►
From YouTube: September 29, 2021 Board of Estimate and Taxation
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
D
B
B
B
B
A
C
B
A
A
B
B
E
B
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
do
have
a
comment
that
you
know
we'll
echo
a
lot
of
things
that
I've
said
both
in
our
meetings
as
well
as
the
city
council's
budget
meetings,
which
have
just
become
begun
and
will
continue
for
the
following
couple
of
months
before
we
mark
up
and
adopt
the
annual
budget.
F
F
F
In
addition
to
that,
the
city
self-insurance
fund
has
a
net
financial
position
in
2022,
which
is
the
mayor's
proposed
budget
that
will
be
before
the
council
this
year
of
negative
98
million
dollars.
Now
you
know
and
I'll
explain,
for
the
public
that
that
doesn't
mean
the
fund
balance
is
minus
98
million
dollars.
F
It
means
the
total
financial
risk
to
the
city
if
all
of
our
bills
related
to
police
and
other
lawsuits
can
do.
At
the
same
time,
our
financial
risk
is
98
million
dollars,
but
hasn't
been
budgeted
for
we
would
be
able
to
move
funds
around.
We
would
be
able
to
shift
funding
between
different
borrowing
from
different
funds
within
the
city
enterprise,
but
the
reality
is
that
that
financial
risk
still
exists
and
it
will
need
to
be
pa
payback
over
time,
either
through
increased
property
taxes
or
reduced
spending
on
other
things.
F
It
doesn't
include
potential
settlements
that
we
may
have
to
enter
into
in
the
future
due
to
the
department
of
justice
and
the
state
department
of
human
rights
investigations
into
our
police
department,
which,
in
other
cities,
cost
millions
and
millions
of
dollars
over
years,
it
doesn't
allow
for
as
much
wiggle
room
as
we
usually
have
for
unexpected
expenses
like
pay
increases
for
city
workers,
another
terrible
police,
killing
or
other
shocks
to
our
city's
budget.
So
I
just
feel
that
I
have
to
out
of
transparency
and
responsibility
to
the
taxpayers
of
our
city
voice.
F
I
wish
this
body
would
at
least
fully
fund
the
park
board's
recommendation
for
youth
programming,
a
bigger
2.6
million
dollars
to
invest
in
our
youth.
It
would
be
a
very
small
property
tax
increase
and
it
was
it
is
something
that
I
would
have
enthusiastically
supported.
I
don't
think
there's
support
here
on
this
body
for
that
increase,
and
I
think
it's
a
shame
that
we
would
bypass
a
chance
to
invest
in
the
most
important
thing
that
is
supposedly
wisely
supported,
which
is
investing
in
in
violence,
prevention
and
youth
programming.
F
Although
all
of
this
continues
to
kick
the
can
down,
the
road
sets
up
impossible
choices
for
the
city
council,
which
folks
then
like
stand
back
and
criticize,
and
I'm
afraid
that
this
budget
with
this
levy,
isn't
realistic
for
meeting
our
city's
financial
risks
in
2022
and
beyond.
B
Okay
looks
like
council
member
fletcher
has
got
his
request
to
speak.
A
Thank
you
chair.
We
are
I'll
echo
a
lot
of
what
council
president
bender
said.
I
think
that
the
it
is
concerning-
and
I
I
at
least
thought
about-
should
we
be
thinking
about
raising
the
maximum
levy
to
a
different
level,
to
account
for
some
of
the
unknowns
for
some
of
the
things
with
all
of
the
lawsuits
pending
with
the
potential
for
a
consent
decree
that
could
have
significant
financial
costs
associated
with
what
it's
going
to
require
of
us
should.
A
Should
we
try
to
give
ourselves
a
little
bit
more
padding,
especially
with
the
the
fairly
large
cash
transfer,
we're
having
to
make
to
our
self-insurance
fund,
to
cover
workers,
claims
and
and
other
legal
liability?
