. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS AISHA CHUGHTAI AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. I'M GOING TO CAL TO ORDER THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 18, 2025. BEFORE WE BEGIN THE MEETING, I WANT TO OFFER A FRIENDLY REMINDER TO ALL MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC
THAT THESE MEETINGS ARE BROADCAS 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 TNSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL MEMBERS 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 QUOR.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER PAYNE. >> PRESENT. >> WONSLEY. >> PRESENT. >> RAINVILLE. >> PRESENT. >> VETAW. >> PRESENT. >> ELLISON IS ABSENT. OSMAN IS ABSENT CASHMAN IS ABSENT. JENKINS. >> PRESENT.
>> CHAVEZ. >> PRESENT. >> CHOWDHURY. >> PRESENT. >> PALMISANO. >> PRESENT. >> VICE CHAIR KOSKI IS ABSENT, AND CHAIR CHUGHTAI. >> PRESENT. >> THERE ARE NINE MEMBERS PRESENT. >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT
WE HAVE A QUORUM. I'LL ALSO REMIND MY COLLEAGUES THAT WE WILL BE USING SPEAKER MANAGEMENT TODAY, SO PLEASE MAKE SURE TO SIGN IN. WITH THAT, WE HAVE FOUR ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. THE
FIRST ITEM IS AN APPOINTED POSITION IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT. I WILL INVITE BRENDA MILLER FROM THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO GIVE THAT PRENTATION. WELCOME, MS. MILLER.
>> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR CHUGHTAI, AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M BNDA MILLER WITH THE COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY. I'M HER TO PRESENT THE APPOINTED POSITION OF DIRECTOR
LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT. IT'S PART OF THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AND REPOR TO THE CHIEF ASSISTANT CITY CLERK. THE DIRECTOR LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT COMBINES THE JOBS OF THE DIRECTOR POLICY
AND RESEARCH AND DIRECTOR OF OVERSIGHT AND EVALUATION. THE JOB WILL LEAD A NON-PARTISAN AND RESEARCH TEAM WITH THE CORE PURPOSE OF INTEGRITY, ACCOUNTABILITY IN SUPPORT OF THE GOAL TO INFORM AND FACILITATE
THE LEGISLATIVE POLICY MAKING AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS COMMIEES. THE DIRECTOR LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT H BEEN EVALUATED AT 645 POINTS, GRADE 14. THE 2025 SALARY SCHEDULE
RANGES FROM $144,000 TO $170,000. CHANGES ARE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 21ST, 2025. THIS POSITION MEETS THE CRITERIA OF SECTION
20.1010. IT REPORTS TO THE CHIEF ASSISTANT CITY CLERK. IT'S A MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT TEAM. IT LEADS THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CITY POLICY, GOALS AND STRATEGIC PLANNING FOR THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. IT REQUIRES LEADERSHIP, VISION, TEAM
BUILDING AND STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION. AND ESTABLISHES POLICY GOALS AND POLICIES THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED BY THE YOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND THE CITY CLERK. PLEASE FIND THAT THE DIRECTOR LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT MEETS THE
APPOINTED CRITERIA AS DEFINED IN SECTION 20.1010 AND FORWARDED ON TO COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION, MS. MILLER. I WILL FIRST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT WE HAVE BEEN JOINED IN THIS
COMMITTEE MEETING BY COUNCIL MEMBER CASHMAN. I WILL WELCOME UP CITY CLERK CASEY KARL TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL DETAILS AROUND THE NECESSITY OF THIS APPOINTED POSITION.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, MY NAME IS CASEY CARL, HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SERVING AS THE CITY CLK HERE IN MINNEAPOLIS. JUST A LEVEL SET AND REFRAME OF WHERE WE ARE. THE COUNCIL AS THE LEGISLATIVE AND PRIMARY POLICY
DETERMINE THE BODY OF THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS HAS ESSENTIALLY THREE BIG RESPONSIBILITIES OR CATEGORIES OF DUTIES AS SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE. FIRST, THE COUNCIL IS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY AND HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ENACT LOCAL LAWS THAT GOVERN THE COMMUNITY, AND INTERNALLY, TO ADOPT
POLICIES THAT REGULATE THE OPERATIONS OF THE CITY. SECONDLY, OF COURSE, COUNCIL HAS E RESPONSIBILITY TO OVERSEE AND EVALUATE THE PERFORMANCE. TO CONDUCT STUDIES AND TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS ABOUT THE
FINDINGS THAT IT DOES IN ITS OVERSIGHT ROLE. ALSO, OF COURSE, COUNCIL MEMBERS REPRESENT THEIR WARDS AND REPRESENT THE CITY AS A BODY. THEY ADVOCATE FOR CITY POLICIES AND PRIITIES AND OFTEN ACT AS AN OMBUDSMAN IN THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH THE CITY
GOVERNMENT. THIS SLIDE PROVIDES ORGANIZATIONAL CHART FOR THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT SHOWING THAT UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL YOU HAVE THE INDEPENDENT OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR SHOWN ON THE RIGHT OF THI SLIDE. AND THEN TO THE LEFT, THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK, WHICH I THE ADMINISTRATIVE ARM OF THE CITY
COUNCIL. HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN HERE IS THE NEW UNIT THAT WE ARE ESTABLISHING, WHICH AS MS. MILLER INDICATED, IS COMBINATION OR CONSOLIDATION OF TWO PRIOR DIVISIONS THAT WERE UNDER THE AUDITOS OFFICE. THE POLICY AND RESEARCH DIVISION, AND THE OVERSIGHT AND EVALUATION
DIVISION. WE'VE COMBINED THOSE TOGETHER IN A NEW SINGUR DIVISION THAT WE'VE TITLED THE LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH AND OVERSIGHT KEEPING TWO KEY WORDS FROM PREVIOUS DIVISIONS. THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 10 FTES THAT WERE
ALLOCATED. ONE FTE, WHICH IS THE DIRECTOR POSITION WE'RE SPEAKING OF TODAY. YOU MAY RECALL THAT IN APRIL WHEN WE MADE THAT TRANSIT MENTIONED THAT THIS ESSENTIALLY CREATESHE COUNCIL STAFF THAT IS ANTICIPATED AND MENTIONED IN
CI CHARTER, SPECIFICALLY SECTION 4.2E1. WHICH PROVIDES T FOR ITS OWN RESOURCES, INCLUDING CENTRAL NON-PARTISAN STAFF TO SUPPORT ITS OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS. HERE ON THIS SLIDE I PUT IN FOUR BIG BUCKETS. THE TYPES OF WORK
WE ENVISION THIS DISION DOING TO ASSIST THE COUNCIL IN ITS PRIMARY LEGISLATIVE POLICY MAKING AND OVERSIGHT ROLES. SO YOU CAN SEE IN TERMS OF POLICY SUPPT, PROVIDING RESEARCH, REVIEW AND ANALYSIS, MONITORING EMERGING ISSUES AND TRENDS, AND
PROVIDING INTERAGENCY CORD NATION IN BEHALF OF THE BODY. PREPARING AND PRESENTING BRIEFINGS AND DOING COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND REPORTS AS DIRECTED BY THE COUNCIL. IN TERMS OF OVERSIGHT, PROVIDING ASSISTANCE WITH FINANCIAL REVIEWS AND ANALYSIS, INCLUDI OF THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED BUDGETS, AND
PROGRAM EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT. AND THEN FROM A STAFFING PERSPECTIVE, IT'S OUR GOAL TO HAVE AN ANALYST FROM THIS GROUP ASSIGNED TO EACH OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES OF COUNCI TO HELP THE CHAIRS AND MEMBERS WITH COMMITTEE WORK PLANS AND T TRACK LEGISLATIVE OUTPUT FROM THE COMMITTEES AND
FROM THE COUNCIL AS A BODY. THIS SLIDE SIMPLY SHOWS THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. MS. MILLER INDICATED THE DIRECTOR REPORTS TO T CHIEF ASSISTANT CITY CLERK, THERE ARE TWO MAJOR DIVISIONS WITHIN THE NEW DIVISI RESEARCH, WHICH IS EXISTING. AND
A FISCAL POLICY AND OVERSIGHT TEAM. THAT PRESENTS MY -- OR CONCDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M HAPPY TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS THAT THE BODY MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU. FOR THAT SUPPLEMENTAL PRESENTATION. ARE
THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE? I AM NOT SEEING ANY. SO WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND.
>> THIS ITEM HAS BEEN PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE AYESAVE IT AND THAT MOTION CARRIES. ITEM
NUMBER TWO IS THE 2025 ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL LONG-RANGE IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE. I WILL FIRST WELCOME UP I BELIEVE LIAM -- >> [INAUDIBLE].
>> WONDERFUL. IN THAT CASE, I WILL WELCOME UP CLIC CHAIR JOHN BERNSTEIN TO JOIN US AND PRESENT THIS ITEM. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING IN FOR THIS PRESENTATION. AND WELCOME. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE'LL JUST GIVE YOU A FEW MOMENTS TO GET YOUR PRESENTATION SET UP. >> IS THERE AN HDMI CABLE I CAN
PLUG IN?
>> OKAY. IS THIS COMING UP FOR EVERYBODY? >> WE SEEIT. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, I'M JOHN BERNSTEI I'M CHAIR OF THE CAPITAL LONG-RANGE IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE. I'M GOING TO GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION HIGHLIGHTING E CLIC REPORT, WHICH WAS PUBLISHED ABOUT A MONTH AGO.
HOPEFULL YOU'VE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT. WHEN FINISHED, I'LL BEAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS. LET ME START WITH A BRIEF PRIMER O CLIC. LET'S START WITH WHAT CLIC IS. WE'RE 33 MEMBERS WHEN FULLY STAFFED. WE EACH HAVE TWO APPOINTEES TO
THE COMMITTEE. THE MAYOR HAS SEVEN. AND THAT RESULTS IN A GEOGRAPHICALLY DIVERSIFIED COMMITTEE ACROSS THE CITY. AND DESPITE THAT GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTEHAT THERE'S SORT OF AN UNWRITTEN RULE -- NOT
SORT OF, THERE IS AN UNWRITTEN RULE. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ADVOCATE FOR OUR MEMBER'S WARD, BUT ULTIMATELY, WE'RE ALL SUPPOSED TO BE TRYING TO ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ENTIRE CITY. WE'RE A CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE. SO OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NON-BINDING.
CLIC CONSIDERS AND PRIORITIZES CBRs SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS. WE DO NOT ORIGINATE OR PROPOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS. WITH WE MAY ON OCCASION -- ABOUT
AN UNMET NEED. AND A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT FROM A FEW YEARS AGO WAS THE NORTHSIDE GREENWAY. IT WAS A VERY WELL ORGANIZED NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP THAT CAME AND PRESENT TO US. NOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CLIC PROCESS.
