Rather than focusing on the challenging task of rebuilding the devastated commercial corridors of East Lake Street and West Broadway, the Minneapolis City Council has spent crucial time crafting a resolution declaring racism a "public health emergency" ("Council calls racism health crisis," front page, July 18). Apparently, the council believes that the city's appalling racial disparities could be magically erased if only its citizens would cast off their retrograde attitudes.
But would the council members concede that many Twin Cities suburbs are less racist than their very diverse and progressive city? Because some of the most measurable disparities, such as high school graduation rates, are vastly worse in Minneapolis than in suburbia. But I highly doubt people in those communities are more open-minded and committed to equality than the citizens of Minneapolis.
It would be very hard to find a city in America as racially "woke" as Minneapolis. In some of the wealthiest neighborhoods, Black Lives Matter signs are more numerous than dandelions. Further, I'd bet that more people in those same neighborhoods are currently viewing and discussing the documentary "13th" than binge-watching "Downton Abbey" reruns.
So maybe the Minneapolis City Council should put some effort into attracting businesses to the city that offer living wages, training and upward mobility for residents on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. I know that's not as exciting as taking on the 400-year-old American problem of racism, but economic empowerment will likely improve more lives and knock down more barriers than any diversity training course.
Jerry Anderson, Eagan
MINNEAPOLIS POLICE
So much for Chief Arradondo
In "Reforms could shape chief's fate" (front page, July 20), several City Council members suggest there is a leadership role for Chief Medaria Arradondo in the new department of community safety proposed in the city charter amendment. They are at best misleading the public. The charter amendment is clear. The head of the new department "will have non-law enforcement experience in community safety services, including but not limited to public health and/or restorative justice approaches." Doesn't sound like the chief!
At least Council Member Cam Gordon is honest when he says he doesn't want to turn the charter decision into a referendum on the chief. He knows the chief is popular and he knows the chief will not be the leader if the charter amendment passes. The proponents of the amendment have disqualified the chief as a leader and don't want to admit it — another example of the pervasive continuing political malpractice by the council. Do the hard work of reimagining the police force before asking the public to approve a vacuous, feel-good proposal. The current proposal is a step back, not a way forward.
Hart Kuller, Minneapolis
• • •
Two observations regarding the potential charter amendment: The council might get more public support if 1) the amendment specifically required the establishment of a police force in a Division of Law Enforcement Services (and perhaps the council could retain the ability to make it as big/small as necessary) and 2) the amendment provided the option for the director of the new department of community safety to have only law-enforcement experience.
I suspect a majority of voters would feel a lot more supportive if the council would simply commit to a functional need for at least a few police officers. And why place a limit on the requirements for the director? The council will have final approval.