A
A
You
know
moving
forward
in
a
way
that
that
that
has
significant
unknowns
ahead
of
us
that
pose
some
real
risk
from
a
variety
of
perspectives,
and
you
know
I
think
it's
worth
giving
voice
to
that.
I
I
think
I
think,
for
myself.
Both
you
know
gauging
the
likely
support
here
and
and
and
the
regressiveness
of
a
property
tax
increase
to
solve
for
those
pretty
significant
systemic
issues,
particularly
with
the
externalities
of
our
system
of
policing.
A
B
Thank
you,
ms
becker.
He
had
a
request.
E
Tax
money
isn't
free
property.
Taxes
are
regressive.
That
means
for
everybody
out
there
listening.
That
means
that
we
tax
the
poor
more
than
the
rich
taxes
are
going
up.
They've
been
going
up
faster
than
inflation
for
about
three
decades
now
and
we
are
making
housing
unaffordable
through
our
high
taxes
and
especially
for
low-income
people,
especially
for
people
up
in
north.
The
taxation
rate
is
already
very
high
for
anyone
who's
on
a
fixed
income,
my
sister's
retired.
E
She
has
a
duplex
up
in
steve,
fletcher's
ward
and
her
taxes
on
her
duplex
are
now
almost
fourteen
thousand
dollars.
If
for
one
it's
her,
and
she
is
a
one
renter
upstairs,
so
I
just
would
remind
everybody
that
this
isn't
this
isn't
monopoly
money
every
time
we
raise
the
taxes,
it
means
somebody
else
gives
up
something.
E
Somebody
else
can't
buy
kids
chew
their
shoes
for
their
kid
go
out
to
dinner
with
somebody
they
love
her,
maybe
make
their
mortgage
payment
pay
the
utilities,
and
so
as
much
as
we
have
a
bazillion
great
ideas
in
government
of
things,
we'd
like
to
do
it's
real
pain
for
real
people
when
the
taxes
go
up,
and
so
I
hope
that
we
remember
that.
E
A
second
thing
I
wanted
to
say-
and
I
said
this
before-
I'm
ecstatic
about
the
park
funding-
the
park
board
had
originally
talked
about
wanting
two
million
dollars
to
increase
programs
for
youth,
and
that
would
be
the
biggest
increase
that
we've
seen
in
a
generation
and
it's
really
exciting
and
it's
really
needed.
Instead,
they
get
2.6
million.
Now
half
of
that
some
property
taxes.
E
The
other
half
is
feathered
through
over
the
next
four
years
that
moves
that
money,
eventually
all
of
it
into
property
taxes
but
uses
some
of
the
federal
money.
And
so
I'm
ecstatic
about
that-
and
I
think
that's
a
great
thing
for
the
park
board
and
I'm
happy
that
I
got
to
in
fact
do
a
tiny
little
bit
of
work
on
that.
E
But
this
can
be
really
transformative
and
we
know
in
the
past
when
we've
done
these
kind
of
programs
they
have
been
so
I'm
quite
excited
about
that
and
kudos
to
the
mayor
kudos
to
the
park.
People,
that's
an
awesome
thing
and
I
guess
the
last
thing
to
to
to
ex
a
little
bit
of
what
board
member
bender
talked
about.
We
have
actuaries,
so
actuary,
sit
and
estimate
risk
and
figure
out
how
much
they
think
that
you
need
to
put
away
based
on
your
risk,
the
and
actuaries
rarely
say.
E
There's
this
much
risk
set
them
aside
all
of
that
money,
because
some
percentage
of
that
will
get
paid
out
and
some
of
it
won't.
If
there
are
issues
with
the
actuary,
then
I
would
hope
that
the
city
brings
in
the
actuary
goes
through
those
assumptions
and
make
sure
that
they're
fully
funded.
E
I
know
that
there
was
no
real
planning,
probably
for
the
size
of
the
settlement
that
the
city
council
chose
to
make,
but
they're
professional
actuaries
who
do
that
kind
of
work,
and
and
traditionally
the
city
has
funded
those
actuarial
needs
and
it
would
be
disconcerting
to
find
out.
