Jacob Frey: Minneapolis City Council, let’s choose collaboration

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of guest commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In Minneapolis, we pride ourselves on being a city that solves problems. That’s why earlier this year I challenged everyone in local government to work together — delivering for our neighbors as a united team. I saw that spirit reflected recently in the joint letter from incoming council members Jamison Whiting, Pearll Warren, Elizabeth Shaffer and Soren Stevenson, who pledged to govern cooperatively despite differing political ideologies and mayoral endorsements.

Every council member ran because they care about Minneapolis. On that, we agree. We all want safer neighborhoods, reliable services and a local government worthy of residents’ trust. Disagreement is normal — even healthy — but only when paired with dialogue and a willingness to compromise.

That’s why the recent budget amendments targeting the mayor’s office land so far off course. When the first move is so mean-spirited and blatantly political, the result is not a stronger city, but a divided one.

Several council members have proposed cutting the mayor’s office budget nearly in half — a move that would force me to fire a significant number of my staff. To be specific: eight of my 15 staff, meaning more than half of my team.

As far as I’m aware, no City Council has ever attempted to cut a mayor’s team. This move is unprecedented, and it raises an unavoidable question: If a candidate supported by the council majority had won the mayor’s race, would the new mayor’s office be facing these same cuts?

This is especially true given that Minneapolis voters approved a charter amendment just four years ago to establish a strong-mayor system of governance. Every administration — regardless of who is mayor — requires that capacity. Weakening the executive branch doesn’t strengthen the legislative one; it simply weakens the city.

Heading into the budget season, residents made clear that they want property tax increases kept as low as possible. I heard that, and I shaped my budget around it. My proposal adds no new spending to the mayor’s office — in fact, it slightly reduces it, even though it is already one of the smallest departments in City Hall. I proposed no cuts to the City Council’s budget and certainly not to its staff. And I put forward $26 million in overall reductions without laying off a single city employee. It’s the right balance between preserving city services and preventing a massive property tax hike, while protecting city employees from life-altering layoffs.

Beyond the direct impact on city services, what worries me most about targeting the mayor’s office is not the dollar amount but the message it would send. After voters asked for collaboration, stability and a reset at City Hall, beginning the year by gutting the mayor’s office is counterproductive and malicious. It distracts from the work residents expect us to get done.

And as national politics grow louder and more polarized — from shifts in federal priorities to the rhetoric coming out of the Trump campaign and administration — it becomes even more important that we avoid turning that conflict inward. Minneapolis has never waited for Washington to solve our problems, and we shouldn’t let federal dysfunction or partisan battles distract us from the work we are fully capable of doing together here at home. Our challenges are shared and so are our responsibilities. The real test of leadership is whether we can stay united in service to our residents, even when the broader political environment pushes us toward division.

To my colleagues on the council: Most of us will be working together for the next four years. I want that work to start on the right foot. Our budget should reflect residents’ needs — the people who elected each of us independently but expect us to govern collectively.

Let’s do the work the people of this city elected us to do. Minneapolis works better when we work together.