CLIC MEETS WEEKLY FROM MARCH THROUGH JUNE EACH YEAR. CBRs ARE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE END OF MARCH. APRIL IS WHAT I WOULD CALL OUR INFORMATION GATHERING PERIOD. TWO FUL DAYS OF
PRESENTATIONS FROM THOSE DEPARTMENTS. IN MAY, THE TASK FORCES BEGIN DRAFTING COMMENTS AND MEMBERS CREE INDIVIDUAL RATINGS ON EACH PROJECT. IN JUNE, THE FULCOMMITTEE FINALIZES COMMENTS AND FUNDING
OF PROJECTS IS COMPLET BASED ON AGGREGATED RATINGS. AND FINALLY, THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETS WITH THE MAYOR. LONG-RANGE PLANNING CAN BE A CHALLENGING
PROCESS. IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE THE COST OF A PROJECT SIX YEARS IN ADVANCE. THOSE NEEDS CAN CHANGE AND UNEECTED PROJECTS CAN ARISE. IDEALLY, EACH PROJECT WOULD BE PLANNED
SIX YEARS IN ADVANCE AND MOVE UP IN THE QUEUE EACH YEAR. BUT LIFE DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS PROCESS BY ITS NATURE IS SOMETIMES
MESSY, I'D LIKE TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT THAT CREATED DIFFICULTIES THIS YEAR. THE EXAMPLE I'M GOING TO USE IS THE BUILDING IN SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS THAT USED TO BE THE
3RD PRECINCT HEADQUARTERS FOR MPD. FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, IT WOULD BE USED. THAT UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATED THE COST TO BE DIFFICULT. ONCE DECISIONS ARE MADE, THIS IS NOT AROJECT THAT IS LIKELY TO BE SCHEDULED SIX
YEARS OU HOWEVER, ASKING FOR $8 MILLION IN EACH OF THE TWO NEAR-TERM YEARS FOR NEW PROJECT CREATES CHALLENGES. $8 MILLION IS A LITTLE LESS THAN 10% OF THE NET DEBT BOND BUDGET IN EACH OF
THOSE YEARS. SO AT A MINIMUM, FUNDING A PROJECT LIKE THIS IS WERE ALREADY IN THE QUEUE. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT POSSIBLE WAYS TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM. PROVIDING A PLACEHOLDER, EVEN
WHEN THE PROJECT IS STILL UNCERTAIN, WOULD BE ONE WAY. THE UNCERTAINTY SHOULD BE CLEARLY EXPLAINED AND THE BEST COST ESTIMATE AVAILABLE SHOULD BE USED. SO IN THE CASE OF THIS BUILDING, IT WAS KNOWN THAT AT SOME POINT BEFORE THIS YEAR THAT THATUILDING WAS GOING TO BE
RENOVATED AND REUSED. RIGHT. SO EVEN IFT WASN'T EXACTLY SURE WHAT THE USE WOULD BE, SOME KIND OF AN ESTIMATE MAYBE COULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US. AND THEN IN ADDITION, INSTEAD OF REQUESTING THE FULL AMOUNT OF A
DOLLAR PROJECT, THAT'S STILL IN A VISION STAGE, REQUESTING A 6-FIGURE AMOUNT TO DO A SCOPE STUDY WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL FOR THE COMMITTEE. OKAY. AS YOU MAY RECALL, A YEAR AGO CLIC RECOMMENDED A VERY LARGE
INCREASE TO THE NET DEBT BOND BUDGETF ABOUT 50% OVER THE 6-YEAR PERIOD. AT THAT TIME, WE ASKEDHE FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE US THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT COULD BE SPENT WITHOUT NEEDING A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE AS CLIC WORKS WITHIN THE BUDGET
YOU ALL SET WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY TAXES. HERE ARE THE NUMBERS WE GOT FROM THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT A YEAR AGO. AND HERE ARE THE NUMBERS THAT CLIC REMMENDED A YEAR AGO. AS NOTED LAST YEAR, CLIC WAS CONCERNED THAT THE NEW ALLOCATIONS TAPERED
OFF IN THE TWO OUT YEARS OF THE SIX-YEAR WINDOW. PREVIOUS TO THE RECENT SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE, THS COULD HAVE REASONABLY CHARACTERIZED AS GENTLY RISING. HOWEVER, THAT CHANGED LAST YEAR
WHEN THE NDB BUDGET INCREASED. FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF LONG-RANGE BUDGETING, HAVING THE PERSPECTIVE DECREASED FACED CHALLENGES. -- AS THEY SHOULD BE IN GOOD LONG-RANGE BUDGETING.
LAST YEAR, THE COMMITTEE CHOSE TO RECOMMEND A SMOOTH DISTRIBUTION OF THE ANNUAL ALLOCATIONS THAT BETTER REECTED THE GENTLY RISING TREND THAT HAD BEEN MORE TYPICAL IN THE ST. WE ATTEMPTED TO DO THAT IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER BY SLIGHTLY REDUCING THE OVERALL
BUDGET FROM A SIX-YEAR WINDOW TO $509 MILLION. YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE SIX-YEAR TOTAL COLUMN. THIS ALLOWED PROJECTS IN THE OUT YEARS THAT WERE DEEMED WORTHY. THIS YEAR CLIC CHOSE NOT TO RECOMMEND A CHANGE TO THE NDB
ALLOCATIONS THAT WERE PROVED. AS A RESULT, THERE WERE SEVERAL PROJECTS CONSIDERED WORTHY OF FUNDING BUT THEY WERE NOT FUNDED BECAUSE OF BUDGET LIMITATIONS IN THOSE OUT YEARS. THE TWO PRIME
EXAMPLES OF TS ARE PV162 AND PV162. THE COMMITTEE UNDERSTANDS THE CITY USES A CONSERVATIVE APPROACH PARTICULARLY AS IT PERTAINS TO DEBT ISSUANCE. BREW
-- THE COMMITTEE ALSO BELIEVES IT'S IMPORTANT TO BALANCE THOSE GOALS AGAINST REALISTIC CAPITAL BUDGETING. TO FURTHER ILLUSTRATE THIS POINT, YOU CAN SEE THE NDB ALLOCATION FOR 2031
IS $.8 MILLION. THAT FIGURE IS BASED ON 2025-DOLLARS. EACH YEAR WOULD BE NEEDED IN 2031 TO MATCH THE BUYING POWER TODAY. IF THE
ANNUAL INFLATION RATE IS 3%, THAT NUMBER INCREASES TO $89 MILLION. THIS EXAMPLE ON ITS OWN SUGGESTS THAT THESE ALLOCATIONS ARE LIKELY TOO LOW. INCREASING THE ALLOCATIONS IN THE OUT YEARS OF THE SIX-YEAR WINDOW DOES NOT COMMIT THE CITY TO ISSUING THAT AMOUNT OF DEBT.
EA YEAR BONDS ARE ONLY ISSUED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR OF THE PLAN. THE GOAL SHOULD BE REALISTIC PLANNING WITH THE GOAL OF UNFORESEEN AND UNREALISTIC CIRCUMSTANCES MAY REQUIRE A CHANGE FOR THOSE PLANS. WE UNDETAND THAT THERE'S A NATURAL TENSION BETWEEN
CONSERVATIVE FISCAL PLANNING, DEBT ISSUANCE, AND LONG-RANGE PLANNING. OUR ASK IS THE CITY TO RETURN TO THE TREND LINE OVER THE SIX-YEAR WINDOW. EVERYTHING I'VE TALKED ABOUTO FAR RELATES TO THE NET DEBT BOND BUDGET AND
THE PROJECTS THAT ARE FDED FROM THAT SOURCE. CLIC ALSO REVIEWS SEVERAL OF THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS. AS YOU ALL KNOW ENTERPRISE FUNDS ARE CLOSE SYSTEMS COULD ONLY BE REINVESTED
IN THAT SAME ASSET. A COMMON MISINTERPRETATION OF ENTERPRIS FUNDS IS THAT THEY'RE SELF-FUNDING SO THERE ISN'T A NEED TO SCRUTINIZE THEM. WHILE THIS MAY BE TECHNICALLY ACCUTE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT FUNDING IT THROUGH THE FEES THEY PAY. CLIC REVIEWS THE PERFORMANCE TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF CAPITAL BUDGET REQUESTS ON FUTURE INCREASES. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT CLIC DOES NOT MAKE GREAT RECOMMENDATIONS, RATHER WE ASSESS THE
REASONABLENESS OF FUTURE RATE INCREASES FROM THE RESULT OF UNDERTAKING THE PROPOSED PROJECTS. FINALLY, I WANT TO AGAIN BRING TOOUR ATTENTION THE FACT THAT THE PARK BOARD CONTINUES TO EFFECTIVELY CIRCUMVENT THE CLIC PROCESS BY
SUBMITTED PROJECTS. BECAUSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND STREETS ORDINANCE. CLIC CONTINUES TO ASK THAT THE PARK BOARD CONTINUES TO SUBMIT MORE PROJECTS THAN COULD BE FUNDED. WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I WILL FIRST RECOGNIZE COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAYNE. >> THANKYOU, MADAM VICE-PRESIDENT. I WAS CURIOUS IF STAFF GAVE YOU A RATIONALE FOR
THEIR NBD ALLOCATION IN TERMS OF, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING MAKES SENSE TO ME SOHY WOULD WE DO SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY? >> THEY DID. IT'S WHAT I TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT THEY'RE TRYING
TO BE CONSERVATIVE. FIVE AND SIX YEARS OUT, YOU DON'T WANT TO -- THE ONLY THING THAT'S REALLY BEING COMMITTED TO IS THE NEAR-TERM YEAR. I SUPPOSE YOU MAY HAVE TO ALSO WORRY ABOUT IMPLICIT PROMISE. SOMEBODY READS
THAT AND THINKS THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT COMING DOWN THE PIKE. THAT'S WHY I SAY IT ALWAYS HAS TO BE CAVEATED WITH THE IDEA OF SOMETHING EXTRAORDINARY WERE TO HAEN, A CHANGE MIGHT HAVE
TO BE MADE. >> THANK YOU. WE'VE GOT THREE MORE COUNCIL MEMBERS IN QUEUE SO FAR. JUST SO YOU'RE PREPARED. NEXT, I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER WONSLEY FOLLOWED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU, VICE PRESIDENT
CHUGHTAI. FIRST, I DO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE WARD 2 APPOINTEES WHO ALSO SERVED ON THE CLIC'S MOST RECENT UND, AND FOR PARTICIPATING IN WHAT IS A DELIBERATE RATE PROCESS TO GET
US THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. AN EXAMPLE THAT YOU COVERED AROUND THE FORMER 3RD PRECINCT WHICH IS NOW GOING TO BE THEINNEAPOLIS COMMUNITY SAFETY CENTER. SEEING SOME OF THE PROJECTS YOU DID,
FOR INSTANCE, PSV23, I BELIEVE THAT IS THE WELLNESS CENTER. JUST WANTING TO GET A BIT MORE CONTEXT ON WHAT KIND OF LED YOU ALL THERE. LAST YEAR WHEN WE HAD
CLIC MEMBERS COME SHARE, THEY FAILED TO SHARE SPECIFICITY, LACK OF DETAILS. IT MADE IT CHALLENGINGOR THE BOARD TO COME TO A RECOMMENDATION. I DO WANT TO LET COLLEAGUES KNOW TOO WE ACTUALLY TOOK THOSE PREVIOUS
CLIC MEMBERS' SUGGESTION SERIOUS. AND THIS BODY DID PASS TO ASK THE ADMINISTRATION TO COME FORWARD TO LAY OUT THE DETAILS ABOUT THEIR PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT SHOULD BE COMING TO COW ON SEPTEMBER 22ND. JUST WANTED TO SEE HOW WE GOT HERE FOR ANOTHER
YEAR WHEN IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME OF THOSE SAME CONCERNS WERE PRESENT. JUST WANT TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. >> I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY SINGLE ANSWER TO THAT. BUT I THINK THERE'S STILL AN ISSUE AROUND SPECIFICITY OF THE PROJECT. AND YOU KNOW, IT'S EASY TO STAND HERE NOW AND SAY ALL
THESE THINGS BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I TRIED TO MAKE A POINT OF DURING MY PRESENTATION IS THIS IS CHALLENGING WORK. RIGHT? THE PUBLIC SERVICE -- THE PUBLIC GROUNDS, PART OF CITY DEPARTMENT IN CHARGE OF, YOU KNOW,
DESIGNING BUILDINGS AND ALLHAT SORT OF STUFF FOR THE CITY, THAT'S CHALLENGING WORK. RIGHT. SOMETIMES THEY'RE ASKED TO DO SOMETHING. THERE'S A HURRY TO DO IT. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE THE LAND FOR IT YET. I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT UPFRONT. YES, THAT IS A PROJECT WHERE IT'S A BIG ASK. IT'S A LOT OF DOLLARS.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SPECIFICITY. AND I THINK ANOTHER CONCERN THAT THE BODY HAD THIS YEAR WAS THAT TO A CERTAIN EXTENT IT SEEMS LIKE THE -- I'M FORGETTING THE NAME OF IT. >> SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
>> YEAH. THANK YOU. THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IT'S BEING LEANED ON A BIT WITHOUT GIVING THE SPECIFICITY ABOUT WHAT IT IS IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT IS BEING ADDRESSED. IT'S SORT OF JUST A BLANKET. THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SAYS WE HAVE TO INSTEAD OF WHAT ARE THE
SPECIFICS. WHAT IS THIS MEETING WITHIN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. >> THANK YOU FOR RAISING THAT. ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, ALSO I'LL BE INQUIRING MORE ABOUT BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD THAT ON A MULTITUDE OF CONTRACTS. AGAIN, WHAT
SUBSECTIONS ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE SAME AS A REQUIREMENT. SO BEING CLEAR OF HOW THAT'S BEING UTILIZED AND WHAT SECTIONS ARE USING, ARE BEING USED AS A BASIS FOR THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION AROUND THESE PROJECTS. I'LL MAKE SURE TO
RAISE THAT TOO ON THE SEPTEMBER 22ND MEETING. WE'VE HEARD SOMEWHAT SIMILAR. THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU FOR SHARING AND PRESENTING TODAY. >> THANK YOU. AND NEXT I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. JOHN, THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR VOLUNTEER WORK. I'M WONDERING IF YOU'D GO BACK TO THE SLIDE ABOUT THE PARK BOARD PLSE. I'M JUST LOOKING FOR A LITTLEORE DETAIL IN THIS. COULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC. WHAT DO YOU THINK IS HAPPENING THERE?