The
city
was
no
longer
doing
that
and
that's
it
for
me
right
now.
Thank
you.
D
D
Well,
I
would
really
like
for
the
levy
to
be
fully
funded
properly.
I
think
our
parks
are
uniquely
situated
to
combat
some
of
the
violence
that's
going
on
in
our
city.
I
remember
I
don't
remember
back
then,
because
I
wasn't
living
here,
but
I
remember
reading
about
how
minneapolis
was
during
the
miraculous
time
and-
and
what
I
do
remember
is
when
I
moved
up
here.
I
started
working
in
our
park
system
and
they
were
they
were
extension.
D
There
was
substantial
park
programming
at
the
time
to
help
reduce
some
of
that
violence.
Our
parks
were
open
to
11
12
o'clock
at
night,
sometimes,
and
that
took
a
lot
of
resources
to
do
that,
and
I
don't
know
if
we
can
combat
some
of
this
violence
in
in
a
way
in
a
progressive
way
if
we're
not
fully
funding
our
parks
in
the
proper
way.
D
I
I
thank
the
mayor
for
offering
ap
april
money
april
money
to
fully
fund
them,
but
we
really
like
this,
this
funding
to
be
sustainable
year
after
year,
so
I
would
really
like
for
our
parks
to
be
funded
properly.
I
think
we
can
mitigate
a
lot
of
violence.
That's
going
on
in
our
city
and
and
that's
yeah.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak.
B
Certainly
do
we
others
are
welcome
to
to
jump
in.
If
you
would
like
to
you
know,
I'm
not
asking
you
to
do
it
for
sure,
but
if
you'd
like
to
speak
you
you
certainly
can.
B
Seeing
no
nobody
else,
we,
oh
no,
I
I
see
ms
bender's
computer
hasn't
blown
up
yet
so
she
she
wants
to
get
back
in.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
still
have
36
minutes
before
my
computer
restarts
so
just
to
quickly
two
things
we
do
still
have
the
actuarial
functions
working
for
the
city.
They
didn't
believe
the
amount
of
financial
risk
that
we
are
facing.
So
there's
a
back
and
forth
happening
because
of
the
unusual
nature
of
the
police-related
expenses
that
have
not
been
accounted
for
in
the
past,
because
they
are
so
unprecedented.
F
So,
yes-
and
I
guess
the
the
overall
point
is-
these
are
real
expenses
that
need
a
real
funding
source
to
pay
them
back.
So
every
ptsd
worker
compensation
claim
is
real
money
that
needs
to
be
paid
back
with
real
dollars.
Every
police
related
violence
settlement
is
real
money
that
needs
to
be
paid
back
with
real
dollars
and
those
dollars
come
from
revenue,
which
is
sales,
taxes,
hotel
taxes,
property
taxes,
and
when
we
have
increased
costs,
we
have
to
either
raise
taxes
or
reduce
spending
in
other
areas.
F
So
my
greater
point
is
that
the
increasing
ballooning
costs
of
the
total
value,
the
total
cost
of
our
police
department,
both
in
the
increasing
amount
of
money
in
the
department
itself
and
the
amount
of
police
related
legal
and
financial
settlements
that
are
happening.
It
threatens
both
those
things.
F
The
property
tax
revenue
either
has
to
go
up
or
other
spending
has
to
go
down
over
time.
I
wasn't
sure
if
coaster
board
member
french
wanted
to
make
a
motion,
it
sounded
like
it.
So
I'm
happy
to
help
support
that
if
needed,
I'll
put
I'm
putting
on
my.
I
know
we
have
a
lot
of
chairs
in
the
room,
but
I
often
help
facilitate
that
kind
of
thing
at
council.
So
if
I
can
be
helpful,
I'm
happy
to.
B
E
So,
just
to
clarify,
so
I
understand
so
the
the
proposal
to
give
the
park
board
2.6
million
dollars
is
fully
funded.
It's
just
that.
You
want
to
shift
that
from
federal
grant
money
for
three
years
to
property
taxes,
so
you're
not
changing
the
overall
spending
in
the
budget.
