open up my Give me one second. I forgot to open up my meeting. >> It's going to update now. >> No, I had I had updates. They finally stopped. Thank goodness. He's looking for a thumbs up. >> Just one second. Okay. Whenever you're ready. There's your thingy dingy. All right. Let's call the workshop for November 18th to order. Roll call, please. >> Council member Woods, >> here. Council member McKenzie >> here. >> Council member Nordby is absent. Council member Schwear is absent. Mayor Mongi >> here. Thank you very much. May I get a motion to adopt the agenda? >> I'll make a motion. >> So, Council McKenzie second. >> Second. >> Mr. Woods. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mayor. We got uh one topic on the agenda this evening. um through conversations uh throughout this budgeting process with myself and Dan um just some concerns that have come up and some of the things that we've been talking about um looking for uh priorities uh and what you guys are looking for. Um there's lots of things happening. We have changes coming with the potential state deficit um in looking at our SIP expenses and the requests that are on them. um trying to roll in the information from the retreat that we had earlier this year and just kind of bring all this stuff together and have a good conversation about uh planning and uh what our fiscal priorities are and what they're going to be. So with that, I will turn it over to Mr. Winnick, our finance director. >> Uh thank you uh city manager Frandle. Thank you uh mayor and council members. Um tonight we're going to um talk a little bit about uh and try to get some direction from city council on fiscal priorities. Um a lot of the material that you're going to see is been shown throughout our budget process. Um but I kind of go back to that retreat and then our our last u meeting when we had all the department heads here and we looked at the management action plans that were a result of the retreat. And in that retreat, and you heard me say it in the in the last workshop on the management action plan, that there really is a different viewpoint from city council members to staff. And you know, and that really in a nutshell is that you know, city council members have a much bigger vision um for the city of North St. Paul and staff is more concerned of things. I'm I'm going to say more of a day-to-day basis component to it. Um kind of want to hit you with the impacts of what we're doing and so you clearly understand where we're at. And then I have some activities where there's a number of questions that I need to get from you that'll help us decide on what we bring back to city council, what type of directions we go um as far as our planning on our capital improvement plans, our operational budgets in the future, and so forth. But I'm going to start off with just a kind of a quick question and I'm going to ask uh Council Member Woods, did you by chance get your truth in taxation or your proposed 2026 um property tax? >> I did. >> And did it go up about maybe 6% total bottom line? >> Honestly, I did not look at it. >> Okay. But I just wanted to kind of tell you that I I do have your property taxes, not your your current one because they're not online yet. Um I was kind of hoping that they would be ready today, but I I took your 2022 um and your 2025. And um just kind of want to give some information um that I think is kind of startling. And you know, part of I want to give you this information is because the next meeting we have on December 2nd, we're going to have the truth in taxation. And so by that time, the residents of North St. Paul should have received their proposed property taxes. We're going to see Ramsey County 9.75% levy increase. We're at 8%. I think the school district's only at about a 2.2%. But for like a median value home, you know, they're going to see about a 7% um increase in the bottom line of their property taxes. But I want to kind of use yours and and yours is pretty close to the median value of the city of North St. Paul. So in 2021, the city portion, the tax for the city was $861. your total bottom line was about 3,424 in 2025. And this is including probably another 6% increase that we're going to see in 2026. But in 2025, the city portion was $1,425. A $564 increase. Over that time period, that results into a 66% increase in your city's property taxes from 2021 to 2025. the bottom line increased from the 3,400 to 4,400 or $1,32 increase which is a results in a 30% increase overall. So obviously I think those are staggering numbers. >> Um property uh notices came out. I I got contacted by a resident in the city of North St. Paul. They're on the opposite high end of the spectrum. Um but uh they had an 18% market value increase in their property and their property is a of a higher value um than our median value increase. The bottom line their property taxes for proposed for 2026 total is going to be increasing 25.5% from where they were at in 2025. Again, those are staggering numbers and that's kind of what the emphasis of tonight's discussion is really kind of to to to really for us to really know everything. Um, when we look at kind of provided by this is provided by Ramsey County and we'll also be going over this in our truth and taxation that for the city of North St. Paul, we've got uh the total number of partial parcels are just underneath 3,800. Um that 9.9% should see a decrease or a zero increase in their property taxes. 56 almost 57% will see a 0 to a 10% increase in their property taxes. 27% will see a 10 to 20% increase in their property taxes. 4.6% will see a 20 to 30% increase in their property taxes. And then the big outlier is a 1.7% will see greater than 30% of a property tax increase um going into 2026 for the proposed part to it. Now, that isn't all due to just the city of St. Paul and even the city's um property tax levy that you see a 66% change. There were some different factors that Ramsey County did a little bit differently. Our um economic development authority up until last year was always in the bottom line that would show in property taxes as others. They moved that up to the city's line. The comparison from last year to this year is accurate at an 8% levy increase which we've shown and what we're proposing at this point in time to to approve in December. Um and then as you're all aware in that whole time frame from 21 to to 2025 there were some significant market increases but the market increases didn't happen across the board. they hit higher in residential properties and not as much in commercial property which we don't have a lot of anyways. But what that ends up doing is that of what commercial property we have in comparison to residential. It shifts the tax burden from commercial to the residential. So they get kind of a double whammy that's occurring onto that and that's where you're seeing those big increases. So, I'm going to leave right there and kind of just say that there's been a lot of impact um for our residents here. And as we go through the information that we've seen before, we're going to be asking for a decent levy increase year after year after year um for at least the next nine years. Um part of it is it's not your decisions that