The discussion on the MPD budget was underscored by concerns over public safety and fiscal responsibility. A council member highlighted the importance of maintaining robust public safety services, citing that the MPD budget had increased from $187 million in 2022 to a projected $229 million by 2025. The anticipated overspend of nearly $20 million at the year’s end was attributed to a lack of vacancy savings and the need for increased officer training. Some members expressed frustration over the divisive rhetoric surrounding police funding, emphasizing that the focus should remain on effective financial oversight and accountability for the department’s operations.

Council members also deliberated on a proposed budget amendment aimed at addressing the city’s low clearance rates for nonfatal shootings, which stood at a concerning 26%. The amendment proposed earmarking $1.7 million to fund seven to nine investigators for a dedicated task force, modeled after a successful initiative in St. Paul. The task force in St. Paul reportedly boosted clearance rates to 74% and reduced shots fired by 30%. While some expressed hope that the amendment could replicate these results in Minneapolis, others raised concerns about the lack of similar state aid and the potential impact on existing precinct operations.

In parallel to the police budget discussions, homelessness emerged as another issue, with council members debating amendments related to emergency housing and shelter funding. An amendment proposing $1 million in one-time funding from the Local Affordable Housing Fund to support ongoing shelter services through Hennepin County sparked debate. Concerns were raised about the long-term implications of using funds intended for affordable housing to address immediate shelter needs. Some council members cautioned against pitting long-term housing solutions against short-term emergency measures, warning that such practices could undermine future housing stability.

The committee also addressed a proposal titled “Tiny Homes Big Dreams Study,” which requested $15,000 to explore the feasibility of a tiny home village as a solution to the rising homelessness crisis. This amendment received unanimous support. Additionally, there was strong advocacy for restoring funding for emergency housing vouchers, which had been cut in the mayor’s proposed budget for 2026. The vouchers were seen as crucial for supporting unsheltered residents and providing wraparound services.

Amidst the broader discussions, a debate unfolded over a contract with Zen City, a company engaged in surveying residents’ interactions with the police. Concerns were raised about the ethical implications of contracting with a company involved in surveillance activities in Palestine. The committee questioned the validity of using the Zen City contract to meet the Minneapolis Department of Human Rights (MDHR) settlement agreement requirements, emphasizing the need for transparency and community alignment in vendor relationships.

As the meeting progressed, council members turned their attention to various community initiatives, including a proposal for a Street Vendor Program aimed at enhancing compliance and cultural competency among vendors. The program received support, with members highlighting its positive impact on vendor certifications and business expansion. Another amendment focused on opioid response initiatives, specifically targeting South Minneapolis. This proposal aimed to support cultural organizations in outreach efforts to combat the opioid crisis, which was described as disproportionately affecting certain areas.