You
just
want
to
shift.
Are
you
shifting
that?
Are
we?
Are
we
adding
to
the
levy
above
or
are.
B
D
F
E
My
understanding
is:
there's
a
it's
in
the
mayor's
budget,
in
fact
that
there
are
line
items
exactly
how
for
the
out
years,
not
this
year,
but
the
next
several
years
of
arpa
money.
How
that
fits
into
the
five-year
plan
am.
I
am
I
incorrect
in
understanding
that,
because
I
thought
that
I
looked
at
this
and
saw
in
that
five-year
plan
that
in
fact
over
time-
oh
there's
the
budget
director.
B
Let's,
let's
ask
mrs
gruber
to
fill
us
in
on
the
the
details
that
she's
been
working
on.
G
Thank
you,
chair
wheeler,
and
I
I
think
that
both
of
you
are
correct,
and
so
let
me
clarify
what's
in
the
mayor's
budget,
so
the
for
the
2022
budget
year,
the
the
mayor's
recommendation
inc
includes
a
1.3
million
dollar
increase
for
the
program.
So
that's
about
half
in
the
future.
In
the
out
years.
In
our
five-year
levy
outlook,
there
are
indeed
incremental
increases
of,
I
believe,
260
thousand
dollars
or
270
thousand
dollars.
G
It's
one
of
those
two
I'll
double
check
here
each
year
to
build
up
to
get
to
that
fully
funded
2.6
million
dollar
proposal
and
council.
President
bender
is
also
correct
in
that
the
proposal
to
backfill
using
arpa
dollars
in
the
next
three
years
is
something
that
the
mayor
has
committed
to,
including
in
his
next
recommendation
for
the
last
chunk
of
planning.
We
have
to
do
about
arpa,
but
he
has
not
released
that
full
plan,
yet
we're
expecting
that
in
the
next
couple
of
months.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Yes,
ms
kruger
is
correct.
We
have
worked
out
the
financial
logistics
to
get
us
to
the
full
2.6
million
dollars
in
an
ongoing
basis,
and
it
is
phased
in
over
several
years
to
ultimately
get
us
there.
In
the
interim,
my
commitment
and
I've
said
this
publicly
I'll
do
so
again
is
to
fully
fund
that
2.6
million
dollars
through
the
combination
of
arpa
and
ongoing
until
we
get
to
the
full
ongoing
2.6.
H
If
that
makes
sense,
and
so
my
my
commitment
is,
there
remain
steadfast
and
it
will
be
there
going
forward
and
importantly
I'll
note
that
this
came
through
an
agreement
that
was
enthusiastically
and
is
enthusiastically
supported
by
the
superintendent
of
the
park
board
and
al
bangor.
This
was
a
a
collective
effort
that
we
came
to
to
get
to
this.
H
You
know
once
in
a
generation
amount
of
funding
that
yes,
indeed
does
fund
youth
recreation
at
an
increase
of
record
levels
that
we
all
ultimately
need,
and,
of
course,
yes,
this
city
budget
also
has
to
accommodate
for
all
of
the
other
needs
that
we
have
at
the
city,
and
it's
through
you
know
not
making
last-minute
changes.
H
It's
through
following
expert
data
and
following
requests,
and
yes
this
was
a
full-fledged
agreement
by
the
super
attendant
of
the
park
board
and
al
bangora,
and
so
that
was
always
our
expectation
and
that's
how
we
want
to
that's
how
I
would
like
to
move
forward
and
so
any
motion
that
changes
the
nature
of
that
agreement.
I
would
encourage
people
to
vote
against.
A
Thank
you,
chair
wheeler,
a
quick
question
for
director
kruver.
Can
you
clarify
the
the
money
as
we
get
to
fully
completing
this
2.6
million?
Is
that
ongoing
money
or
one-time
money,
because
I
I
think
I
got
the
impression
in
another
conversation
that
this
might
tail
off
further
down
the
road.
G
A
Thank
you.