put us in that position. your decisions have been to try to get us out of where we have been at. And so I don't want this to be just looked at as a doomsday component. I want you to be aware that it is having an impact on our residents. But there's a lot of positive things that the city council has done in the time that I have been here. We have developed a very comprehensive capital improvement plan. we are trying the best that we can to be able to afford or to fund that. That's what's really driving our levy increases. It isn't necessarily our our just our I'm I'm going to say our dayto-day operations in our general fund. If you remember in this year, we're probably only having about a $26,000 increase um in in our in our operations outside of our personnel um costs. In the time that I've been here, we've added FTEES, we've added a number to our police force, we've added to our fire department, we've added to our public works and so forth. I think right now we are in a very good position from a you know from a a staff count. Um last year um you know uh our city manager and then it got approved by city council um did a wonderful job of contract negotiations made sure that we're matching the market to make sure that we're retaining the talent that we have today and that we can attract the talent that we need in the future. Um, all of that's been included. Um, and then planning. We've done an excellent job of planning. Um, we've put oursel in a better overall financial position with policy changes as far as our fund balance policy where we're in the general fund over 50%. Um, we're going to continue to do that. We saw that that um resulted in an upgrade in our bond rating from double A to double A+. So, we're seeing a lot of positive things that we have done, but I kind of want to walk you through um the information that's been presented to you before. Um, and we're going to kind of just look at what our future CIP commitments are, some of the other factors that have been shared. Um, review of the 25 26 city goals. I'm not going to really go through a lot of those. And then there's activities. And the activities are more for us to hear from you to give us some insight of how we set I guess our direction for department heads. We have to realize that as we come to the conclusion of 25 and we have the 26 budget pretty well all lined up and it's been presented, we're going to be starting the 27 budget and we're going to be starting the next 10-year capital improvement plan and looking at that. So, we kind of want to be able to set that direction with the understanding of what is city council really looking at and looking for. And then if time permits, we're going to we're going to have a little example and that we need a little direction so we're all on the same page. So, as we as we looked at our 26 to35 um capital improvement plan and we look at the funding sources, there's a lot of money that um is being scheduled um to be expended um over $und00 million. And the larger parts of of that are are definitely in your street maintenance. Um it's going to be in your um bonding for for uh streets on your major reconstruction projects. You're going to see a lot in our facilities and you're going to see a lot um that is that is earmarked into um our parks um system. We have levy amounts that are um identified um over a 10-year period. But I want to make a note um that the capital improvement plan still needs to be adjusted to avoid cash flow issues or city council needs to approve temporary loans. And then I'll show you an example of of that a little bit later as you go through this. There's some of these funds that'll end up having cash flow issues, which means we need to adjust some of our projects in in future years, probably outwards, or city council has the authority to do temporary loans. That isn't something that I ultimately recommend city council do, but you have that authority to do that. And then the other component to it is none of this includes potential for maybe some grant funds that can help offset that the the ultimate cost or the the net cost that the city would end up having to pay for. But as we went through and looking at this, right now we're we're looking at a year after year of about a $250,000 increase for street and streets debt debt. Um we're looking at um almost a percent for parks. We're looking at um just under 2% for asset preservation, which is our facilities. um we take that all together and this year it means about a 6.01% levy. Obviously, as our levy goes up, if we keep those dollar amounts the same, the percentage will go down, but ultimately we're going to be starting pretty close every year for the next 9 years at a 6%. Not including cost of living increases, not including health insurance costs, not including if there's other items that come up and that we need to be able to fund. Um, and so that's part of where this these activities are to try to get your sense and feel from you of do we keep adding and adding and adding or do we say hey this is it? This is what our plan is if there's some things that are added or additional to our capital improvement plan which there will be um life is dynamic. Things continuously change that we need to hear from you. How do we prioritize those? And so it means, hey, if we need extra money over here, it means where do we get that money from? And then we have to maybe delay something else to be able to do that. Now again another very positive thing that we've done if we look just and I'm just going to look from from uh pay 24 to pay 26 those are the payable years you know our levy that we have for the city HR and EDA has gone from just under 7.1 million to just about just under 7.2 2. Not a lot. It really hasn't increased in the last 3 years. Yet, the driving factor has been that we've increased um our levy for streets, parks, and facility levies. not because of decisions that were done by you, but to correct some of those decisions that were done in the past and make sure that we're positioning ourselves to take care of our, I call it, our infrastructure that we've gone from about $250,000 to $1.4 million to be able to afford those things. So, that's a very positive thing. Yes, it it's had obviously it's had an impact on our residents as far as their property taxes, but as far as the city's position is that we're t starting to take care of the things that we need to take care of. And we're not the only city that's in this type of a position. And then because of that, if we look at that plan, our capital improvement plan, it's also going to have impact on our our enterprise funds, our water fund, our wastewater fund, our electric fund. I don't believe our electric fund is going to need to have the 2.25% increase. I think it's going to be very minimal if we're going to need anything um coming up in the in the future years. our surface water is going to be um hit and they're all going to be somewhere in the range of about 6% annual increases that we're going to end up having to to do and we're going to have to start that in 2027. And then the solid waste fund or garbage collection, you know, that'll um have to be increased. Right now, we're we're drawing down our fund balance. um