Thank you.

Good morning.

My name is Aisha Chugtai and I'm the chair of the budget committee.

I'm going to call to order our adjourned meeting for Tuesday, December 9th, 2025.

Before we begin the meeting, I want to offer a friendly reminder to all members, staff, and the public that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation.

These broadcasts include real-time captioning as a further method to increase the accessibility of our proceedings to the community.

Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast.

We ask all speakers to moderate the speed and clarity of their comments.

At this time, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll so we can verify the presence of a quorum.

Councilmember Payne.

Present.

Wonsley.

Present. Rainville. Present. Itaugh. Present. Ellison is absent. Osman is absent. Cashman.

Present. Jenkins. Absent. Chavez. Present. Chaudhary. Absent. Palmasano. Present. Vice

Chair Kosky. Present. And Chair Chugtay. Present. That is nine members present. Let the record

reflect that we have a quorum. I will also remind my colleagues that we are using speaker

management today so please make sure you sign in we will now begin we will now continue

considering revisions to mayor fry's 2026 recommended budget yesterday we left off with

amendment number 29 with council members rainville paul masono and chowdhury in queue to speak i will

recognize um i will first recognize council member uh cashman to summarize um the amendment we are

are discussing amendment number 29. Good morning. Thank you chair Chugtie. Number

one, good morning everyone. Number two, let's relieve ourselves of this budget

amendment. And I'll move approval again. Is there a second? All right we'll go to

the queue now see if there's any discussion on this item. I'll first

recognize councilmember Rainville followed by councilmember Palmisano. Thank

Thank you. So I'm going to vote for this for many reasons, but one is to stop the puns.

They are painful. I'll give you that.

But I would like to be added as author of this.

I think you've been really creative in finding the funding.

Good job, Katie. Council Member Cashman, I have to give you credit for that.

And I do have great confidence in our Public Works Department.

I think they're smart enough to figure this out.

do some baby steps, do it right, but I really look forward to seeing the results of this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, I'll recognize Council Member Palmisano, followed by Council Member Chowdhury.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Those are hard acts to follow.

I agree that we need more public restrooms, and everyone needs safe and clean facilities.

I have several questions as to how this would work in reality.

So I worry that we'd be pissing away money here.

The very first sentence of the key highlights on the standalone public restrooms report

by our legislative research and oversight division says many of the cities reviewed in this report

completed a pilot program prior to installing more permanent restroom options.

This particular amendment has ongoing funding.

So first, I'm curious for the author or someone who helped put this together, is your intent to do a pilot program as other cities have done to determine the effectiveness and the true costs of such a program?

Or what have you used to determine how we do this permanently now?

I'll recognize Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Palmasano.

I made this funding ongoing because in our research, talking with other cities that have implemented this, Ann Arbor being one,

the bathrooms were so popular that the community did not want to get rid of them once they were created.

And it was for creating some sustainability of the funding to make this ongoing

that you wouldn't have to debate removing bathrooms next year as a council.

And I think it's wise for us to invest in things long term rather than one-time funding

because we've seen some comments from the administration

that when we do pilot projects,

it does create budgetary concerns down the road.

And so I thought it would be more sustainable in the long term

to ensure we had the ongoing funding for this.

And this is coming from the Value Capture District Fund,

which expires in 2038.

So I think we have plenty of time that's 14 years away

to find other sources if need be at that time.

I also envision that this would be rolled out on Nicollet Avenue because that's where the value capture district is.

However, there are many communities throughout Minneapolis that could benefit from public bathrooms, Uptown being one of them.

And it's worth exploring, I think, when we see how this goes on Nicollet Ave, how we could potentially fund bathrooms in other neighborhoods.

Park dedication fees can go to neighborhood associations, for example, to do bathrooms.

or special service districts might consider it,

or there are other ways,

and partnerships with the county or Metro Transit

or the park board could be explored.

So I think that this narrow scope along Nicollet Avenue

is a good way for us to test it out.

Thank you.

That's a good answer, and I really do appreciate that.

I am a little concerned on the impact and services

of the .75 FTE that's resourced to this new project

out of Public Works.

I don't know if Director Sexton has an idea as to who or whom in his department will end up being responsible for this.

Again, from our legislative research study for PV Plaza, DID staff said the key to that restroom's success is ambassador staffing.

They said you need someone to keep an eye out.

If not, people would just go in there, lock it, and claim it as their own.

in Bidet Macoska they talked about a lot of problems in the commons park board staff

had to build a fence or cage around the porta potties that are only open when the park is staffed

I highlight those issues to say that if we as a city are going down this path it's clear to me

that we need a significant amount of resources deployed to monitor the restrooms not just to

maintain and clean them.

I see Director Sexton standing up, and I'm curious,

how, where from the Public Works budget

will you be taking this FTE and resourcing it

to bathrooms, and how often?

Chair Chugtai, Council Member Palmisano,

my name is Tim Sexton, Public Works Director for the city.

In terms of your question regarding the staffing

this work. I think it's we did want to make sure in our responses it was clear

that we are we do have an assumption that there would be some of this funding

would go towards staff administration and management of the pilot program

itself. We are envisioning there's quite a bit of engagement involved along with

contract management. I think that most logically fits in with our transportation

planning and programming team. The planners who do that engagement it may

shift in the future to some other group within Public Works if this moves from

the installation to the maintenance but I do just want to make it clear to

Council that this works for us assuming that we can have some staff time

included in the $700,000. Yeah so this is money meant to help improve

transit so if we're using money that's meant to improve transit to bathrooms

that's a choice. My fear is that we get started with something like this and then we find we can't

manage it with the operating costs that will be required. I'm curious how many units can we truly

operate with this kind of funding and what has been your conversation about that? It looks like

the author is ready to answer that question. Sure. We kind of set the expectations a little

bit lower because we wanted to give buffer to public works to be able to manage the contract.

So when we originally talked to other cities, I think $700,000 could fund up to eight bathrooms,

but we set the expectation down to about five so that we could give that buffer to staff.

And just noting that this is to contract with a private vendor to that private vendor would

also assist in the maintenance and operations.

And some companies have even said that if you and if Minneapolis starts working with

certain companies, that they would bring a staffer to, you know, to work and live here

in Minneapolis.

And I think we could benefit from an economy of scale if other cities in the region started

working with the same vendor, then we could have more staff on hand.

But of course, that's something for Public Works to do in the contract development.

So just to be clear, I've heard you mention that I've heard Director Sexton mention it's

a pilot, but what you're saying is that, I mean, this is ongoing money.

That's the budget amendment before us.

You're saying that money would run out in about 12 years.

So it's kind of a 12-year pilot maybe is what we're saying.

Do you know of any areas or businesses?

Have you worked with the downtown council at all to see where these bathrooms would

most appropriately be placed?

I would imagine by transit stops.

Yeah, all along Nicollet Ave and the value capture district map is included in the budget

proposal.

So you can see it goes all the way south to the Kmart site and it goes all the way north into downtown northeast.

Councilmember Palmzono's time has expired.

Councilmember Cashman, wrap up your thought so we can get your answer.

Yes, and there's also a map in here of urination hotspots that the downtown council is servicing.

So I'm guessing that hotspot map would also be helpful data in selecting sites.

Thank you.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

I initially had Council Member Chowdhury in queue.

I will note that she has joined us in this meeting and recognize her for comments.

Thank you, Chair Chugtai.

Thank you, Council Member Cashman, for bringing this amendment forward.

I just wanted to speak in support of it.

I think that us as a city looking at a longer-term pilot for public restrooms

is a great way for us to become a smart city and be a city where it's easy for people of all ages

to be able to enjoy different corridors, especially for our transit riders.

I was really, really impressed by the response we got from our legislative directive

and to see how many options there are for the city of Minneapolis to contract with.

I'll uplift one.

