The most newsworthy item council voted on this week was the so-called Waymo ordinance, which would require a human “safety monitor” to always be present for robotaxis to be licensed to operate in the city. Waymo calls this a “de facto ban” on autonomous vehicles in Minneapolis, and I agree. It passed 7-6, and the mayor has already announced his intention to veto the measure.
The debate was lively and focused largely on protecting the jobs of a predominantly immigrant rideshare workforce versus the advocacy of the disability community for greater freedom and choice for transportation options. Things took an unexpected turn with the invocation of pet safety as a further reason to support human monitors. The claim was made that these vehicles are especially dangerous for the pet population. Don’t get me wrong, every pet life is precious, but the research I’ve seen shows a grand total of 14 confirmed animal injuries or deaths between 2021-2025 connected to autonomous vehicles (including one raccoon), which to me isn’t a compelling reason to require a human safety monitor in robotaxis.
I voted against this measure for several reasons. First, I had a problem with the authors’ process in bringing this ordinance forward. The same authors advanced a council action – which passed 13-0 – directing our Legislative Research and Oversight team to produce a report examining the technological, regulatory, and economic landscape of robotaxis across the country. We will be receiving this report along with a presentation in two weeks. To bring forward an ordinance change before receiving the research we asked for is a completely backwards way to make policy and is disrespectful of our staff’s time.
Second, the safety arguments fall flat. While autonomous vehicles aren’t perfect, the publicly available safety data so far is very promising. Over 270 million driverless miles, Waymo has been involved in 82% fewer injury-causing crashes than human drivers, and 95% fewer serious-injury-or-worse crashes. Those are Waymo’s own numbers, but an independent study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found 81% fewer injury crashes per mile.
Finally, I found the advocacy of the disability community compelling. I don’t think it’s our place to protect the jobs of one particular constituency, especially at the expense of giving other community members the choice to move around the city as they choose.
Regardless, I want to make sure you know that we will have a Ward 7 Community Conversation on October 22nd, from 4:00 to 5:00 p.m., at Loring Park that will feature an actual Waymo vehicle. Come to the Community Arts Building and see the car for yourself and dialogue with representatives from the company about your questions and concerns. I hope to see you there!
Another controversial item that came before the council this week was a gift acceptance for MPD personnel to accompany Inspector Ryan Kelly to an international law enforcement conference in Orlando where he is going to be honored for his bravery in response to the Annunciation shooting. Some of my colleagues objected to this because in addition to this $16,000 gift, MPD would be spending $14,000 from their own budget to send 9 staff there for the week. They objected because MPD has already overspent their overtime budget and argued this is just another example of MPD’s “reckless” overspending. They put forth an amended motion as a “compromise” that would allow MPD to accept the $16,000 gift (not sure which of my colleagues were opposed to MPD even accepting this gift at all), as long as they didn’t spend the additional $14,000 to allow a broader scope of team members to go to the conference.
I did not support the amended resolution, and I fully support accepting the gift and spending department funds, because the actions of Inspector Kelly and MPD in response to that tragedy represent everything that we want to celebrate about our police department. I understand the concern about overtime, and it deserves scrutiny. But just like every family makes certain spending decisions that perhaps stretch their means because they reflect their values, the same is true with this conference. I believe that when we lift up the department in moments like these, we improve morale and we reinforce the kind of department we want MPD to be.
Letting this gift acceptance and attendance at the conference get caught up in broader wrangling over the police budget is an exercise in missing the point. When it comes to MPD, this council’s approach is “yeah, but…,” and even our praise is qualified. With this gift acceptance we’re essentially saying, “yeah, we celebrate how you responded to a horrific mass shooting, but what about your overtime budget?” There’s a time and a place for that conversation. Now was not that time and this was not that place.
The levy is set, and it’s budget season
On Tuesday afternoon the Board of Estimate and Taxation met and set the city’s maximum property tax levy for 2027. The number came in at 11.9%, which is four times the estimated rate of inflation in 2027. The 11.9% includes the Park Board’s full levy request as well as the full request from the mayor. For the median home in Ward 7, that represents a 16% increase, or an additional $505 for the year. This does not include the 8.15% levy increase from Hennepin County or the increased levy from Minneapolis Public Schools.