we're developing we're almost at the the point of bringing in an RFP um for city council's consideration and get out on the streets where we may end up having a different vendor or maybe it's the same vendor but we'll have a different contract um going into I think um September 1st of next year. um at that point in time that's when we would adjust the the rate is for the 2027. Um so when we look at this we're going to be challenged year after year again for the next nine years to hold our levy increases between 8 to 10%. Why? We're starting off with that 6%. We're going to have cost of living. We're going to have insurance increases. We're going to have operational costs that are increased. So, we're going to have a struggle. It's it's going to be our department heads are going to be um tasked with holding us between 2 to 4% increases um year over year over year. Some other factors that we had talked about there's been a lot of conversation you know from the this at the state level um that they're projecting you know a deficit going into the bianium of 2028 2029 that'll have an impact um on us um potentially um it would have an impact on some of the aids that we give that we receive. One of the biggest aids that we receive is a local government aid where we receive, you know, a little over $1.6 million. If there's reductions into that, that means we have to come up with where do we get that money from um to fill that gap. And then, you know, the federal budget changes. Um, you know, the I think they it was termed the big beautiful bill um did make some major changes to the SNAP program and um where um tighter um qualifications and restrictions for how long someone can be on the SNAP program. In addition, shifting more to the local level or the state level. Well, if the state's going to have, you know, receive less federal dollars and they're going to have a budget deficit, they're going to be in a big challenge. They're going to be looking to cut something. And that's going to more than likely be aids that they're giving to local government. Counties are going to be hit hard. Cities are going to be hit hard. Um, and I think that's why you're seeing, you know, like our our county, Ramsey County, in the past has been holding their increases somewhere 3 4%. Now, you're seeing in the bianium that they're they do a they do a two-year budget cycle. They're looking at 9.75 for this year and I think it's 7 and a half um for 2027. Why? Because they anticipate and they already could have know the projections of what they're anticipating of cuts in that SNAP program that's going to end up hitting them. Um, so you know, it's just a question that comes out there and says, "Hey, what happens if we lose a percentage of our local government aid? What is that amount?" And then our question is going to be, "What do we do to adjust to be able to do that?" Now, in the last legislative session in the Senate, they were actually discussing, well, actually both parties were discussing a reduction in local government aid. Nothing materialized into it. Um, the Senate had proposed about a 3.1% reduction, which if we look on our our chart would be about $48,000. I think the 3.1 actually comes out to about $50,000 reduction. So, when we look at that, we're going to see that we would have just there another.7% levy increase just to cover the loss of that local government aid if it were at the 3.1. But if it were higher, you obviously can see what that levy increase potentially could be. Um, and then the question is how do we adjust to that? Remember, starting a base at 6%. Cost of living, insuranceances, operational costs. We're in that 8 to 10. Throw on top of this now we're pushing ourselves even higher. Do we go even higher? That's the question that comes back um to city council and trying to get that insight. We've already seen what the impact has been on a you know a median value home from 2021 to 2025 significant. The city goals number three financial stability and cost management that was in the past. Number four, it's moved up out of this last retreat to number three. Something that's very important. Yes, number one is infrastructure and public safety, but the question is how do you balance those two? In many ways, there's a lot of conflicts between those two. To appropriately do your infrastructure needs money, but money means I'm inc I'm increasing the levy more and more. So there's there's competing components that are continuously going through and again that's why I have a series of questions to try to get some insight from city council and some direction. So now we're going to start some of these activities kind of brainstorming and the first one is and I'm going to give little post-it notes and some pens um and we're going to kind of go through and the first question that's being asked well I'll stop first of all are there any questions as we've moved to the information through the information that we've at you know to to right now to this point. No, >> I don't think so. I mean, you know, costs are going up everywhere, so unfortunate. >> I get to walk around. This could be fun. >> What was that guy? The dating game with the big long microphone. What was his name? >> Come on down. >> Barker. >> I'm going to give our city manager one, too. >> Little Wink Martindale action. Thank you. So the first question that's being posed to you is what are the top five most critical needs facing North St. I'll give you some time to kind of think about that and then we'll have kind of a we'll share our information and kind of have a little discussion and again this is really for department heads, city manager department heads to kind of get that next level of insight of of what is city council thinking? And again, we have different viewpoints. So we want to make sure that we can align ourselves in the future with your thoughts, your priorities. I can come up with five things. Maybe I'm just being too >> I'll take swords from 600. All done. Quite impressive. >> All right. So, who would like to volunteer to kind of share? >> They can go first. >> They can go first. >> I'll go first. I'll do it. Rising costs, infrastructure, I think, is big. Public safety, of course, just higher bills for our residents overall. And part of it too, I think the biggest that most people are getting hit for right now that adds to is our homeowners insurance that everybody's getting hit with. So that brings a lot less money for everybody else. So everything's expensive and it's all really stretchy. >> Absolutely. Uh food costs continuously are are rising. Um Yes. And and that's kind of where I wanted to show where the property taxes have gone because we're a contributing factor to all of that. and um and the future's there there is uncertainty. >> Um if you don't mind, I'd like to take your post-it note after you've shared um because then I'll summarize this information. Hope >> we can read it and share it with all of our department heads who would like to Very good. Excellent responses. See, that gives us insight to what we need to focus, how we're we're we're going to deliver things in the future, where where we're going to make adjustments and and adjustments in our capital improvement plans