Throne toilets was one that I was impressed by because they had figured out a model that

addressed concerns about climate control, also has kind of like a contract that takes care of all of

the things around cleaning and maintenance, and other cities had a dedicated person in the region,

the area that would come and service the area. And then in terms of safety and use, one of the

tactics that they used was having like their city hall, it could be local libraries, it could be a

number of organizations that we could partner with that would give community members specific cards

to access the public restrooms and they would get to card in and get to use it. And then if there

was any instance of vandalism or destruction or just behavior that we don't want to see in our

public restrooms, we'd be able to identify that individual card code and shut it off and be able

to enforce it that way. So people who are not using toilets the way that they're meant to be

used would be held accountable. And I just think the technology and the thought process around this

has really developed and for me I would really like to be able to see how this works on Nicollet

Avenue to see how we could expand it throughout the city like that's my longer-term vision for

public public restrooms in my ward since I started representing the 12th ward the 46th and Hiawatha

the station has had a really, really unique instance of people using the restroom around

the transit station or nearby local businesses.

And a lot of that has been mitigated with the addition of some porta-potties, but still

could be improved upon.

And that's a major transit hub in and of itself.

There's a lot of transfers that happen there.

And it's oftentimes a stop that people come into our city from the airport.

And so to see a facility like that available to visitors from outside of our state coming in and heading towards downtown in the future,

I think would be a major improvement.

And my residents have asked for a very, very long time to see if there's a public restroom option the city can look at and partner with Metro Transit.

So I'm really supportive of this.

I think this is going to bring our city into a new modern era and really improve the public realm.

And I wanted to ask Council Member Cashman if I could be a co-author on this.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Clerks have noted both Council Member Rainville and Chowdhury.

Excellent.

I'll note that we've been joined by Council Member Osmond.

I'll next recognize Councilmember Chavez followed by Councilmember Palmazano.

Thank you, Chair Chuck Chai, and thank you, Councilmember Cashman, for bringing this budget amendment forward.

It was great to see some of these bathrooms in Washington, D.C. when we went to the National League of Cities

and very excited that you brought this work forward.

I think it's really important.

I know that it's mostly focused in a downtown area, but my reason for supporting it is because it's important that we start somewhere.

And if we see that this is something that is going to be really great in downtown,

we'd love to see how we could in the future bring this across or different parts of the city in Minneapolis.

This is a topic that a lot of my constituents reach out to me when I'm knocking doors,

when we're talking about specific livability issues on how we can just create access to bathrooms

so we can make sure that we can have clean streets and neighborhoods.

So just really excited, very proud to support this amendment

and would ask Council Member Cashman if I could also be added as an author.

Absolutely.

Excellent.

And then we'll close out with Council Member Palmisano.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I did have some closing comments I wanted to share

and just didn't want to try and push that in at the end.

I agree that we need public restrooms

and I agree that we need them outside Nicollet Mall,

like Council Member Chowdhury notes.

But I just don't think this amendment is ready

or in a place I can support it today.

We have no idea if $600,000 per year

is enough to manage all of these factors

of installing, operating, and maintaining these units.

I would have preferred to see an amendment

written as a three-to-five-year pilot,

a pilot like Director Sexton mentioned,

so that we can accurately determine

what the financial investment is that is needed.

I imagine that site selection alone will be a very cumbersome process and might experience some pushback about exactly where these units are placed.

So I do appreciate the interest in this.

I am confident it will pass, but I won't be able to support it today.

But thank you, Council Member Cashman, for your work on this.

You've gotten much, much further than many people before you.

Wonderful.

Seeing no further discussion, I will ask the clerks to call the roll on amendment number 29, Nicollet Avenue Public Restrooms.

Councilmember Payne. Aye. Wansley. Aye.

Rainville. Aye. Vita. Aye.

Osman. Aye.

Cashman. Aye.

Chavez. Aye.

Chowdhury. Aye.

Palmasano. Nay.

Vice Chair Kosky. Aye.

Chair Chugtay. Aye.

That is 10 ayes and 1 nay.

That motion carries.

Amendment number 30 is nighttime business license inspectors

offered by Council Member Rainville.

Council Member Rainville, will you please introduce your amendment

and make a motion?

If we can turn on your mic, please.

It's a good start to turn on the mic.

Thank you for reminding me.

What you have before you is a proposal for nighttime business license inspectors operating out of CPED,

and that would move money out of Public Works to fund this on an ongoing basis,

continue to work with Public Works and budget to working through the ability to minimize impact on their budget.

I know this is a tough ask of Public Works to do this.

But I wanted to speak in favor of this.

This is an effort to keep our nighttime economy moving.

At this point now, when 5 o'clock, 6 o'clock at night,

there is no one on the city staff to help monitor this economic engine

that is our nighttime economy.

And this is an opportunity for me to work with all of you on the council

to see how can we help your business districts,

whether it's Dinkytown, Uptown, East Hennepin, Lake Street, West Broadway.

Think of all the places we have that nighttime economy, yet there's no city management of that.

And I also want to direct some comments to CPED.

I've talked to Eric Hansen, Director Hansen, many times, and I realize this is a tough ask of you as well.

But I'm committed to working with you and your staff, and let's figure this out.

we need this and I really hope that my fellow colleagues can support this

amendment and work with me so I motion make a motion to approve it thank you

is there a second second is there any discussion I'll recognize Council

President Payne thank you Vice President Chuck time speaking in support of this

amendment I have Northeast has a number of little neighborhood bars and right

now the status quo is that either we have bar owners that are really on top of managing

their operations and there's no issues or we have owners that are just overwhelmed by

the reality of having a bar in the middle of a residential neighborhood.

I have a survey up here from one of my constituents who just went and knocked doors of his neighbors

and got 60 pamphlets out, 45 responses that are just highlighting some of the issues that

they have with one of our neighborhood bars.

And I think that we need a middle ground between, you know, a well-run bar or a bar that's struggling.

And I think that having a higher touch from the city can help make those neighborhoods and those businesses more successful.

So I'm speaking, I hope everybody supports this.

I'm not seeing any further discussion.

Clerk, please call the roll on Amendment No. 30, Nighttime Business License Inspector.

Council Member Payne.

Aye.

Wansley.

Aye.

Rainville.

Aye.

Vita.

Aye.

Osmond.

Aye.

Cashman.

Aye.

Chavez.

Aye.

Chowdhury.

Aye.

Palmasano.

No.

Vice Chair Kosky.

Aye.

Chair Chugtay.

Aye.

That is 10 ayes and 1 nay.

That motion carries.

Next is amendment number 31.

There is a revised version of this amendment that was passed out, I believe, yesterday.

This is grocery store development funding offered by Councilmember Wansley.

Councilmember Wansley, will you please introduce and move approval of your amendment?

Yes, thank you, Council Vice President Chuck Tai.

This amendment comes from myself and Councilmember Ellison.

And for the clerks, I will note that Councilmember Ellison is missing as a co-author on this motion

and would like that to be added.

But this amendment allocates $200,000 to support the development of a grocery store in an area of our city identified as experiencing high food insecurity or what also as our homegrown council has defined to be food apartheid.

The revised motion also makes clear that these dollars may only be released if a qualifying organization, such as a nonprofit or community development financial institution, submits bids for the funding along with matching dollars.

My office, as well as Councilmember Ellison's office, has been in several conversations with potential partners, both in War II, as well as stakeholders in North Minneapolis, who have a demonstrated interest in working together to get a grocery store in those respective areas.

In Dinkytown specifically, several community groups, through partnership with the University of Minnesota, have even secure funding to hire staff to advance this work.

These dollars are earmarked in the Great Streets Fund, which limits the geographic areas which this grocery store can be, but still offers many options for corridors in the areas that would be impacted.

And that would touch the areas that community partners that we've been in discussions also are interested in advancing this workaround.

So with that, I will move this motion for approval and ask for a second.

Second.

That amendment number 31 has been properly moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

I will recognize Councilmember Vita.

Thank you, Chair.

My question is for the author.

Council Member Wansley, I'm just wondering if there's opportunity here for existing grocery stores to benefit from this.

I think the bigger problem we have in Ward 4 is we have North Market.