>> SURE. SO STARTING IN 2016, WHEN THE PARKS AND NEIGHBORHOODS INFRASTRUCTURE ORDINANCE WAS PASSED, THA LEGISLATION CODIFIES THE MONEY THE CITY
TRANSFERS TO THE PARK BOARD FOR CATAL PROJECTS. SINCE THAT TIME, THE PARK BOARD HAS SUBMITTED PROJECTS THAT EXACTLY TCHES THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY'RE GOING TO GET FROM THE CITY. SO SOMETHING AROUND $13 MILLION. SO IN EFFECT, IF W
THEIR PROJECTS, THEY WOULD HAVE MONEY THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO TH. IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT THEY SHOULD BE DOING IS SUBMITTING $20 MILON WORTH OF PROJECTS SO WE CAN TELL THEM WHICH $ MILLION WORTH OF PROJECTS RISE TO THE TOP AND WHAT THEY SULD CONSIDERING
DOING. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT EVERY CITY DEPARTMENT DOES. DOES THAT CLARIFY FOR YOU? >> THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. NEXT, I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR CHUGHTAI,
AND THANK YOU, CHAIR BERNSTEIN, FOR SERVING. THANK YOU TO JOHN WHO IS ALSO HERE. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE LORING GREENWAY, WHICH HAS BEEN ON THEW
IN YOUR REPORT YOU DETAIL OUT THAT MANY OF THE FACILITIES ARE CURRENTLY NOT WORKING. THERE'S URGENCY IN COMPLETING THESE REPAIRS, INCREASED OPERATIONAL COSTS AND SAFETY CONCERNS. NOTED IN THE CLIC REPORT. CAN YOU SHARE AITTLE MORE DETAIL AS TO
WHEN THE CAPITAL REQUEST FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO LORING GREENWAY WAS PUT INTO THE QUEUE, AND WHHER IT'S REMAINED IN THE SAME PLACE OR BEEN BUMPED OR IMPROVED IN ORDER TO MEET THE URGENCY OF THE FOUNTAIN LIGHTING,LL OF THE ASSETS THAT
ARE IN DISREPAIR. >> THAT ONE'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED. IT'S GOT SOME FUNDING SOURCES A LITE OUTSIDE OF CLIC. I FORGET THE NAME. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT LEVY. I BELIEVE THAT PROJECT IS RELATIVELY NEW. LIKE MAYBE THIS
YEAR OR LAST YEAR. SORRY, THEY ALL KIND OF RUN TOGETHER ON ME. AND THAT ONE'S COMPLICATED BY THE FACT THAT THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT ISSUES. BUT SEEMS TO ME THE BIG ISSUE IS THE ROOM
THAT HOUSES ALL OF THE ELECTRICAL FOR THE LIGHTING AND THE FOUNTAINS IS HAZARDOUS BECAUSE THERE'S WATER LEAKS IN IT. AND TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM TEMPORARILY, THE LIGHTS -- EVERYTHING'S JUST SWITCHED ON
AND NOBODY GOES IN THERE. CLEARLY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TOE FIXED ASAP. I THINK WE COMMENTED ABOUT THAT IN THE RERT. >> OKAY. SO DID THIS KIND OF GET RECOMMENDED FORPENDING IN 2026? BECAUSE AS I'M SEEING IT'S
NOT ON THE LIST UNTIL 2027. >> RIGHT. WE GENERALLY DO NOT MOVE PROJECTS AROUND BY YEAR. WHAT WE MIGHT DO IN A COMMENT IS SAY THIS IS URGENT ANDOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER MOVING IT UP.
BUT TWO PROBLEMS WITH US MOVING PROJECTS AROUND OURSELVES. ONE IS CAPACITY. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ANY PARTICULAR CITY DEPARTMENT'S CAPACITY IS AND WHETHER WE'RE TELLING THEM TO DO WAY MORE THAN THEY'VE GOT PERSONNEL TO DO IN A
YEAR. AND THE OTHER IS FUNDING. THIS HAS TO BALANCE EACH YEAR. TRY TO MOVE THINGS AROUND AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE BUT WE WILL SAY SOMETHING IN THE COMMENT. >> MM-HMM. I THINK THIS IS URGENT JUST GIVEN T LIGHTS AND THE WATER LEAKS AND OTHER ISSUES
THAT ARE HAPPENING HERE. SO I'M LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS ON HOW WE CAN MOVE THIS UP OR HOW WE CAN FUND SOME OF THE REPAIRS OUTSI OF CLIC. SO THIS IS HELPFUL. AND I APPRECIATE ALSO YOUR COMMENTS ON THE LORING PLAYGROUND, WHICH IS O THE GREENWAY, THAT WAS
REMOVED UNANNOUNCED WITH NO PLAN FOR REPLACEMENT. AND SO WAS THERE ANY FUNDING REQUEST FOR LORING GREENWAY PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT IN THE CAPITAL REQUT THAT YOU RECEIVED? >> NO. NOT THAT I RECALL. >> AND HOW DID YOU HANDLE THAT? YOU JUST MADE THE COMMENT ON
THIS ISSUE? >> RIGHT. >> OKAY. >> AND THIS IS ME SPEAKING PERSONALLY, IT STRIKES ME THAT NOTWITHSTANDING MY COMMENTS A FEW MINUTES AGO THAT THE PARK BOARD, TT THEY WOULD BE BETTER
SUITED, THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. PL PARK GROUNDS AMONG MANY OTHER THINGS. >> I AGREE. UNTIL NOW WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANY INTEREST FROM THEM IN TAKING THIS UP. LASTLY, JUST WANTED TO CHECK ON HOW YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BNG
REFLECTED IN THE MAYOR'S BUDGET. I DO SEE IN THE BUDGET BOO HERE THAT WE HAVE MORE MONEY ALLOCATED TOWARDS CAPITAL THAN WAS IN THE CLIC'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SO HOW DID WE GET TO THAT POINT? >> I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET IN DETAIL SO I COULDN'T
TELL YOU THAT AT THIS POINT. >> OKAY. I'LL ASKUDGET DIRECTOR. THANKS. >> COUNCIL MEMBER CASHMAN, LET'S NOTE THAT FOR A STAFF FOLLOW UP MEMO. AND MR. O'BRIAN CAN BE
SURE TO GET BACK TO US. >> THANK YOU. S. THERE'S AN EXTRA $12 MILLION FOR CAPITAL THAT WAS NOT GIVEN BY REQUEST TO CLIC, FROM WHAT I'M READING. WHIC SEEMS LIKE IT WASN'T REVIEWED BY THE COMMITTEE. AND SO IT'S JUST BEING ADDED IN.
THAT'S MY READ OF IT. SO WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED. >> SO FOR CLERKS, IF WE CAN NOTE THAT AS, IF STAFF CAN PROVIDE US SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE CLIC RECOMMENDATION OF THE CAPITAL BUDGET THIS YEAR AND THE MAYOR'S
BUDGET AND WHERE THAT $12 MILLION DIFFERENCE CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO. >> IS THAT $12 MILLION IN 2026 OR IN GENERAL? DO YOU KNOW? >> 2026. LET ME CHECK QUICKLY.