and our operationals. Um, so who would like to go next? >> I can go. >> Council member Woods. >> So, I put uh control, you know, controlling expenses. So, how do we control the expenses? um kind of along the mine was a little bit more broad than his was very focused um infrastructure maintenance. So maintaining the buildings that we have and making you know catching up on a lot of the maintenance that we've foregone over the several years and then one thing um responding to the median age of our north St. population. >> You know, uh we are in a position where a lot of our residents are a lot of our properties are being sold to younger families, you know, >> and so a lot the money, I shouldn't say the ability for them to afford, you know, increases in taxes and insurance and things like that may not be there. So >> very good. That's a a very good point. And you see it on the opposite side of the spectrum, too. those who are retired and you're on more of a fixed income. um and you're not going to have a the bigger increases in your earning power um moving in the future. um that were Council Member McKenzie, would you care to share what >> Well, I guess what I would say like is uh one of our top things is to make sure our city buildings are up to code and everything's up to where they are standardized. Um, then I didn't I wasn't sure how you were addressing this, but I thought our water tower is probably the most >> critical thing that we need to be budgeting for down the road. And also there's some street projects that are in dire need and those are ones that have been on the radar and I think we should continue to follow the process that has been in the works already. not without adding any more major projects, but also to fix the streets that are able to be re black topped or surfaced without digging underground. That's probably one of there's some streets that are in dire need yet that we can continue to work on and that'll be part of next year's plan. And then the 27 will be up Mo and Chisum and that. >> So at that point then now we're looking at 28 29. So depending on the water tower where that's going to fall in, do we do a part of a street project in and along that depending on where the water tower falls in now. >> Okay. No. Excellent. Excellent. Excellent. But I think I think we could uh I think we could uh work out some plans and keep everything going of what they've got that they've had in the past planned on. So kind of kind of what I'm what I'm hearing is that obviously costs are a big driving factor >> or I'm going to look at it in a little bit different affordability. >> Okay. >> And our infrastructure. I'm hearing that. Mhm. >> Yeah. We fell so far behind over the years and it's going to take us a while to catch up and we just don't want to keep falling behind. And then I and then I I I I think kind of a a part and I'm going to kind of when we talk about that median age changes in that I think it in a certain way is it speaking to the point that we need to be cognizant of our services and are we meeting the needs >> of a younger of a younger generation. >> I agree. And an older one, too. Is that the older one? >> Are we stressing >> finding the right balance, >> right? >> Between our >> Yep. >> And again, this the city's doing a very good job of of trying to plan and to get ahead. You know, when we talk about um you know, one of the components that we look at is that we do have a lower income community. Um and with rising costs across the board, um people are being hit with insurance, health insurance costs, home owner, uh home insurance costs, food, you name it. You know, it's not just the property tax component to it. One of the the things um our city manager has set us um on to looking um Ken and myself and we're in the preliminary look at it is that um started in 2024 and it's continuing now. If you remember that there was a shift in the property taxes where there was an additional 1% that was added to the sales tax in the state of Minnesota. 75% of that or 75 of that 1% increase was going to transportation and the other 25 uh% of that 1% increase was going to um more affordable housing. And so we last year received $85,000. This year will receive $200,000. And it really needs to be for more of the lowincome um community uh within your uh jurisdiction. So what the city manager has us looking at is that one of the components um that we um see pretty much on a daily uh daily basis. And I remember when I gave my department update uh uh the first time uh that council member Woods was there, he called me up and asked me to have a meeting with him. And one of the things that he was totally surprised was how many disconnection notices we end up sending out to our customers. And in our weekly updates, you know, when it comes to billing time, we show that over and over again. And and you know, we'll we're always in the range of 400 or more. And there's always some sort of disconnection. Now, there's a lot of strict rules that are out there of the cold weather rule and so forth. Again, when you see the cutting of finances coming from the federal government that's hitting the county government where they have a cap program that helps um you know, individuals of lower income to help with their utility bills. What our city manager has charged us with looking is is that acceptable to use this money to maybe help at a city level to help out with utility payments for individuals. So, we're looking into that, you know, and I think that kind of addresses Oh, that that was kind of nice. Uh, that kind of addresses that service delivery piece to it that yeah, we realize our costs are going up, but we're trying to come up with other ways to help all individuals that are within our organization. One other thing too just to kind of elaborate on what we're talking about with expenses and utilities and that you know being the mayor I'm on the the account so they call if there's a some check that bounces and just like today there was another one and over the three years I've almost been mayor the last six months I've had more in the last six months than I've had of all the years I've been here >> so that just shows the stress we're having where people don't have the in their account that they have. So it it has ticked up quite a bit. >> It has. It absolutely. And that's where, you know, we're trying to come up with a potential, you know, assistance for that. Not necessarily going to be the full solution. Um but at least maybe we can try to help that out a little bit. Um because the city does write off um well, you you saw because you passed the delinquent utilities. um and that covers everything except for electric because electric can't um be be put on delinquent utilities. So that would go onto their property taxes directly. Um and if they don't want if they don't pay for that over time, you know, that'll end up going into foreclosure, so forth, da da da. Um electric, if we can't collect it, we do have a collection company that we utilize, but we end up writing off um you know, probably about 50,000 or a little bit more than that a year. Um, so you know that's something for everybody to be aware of. Um, next question. Are the top five most