Minn. lawmakers and police groups criticize U of M award to Communities United Against Police Brutality

The University of Minnesota’s systemwide awards process drew sharp criticism at a Minnesota House committee hearing after the Office for Public Engagement confirmed Communities United Against Police Brutality (CUB) received an Outstanding Community Partner award.

Amber Cameron, director of the university’s Office for Public Engagement, told the committee the office facilitates a systemwide awards process that has recognized community partners since the program began in 1999. Cameron said selection committees evaluate nominations solely on the materials submitted and that both individuals and organizations — formal or informal — have been eligible for the community partner category.

The exchange began when Representative Novotny questioned how, given public statements by CUB’s leader and the group’s letterhead imagery, the organization could be characterized as advancing “positive change.” ‘‘Their letterhead shows what appears to be ... a police officer with a long club beating a person on the ground,’’ Novotny said. Cameron replied that her office asks selection committees to evaluate packets objectively and that she does not adjudicate an organization’s work.

Cameron described the nomination materials for CUB as documenting an extended relationship with the university through the Center for Community Engaged Learning: the nomination asserted CUB had been connected to coursework across many departments, and reviewers cited documented impacts including student involvement in policy research and a paper that contributors said led to the passage of ‘‘Travis’s Law,’’ a bipartisan bill redirecting certain 911 mental-health calls to specialized teams. The nomination materials, Cameron said, recorded roughly 130 course offerings over 24 years involving the group, across 26 course listings in 17 academic departments and about 1,000 students; the committee was told those figures came from the nomination packet.

Lawmakers and law enforcement representatives repeatedly disputed aspects of the group’s public portrayal. Brian Peters, executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, told the committee, “Communities United Against Police Brutality is an extremist organization that spreads misleading and harmful narratives about law enforcement.” Peters and others cited social media posts and public remarks they said misstated facts in multiple high-profile cases and accused the organization of promoting anti‑police rhetoric.

Representative Novotny also noted an IRS determination letter included in committee materials showing CUB’s nonprofit status dated June 25, 2020, and contrasted that with repeated public claims that the group or its leader had operated for decades. Cameron said the award criteria do not require a formal tax status and that some past community partner honorees were informal groups or long‑standing grassroots efforts without an organizational tax filing.

Committee members requested additional records from the university. Cameron said the office would follow up with the provost’s office on questions about course development, provide speaking notes and the video produced about the awardees, and coordinate on how nomination materials and award paperwork could be released. Cameron also confirmed the community partner award carried a $5,000 prize that is processed through the university’s operations and maintenance budget and that 2024 was the last year the outstanding community service awards were conferred as the university transitions the program to a new internal awards structure aligned with community‑engaged scholarship.

No formal action was taken by the committee. Several legislators urged the university to review partnerships and vetting processes before recognizing external groups, and law‑enforcement witnesses urged the university to consider whether acknowledging the group was consistent with promoting campus safety and respectful discourse.

Committee Chair Rehrig and members said they expected follow‑up materials from university staff and signaled continued oversight and inquiry.