Ramsey County Board Workshop on 2026-27 Budget Addenda - November 5, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Ramsey County Board Workshop on 2026-27 Budget Addenda - November 5, 2025
The Ramsey County Board continued its budget workshop on November 5, 2025, to discuss a series of addenda to the 2026-27 biennial budget. The addenda, sponsored by Finance and originating from the County Manager's office, included proposed reductions to address property tax pressure. Commissioners reviewed and debated each item, focusing on fairness, impact on services, and long-term financial sustainability.
Discussion Items
- Item 11: Two-Day Unpaid Furlough for Senior Leadership and Unrepresented Staff - Proposal to require 265 senior and unrepresented employees (including IT and elected office staff) to take two unpaid days each year of the biennium, saving $260,000 annually. Discussion included comparisons to Hennepin County's voluntary program, concerns about morale and burnout, and suggestions for a more comprehensive approach including board and elected officials. The board decided to pause the item for further study and a broader discussion encompassing all leadership.
- Item 12: Reduction in Greater MSP Investment - Proposal to reduce from $50,000 to $25,000. Commissioners expressed frustration with lack of tangible results and questioned the partnership's value. Some supported zero, but a compromise was reached to reduce to $25,000 and revisit after a board meeting with Greater MSP in early 2026.
- Items 13 & 14: Strategic Priority and Residents First Funding - These flexible funds ($1.5 million total) were proposed for elimination. Commissioners noted that the priorities are now embedded in departmental work and that the budget already includes significant investments aligned with these priorities. The CFO clarified that contingency funds exist for unforeseen needs. The board generally accepted the cuts, though some expressed concern about losing nimbleness.
- Item 15: Indirect Cost Allocation Study Delay - One-time reduction of $100,000 by delaying the study until after the new ERP system is implemented. Accepted.
- Item 16: Low-Income Indigent Burial Fund - Slowing the increase from $450,000 to $200,000 in 2026, with full increase in 2027. Discussion on potential use of opioid settlement funds. Accepted.
- Item 17: Human Resources Position Cuts - Cutting 3 FTEs from HR (saving $450,000), but retaining two positions for paid family medical leave funded from a different source. A DIOD position is postponed. Accepted.
- Item 18: Information Technology Reduction - $300,000 reduction from IT portfolio with no expected impact on services or security. Accepted.
- Item 19: ARI Planning Support Reduction (2027) - Reduction in planning staff as the program operationalizes. Accepted.
- Item 20: Metro Square Service Center Security Reduction - Reducing sheriff deputy presence from 3.5 to 2 FTE, saving $279,000. Discussion included safety data, equitable treatment across facilities, and a planned security study. Accepted with understanding of ongoing safety assessments.
- Item 21: Community Engagement Funding for Sheriff - Reduction from $300,000 to $100,000, saving $200,000. Discussion focused on the importance of cross-departmental youth engagement and preventative work. The sheriff confirmed $100,000 would sustain momentum. Accepted.
Key Outcomes
- No formal votes were taken; the workshop served as a discussion to inform the final budget.
- Item 11 was paused for further comprehensive discussion.
- Item 12 was tentatively approved at $25,000 with a review after a board meeting with Greater MSP.
- The remaining items (13-21) were discussed and generally accepted as presented, with some clarifications and conditions (e.g., the security reduction tied to ongoing risk management evaluations).
- The board plans to hold a truth in taxation hearing on December 11, 2025, and approve the final budget and levy on December 16, 2025.
Meeting Transcript
They're all within a year for sure. Well, all right then. You mean business? We'd like to call a painting to order. This is a continuation of this morning's workshop. And we had done two of the items on the chart, correct? Yes. And now let's move on to the next one. All right. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. We are on item number 11. And just as a broad order review of this one, this one actually came out of the county manager's office. It is an addenda that reduces the levy by 260,000 each year. Currently, the county um has a performance pay salary plan. It's called the 727. Those are all the employees that receive some sort of a performance pay. We have 200 and 65 positions that would encompass primarily senior leadership as well as a lot of our IT staff are in that salary plan. Within that salary plan are also employees who are also in our elected offices, including the county attorney's office and the sheriff's office as well, because they're all in the same plan. And so the proposal is for that group of employees. And I am not personally on that salary plan. I have an annual contract with all of you, as you know. Um, but it would be for um the um 265 positions in addition to the county manager, um, taking a two-day furlough each of the uh years of the biennium. So it'd be the savings would be 260 each year. So um happy to discuss with you all. Um potentially the second year might be a different cost, right? If there's like been raised the wage increases, it's minor. Yeah, minor. It would be minor. So um happy to take any questions or thoughts of um any questions? So again, this is like for high level Yeah, these would be the highest employee paid employees in the county. Um all these employees are unrepresented. They um would remain eligible for their step increases. Also, they would be stay eligible for their performance base pay, which is why they're in this plan because they get that, and they also would be eligible for their general wage increase, which happens on on in on January 1st of each year as well. So they would not it they would be reduced from getting two days of pay, but they would get two days off. We would just handle it like people manage their vacation, uh working with their supervisors or managers to you know pick two days a year that they want to take off and they would code it differently and wouldn't get paid. So essentially, you know, you'd have a paycheck that you're only getting paid for um the um nine days or eight days, yeah. You'd be six giving up 16 hours each year of un as unpaid. How what is their current paid PTO or time days off? And do we is it um is it like they're at their max PTO that they can earn or that they give, or how I guess how does that work for us? Like I know in the nonprofit sector it was different, like senior leadership level got like 20 days of PTO a year plus holidays, like are we similar? And the other employees who started coming in like earn their way up to whatever their max was. Um they get the same day of holidays as every other employee. Um answering the easy ones first. In terms of um, we the county doesn't have PTO, we have vacation, like I said. Um, in terms of vacation, it is based on number of years of experience. So likely while there's not a set number, I would assume that the majority of the people at this level are getting the highest level of vacation, probably four weeks a year, some of them five weeks a year, I would guess. And it's not kind of not seniority or length of employment setting. Um Mr. Chair, commissioners, it is I said they say experience because it doesn't have to be in Ramsey County, right?
openpublica.com