critical needs that you've just identified facing our community addressed in the capital improvement plan? So, this is really to kind of look at what you've said in your concerns and and I know you're fully aware of them and then you look at our capital improvement plan and I did attach it as a as a document. >> Are we addressing it? Um, I know there was a lot of talk about, you know, the water tower. The water tower is in our plan. >> Um, we will have a we will have some cash flow issues in the in the the water because of that. It's, you know, a significant, I think, of like a $5 million um project. Um streets, we're covering streets in a number of different manners. Um cost affordability, obviously that's not necessarily being directly addressed because that's a >> correct. >> Yeah. >> You know, counterpiece to it, but you know, kind of your input on to that. And to me, this is more of a yes. qualification know where we what are we missing um you know kind of piece to it >> I think we're hitting the big ones that we were that as a group when we were discussing earlier this year that we wanted you know the infrastructure public safety and you know I think we're touching on all those things that we were discussing >> so I I'm going to I'm again my mind works a little bit differently I think you're all aware of that >> so on a scale of 1 to 10 would you where would you rate that we're meeting our needs as far as our capital improvement plan to what you've identified as the critical needs for this community. >> I'd say a number two. >> Number one to two. >> Okay. I think we're doing >> I'm I'm going to say 10's the highest. >> Oh, 10's the highest. Oh, the other one. >> I did too. I was like I was going to I was going to grab Ken and Ken Ken take over. >> I'm doing something wrong. >> So, I think a nine. >> A nine. >> Nine. Yeah, I think we're addressing it pretty well. Been on a good plan. >> Eight. >> I would say a seven or eight. >> Seven or eight. >> So, we're doing a pretty good job. >> Um, you know, and again, you know, the development of that capital improvement plan goes to our our directors. They're the ones who are putting that information um in there. And the credit goes to you for your support of us doing that and obviously um supporting the levies that are needed to back that up. One of these times I'll get it get it right. So, does the 8 to 10% levy increase that I've been talking about because we're going to have that 6% kind of as a base to cover the capital improvement plan that we have and and again, there's still going to be cash flow issues and things are going to have to be shifted a little bit. And then we're going to have, you know, any operational costs. And really when I'm looking at that 8 to 10, I'm really looking at it from the standpoint is there's not going to be additional FTEEs added on top of it. Because if we have an additional FTE, you know, with benefits, you know, you're looking at probably 1 and a.5% levy increase just to be able to do that. So this is just basically to cover our contracts that we currently have, you know, our union contracts, cost of living, our insurance increases, which again are are part of that union negotiation, but we don't control the insurance increases. Um, so it it's any other operational costs that may end up coming out um onto it. So again, this is more of a what are your thoughts as far as does that 8 to 10% levy increase meet the goal? And I'm going to read the goal. The goal that you had set was the number three which was the financial stability and cost management. And you were bringing the levy to a more affordable level. Does that 8 to 10 match that? um re-evaluating contract services to optimize cost, identifying areas to reduce cost and streamline operations, maintaining financial stability while funding key projects. Again, funding key projects, we can keep adding then you're never going to achieve you're never going to even get to the 8 to 10. But is the 8 to 10 kind of your acceptable range in your mind? Do you want to keep going higher? Do you want us to try to go lower? Again, it's going to be almost near impossible to get below that 6%. Um, so it's kind of discussion of your thoughts on that process. >> I think going 8 to 10 is pretty safe because we can manage year after year of what we've got coming down the pike. And if there's a project that we can't afford, we'll just scrub it. until we see fit that it'll work into the pro the process here. >> Okay, good comments. So, I'm hearing the 8 to 10 is acceptable, but really no more. Depends where the money's at at the time when we're doing the budget cycle. >> So, explain that a little bit. Well, it depends how how far if we're behind on the state aid and things coming in like that. How are we going to be able to afford a major project without all our residents becoming angry on us doing more things that we should be? And that's the that's the tough question that's that's there. If we're faced with some reductions in AIDS that d makes us drive up our levy a little bit higher then here's the question because you mentioned a little bit about this that do we delay a project or if it's a project that has a higher priority which we'll kind of get into kind of looking at from a categorical standpoint of our CIP. Um, do we I I'll say I have a dollar to spend. That's all I have. >> And does it go here? Does it go here? Does it go here? And if it's going to cost me $2, then that means I have that $1 I'm going to put there, but I have to get a dollar from somewhere else. So that means something else has >> has to drop off. >> Has to drop off. Um and and so in a in a certain way what I'm kind of looking at this is that first of all two parts is the 8 to 10% something that's palatable to you >> considering the 6% for the infrastructure and so forth. And then if it is that kind of your cap you don't want to see it going up above that range. We don't want to see twelves. We don't want to see 14s. We don't want to see 15s. Even if even if even if local government aid gets dropped off >> big time, >> nobody could predict the future. So you got to keep it within means. >> Okay. And so so you're willing to then not to do something that is a lower priority to be able to make that happen. So on my part, 8 to 10 is minimal. I think we can get, you know, that's bare bones because we have start out with six, >> right? >> So then it becomes like we said, as things go on, it's going to be what don't you want? So it's going to have to turn into what don't you want. We kind of did, we kind of went through that cycle with the community center. We knew how much this was. Can we afford it or what are we going to give up for it? And I think that's just the way it's going to be on everything because we don't have unlimited resources. Our taxpayers can't pay it and we, you know, that type of thing. >> So you're looking at that as really our limit, >> right? >> I think so. >> Both you good with that. >> It's going to be tough. Like you said, you see White Bear, I think they went up 17% or something like that. I can't remember, but they're >> they've they've had some a couple of big years where they were actually in the in the 20s. I think it was