Proposal to disband Minneapolis police blocked from ballot

FILE - In this June 7, 2020, file photo, Alondra Cano, a City Council member, speaks during "The Path Forward" meeting at Powderhorn Park in Minneapolis. The focus of the meeting was the defunding of the Minneapolis Police Department. A Minneapolis commission decided Wednesday, Aug. 5, to take more time to review a City Council amendment to dismantle the Police Department in the wake of George Floyd’s death, ending the possibility of voters deciding the issue in November. (Jerry Holt/Star Tribune via AP, File)/Star Tribune via AP)

By AMY FORLITI Associated Press (08/05)

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A Minneapolis commission decided Wednesday to take more time to review a City Council amendment to dismantle the Police Department in the wake of George Floyd’s death, ending the possibility of voters deciding the issue in November.

Members of the Charter Commission expressed concern that the process to change the city’s charter was being rushed after Floyd died following an encounter with police. While several commissioners said changing the Police Department was necessary, they said the amendment before them was flawed. Several said it faced legal barriers, was created without input from key community members who oppose it, and that it gave too much power to the City Council.

“It’s appropriate to explore transformational changes in the department, but it needs to be done thoughtfully,” said Commissioner Peter Ginder, who voted in favor of taking more time. “That hasn’t been done here.”

The five City Council members who authored the proposed charter amendment released a statement criticizing the decision, but said they will continue to work toward transforming the way the city provides public safety. They said they plan to put an amendment before voters in November 2021.

“It is not our legacy to use bureaucratic processes to circumvent the people in an attempt to ‘protect’ voters from themselves,” said Council Member Jeremiah Ellison. “That is not democracy. In a democracy, the people decide. But I guess today the Charter Commission decided otherwise.”

The proposed amendment followed widespread criticism of law enforcement over Floyd’s death. It would have replaced the Police Department with a “Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention” that backers said would take a more “holistic” approach, which wasn’t fully defined. The proposal did allow for armed officers — creating a division of licensed peace officers, who would have answered to the new department’s director.

“The council says ‘Trust us. We’ll figure it out after this is approved. Trust us.’ Well I don’t, and we shouldn’t,” said Barry Clegg, chairman of the Charter Commission. “Charter change is too important.”

The 15-member commission, made up of volunteers appointed by a judge, voted 10-5 to take another 90 days to review the proposed amendment. Most of those who voted against taking the extra time said they would recommend rejecting the amendment.

But the issue would likely have gone to voters even if it was rejected because the City Council was required only to consult the commission and is not bound by their action. The lack of a final decision means the proposal won’t clear deadlines to make the ballot this November, but it could be on the ballot in 2021.

“There is no democracy denied here. There is no denial of democratic rights. It’s a question of when, not if,” Commissioner Gregory Abbott said. “We can fix this. We can get police reform. We just need to find a different avenue to do it in.”

A similar move by the commission effectively ended a proposed charter change in 2018 that would have given the City Council more control over the department.

Mel Reeves, a longtime community activist, said he was not surprised by the commission’s decision. He saw it as a delay tactic.

“We talk about living in a democracy, but if you really want to be democratic, sometimes it’s damn near impossible. If people really want to do something, there are all kinds of mechanisms to keep them from doing it,” he said.

The process has unfolded during a violent summer in Minneapolis after Floyd’s death, with shootings dramatically higher than last year. Many residents are worried about a proposal to “abolish” police officers.

Some City Council members promised a robust process to get public input on how a new department would look and work. Council member Steve Fletcher, one of the proposal’s authors, said before the commission’s vote that the city would continue to move ahead with the community engagement process.

Floyd, a Black man who was handcuffed, died May 25 after Derek Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for nearly eight minutes, as Floyd said he couldn’t breathe. Chauvin was charged with second-degree murder and other counts, and three other officers at the scene were charged with aiding and abetting. All four officers were fired, and Floyd’s death sparked protests in Minneapolis and around the world.

Mayor Jacob Frey, who was opposed to abolishing the department, and Chief Medaria Arradondo have moved ahead with their own changes since Floyd’s death, including requiring officers to document attempts to de-escalate situations whether or not force is used. They also have expanded requirements for reporting use-of-force incidents, ordering officers to provide more detail.

Arradondo also pulled the department out of negotiations for a union contract, saying he wanted a review designed to change the grievance and arbitration process.