That's a struggling grocery store that, you know, if we developed a new grocery store,

it wouldn't be as helpful to the community as helping North Market, right?

So, like, I'm just wondering if there's an opportunity or could we maybe create an opportunity in this for a store like North Market or Solo or Colonial Market,

some of the stores that we have in North Minneapolis already that are struggling to stay open that may be able to benefit from some of these dollars

in helping not to create another grocery store,

but to sustain existing grocery stores in our community

that is ran by our community members.

Thank you, Council Member Vita.

I do appreciate the intent.

This budget amendment is strictly for pre-development dollars,

so it is targeted towards communities that's looking to create a new grocery store.

I don't know from the conversations that Council Member Ellison has had,

I think some of the intentions behind that is looking at areas in his ward that are not in proximity to some of the places that you name.

So communities who don't have access through vehicles or whatever the case might be to be able to access those and to have a store created in their communities.

And I know that's the case for my ward as well.

But, yeah, I do understand that intent.

would love to have further conversations about that, but this amendment is strictly for the

pre-development phase for something new. Thank you. I would just also say Councilmember

Ellison has Cub Foods in his ward, so that's like the one major grocery store in

in North Minneapolis, but I understand. I can't support it. I think we need

I think we need to help the businesses that exist already to be sustained, and I know

for certain that several of the stores in North Minneapolis could benefit from this kind of money.

I had had conversations about bringing an amendment forward to help with that.

North Market was on the brink of closing the doors at the end of November,

and someone stepped in and helped them with funding.

So I'm able to have conversations with staff this upcoming year to make sure that we can.

And I've got a commitment from staff, you know, to help out in ways that we could and make sure that they're sustained.

They went from they had changed their entry was the 50 percent off fruits and vegetables on Wednesdays.

And they changed that to 25 percent and they saw a huge decline in people coming to the store.

So now they went to two days a week at 50 percent off fruits and vegetables.

And so that's something we need access to.

We need to keep growing that program.

And I think as a city, we can help.

And I was hoping this would be able to help them.

And because it can't, I can't support this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next I'll recognize Council Member Osmond and note that we've been joined in this committee by Council Member Jenkins.

Thank you, Chair.

I support the amendments.

I think it's a great, wonderful, my area, like Elliott Park, could definitely use something like this.

But I am a little concerned about limiting this to nonprofits or, you know, nonprofits don't start groceries.

Groceries are mainly independent, family-owned, family-run businesses.

And I don't know if this is just limited to nonprofit only or?

Councilmember Osmond, you'll see we just listed some examples of organizations that could qualify.

Again, it will go through an RFP.

So nonprofits, different organizations can submit as long as they have those matching dollars.

But it also mentions community development institutions.

It also mentions, you know, similar groups like that.

So it's not just limited to nonprofits.

Yeah.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we'll go to Council Member Rainville followed by Council Member Cashman.

Thank you.

I stand in support of Council Member Vita.

I agree 100% that we should support the existing grocery stores as well.

So I'm wondering if the author, is there any wiggle room in your amendment that at least some information in the research of this could help focus on existing grocery stores as well?

Thank you, Council Member Rainville.

I think we've spent almost nearly a year getting to this place about identifying the need for

pre-development dollars. Again, I'm more than happy to work with Councilmember Vita, especially

our homegrown council who've also talked about this, to look at how to support existing stores.

But the issue that I've had conversations with Councilmember Ellison and just residents in my

ward is the need for something new in the areas that don't have access to a grocery store. So

So that's why I want to keep the intent of the amendment as it currently stands.

Okay.

Thank you for that response.

Is Council Member Ellison going to come in today?

Could we talk with him?

Could we lay this over until he's in?

I don't see the need to do that.

I mean, these amendments have been also public.

So if someone, I mean, Council Member Vita or yourself would like to find additional funding sources to do exactly or accomplish the intent that you're laying out,

I think we will love to see that.

You have until tonight to do that, but I don't see that needing to come in conflict with what we're considering today.

Thank you.

Council Member Cashman.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I had also asked about some flexibility in this funding because I think that our PAR report did have a lot of recommendations, including public-private partnerships that I think could be explored.

And I did want to point out that if you look at our license fee schedule that, you know, businesses who are operating a grocery store have to pay to the city, it ranges from $460 up to $1,700.

and I feel like there could be an opportunity to explore waiving fees for grocery stores

starting in the green zones, for example, or finding ways of reducing the city burden

that we're placing on grocery store operators, maybe exploring a vibrant storefronts type model

where we're subsidizing part of the rent to fill vacant storefronts with small grocery stores

or convenience stores, I would really like to see this issue addressed flexibly so that

we can try to create the maximum output from this money that the council's allocating.

I'm wondering if those options that I've put forward now fall within the budget proposal.

Thank you, Council Member Cashman. Again, I can only go by the motion language that's

very, I think it's clear. It notes it's a one-time appropriation for qualifying organizations,

and it lists some of those as examples who have matching dollars to do the pre-development work

to start a grocery store. I'm hearing folks would love to explore how to support existing

grocery chains or options. That is not what this amendment does. It is to start new grocery stores

in areas that that has been identified or has been identified as a need.

But it does allow that flexibility in terms of, again, you need matching dollars.

There's contingencies and a list of different examples of organizations

who can essentially be qualified to access these dollars.

And one other question.

Would private companies be eligible for these dollars or is it only for nonprofits?

I think the goal is absolutely focusing on organizations that have a public interest.

So it lists again community development, financial institutions.

We see some of those that kind of actually an example that Councilmember Vespa mentioned

like North Market.

Those are some of the organizations that we are seeing doing the heavy lifting of advancing

this work.

Private chains as we also saw from that report that PAR did actually do not have an issue

with getting the resources and upfront capital to do development of grocery stores.

So that is not where we're seeing the need.

It is some of these more publicly linked or publicly financed institutions that want to do this work

who don't have those type of resources available to them, and this is to help support those.

Would grocery stores like Good Grocer on the south side be eligible?

Because I know that they're one of the few grocery stores that provides SNAP and other benefits in the area,

which is a difficulty right now.

I think, as you know, Councilmember Cashman, that's an operational decision.

I don't get to make that.

If they are a nonprofit organization or if they have a CDFI, I think that is something that CPED,

who would be the host department, to be able to determine through the RFP.

But I don't even know.

I can't make that decision.

Okay.

Wonderful.

Councilmember Palmasano.

Councilmember Rainville, will you turn off your mic?

Thanks.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I do have a question for Director Hansen, actually.

I'm worried that this amount of money is not likely to achieve the goal,

which is a grocery store in a food insecure area.

Grocery stores are notoriously expensive to develop and maintain

and have very little profit margin that gets to go back into the store.

What can $200,000 accomplish here?

There's no way it can cover space, build out inventory, technology, equipment,

licenses or even staff just to open the doors but it could really do a lot for

existing places like North Market director Hanson my question for you is

what services will be lost within business development with this

appropriation good morning chair chug tie members of the committee America

Hanson the CPED director and to answer your question councilmember Paul

Masano. Yes, it's in the eye of the beholder how much money it is. $200,000 though for the

creation of a new grocery store is not going to be sufficient to open a grocery store. It would

have to leverage other funding. And that's what the amendment does say. As the council author

Wansley talks about, it's potentially leveraging some matching funds with some organizations that

in the market. We are not experts at opening grocery stores. We have talked

to others. As this amendment came across our transom, we kind of

started to do some research about how much this would hold. This is absolutely

something that would have to go into an existing building. This wouldn't be a new

construction that would be cost prohibitive. So you'd be looking at us

maybe retenanting a space that potentially was a grocery store at some

point in time or a space that could have a size that would make it make sense for

a new grocery store to operate. On the margins, you're right, it's significantly

thin margins on grocery stores. You're seeing that in North Market. We're also

seeing that in the small community-based grocers, whether publicly minded or a

for-profit entity, and the larger grocery stores. We're seeing that in grocery

stores, the grocery store markets. The large grocery stores of a generation ago

are the small urban ones.

