Mpls. attorney: Minimum wage, police insurance shouldn't go to voters

Two major changes in labor law should not be put to voters, says Minneapolis city attorney Susan Segal.

Her legal opinion issued Thursday will be a roadblock in putting proposed measures to require police liability insurance and raise the minimum wage on the ballot this fall. Still, supporters for putting the hotly contested issues to a vote say they'll battle on.

The first proposal would ask voters if the city should require its 840 police officers to get professional liability insurance, potentially subsidized by the city. Bad officers, supporters say, would be forced out by the cost of claims against them.

"The issue is the many, many cases that the city pays out large sums of money [for misconduct] and they don't seem to have any brakes on the process," said Michelle Gross, founder of Communities United Against Police Brutality.

The second measure would ask voters to approve a $15 minimum wage to follow the mandatory sick leave the City Council approved earlier this year, set to take effect in 2017.

Several groups are pushing for the wage charter amendment in Minneapolis.

"Corporations have to pay their employees a living wage, because workers are not able to survive off of the current federal minimum wage," said Stephanie Gasca of CTUL, an advocacy group for low-wage workers, particularly fast food and janitorial workers.

Both proposals could be addressed by the City Council itself, but neither has made much headway at City Hall.

That's what prompted supporters to start a petition drive, hoping to take the issues directly to voters this fall. They turned in their signatures earlier this summer, and city officials say they got enough.

Even with those signatures, the City Council asked for a legal opinion on whether the measures could be valid. Minneapolis allows charter amendments for city functions, like the one that restricts city spending on professional sports facilities.

But it doesn't allow voters to enact regular ordinances.

The city attorney's office recommended the council turn away both petitions.

The legal opinions say the police insurance provision isn't allowed under state law, and the minimum wage issue is "invalid because the petition is an ordinance proposal cloaked as a charter amendment."

Supporters say they'll push to get the measure on the ballot anyway, and may go to court to get before voters.

"If the Minneapolis charter can regulate such things as liquor sales, it can certainly provide that a basic duty of government is to ensure the general welfare by providing for this living wage," said Ginger Jentzen, a spokesperson for wage advocacy group 15 Now Minnesota.

Critics urged the city to heed the legal advice: Both the Downtown Council and the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce said the proposals risked setting a dangerous precedent.

Peter Nelson, vice president and senior policy fellow at the conservative Center for the American Experiment, has written critically of efforts to change labor law at the municipal level.

He says employment law is complex and wide ranging, and it doesn't fit well with local jurisdictions.

"Wage provisions in Minneapolis versus a wage provision in St. Louis Park versus a wage provision in Brooklyn Center will create all sorts of problems for a business," he said. "Because these employees don't necessarily just work in Minneapolis. They might work in Minneapolis half the week, and in St. Louis Park half the week. And then all of the sudden you have to change your payment policies based on where they're working."

The city attorney did write draft ballot questions for the council to consider — if officials decide to ignore the legal opinions.

City Council President Barb Johnson said there will be votes to put at least one of the matters on the ballot anyway, but she wasn't sure if there were enough to ignore the advice of the city attorney.

The council is scheduled to take up the matter next week.