SORRY. THAT WAS 2025. THIS YEAR THERE'S A $7.6 MILLION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION AND THE CLIC RECOMMENDATION. >> SO I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, BUT I'VE GOT A LIKELY CANDIDATE. THE DEMOCRACY CENTER THAT I MENTIONED A FEW MINUTES AGO, THE
NEW USE FOR THE FORMER 3RD PRECINCT. THE REQUEST FOR THAT WAS 26 AND 27. AS I SAID, THOSE WERE BIG ASKS ALL OF A SUDDEN IN '26 AND '27. TO MAKE THE FUNDING WORK, WE PUSHED IT OUT ONE YEAR
TO '27 AND '28. MY GUESS IS THE MAYOR HAS MOVED IT BACK. >> THERE WERE ALSO SOME THINGS MOVED DOWN. PHALT. >> ANTICIPATING THAT WOULD LIKELY HAPPEN. IF IN FACT THEY
WERE GOINGO MOVE IT BACK, THAT THE PLACE TO TAKE MONEY FROM WOULD BE SUPPLEMENTAL PAVING. SHOULD I CLARIFY THAT? WHAT PUBLIC WORKS DOES IS THEY COME TO US AND SAY THEY CAN USE X-NUMBER OF DOLLARS. A IF
WE'VE GOT EXTRA MONEY HANGING AROUND, THEY CAN USE A SUPPLEMENTAL AMOUNT OF X-DOLLARS AS WELL. IN SOME CASES WE FUNDED SOME THAT OF SUPPLEMENTAL MONEY. BUT WE DID THAT SAYING IF YOU NEED TO MOVE THIS BACK, PLEASE TAKE MONEY FROM THE SUPPLEMENTAL
FUNDING FIRST VERSUS CANCELLING SOME OTHER PROJECT. >> SURE. THANKS YEAH, IF WE CAN JUST HAVE A REPORT ON WHAT'S THE CAUSE OF ALL THE INTERPRETATIONS BETWEEN THE MAYOR'S BUDGET AND THE CLIC REPORT THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YO >> AWESOME. THANK YOU. AND
FINALLY, I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL >> THANK YOU, CHAIR CHUGHTAI. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR BE BERNSTEIN, FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I WAS AT THE JOINT CLIC AND PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS PROCS. AND THE TESTIFIERS THAT DID COME, THEY WERE SPECIFICALLY TAING ABOUT NICOLLET MALL AND DOWNTOWN TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS. AND LOOKING AT UR REPORT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE BODY HAVE MADE
SOME SIGNIFICANT MMENTS, KIND OF SHARING DIFFERENT CONCERNS. I JUST WANTED YOU TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE OUT THE CONVERSATION ABOUT NICOLLET MALL, WHAT IS CLIC THINKING ABOUT, WHAT IS CLIC CONCERNED ABOUT AND HOW THAT PROCESS HAS BEEN. >> I THINK THE BEST WAY TO
REPRESEN CLIC'S VIEW OF THE DOWNTOWN TNSIT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WHICH IS BASICALLY MOVING THE BUSES OFF OF NICOLLET MALL, IS THAT IT NEEDS MORE STUDY. IT SEEMS LIKIT'S INCOMPLETE. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S BEING ASKED FOR DOES NOT
INCLUDE EVERYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN TERMS OF PEDESTRIANIZING NICOLLET MALL. AND IT SEEMS AT LEAST FROM T INFORMATION WE HAVE, THAT A FULL STUDY HASN'T BEEN DONE. OUR THOUGHT WAS THAT INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT PUBLIC TRANSIT ON
NICOLLET MALL AND THE TWO OR THREE SURROUNDING STREETS, THEY OUGHT TO LOOK AT ALL OF DOWNTOWN AND WHAT MAKES SENSE IN TERMS OF CONTEXT OF WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO DO TO NICOLLET MALL. IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS A BIG ASK. I THINK IT WAS $20 MILLION. AND IT SEEME
WORK BEFORE IT WAS READY TO BE ACTUALLY SCHEDULED. >> GREAT. THANK YOU. YEAH. I'LL JUST UPLIFT ONE OF THE LINES IN THIS REPORT. IF THIS PROJECT IS DETERMINED TO BE VIABLE, PUBLIC
TRANT SERVICE NEEDS TO BE AS GOOD OR BETTER ON ALTERNATIVE STREETS WITH DEDICATED TRANSIT LANES SIMILAR TO NICOLLET MA CURRENTLY. I FEEL LIKE THAT IS AN AREA AND A QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ANERED. BUT I APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION THAT
IT BECAME MORE OF A DIALOGUE IN GENERAL ABOUT DOWNTOWN TRANSIT IMPROVEMT, AND NOT JUST SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THIS CORRIDOR. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE HAVE COMPLETED THE DISCUSSION ON THIS
ITEM I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER MEMBERS IN QUEUE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING IN AND PRESTING THIS ITEM. AND THANK YOU TO ALL OF THE CAPITAL LONG-RANGE IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS, ALL 33 OF YOU FOR ENGAGING IN THIS PROCESS AND HELPING INFORM THESE REALLY CRITICAL DECISIONS. >> THANK YOU.
>> I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT REPORT. AND WIT THAT, ITEM NUMBER 3 IS A PRESENTATION ON THE 2025 SECOND QUARTER FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF SELECT CITY
FUNDS. I WILL INVITE DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER, GEORGE HARGROVE, TO GIVE THAT PRESENTAON. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR CHUGHTAI. GIVE ME A SECOND HERE AND I'LL GET IT UP ON THE SCREEN HERE.
>> TAKE YOUR TIME. >> OKAY. THANKS AGAIN, CHAIR CHUGHTAI,
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS GEORGE HARGROVE, I'M THE CITY CONTROLLER. I WILL BE PRESENTING THE SECOND QUARTER FINANCIAL UPDATE ON THEITY FINANCES ON SELECT CITY FUNDS. SO MOVING RIGHT INTO IT. AS I THINK I SAID
LAST TIME, THIS IS A POINT IN TIME REPORT AS OF JUNE 30TH OF 2025. SO ABOUT SIX WEEKS AGO OR SO WE CLOSED THE BOOKS THROUGH JUNE. WE WON'T HAVE FINAL NUMBERS UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR WHEN WE HAVE OUR YEAR-END
AUDIT. WE'LL HAVE MORE ABOUT THAT FROM DEPUTY CONTROLLER LANING IN A LITTLE BIT HERE. FINANCIAL REPORT. CAUTION CERTAINLY IN GIVEN THE CHANGING SITUATION IN THE CITY. I ALREADY
KNOW OF THINGS THAT HAVE CHANGED SINCE WE'VE GIVEN THIS REPORT. CERTAINLY IF CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE, CERTAINLY WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HELP THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL TOO. SO TALKING
ABOUT OURINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS. I REALLY FEEL THE CITY IS KIND OF IN A PERIOD OF TRANSITION RIGHT NOW. I YOU LOOK AT 2024, WE'LL SEE THERE WAS A PRETTY STABLE YEAR, ESPECIALLY IN THE GENERAL FUND WHERE THE BALANCE REALLY DIDN'T GO UP OR DOWN THE
WHE YEAR. HOWEVER, IN 2025, LOOKING AT THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR, WE KIND OF NOTICE THE FUND BALANCE ARE STARTING TO RUN DOWN NOW. CERTAINLY AS TIME GOES DOWN, ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THE FEDERAL FUNDING AND THINGS THE CITY HAS RECEIVED OVER THE LAST
SEVERAL YEARS AS THAT'S BEEN SPENT OUT. WE'VE SEEN THE FUND BALANCES KIND OF SPUN OUTNOW. ONE OF OUR MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS IS I'M HAPPY TO REPORT WE'VE CONTINUED OUR AAA BOND RATING FOR ALL THREE MAJOR RATING AGENCIES. THEY JUST RECENTLY
CONFIRMED THAT. CONTINUE WITH THE AAA BOND RATING ON OUR DEBT. WE ALSO CONTINUE TO SEE PROPERTY TAXES RIDING BELOW BUDGET. ABOUT $19 MILLION BELOW OR SO DUE TO NON-COLLECTIBLEAMOUNTS. AS FAR
AS SALES TAXES, THEY'VE BEEN FAIRLY STABLE. WE WERE NOTICING SOME MINOR DECREASES IN THE DOWNTOWN ASSETS FUND. HOWEVER, LATELY, THEY'VE BEEN ABOUT SIMILAR TO LAST YEAR. WE CONTINUE TO WATCH THAT. ONE ITEM THIS YEAR THAT'S HAD A MATERIAL
EFFECT ON CITY FINANCES IS THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS ARE PROJECTED TO BE ABOUT $16 MILLION OVER BUDGET, WITH ABOUT 75% OF THAT IN THE POLE DEPARTMENT. WE CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE FEDERAL GRANTS SITUATION. THERE HAS BEEN SOME PLAN DECREASES, PARCULAR IN
THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AREA, AS WELL AS THE HEALTH AREA OR SO. WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY BIG CHANGES SINCE THEN. CERTAINLY AS WE MONOR THE BUDGET PROPOSALS COMING UP IN THE NEXT FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR,E DO SEE SOME VARYING DEGREES OF SUPPORT FOR SOME OF OUR PROGRAMS, ESPECIALLY
IN THE HUD CONSOLIDATED PLAN AS WELL BETWEEN THE CONGRESS AND T CONTINUE TO WATCH THAT. NOTE IN REQUEST FOR CHANGE SO WE'VE HAD TO GET A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE IN THE CY TO PLAN STRATEGIES
OF HOW BEST TO RESPOND TO THAT. FINALLY, WE DID ISSUE OUR ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT THAT DEPUTY CONTROLLER LANGE WILL TALK ABOUT. IT WAS DONE A COUPLE OF MONTHS. WE'RE BACK ON TIME NOW. BACK ON SCHEDULE FOR ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT. MOVING ON. YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS SLIDE HERE THAT OUR TOTAL BOOK FIELD OF CASH INVESTMENTS HAS BEEN PRETTY STABLE. IT'S ABOUT DOWN TO ABOUT
$20 MILLION OR SO FROM LAST YEAR. BILLION DOLLARS OR SO COMING IN HERE NOW. MOVING ON. THE CITY IS MEETING ITS FUND
BALANCE AND NET POSITION REQUIREMENTS IN ALL BUT JUST A FEW FUNDS. SELF-INSURANCE IS STILL ON HERE. I WILL SAY TECHNICALLY IT DOES MEET OUR POLICY. OUR POLICY ARE GENERALLY AROUND SHORTER TERM ABILITIES.
HOWEVER, IT DOES HAVE A NEGATIVE NET POSITION IN GENERAL LIABILITY IN TERMS OF LEGAL CASES AND THINGS THAT HAVE COME AGAINST THE CITY. SO WE STILL HAVE QUITE A BIT OF FUNDS IN THAT AREA AS WELL TOO. FLEET
SERVICES STILL O THE LIST HERE. PROJECTING THEM TO BE ABOUT $1 MILLION. $1.1 MILLION OR . PARKING ON THE OTHER HAND IS IMPROVING. THEY'RE EXPECTED TO BE ABOUT $2.6 MILLION BELOW TARGET AT THE END OF THIS YEAR.
IT'S GETTING CLOSER, WE HOPE SOME TIME IN 2026 WE HAVE PROPERTY CASH BALANCE. AND PROPERTY SERVES PROJECTED TO BE $4.6 MILLION BY THE END OF THIS YEAR. AND FINALLY, MOVING ON TO
THE GENERAL FUND. THE GENERAL FUND IS OUR BIGGEST FUND IN THE CITY. IT ACCOUNTS BASICALLY FOR ANHING THAT'S NOT REQUIRED TO BE ITS OWN FUND SUCH AS INTERNAL SERVICES OR ENTERPRISES OR FUNDS THAT HAVE MAJOR RESTRICTIONS ON
PROJECTED CASH BALANCES ARE PROJECTED TO GO DOWN. PROJECTED TO BE ABOUT $174 MILLION. MORE
RECENTLY THE CASH BALANCE WAS $15 MILLION COMPARED TO $58 MILLION. IN KEENG KIND OF WITH THE THEME, I'VE BEEN MENTIONED IT IS STARTING TO RUN DOWN AS WE MOVE INTO 25 HERE.
