City Spending: Who is Watching?
In an Election Year, Tracking the City’s Spending is More Important Than Usual
A Walk in the Park
On Saturday mornings, we walk with our dog, Zelda, and start thinking about a topic for the newsletter. It’s not always easy to focus. Zelda needs training—she lunges at bikers, joggers, other dogs, squirrels, and rabbits. Anything or anyone moving faster than us. As a result, staying focused on these walks can be a challenge.
Most weeks, there are more stories than we can cover. The challenge is narrowing them down to one that interests us and, hopefully, our readers. Lately, we’ve been assessing the state of local news. The Star Tribune has largely stopped covering City Council meetings and candidate forums. A few digital outlets, like The Minneapolis Times and Minnesota Reformer, continue reporting on important issues. There are also neighborhood papers, such as Hill & Lake Press and the Longfellow Nokomis Messenger. Compared to some cities, Minneapolis has a decent number of local news sources.
Like many people, we rarely watch live TV. Unless someone sends us a link to a TV news clip, we’re unlikely to see it. Instead, we—like much of the public—rely on a fragmented social media ecosystem: Facebook groups, YouTube, BlueSky threads, podcasts, and newsletters. Only 35% of people under age 44 read a newspaper more than once a month. And much of what circulates online is unedited, unchecked for accuracy, and often lacking nuance.
The Fractured News World
To say our news landscape is fractured is an understatement. It’s a serious problem when you’re trying to find out what happened, track someone’s record, or learn the fate of an ordinance, zoning change, or spending decision. Searching for information means navigating a fragmented universe—one filled with context-free headlines and muddied by spin. Understanding what’s happening in your neighborhood requires diligent research. Unless it involves multiple shootings, it likely won’t make the newspaper or TV news—and even then, there’s no guarantee.
The fractured state of local news coverage matters for several reasons:
Democracy. If you were to walk the streets on April 8 and ask people what day the DFL caucus is, we’d guess at least 80% wouldn’t know what you’re talking about. Another 10% might know but wouldn’t care, either because they don’t understand its significance or don’t see a reason to participate. Of the remaining 10% who both know and care, 5% will be busy that night, 3% will forget, and 2% will show up to choose the next City Council, Park Board, and Mayor.
(Several newsletters and online threads have criticized groups trying to raise awareness about the caucuses. The general argument goes: “You’ve raised a lot of money, and you’re promoting candidates who don’t support the type of development and infrastructure we want—therefore, you must be Republicans.” There are many problems with this line of reasoning, enough to warrant a separate newsletter. But what we’ll say for now is that the funding is unlikely to be sufficient to get this information into the consciousness of 90% of the city’s population.)
City Spending. There simply aren’t enough reporters investigating how our tax dollars are spent on a local level. In an election year, this lack of scrutiny means that incumbents may have the opportunity to reward supportive groups and organizations without accountability.
Recent Spending Deserves More Scrutiny
To investigate this story, we dug into the Legislative Information Management System (LIMS) and reviewed recent City Council agendas to see what had been approved. We started with the February 27 meeting, where a significant amount of money was allocated. Here are a few key expenditures:
Community Engagement Services:
10 separate vendor contracts of $100,000 each
12 separate vendor contracts of $300,000 each
Total for these 22 contracts: $4,600,000
Group Violence Intervention:
Contracts awarded to five organizations totaling $800,000
Reviewing the agenda from March 27, we found that the city is hiring nonprofit consultants to train other nonprofits. Key allocations include:
Cure Violence Global was hired to provide training and technical assistance to MinneapolUS for $681,000 over three years
MinneapolUS contracts with multiple violence prevention organizations:
Restoration, Inc. = $708,000
T.O.U.C.H. Outreach = $708,400
Sabathani Community Center = $708,400
MAD DADS = $619,394
A Mother’s Love Initiative = $671,155
Total: $3,415,349 + $681,000
As residents, we are unlikely to ever learn whether this money was well spent—whether violence was reduced or if community engagement improved. No one outside the city is reporting on the contents of these contracts or how success will be measured.
One oddity stands out: Why are so many contracts for the same amounts? For instance, 12 contracts of exactly $300,000 were awarded to different businesses. Are they all charging the same hourly rate and working the same number of hours? And why are there two separate Violence Interrupter contracts for $708,400? These patterns suggest that more due diligence may be needed.
Conclusion
We’re raising questions even though we know the answers—if they exist—will likely go unheard. That’s the nature of today’s fractured news landscape. Even if a story is written—most likely by a volunteer—it will reach a small audience, make a brief splash, and then disappear into a lake of news constantly set swirling by national controversies, political infighting, and finger-pointing that define our city government.
Without robust, diligent reporting on local government actions, we rely on our politicians to act with restraint and common sense. This year, we intend to track key issues and candidates in the hope that some recognize oversight is a fundamental part of budgeting. That responsibility extends across nonprofits, construction contracts, and all levels of government operations.
This week, the City Assessor released a report showing a 22% decrease in the value of downtown buildings, an 8.6% drop in commercial property, and 50% less apartment construction in 2024 than in 2023. The significance of this report was a highlight of Council Member Rainville’s most recent newsletter—with less tax revenue coming from the commercial sector, the burden will shift to residents.
We want government services and recognize taxes are needed to pay for them. Wasteful spending, however, leads to higher taxes, which are a burden to residents and businesses. It’s a burden that keeps the city from moving forward.
Property taxes, in particular, are regressive; they disproportionately impact those who can least afford them. Minneapolis leaders must find creative ways to curb tax increases while maintaining core services. The city has two options: dramatically boost business activity and commercial property values or impose much greater spending discipline.
Before the situation worsens and major cuts to services and staff become inevitable, city leaders must acknowledge the economic stress residents are already feeling. Every dollar spent must improve the daily lives of our neighbors and strengthen local businesses.
My daughter-in-law is research director at The Civic Federation here: https://www.civicfed.org/ Non-partisan, independent, non- profit. They track all elements of Chicago spending and call bullshit when they see it. The Twin Cities could use something like this.
Thank you Terry, I will be sharing your newsletter it is so impactful! I also plan to contact Star Tribune and ask why there is so little coverage of our critical city elections? Curious to see if I receive a response.