Meeting Information
- Date: September 11, 2024
- Title: Public Health and Safety Committee Meeting
- Present: Jason Chavez (Chair), Robin Wonsley (Vice Chair), Elliot Payne, Michael Rainville, Jeremiah Ellison, Linea Palmisano
- Guests: Mayor Jacob Frey, Rachel Sayre (nominee for Emergency Management Director)
- Votes: 4
Highlights
- Nomination of Rachel Sayre as Emergency Management Director
- Encampment Removal Reporting Ordinance discussion and vote
- Delay of discussion items due to time constraints
Discussion
Nomination of Rachel Sayre as Emergency Management Director
Mayor Frey introduced Rachel Sayre as his nominee for the position of Emergency Management Director. He highlighted her extensive experience in international humanitarian aid and disaster response, including work with U.S. Aid in various global crises. Council members asked questions about Sayre’s approach to emergency management, language access, and considerations for vulnerable communities during crises.
Sayre addressed the committee, emphasizing her background in emergency response and her commitment to making Minneapolis a leader in emergency preparedness. She highlighted her experience with the National Incident Management System and her focus on addressing the needs of the most affected people during emergencies.
Council members expressed support for the nomination, with several emphasizing the importance of language access and considering vulnerable populations in emergency planning.
The nomination was approved unanimously.
Encampment Removal Reporting Ordinance
Council Members Chowdhury, Chughtai, and Chavez presented an ordinance requiring regular reporting on encampment removals, including costs, outcomes for individuals experiencing homelessness, and public safety data. The ordinance aims to increase transparency and accountability in the city’s approach to encampments.
The discussion was lengthy and contentious, with council members and public commenters expressing a range of views. Supporters argued that the ordinance would provide necessary data to inform better policy decisions, while opponents raised concerns about potential delays in encampment closures and the scope of data collection.
Council Member Palmisano proposed an amendment to remove certain reporting requirements related to housing and services, arguing that these were outside the city’s jurisdiction. This amendment was debated but ultimately failed.
Council Member Ellison said: “This really is about transparency in spending. I do want to be, I know some folks might be upset because their experience with staff can be a traumatic one. Their experience with the system can be a traumatic one. But I really do view this as a systemic problem not an individual problem.”
The ordinance passed with a vote of 4 ayes and 2 nays.
Public Comments
There were numerous public comments on the Encampment Removal Reporting Ordinance, reflecting a wide range of perspectives:
Howard Johnson: Supported the ordinance and emphasized the need for better support for crime victims and addressing PTSD in communities affected by traumatic events.
Sarah Andrew: An outreach worker who supported the ordinance, describing firsthand experiences of the negative impacts of encampment closures on unhoused individuals.
Paul Pacheco: Expressed concerns about the impact of encampments on nearby residents and businesses, particularly children’s safety.
Ivana Winston: Advocated for creating stabilization communities in vacant city-owned properties to provide comprehensive support for unhoused individuals.
Elizabeth Anderson: Supported the ordinance, arguing for the need for transparency in city spending on encampment removals and questioning the effectiveness of current approaches.
Linda Leonard: Described challenges faced by property owners near encampments, including safety concerns and city fines for issues related to encampments.
Naomi Wilson: Supported the ordinance and criticized Council Member Palmisano’s proposed amendment, arguing it would put the city at odds with the county’s housing-first policy.
Joe Hessler: Supported the ordinance, describing encampment sweeps as institutional cruelty and emphasizing the need for accountability.
Multiple other commenters spoke both in support of and opposition to the ordinance, with supporters generally emphasizing the need for transparency and more humane treatment of unhoused individuals, while opponents raised concerns about public safety and the impact of encampments on surrounding communities.