PROJECTED 2025 ENDING FUND BALANCE, PROJECTING 49 MILLION. WE'RE FORECASTING OUR 17% MINIMUM FUND BALANCE REQUIREMENT WHICH IS ACTUALLY
BASED ON THE BUDGET. ABOUT $30 MIION ABOVE THE FUND BALANCE. INCLUDES $24 MILLION PLANNED USE OF FUND BALANCE. WE DID ROLLOVER LESS THAN $42 MILLION. FINALLY, OF THE
$149 MILLION WE DO NEED TO RESTRICT FUNDS FROM THE NORTH COMMONS PARK AND PUBC SAFETY FUNDS WE RECEIVED FROM THE STATE. SO LOOKING AT IT IN MORE DETAIL HERE, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S OUR $209 MILON UP ON TOP. WE'RE FORECASTING GENERAL FUND
REVENUES OF ABOUT $640 MILLION. BUT SPENDING AROUND $700 MILLION OR SO.O THAT'S THE $60 MILLION DECRSE TO $149 MILLION. PUBLICS
THAT BRINGS US DOWN TO $134 MILLION. COMPARED TO THAT TARGET, IT LEAVES US ABOUT -- CERTAINLY MANY USES OF FUND BALANCES. FOR EXAMPLE, FEDERAL GRANTS CUT, THAT COULD BE A
NEED. THERE'S ALSO OUR ANTICIPATING ROLLOVER BETWEEN '25 AND '26. THE ECONOMY AND THE GENERAL MARKETS, WE'RE WATCHING THOSE CLOSELY TO DETERMINE IF THEY HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE CITY'S FINANCES. AND THEN LOOKING AT A LITTLE BIT MORE
DETAILS ON THE GENERAL FUND RENUE. YOU CAN SEE MOST OF IT IS PROPERTY TAXES. YOU CAN SEE THE BUDGETS IN THE BL. IN THE GREEN KIND OF DOTTED BAR GRAPHS, THEY SHOW THE PROJECTED OR SO.
SO YOU COULD SEE PROPERTY TAXES COMING UNDER BUDGET. A LITTLE BIT UNDER BUDGET FOR FRANCHISE FEES. YOU CAN SEE TT IN THE NUMBERS BELOW WITH MOST OF THE
UNRAGE IN PROPERTY TAXES, FRANCHISE FEES, AND LICENSE AND PERMITS. AND THEN THIS SLIDE LOOKS AT THE TIMING OF THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE. YOU CAN SEE THE ACTUAL IN BLUE. AND THEN IN GREEN, IT'S THE AVERAGE OF THE PAST THREE YEARS. YOU CAN SEE WE'RE RUNNING A LITTLE BIT UNDER AVERAGE. YOU CAN SEE TT
IN THE BULLET POINTS AS WELL TOO. WE'RE PROJECTED TO COLLECT ABOUT 97, 96-97%R SO. USUALLY WE COLLECT ALMOST 100% OR SO. SO IT'S RUNNING A LITTLE BIT UNDER
BUDGET. IF WE LOOK AT THE EXPENDITURE SIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND, WE CAN SEE A LOT OF IT IS IN PUBLIC SAFETY, THAT I MENTIONED BEFORE. CERTAINLY HEALTH AND SOME OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS LIKE THAT ARE PROJECTING SIGNIFICANT BUDGET
SAVINGS. BUT OTHER ONES LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY OVERALL LIKE I SAY IS ABOUT $11 MILLION. PUBLIC WORKS IS ALSO ABOUT $3 MILLION UNFAVORABLE. MOST OF THAT IS MA SOME OF THEIR WORK FOR OTHERS, ACCOUNTS. SO ACTUALLY MOST OF
THAT IS COVERED BY REVENUE, ABOUT $4 MILLION OF THAT IS COVERED BY REVENUE. YOU CAN SEE THE VERY LAST LINE, ALL OTHER EXPENSES IS ABOUT $60 MILLION UNFAVORABLE. THAT'S THE CONTINGENCY WHICH IS ABOUT $13.5 MILLIO OR SO. SO THAT'S
THE STORY ON THE GENERAL FUND E TIMING, YOU'LL SEEN THE BLUE CHARTS THERE, YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE RUNNING A LITTLE BIT AHEAD OF THE THREE-YEAR AVERAGE. MEANING WE'RE SPENDING MORE MONEY. WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT
WE ARE STARTING TO SPEND THINGS DOWN. YOU CAN SEE THAT AS THE QUARTERS MOVE ON THAT WE HAVE SPENT A LITTLE MORE THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST THREE YEARS. WE'RE PROJECTING ABOUT 97% OF OUR BUDGET BEING SPENT AS OPPOSED TO
A LITTLE LESS THAN 92%. WE'RE SPENDING THINGS DOWN A LITTLE FASTER THAN WE NORMALLY HAVE HERE AT THE CITY. AND THEN MOVING ON TO SOME OF OUR OTHER FUNDS. THIS IS THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS. THESE ARE FUNDS THAT ARE GENERALLY RESTRICTED.
BIGGER ONES ARE THE CONVENTION CENTER, REGULATORY SERVICES AND GRANTS. CPED ALSO HAVE QUITE A BIT OF FUNDING THAT'S RESTRICTED. YOU CAN SEE FOR BOTH THE FUND BALANCE AND THE CASH BALANCE, THOSE ARE BOTH PROJECTED TO DECREASE BY YEAR-END. SOME OF THAT IS DUE TO
TRANSFERS FROM DOWNTOWN ASSETS TO GENERAL FUND. CPED THAT ONE THING THAT AFFECTED THEIR FUND BALANCE IS WE FOUND SOME LAND FOR RESALE THAT WAS NOT HERE ANYMORE, SO WE HAD TO TAKE THAT OFF THE BOOKS. THAT WAS ABOUT $14 MILLION. SO THAT WAS PART OF
THE FUND BALANCE DECREASES AS WELL TOO. AND SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THIS IS A DETAILED REPORT HERE OF OUR FINANCIAL STRENGTH AND FUND BALANCE PROJECTIONS FOR THE MAJOR FUNDS IN THE SPECIAL
REVENUE FUND FAMILY. YOU CAN SEE IF YOU LOOK ON THE FAR RIGHT SIDE OF IT, YOU'LL SEE ALMOST UNIVERSALLY THE FUND BALANCE GOING DOWN FROM WHAT IT WAS IN '24 A '25. THE DOWNTOWN ASSETS
AND SPED CPED TOO. MOVING ON TO INTERNAL SERVICES. SELL THOSE TO OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AS OPPOSE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. YOU CAN SEE ONE OF THE BIGGER ONES ARE FLEET SERVICES, PROPERTY SERVICES, AND OF COURSE THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND. HERE
IT'S A LITTLE BIT MISLEADING. CASH INCREASING FROM 2024, THAT'S SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND THAT'S HAVING A FAIRLY HEFTY CASH INCREASE. I'LL SHOW IN A SECOND. THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WHY TY'RE INCREASING.
OTHERWISE, MOST THINGS HAVE DECREASED. WE CAN SEE THAT ON THE NEXT SLIDE. IF YOU LOOK ON THE FAR RIGHT OF THE SLIDE, PROJECTIONS FOR 2025. ALMOST ALL INCREASING A LITTLE BIT, EXCEPT FOR SELF-INSURED, WHICH ISOING
UP ABOUT $26 MILLION TO PUT THE CITY IN BETTER POSITIO FOR LONG-TERM LIABILITIES. FINALLY, OUR LAST FAMILY OF FUNDS IS THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS. THIS IS KIND OF THE EXCEPTION TOIND OF FUND BALANCES RUNNING DOWN. THIS ONE
IS FAIRLY ABLE. THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING UP A LITTLE BIT. YOU CAN SEE OURPROJECTIONS. PUBLIC WORKS TYPE ENTERPRISES SUCH AS THE SEWER STORMWATER, WATER, SOLID WASTE. CPED HAS
PARKING. CPED HAS A FUND AS WELL TOO. BUT THAS NOT NEARLY AS BIG AS THE ONES IN PUBLIC WORKS. INCREASING BY ABOUT $14 MILLION. CASH IS PROCTED TO GO UP ABOUT
$15 MILLION. -- FINALLY, LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS HERE, FAR RIGHT AGAIN COMPARES THE 2024 ENDING AMOUNT WITH OUR PROJECTED 2025. YOU C SEE MODEST INCREASES IN EVERY AREA WITH STORM WATER
SHOWING $8 MILLION INCREASE FROM 2024 TO '25. EXCEPTION TO SOLID WASTE, WHICH IS PROJECTED TO GO DOWN BY ABOUT $1 MILLION OR SO. PRETTY STABLE IN THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS. SO AT THIS POINT,HAT
CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION ON THE SECOND QUARTER FINANCIALS. I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR CHUGHTAI, AND THANK YOU, CONTROLLER
HARGROVE. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS, SOME OF WHICH YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER, SOME I'D LIKE TO KNOW FOR FOLLOW UP JUST DEPENDING ON THE AVAILABILITY OF THE INFORMATION. BOTH REVENUE AND EXPENSES, AND LOOKING AT WHY
SOME THINGS DIDN'T GENERATE THE REVENUE WE EXPECTED. AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, WHY WE DIDN'T MEET THE EXPENSES THAT WE PLANNED TO. I THINK THAT'SOOD INFORMATION AS WE HEAD INTO BUDGET MARKUP. SO ON THE REVENUE SIDE, I WAS
WONDERING WHY THE FRANCHISE FEES WERE DOWN COMPARED TO BUDGET? WOULD YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW THE DRIVERSF THAT? >> LET ME GET MY CHART OUT HERE. THIS IS ON THE DETAILED REPORT.
YEAH, I DO SHOW FRANCHISE FEES IS PROJECTED UNDER BUDGET. THE BEST DETAILS FOR YOU, IFOU DON'T MIND, I'LL PUT A NOTE TO GET YOU THAT. >> YEAH, THAT'D BE GREAT. THE
SECOND ONE WAS A SLOW DOWN IN THDOWNTOWN ASSETS FUND. >> I BELIEVE THAT WAS PART OF THE 2025 BUDGET TO SPEND DOWN THE DOWNTOWN ASSETS. IF I LOO AT THE SPECIFIC REPORT HERE.
JUST GIVME A SECOND HERE. >> SO IT'S NOT THAT THERE WAS A -- THAT THE REVENUE FROM THE DOWNTOWN ASSETS FUND WASN'T AS EXPECTED. IT'S THAT THE SPENDS HAPPENING AS PLANNED? >> YEAH. AGAIN, YEAH, IF YOU
LOOK AT THE USES -- THIS IS ON PAGE 16 OF THE DETAILED REPORT. YOU SEE LIKE A TRANSFER OUT TO THE CITY GENERAL FUND. IN '24, THAT WAS ABOUT $25 MILLION. FOR THIS YEAR, '25, IT INCREASED TO ABOUT $45 MILLIO THAT'S
PROBABLY ONE OF THE MAIN EXAMPLES. EVERYTHING ELSE WAS A LITTLE CLOSER. TRANSFER FROM CONVENTION CENTER AS WELL. >> RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND THEN WHY ARE SO MANY PROPERTY TAXES LABELED NON-COLLECTIBLE?