I think of the ones like the Cubs that are on Lake Street,

both the west side and the east side,

those are actually small in the market.

We see the newer grocers building bigger floor plates

for services and having a myriad of services.

So think about Hy-Vee's entering into the market

and they have more than just groceries

and the deli and that sort of thing.

They sell clothes and they have a bar and restaurant

and other things that are drawing people.

And that has had significant impact on the smaller grocers in Minneapolis.

And we've seen that, especially those larger opportunities to do a grocery store on the border, in the suburban communities.

So in Richfield or in Brooklyn Center or in Robbinsdale, that has kind of sucked the trade area.

So it's very challenging to do grocery in urban areas.

So that's to think about it.

It's going to be a portion.

We're not certain if this will be successful to get to where that we don't have that data right now.

We just know it's expensive to get a tenant to find a space to fit it out with all of the racking and coolers and all the things you need.

And then to get the not only to have the inventory, but to have the relationships to the distributors.

So an organization like Cub or Aldi will have that connection.

A startup is going to pay more on the wholesale market than you'd see in those other with a better buying process.

So there's a lot of headwinds in a grocery store creation in Minneapolis.

That's why we don't see a lot of them, and we don't see them in certain areas,

because the trade areas of the larger things are going to suck them all down.

Thank you.

You know, Council Member Cashman mentioned this, and it's a good point, is what are some of the city costs that we need to take in for a grocery store to open in our business?

I know we've been able to help some with green cost share types of loans.

Are there other ways that you know of that we help grocery stores locally through CPED?

Yep.

Chair Chugtai, Council Member Paul Masano, our typical commercial products are available.

The Ownership and Opportunity Fund, the 2% Loan Program,

Facade Programs, those are typically what we can offer.

There's not anything specific to groceries.

The Health Department, I think, has some programs around having healthy foods,

and the Green Cost Share is also the Health Department.

Thank you.

Those seem like ways that help largely across the city

that we can help grocery stores and grocery stores in trouble.

grocery stores do pay a lot in energy costs.

And I'll just mention to my colleagues that on Thursday,

we'll consider a different topic that might raise those energy costs

with an increase to the franchise fee.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. Next, I'll recognize Council Member Vita.

Thank you. Director Hanson, just a clarifying question.

You said that, like, a previous store or a previous space could be used.

Just for clarification, are you saying, like, the Worth Co-op was in the building on Golden Valley Road?

I don't think they stay open for over a year.

But they were operating as a grocery store.

Like, that would be something that could come back or, you know, like, into that space that was outfitted for a grocery store from –

but I think North Point used it as a food shelf at one point, too.

So, like, you're saying that sort of space and that kind of organization.

Chair Chugtai, Council Member Vita, I'm saying that a new constructed – a newly constructed grocery store, this would not help.

Right.

It just wouldn't.

You'd have to look for space.

I think that worth co-op space is too small.

That's one of the reasons it didn't operate.

Yes, North Point did operate it as a food shelf,

but it does not have the floor space to operate at a profitable market.

North Market is probably the smallest we're going to see,

so you're going to have to look for buildings like that,

or former Aldi, they've moved around.

But you're going to need somewhere north of 15,000 square feet in order for it to work,

and even then, they're going to be on some pretty tight margins.

Okay, thank you.

Not seeing anyone else in queue, clerk please call the roll on the revised number 31 grocery store development funding.

Councilmember Payne. Aye. Wansley. Aye. Rainville. No. Vita. No. Osmond. Aye. Cashman. Aye. Jenkins. Nay. Chavez. Aye. Chowdhury. Aye.

Palmasano no vice-chair Kosky I chair Chugtay I that is eight eyes and four

nays motion carries next is amendment number 32 commercial adaptive reuse

study offered by councilmember Cashman councilmember cashman will you please

introduce and move approval of your amendment thank you madam chair this

This amendment before us is $125,000 one-time appropriation within CPED to study the public benefit of and evaluate financial incentives for adaptive reuse of underutilized commercial buildings.

So yesterday in our budget committee, we heard from the Q3 financial status presentation that property taxes are projected to be $17.4 million under budget.

We also saw in the City Assessor's 2025 report that the estimated market value of downtown commercial property values fell 9.5% from 2024 to 2025.

And we are seeing in-person work still at just 75% of its pre-COVID levels as of late 2025.

And we have taken some steps as a city to incentivize the conversion of office buildings into housing to become a more productive use for downtown with the zoning code reforms that we passed last year.

But we have not really explored a financial incentive to make this happen. And while we understand the barriers that exist to converting these buildings and financial barriers, engineering barriers, we don't fully understand the public benefit.

And I would like us as a city to study that public benefit, to model the benefits of converting a building like the North Star Center, right?

In the center of downtown, it converted from a vacant office into 500 units of housing.

And that, of course, lowers the property tax rate because it goes from a commercial rate to a residential rate.

But at the same time, it brings 500 new residents into that core, which support the sales tax of the neighboring areas.

It also brings up the value of the buildings nearby because it's now occupied.

And if we're going to really tackle this issue with the force that we need, I believe that we need to have better metrics and modeling to support the policies that will continue to push for the state legislature and here at the city moving forward.

So I will move this study for approval and ask for your support.

Second.

Amendment number 32 has been properly moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Council member.

Bomisano.

Thank you, Madam chair.

Um, I think the success of the groove lofts have shown us that this can be done.

I am curious about what the barriers are preventing more of this reuse.

Um, we certainly have enough empty buildings.

Um, but I also know it's extraordinarily expensive to do this right now.

So maybe some other help will, um, will be helpful in this, in this area.

So thank you for this amendment.

Not seeing any further discussion,

clerk, please call the roll on amendment number 32,

commercial adoptive reuse study.

Councilmember Payne. Aye.

Wansley. Aye.

Rainville. Aye.

Vita. Aye.

Osmond. Aye.

Cashman. Aye.

Jenkins. Aye.

Chavez. Aye.

Chowdhury. Aye.

Palmasano. Aye.

Vice Chair Kosky. Aye.

Chair Chugtay. Aye.

That is 12 ayes.

That motion carries.

We are next going to move to amendment number 33, which is vacant retail activation offered by council member Cashman and myself.

I will recognize council member Cashman to please introduce and move approval of this item.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for co-authoring this amendment with me.

This is another economic development proposal to address the retail vacancies that we're seeing citywide.

The proposal is for a cost share program for vacant retail activation,

which would support property owners actually making physical changes to their buildings

to allow for the retail tenants to come in,

whether that's subdividing their space into smaller spaces that would be more affordable to local small businesses

or even adding doors to allow for shoppers to be able to get into buildings, which we're seeing as well.

And this would be a cost share program.

So we'd really be leveraging private investment as well at the same time.

I did write a pretty detailed proposal here.

But of course, this would be in the hands of CPED to develop the program.

And it is pulling on the Downtown Assets Fund, but it is for a citywide program

so that every ward could benefit from the benefit of this retail activation.

And I'll just note, we've had a lot of success with Vibrant Storefronts in the past couple of years,

which is a rental subsidy, and I think this is kind of 2.0 of the Vibrant Storefronts model

where we're actually funding improvements of the physical spaces to make it affordable

for small businesses to rent in the long term.

And I think the economy of the future is really supporting smaller square footage in our retail spaces

so that our local businesses can afford the cost of rent.

So I will move approval of this item.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a proper motion before us.

Is there any discussion?

Council Member Palmisano.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to point out that this amendment, along with amendments 26 and 27,

transfers $2.2 million from downtown assets.

While I understand this amendment is meant to just reduce empty retail space,

at a time that we're trying to revitalize downtown,

that is a lot of money coming all from the same source here.

So I wanted to point that out. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there any further discussion?

Going once, going twice, not seeing any.

Clerk, please call the roll on Amendment No. 33, Vacant Retail Activation.

Council Member Payne. Aye.

Wansley. Aye.

Rainville. Aye.

Vita. Aye.

Osmond. Aye.

Cashman. Aye.

Jenkins.

