The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026.05.11 CCM REGULAR05/11/26 -1- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MAY 11, 2026 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor April Graves at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor April Graves, Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Teneshia Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were Interim City Manager Daren Nyquist, Interim Deputy City and Public Works Director Liz Heyman, Community Development Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong Thao, Interim Finance Director Dan Tinter, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar. Councilmember Kris Lawrence-Anderson was absent. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM Mayor April Graves opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum and reviewed the Rules of Decorum. Julie B. asked about the water meters and if the broken water meters are homeowners, or if any of them are businesses, rentals, or apartments, and if that has been looked into. She asked if the Council knew if there were any language barriers for the households that have broken meters, and what attempts have been made to ensure that they are getting information and language that is accessible to them. She added that the assessors should have access to the language line, so if they are out communicating with residents who may not have English as a first language, the Assessor can ensure that information is made available to residents via those methods. Julie B. noted that a statement was previously made regarding Canopy about the Police coming to all of those calls, but the Police do not come to all those calls. Calls are triaged through 911, and the appropriate distance response is dispatched. The whole point of it is so the Police are not having to respond to all of the calls, and people can have a different level of response available that does not necessitate the Police coming. She stated she is very thankful for that service, both here and in Minneapolis, and has 05/11/26 -2- DRAFT seen individuals she serves directly who have utilized it on more than one occasion, and it has been a valuable resource for them. She added that she is happy to see mental health being recognized. Julie B. continued that the City used to do No Mow May, but there has been some shifting around that, and as someone who likes to foster pollinators in her yard and beekeepers, the City needs to be mindful about how they are controlling weeds because putting chemicals on plants is inviting pollinators to a poison buffet. Mayor Graves noted that there are businesses included in the water meter change-out, and at the previous Council discussion, Staff let the Council know that the biggest users will be targeted first. The comments made around language barriers are really important, and there is hope that translation services will be part of how the City does the work on the meters. Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to close the Informal Open Forum. Motion passed unanimously. 5. INVOCATION Mayor Graves recited a poem she wrote in 2023 called "Rebel for Love." "Feeling so at peace with love and abundance, no need to doubt whether it is to be or not. Focused on the moment, what is. Time can never be fought because God never sleeps. Though we may weep and reap what we've sown. Caught in the cycle of mystery, the unknown. An enlightened frequency of understanding truth, commanding your actions on this earth, grounded in divinity, death to birth, birth to death, pause. Inhale, exhale. Take a belly breath. Release into bliss. Wisdom once missed, as you dismiss your true potential. Confused, stuck all up in the mental left, the spiritual forgotten own your legacy, begotten from kings and queens, Gods and Goddesses that cleaned up and made messes, mistakes, and successes are what this existence is about, not money, status, prestige. Worried who's got clout, who's got the juice? It's always Ja. Those connected to the most high are maximally manifested into the collective lifting generations, igniting revelations and elevations of the consciousness, awakened anew, renewing the roots buried deep. Listen, our ancestors speak in the wind in the rain through the joys through the pain. It's not insane to be a rebel for love, one, and unconditional in a world that is so positional. It takes courage to care when desperation becomes traditional, but even in the darkest moments, there's always something additional to be found. A diamond crafted under pressure, small in size but huge radiating the strength of the universal spirit who feels it, knows it, takes heed, and revere it." 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA. Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Moore seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the minutes as stated during the Study Session, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. April 27, 2026 – Study Session 05/11/26 -3- DRAFT 2. April 27, 2026 – Regular Session 6b. LICENSES GARBAGE HAULERS Ace Solid Waste, Inc. 6601 McKinley Street Northwest Ramsey, MN 55303 Aspen Waste 2951 Weeks Avenue Southeast Minneapolis, MN 55414 Curbside Waste PO Box 43067 Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Darling Ingredients 9000 382nd Avenue Blue Earth, MN 56013 Suburban Waste MN LLC 7125 126th Street West #500 Savage, MN 55378 LOWER-POTENCY HEMP EDIBLES RETAILER REGISTRATION Brooklyn Center Municipal Liquor Store #1 1350 Shingle Creek Crossing Centerbrook Golf Course 5500 Lilac Drive Premier Tobacco 6930 Brooklyn Boulevard Cloud 9, Brook Center Plus LLC 615 66th Avenue North MECHANICAL API HVAC Services 7450 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie 55344 Air Express, Inc. PO Box 490400 Blaine 55449 Anderson’s Residential Heating & A/C 1638 County Road 10, #34 Spring Lake Park 55432 Binder Heating & Air Conditioning 222 Hardman Avenue South St. Paul 55075 Bonfes Plumbing Heating & 455 Hardman Avenue South Air Conditioning St. Paul 55075 05/11/26 -4- DRAFT Blue Ox Heating and Air 5720 International Parkway New Hope, 55428 Burnsville Heating & A/C 3451 West Burnsville Parkway, #120 Burnsville 55337 Damyans Heating and Cooling LLC 2240 Chippewa Road Medina 55340 Genz-Ryan Plbg & Htg Co 2200 Highway 13 West Burnsville 55337 Glowing Hearth and Home 5391 12th Avenue East Shakopee 55379 Harris St. Paul Inc. 909 Montreal Circle St. Paul 55102 Hearth & Home Technologies LLC 7571 215th Street West Lakeville 55044 Heating & Cooling Two Inc. 18550 County Road 81 Maple Grove 55369 Hoffman Refrigeration & Heating 5660 Memorial Avenue North Stillwater 55082 Marsh Heating & A/C 6248 Lakeland Avenue North Brooklyn Park 55428 MN Plumbing and Home Services 21017 Heron Way #105 Lakeville 55044 Midwest Maintenance & Mech 750 Pennsylvania Avenue South Golden Valley 55426 Newage Appliance Repair Service 2345 Skillman Avenue East North St. Paul 55109 Northern Heating & A/C Inc. 9431 Apline Drive Northwest Ramsey 55303 Professional Mechanical Services 19640 200th Avenue Northwest, #9 Big Lake 55309 05/11/26 -5- DRAFT RTS Mechanical LLC 795 Tower Drive Hamel 55340 SIGN HANGER’S Resolution Graphics, Inc. 3770 Dunlap Street North Arden Hills 55112 Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. 8786 West 35W Service Drive Blaine 55449 Topline Advertising 16307 Aberdeen Street Northeast Ham Lake 55304 RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE IV– six-month license) 5528 Humboldt Avenue North JAY DEE HENZLIK 5700 Colfax Avenue North Elijah Yarpah INITIAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 5307 Newton Avenue North Moses S Gibson 5601 Dupont Avenue North Damien Francis Morgan 5603 Bryant Avenue North Dwayne Meier RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 6342 June Avenue North D A Swartout Jr/ t L Swartout RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 1510 69th Avenue North JULIUS ASVELT COCHRAN 4201 Lakeside Avenue North, #101 MEKUANINT TAYE RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 819-21 55th Avenue North Stephanie Statz 3612 Commodore Drive Ih2 Property Illinois Lp 3815 52nd Avenue North Property Management Mn Llc 5421 Lyndale Avenue North Zoe & Brett R Hildreth 6c. COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS 05/11/26 -6- DRAFT 6d. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 35-4013 (ALLOWED USE TABLE) OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING CEMETERIES IN THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICT AND CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 35-4409 (TEMPORARY USES AND STRUCTURES) – SECOND READING 6e. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2026-13 POLICE STATION 2026 ROOF REPLACEMENT 6f. UPDATED 2026 FEE SCHEDULE 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING AND ACKNOWLEDGING MAY 2026 AS MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH Mayor Graves read aloud a proclamation declaring May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month in the City of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Moore seconded to accept a proclamation acknowledging May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month. Motion passed unanimously. 7b. RESOLUTION DECLARING MAY 17-23, 2026, NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, AND RECOGNIZING MAY 16, 2026, AS BIG WHEELS & BIG WORKS DAY AT BROOKLYN CENTER PUBLIC WORKS Mayor Graves read aloud a resolution declaring May 17-23, 2026, National Public Works Week in the City of Brooklyn Center, and recognizing May 16, 2026, as Big Wheels & Big Works Day at Brooklyn Center Public Works. Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to adopt a RESOLUTION declaring May 17-23, 2026, as National Public Works Week in the City of Brooklyn Center, and Recognizing May 16, 2026, as Big Wheels & Big Works Day at Brooklyn Center Public Works. Motion passed unanimously. 7c. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MAY 10 THROUGH MAY 16, 2026, AS POLICE WEEK AND MAY 15, 2026, AS POLICE OFFICERS MEMORIAL DAY Mayor Graves read aloud a resolution declaring May 10-16, 2026, as Police Week and May 15, 2026, as Police Officers' Memorial Day. 05/11/26 -7- DRAFT Councilmember Kragness moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to adopt a RESOLUTION declaring May 10-16, 2026, as Police Week and May 15, 2026, as Police Officers' Memorial Day. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Moore thanked Mayor Graves for reading out all the proclamations, and stated there was a previous discussion about being all-inclusive or not recognizing all, and believed it is also Asian and Pacific Islander Heritage month. She stated she appreciates Mayor Graves reading all these proclamations, but does not want to leave anyone out. Mayor Graves stated that hopefully, it can be on the next agenda meeting, if it is not already. Councilmember Kragness stated that May is also Jewish and American Heritage month, as well as Norwegian Constitution Day, and World Day for Cultural Diversity. Councilmember Moore added that maybe the Council can consider whether they should acknowledge all of them, or none, because it is being put in the quarterly newsletter on the first page. Mayor Graves stated that the Council just has to be diligent about seeing what might be left out and will continue reading them because the recognition is important to keep morale high and keep people feeling included and seen. 7d. FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN Mr. Nyquist noted that Dan Tinter, who has been acting as the Interim Financial Director from Ehlers, will be walking through the five-year financial management plan, which is a critical tool going forward for the organization. He noted this is also the opening bell for the 2027 budget process, and Mr. Tinter and his team at Ehlers have done a great job putting this together and will be revisited every year during the budget process. Mr. Tinter noted that he was there to discuss the 10-year financial management plan and talk about the various findings and recommendations on a fund basis. A financial management plan is a multi-year fiscal plan, and in this iteration, for this first thrust, all property tax-supported funds are included. The City does maintain certain enterprises and certain public utilities that are not supported by property taxes, and those will be discussed in a separate presentation later this year. Since the Council typically takes action on the property tax levy by September 30 of each year, it is for the proposed property taxes. The financial management plan focuses on property tax- supported funds or funds that receive support from the general fund, since the General Fund's principal funding source is property taxes. There will be a few other funds in the presentation that do have transfers in from the General Fund that will be discussed because ultimately, that does impact the property tax levy. 05/11/26 -8- DRAFT Mr. Tinter continued that any recent or pending City Council action should be incorporated into the financial management plan. This includes strategic planning decisions, major contracts or commitments, and adopted plans such as management plans, transition plans, and previous improvement plans, as noted on the presentation slide. As part of this effort, any outstanding debt the counsel currently services related to capital projects, as well as any future debt that may be contemplated over the next 10 years as a result of those various plans, will be addressed. He added that he would model potential tax changes over time to provide estimates of property tax impacts for a median-valued residential home within the City of Brooklyn Center. Mr. Tinter explained that ultimately, the financial management plan is based on a series of assumptions that are stress-tested both for the current fiscal year and over the next decade. This allows the Council to better understand the organization’s current financial position and its long- term financial outlook as future decisions are made. He noted that the benefit of this process is that, as additional decisions are made, as mentioned by Mr. Nyquist, the financial plan can be updated and show in real time how those decisions may affect the organization’s financial position both today and over the next decade. Mr. Tinter noted that it is important to remember that the plan is not set in stone, and is a series of assumptions and a snapshot in time. As the Council makes decisions, projects move forward, contractors are paid, and those assumptions will change, and the financial plan and management plan will update accordingly. Typically, for an organization with the kinds of financial complexities that will be discussed tonight, these plans are updated annually. He noted that the council may be asking why go through this process and spend time planning for both the present and the next 10 years, but there are several important advantages to financial management planning. Most importantly, Councilmembers, Staff, and the public often have great ideas for programs, projects, and initiatives, but the next question is always how the City will pay for them. The financial management plan helps answer that question by identifying the resources that would be required to accomplish a specific activity, program, or project. As a result, the plan helps identify potential funding sources for those priorities. It also helps identify available assets and fund balances that could support projects or programs. In some cases, internal resources may be sufficient; in others, external