>> THAT I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON AS WELL TOO. >> IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS ALMOST 3% OF WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAXED FOR PROPERTY TAXES ARE NON-COLLTIBLE AND THAT THE NUMBER HAS RISEN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.
>> THAT'S GENERALLY WHAT I'VE SEEN THAT DO PROPERTY TAXES. NON-COLLECTIBLE IS ABOUT 3% OR SO. I'LL SEE IF I CAN SEGMENT THAT >> I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO WHAT TYPES OF PROPERTIES. IT'S
PROBLY COMMERCIAL GIVEN THOSE ARE THE ONES WHOSE VALUES HAVE DROPPED THE MOST, WHILE OTHERS HAVE RISEN. THIS IS SORT OF A SPECULATIVE QUESTION, SO JUST FORGIVE ME. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH REVENUE WOULD BE GIVEN IF WE
LEVIED TAXES ON RELIGIOUS INSTI EXEMPTED? >> CHAIR CHUGHTAI, COUNCIL MEMBER SHMAN, I'D HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. >> ON THE EXPENS SIDE, AND I CAN EMAIL THESE OVER, ON THE EXPENSES SIDE, I THINK THE PUBLIC WORKS GOING OVER BUDGET,
I THINK THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE GIVEN SOME OF THE EXTRA INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS THAT HAVE COME UP. BUT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THIS PUBLIC SAFETY. $16 MILLION OVER SPEND. DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS
INVOLVED IN THAT? >> MOST OF IT IS I THINK OVERTIME FOR OUR POLICE OFFICERS AND OUR FIREFIGHTERS. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN THE DOUBLE TIME KIND OF ISSUE AS WELL TOO IS PUTTING FURTHER STRAI ON THE BUDGET. I CAN GET BACK TO YOU
WITH A COMPLETE REPORT IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL, COUNCIL MEMBER CASHMAN, CHAIR CHUGHTAI. >> I WAS WONDERING, AND MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING YOU'D HAVE IS THATHE LAST FIVE YEARS, HOW MUCH IS THE OVERSPEND THEN? LIKE WAS THIS NORMAL? WAS THIS A
TREND? AND THEN I'LL JUST COMMENT HERE FOR MY COLLEAGUES THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING TO ME THAT WE CAN OVERSPEND ON THIS BUDGET LINE, BUT THERE ARE OTHER PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES THAT HAVE
BEEN FUNDED FOR MULTIPLE YEARS. LIKE THE UPTN PUBLIC SAFETY AMBASSADORS THAT WERE FUNDED IN 2023 THAT STILL HAVE NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED. SO SOME OF THE OVERSPENDING ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUDGET WHILE NOT IMPLEMENTING THE THINGSHAT
WERE BUDGETED FOR IS NOT SHOWING GOOD GOVERNANCE, IN MY OPINION. ANDHAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. >> WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. I'M NOT SEEING ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM COLLEAGUES, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AND I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE
AND FILE THAT REPORT. EELLENT. AND WITH THAT, OUR FINAL ITEM IS THE 2024 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT ON YEAR-END AUDITED FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL RESULTS. HERE T PRESENT THAT ITEM IS DEPUTY CONTROLLER ROB LANGE FROM THE
FINANCE AND PROPERTY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. WELCOME, MR. LANGE. AND PLEASE GET STARTED AS SOON
AS YOU'RE READY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR CHUGHTAI. AS STATED,
MY NAME IS ROB LANGE, I'M THE DEPUTY CONTROLLER FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. I WAS THE PRIMARY CONTACT FOR THE AUDIT WITH THE CITY, INCLUNG THE STATE AUDITORS. THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE ABOUT THE 2024 AUDIT THAT DID
TAKE PLACE. I BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THIS ACFR RIGHT HERE IS A FULL FINANCIAL OF THE CITY. IT INCLUDES CERTAIN INFORMATION THAT GOES INTO DEEPER DETAIL, INCLUDING SUCH
ITEMS AS A COMPLETE BALANCE SHEET. IT IS APPROXIMATELY A 25-MINUTE PRESENTATION. PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS AS WE GO THROUGH. THE PRESENTATI IS GOING TO COVER FOUR ITEMS, WHH THE ACFR IS. A
REVIEW OF THAT ACFR, AND AUDIT THAT HPENS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ACFR. WHAT IS THE ACFR? IT IS THE ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE REPORT. IT CONTAINS ABOUT 200
PAGES, A LITE MORE OF DETAILED FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND IT IS REQUIRED. IT IS NOT A OPTIONAL THING THAT WE CAN DO. CONSEQUENCES, IF WE DON'T FILE THIS TIMELY, WE COULD HAVE RISK OF GRANT LOSS, TROUBLE ISSUING DEBT. AND EVEN IF WE DO ISSUE THAT DEBT, IT MIGHT COME AT A
HIGHER INTEREST RATE. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, LOST OF TRUST FROM THE COMMUNITY. IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE THEIR PROPERTY TAXES ARE GOING TO, IT WILL NOT BE GOOD AND A LOSS OF TRUST FOR THAT. BEFORE I GO ANYFARTHER, I WANT TO SAY WE ARE A MEMBER OF
THE GOVERNMENT FINAN ASSOCIATION OR GFOA. REQUIRES THAT THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS ENHANCE ITS TRANSPARENCY IN THE ACFR. WE GO ABOVE AND BEYOND SO WE CAN CONTINUE IN GOOD STANDING OF THIS MEMBERSHIP. AND WE
RECEIVED FOR THE PAST 50 YEARS THEIR HIGHEST AWARD, WHICH IS CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT AND EXCELLENCE IN FINANCIAL REPORTING. SO HERE WE HAVE THE 2023 ONE. WE DID JUST FILE FOR 2024. WE SHOULD FIND OUT BY THE END OF THE YEAR. I'M VERY CONFIDENT THAT WE WILL CONTINUE
OUR TREND. SO AUDIT TIMELINE. WE DO START THIS IN NOVEMBER. WE DO PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND INTERNAL CONTROL REVIEW FROM END OF YEAR DECEMBER TO MID-FEBRUARY, WE CLOSE THE BOOKS. FROM MID-FEBRUARY TO
APRIL, WE PREPARE AUDIT WORK PAPERS AND WE DO A SUBSTANTIAL TESTING AT THAT POINT. WE COMPILE THE DRAFT OF THIS REPORT AND FINALIZE AUDIT TESTING. AND FINALLY, WE FILE IT BY
JUNE 30TH. THIS YEAR, EXCELLENT NEWS, W DID FOLLOW THE TARGET TIMELINE THIS YEAR AND WERE ABLE TO FILE BEFORE THE JUNE 30TH DEADLINE. ALL IN ALL IT TAKES ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS. IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF WHAT THE
DEPARTMENT DOES. AUDITAL OPINIO AND ANALYSIS, SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIALS, WHICH ISHERE THE BULK OF THIS PRESENTATION IS ING TO LAND. BEFORE I GO TOO MUCH FARTHER, I WANT TO GIVE YOU A SNIPPET OF THE TABLE OF
CONTENTS. THINGS HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE IS WHAT I'M GOING TOOVER BRIEFLY TODAY. BUT THE REST OF IT IN WHITE IS MOST INFORMATION THAT YOU COULD LOOK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO YOURCITY'S FINANCIALS. FINALLY, HERE'S THE SECOND PAGE OF THAT TO HIGHLIGHT THA FACT
MORE. SO THE AUDITAL OPINION IS THE END GOAL. AND THE ATD AUDITORS PROVIDE AN -- IT'S NOT JUST YOUR INTERNALCCOUNTING TEAM THAT'S PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. IT'S THIRD-PARTY
AUDITORS SAYING I CAN BE RELIED UPON BY THE PUBLIC AND CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE DECISION THEY DID ISSUE AN AUDIT UNMODIFIED
OPINION, WHICH IS THE STANDARD. REPRESENTS THE FINANCIAL POSITION OF YOUR CITY. NEXT SECTION IS THE MANAGENT DISCUSSION ANALYSIS, MDNA. IT'S WRITTEN BY THE CTROLLER GROUP. IT IS A 25-PAGE SECTION OF JUST
WORDS AND PARAGRAPHS, NOT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THAT SOMEONE COULD READ TO GET A GOOD VIEW OF WHAT THE CITY IS AS WELL AS PRIOR YEAR ANALYSIS. SO IF SOMEONE OM THE PUBLIC DID NOT HAVE THE SAVVY TO REVIEW FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, I
ENCOURAGE THEM READ THIS 25-PAGE PORTION AND YOU'LL GET A GOOD PICTURE OF THE CITY. I DOAVE A SNIPPET HERE OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THAT MD & A THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU CAN FIND. THIRD SECTION IS THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. THIS PROVIDES INFORMATION ON THE CITY AS
WHOLE AS WELL AS BROKEN DOWN TO INDIVIDUAL FUNDS. THE BALANCE SHEET OR STATEMENT OF NET POSITION. THIS IS A STATEMENT NOT TYPICALLY PRESENTED IN THE QUARTERLY REPORTS. BECAUSE TYPICALLY WE WOULD PRESENT THE STATEMENT O ACTIVITIES OR THE INCOME STATEMENT SO THAT YOU
GUYS COULD SEE THE INCOME AND REVENUE AND EXPENSES. FINALLY, WE HAVE BUDGET TO ACTUAL STATEMENTS, WHICH IS ALSO SOMETHING YOU'RE TYPICAL TO SEEING. AND HOW CASH MOVED THROUGH THE FUND. WE WON'T BE TOUCHING SO MUCH ON THE CASH
FLOW, IT'S VERY TECHNICAL. THE NEXT FEW SLIDES. I DID SELECT, THERE IS OVER 50 FINANCIALS ON THIS. I DID NOT WANT TO SPEND. I PROVIDE THE MOST USEFUL
INFORMATION FOR THE TIME WE HAVE. THIS IS THE BALANCE SHEET FOR YOUR ENTIRE CITY. I'VE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE THE KEY ITEMS. ENTIRE CITY IN ALL ITS FUNDS IS $5 BILLION. OF WHICH,
$1.1 BILLIONS CONSIDERED CASH. ADDITIONALLY, I WANT TO POINT OUT THE CURRENT ASSETS, CASH, RECEIVABLES, INVENTORY. THINGS WE CAN USE FOR NEXT YEAR'S SERVICES. THAT TOTALS
$1.5 BILLION. FINALLY, WE HAVE $3.5 BILLION WHICH IS OUR BRIDGES, OUR AD. THAT IS THE A AATE ASSETS AT THE END OF 2024. $350 MILLION IS CONSIDERED
CURRENT. WHICH IS IMPTANT BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BANCE SHEET AND THE HEALTH OF THE CITY, CAN WE PAY OUR CURRENT LIABILITIES? WE HAVE OVER FOUR MORE TIMES CURRENT
ASSETS THAN WE DO CURRENT LIABILIES. THAT'S IMPORTANT IN RATIO. TWO OR HIGHER IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. THEN FINALLY, WE HAVE THE NET POSITION. THAT'S ASSETS MINUS LIABILITIES. WE HAD A LITTLE OVER $3 BILLION IN NET POSITION FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
LOOKING AT THAT $3 BILLION NUMBER, WE'LL SEE ABOUT $2.6 BILLION IS INVESTED IN OUR NET AND CAPITAL ASSETS. OUR LAND AND BUILDINGS, LESS OUR LONG-TERM BUILDINGSSSOCIATED WITH THEM. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT NUMBER. OF THE POSITION, WE
CANNOT NECESSARILY SPEND $2.6 BILLIONF THIS THAT'S TIED IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. WE ALSO HAVE $240 MILLION. WE CAN'T NECESSARILY DIVERT THOSE FUNDS TO DIFFERENT PROJECTS BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN TAGGED TO A
DIFFERENT PROJECT. -- UNRESTRICTED AND MAY BE EASILY USED. THIS IS THE ENTIRE CITY'S INCOME STATEMENT. THIS IS
GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING. IILL NOTATE THAT IN THE ENTIRE CITY WE SPENT $1.3 MILLION. YOU CAN SEE DOWN THE COLUMNS THE DIFFERENT. -- WE THEN HAVE
CHARGES FOR SERVICES, GRANTS, OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS TO OFFSET THOSE EXPENSES. BUT THE END RESULT IS IS THAT WE HAVE $518 MILLION IN LOSS BECAUSE WE DON'T CHARGE FOR ALL OUR SERVICES. INSTEAD, THOUGH, WE DO COLLECT PROPERTY TAXES TO OFFSET
THAT. WE COLLECTED $653 MILLION IN GENERAL REVENUES, AND THAT DID RESULT IN THE INCREASE IN NET POSITION OF $134 MILLION FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. SO HERE'S A SNIPPET FROM THE STATISTICAL SECTION. I WILL SHOW THAT THERE IS -- IT'S A 10-YEAR TREND. IT
WILL INDICATE THAT WE WENT FROM $1.9 BILLION IN NET POSITION UP TO $3 BILLION IN NET POSITION. OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS.