because again public safety uh facility infrastructure >> we got the ladder truck coming. We have a lot of other things where you know you look at your numbers that went by you got 5 million you got 17 million you got you know 9 million and I mean it was up and down. I mean there really we had a few years 31 and 2031 and another one where they were double digits you know 17 to 19 million. So >> yeah absolutely >> that takes a lot. Council member Wood's thoughts on this. >> Yeah, given that we're I mean given that 6% is really the baseline that we're starting with. I mean that only gives us two to 4% wiggle room for accomplishing anything and that's not a lot. >> Agree. >> Means that we're not going to be able to get much done in the way of improvements within the community. Um, well, I should Yeah. So, >> so the 6% is going for really for >> for the >> Yeah. for the the CIP, which does accomplish quite a bit. >> Yes. Y >> Yeah. >> But so that 2 to 4% just doesn't it's not a lot of wiggle room for >> as things come up, as projects get prioritized. And we've seen the issues with deferring things for too long >> and we don't want to continue to do that to future councils, future representatives for the city. Um, we don't want to put them in the same position that we're in. So, >> so you're looking at this also as kind of the limit type of piece to it is >> Yep. Because right now with with the tip we tiff we have a lot of apartments a lot of things that aren't really going to be paying for many years. So there is a wind you know somewhat of a wind flow you coming through down the road. >> We got to try to hold on and you know there's a lot of money that was spent from the city to get the those developments as far as infrastructure for us to do roads and things like that. So we put a lot of money out. Now we're going to be quite a while before we start getting it back. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. Again, this is underneath the the your goal of financial stability and cost management. Um, and if you'll write down if you'll list five areas where you would like to see spending reductions >> in reduction. >> Yes. Yes. Please write them down on your post-it notes. >> We got fired. H >> just joke. How can do? I don't know. >> Do we have to announce these out publicly for >> Yeah. I think I think that's a that's a good change to like. You may not like it. Yeah, that's that's that you could >> Well, I think you know like you guys have said other departments have have done their spending reductions to their what they need to operate their departments. As far as our council people, we don't know the everyday day-to-day operations and how much goes through the whole city operations. So for me, I can't say what we need to deduct in spending, but I think what they've done is cutting back on everything has done a good job. May be able to balance the budget pretty well each year. No, they they definitely they definitely have. You know, I think you've at least through this year. Um and and it has been in past years too, all the department heads have have come and spoke. Um I I personally don't recall where um maybe with the exception of of one where you've heard any department head say I need additional staff. So, I'm going to take that to mean that they're pretty comfortable with the staffing levels that they're currently at. Um, we have a great group of department heads. Um, and they do manage it very well and they manage within their their means. Um, the one that I, you know, I speak to, and I'm not trying to pick on anything, has been police. I think it was the end of last year, they gave a pretty shocking um presentation of where they see out in the future, which is something this city this size really can't afford. Um but again, we go back to that 8 to 10%. I'm going to tell you there's no way you could ever achieve that what was presented. Um, and so it really comes down to that we need to look within that and if there's something that needs to be adjusted, something has to give up. We have to be able to give something up. And off the top, I don't know what that is. And that's kind of trying to give your your insights. And I do like what the city manager says is not would like to see spending reductions tolerate. So I'm just going to throw it out there. And I hope you all say absolutely no way. Get rid of our police department. Contract it out. Hopefully you say no way. >> Absolutely not. >> But I think that's a valuable option. >> But but what I'm saying is that those are the tough decisions if we can't live within that 8 to 10. If we hear so many residents complaining about the affordability of in the city >> we have and that's that's was kind of interesting and and I'll I'm not trying to pick on anybody. Did you write did you write anything down? >> I wrote public safety. >> Public safety. Nothing. Nothing. >> I brought the number one. I just >> And and part of the reason why you didn't write anything down is because we don't have fat. >> No. >> No. >> In in our levy. And so, unfortunately, it would take something drastic. I'm not proposing it. I'm just saying it as part of a conversation that we're having. As long as we can maintain, what I'm hearing from city council is as long as we can maintain in that 8 to 10% acceptable range, which would be without adding staff, we're okay. If we start adding staff, we're never going to achieve that. And then we're going to have to start looking at some bigger alternatives. You talk other cities, you hear them at conferences and thing talking about doing mergers for certain things that they can double up on as far as, you know, different different items as far as a city can do where they could team up with another city. You see that quite a bit now. People are talking about that. >> Yep. No, I'm not a big proponent of that because you lose so much of your identity. Um, and I don't necessarily I I think there can be some quick financial gains. I don't think you gain in the long run >> um with those types of pieces because I mean if you look at cities that have contracted with Ramsey County um they're continuously getting close to double or not double digit increases on an annual basis for those contracted cities >> and you can't control >> you can't you can't control and um so I'm not I'm not proposing I'm just saying it was kind of interesting that we didn't come up with a lot of answers >> but it really does force versus at some point in time that you would have to look at this as being something. I'm just going I'm just going to call it a it would have to be something that would be a radical decision. >> Yeah, for sure. >> And I'm not proposing it. I'm not saying I'm just for the conversation just threw that out there. >> Yep. The one the only thing I raises my eyebrow sometimes is somebody says if we we get something well we can get it and then you know you know share it with other cities. Well we're the smallest city so we don't have to have the best of this so we can share it with somebody you know we're at the size where you know we'll be the neighbor that hopefully that you know we can do things but you know be able to share their resources. >> Absolutely. Yep. And that's where I