In executive order, mayor directs Minneapolis to implement police reforms nixed by Trump

MINNEAPOLIS — Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey issued an executive order Tuesday directing city staff to implement the terms of the federal police reform agreement that was crushed by the Trump administration last month.

The order instructs the City Attorney’s Office to create a formal index of all reform items from the now-dissolved federal consent decree, except those that are already included in or conflict with a separate settlement with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.

It asks the city attorney to advise on how to allow an independent watchdog of the state’s settlement to also monitor the implementation of these terms. The order requires “full cooperation” from city leaders and employers in making the changes first laid out in the agreement, and can be rescinded only by a future mayor.

“We are committed to police reform, even if the Trump administration is not,” Frey said in a statement to the Minnesota Star Tribune on Tuesday. ”Our residents demanded meaningful change, and we’re delivering on that promise with this executive order, ensuring the work outlasts politics and any one administration.”

The executive order marks the latest episode in a twisting saga that began with George Floyd’s murder five years ago, sparking state and federal civil rights investigations into the Minneapolis Police Department and prompting city leaders to chart a new path on the future of policing.

Since the Justice Department announced last month it was dissolving the federal agreement negotiated under Joe Biden’s presidency, elected officials in Minneapolis have scrambled to assure residents they will keep their promises to rebuild the city’s public safety system.

Over the past couple of weeks, some City Council members have proposed a separate contingency plan: The city could take the terms of the federal agreement and fold them into the state’s Department of Human Rights settlement, which is in effect. This would ensure the agreement is still enforceable by a judge and monitored by an independent watchdog, according to proponents of that plan.

“Community members have noted that ‘there is a clear difference between a promise made by politicians and a legally binding settlement.’ I couldn’t agree more,” City Council Member Robin Wonsley wrote in a recent letter to constituents, nodding to promises from Frey and others to carry out the reforms, even without a court agreement.

“I believe that Minneapolis residents deserve not only a verbal commitment, but a legally binding one too,” Wonsley wrote.

But in a June 2 internal memo obtained by the Star Tribune, City Attorney Kristyn Anderson has warned the council members they don’t have the authority to take this action.

The mayor’s office holds authority over police operations and contract negotiations, and the directive from the council would attempt to “invade or usurp” that authority, according to Anderson.

Asking the City Attorney’s Office to reopen the settlement and reach a specific result also “inappropriately infringes on the professional responsibilities” of the office, Anderson wrote. The city attorney represents the city enterprise — not any single elected official — and must be able to exercise independent judgement, give candid advice and only pursue “meritorious legal arguments.”

“Whether issued by the Council or the Mayor, any directive that seeks to direct the [City Attorney] to take actions regardless of their professional responsibilities is an improper directive,” the memo says.

In 2023, the Justice Department charged the Minneapolis Police Department with a pattern of unjustified deadly force, unlawful discrimination against Black and Native American people, violations of free-speech rights and at times causing trauma or death when responding to behavioral health crises. The report was drawn from reviews of thousands of hours of body camera recordings and documents, analysis of data on calls for service, stops, uses of force and other officer activities from 2016 to 2022.

Investigators also interviewed some 2,000 community members, including family members of those killed by police, and members of the department in all ranks.

“The patterns and practices of conduct the Justice Department observed during our investigation are deeply disturbing,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said at a news conference in Minneapolis in June 2023. “They erode the community’s trust in law enforcement. And they made what happened to George Floyd possible.”

City leaders pledged to begin to negotiate a court-enforceable consent decree with the Justice Department while appointing an independent monitor to oversee it.

But by the time the city and Justice Department finished negotiations, Donald Trump had won the 2024 election and was preparing to take office. Many in the city anticipated the Trump administration would move to dissolve the consent decree, as it had attempted to do in Baltimore during his first term, and began working on a Plan B.

Last month, after the Justice Department officially moved to nix the consent decree, Frey gathered with police and City Council leadership in a unified pledge to continue to enact the changes laid out in the agreement. “We‘re doing it anyway,” Frey said.

In a statement, state Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero said the agency “has expressed to the city its openness” to incorporate unique terms of the consent decree into the state agreement.

Yet without a court-enforceable agreement, some said they worried the long-fought reforms would fall by the wayside of a future city administration or police chief.

Wonsley proposed a City Council vote on directing the City Attorney’s Office to negotiate the terms of the consent decree into the state agreement, which also came out of an investigation after Floyd’s killing that found a pattern of racist and illegal policing.

In a statement, Anderson said she could not comment on the specific language of the legal memo because it’s classified as privileged.

“The City Attorney’s Office has spent months exploring whether this was a viable option,” Anderson said. “But this is not something that we can do on our own; it would require a legal basis to request and receive Court approval. At this point, we have not found a legal pathway forward.”

___________