Aye. Chavez. Aye. Chowdhury. Aye. Palmasano. Aye. Vice Chair Kosky. Aye. Chair Chukty. Aye. That is 12 ayes. That motion carries. Next up is amendment number 34. Invest in child care workers offered by Council Member Wansley. Council Member Wansley, will you please introduce and move approval of your amendment? Yes. Thank you, Council Vice President Chukty. This amendment builds off of work.

and investments made by the council in the city last budget cycle to support the expansion of the child care workforce,

which has been identified as a strategy in addressing the high cost of child care for working families in our city.

This earmarked about $102,000 in CPES Workforce Development Fund, which has an approved budget of $14 million.

It was support funding at FTE that will help residents interested in early child care education get plugged into the correct pathways and programs.

This was brought forward out of many conversations with stakeholders, including Minneapolis public schools and other local child care providers.

And conversations with those stakeholders and other experts in the field have consistently focused on the huge role that workforce shortest plays in increasing the cost of child care.

and how beneficial it would be to create clearer pathways into child care careers for high school students,

college students, and people of all ages in our community.

And this FTE will lead the creation of those pathway initiatives and programs and conversations with those partners.

This funding will, of course, have a massive impact on increasing the early child care workforce,

which will help local residents and workers in essentially accessing these services and also

ideally experiencing some financial relief as well. So with that, I will motion approval of

this item and request a second. Second. The item has been properly moved and seconded. Is there

any discussion? I'll recognize Council President Payne. Thank you, Vice President Chuck Tai. This is

so extraordinarily timely and oddly it pairs with our previous amendment around grocery

store access. I actually have a new Aldi coming into the ward and the current development plan

is to have that Aldi have a condo for a child care center and the developer is trying to

work with a child care development organization that the kind of similar to the grocery store

model, the child care centers are running on really tight margins as well. And there's some

internecine tax policy around seminary centers of learning that are qualifying for tax abatement,

which could be the make or break difference on whether or not we get another child care center

in the ward. It's really technical. It's really complex. I could see us having a full-time staffer

that knows how to navigate some of these challenges

so that we can actually expand access to child care to our community.

So there's a real need for this, and it's really timely.

So thank you, Council Member Wonsley.

Thank you.

Next I'll recognize Council Member Palmisano.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minneapolis Public Schools already has a career pathways program

for pre-K through sixth grade.

It's in partnership with Mankato State and Metro State,

and that's about all I know about it.

Perhaps others know more here,

but I really don't think it makes sense to reinvent the wheel

and have CPED stand up a brand new program utilizing an FTE

when this other program already exists.

Would this need to be a new track

as part of the existing career pathways program?

I'm seeing Council Member Wansley nod yes.

to me unfortunately this feels like a duplication with the public schools thank you council member

Wansley yeah thank you CVP checks out just for clarity for council member pomisano there is a

distinct difference and I think you know this is someone who has school-aged children between

preschool and early childhood education early childhood education comes before preschool that

is where we have a gap and where we're seeing the greatest need amongst families who have to

pay either child care providers to provide educational and also child care just opportunities

to their youngest to the youngest members of their families until they are preschool ready

and can go either through a public school or non-public school track so these are distinctly

different and the gap is really focused in or an early childhood education and that is not a space

where we see NPS is filling which is why they've been part of these conversations with our office

and city staff around how we can work together to create this FTE position to support a pathway

program. So we have great partners at the table, both at NPS, also at the state level who are

really excited about that, and again, we'll encourage my colleagues to support.

Seeing no further discussion, clerk, please call the roll on Amendment No. 34,

Invest in Child Care Workers.

Councilmember Payne.

Aye.

Wansley.

Aye.

Rainville.

Aye.

Vita.

Aye.

Osmond.

Aye.

Cashman.

Aye.

Jenkins.

Aye.

Chavez.

Aye.

Chowdhury.

Aye.

Palmasano.

No.

Vice Chair Kosky.

Aye.

Chair Chugtai.

Aye.

That is 11 ayes and 1 nay.

That motion carries.

Next we are ready to move to amendment number 35.

Enterprise Policy Management System Staff Direction

offered by Council President Payne.

Council President Payne, will you please introduce

and move approval of this amendment

and make sure to just note that this is a $0 amendment

and just walk through some of the context

so everyone is aware.

Thank you, Vice President Chaghtai.

As we discussed in our last COW,

we are moving forward with a policy management platform.

This was a budget amendment last year.

We are very much on our way to getting a vendor identified

It's just the timing of it all. These funds need to be rolled over and we need to take this action so that we can actually leverage those funds that were allocated for this year's budget.

Mr. Clerk, did you want to speak to this at all?

Through the chair, Mr. President, I appreciate that summary.

This is an enterprise-wide project to provide the funding to acquire a new system to manage the process of both bringing forward and developing policies, but also of managing and making those policies available to the public.

So I appreciate the support for that.

Is there a second to counsel President Payne's motion?

Second.

That item has been properly moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

I'm not seeing any. Clerk, please call the roll on amendment number 35, Enterprise Policy Management System Staff Directive.

Councilmember Payne. Aye. Wansley. Aye. Rainville. Aye. Vita. Aye. Osmond. Aye. Cashman. Aye. Jenkins. Aye. Chavez. Aye. Chaudhry. Aye. Palmasano. Aye. Vice Chair Kosky. Aye. Chair Chugtay. Aye. That is 12 ayes.

That motion carries.

Next up is amendment number 36, policy for the people.

And we will take up 36A and B together.

This amendment is offered by Council Member Wansley.

A revision to this was passed out, I believe, on Friday or yesterday.

But there's a second revision.

And it's also in yellow.

and the top of it reads number 36, second revision.

Council Member Wansley, please introduce and move approval of your amendment.

Thank you, Council Vice President Chuck Tai.

Since coming into office, my priority post-government structure

has always been to ensure the development and growth of the legislative branch

and making sure that we have the resources and infrastructure that we need

to carry out our responsibilities and authorities

to serve the 400 plus thousand residents that we all represent across the city.

And ensuring funding is available for the legislative body to do that work

complements us needing FTEs to carry that out,

and specifically to carry out research, evaluation, oversight,

and policy expertise needs that support our work as well.

This motion in front of you essentially repurposes the very original

motion where we were looking to pull FTEs from the administrative side to essentially use already existing FTE positions that's within the legislative department or the city clerk's office that's actually already in motion for classification. And those positions would be supporting the very specific committees that actually carry a bulk of our work on the legislative process. So I'm very grateful to know

that our clerk staff has been prioritizing its work to make sure we get these FTEs as opposed to

us having to find new resources to support that. So the $25,000 that you see reflected is

appropriation that would be made from the legislative department to HR to ensure that

the JFQs and classifications that would need to happen to get us those additional positions

would receive the proper support needed.

We actually have to use the support of a vendor

that does that classification

because there is such a huge backlog

for our internal HR team

who are also responsible for those.

So we'll be guaranteed support

through that vendor with this appropriation.

And then the subsequent motion

is a staff directive to the legislative department

making sure that we get a report back

on the progress for getting those FTEs

the classifications, the JAQ, just making sure we're moving along with the actual formalization

of those positions for no later than March of 2026. So just closing the loop or making

sure we get those positions. So those are what those two motions do. And I will move

those items for approval and ask for a second. Is there a second? Second. That item has been

properly moved and seconded. I will note, as you can see in your binder, the very first

draft of this amendment was taking approximately half a million dollars on going out of the

mayor's office department.

And I am just, I'm really grateful to the author, to Council Member Wansley here for,

you know, her willingness to be flexible and find a creative solution here that is an alternative

to such a significant reduction to the mayor's office.

And thank you for, again, your willingness to collaborate

and compromise and come to the table.

And I'm glad we were able to find a solution that moves us forward.

Is there any further discussion?

Not seeing any.

Clerk, please call the roll on Amendment No. 36,

including both the motion and the staff direction.

this amendment is policy for the people.

Council Member Payne. Aye. Wansley. Aye.

Rainville. Aye. Vita. Aye.

