Minneapolis City Politics General Discussion

[amiller92]

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

However, some of the people on the council routinely blame mediocrity as a reason to do nothing (see: Palmisano's logic that because we do a bad job plowing streets, we shouldn't even try to plow sidewalks), so it's not a major leap to see disorganized scheduling as a cynical way to delay policy the person who demanded to be put in charge of all the departments doesn't want to see pass.

The people in the room knew who was absent and why. That was enough information to know not to do what they did. You accommodate other people's faith, regardless of whether the outcome would change.

[twincitizen]

Counter-thought: The three who were not in the room were all strong proponents of rent control, and they 100% knew the vote was happening at this meeting (which, again, had already been rescheduled from Thurs to Weds in efforts to avoid conflicting with Eid...until the holiday changed just 10 days ago). Religious holiday or not, all three made a conscious decision to skip the vote. Why couldn't they have attended morning prayers and then shown up for the Council meeting for an hour to make the vote? The Council meeting doesn't last all day...they absolutely could have come in for this critical vote. I literally don't believe that their religion is more important to them than their political priorities...they ran for office to pass things like rent control. This was a political stunt. Skipping the vote and claiming religious intolerance is pretty clearly rallying their side in support, as intended.

[VacantLuxuries]

The people in the room knew who was absent and why. That was enough information to know not to do what they did. You accommodate other people's faith, regardless of whether the outcome would change.

Oh I agree. The people who were in the room decided to take this opportunity despite how it would look, which is a reflection on them.

My comment was largely dealing with the thoughts of whoever set this conflict up in the first place.

I literally don't believe that their religion is more important to them than their political priorities...they ran for office to pass things like rent control. This was a political stunt. Skipping the vote and claiming religious intolerance is pretty clearly rallying their side in support, as intended.

Now that's a cynical take, and one that probably won't go well for the council's centrists next election if they decide that's the hill to die on. As has been pointed out, this was likely heading to an unstoppable Mayor veto anyway, so even if an opportunity like this presented itself, it was a bad political move for the people in the room to take advantage of it. They don't get a pass because the outcome was guaranteed - that actually makes it worse TBH.

[amiller92]

Counter-thought: The three who were not in the room were all strong proponents of rent control, and they 100% knew the vote was happening at this meeting (which, again, had already been rescheduled from Thurs to Weds in efforts to avoid conflicting with Eid...until the holiday changed just 10 days ago). Religious holiday or not, all three made a conscious decision to skip the vote. Why couldn't they have attended morning prayers and then shown up for the Council meeting for an hour to make the vote? The Council meeting doesn't last all day...they absolutely could have come in for this critical vote. I literally don't believe that their religion is more important to them than their political priorities...they ran for office to pass things like rent control. This was a political stunt. Skipping the vote and claiming religious intolerance is pretty clearly rallying their side in support, as intended.

I think that's unreasonable, but okay, if it was a stunt by the three to observe a religious holiday, it was epically stupid for the majority to hand that to them. Either way, Jenkins et al look terrible.

[phop]

Didn't Jenkins vote for the proposal?

[twincitizen]

That makes it all the more interesting that no one tried to call for a special meeting to be held on Monday or Tuesday this week. The date change for Eid (happening Wednesday instead of Thursday) was apparently known 10 days ago. They could have called for a special meeting as late as Friday, in order to meet the legally required 3-day advance notice. But no one said anything until this Monday, when it was too late at that point to hold a meeting sooner than Weds.

Jenkins voted in support of continuing the policy discussion (not killing it) both a few weeks ago and yesterday. As Council President, she definitely could've called for a special meeting...except that nobody brought up the scheduling conflict until Monday (again, even though the new earlier date for Eid was known a week prior). Now, on Monday when it was apparent that Eid created a conflict with the Wednesday meeting, they technically could have canceled the Wednesday meeting and held one on Thursday instead. Why that didn't happen, I'm not sure. It's not super clear that anyone is really "at fault" here. I don't think anyone was acting maliciously.

Something that is clear to me is that holidays which can't be determined more than 10 days in advance simply aren't compatible with government calendars / official meetings. This moon sighting stuff should be a relic of the past. They absolutely have to pick a fixed date further in advance...this should not be that difficult.

[MNdible]

Yes, and it sounds like the proponents also could have moved to table the motion, but they didn't.

Here's the Strib's write-up.

This chunk towards the end of the article seems particularly damning, almost as if the arch-progressive block was more interested in using the issue as an election wedge issue than actually passing anything:

Whalen and other rent control advocates have said for months they were hoping to negotiate with potential swing voters on the council — including Jenkins and Johnson — in hopes of reaching some compromise that was either amenable to Frey or capable of garnering nine council votes.

But council members backing the 3% plan decided last month to continue to push it, which made it ripe for defeat when the opportunity presented itself. Johnson, for example, has said he's open to other rent control possibilities, but not the 3% plan.

When asked whether housing advocates supported holding fast to the 3% plan, Whalen demurred. Council members, he said, "made the decision to start with [the 3% plan], whether we agreed or not."

[seanrichardryan]

...
Something that is clear to me is that holidays which can't be determined more than 10 days in advance simply aren't compatible with government calendars / official meetings. This moon sighting stuff should be a relic of the past. They absolutely have to pick a fixed date further in advance...this should not be that difficult.

I just don't have an opinion how 1.9 billion people should observe their religious holidays, but you do you.

[SurlyLHT]

...
Something that is clear to me is that holidays which can't be determined more than 10 days in advance simply aren't compatible with government calendars / official meetings. This moon sighting stuff should be a relic of the past. They absolutely have to pick a fixed date further in advance...this should not be that difficult.

I just don't have an opinion how 1.9 billion people should observe their religious holidays, but you do you.

I researched this and it appears it's not standard. It varies depending on if followers are Sunni or Shia and what country they're in. European and American communities an Imam will call it based on a declaration of a cleric in another country. It's not standardized. Like with most religions they are various opinions. (Christmas and Easter are different within Orthodox Christianity)

[tedlanda2571]

I just don't have an opinion how 1.9 billion people should observe their religious holidays, but you do you.

Do you have an opinion on how 2.2 billion people should interpret their religious texts with respect to abortion and gay rights?

[amiller92]

Do you have an opinion on how 2.2 billion people should interpret their religious texts with respect to abortion and gay rights?

I do not. Interpret how you want. Just don't expect anyone else to have to live by your rules.