you know I I I think we do benefit from the um Brian, you're going to help me out here. What the term that we have both in our police and our mutual aid. >> Mutual aid. >> Mutual aid and our electric are our our police, our our fire and and we do we benefit from those and and we help we assist them, too. But there it is very beneficial. >> Oh, definitely. Especially fire and the police. Yeah. >> So, I'm I'm not going to make you ponder on that one too much more. And so then how can we prepare for future financial challenges? And again, you know, if we if we stay at that 8 to 10%. Um what if we saw a reduction in local government aid? Um how do we make adjustments to that? Are we willing to postpone delay um repprioritize some of our projects, um that are out there um instead of increasing beyond the 8 to 10%. >> There's are there are some things that can be postponed, but they're saying certain things that happen, you have to do it. So, I mean, that's the type of thing where priority, you know, maybe have to rep prioritize. We did that with uh some of the streets where um we had a lot of water main issues. So we bumped a couple around to be able to get to that. We you know all of a sudden you got five or six that are breaking in places then you have to think okay well we have to prioritize some of this stuff and that's the that's where I think the as a city and a staff they've done very well is to understand priorities and be able to shift and be you know instead of saying well now we'll just do both and just you know add on the price. You know, we've had some we've had some residents that have been very upset cuz their streak got postponed a couple years. >> Yeah. >> Well, they would have they would have been upset if we would have gone through and raised the taxes for more, too. So, I mean, that's the thing. It's, you know, understanding and be able to make those tough decisions and try to live within the budget. The other thing I I think we also need to be aware be I guess um I guess be aware of is is it viable to spend, you know, $200,000 this year to fix something knowing that it's only going to buy us, you know, what is the longetivity of whatever money we spend? Do we just knuckle down and spend the, you know, million dollars this year to get it done and get it done right versus just putting a band-aid on something to get us by >> knowing that we're essentially just wasting that money, you know, short term. >> I think that example was that water and that one street down the way where we were able to tag them on because, you know, we have to rip it up later. So, yeah, but that's definitely, you know, what's our best bang for our buck, right? I agree. Do it once and do it smart. Looks good. >> That does that kind of cover that? I I agree with you. Um yeah, we don't want to be doing something and spending, you know, the $200,000 and then two years later we're ripping it up, >> right? um you know if it's going to cost five times that amount but it's going to last 10 times longer that's the wiser choice to it. So in a certain way spend wisely but we really should be doing some sort of like I'm going to call it cost analysis. >> Yeah. >> Cost >> costbenefit analysis. Perfect. Thanks Ken. I'm >> here to help. >> I know you are. And this is Mike's going over you pretty quick. And one of the components with that costbenefit analysis and I've seen this again I've spent a lot of years in government and one of the things that's always surprised me and is that you could go and build a brand new facility and no one ever talks about what's the ongoing operational costs are going to be >> and they're always more than the project usually. >> Oh over time. Oh, it it it is what do they I think that what they say is that the building will cost you onetenth of the costs that it will be for operating that facility over the life of that facility. >> But it's really coming down to that cost benefit and to look at every component to it. Again, I'm not trying to pick on anybody, but it's just like if you add an FTE in the police department, then do you have to add additional vehicles? Do you have to add additional body cams? Do you have to additional this and that? there's always more costs that are associated with one just move than just an FTE normally. Um place, you know, space for them to sit if it's an office staff and so forth. So that kind of kind of goes there. So you've you've kind of walked right into that prioritize. So I need you to rank the CIP categories as to their overall importance. You know, how do you rank? What is one two three? What this does is that yes, when we're faced with those decision, if you want to if you want if we're faced with those decisions that we have that $1 to spend, how do we spend that $1? >> Um, we need some insight on how we prioritize Ready? >> Who would like to go first? >> I will. >> Okay, you're number one. Uh buildings facilities. >> Number two, >> streets utilities reconstruction. >> Number three, >> pavement preservation. Utility infrastructure preservation. >> Number five, >> capital technology. Uh number six is vehicles and equipment. Number seven is ponds, natural resources right now. And then the parks right now >> is eight. Okay. Thank you very much, Council Member McKenzie. Next. >> Number one, street utility reconstruction. Number two, building facility improvements. Number three, I'm sorry, she'll lean forward. I apologize. Number three, infrastructure preservation. Number four, >> number three was what? What was that? Which one? >> Utility. I'm sorry. Utility infrastructure preservation. I apologize. I said part of it. Pavement preserv four. >> Five is um capital technology. >> Six is vehicles. Seven is ponds and eight is parks, playgrounds, and pass open. Open space. >> Council member Woods. Um, utility infrastructure preservation is one. >> I'm sorry. I'm >> utility. >> Utilities number one. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Number two is streets and utility. >> Okay. >> Number three is pavement preservation. Number four is parks. Number five is building and facility improvements. Number six is ponds. Right in the middle there. Seven is capital technology and eight is vehicles and equipment. When we kind of look at this, I think we see our streets and utility, you know, meaning the the water, the waste water and so forth. So far uh fourth is is probably our highest. Um, quickly looking at it, I think our utility is number two, >> building and facility improvements. >> I think they're tied >> toss between that and pavement preservation. And then I think pavement preservation comes in number four kind of looking at that which is kind of encouraging from the standpoint is that we're levying for building and facilities to take care of our needs there. Both pavement preservation and street and utility are locked together on the same type of plan. So we're levying for those. And then this is your utility infrastructure is really coming from our u enterprise funds themselves. So the only one that we have dedicated some levy forth is this one and that's unfortunately tied with last is like a three-way tie for I think this is 20. This is 20 and this is 20. And so it ranks kind of the the