received important input from community members earlier this year. Your voices were heard, and they are reflected. And now it is my great honor to present to you the City of Minneapolis 2020 recommended budget. And as a matter of housekeeping, here’s the same brief disclaimer I offered last year: There is a lot to unpack, and several exciting items didn’t make it into these remarks given time constraints. I will be more than happy to further discuss any item in the 2020 budget with you. My door is always open. Structural Changes Last year, we promised you a strong foundation for a stronger future in Minneapolis. We’ve made good on that commitment, but we must now put our city on the right course for the future – a course that accounts for a cyclical economy, political instability, a warming climate, and our shared values that drive each and every decision.
    [Show full text]