Osmond. Aye. Cashman. Aye.

Jenkins. Aye. Chavez. Aye.

Chowdhury. Aye. Palisano. Aye.

Vice Chair Kosky. Aye.

And Chair Chugtay. Aye. That is 12 ayes.

That motion carries.

Next up is amendment number 37, audit department FTEs,

offered by Council President Payne,

Council Member Chowdhury, and Vice Chair Kosky.

Council President Payne, will you please introduce

and move approval of your amendment?

Thank you, Vice President Chaghtai.

This amendment is to...

The city auditor presented a vision for the department

that included a build-out of the special review and advisory services.

This is essentially two years in the making.

We originally created the Division of Oversight and Evaluation and Policy and Research within the auditor's office.

We worked with the city attorney.

Those functions were identified to be better suited, working directly within the legislative department,

not as a part of our independent auditor. Mr. Timmerman, who's in the audience, brought forward a proposal to try to build out that vision of a strengthened oversight capability within the auditor's department that is the Special Review and Advisory Services,

and has given us very clear guidance that his intent is to, you know,

take on large issues in the city when it comes to oversight

as evidenced by the willingness to take on the investigation of the shooting of Davis Maturi,

the investigation of the death of Allison Luchere.

And, you know, we got to a point where he was running out of capacity

as we were running into a higher need for oversight.

And so for Mariah Samuels, she was not able to take that on.

This budget amendment is really aimed at making sure that our city auditor has the capacity to say yes.

And I'll also note that we worked really closely with our budget team starting at the beginning of the year.

We identified four FTEs to move over to the auditor's office.

with the vision of a multi-year build-out.

The mayor actually cut two of those positions

and his recommended budget.

I wanted to restore those positions

and do the full build-out as a result of that cut.

I want to actually thank Vice President Chugtai

for her leadership to work with the administration

to actually get us to a source

that was amenable to the administration.

She moved heaven and earth

to try to get to a place where everybody can support this.

And so I'm grateful to the administration's work on that as well.

And I will move approval of this item and ask for a second.

Amendment number 37 has been properly moved and seconded.

I want to note for colleagues, this is the revised number 37 that we are looking at.

And again, want to thank the authors for their incredible diligence and willingness to collaborate, compromise, come to the table.

And really, really grateful for the product that's before us today.

Is there any further discussion?

I will recognize Council Member Palmisano.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I really appreciate that many people have come to the table to figure out a way to fund this amendment.

It took quite a bit of work and collaboration and also trust between one another.

I chaired the audit committee for 10 years, and there's nobody more than I that understands the importance of the Office of the City Auditor.

That does give me a unique perspective.

I will say this.

This department has grown quite a bit over the past couple of years.

Now we're adding four more positions, replacing two that were removed and vacant, plus an additional two.

And we've all seen departments that have grown too fast.

I will support this today because of the trust involved here on all sides.

But I do want to caution us to give audit a chance to absorb these new positions and be responsible about their growth.

this department is too important to not be monitoring its ability to incorporate all

these new positions in the work that they are intended to do. Thank you. Thank you. And finally,

I'll recognize Council Member Cashman. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that everybody was

working to compromise here, but I do have some concerns that Public Works and CPED are getting

their positions taken instead of the mayor's office positions, politically appointed positions.

And I'm wondering how it came to be that the mayor and his negotiating team came to agree

that public works and CPED positions should be taken for this.

That's an excellent question, Council Member Cashman.

I'm going to ask Director Descenza if we can get COO Anderson Kelleher here.

While we're doing that, I will attempt to first respond to your question.

These are all positions that are vacant.

They were identified by the negotiating team that the mayor identified as we work through this markup packet.

And I can't speak further to why these were the positions that were picked.

And so I think that's something the COO can do.

Or we can see if Mr. Jelly or, you know, I see we have both the CPED and the Public Works Directors here.

I don't know if we want to invite them up to just talk about these vacancies.

All right.

The Deputy COO it is.

There we go.

Rock, paper, scissors.

If you'll first begin by introducing yourself.

Good morning, council members.

Brett Gelli, Deputy City Operations Officer

for Development, Health and Livability.

I will speak the best I can to the conversations.

I was not in the room with council vice president,

but as we were working through budget amendments

and trying to find sources that both sides could agree to,

We worked with all departments and reviewed current vacancies and were able to find the positions that are in the amendment or something that our side we could support and agree with just to make sure we had a deal.

All right, thanks.

I just wanted to point out that, you know, I think the mayor put out a commentary in the Star Tribune

saying it was mean-spirited to cut from his staff, but at the end of the day, he's the CEO of the city,

and all 4,000 staff are his staff.

And so I think it's right to be equally concerned about staff in CPET and Public Works,

as it is the many, you know, politically appointed policy aides in his office.

And I think what I'm seeing here is that these are vacant positions,

and so there's no one being laid off by this cut.

And so I think that was a line that was drawn, but just wanted to point out that, you know, that these are still the mayor's staff as well.

Certainly.

And do you want us to invite up either of the directors, or has your question been sufficiently answered?

And the public works in particular, transportation planning and programming and transportation operations, mobility, what would be the impact of those cuts to public works if Director Sexton can speak to that?

Welcome.

Thank you.

I'd share Chuck Dye, Council Member Cashman.

In terms of impacts, you know, the transportation planning and programming staff do bring our projects up to 30% design.

They lead the public engagement.

So reductions in that area will reduce the level of public engagement we can do.

We'll slow down project development.

And then in transportation, or excuse me, traffic and parking services, where the other position is coming from,

I believe that one is in our sign shop, and they're responsible for printing signs and being able to respond quickly,

whether it's things like the Lena Smith Boulevard changeover or the recent signs that we posted related to prohibiting ice in city,

use of city parking lots.

So reducing staff, while it's not like we cannot do a single task, it will slow down and impact the things that we do.

That said, it's, you know, when you look at the total combination of all cuts to public works that have been approved thus far, we are looking at, you know, six staff and over almost $500,000.

So it's difficult to say specific items that we can or cannot do because of the type of work that we engage in.

But there will be impacts.

Things will be slowed down.

Or there will be things throughout the year that we cannot get to.

Okay.

I appreciate you advocating for your department.

Every department has given some in these negotiations.

I know even the legislative department gave to cover co-enforcement to restore those cuts.

And yeah, I guess I'm just disappointed that instead of cutting from politically appointed political operatives in the city,

we're cutting from more core city services positions for this.

And I will once again clarify, these are all vacant positions.

So there isn't a current service that is being provided that will then go away or have a layoff unfold.

But appreciate the conversation and the discussion.

I'm not seeing anyone else in queue.

Clerk, please call the roll on the revised Amendment No. 37, Audit Department FTEs.

Council Member Payne.

Aye.

Wansley.

Aye.

Rainville.

Aye.

Vita.

Aye.

Osman.

Aye.

Aye. Cashman. Aye. Jenkins. Aye. Chavez. Aye. Chowdhury. Aye. Palmasano. Aye. Vice Chair Koski. Aye. And Chair Chugtay. Aye. That is 12 ayes. That motion carries. Next up is amendment number 38 around budgetary control financial policy offered by myself, Vice Chair Koski, and Council Member Wansley.

I will introduce this amendment and move approval.

And then we will go to the city attorney who will walk through what is actually in this amendment in detail.

So I will say, you know, with intention, this is a budget cycle that I am the lead author on just this amendment alone.

And it is a change to financial policies and a zero dollar amendment at its core.

So, you know, I think we are in the years that I have been a member of this council, I think there is a real need for us to build some guardrails around how money is spent once it has been allocated through the budget process and build in some accountability.

And so these are a few sections to the financial policies that ultimately are all trying to address pieces of that accountability.

With that, I'm going to ask for a second, and then we'll go to the city attorney.

Madam city attorney, can you please walk us through what is in this amendment?

Thank you, Madam Chair, Council Members.

So I'm going to try to in both sort of simply enough but also in detail explain what this

financial policy does.