resources may be needed. The financial plan is a useful tool for determining those options. He added that the Financial management plan also helps manage expectations, as various programs and project plans are developed, the financial management plan helps explain when projects can realistically occur and why they need to happen in certain years from a financial perspective. This improves communication not only with the community but also with external stakeholders such as state legislatures, state agencies that may provide grants, credit rating agencies evaluating the City's creditworthiness for bond issuances, and private organizations that may partner with the city on programs and activities. These groups want to see that the city has a strong understanding of its current and future financial position. Mr. Tinter added that, from his perspective as a former Finance Director, another major benefit is that the process improves the annual budgeting process, and as Mr. Nyquist mentioned, he will discuss several issues related to the City's financial condition and hopefully receive feedback from the Council. When there are more detailed budget discussions later this year, none of these ideas will come as a surprise; instead, they will be a natural continuation of the conversation that they 05/11/26 -9- DRAFT will have this evening. He noted that strong financial planning helps reduce reactivity and unpredictable situations, and the Council will already know what financial levers to pull from and what resources are available. He stated that he is working with a community right now that had a windstorm last year, and it cost $700,000 to clean up, and that gave them a good sense of where to pull those resources from and how to respond to those crises. Mr. Tinter stated that when compiling the financial management plan, he reviewed a number of different funds, all of which are supported by property taxes. He noted that he will discuss most of them in some level of detail this evening; however, he will not spend significant time discussing the special assessment construction fund, the employee retirement benefit fund, or the currently active debt service funds supported by property taxes. The primary reason is that those funds are functioning well, and there are no significant concerns or policy issues that require council discussion tonight. The other funds, however, do contain several issues and considerations that he would like to review with the council and receive feedback on. That said, it is important to emphasize that he did review the debt service funds, the employee retirement fund, and the special assessment construction fund as part of this process. He stated that there were also conversations between him and staff to ensure that everyone was comfortable with how those funds are currently operating. As part of developing a long-term financial management plan, he and his team had to make a series of assumptions, and there are several key assumptions that are particularly important to note. He noted that most importantly, he must estimate future increases in operating and project expense expenditures, as well as projected increases in external or third-party revenue sources, as shown on the presentation slide. These assumptions are that there will be a four percent year-over- year increase in operating expenses due to the current inflationary environment. He noted that the other assumption is that there will be a two percent annual increase in non-property tax-supported revenues. When looking at those assumptions, the model projects expenses growing faster than revenues, and the counsel might ask why he would structure the model that way. The reason is that they intentionally take a conservative approach. He stated he would rather assume that expenses will outgrow revenues than create overly obvious optimistic projections. From a budgeting and financial planning perspective, it is much easier to come back later and say that expenses were lower than anticipated or revenues were higher than expected. The reverse is a much more challenging conversation to have. As a result, the recommendations are built around a conservative financial model design to minimize surprises. Ultimately, one of the most important principles in working with elected bodies is to avoid creating unnecessary surprises and ensure the council is not put in a position where difficult decisions must be made, simply because it got some of the math wrong. Mr. Tinter continued that the presentation references maintaining an unrestricted general fund balance between 50% and 52% that assumption is built into the financial plan because it reflects an adopted policy position of the City Council. He noted that he is also assuming no additional full-time equivalent FTE positions; in other words, he assumes that the current staffing levels supported by property tax-supported funds remain consistent throughout the duration of the model. If staffing levels are adjusted in the future, those changes would naturally affect the projections within the plan. In addition, while Staff is in the early stages of developing the next capital improvement plan CIP the discussion tonight is based on