End of era at City Hall

Lisa Goodman is not ready to relax and coast through her last year at City Hall now that she has decided to give up her 7th Ward council seat.
“That’s not my style,” said Goodman, the council’s longest serving member. “I don’t feel as if a great burden has been lifted off my shoulders. I going to continue to give this job 110% of my energy, just as I have always done, until my very last hour in office.”
Goodman was first elected in 1998 as a self-described Wellstone Democrat, representing a district that now covers the upscale Lake District and a large section of downtown.
“Back then, I was the lefty that people in my neighborhood were afraid of,” Goodman told the Star Tribune. “Some viewed me as too left-leaning when I first ran.” Now a City Hall veteran, Goodman is considered part of the Council’s more conservative or moderate faction. “Although I probably have become a bit more moderate over the years, I feel like I have stood still and the world has changed around me,” she said.
During her 26 years in office, Goodman has gained a reputation as a tireless worker who looks after the interests of her 7th Ward constituents. “Lisa Goodman has shown amazing stamina and enthusiasm in her years on the Minneapolis City Council,” said one long-time supporter, Don Ostrom. “She never lost interest while attending an endless number of council sessions, committee meetings, neighborhood gatherings, and other events.”
Goodman may have maintained good relations with her constituents but her relations with her City Hall colleagues have, at times, been contentious. “(Lisa’s) greatest show of respect is her willingness to debate with you, exchange a few strong words, and arrive at a better conclusion – one that has been enhanced by the spirited discourse,” said Mayor Jacob Frey.
Recently the Connector engaged in “spirited discourse” with Lisa Goodman. Here are excerpts from that conversation.

Q. During your years on the council, you have played a major role in shaping Minneapolis’s development policies and programs as chair of the Community Development Committee. How has the city’s approach to development changed during that time?
A. I think the city has made real strides in how we approach community development. When I first got on the Council, we were spending more public money on parking ramps than we were on affordable housing. And we were not doing enough to hold developers accountable when we made city subsidies available to them. When we included a housing affordability requirement in a development agreement, too often it only required a very minimum effort which didn’t reach people with the greatest need. Now that has changed with more stringent affordability requirements. Over the last 20 years, we have used the city’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund to leverage a billion dollars of housing investments in the city.
On the commercial front, our efforts to rescue and restore downtown’s historic theaters have been a great success. Since the theaters have been restored, their economic impact is well over $1 billion.
And this year, we were able to reach an important milestone. Working with our non-profit partner, the Hennepin Theater Trust, the city bonds used to finance the restoration were paid off 15 years early.

Q. This year Minneapolis City government has undergone two major structural changes. As a result of the 2021 charter amendment, the roles and responsibilities of the mayor and the council have been clarified. In addition, the council and the mayor have established a new Office of Community Safety to oversee the city’s various public safety functions including the Police Department. What is your assessment of these structural changes?
A. The charter amendment strengthening the role of the mayor was an important step forward. Our previous hybrid system, with overlapping authority between the mayor and the council led to lack of accountability in City Hall. We saw that problem play out in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder. Now the division of responsibility between the mayor and the council is more clear cut. The mayor has operational authority over for city government while the council’s role primarily involves policy making. But there are kinks that need to be worked out with the new system. One of those involves constituent service. As a council member, I see constituent service as a key responsibility, but not all my colleagues view their job the same way. Some want 311 to handle all their constituents calls. But 311 doesn’t actually solve problems. All they can do is refer calls to the appropriate department. But those of us on the council have no way of knowing whether our constituents problems actually get solved.
That needs to change.
The new Office of Community Safety will make a real difference in City Hall if it can break down the silos in our current public safety agencies. But if the new office becomes just an oversight group that reviews the works of the police department and the other public safety agencies, the new structure will not live up to the expectations we have set for it.

Q. Crime continues to be a front-page issue in Minneapolis, particularly crime perpetrated by young people. Does the city need a new approach to combating juvenile crime?
A. The city is facing a serious crime problem, but the city’s role in combating that problem is only one piece of a very complicated problem. The real issue is with the juvenile justice system in Hennepin County.
Our police officers can keep arresting the young people who are doing the carjacking and stealing the Hyundais and Kias. But then they are released into a juvenile justice system that does little to deter future criminal actions. Fourteen- and 15-year-olds know they can keep committing these crimes because they only receive a slap on the wrist when they are caught. Carjacking is defined as a property crime so the penalties are less. That should change. Carjacking needs to be placed in the same category as armed robbery.
Right now, the victim does not get much consideration when these crimes are prosecuted. That’s not right. It is not just upper income people who have their cars stolen. Low-income people are also victims. Losing their means of transportation can be very disruptive for them, They need their cars to get to work and get their children to daycare. We don’t consider their needs when we prosecute these types of crimes.

Q. The pandemic and the civil unrest in 2020 have delivered a double blow to downtown Minneapolis. Is there a way forward for restoring downtown’s economic and social vitality?
A. Downtown has received a lot of negative press. Too often media reports make it sound as if downtown is dying, but that is not the case. Office occupancy is a 62% of pre-COVID-19 levels – which is substantially better than the most central city business district where the return rate is only about 40%.
Downtown is no longer what it once was when department stores lined the Nicollet Mall, but it is serving a new role now. Fifty thousand people live downtown. They have daily service needs and downtown businesses are starting to meet those needs. When I first came to City Hall, there were no grocery stores downtown. Now there are five of them.
It is true that downtown is facing some difficult challenges, but those challenges are providing an opportunity to think about downtown and its needs in new ways. Transit is one area where we need a new approach. I think we should take busses off the Nicollet Mall, and make it a true pedestrian mall.
Downtown still has a lot of strengths. It is resilient.