So
if
I
can
sort
of
accurately
sum
up
the
the
choice
in
front
of
us
it's
about
whether
arpa
dollars
should
be
used
for
this
to
ramp
up
to
it
or
whether
the
harper
dollars
could
be
put
to
some
other
use.
If
we
raise
the
levy
by
its
0.39
to
fully
fund
this
in
an
ongoing
way
from
year,
one.
E
G
Yes,
thank
you
councilmember,
fletcher
and
becker.
I
would
say
that,
yes,
it
is
fully
funded
in
the
mayor's
recommended
budget,
including
that
plan
to
direct
to
use
arpa
funds.
This
motion
would
substitute
levy
dollars
for
those
arpa
funds
to
get
to
the
same
total
amount
for
the
park.
Youth
programming.
B
F
B
Okay,
a
motion
has
been
made
and
seconded
we've
had
lots
of
good
discussion
already.
Is
there
any
further
discussion.
A
B
B
E
G
Yeah
sure
I
can
speak
to
that
a
little
bit,
so
our
budget
process
kicks
off
much
earlier
in
the
year
and
involves
an
annual
contract
with
the
actuarial
analysis
with
a
third
party
that
takes
a
look
at
our
spending,
our
historical
data
and
does
that
analysis
we've
included,
I
believe
the
we
have
some
regular
internal
service
charges
that
are
driven
by
that
actuarial
analysis.
We
have
an
additional
transfers
that
I
believe
I
talked
about
in
the
first
couple
times.
G
I've
I've
been
at
this
committee
that
are
to
ensure
that
the
funds
are
in
healthy
positions.
So
I
I
would
be
happy
to
follow
up
with
our
deputy
cfo
lori
johnson
who's,
really,
the
expert
on
the
risk
management
side
of
our
of
the
department
of
finance
for
for
any
more
nitty-gritty
details.
E
I
appreciate
that
I
was
the
I
was
the
budget
person
for
the
internal
service
funds
at
one
point
so
know
an
excruciating
amount
about
this.
I
understand
that.
E
A
Thank
you
show
wheeler
and
just
and
and
just
to
speak
on
that
a
little
bit
I
I
do
want
to
to
emphasize,
and
I
think
the
reason
that
that
that
I'm
not
moving
something
more
substantial
for
a
discussion
is
that
I
think
that
there
we
are
within
the
guidelines
on
the
fund
balances,
but
we
are
spending
them
down
in
in
order
to
make
this
budget
work,
which
is
the
kind
of
move
that
you
make.
If
you
think
2021
was
the
bad
year
and
then
things
are
getting
better
in
2022.
A
and
given
the
unknowns.
I
I
think
that
the
you
know
there's
some
reason
to
think
that
that
might
not
be
the
case.
Actuarial
work
is
important
and
it
gives
us
a
lot
of
feedback
about
what
to
expect
in
the
budget.
A
It
also
is
a
lagging
indicator
in
many
cases,
and
the
the
the
primary
example
from
the
last
couple
of
years
is
that
the
actuaries
told
us
to
treat
police
liability
settlements
as
an
anomaly
following
the
justine
damon
settlement
and
are
only
now
starting
to
look
at
the
frequency
of
police
settlements
and
saying,
actually,
we
need
to
adjust
our
internal
fees
into
the
self-insurance
fund
from
npd,
because
we're
seeing
this
as
something
that
actually
probably
has
some
some
ongoing
expectation
of
being
an
expense.
A
And
so
so
the
I
think
the
concerns
that
we
are
raising
are
are
more
a
question
of.
Are
there
things
that
we
know
and
understand
that
don't
fit
within
the
professional
framework
of
what
actuaries
are
supposed
to
look
at
when
they're
doing
their
accounting
work,
but
that
we
know
and
understand
about
the
world
and
about
the
budget
and
about
how
things
are
working
in
our
city?
A
And
to
my
to
my
knowledge
and
we've
been
pressing
on
this
question
quite
a
lot
with
with
budget
staff
on
the
council
side.
Lately,
the
the
the
fund
balances
are
still
at
the
range
that
is
recommended,
but
we
are
going
to
be
to
a
point
where,
when
unexpected
things
come
up,
it'll
be
hard
to
maintain
those
ranges.
If
we,
if
we
have
to
start
dipping
into
those
funds
a
second
time
mid-year,
as
as
less
expected,
things
come
up
so
wanted
to
share
that
perspective
on
it.
A
But
I
think
to
your
point
in
terms
of
what
the
actuaries
have
told
us
and
in
terms
of
what
our
internal
policies
are,
which
are,
I
think,
good
responsible
policies
about
the
fund
is
to
maintain
my
understanding.
Is
that
we're
still
maintaining
those
balances,
just
not
with
nearly
as
much
wiggle
room
if
we
start
to
have
to
make
adjustments
if
there
is,
for
example,
a
consent
decree
or
faster
than
expected,
rising
labor
costs
or
any
of
the
other
things
that
feel
like
legitimate
possibilities
for
2022.
B
Okay,
now
before
we
go
any
further,
I
have
got
a
question
that
I'm
going
to
ask
of
our
staff
person,
tony
sterl,
who
we're
really
grateful
to
have
here.
We
just
had
a
vote
where
it
was
three
to
three
and
then
the
resolution
didn't
pass
and
I
advocated
years
ago
to
add
a
seventh
person
to
the
board
of
estimated
taxation.
So
we
would
not
have
those
sorts
of
things
happening,
but
it
was
deemed
okay
to
stay
with
six
members.
We
used
to
have
seven,
but
the
library
board
left.
B
So
we
have
six
and
we
can
lock
it
down
in
a
3-3
vote
and
that
will
then
mean
that
the
resolution
that
is
before
us
will
not
pass,
and
I
want
I.
I
guess
I
want
to
ask
tony
to
explain
to
all
of
us
you
as
our
staff
person
and
who
have
been
working
really
hard
on
on
all
these
things,
to
explain
what
the
sort
of
the
process
is
and
and
what
we
might
face.
If
we
have
a
locked
six
three
three
vote,
tony
sure.
I
Yes,
thank
you,
president
wheeler
and
and
board
members.
I'm
I'm
happy
to
take
a
stab.
So
if
this
body
is
unable
to
agree
on
a
levy
resolution
tonight,
we
would
then
be
unable
to
formally
certify
our
tax
levy
with
hennepin
county
by
the
due
date
of
september
30th,
which
is
tomorrow.
I
If
that
were
to
occur,
we
would
then
per
state
statute
default
to
last
year's
levy
of
395.8
million,
perhaps
just
briefly
for
some
context.
That
would
represent
a
reduction
of
21.6
million
in
property
taxes
as
compared
to
what's
in
the
mayor's
proposed
2022
budget.
I
Thank
you,
president
wheeler.
I
should
clarify
if
this
were.
If
this
resolution
were
to
fail
and
another
resolution
were
not
to
pass,
then
yes,
that
would
be
an
accurate
statement.
However,
if
this
resolution
were
to
fail,
another
resolution
could
be
brought
forward
until
a
resolution
is
passed
by
this
board
at
the
meeting
today.
B
All
right,
thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
before
us
before
we
move
to
a
vote
on
the
measure
that
is
before
us.
B
D
A
B
B
Well,
what
an
interesting
meeting
I
I
want
to
thank
everybody
for
being
here
and
for
speaking
their
their
truth
in
their
mind.
I
I
think
we
can
feel
pretty
good
that
we
we
have
done
our
duty
as
as
a
board
of
estimate
and
taxation.
Now
this
goes
to
the
council
and
they
can
spend
up
to
the
levy
that
we
have
approved.
B
They
can
always
spend
less,
but
they
can
spend
up
to
that
levy,
and
that
is
one
of
the
two
big
responsibilities
that
we
have
as
well
as
all
the
capital
bonding.
I
think
we
have
got
everything
done
before
us.
Our
our
business
is
concluded
without
objection,
we
do
stand
adjourned.