According to draft language of the amendment, the new department would have had “responsibility for public safety services prioritizing a holistic, public health-oriented approach.” The director of the new agency would have “non-law-enforcement experience in community safety services, including but not limited to public health and/or restorative justice approaches.”

But the amendment included other provisions that some commissioners feared wouldn’t be understood by voters.

Commissioner Toni Newborn, voted against additional review, expressing concern it would be seen as a delay tactic. But she said she did not support the amendment because it put the Police Department under City Council control.

Commissioner Andrew Kozak said many people who have fought for years for equality and racial justice have come forward to say the amendment wasn’t ready, and that they were never consulted.

“They are the people most affected by police misconduct … and I think I’m going to listen to them,” he said.

https://apnews.com/47cc373752ffab4c983077e6bc90ab13

Copyright 2020 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistribute

Posted in: Defund/Dismantle Police, Legislation, Misconduct/Abuse of Authority, Police, Police Brutality/Abuse of Authority, Public Safety, Racial Issues

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

eight + nine =

Terms of Use for Posting Comments

Terms of Use

This site (the “Site”) is operated and maintained by Law Enforcement Education Foundation, Corporation (“Company”). Throughout the Site, the terms “we”, “us” and “our” refer to Company.  The words “user,” “you” and “your” as used herein refer to you.

Please read these terms and conditions of use (“Terms of Use”) carefully before contributing content. If you do not agree to these Terms of Use, please do not contribute content. Your use of the Site is subject to the Terms and Conditions found here .

By contributing content to the Site, you represent and warrant that you are at least eighteen (18) years old and that you have read and understand these Terms of Use and any amendments thereto and agree to be bound by them. If you are not at least eighteen (18) years old or you do not agree and accept these Terms of Use, you are prohibited from contributing content.

From time to time, we may permit users to submit content to the Site.  You hereby acknowledge and agree that by submitting remarks, comments, suggestions, ideas, graphics, feedback, edits, concepts, comments, photographs, illustrations and other materials (other than personal information and/or registration information) through the Site (individually and collectively, “Submissions”), you (i) grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, transferable, irrevocable and fully sub-licensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, translate, distribute, publish, create derivative works from and publicly display and perform such Submissions throughout the world in any media, now known or hereafter created, without attribution to you; (ii) grant us the right to pursue at law any person or entity that violates your and/or our rights in your Submissions; and (iii) forever waive any and all of your rights, including but not limited to moral rights, if any, in and to your Submissions, including, without limitation, any all rights or requirements of attribution or identification of you as the author of the Submission or any derivative thereof.  We reserve the right to remove any of your Submissions from the Site, in whole or in part, without notice to you, for any reason or no reason.

Submissions are made voluntarily. Any submissions which include personally identifiable information are subject to our Privacy Policy found here .  You may not upload or otherwise publish content on the Site that (i) is confidential to you or any third party; (ii) is untrue, inaccurate, false or other than an original work of your authorship; (iii) that relates to or impersonates any other person; (iv) violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property rights of any person or entity; (v) contains any content, personally identifiable information or other information, or materials of any kind that relate or refer to any other person or entity other than the provider of the products, goods or services to which the Submission relates; or (vi) violates any law, or in any manner infringes or interferes with the rights of others, including but not limited to the use of names, information, or materials that (A) libel, defame, or invade the privacy of any third party, (B) are obscene or pornographic, (C) are harmful, threatening, offensive, abusive, harassing, vulgar, false or inaccurate, racially, sexually, ethnically or are otherwise objectionable or otherwise contrary to the laws of any place where such Submissions may be accessed; (D) constitute personal attacks on other individuals; (E) promote criminal, immoral or illegal activity; (F) promote or advertise any person, product or service or solicit funds; or (G) are deemed confidential by any contract or policy.

You are solely responsible for any Submissions you make and their accuracy. We take no responsibility and assume no liability for any Submissions posted by you or any third party.

Unless approved by us in writing in advance, you agree not to: (i) provide or create a link to the Site; or (ii) create any frames at any other sites pertaining to any of the content located on the Site.

We reserve the right, in our discretion, to update, change or replace any part of these Terms of Use for Posting Comments by posting updates and/or changes to our Site.  It is your responsibility to check this page periodically for changes.  Your continued use of, and/or access to the Site, following the posting of any changes to these Terms of Use for Posting Comments, constitutes your acceptance of those changes.