Leftward, whoa! Balance needed in Minneapolis politics

With Minneapolis DFL endorsing conventions in the rearview mirror, it's time for the vast majority of voters to begin focusing on this year's City Council and mayoral election.

Endorsing contests these days, in both parties, pull candidates to the extremes. Some aspiring Minneapolis politicians believe success requires fealty to an agenda that has little to do with actually running municipal government, and everything to do with bringing a left-of-mainstream vision for the city into reality.

This agenda is determined by a small group of activists who have outsized influence over a process involving only a narrow slice of the population as participants. The most recent citywide endorsement gathering showed why. Attendees sat for 12 hours before casting a single indecisive ballot in the mayor's race, then adjourned. Not many people see that as a good use of the time they have to invest in civic involvement.

In City Council races, the result of this activist agenda being pushed has largely been stalemate. Nearly all incumbent members of the current council — which by any measure is among the most left-leaning in the nation — were targeted by opponents from the much further left. Only one, Blong Yang in the Fifth Ward covering north Minneapolis, saw a challenger endorsed. Yang is running in the fall anyway.

Several other members were denied endorsement, despite records at City Hall that would be the envy of progressive advocates anywhere else. Those incumbents are also running in the general election.

But while the endorsement results were modest, the left-of-mainstream agenda has shaped the debate thus far. So now it's time for everyone else to have a say. For the rest of the Minneapolis electorate, the contours of this election should be reshaped to offer a broader set of ideas from candidates. To get us started, here is a perspective on four of the many issues that will affect our city's future.

The Minneapolis economy has outperformed most other places in the nation in recent years. Record levels of investment have occurred. But not everyone has benefited. Employment disparities among racial groups are real and must be addressed.

The current response is a "command-and-control" approach, compelling city employers to pay certain benefits and a Minneapolis-only higher minimum wage. Employers will respond as they must for their own viability — by cutting employee hours, looking for more qualified workers and adopting business practices that are less labor-intensive.

The city's new policies will only hurt the lowest-earning workers, who most need chances for economic advancement. A better solution is to invest in these members of our community, through workforce partnerships involving community organizations, educational institutions and employers in need of prepared workers. And at the same time, encourage rather than inhibit job growth.

The debate so far has been one-sided in favor of "City Hall knows best." I hope this important discussion will deepen and ultimately take a different direction. If not, the landscape for neighborhood-scale commerce, in particular, will change for the worse in coming years. And that will translate into less opportunity for the folks who need it most.

Safe streets are fundamental to the success of any community. Any safety strategy must be multifaceted. One key is effective law enforcement and a well-functioning criminal justice system. At a time of fraught police-community relations, there is no more difficult issue to address in local politics.

But extreme views, ranging from "we don't need police" to "law enforcement can do no wrong" leave plenty of room to fashion a balanced approach that upholds the expectation of fair policing while also affirming the essential job that officers and others in the system perform.

An oft-heard truism in the current climate is "we can't arrest our way to safety." One's interpretation of that fact can either help elected leaders find the right balance or pull them in the wrong direction. An engaged, professional and energetic police force is central to a continuum of safety responses that also must include community outreach and prevention strategies. But outreach and prevention alone, like enforcement alone, will not deal with the crime that plagues some parts of our city and victimizes too many people. Minneapolis is a safe city most places, most of the time. Where that is not true, citizens rightly expect an unrelenting commitment to restoring order, with effective policing at the core of the response.

Minneapolis is a great city, playing a leading role during a period of American urban renaissance. But in a hypercompetitive environment, continued success can't be taken for granted. We can fall behind in the blink of an eye, either by lack of attention to positive opportunities and/or adoption of policies and practices that make Minneapolis a uniquely costly and complicated place to do business.

Our current officials have taken the city a long way down this ill-chosen path. And, make no mistake, there is more to come, depending on the outcome of this election. A burdensome workplace scheduling mandate, set aside 18 months ago, will be back front and center if the activist agenda prevails, as just one example. The most harmful impact of such policies will continue to be felt within our small-business sector, including immigrant-owned establishments.

Minneapolis also has to be concerned about future decisions by companies that have the ability to locate or invest elsewhere in an increasingly global and digital economy. Their decisions can easily be influenced by a perception based on City Hall actions that Minneapolis isn't "open for business." We may never see it coming, but could wake up one morning wondering what happened to our once-vibrant economy and the public-private partnerships that have ushered in much progress for our community.

Local government doesn't solve the world's problems. Anyone running on that platform is aspiring to hold the wrong office. City Hall does address the day-in, day-out street-level solutions that allow neighborhoods and their residents, and commercial districts and their businesses, to thrive. This set of responsibilities is broad and challenging enough, as is determining the proper level of property taxation for a suite of essential city functions. Most important, constituent services are the bread-and-butter responsibility of municipal officeholders.

In today's political climate, where the policy preferences of some who care deeply about important social issues aren't well-satisfied at the federal and state level, it's tempting to jump into local races believing that is a place to start. And it is, if candidates bring equal passion to the actual issues they will be resolving on behalf of city residents. Other agendas simply divert time, attention and resources from the core work of City Hall and inevitably result in unintended consequences that throw Minneapolis off-track.

This is shaping up as the most consequential municipal election in many years. To date, the debate has been led by an endorsement process pulling candidates toward a vision of Minneapolis that is far from mainstream. The loudest voices in the room have held sway so far, and many candidates have responded.

Going forward, the broader electorate should expect a more complete and balanced discussion of a full range of critical issues.

Perhaps a proudly progressive city will lurch sharply leftward, as some hope. But I would put my money on a different outcome — one that won't satisfy activists' demands, and that at times will continue to frustrate the business community as well. But it will keep Minneapolis steadily progressing toward a brighter future.

Steve Cramer is president and CEO of the Minneapolis Downtown Council and Downtown Improvement District. He is a former member of the Minneapolis City Council.