the 2026 CIP that was adopted by the council late last year alongside the certified property tax levy and annual budget. Of course, there 05/11/26 -10- DRAFT will be changes to the CIP over time as there are every year, but long-term financial planning requires them to begin with a defined set of assumptions. One important point to emphasize is that when Ehlers prepares a financial management plan, they do not take a formal position on whether the city should or should not pursue a particular project, program, or expenditure. Decisions about city operations, programs, and priorities are ultimately the responsibility of the city manager and the City Council. He added that his role is to identify the revenue requirements necessary to support the activities and priorities established by the city. If the council determines that certain revenue requirements are not acceptable or should change, then the discussion naturally becomes how the organization's activities, programs, or projects may also need to change. He noted that he does not make policy recommendations on those issues and that distinction is important to keep in mind throughout this discussion. Looking ahead over the next 10 years, the City currently has over $161 million in implementation projects supported by approximately $31 million in projected debt issuance over the next decade. Most notably between 2026 and 2029, the City is not planning to issue any additional property tax-supported debt beginning in 2030 and continuing through the end of the projection. Some additional debt is anticipated primarily to support planned street projects. One item worth highlighting relates to previous discussions regarding the potential debt financing of certain fire truck acquisitions through the central garage internal service fund. For purposes of this financial plan and based on the current understanding of the Central Garage funds' financial position, he assumed those fire trucks could potentially be purchased with cash rather than through debt issuance. He noted that he will discuss that in greater detail when he reviews the individual fund itself, but wanted to mention it now because that may look different from prior Council discussions regarding equipment certificates and debt financing. He noted that he did not forget about the equipment certificates, but modeled them differently based on the fund's current financial condition. Mr. Tinter continued with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) fund. The City currently levies at or near the statutory maximum property tax amount for this fund. Interestingly, the City then transfers the balance of those revenues into the economic development authority EDA fund, which he will discuss later on. At this time, there are no other significant planned activities within the HRA fund itself. As a result, the fund maintains only a modest balance of approximately $8,000 annually beginning in 2024 and continuing through the projection period ending in 2036. The fund's primary function is simply to transfer revenues to the EDA fund, and a formal target fund balance for the HRA fund has not been established. He added that when looking at the EDA fund its primary funding source is that transfer from the HRA fund since the City has not recently undertaken HRA specific activities one option the council could consider would be levying directly into the EDA fund rather than continuing to levy through the HRA fund, particularly since the HRA fund itself is not currently being used for any related HRA activities and is transferring all the money into the EDA fund and then the EDA fund is actually creating the outlays. The option is to either levy an EDA levy, which the City could do under the statutory authority under Minnesota state law, or they could opt to increase the General Fund levy and transfer that money into the EDA fund. From a levy perspective, it would basically be a net-zero change. The HRA levy would go down, the General Fund levy would go up, and then money would be deposited into the HRA fund. Then, ultimately, the HRA fund would not be needed because it doesn't maintain a significant balance, there are no long-term plans for it, and the balance of the revenue it does collect gets transferred to another fund. He noted that the way it is currently 05/11/26 -11- DRAFT done requires extra accounting work to keep these accounts and perform the transfers between the two. When there are transfers of this nature, it is generally a little less transparent because the City is levying a tax, depositing it into a fund, and then transferring it to another fund as opposed to levying a tax, depositing it into the fund that is going into to create the costs associated with that fund. This is not to say that the City cannot do that, and it is not to say that cities, counties, and special tax insurance do not do it, but it is generally considered less transparent overall when transferring money between funds. It is an extra layer that members of the public, or any third party, have to go through to figure out what exactly is going on. Mr. Tinter continued that the EDA fund itself has some challenges. It maintains a structural imbalance, meaning