Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Victim Advocacy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee approves continued contract for sexual-assault advocacy embedded with police unit

2939100 · March 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Administration and Enterprise Oversight Committee approved a contract with Cornerstone Advocacy Services to continue a victim-advocate embedded with the Minneapolis Police Department's violent-crimes unit. Deputy Chief Emily Olsen described the advocate's role and said the team handled 910 cases in 2024; the motion passed by voice vote.

The Administration and Enterprise Oversight Committee voted to approve a contract with Cornerstone Advocacy Services to continue an advocate embedded with the Minneapolis Police Department's violent-crimes unit.

Deputy Chief Emily Olsen, who described the unit's relationship with the advocate, told the committee the advocate makes confidential outreach to survivors, escorts victims to hospitals for Sexual Assault Response Team exams, helps connect survivors to housing, therapy and other resources, and coordinates with the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office when cases move to prosecution. Olsen said the violent-crimes unit handled 910 cases in 2024 and 28 cases as of March 13, 2025.

The committee’s chair, Robin Wansley, asked whether there were questions; none were raised. Wansley moved the item for approval and the committee approved it by voice vote. No substantive amendments or conditions were recorded on the public record.

Why it matters: The advocate role is described by Minneapolis police as providing ongoing, confidential support that police investigators and prosecutors cannot provide. Committee members framed the contract as a service that helps survivors navigate both immediate medical needs and longer-term supports as cases proceed through investigation and, in some instances, prosecution.

Discussion vs. decision: The presentation and committee discussion were informational and supportive; the formal action was the committee’s voice vote approving the contract, which the chair said “carries.” No roll-call tally or financial details of the contract were provided on the public record during this meeting.

What to watch next: The item will proceed to full council as part of the City’s regular contract approval process. The presentation did not include the contract dollar amount or term; those details were not specified in the committee record.