Readers Write: The Lake Street raid and policing in Minneapolis

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

The other day I ran into a St. Paul police officer at a local deli and gave him a subtle nod of respect as I walked by him. I grew up in St. Paul, and 12 of my high school classmates went on to become police officers. Their job is really difficult, and they deal with the worst of worst and put their lives on the line every day they work the beat. These hardworking officers are our friends and neighbors, and I always look at them with respect. In essence, we know them and we see them.

It was with a heavy heart, then, that I opened the paper Wednesday morning to see masked and heavily armed law enforcement agents raiding a Mexican restaurant in Minneapolis (“Federal, local agents clash with protesters on Lake Street,” June 4). They’ll tell you these agents need to protect their identities, as these are dangerous gang members who could threaten them or their families. Fair enough, maybe that’s the case, but at the end of the day it’s not the type of policing I want in my city or society in general. That type of policing, whether you like it or not, has an odious smell to it. I do not want to walk down my street seeing masked agents plucking people off the street carrying semi-automatics. It reeks of Nazi Germany — there, I said it.

Ask me what type of police I want in the city. I want the officer in the deli or my classmate who honorably retired after 30 years on the force a few months ago. I can see them, and I know them, as their identities aren’t concealed. To those agents in the recent raids, I ask you: Which officer do you want to be? The one who commands my respect or the one who makes my stomach turn?

Sean Klett, Woodbury

•••

Making the assumption that it was an immigration raid and being taken back that you were not informed of this activity is careless and dangerous behavior.

Let these professionals complete their assignment to protect the community.

It apparently wasn’t what you all thought it to be, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid. One individual stated that without notice ahead of time it caused confusion in the community. Well, law enforcement does not make the public aware of a raid ahead of time ... that would defeat the purpose of the raid.

Do you want drugs and money laundering going on in your community? I think not, so let these agents do their jobs in controlling crime. The extra officers were sent to control the protesters and keeping under control for safety reasons.

Deb Schaefgen, Maple Grove

This is not the first crime crisis for the city in recent decades. Building on the violence of the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s, in 1996 the New York Times declared Minneapolis to be “Murderapolis.” The city clawed its way back through good strategy (CODEFOR, a computer-assisted targeting of police resources), communication, resources (police officers and partnerships), the support of the community and elected officials.

While recent months have shown declines in violent crime and MPD hiring has improved, we are certainly not out of the woods. There are things that give me hope. I was on the search committee when Chief Brian O’Hara was hired and have gotten to know Hennepin County Sheriff Dawanna Witt. In my opinion they are the most thoughtful and experienced — but humble — team of public safety leaders our city has known. That partnership deserves our support and the time they need for reform and to restore public safety.

Gregory Hestness, Minneapolis

The writer is a retired deputy chief of the Minneapolis Police Department and retired chief of the University of Minnesota Police Department.

Wednesday’s Star Tribune featured a counterpoint from the good folks at Plymouth Congregational Church that I can only describe as “Orwellian” (“Pushing for police coaching records is legally risky,” Strib Voices). In his classic “1984,” George Orwell taught some of us how important words, including redefining them or using them in a misleading fashion, can shape public discourse and even support an authoritarian regime.

The writers from Plymouth point out certain privacy issues associated with the treatment of complaints about public employees. Data about that treatment is regulated by Chapter 13 of Minnesota Statues. What is Orwellian in their discussion is their consistent description of Chapter 13 as the “state Data Privacy Act.” The use of that label is both wrong and misleading. I think they chose that label to reinforce their privacy arguments.

Chapter 13 that regulates government’s use of and access to government data is officially entitled the “Minnesota Government Data Practices Act.” The predecessor statutory language to Chapter 13 was unofficially called a data privacy act for a few years. That practice ended in 1979 when the statute acquired its official name. Part of the reason for an official name citation reference was to help the public understand that the revised statute reflected not just regulation of the government’s use of personal data but now put a strong emphasis on public access to government data. I know that because I, working with the Revisor of Statutes Office, got to pick the official name.

Shreves and Satorius discussed the importance of privacy for public employees. In response and to illustrate the importance of words, I only have two: Derek Chauvin.

Don Gemberling, St. Paul