it has ongoing expenditures that exceed ongoing revenues. From 2024 through the projection period of 2036, the ending fund balance actually goes down because it is not raising enough current revenues to support current expenditures, and that deficit has to come from somewhere, and in the construction edition of this fund, it ultimately comes from the fund balance reserve or savings account. So this account has been taking money out of the EDA savings account to meet those ongoing activities, which is why it has a structural imbalance, because it is not functioning as it should. If these costs were to remain consistent over time, and adjusted for inflation, given what he has seen with the property tax levy, beginning in 2030 to maintain the balance of this fund, the City would have to start transferring money into the fund at around $250,000 per year for the total projection period ending in 2036, with a total of an additional $1.75 million transferred in. The nice thing is that the fund does remain above its fund balance requirement, and the City does have time to resolve this issue. The City is going to continue spending down the fund balance in 2026, as the EDA supports its planned activities as authorized by the Council, but there is wiggle room before this fund balance becomes more worrisome, and money would have to be transferred in from other funds. While this fund needs to be addressed, it is not something that needs to be solved as part of this budget year, but the Council should start taking an active interest and consider modifying it in the future. Mr. Tinter continued that the target fund balance of the EDA fund, cash flows, lows, and planned activities are all things that Ehlers looks at when figuring out what the fund can support while maintaining a certain balance. When putting together the target fund balance, the fund should be able to maintain enough money to keep going and address any concerns or unforeseen circumstances with enough resources to engage in a more thoughtful long-term financial management planning. These target balances can be changed, but the main idea is that if the fund dips below that target fund balance, it should be a yellow light to exercise caution, and conversations should start with the Council about whether or not that is a good thing, and what they are comfortable with. This should help foster the Council to begin financial planning conversations before the fund gets to zero, or the fund becomes negative, and the means to adjust it become more challenging and urgent. This allows the Council to have more time to make those course corrections if necessary, hopefully, a few years in advance. Mr. Tinter noted that the Capital Improvement Fund, the primary funding source for this, is local government aid received from the state of Minnesota, and almost $5.1 million in grants that are currently planned for use for Community Center improvements that will cost around $5.3 million in 2027. This fund is funding a large project primarily through external funding, and the City 05/11/26 -12- DRAFT should be congratulated on accomplishing a very expensive project with external funds. Right now, those projects are totaling around $23 million in total capital outlays, and this fund does not include the Public Works Garage project which is estimated at $45 million but this does not impact the Public Works Garage itself and the fund's projection because at those amounts, the City would likely finance it with debt and not cash through property tax levy related to those property tax supported positions. Since the Public Works Garage would support the operations of the Utility funds, there would be some utility outlay as well to support that debt. He added that even though the Public Works Garage project is not part of this fund, and it is a $45 million project that is a lot to ignore, it does not actually impact the long-term projection that much, because the City will raise other revenues to deliver that project if and when the City decides to do it. Mr. Tinter noted that the other thing to look at when establishing a target fund balance for the Capital Improvement Plan fund is that the fund had more money in it, and working with Public Works, he has identified about $520,000 in annual placeholders starting in 2027. One thing that the Council may notice is that the City has been operating under a perception that some of these funds did not have as much money as they, in fact, have. When doing the longer-term financial analysis and modeling out the anticipated revenues against the projected expenditures, it was realized that in some of the funds, there is more capacity to deliver projects. In conversations with the Public Works Department, Staff were aware that several Capital projects have either been delayed or, in some cases, downsized in order to meet the budget targets, much like any community, and this is not unique to Brooklyn Center. There are a number of deferred maintenance projects that require certain Capital outlays, and Ehlers has programmed that the City would start spending potentially an additional $500,000 a year to accomplish some of those projects. From a Council perspective, this will all be