MINNEAPOLIS — Editors Note: The above video originally aired on KARE 11 on Sept. 7, 2021.
A new hearing has been scheduled for 9 a.m. on Monday to consider the future of a ballot question that would ask Minneapolis residents to vote on replacing the Minneapolis Police Department with a Department of Public Safety.
A group of city residents, including former city council member Don Samuels, are asking Hennepin County Judge Jamie Anderson to block the latest approved version of the question.
Currently, the question and an included explanatory note read:
Question: "Shall the Minneapolis City Charter be amended to remove the Police Department and replace it with a Department of Public Safety that employs a comprehensive public health approach to the delivery of functions by the Department of Public Safety, with those specific functions to be determined by the Mayor and City Council by ordinance; which will not be subject to exclusive mayoral power over its establishment, maintenance, and command; and which could include licensed peace officers (police officers), if necessary, to fulfill its responsibilities for public safety, with the general nature of the amendments being briefly indicated in the explanatory note below, which is made a part of this ballot?"
Explanatory note: "This amendment would create a Department of Public Safety combining public safety functions through a comprehensive public health approach to be determined by the Mayor and Council. The department would be led by a Commissioner nominated by the Mayor and appointed by the Council. The Police Department, and its chief, would be removed from the City Charter. The Public Safety Department could include police officers, but the minimum funding requirement would be eliminated."
That version was approved by the Minneapolis City Council on Tuesday after Judge Anderson granted a temporary restraining order against former language, saying it was "unreasonable and misleading."
The restraining order was the result of a lawsuit filed by the same group opposing the current language. After the altered language was approved by the city council, the group said in a letter to the judge that the language was not changed enough, and is still too confusing.
The ballot question has had a history of challenges since it was first approved by the city council in July. "Yes 4 Minneapolis," the advocacy group that proposed and petitioned for the question, successfully sued to remove the original explanatory note attached to it, saying it read like a "warning label." Mayor Jacob Frey then vetoed two revised versions of the question, though the council overrode his second veto to approve the language that was ultimately struck down this week.