The council has a clear pattern of using taxpayer dollars to fund nonprofit projects aligned with their political priorities
The restaurant world is ever-changing, and in some ways, we like it that way. There are the beloved standbys, and then there are those bold ventures where someone decides to take a leap into the unknown with a new restaurant. Customers often pile in during the first few weeks to check out the latest hot spot. If the reviews are good, the restaurant has a slim chance of succeeding.
City-Funded Models
Council Member Jason Chavez announced on Facebook that the City Council has granted May Day Café a $130,000 forgivable loan to help them purchase the building at 3440 Bloomington Avenue South. This will allow them to pursue their dream of becoming a worker-owned and operated café. It’s an intriguing concept, and we wish them the best of luck. After all, we’re investors in this project—our tax dollars form the backbone of this risky endeavor. And it is risky because all restaurants, by nature, are risky.
Consider Revival as an example. On Monday, after 10 years in business, it announced it was closing its doors.
“We are unable to see a path forward and be financially responsible to our staff and core costs,” co-owner Nick Rancone told Minnesota Monthly. “With a heavy heart, we must say goodbye to Revival.”
The closing of Revival means 100 restaurant workers are now without jobs. It raises the question: could the $130,000 given to the May Day Café have been used to help Revival—or any other restaurant struggling to make payroll and retain customers? Instead of choosing specific organizations to receive grants, the City Council could focus on creating a vibrant economic environment in Minneapolis that allows businesses to thrive independently.
If direct funding to individual organizations is part of the solution, an independent evaluation committee would help ensure fairness and avoid obvious conflicts of interest.
A Pattern of Picking Winners
Your view on whether worker-owned businesses are a good or bad idea might influence how you feel about the city providing direct loans. However, the council has a clear pattern of using taxpayer dollars to fund nonprofit projects aligned with their political priorities. For instance, they continue trying to keep the dream of the Roof Depot alive, and the recent budget amendments included $100,000 for the Rise Up Center on Hennepin — a move many see as a handout to political activists and union organizers.
This newsletter supports exploring new forms of ownership and experimenting with innovative business models. However, the hazard lies in the undemocratic process by which the council is selecting winners. The risk is particularly high in an election year, where there is potential for quid pro quo: those receiving grants might, in turn, support the candidates who awarded them. These individuals often become the volunteers who door-knock and staff phone banks. No challenger can compete with this type of favoritism. In effect, it becomes a massive campaign expenditure—but instead of it being a reportable campaign expense, it’s funded with city dollars.
Projects like the Roof Depot, the Rise Up Center, and the May Day Café each have the potential to foster a more communal form of work. But they also carry significant risks of failure. When they fail, it’s not private investors who bear the losses—it’s us, the taxpayers of Minneapolis. We are left with vacant buildings and the costs of cleanup.
Unfortunately, taxpayers have no direct vote on these projects. We vote for representatives and trust them to spend our money responsibly.
When the Going Gets Tough
Revival was successful for over 10 years, but it has now closed its doors. Other recent restaurant closures include Kim’s in Uptown, Red Dragon near the Wedge (after nearly 50 years in business), and Union Hmong Kitchen. The list doesn’t stop there—Dulono’s Sports Bar, Kruse Markit, and Bebe Zito’s Eat Street location have also shut down. The restaurant business is notoriously challenging: margins are slim, the hours are long, and customers can be fickle.
People take the risk of starting and running a restaurant because they love food and dream of eventually making a decent living. When you invest your own money into one of these ventures, you’re fully committed to doing everything you can to make it successful. That kind of personal commitment may be absent a year from now if a city-funded project runs into obstacles.
We hope the May Day Café workers stay united and avoid internal disputes or conflicts in vision that could jeopardize their success. After all, many others have failed despite their best efforts. It’s an unusual risk for the City Council to take.
Since it’s taxpayer money and not their own, the council bears no real personal risk. For some members, this could be less about supporting local businesses and more about securing political support for re-election.
