Readers Write: Violence prevention, Minneapolis politics, Trump’s first 100 days

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

•••

It is important to give historical context to the Star Tribune report about the inadequate oversight of violence prevention contracts (“Violence prevention faltering in Mpls.,” April 27). The obvious reason for this poor accountability is that the city was compelled to put violence prevention groups on the street immediately to meet the public safety crisis caused by the simultaneous shocks of George Floyd’s murder, pandemic disruptions and a one-third drop in Minneapolis police officers. The Star Tribune sounded this alert on Jan. 21, 2021: “Facing twin demands to curb police brutality and turn back a surge in violent crime, Minneapolis leaders have tripled the budget of a low profile city agency that treats violence as a public health crisis.” Unfortunately, the system’s infrastructure to handle this exploded budget did not exist within either that “low profile agency,” or the groups that were awarded contracts.

It takes a great deal of time, experienced staff and IT investment to create this infrastructure from scratch. As a downtown resident, I was happy that the city ignored this problem in order to put boots on the ground immediately on Nicollet Mall and other hot spots, and this paper has reported that murders, shootings and robberies did in fact begin to decline in 2021.

It should be no surprise that the price for this urgent rollout was poor accountability and that there is still fallout from this. However, Community Safety Commissioner Todd Barnette assured us in Friday’s article that the Neighborhood Safety Department is strengthening its invoicing and procurement processes and that “we’re on the right path.” We should take him at his word, while of course staying watchful as this new critical effort continues to roll out at a pace and on a scale unseen in our city’s history.

John Satorius, Minneapolis

Thanks to Charlie Rybak for this public conversation that has been going on privately for years (“There’s something rotten in Minneapolis politics,” Strib Voices, April 28). I agree with him and have played both sides of this fence. I attend the do-nothing caucuses, which are painful to endure. (My regular advice is to bring your sharp stick so you can poke your eyes out while you sit there for 12 hours doing nothing.) I also support the evil PACs because they make visible the obvious problems. What’s a citizen to do?

This year, it was proposed that a candidate who accepts an endorsement from another party shouldn’t be eligible for endorsement by the DFL. Shot down. That, of course, was aimed at the “progressive” socialists, who spend tons of money to be endorsed by the DFL, where many “moderates” want a voice too. I’m using Rybak’s terms as he defines them.

Our one-party town is to blame. All “conservative” and “radical” voices need to be contained within one party, which can’t work. What happened to “middle-of-the-road,” where most people live? (Remember Council Member Denny Schulstad, in a ward now run by a progressive with no competition?) We have a lot of work to do to fix this town, and the current DFL isn’t the vehicle for it. We must do away with the whole caucus concept. Ranked-choice voting does the rest.

Mary Ann Knox, Minneapolis

•••

I found much to agree with in Rybak’s critique of the sad state of Minneapolis politics. He diplomatically characterizes the competing sides as moderates and progressives. Particularly distressing is the absence of candid dialogue and, as Rybak points out, a zero-sum approach to governing.

All of Mpls was formed in 2021 to oppose the amendment to dissolve the Police Department as we know it and perhaps incorporate a police department within a Department of Public Safety. The amendment was soundly defeated.

Minneapolis for the Many was formed in 2023 and in many ways was a successor to the Yes 4 Minneapolis group, which advocated for the charter amendment to eliminate a police force.

Rybak left out one very salient data point when he compared funding for the two groups. In fair disclosure, I have become a supporter of All of Mpls. In the 2024 campaign reports, All of Mpls disclosed that 99% of its donors came from Minnesota residents and unions. My immigrant great-grandfather arrived in Minneapolis in 1878, which I believe makes me a legitimate Minneapolitan.

Conversely, the 2024 report for Minneapolis for the Many shows that 2% of its funds came from Minnesotans, whereas 87% came from the Movement Voter PAC, a Massachusetts-based left-leaning organization supporting fellow travelers nationwide.

We need to keep an eye out for the puppet masters.

The writer, retired, was chief of the University of Minnesota Police Department and deputy chief of the Minneapolis Police Department.

Since the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration’s flurry of activity in its first 100 days, Americans have noted the changes new presidential administrations have accomplished in that same period. While the second Trump administration has made an unprecedented number of sweeping executive actions in its first 100 days, its legislative accomplishments are meager. According to Wikipedia, only four bills have been signed into law and two more await the president’s signature. Of those, one is the continuing resolution to fund the government temporarily, one instructs Homeland Security to detain aliens who are charged with theft and other crimes, and the other four are rollbacks of rules submitted by different parts of the Biden administration.

While the executive actions have been disruptive of our economy, our federal government, our standing in the world and possibly our national security, they are not permanent. The courts can stop them (as is happening on a number of them), the next president can reverse them with an executive order and, in principle, Congress could overrule them.

With regard to Congress, there are 91 bills the House has passed that have not been acted on in the Senate. This speaks to the power of the Democratic minority in the Senate. Our democratic system is complicated, requiring many players to make lasting change, not just the decisions of one person or even a compliant majority in the House.

Perhaps the record of this new administration thus far is more about chaos and disruptive initiatives, rather than lasting accomplishments.

•••

When all else fails, Democrats revert to “wonk-ism,” which is a tendency to focus on messages about issues that are obscure or too many and complex for the public to comprehend. Recent polls demonstrate growing dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump’s economic policies. Retirees on Medicare and Social Security; farmers and working folks are apprehensive. These are folks who voted for Trump.

So, are Democrats united around basic and simple messages focusing on Medicare cuts, inflation or farm prices and export disruption? No, they are all over the map. Here’s a simple formula: Stand firm on Medicare. Eliminate taxes on Social Security and pass a farm bill limiting tariffs. Then, announce that these efforts will be funded by higher taxes on the wealthy.

But, to make this strategy work, Democrats must stick together on these messages alone. Nothing else. If you rally around farmers and retirees, you strike at core groups that voted for Trump. This strategy makes the seats much hotter for moderate Republicans in 2026.

Dan Gunderson, Minneapolis

Remarkably, somehow “no one is above the law” has a different meaning depending on which side of the fence you are on.