Overall, it's amendments to the budgetary controls policy and the purposes are both

to clarify portions of the policy that have always been there and also add new requirements

to aid in budgetary transparency.

So let me just step through each of the sections.

As you know, we already have a budgetary controls policy.

It is much shorter than what is before you,

so I'm going to try to highlight the things that are the same

and the things that are different.

So the very first section is called Legal Level of Budgetary Control,

Budget Amendments, and Reporting.

This first section of the policy repeats what was already in the policy

and codifies legal fact. Under our charter, through the annual budget process, the council

annually appropriates money for each department's programs and operations. This annual departmental

budget we refer to in this policy and have defined it as department slash fund level budget. This is

the same term that exists in the current financial policy. But let me explain what this means. I'll

give you an example from my office's budget and I'm going to try to weave in

some examples using my office's budget because that's what I understand and I

think it might be helpful for general understanding. So in the 2025

department fund level budget for my office so department would be city

attorney's office fund is general fund and for 2025 my department slash fund

level budget was about $23 million. So that's what I'm going to talk about. So even though sometimes

we present budgetary data in a more granular way, so for my office, say $10 million for the civil

division and $13 million for the criminal division, the department slash fund level budget is that

top line appropriation to my office of $23 million. So under this policy, as was true under the

existing policy departments are not authorized to amend or exceed their

but departmental budget that was approved during the annual budget process

without council approval so I can't as a department head without council approval

amend my budget to be 24 million dollars instead of 23 million dollars there are

some exceptions to this that I will come back to but just like is true under the

current policy within my 30 million 23 million dollar budget I have the

authority to exercise operational control to administer my 23 million dollar budget which

includes the authority to shift funds within my department budget as I deem appropriate to carry

out my department's functions. So for example if I have an attorney position in the criminal division

but I decide that because of all of the federal litigation we've become involved in that I need

that position in the civil division I have the authority to shift those funds from the criminal

division to the civil division without approval as long as I stay within my 23 million dollar

departmental budget, that department-slash-fund-level budget, again, City Attorney's Office General Fund.

As I said previously, there are some important exceptions in charter to the general proposition

that departments can't exceed their budgets without council approval, and those are also

addressed in this policy now. So number one, the charter gives the finance department the

administrative authority to authorize payments that may exceed the department's budget in order

to pay payroll. That's explicit. And number two, the charter permits the council by ordinance to

authorize the payment of routine claims and bills. Both of these exceptions are important to ensure

the city satisfies its legal payment obligations. So another example, if the council votes to approve

a labor agreement with the attorney's union midway through the year, giving raises that weren't

accounted for in my annual departmental budget, finance can lawfully pay the attorney's salaries

even if the amount ultimately exceeds my $23 million budget.

What's new in this policy though is explicitly requiring transparency.

Under this policy, any of these administrative authorizations must be included in the Finance

Department's next quarterly report.

So that's the first section.

Moving on, second section is called Council Dedicated Funds.

This policy newly addresses Council earmarks and we have defined those, we've used the

term council dedicated funds in the policy and define it there. These earmarks are captured

in your budget amendments dedicating funds for a specific purpose. For example, the earmark

of funds to the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs for the purpose of providing community

engagement and support for immigrant and refugee communities. The policy provides for both

controls and reporting. So under the policy, number one, the earmarked funds can't be

used for different purposes without council approval. The policy provides

that the administration may request council approval for reallocation. Number

two, the administration must report by April 30th on its spending plan for the

earmarks and the status report by August 31st. And number three, if the

administration determines it can't carry out the purpose of the earmarks for

whatever reason or if it determines the earmark is for more money than necessary

it needs to report within 60 days of that determination the amount, the reason,

the effect on carrying out the earmarks purpose and any other relevant information.

Moving on, next section is called reporting of anticipated overspending.

The policy creates another reporting requirement on departmental spending.

Under the policy, number one, if at the time of the quarterly finance department report,

a department exceeds the prorated amount of the departmental budget,

again that department slash fund level budget which would be for me my 23 million dollar budget

the department must report it to council with a proposed correction action plan if applicable.

So for an example say at quarter two I've already spent more than half of my 23 million dollar

budget I would report that. That does not necessarily mean that I'm on target to go over

budget. Bills tend to come in at different times of the year so if I had a big bill due in the first

half of the year and I know that I have sufficient funds in my budget to pay for everything else in

the second half of the year, I would just explain that in my report and wouldn't need a corrective

action plan. Number two, if at any time a department reasonably expects that by the end of the year it is

going to go over budget, the department has to promptly notify finance and include that information

in the next quarterly report. Number three, if by any, sorry, if by the end of the year the department

actually has exceeded its annual department budget, then the next year the

department must submit monthly budgetary status reports to the council.

And number four, as another check within the system, the legislative department

will have access to the city's financial systems, which is also another

transparency measure. To maintain the integrity of those systems, that

access will be restricted to view-only capability and subject to the finance

department's normal operating policies and procedures.

And then the final section is called lapses and rollover, and I believe it's identical

if not close to identical to what has already been in there, but I might as well explain

it as long as I'm on a roll.

So this section of the policy, again, same as the current policy, unspent appropriations

generally lapse at the end of the year and money goes back to the fund from whence they

But there is a rollover process where appropriations that are unspent but are encumbered, which means obligated, for example, through an executed contract, can be authorized to continue rollover into the next budget year.

So for 2026, the city attorney's office budget might be $23 million plus $100,000 for an expert witness contract that was executed in 2025 for services to be rendered in 2026.

So that's essentially what's covered in that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam City Attorney.

I want to thank you, the Finance Department and the leaders of the Legislative Department

for working together on crafting this amendment.

I will see if there are any questions or discussion.

Council Member Palmisano.

Madam Chair, I wanted to speak on this item, and I had a chance to speak with you at length

about it last night.

so I will work to be brief.

I really did appreciate our conversation and your willingness to talk through this with me.

And at the point of last night, my first reaction was that while I take council's role in oversight very seriously,

I believed that this went too far.

It required so much added reporting that it felt a bit punitive,

And I felt we needed to balance our agreed duty of oversight and excessive requirements that take staff away from their regular duties, from the things that we expect them to be doing.

As Attorney Anderson pointed out, there are a lot of reasons our departments can go over budget and, you know, we need to cast a wide net there.

Yes, MPD and MFD go over budget for overtime.

A COUPLE YEARS AGO, AND AS WE HEARD EARLIER, THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WAS OVER BUDGET IN THE

PAST DUE TO A WAGE STUDY AND THEN CURRENTLY DUE TO NEW TECHNOLOGY.

I DO THINK WE CAN CONDUCT OUR OVERSIGHT DUTIES WITHOUT REQUIRING CONSTANT REPORTING THAT REQUIRES

A LOT OF TIME.

AND THIS IS THE FIRST OF A FEW POLICY ITEMS TODAY ON OUR DOCKET.

TWO NEW ORDINANCES WE'LL HEAR AT COW THAT REQUIRE A LOT OF REPORTING BY STAFF.

But sitting with our conversation last night, Councilmember Chugtie, and hearing Attorney

Anderson's explanation today, and checking in with a couple of other people, I do think

that, one, this was a big lift, and I am eager to move in this direction and to be supportive

of this today.

So thank you.

This clearly took quite a bit of work on your end to pull together.

Thank you, Councilmember.

I'll recognize Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm a little concerned about small departments having to do this reporting.

Did you consider at all departments that would not have the resources to do reporting,

like the assessor's office who did go over budget but has a valid reason and process to ameliorate that issue?

I think in one way or another, the reason a department would go over budget is justifiable in some way.

Whether that justification is acceptable to the body or to taxpayers is a different question.

Every single department, regardless of their size, meets with the budget office on a monthly basis to go over their budget and to review their prorated budgets by month

and be able to project out when there will be an overage.

This work is already happening.

It's that it doesn't come,

we don't have a line of sight into it

outside of quarterly reporting, right?

Yesterday, we received the third quarter

financial status report

and the controller's office correctly pointed out

that the overage within the police department

was something that we knew was going to happen

all the way at the beginning of the year,

But nobody up here was planning for such an overage and its impact on the bigger picture.

