President Payne articulated his frustration, noting that the necessity for formal action to access information reflects a breakdown in the city’s new governance structure. He highlighted instances where the MPD allegedly withheld data from the city auditor, which Payne deemed a violation of the city charter. Payne’s remarks underscored the broader cultural issues within the administration concerning transparency. He recounted a canceled meeting with the mayor meant to foster collaboration between the council and administrative leadership.

Another council member echoed Payne’s sentiments, emphasizing the $650,000 taxpayer-funded report’s importance to the council’s understanding of the city’s workforce. This member expressed shock over the lack of informal communication about the report, stressing the council’s vested interest and the expectation that such information should be accessible without needing a legislative directive. They framed the directive as an opportunity to rectify the situation and improve collaboration within the city government.

Council Member Linea Palmisano offered a differing perspective, supporting the push for information access but questioning the directive’s necessity. Palmisano argued that briefings could suffice for the council’s informational needs, criticizing the push for a directive as political maneuvering. Conversely, Council Member Jason Chavez questioned the rationale behind treating the report as non-public, given the taxpayer investment involved. Chavez called for greater transparency, while the city attorney explained the statutory protections covering the report, which relate to management negotiation positions.

Council Member Emily Koski highlighted the report’s financial implications, noting that personnel salaries account for half of the city’s general fund. Koski expressed frustration over the council’s need to resort to legislative action to access vital information, emphasizing the urgency of receiving the report to inform budgetary decisions. Vice President Aisha Chughtai and Council Member Chavez both dismissed the idea that their actions were gamesmanship, insisting that their request for information was a necessary step to fulfill their oversight responsibilities.

In other business, the council deliberated on a resolution related to the Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET). The resolution, introduced by President Payne, includes the addition of a full-time staff member to support the BET, fostering collaboration on exploring new revenue sources for the city.

The meeting also featured a presentation on social housing, with Andrew Hawkins and Sara Renner from the Legislative Research Office providing an overview of social housing models. They detailed successful implementations in cities like Vienna and Singapore, emphasizing the potential for Minneapolis to adopt similar approaches to address housing affordability challenges. The presentation highlighted three primary typologies of social housing models, including mixed-income housing facilitated by government-backed loans, public housing conversions, and affordable housing using dedicated funding streams.

Council Member Katie Cashman raised questions regarding the research findings, particularly seeking to understand specific housing needs in Minneapolis that remain unmet by other partners. Cashman linked the social housing study to municipal revenue.

Lastly, the council discussed Dakota County’s approach to avoiding competition with non-profit developers for government subsidies. Dakota County leverages a dedicated housing tax levy and bonding authority to finance affordable projects, maintaining affordability while managing debt through a diverse revenue pool. This model, along with others discussed, illustrates the potential pathways Minneapolis could explore to enhance its housing policies amidst current financial conditions.