From Dave Beaudoin, Ballotpedia <[email protected]>
Subject Amendment to replace Minneapolis police could be on Nov. ballot
Date July 14, 2020 9:32 AM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
A potential charter amendment to replace the Minneapolis Police Department + three statewide primaries are tonight
------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------

[link removed]

Welcome to the Tuesday, July 14, Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

* First public hearing on charter amendment to replace the Minneapolis Police Department will take place Wednesday
* Statewide primaries to be held in three states tonight
* State supreme court justices have a 98% win rate in retention elections since 2008

------------------------------------------------------------

 
** FIRST PUBLIC HEARING ON CHARTER AMENDMENT TO REPLACE THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL TAKE PLACE WEDNESDAY
------------------------------------------------------------

Tomorrow, July 15, the Minneapolis Charter Commission will hold a public hearing on a proposed charter amendment that would remove all reference to the city's police department from the charter and add a section establishing the Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention. The Minneapolis City Council proposed this amendment for the Nov. 3 ballot.

Here is a timeline of the events leading up to the charter amendment and how far this measure has progressed:

*
MAY 25: Minneapolis police officers arrested George Floyd, a Black man, after receiving a call that he had made a purchase with a counterfeit $20 bill. Floyd died after one officer, Derek Chauvin, arrived at the scene and pressed his knee onto Floyd's neck as Floyd laid face-down on the street in handcuffs.

*
JUNE 12: Sponsors of the charter amendment gave notice of their intent to introduce the amendment at the next city council meeting.

*
JUNE 26: The Minneapolis City Council voted unanimously to send the proposed charter amendment to the Minneapolis Charter Commission.

*
While the city council does not have to follow the recommendation of the charter commission, the city council cannot act on the proposal before receiving an official recommendation from the charter commission according to state law.

*
The charter commission has a maximum of 150 days to review charter amendment proposals from the city council.

*
The city council must give final approval to the charter amendment by August 21 to put the measure on this year’s ballot. It requested the charter commission to expedite its review.

*
JULY 1: The charter commission scheduled the first of two public hearings on the amendment for July 15.

*
AUGUST 5: In response to the request for an expedited timeline, Commission Chair Barry Clegg said that the commission would consider a final decision on the proposal during its August 5 meeting, allowing for a vote by the city council by August 21 if the commission agrees on a recommendation. Clegg said, however, "If we elect to take our additional time, this ballot question will not be on the ballot in November.”

*
AUGUST 21: The deadline for the city council to approve the amendment for the Nov. 3 ballot.

The measure would:

*
Establish the Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention and the director of the new department

*
The director of the department would be nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the city council

*
Allow a Division of Law Enforcement Services within the new department 

*
The division would be made up of licensed peace officers

*
Its director would be appointed by the director of the Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention

*
Give the city council authority to establish the Division of Law Enforcement Services

Currently, the mayor has authority over the police department and nominates the police chief, who must be confirmed by the city council. The existing charter also requires the city council to provide funding to the police department to provide for "a police force of at least 0.0017 employees per resident." 

Minneapolis City Council members Jeremiah Ellison, Alondra Cano, Cam Gordon, Steve Fletcher, and President Lisa Bender sponsored the proposal. 

Mayor Jacob Frey opposes the amendment. 

This isn’t the first time the city council has tried to put a charter amendment concerning the police department on the ballot. In 2018, the Minneapolis City Council voted 7-5 to send a charter amendment proposal to the Minneapolis Charter Commission that would have repealed provisions in the charter giving the mayor complete control over the city's police department. The measure would have, instead, allowed rules and regulations for the police department to come from both the city council and the mayor. The charter commission did not make a recommendation to the city council in time for the city council to put the measure on the 2018 ballot. Click here ([link removed]) for the timeline of that 2018 charter amendment proposal.

Learn more ([link removed])

mailto:?&[email protected]&subject=Check out this info I found from Ballotpedia&body=[link removed] [blank]    [link removed]'s%20Daily%20Brew [blank] [blank]    [link removed]
------------------------------------------------------------
[blank][link removed]
REGISTER TODAY ([link removed]) →
------------------------------------------------------------

 
** STATEWIDE PRIMARIES TO BE HELD IN THREE STATES TONIGHT
------------------------------------------------------------

We’re covering statewide elections in Alabama, Maine, and Texas tonight, July 14. After that, no statewide primary elections will take place until Aug. 4 ([link removed]) .

 In the past week, we’ve previewed some of the battleground races that will be on the ballot, including:

*
Democratic primary runoff for the U.S. Senate seat from Texas ([link removed])

*
Republican primary runoff for the U.S. Senate seat from Alabama ([link removed])

*
Republican primary for Maine’s 2nd Congressional District ([link removed])

If you’ve got an election today, don’t forget to use our sample ballot ([link removed]) feature for information on what’s on your ballot.

Learn more→ ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

 
** STATE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES HAVE A 98% WIN RATE IN RETENTION ELECTIONS SINCE 2008
------------------------------------------------------------

From 2008 to 2019, state supreme court justices have WON 98% OF RETENTION ELECTIONS, according to a Ballotpedia study ([link removed]) . Here are some quick stats:

*
155 state supreme court justices have faced retention elections since 2008. Incumbent justices won 152 (98%) of these elections. 

*
During that time period, incumbent justices in non-retention elections faced 196 elections. They won 176 (90%) of these elections. 

*
Incumbent justices in all types of election experienced a 93% win rate.

In retention elections, voters are asked whether an incumbent judge should remain on the bench for another term. The judge does not face an opponent and is removed from the position if a majority votes against retention.

Each state plus the District of Columbia has at least one supreme court, or court of last resort. Oklahoma and Texas both have two such courts—one for civil appeals and one for criminal appeals. There are 344 state supreme court justices in the 53 state courts of last resort, including the District of Columbia. Governors appoint justices in 27 states, while in the remaining 23 states, supreme court justices are elected.

Iowa is the only state since 2008 in which justices lost retention elections. Iowa Supreme Court justices Marsha K. Ternus, Michael J. Streit, and David Baker lost their retention elections in 2010 ([link removed]) following their participation in a decision to remove the state ban on same-sex marriage. 

Learn more→ ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

BALLOTPEDIA DEPENDS ON THE SUPPORT OF OUR READERS.

The Lucy Burns Institute, publisher of Ballotpedia, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. All donations are tax deductible to the extent of the law. Donations to the Lucy Burns Institute or Ballotpedia do not support any candidates or campaigns.
 

Click here to support our work ([link removed])
 
------------------------------------------------------------

============================================================
** Follow on Twitter ([link removed])
   ** Friend on Facebook ([link removed])
_Copyright © 2020, All rights reserved._

OUR MAILING ADDRESS IS:

Ballotpedia
8383 Greenway Blvd
Suite 600
Middleton, WI 53562
Decide which emails you want from Ballotpedia.
** Unsubscribe ( [link removed] )
 or ** update subscription preferences ( [link removed] )
.
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis

  • Sender: Ballotpedia
  • Political Party: n/a
  • Country: United States
  • State/Locality: n/a
  • Office: n/a
  • Email Providers:
    • Pardot
    • Litmus