These property tax increases do not solely affect homeowners, but renters as well, as multi-unit owners often pass taxation directly on through rent increases. Property owners will get an understanding of their new total property tax increases for 2027 when they receive their “Truth in Taxation” notice in the mail early November. While $505 might not seem like that much when it’s spread out over multiple payments, it’s just another example of costs increasing faster than inflation and squeezing more households’ budgets. Affordability is one of my top priorities, and that starts with the city getting serious about getting our fiscal house in order. With the city of Minneapolis having just about twice the 2027 levy of St. Paul (6.8%) we continue to make ourselves look unattractive for long-term investment.
The good news is that this is a maximum, and the Council can still bring the final levy down before the vote in December. With the levy set, we are officially in full-on budget mode here in my office. In case you weren’t able to make it, we recorded last Thursday night’s Community Conversation on the Mayor’s Proposed Budget, featuring a slide presentation from Budget Director Shawn Greene. I will reiterate what I said that night: the proposed levy is too high and we need to work together to bring it down.
Via constituent newsletter
Yes, autonomous vehicles (AVs) are already being tested in St. Paul.
While the majority of the media attention and regulatory debate has centered around neighboring Minneapolis, companies like Alphabet’s Waymo have expanded their mapping and testing operations into St. Paul. Waymo vehicles, featuring their signature roof-mounted sensors and cameras, have been spotted navigating the streets around the Minnesota State Capitol and nearby residential neighborhoods.
Here is what you need to know about AV testing in the area:
Human Drivers are Present: During this current phase of testing, the vehicles are not completely driverless. They operate with a human safety monitor behind the wheel to collect data, map the terrain, and evaluate how the technology handles unique winter weather conditions.
Regulatory Gray Area:
Under current Minnesota state law, autonomous vehicle testing is neither explicitly authorized nor prohibited. State lawmakers have debated multiple bills to establish a uniform permitting framework and safety guidelines, but statewide legislation has stalled.
Contrasting City Policies:
While the St. Paul city government has expressed a willingness to collaborate with operators to ensure streets remain safe and efficient, Minneapolis has seen intense pushback. The Minneapolis City Council recently passed an ordinance to require a human safety monitor in all robotaxis—a move that Mayor Jacob Frey vetoed, calling it a “back door ban”. Because St. Paul has not enacted a similar restriction, testing continues smoothly across the city.
Key part of Shaffer’s argument on AVs..
“I don’t think it’s our place to protect the jobs of one particular constituency, ”
So…
Thank you Mayor Frey. ��
Despite this SAME voting block of seven continuing to waste OUR time and suck up OUR limited City’s resources, when they knew this ordinance was not likely to make it through ( because it made no sense), Frey wasted no time.
https://www.fox9.com/news/minneapolis-mayor-robotaxi-regulation-veto-doesnt-make-sense-oct-
2-2026
About the MPD…
For anything to do with ANY law enforcement agency, this voting block is NEVER going to be supportive or helpful.
The reason that many of this group of 6 or 7 got on the Council in the first place, was to be antagonistic towards the MPD and to look for ways to disrupt, disassemble, and defund the MPD. So, they will never be helpful with anything concerning public safety. Absolutely nothing.
Yes – the Magnificent Seven are seriously priority-challenged. Much of our current problem started with the 2040 Plan under Lisa Bender. I want to know who is profiting from all the zoning changes, bike lanes, Towards Zero pedestrian safety etc – having been a professional driver in Mpls. & the entire metro with straight A’s in physics and math I can pretty much guarantee that greenhouse gas emissions have increased due to congestion caused by these policies. Where is that report? And what’s the price tag so far? These people don’t do proper research – anything developers and other contractors label as a benefit to the BIPOC community, environment etc is a sure sell to these fools whether it’s true or not. The BIPOC & environmental benefits were major selling points for the mangling of our transportation system – yet when held to account by the EPA on groundwater contamination by multiple new “affordable” housing developments the city bypassed its constituents & got a free pass from the state legislature. They are a developer’s dream customers. No life experience, no sales resistance and their idea of public engagement being to get feedback after already making decisions & committing to spending money are major problems.