Charter Commission floats the idea of part-time councilors at lower pay
At its January 15 meeting, the Minneapolis Charter Commission re-elected Peter Ginder as its chair. Ginder has a résumé with the city spanning 30 years. In 2022, he stepped in as interim City Attorney at the request of Mayor Jacob Frey. On Wednesday, he made waves by suggesting that the commission will review both the salary levels and structure of the city council.
A 2023 report commissioned by the city found that Minneapolis city council members earn 35% more than the median salary of council members in other cities. In terms of dollars, their nearly $110,000 annual salary is almost $27,000 higher than that of council members in similarly sized cities.
The Kansas City Model
There are several features of Kansas City’s government that we might consider adopting in Minneapolis to improve governance. Kansas City is a Midwestern city with a population of a similar size.
- The city has 12 part-time city councilors, each earning $81,538 annually.
- There are six wards. Each ward elects one councilor, and six additional councilors are elected at-large.
- The mayor serves as the 13th council member and acts as the council president. The mayor is elected at-large and earns a full-time salary of $163,028. For comparison, the Minneapolis mayor earns $141,000 annually, which is below the median for cities of similar size.
- Both city council members and the mayor are limited to serving two terms.
- A significant difference between the two cities is in police oversight. In Kansas City, the mayor does not oversee the police. Instead, a Board of Police Commissioners handles police oversight. This board operates under the authority of the Governor. The board consists of five members: the mayor and four additional members who are appointed by the Governor and approved by the state senate.
Given the high cost of operations and oversight for the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD), transferring oversight and the police budget to the Governor’s authority is an option worth considering.
How Most Minnesota Cities Do It
According to the Star Tribune, most Minnesota cities have at-large city councils. If this model is effective, why are council members like Jason Chavez opposed to it? Chavez told the Star Tribune, “It’s disheartening to hear about continued attempts at power grabs by unelected bodies. This [will] only benefit wealthier areas of Minneapolis and further marginalize areas struggling with poverty and home to Black, Indigenous, communities of color, and immigrant communities.”
Chavez’s comment reflects his personal interests more than the concerns he claims to represent. While he frames himself as a voice for impoverished and BIPOC communities, his stance appears to prioritize maintaining his own power.
Consider the numbers: Chavez was elected by just 3,407 voters, representing only 23% of registered voters in Ward 9. That’s a mere 1.3% of voters citywide. Yet, as one of 13 city council members, his vote carries 7.7% of the decision-making power on citywide issues. Decisions on budgets and policies—such as setting the minimum wage for Uber drivers—impact the entire city and even the broader metropolitan area.
Maintaining the Status Quo
Our current city council members want to preserve the status quo because it grants them disproportionately more power relative to the number of people they represent. If Kansas City’s system can effectively represent “those who struggle with poverty,” a revised council structure in Minneapolis could do the same. By framing the issue too narrowly, Council Member Jason Chavez and others perpetuate a misguided argument that hinders the city’s ability to address its challenges comprehensively.
Helping those struggling with poverty requires citywide economic development. People in Ward 9, for example, are not confined to Ward 9 for employment opportunities. A key issue missing from Chavez’s rhetoric when he claims to speak for those in poverty is a clear plan for how to lift more people out of it. Expanding city government and giving grants to supportive nonprofit organizations, as appears to be his current approach, is not a viable solution.
Chavez’s self-righteous denouncements of corporations and his call to raise the minimum wage to $25 an hour may sound appealing, but raising the minimum wage alone does not create jobs. Businesses need safety and stability in the city to thrive. The recent closures of Frattallone’s Hardware and CVS on Nicollet Avenue are stark reminders that neighborhoods reach a breaking point when crime is left unchecked.
For Minneapolis to succeed, the city needs businesses to open their doors without fear of crime or harassment. Entrepreneurs who produce goods and services must see Minneapolis as a place where they want to start and grow their businesses. Without a thriving economic engine, there is no sustainable pathway out of poverty for residents.
A System Exploited
Our current system enables small factions of political activists to dominate the council. It takes only a small group of a candidate’s supporters to manipulate the caucus process to secure the DFL endorsement. From there, just a few thousand votes are enough to elect someone who will represent over 400,000 residents once in office.
If, as Rep. Emma Greenman argues, breaking the city into 13 distinct wards promotes “direct democracy,” then let’s make the process truly local. Limit fundraising to residents of the candidate’s ward and require volunteers to be residents of the candidate’s ward. Of course, this won’t happen—despite their rhetoric, these council members rely on support from across the city, state, and even the country to win elections.
For instance, a review of expense reports from 2023 reveals donors contributing to candidates in multiple wards, not just their own. Some candidates even took fundraising trips out of state. If these councilors truly represent their wards, why the reliance on long-distance fundraising? Why are they hiring campaign managers and door knockers from places like Chicago? These practices raise serious questions about whether their priorities align with their constituents.
The Charade of Direct Representation
The structure of the Minneapolis City Council is not sacrosanct. Reexamining it to determine whether it still serves the best interests of the city is long overdue. Yet, in typical reactionary fashion, Chavez and others reduce any potential for meaningful discussion into a divisive battle over race. This tactic ensures that no logical debate about the merits of change can occur. Their other go-to strategy is to label anyone who questions them or their policies as a Republican, further stifling constructive dialogue.
The status quo allows small, politically savvy groups to manipulate outcomes, leading to economic stagnation, the destruction of neighborhoods, and a divisive discourse that leaves 70% of voters unmotivated to participate in elections. Minneapolis needs a modernized government structure and leaders willing to adapt to the times—leaders willing to prioritize the city’s future over their own political power.
We didn’t pay attention when we had good governance, so we end up with this. Don’t be afraid of good government.
If you want a mixed at-large and ward system, elect a nine member City Council using the current six Park Board districts electing one each and three at-large. If you are worried about discrimination against non-whites, check the results of at-large Minneapolis School Board and Park Board races. The down side is that City Councilors will be looking over their shoulders worrying that their Park Commissioner is stalking them. But, that may not be a down side for the citizenry.
Yes, let’s re-examine this! The salaries are too high and the council is too ineffective. Making them part-time would help. I love the idea of only allowing money and volunteers to come from the ward, if they want to keep the ward system. Outside money hurts local elections. We need to do something to get more people involved in their own elections. The St. Paul model seems better to me.
Way to go, Pete Ginder!!