Committee of the Whole Meeting - October 21, 2025

On Tuesday, October 21, 2025, the Minneapolis Committee of the Whole convened to review committee reports, address a legislative directive regarding withheld compensation data, and consider administrative resolutions. The meeting featured significant debate regarding transparency, access to taxpayer-funded studies, and the role of the administration versus the City Council, alongside standard agenda items including housing policy overviews and governance clarifications.

Consent Calendar

• Adoption of the 2026 transition calendar for regular City Council meetings.

Public Comments & Testimony

• No public comment section is recorded in the provided transcript; only direct member dialogue and staff presentations are included.

Discussion Items

Legislative Directive: Access to Guide House Compensation Study

• Councilmember Koskey introduced a directive requesting the administration provide the full Enterprise Wide Salary and Compensation Study conducted by Guide House Inc. for $650,000 in American Rescue Plan funds. She expressed strong support for making the report available to the Council, emphasizing that access is legally required under the City Charter for fiscal oversight and budget decisions. She highlighted that the administration's refusal to share the data following informal requests violated the City Charter and the Council-Administration Interactions Policy, noting that non-public data can be reviewed by Council members under secure, confidential processes.
• Council President Payne expressed support for the directive but voiced significant concern regarding the breakdown in collaborative governance. She stated she is not happy that a formal directive was necessary to access information, viewing it as a symptom of a culture where the administration withholds information that should be shared organically.
• Council Vice President Chugtai expressed support for the directive, characterizing the administration's inaction as a failure that must be corrected to restore a collaborative culture. She noted the frustration that a month and a half of follow-ups was required before this action was necessary, framing the vote as an opportunity for growth rather than blame.
• Councilmember Cashman expressed support for obtaining the data but offered a nuanced position, suggesting the situation felt unnecessarily political. She argued that briefings on the non-public data would suffice for the Council's governance role and expressed concern that a 600-page document required full transparency of gritty details that may not be necessary for high-level decision-making.
• Councilmember Palmasano expressed opposition to the necessity of the directive, characterizing the request as unnecessary politicking. She stated she supports access to information in principle but argued that public briefings would be adequate, asserting that the Council does not negotiate individual salaries and that the gamesmanship of the situation undermines the maturity of the Council.
• Councilmember Chavez questioned why the study could not be made public, expressing confusion over the lack of transparency regarding $650,000 of taxpayer dollars. Her position was supportive of transparency, noting that the Council must advocate for access to information in every instance.
• City Attorney Abelson provided legal context, stating that the study contains non-public data under Minnesota Statute 13.37 (labor relations data) because it informs management negotiation positions. He clarified that while the Council has a right to access the data for business purposes, the City Council does not have the authority under state law to waive the Data Practices Act to make such data public.

Resolution: Administrative Support for the Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET)

• Council President Payne discussed a resolution to clarify the administrative relationship between the Office of the City Clerk and the independent Board of Estimate and Taxation. She expressed support for the clarification, noting it establishes necessary "guide rails" for staff time usage following the hiring of a full-time BET staff member.
• Councilman Carl (Clerk's representative) explained that the BET lacks an organizational center for payroll, procurement, and administrative support. He stated the resolution provides administrative functionality to the BET, clarifying that the staff member primarily supports the BET but may assist legislative research when available.
• Councilmember Rainville asked for clarity on how staff time would be allocated. The City Clerk's representative confirmed there is no fixed percentage for non-BET work; assistance is provided only to the extent the BET staff position has available time.

Presentation: Social Housing Overview and Study Framework

• Director Andrew Hawkins and Sarah Renner from the Legislative Research and Oversight (LRO) division presented a policy briefing on social housing models to inform a future Request for Proposals (RFP). They outlined three typologies from the NYU Furman Center:
  • Group A: Public developer models using revolving loan funds (e.g., Montgomery County) for mixed-income housing.
  • Group B: Models leveraging federal programs to redevelop existing public housing (e.g., Atlanta).
  • Group C: Models using dedicated funding streams and portfolios of smaller properties to ensure permanent affordability (e.g., Dakota County).
• Councilmember Cashman inquired about the comparative advantages of public development over private/non-profit partners. Hawkins noted that public entities can leverage public land and financing tools that private actors cannot, specifically addressing needs not met by other sectors.
• Councilmember Payne expressed interest in the typology, noting it helps contextualize current low-interest market realities. She expressed a leaning toward the Dakota County model (Group C) for its local precedent but remained open to further research to determine the best alignment for Minneapolis.
• Councilmember Chugtai expressed interest in a deeper dive, specifically regarding capital funding, management costs, and Group A models involving market-rate housing to cross-subsidize affordable units.
• Council President Payne requested to receive and file the presentation without immediate action, prioritizing the foundational research provided.

Follow-Up Inquiries

• Councilmember Chavez requested a memo from the City Attorney regarding a previous Guide House salary survey from November 2023 to understand why a different study was considered public while the current one is classified as non-public.

Key Outcomes

• Legislative Directive Passed: 10-0 Vote in favor of directing the Mayor to provide the Guide House compensation study to the Council. The directive includes an understanding that the data is non-public and requires a confidential review process.
• Clarification of Vote Language: Council Members Palmasano and Chugtai requested a confirmation that the Director will amend the directive's language before the final vote on Thursday to explicitly state the data will not be made public via LIMS, as a violation of state law, which was a concern raised during the meeting. The Director confirmed the language would be updated.
• Resolution Adopted: 10-0 Vote in favor of the resolution recognizing administrative support for the Board of Estimate and Taxation within the Office of the City Clerk.
• Presentation Received: The Social Housing Overview was received and filed for informational purposes.
• New Item Added: A resolution recognizing administrative support for the Board of Estimate and Taxation was added to the agenda by Council President Payne after the initial roll call.