Thread by @BokononsProphet

🧵

I'm flat out opposed to Ballot Question 1. It's a power grab by the elite of Minneapolis, plain and simple. It's defenders have never put up a logical reason why we need it and I'd never trust the people who made sure it's on the ballot. 1/16

I don't like being uniformed though. I looked for a good primer on how the Minneapolis city government is structured, but searches largely just return the noise that's generated today, which isn't what I want.

This article from 2013 though... 2/16

minnpost.com/politics-polic…

I'm going to use Jacob as a proxy here for all of the people pushing for Yes on 1. He may not have said all of these things, but they're part of the larger argument. 3/16

First thing... Jacob is correct when he says the system used by Minneapolis is very rare, but isn't a "weak mayor" system which is typical for small towns (and not large cities). That's where the truth from Jacob ends.

Jacob is purposely conflating these two things. 4/16

In a true weak mayor system, the mayor is responsible for just about nothing. It's how you can get a dog elected mayor in some places. It's a figurehead position. This is not the case in Minneapolis. 5/16

In Minneapolis's system, the mayor does have extensive powers as the chief executive, but not as many as in a "strong mayor" system.

Here I'm going to take the Park Board and Education out of the thread because they would be unaffected by Ballot Question 1. 6/16

The mayor has the power to nominate major appointments which must then be approved by the executive committee. This is *a lot* like how the Senate confirms appointees for the cabinet and it's one of the places where Jacob's "14 bosses" argument breaks down. 7/16

This is how shared government works.

There are checks & balances.

If there were a terrorist attack, Congress would get the appropriate secretaries into hearings to demand answers. They wouldn't just be responsible to the President after having the Senate approved them.

8/16

The President never complains about 539 bosses for secretaries.

Additionally, these committees aren't the entire council.
Example: The police chief can get called in to talk to the Public Safety Committee. There are 6 members of that committee. So it's more like 7 bosses. 9/16

Back to the terrorism example: those secretaries (Defense, Homeland Security) would have hearings with the House and Senate Homeland Security committees.

They're accountable to 35 House & 14 Senate members.

The President never complains about 50 bosses for secretaries. 10/16

So... the "14 bosses" thing is never brought up at the federal or state level, even though a very similar structure is set there. So what's the deal? Why would the Charter Commission and Jacob want to eliminate accountability?

11/16

For the same thing I started with: Power. Ballot Question 1 was put on the ballot by the Charter Commission. The people didn't do it, well-connected Minneapolis citizens with money and power wanted it for their own reasons.

Why wasn't this on the ballot 2, 4, 6 years ago? 12/16

Because those well-connected Minneapolitans didn't have their power threatened by an uprising & the political awakening of so many people

They were content with the current system because they weren't threatened

They needed to do something once their power was threatened. 13/16

You might think it's a minor change, but it's not. In the words of @amyklobuchar
14/16

This is a deliberate assault by the charter commission and those people behind it to consolidate their power. They want to control the mayor and the people who could become mayor down the road.

That's it. It's a naked power grab because they don't think anyone will notice 15/16

Hard to believe my gut instinct was that right. The system is far closer to the Legislative/Chief Executive systems at the state/federal level than Jacob would have you believe.

So, remember your ballots.

Q 1 - No
Q 2 - Yes
Q3 - Yes

And absolutely #DontRankFrey

16/16