>> LET'S PAUSE HERE FOR A QUICK QUESTION. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAYNE. >> THANK YOU, VICE PRESIDENT. I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THE REPORT INCLUDED IN THE ROLL-UPS. FOR INSTANCE, WE HAVE A GENERAL GOVERNMENT LINE ITEM THAT -- I'D
JUST LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ACCOUNTING FOR IN TH GENERAL GOVERNMENT. WHEREAS PUBLIC WORKS, PUBLIC SAFETY ARE FAIRLY SELF-DESCRIPTIVE. BUT I'M MUCH MORE INTERESTED IN KIND OF UNDERSTANDING MAYBE THE NEXT LEVEL OF DETAIL UNDERNEATH THAT. I'M GUESSING IT'S A NUMR OF
FUNDS. >> FOR THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT? >> YEAH. >> YES. ACTUALLY, LATER O IN THE FINANCIALS, I WILL BE SHOWING -- BECAUSE THIS IS THE CITY OVERALL. BUT WE ALSO HAVE INDIVIDUAL FUNDS THAT WE REPORT ON AS WELL AND WE CAN SEE THE ACTIVITY ON THOSE. FOR THIS, WHEN WE REPORT THE STATEMENT OF
ACTIVITIES, IT'S ON A FUNCTIONAL EXPENSE. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ONE FUND IS GOING TO MAKE UP ONE ASPECT. IT'S NOT A ONE TO ONE RATIO. FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT, IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE THINGS LIKE MYSELF FORFINANCE, HR, ASSESSING. THINGS THAT WOULDN'T
FALL IN THE OTHER BUCKS. TO BE HONEST, IT'S ALMOST THE CATCH-ALL. IT DOESN'T FALL IN PUBLIC SAFETY, PUBLIC WORKS, HEALTH AND WELFARE. SO TO ANSWE THAT DON'T FALL INTO THAT. OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. PLEASE CONTINUE. >> AND JUST TO RECAP, AS FAR AS HOW WE'VE BEEN TRENDING OVER TH THE STATISTICAL SECTION. BUT I JUST WAND TO BRING IT HERE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT YEAH, WE'VE
WRITTEN FROM 1.9 -- BUT MORE TO THAT STORY IS MOST OF THAT GROWTH HAS BEEN PART OF NET INVESTMENT AND CAPITAL ASSETS WHICH IS OUR LONG-TERM LIABILITIES, LESS ASSOCIATED
LONG-TERM DEBT. 1.7 TO $2.6 BILLION SHOWING THE GROWTH IN T CITY'S CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE MOSTLY. SO THAT IS THE CITY OVERALL. BUT WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT THE CITY WITHIN INDIVIDUAL FUNDS AS WELL. THE HEALTH OF JUST THE WHOLE CITY
NEEDS TO BE DISSECTED. SO WE DO MAIN BUCKETS, GOVERNMENTAL, ENRPRISE AND SERVICE FUNDS. I'M GOING TO FIRST START WITH GOVERNMENTAL. THIS INCLUDES GENERAL FUND. THE GRANTS, ARENA, DOWNTOWN ASSETS. THE LIST IS RIT THERE ON THE SIDE. THESE ARE GENERALLY WHAT PEOPLE THINK
OF WHEN THEY THINK OF GOVERNMENT. IT'S COLLECTING THE PROPERTY TAXES. IT'S COLLECTING THE FRANCHISE FEES AND USING THOSE TO PROVIDE GOVERNMENTAL SERVICESIKE POLICE, FIRE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO HERE'S THE BALANCE SHEET. AGAIN, SOMETHING THAT'S NOT TYPICALLY
PRESENTED IN THE QUARTERLY REPORT. I WANT TO SHOW WE HAVE TOTAL ASSETS OF $1.07 BILLION. THESE ARE ALL CONSIDERED CURNT ASSETS ON THIS FINANCIAL STATEMENT. WE GO TO LONG-TERM
LIABILITIES OF $102 MILLION. WE CAN SEE OUR CURRENT ASSETS COMPARED TO CURRENT LIABILITIES SHOWS A GOOD HEALTH OF THE FUNDS OVERALL. FINALLY, THE TOTAL FUND BALANCE OF ALL THESE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS,
$752 MILLION. BUT I WANT TO FOCUS ON THE GENERAL FUND. THE MAJORITY IS CASH. WE DOAVE TOTAL LIABILITIES OF $40 MILLION. AGAIN, SHOWING ABOUT A FOURO FIVE CURRENT RATIO. AND THEN FINALLY, WE HAVE THE FUND BALANCE OF $209 MILLION. THIS IS WHAT WE
WANT TO REFLECT WHAT GEORGE WAS JUST TALNG ABOUT. OF THAT $209 MILLION, ONLY ABOUT $140 MILLION OF IT IS CONSIDERED UNASEENED WHICH -- UNASSIGNED. WE HAVE A 17% FISCAL POLICY THAT
WE HAVE TO STICK WITH. THAT'S THE MINIMUM FLOOR WE WANT TO BRING IT DOWN TO. SO KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN YOU LOOK THROUGH THESE FINANCIALS. NOW WE HAVE THE INCOME STATEMENT. SO ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, WE COLLECTED
$1 BILLION, A LITTLE OVER. AND WE EXPENDED $1.1 BILLION. THEN WE DO HAVE SOMETHER FINANCING SOURCES AND USES. THIS INCLUDES TRANSFERS RESULTING IN $16 MILLION INCREASE FOR ALL THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS. LET'S JUST
FOCUS ON THE GENERAL FUND AGAIN. WE COLLECTED $570 MILLION. WE EXPENDED $640 MILLION. IT'S A DEFICIT OF $70 MILLION. SO HOW DOES THE CITY COVER THAT DEFICIT? WELL WE HAVE TRANSFERS
FROM OTHER FUNDS THAT WERE ABOUT $9 MILLION IN 2024. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF TRANSFER AS WELL. BECAUSE OF THESE TRANSFER WE HAD A LOSS OF $1 MILLION. AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO SEE BECAUSE WEET THESE TRANSFERS FROM DOWNTOWN ASSETS. WE GET THESE TRANSFERS FROM THE PARKING FUND. WE GET THEM FROM GRANT FUND. SO
THE HEALTH OF THOSE FUNDS NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AS WELL WHEN W MOVE FORWARD. SO THAT'S THE GOVEMENTAL FUNDS AT A HIGH LEVEL. NEXT, WE HAVE THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS. THESE ARE BUSINESS-TYPE LIKE ACTIVITIES. WE SELL A SERVICE AND COLLECT A FEE FOR IT. WEAVE TO LOOK AT
THE FINANCIALS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. PARTICULARLY, THE INCOME STATEMENT. STATEME NET POSITION. THIS IS OUR BALANCE SHEET. THIS BALANCE SHEET IS SO LARGE, I HAD TO SPLIT IT IN TWO. THE FIRST IS JUST THE ASSETS.