So this is about bringing line of sight into that.

And then also, you know, really reiterating to departments that their adopted budgets are not suggestions.

That is a formal act by the body and is something that everyone should be working to stay within target of,

even when there are real reasons not to.

And we'll accommodate that.

But that needs to come with a level of accountability too,

so that when departments are in the position where they have to come before us on a monthly basis

to review their budgets, that there is always a high bar for what is a justifiable reason for going over budget.

So we're trying to manage.

So we have a line of sight into this, right?

We just received, again, third quarter financial status report yesterday.

Third quarter ended.

We're near the end of the fourth quarter right now.

So a bunch of time passes in between these things, and it's important that we are staying on top of potential financial issues like the scale of MPD overspend.

I just have a couple other questions for you, too.

Does this work retroactively, or is this only moving forward?

And the reason I ask is because in the last budget, we moved money from the mounted patrol stable lease to fund a crime prevention specialist in the 5th Precinct.

Office of Community Safety just decided, nope, we don't want to end the mounted patrol program.

And nope, we don't want to hire a crime prevention specialist and just didn't do it.

And that was something that I think was incredibly wrong.

And I'm wondering how this resolution addresses that.

Excellent question.

I'm going to go to the city attorney.

Thank you, Madam Chair, council members.

this is prospective.

So not retroactive.

That means it's not retroactive.

It does not look back at earmarks from the 2025 budget.

This will be in effect for earmarks going forward that you've just passed with the 2026 budget.

We'll start with the 2026 budget.

Correct.

And we don't have any way to adjust for that.

It's a big part of why we put this in place because of the exact issues that you've outlined

here and have brought up over the course of markup and over the course of this year.

Yeah, and I will keep talking about it because I think it wasn't right, and it's something that

the council needs to keep considering as they work with that department in particular moving forward.

Excellent. Thank you. Council Member Chowdhury, followed by Council President Payne.

I'll keep my remarks really brief. I just wanted to say I appreciate this coming forward. I think

this is a really pragmatic forward-looking policy.

I think this is also an outgrowth of government structure and how we as the

council and the administration work together and communicate with one

another with the change in government structure.

One of the things that I have seen as like one of the barriers to success in

our organization is these huge gaps in communication and being on the same page.

And as it comes to our budgetary controls and the amendments that we've made and where

they end up throughout a calendar year, that's been a huge hole that has, one, led to frustration,

but two, like brass tacks, impacts our ability to budget in a way that's more collaborative.

And I think reporting is a good thing, and we're probably going to need more in different parts of the organization as we try to figure out how do we address communication gaps to do our jobs and ultimately do the work of supporting the constituents of Minneapolis.

So thank you for bringing this.

Thank you.

Council President Payne.

Thank you, Vice President Chuck Tayyia.

I'll echo some of the sentiment that Council Member Chowdhury is sharing around just formalizing better communication.

I think one of the big themes of this term that I've had with the administration is that we can work informally or we can work formally.

We can look at the relationships that we've built or we can look at the charter.

And I think that as we have evolved into this new government structure, increasingly we are establishing a need for increasing levels of formality because there are such breakdowns in informal communication.

And I think, you know, it's shockingly timely that this is being brought forward because, I mean, one of the questions that was asked, I think Council Member Cashman asked this of our safety commissioner of, you know, what are you doing to prevent these types of overages?

And in December, as we're finalizing our budget, they're saying they're going to start a conversation around more oversight.

That was as shocking to me as the actual dollar figure of the over budget.

They should have known these problems at the beginning of the year and had those conversations started at the beginning of the year.

So it's not even just a breakdown in communication between the legislative and executive sides of our government.

It was a breakdown in communication within administrative departments, right?

And so I think that this level of oversight and, more importantly, transparency is what's going to enable us to have much more informed, better governance conversations.

So this is just a win all around.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And finally, I'll recognize Councilmember Wansley.

Thank you, CVP Chexau.

I just wanted to also share a few comments as a co-author and my intentions for also being part of this work.

It's actually aligned with something Councilmember Cashman mentioned of actually experiencing now multiple budget cycles where this council has made appropriations and we do not see the mayor then implement or execute them.

We're even seeing that play out in this existing budget where we know council mayor preparations for 2025 for emergency housing vouchers to get 150 unsheltered people into permanent housing with wraparound services.

And that work did not get executed this budget cycle.

And now we're having to do the restoration of that along with other like civilian investigators right now.

And as you mentioned, crime prevention specialists, safety ambassadors, there's numerous examples to point to of this council fulfilling our authority, making the appropriations based off of what we hear from our residents as top priorities.

And then not often seeing the administration be a willing partner to then do their part of executing on them, regardless of how they feel about them or not.

So I will name that was my intent and also not wanting to be in another cycle next year of asking and doing legislative directives and trying to follow up or quote unquote micromanaging the administration on why they're not implementing the things that this council passed and said we want to see be advanced.

We want to see be executed and that is your responsibility.

And the technical term that we learned through this process for that is called empowerment.

when the executive does that.

We're actually seeing Congress now actually use empowerment actions

because this is literally playing out by President Trump in many ways

of not executing congressional earmarks

and other funding appropriations that's being made

because our executive at the federal level also don't like them.

So we don't want to get to that level at the municipal side of things.

So this was one of the ways in which we were able to say,

let's figure out a policy solution to make sure there's greater transparency and oversight over

the administration as it pertains to council's budget amendments, because apparently that is

where we have the greatest issue in seeing work be implemented and executed. And I will even name

throughout this budget cycle, we've seen our own COO come forward and name multiple times this

underlining, we don't know if we'll implement this, or we don't know if we'll implement one

of these budget priorities. And it's like if this body passed it, it should be implemented. It should

not be used as a political pawn of things. We're simply trying to do our jobs. We want the

administration to do theirs. And this essentially acts as guardrails for both of us to basically do

the work that taxpayers and constituents sent us to do. So I'm really excited that we were able to

get to this place to bring this policy forward. I will note I'll be bringing a revision as well

tonight that addresses something else that has come forward in this process around greater

monitoring around our legal settlement dollars and I think we constantly hear that be used as a reason

for dollars going out the door but no accounting for what what is it for it's just oh it's the

legal settlement and it's next thing you know we're 20 million dollars over budget and that's

not also appropriate so I want to name that'll be coming tonight but that said I'm grateful for my

co-authors for working together city staff to get to a place where we can bring this policy forward

today wonderful thank you council member wansley uh just to clarify are you bringing an amendment

to number 38 that is correct okay so here's um here's my suggestion then like let's hold this so

that we can just get it amended we don't have to do an additional motion to reconsider um and we'll

pick up right here. And I'm not seeing any further discussion on this item. So laying this over

until this evening. And here's what I want to do in terms of how we're moving forward now.

So we've got number 38, which is going to have an amendment. We have a new number 39 based on

something that came up in discussions with the legislative department. We have a new number 40

offered by Council Member Chowdhury. We have a revision to number 11 and number 12 that was passed

out. And that's just accommodating an additional change that was flagged by the administration.

And then finally, I think there's a couple of additional revisions to amendments that authors have made me aware of.

So that's a total of one, two, three, four, five, six, seven items that we need to take up.

I want to give people some time because I know Cal is going to run really long today.

And it's very possible we roll right from Cal to the public hearing.

So I want to adjourn this meeting.

we're going to obviously make a motion to pass everything over to the to council for this evening

and after the public hearing concludes in our council meeting tonight we'll take up the remaining

items um in the in in the order i've outlined so um with that uh mr clerk i make a motion to send

everything um over up to the council correct um so i'll make that motion and ask for a second

Second.

Wonderful.

And all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say nay.

Any abstentions?

The ayes have it.

That motion carries.

I will see you all tonight.

And seeing no objections, we stand adjourned.

Please, yes, bring your binders.

Oh, that's right.

They can stay.

Never mind.

You can leave your binders.

It's going to be a little bit.

Thank you.