The Minneapolis DFL: One Party, Many Agendas
Divided City Government Can Be Fixed
Minneapolis voters have reshaped the structure of city government in recent years, but the city's dominant political party remains largely undefined. The Minneapolis DFL continues to function as a catch-all umbrella for candidates with sharply divergent values, offering voters little clarity about what the party actually stands for.
Voters Wanted Change—And Got It
In the 2021 municipal election, voters approved a ballot measure creating a strong mayor system, with 52% in favor. The change consolidated executive authority under the mayor and ended a decades-long experiment in shared governance between the mayor and 13 council members. For many, it was a necessary correction—city departments weren’t functioning efficiently, and a fractured council was no longer a viable way to run the city.
The same year, a proposal to eliminate the Minneapolis Police Department and create a Department of Public Safety failed, with 56% voting no. Despite the trauma of George Floyd’s murder just a year earlier, a majority of residents rejected a police-free city.
A third question—authorizing rent control—passed with 53% support. But the Council has taken no action since. The measure allows the Council to either pass a rent control ordinance directly or refer one to voters. Neither has happened.
Turnout jumped in 2021 to 54% of registered voters—up from 42.5% in 2017—suggesting that structural governance questions motivated residents to participate. In contrast, turnout in 2023 dropped to just 31.7%, when only City Council seats were on the ballot.
This year’s citywide election, which includes the mayor, Park Board, and Board of Estimate and Taxation, offers another chance to evaluate the city’s direction—but without the added clarity of ballot initiatives.
Getting the Right Balance
The shift in political control of the council has been incremental but significant. In 2017, Cam Gordon, a Green Party incumbent, ran unopposed in Ward 2. In 2021, that same seat went to Robin Wonsley, a Democratic Socialist (DSA), after a recount confirmed her 14-vote victory over Yusra Arab. Wonsley’s win marked a sharp leftward turn for the council and an increasingly tense dynamic with Mayor Jacob Frey.
Because of redistricting, the 2021 council served only a two-year term. In 2023, voters largely returned the same group—with two notable changes: Katie Cashman replaced longtime council member Lisa Goodman in Ward 7, and Aurin Chowdhury succeeded Andrew Johnson in Ward 12. Together, these changes tipped the balance, giving Wonsley-aligned members veto power over the mayor.
Elliott Payne, elected Council President, used his opening remarks to criticize the strong mayor system, asserting the Council’s equal standing. But that argument directly contradicted the will of voters just two years earlier.
The 2025 election will likely serve as a referendum on that power dynamic. If Frey wins again—it will take flipping several Council seats to shift the balance toward productive governance on unresolved issues like the city budget and George Floyd Square.
What Does the Minneapolis DFL Represent?
Endorsements this spring hint at internal divisions. Elizabeth Shaffer secured the DFL endorsement in Ward 7. In Wards 9, 10, and 11, endorsements will be decided May 31. The race drawing the most attention is in Ward 10, where challenger Lydia Millard is seen as a strong contender to unseat Vice President Aisha Chughtai. We’ll be covering that endorsement meeting with a live chat for paid subscribers.
Yet as the party prepares to endorse candidates across the political spectrum, a basic question remains: What does the Minneapolis DFL stand for?
Despite observing countless speeches, interviews, and posts, no consistent platform emerges. It’s unclear whether the DFL party supports the strong mayor system, whether it backs policing reform or police abolition, or whether it’s willing to hold members accountable—even in serious cases like Ward 6 Council Member Jamal Osman, whose ties to fraud remain unaddressed.
More troubling is the reality that candidates as different as Jason Chavez, Aisha Chughtai, Michael Rainville, and Linea Palmisano all operate under the same DFL label. For voters trying to understand the values and priorities of the people they’re electing, this lack of clarity is a problem.
One Party, Multiple Factions
The realignment of Minneapolis politics hasn’t brought clarity—it’s made things murkier. Candidates backed by groups like All of Mpls and We Love Mpls often appear ideologically opposed to those supported by Mpls for the Many and the DSA. Yet all operate under the same party banner. If not for endorsements and campaign literature, you might believe they belonged to entirely separate parties.
In truth, the DFL is no longer a single coalition—it’s a collection of factions competing under one label. The result is confusion. Outside groups—unions, PACs, advocacy organizations, churches—shape the messaging, but most voters don’t have time to decode who stands for what.
In the absence of defined factions, voters face uncertainty. For many, it’s easier to disengage entirely.
Time to Draw Clearer Lines
Only a minority of voters follow local politics closely. Most just want basic competence: public safety, clean streets, working infrastructure. These voters are often dismissed as “low-information,” but their expectations are reasonable—and unmet.
Minneapolis would benefit from clear, internal caucuses within the DFL. Let candidates define their values and make those affiliations public. Whether they call themselves Progressives, Moderates, DSA, or Blue Dogs, voters deserve to know what those terms mean. Clear labels would provide useful insight—especially in wards without DFL endorsements, such as 2 and 5.
Local media engagement continues to decline. When newspapers and television don’t fill the information gap, voters rely on social media, candidate literature, endorsements from party elites and their neighbors. The Minneapolis DFL label has lost meaning. To make Minneapolis elections more transparent and democratic, it may be time to treat the factions within the DFL as what they already are: separate ideological entities.
Voters deserve to know what—and who—they’re voting for.
Spot on. I have talked to neighbors, who are generally intelligent and well read and they shake their heads in confusion when I try to explain the MPLS DFL caucuses and endorsing conventions. Too many then decide there are better ways to spend their time. Maybe they will go to the polls this November, maybe not. The other unfortunate consequence is that this dynamic is hurting the DFL brand beyond the MPLS borders. Many of the far left are understandably outraged at the Governor and Legislative DFL leaders recent compromise regarding undocumented adult residents to no longer receive state subsidized health care, without looking inward to see how their ideological purity test turned off many state wide moderate and independent voters last fall: Hence resulting in a divided legislature.
Great read, Terry. When the DFL stands for everything, it stands for nothing. The questions are, what are the most viable pathways to fix the mess, and who can/should drive the changes? Can the leadership at the DFL right the ship? Can the mayor and a better city council fix the system? Is a referendum required? Do we need at least one additional party to compete with the DFL? Who can change the hot mess we call caucuses, and what would it take?
As you allude to, at the core of confusion is lack of transparency/visibility, and the Strib's abdication of local coverage has made the situation all that much worse. I've complained about it to both a reporter (Jeff Day) and also the publisher (Steve Grove). I'm not naive enough to think my complaints will effect change, but maybe if enough voices are heard...