$1.6 BILLION IN ASSETS, OF WHICH THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE ASSETS IS ASSOCIATED WITH CATAL, BRIDGES, AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO PROVIDE THE ENTERPRISE SERVICES. $205 MILLI IS CONSIDERED CURRENT ASSETS TO BE UTILIZED NEXT YEAR. COMPARING THAT TO OUR
LONG-TERM LIABILITIES, WE HAD $415 MILLION IN LONG-TERM LIABILITIES. CURRENT LIABILITIES ONLY $67 MILLION.OU COMPARE THE $205 MILLION IN CURRENT ASSETS COMPARED TO THE
$67 MILLION CURRENT LIABILITIES, WE'RE SHOWING ABOUT A 3 RATIO FOR THE CURRENT RATIO. FINALLY, IO WANT TO GO DOWN TO THE NET POSITION, OF WHICH $75 MILLION IS CONSIDERED UNRESTRICTED. I DID HIGHLIGHT IF WE GO INDIVIDUAL ON THE FUNDS, THE
PARKING FUND, IT HAS A DEFICIT UNRESTRICTED NET POSITION. WE WANT TO CONSIDER WHAT FUNDS MIGHT END UP NEEDING MORE ATTENTION. PARKING IN PARTICULAR D A $10 MILLION CURRENT ASSETS. BUT $14 MILLION IN RRENT LIABILITIES SHOWING WE
MIGHT OWE MORE THAN WE HAVE IN CURRENT ASSETS. THERE ARE A FEW DRIVERS WITH THAT. I WILL SAY BECAUSE OF OUR FISCAL POLICIES, IT WAS IDENTIFIED IN A PREVIOUS YEAR. SO THAT DEFICIT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN IMPROVING. $5 MILLION IN '23. IN '24, IT'S
ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS. AND WE'RE HOPING TO IMPROVE THAT SITUATION. PART OF THE REASON IS BECAUSE WE TRANSFE MONEY TO SUPPLEMENT THE GENERAL FUND, AND THAT HAS TO BE DECREASED ACCORDING TO T HEALTH OF THE OTHER FUNDS. REAL QUICK ON THE
INCOME STATEMENT TERPRISE. WE DO HAVE OPERATING REVENUES OF $355 MILLION. EXPENSES OF $309 MILLION. TOTAL OPERATING INCOME $45 MILLION. WE TREAT THESE AS BUSINESSES. AND GENERALLY, IF YOU DON'T HAVE OPERATING INCOME YEAR OVER YEAR, YOU CANNOT HAVE IT FOR A COUPLE
OF YEARS BUT IT WILL EVENTUALLY AFFECT THE HEALTH OF THE FUND IF YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO GET AN OPERATING INCOME. FINALLY, NET WA $45 MILLION. ALL RIGHT. ONE MORE SET OF FUNDS. THE INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS. THESE FUNDS ARE
DESIGNED MORE AS COST CENTERS FOR THINGS SUC AS I.T. A LOT OF CITY DEPARTMENTS NEED AN I.T. SERVICES. WHEN REVIEWING THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THIS,
YOU DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO BUILD A LARGE NET POSITION BALANCE IN THEM. YOU WANT TO COLLECT JUST ENOUGH REVENUE T PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. WITH THAT IN MIND, $388 MILLION IN TOTAL ASSETS, BUT THE VAST MAJORITY IS CURRENT TO PROVIDE
THOSE SERVES. $220 MILLION OF CURRENT ASSETS. THE LARGEST PART OF THAT IS CASH AT $204 MILLION. LIKE GEORGE SAID IN HIS QUARTER 2 REPORT, THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND IS HOLDING A PORTION OF
THAT. TOTAL OF THE CITY OF $1.1 BILLION, SELF-INSURANCE IS LDING APPROXIMATELY 17% OF OUR CASH FUND BALANCE. BUT IT'S NECESSARY. IF WE GO TO THE LIABILITY SIDE, TOTAL
LIABILITIES OF -- $82 MILLION IS CURRENT. IMPORTANT ASPECT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND, 60 MILLION IN CURRENT LIABILI FOR THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND. $175 MILLION IN ASSETS. SO WHILE THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND DOES
HAVE A NET POSITION DEFICIT, WE ARE ABLE TO PAY OUR CURRENT LIABILITIES THREE TIMES OVER ON THAT. WE STILL HAVE TO KEEP AN EYE ON IT, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE IN A DIRE SITUATION. FINALLY, THE REVENUES AND
EXPENSES. THE INCOME STEMENT. THIS REFLECTS WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE. WE COLLECTED $268 MILLION. WE SPENT $279 MILLION. AFTER WE FACTORED IN SOME NON-OPERATING REVENUES SUCH AS TRANSFERS, WE HAD A LITT BIT OF A LOSS OF
$7 MILLION. BUT NOT SIGNIFICANT. WE DO WANT TO COLLECT ABOUT AS MUCH AS WE HAVE FOR SERVICES IN THAT. AND THIS HELPS REFLECT THAT. SO THAT'S THE THREE MAIN FUNDS. I WANT TO SHOW YOU TWO
MORE STATEMENTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU CAN GET WITHIN THE ACFR. THIS IS THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO ACTION REPORT. WE COLLECTED $37 MILLION LESS THIS IN REVENUES THAN BUDGETED. THERE WAS A QUESTION ACTUALLY EARLIER
ABOUT WHAT THE POLICE HAVE HISTORICALLY. HAVE THEY BEEN OVER OR UNDER BUDGET. IN 2024, THEY WERE ACTUALLY UNDER BUDGET BY $5 MILLION. ALTHOUGH TY'RE CURRENTLY FORECASTED OVER BUDGET BY ABOUT $11 MILLION, THIS IS
HIGHLIGHT OVER THE YEARS THE ACFR CAN SHOW YOU THAT INFORMATION YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. >> CAN WE PAUSE HE FOR ONE MOREQUESTION. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAYNE. >> THANK YOU, VICE PRESIDENT
CHUGHTAI. WE KNOW FOR A FEE WE ARE STATUTORILY REQUIRED TO ONLY DO COST CAPTURE FOR A FEE. BUT THEY'RE OPETING AT A NET POSITIVE POSITION. WHERE IS THAT LINE BETWEEN A SERVICE THAT CAN EXIST WITHIN AN ENTERPRISE FUND
AND SOMETHING THAT IS A FEE THAT HAS TOPERATE AT 95% COST CAPTURE? >> THAT IS A WONDERFUL QUESTION THAT I DON'T HAVE A DIRECT ANSWER FOR YOU CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW. AS FAR AS THE INDIVIDUAL AGREEMENTS RELATED TO WHAT CAN BE UTILIZED OR NOT. NOW WITH THE
ENTER ENTERPRISE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS FOR SAY THEATER ENTERPRISE WHERE WE NEED TO BE MORE PARTICULAR WHETHER OR NO TRANSFERS CAN GO OUT TO FUND OTHER SERVICES. VERSUS LIKE PAING, IT CAN BE CONSIDERED CERTAIN REVENUE GENERATED FROM
ELSEWHERE. >> IT MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEYS. NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT ACTUALLY, FOR CLERKS, IT YOU COULD JUST DOCUMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE FOLLOW-UP. WHAT'S THE DEFINITION -- HOW WOULD I WANT
TO PHRASE THIS QUESTION? WHAT WOULD BE THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT FOR CAPTURI A FEE VERSUS OUR ABILITY TO GENERATE REVENUE IN AN ENTERPRISE FUND? AND THEN WE WON'T PUT YOU ON THE
SPOT F THAT EITHER. >> THANK YOU. >> WONDERFUL. YOU'RE WELCOME TO CONTINUE. >> THANK YOU. AND THEN THE LAST STATEMENT I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT AS PART OF THE ACFR, WE ARE REQUIRED TO ALSO REPORT ON
RELATED ENTITIES. WE CALL THEM COMPONENT UNITS HERE. WE DO HAVE TO REPORT ON MINNEAPOLIS PARK AND RECREATIONS BOARD, MBC, AS WELL AS MEET MINNEAPOLIS. WE DO HAVE A FEW FIDUCIARY FUNDS THAT YOU CAN FIND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR. WITH THAT BEING
SAID, THESE ALL HAVE THEIR OWN AUDIT AS WELL. SO IF YOU'RE VERY INTERESTED IN MEET MINNEAPOLIS, YOU CAN PULL UP THEIR AUDIT AND LEARN MORE. BUT BECAUSE OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP, WE DO HAVE TO DISCLOSE TO GIVE A FULL PICTURE.
SO THAT IS THE THIRD SECTION. NOW WE'RE ON TO THE FOURTH SECTION. NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, CERTAIN LINES REQUIRE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE SUCH AS CASH, CAPITAL ASSETS, LONG-TERM DEBT, PENSION FUNDS AND RISK MANAGEMENT. THESE CAN
HELP REFINE QUESTIONS AND LEARN MORE SUCH AS IT'S USEFUL FOR DIGGG. ON PAGE 63 OF THE ACFR, YOU CAN SEE IT'S DISCLOSED, $620 MILLION IS RELED TO U.S.
TREASURY OBLIGATIONS, T-BILLS. YOU'LL SEE THEY'RE MOSTLY CONSERVATIVE, SAFER INVESTMENTS. AT NO POINT DO YOU SEE CRYPTOCURRENCY. THE SECOND IS
STATISTICAL. DEMOGRAPHIC, OPERATIONAL, FINANCIAL. WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT ONE FINANCIALS STATISTICAL SECTION WITH NET POSITION. BUT I ALSO FOUND ANOTHER ONE THAT MIGHT BE USEFUL, WHICH IS OPERATIONAL.
HOW DO WE DEFINE SUCCESS FOR CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS. HOW DO WE DEFINE SUCCESS IN THE ACFR, OCCUPANCY RATE. IT PLUMMETED TO 15%. AND THEN HAS SINCE RECOVERED SINCE THE PANDEMIC TO
45%. HOW ABOUT 311? WE DEFINE THAT AS ONE OF THE ASPECTS IS RESOLVED IN FIRST CALL. 80% TO NOW 92% 10 YEARS LATER. THIS IS JUST ONE PAGE. I THINK THERE'S TWO MORE PAGES ON OPERATIONAL TRENDS. SO THAT'S THE ACFR.
THAT'S THIS. WE HAVE ONE MORE AUDIT I'M GOING TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON AND THAT IS THE SINGLE AUDIT, THE FEDERAL GRANTS. AS PART OF RECEIVING FEDERAL GRANTS, WE DO NEED TO GO THROUGHHIS AUDIT. THAT FOCUSES PRIMARILY ON DID WE
SPD THE GRANT MONEY TOWARDS THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS STATED? DO WE HAVE INTERNAL CONTROLS TO MAKE SURE IT'S TRACT APPROPRIATELY AND ANY ERRORS ARE QUICKLY CAUGHT. EXPENDITURES IN FEDERAL WARDS AS PART OF THIS AUDIT. IF WE DON'T GO THROUGH
THIS AUDIT, WE WILL NOT G FEDERAL GRANTS. SO WE DO NEED TO CONTINUE THIS AUDIT AND REPORT THIS TOHE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THIS IS A QUICK EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU CAN FIND ON THE CFA, THIS IS ONE PAGE OF MANY. IT JUST
HIGHLIGHTS THAT -- $1.8 MILLION OF WHICH GOES TO OTHER ENTITIES TO SPORT THE GRANT. SO THAT IS A HIGH LEVEL OF THIS ACFR. THERE'S SIGNIFICANTLY MORE, AND I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS MORE IF NEEDED. BUT WH THAT, I DO
WONDER IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THA YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION, MR. LANGE. COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE ANY FURTR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE? I'M NOT SEEING ANY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING IN. I BELIEVE THIS WAS YOUR FIRST TIME PRESENTING TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. IT WENT WELL. THANK YO NEVER MIND, SPOKE TOO SOON. COUNCIL MEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THIS IS SO
INCREDIBLY USEFUL. EVEN THE INFORMATION ON OURECYCLING RATES THAT'S IN HERE, OUR COMPOSTING RATES. SO MUCH GOOD INFORMATION. WE WILL BE DIVING INTO THIS REPORT FORMANY, MANY WEEKS TO COME. I JUST WANTED TO
REQUEST IF IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP MEETING WITH YOU TO UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE COMMCIAL PROPERTY VALUES AND THE WAY THEY FALL IN AND THE WAYS WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET BACK ON A BETTER COURSE OF HAVING ACTUAL VALUE IN OUR TOP
10 PROPERTY TAX PAYERS, WHICH IS REALLY FLIPPED ON ITS HEAD IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. I JUST WANTED TO REQUEST THAT MEETING WITH YOU. >> WELL DONE READING THROUGH THE DETAILS ON THAT. I DID NOT HAVE IT IN MY PRESENTATION. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, AS PART OF THE STATISTICAL SECTION, IT DOES
HAVE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> THANKS. >> AWESOME. WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR THIS PRESENTATION.EEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT REPORT. AND WE HAVE NOW CONCLUDED ALL BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE TODAY. AND IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS, WE
STAND ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYONE.