The Duluth City Council met on September 18, 2025, at 5:15 PM to discuss several agenda items, including the proposed maximum tax levy for 2026, the Duluth Transit Authority (DTA) budget, and various resolutions. The council considered a 4.13% maximum levy increase, with debate over providing additional flexibility. The DTA General Manager presented potential service cuts if the requested 42.9% levy increase were reduced to around 21-25%.
Can you just assign somebody that you can go to good evening? It's 5 15 and we will begin with uh Counselor Forzman from Finance is not here. Councillor Randorf, would you read in, please? I sure can. Thank you. Senator Tomonic. We're on item two, resolution 697 is a resolution proposing the sum to be raised by taxation for general purposes for the year 2026. Resolution 698 is a resolution proposing the sum to be raised by taxation for the special parks fund levy for the year 2026. Resolution 700 is a resolution proposing the sum to be raised by taxation for the special taxing district housing and redevelopment authority for the year 2026. And resolution 702 is a resolution proposing the sum to be raised by taxation for the special taxing district, Duluth Transit Authority for the year 2026. Thank you, Councillor Randor. Are there any questions on items two through five? Yes. Councillor Randor. Thank you so much, President Tamonic. I see we have General Manager Chris Blendon here from the Duluth Transit Authority. A couple questions if uh you'd like to uh approach the lectern. Welcome. Good evening. And thank you again so much for meeting with us this afternoon, Councillor Forsman, uh nephew Swenson and myself to do a deep dive in your capital and your proposed budget. Um my question for you tonight is given our discussion this afternoon and your ask of a 42 point nine percent increase. Um tell us a little bit about how you would manage next year if that increase was more around the 21 to 25 percent increase. Yeah, so um uh a little background on that steep increase. The last two years, Minnesota Department of Transportation had a additional uh subsidy where our local match percentage went from a typical 20 percent all the way down to five percent. A few years ago we had been asking for a significant levy increase. The subsequent two years we saw that huge subsidy from the state, so we didn't need that big increase, and now that subsidy is gone, so we're we're back again. Um if that percent increase um would drop down to was that 25 percent? Is that yeah, we'll use a hypothetical 21 and a half or 22 percent. Yeah, I'd have to calculate what the dollar amount of that would be and then work backwards from our budget on what we could address to close the gap. Um where we would start would have to be with uh service cuts or programs we might have with different organizations where we subsidize uh rides or offer special service. So um under that scenario at the top of that list would likely be the warming center program and calculating what the shuttle. So there's two pieces to that. In the evening, we uh we provide rides across the whole network for free. There's no cost. Excuse me. The um passenger will board and tell the driver they're going to the warming center, and the the driver will record the ride and they'll sit down and we bring them to the warming center. The following morning we have uh a dedicated shuttle that operates for two hours in the morning. We it it does three or four loops because there's so many people waiting for a bus that it makes several rounds. And it starts at the warming center, drops off at the Damiano, uh Union Gospel Mission in the transit center, and does it again three times until everyone's uh where they need to be. Um the cost for the shuttles that we added in. That would be an annual cost, somewhere around $50,000. That would be a straight local levy reduction of $50,000. Um we do have lost fare revenue potential, and we calculate at the maximum that would be maybe around 11,000. That's if every passenger were to pay an average fare. Um it's very unlikely that we would still have that ridership. Only a small fraction would continue to ride unless some other organization picked up the cost of those fares. In addition to that, because 50,000 isn't isn't a whole lot. So likely after that would be the canal park tourist trolley, the Port Town Trolley. It's a seasonal summer service, and that would save us somewhere around a quarter of a million. One issue with that is we did buy new trolleys just a few years ago.