lowest yet we're dedicating levy towards that parks and open space piece to it. So that may be something for future conversations and considerations that we may end up doing. And that and I think that comes from our our discussions that we've had um already tonight where that if we have a project and that there's some sort of a cost overrun that we would end up maybe dipping into the parks or delaying something on the park side to it. Just a just a thought. And then the last question for the night and we're going to end it up here because we've got a a lot of young um talented individuals coming up next which is always fun. Uh what do you need from staff to help you make decisions? Anyone want to take a moment and just kind of write down some thoughts? Are you really asking them how can we help you help or how can I how can we help you >> just make more better communicating with us? I think staff involvement in the retreat that we had in the spring was huge. >> 100%. Yeah. >> So, continuation with the Absolutely. staff involvement in the retreat. >> Yep. >> Yeah. It was it was great having him with us. >> And then taking that another step further is continued and I think the city manager does a good job of this bringing in you know during our workshops and I shouldn't say just the city manager all of you guys do a great job of this bringing in um the different department heads periodically to just give us an update. You know what's going on in the department? what you know what don't we know about that's priority for that's a priority for you that we can assist with >> so I agree and they give us honest upfront you know the good the bad and the ugly you know that's what I really like is you know what there's going to be problems let's hit them head on you know don't tell us what we want to hear tell us what we need to hear and it's better to know about it ahead of time than after the fact >> yes >> it's easier to address them proactively. >> Mhm. >> Don't sugar. >> No. >> It is what it is. Let's deal with it. >> One one of the things that I've talked to Jenny, I'm not putting Jenny on the spot because she told me I can't put her on the spot anymore. But, uh, what I've talked to her about is that when you see a city council item, I I would like to have she's checking out to see if I if we can get a section in there, um, just like you see recommendations and so forth that there would have an item about financial impact. Um, reason for that is to be able to say, and it can be as simple response as it's in included in the operating budget >> 100% >> or it's included in the CIP and it was approved at this amount >> or neutral. type of piece. Here's the reason for that. And I again, I'm not picking on things. I'm just trying to use examples so you kind of understand where I'm coming from, too. >> That uh recently um there was presented the 2026 um uh pavement preservation um to do the next design phase and one of the components that was there is that the water part of it is going to is be higher than we had estimated. Okay. I agree with your decision and it was presented very well to you. But here's a piece that was missing to that is that yes, absolutely I would do that because the water component because we needed to replace some of the water main. But here's the piece that was missing for you to make that decision. Do you know what that financial impact will be? because it will have an impact on that rate for the water because it's higher than what we have in the financial plan. And that's where the piece to it is if we can give you that information up ahead of time. And that's where this dialogue tonight was very important because what it can also be is that working with the city manager, I can say, "Hey, based upon some of the prioritization, we need to move money from A to B and delay this other thing." So it's not having an overall impact on on what you vision as far as getting done. Um so that's kind of one thing that that you have come up with is that trying to give you a little bit more information um so when you're making those those decisions that you're actually seeing that financial impact upfront when you're making the decision. So >> great. Yeah. >> So makes sense. That concludes we're not going to get to the the exercise um tonight and kind of looking at uh the thing I'm going to leave with two two different pieces later on tonight. Um you're going to see and and uh I think a presentation from Motorola um talking about body cams and stuff. It's much needed. Um it's something that's desperately needed in the city. um you know uh we we have come with a funding source that'll be there because we paid off the bonds earlier in this year in February um for uh the public works facility. Um so we have money left over in that debt service fund which we have the right to transfer and so um it's proposed to be funded by transferring that. Another good piece to that is that if we pay for it all up in front over instead of paying it over the five years, um we will get a return of a little over 4% present value um on our money. Um so it kind of allows us to save a few bucks over over time which right now you struggle to find a 4% in how government can can invest uh funds. So I think it's a it's a really good deal and it's needed. I think before the end of the year, we've had a number of conversations about it. You're going to see the fire department come in and ask for the potential of moving up the schedule on buying the ladder truck. Um he's done his due diligence. He's going to come in somewhere um all all total with um all the uh accessories that are needed for uh outfitting the new rig. I think he's going to come somewhere at about $1,775,000. It's on the CIP out I think about two or three more years at 2 million. >> So I think he's going to come in um with that. If you decide not to move forward with that, even as of the first of the year, that price would go up four and a half% which I think we um the fire chief and myself looked at it, you know, I think it it ended up amounting to like about 60some thousand that there would be an increase into that and you can anticipate that those increases will be continuously happening. So that'll be an item that'll be brought forth with you and it's been on our capital improvement plan. it just needs to be moved up and um there are funds in the equipment fund to be able to cover that earlier than than later. Um so those are special items to it. I'm going to conclude with I thank you very much for the honest and open. I think it gives us a lot of direction. I'm going to make uh leave these up. I'll pull these tomorrow um and start to summarize them and and uh get them out to um I'll sit down with um our city manager and then we'll get them out to our department heads. um it kind of sets our direction and prioritization uh for the future. So I thank you very much for your honest feedback um and um always a pleasure. >> Thank you very much for everything. Appreciate it. >> Thank you Dan. >> Thanks Dan. >> I'll have a motion to adjourn. So move. >> So move. Council member Woods. Second. Second. Council member McKenzie. All those in favor say I. I. Give us five minutes and then we'll start the meeting.