discussed as part of the development of the annual budget and the next iteration of the CIP and the CIP's over the next handful of years as the City identifies projects for these additional resources. With that in mind, and knowing the backlog of work that has to happen that could be supported by this fund, Ehlers has assumed for the modeling process that the City would spend it now. The nice thing is, even if the Council chose to spend that additional $520,000 looking at the targeted fund balance for this fund, at the end of 2036, the fund still remains above that targeted fund balance threshold, which is a really positive thing for this fund. Overall, this means that the Council could choose to spend an additional $500,000 on Capital projects related to this fund, and the fund would remain financially solvent over the next decade. The only thing to keep in mind is this fund is primarily funded by local government aid which is not a source that the Council or the community has any self-determination over and it relies on a complicated formula that is set by the state legislature and every year, the state has to allocate funds to be distributed by that formula and there have been years that the state has cut back significantly on local government aid. In fact, after the financial crisis, the legislature went back through a specialized legal process and decertified local government aid mid-year to solve the state's budget crisis. This does not mean that the funding by government aid is a good or bad thing; it is just a risk that the Council should be aware of when talking about these additional projects. Hopefully, the Council will begin the CIP process after the legislative session ends, so the Council will have good information about funding and could pivot accordingly. He added that looking out over a 10-year period, this is something to remember because the fund could go up or down, and because of that risk, the Council may have to make different choices as part of their annual budget development process related to the CIP. 05/11/26 -13- DRAFT Mr. Tinter explained that, looking at the City’s Municipal State Aid (MSA) fund, which is funded primarily by intergovernmental aid related to grants, there is some debt that does not support the activities of this fund. There is about $33 million in total capital outlays planned over the next 10 years, so the City is averaging $3 million in street reconstruction projects that are supported by the Municipal State Aid allocation from the state. The fund does have a typical healthy fund balanced cycle. Between 2022 and 2026, there is a period of savings and spending from 2027 to 2029, and it rebounds from 2030 to 2034. In healthy, well-functioning capital project funds, there are periods of spending and saving, and in some of those years when the balance goes down, the fund models some additional debt at about $4.7 million in 2031 and $2.5 million in 2035. For a fund with this level of activity, that is a relatively modest level of debt over a 10-year period. In that way, the City is delivering on the projects that are in the MSA fund with the cash flows that are available and only taking on a relatively modest amount of debt at the local government level to deliver the capital plans that are associated with this project. In the year 2036, the fund is above the target fund balance that has been established in this capital project fund with a five-year rolling average, and that is primarily because the capital outlays that any City has county school district special taxing jurisdiction to use may have years where it spends millions and years where it spends hundreds of thousands. This fund does support both capital and maintenance activities, and there is a 50 percent target because there are operations associated with this fund related to street maintenance. The other thing is that there is no self-determination over municipal state aid data, and Ehlers has assumed that municipal state aid data allocation from the state over the next 10 years would remain flat. So much like local government aid, if there is more or less funding, the Council would make different decisions over the next 10 years. That being said, the fund will likely outperform this projection, and it is fairly conservative, so he feels good about how this fund is functioning and that it can deliver about $3 million of projects for the community of this size every single year. Mr. Tinter moved into the Street Reconstruction Fund, which has a primary funding resource from franchise fees and debt. As a reminder, franchise fees are fees that the Council imposes by Ordinance on electric and gas utilities that operate in the City's rights of way or on public property. The theory being that these private and semi-public organizations profit from using the City property to deliver their electric and gas utilities to the public, so the public ought to get paid something for allowing the use of property for companies to profit. The City has established these fees, much like other organizations that have franchise fees to support street reconstruction projects. Other cities use similar types of fees for parks or buildings. Due to this funding source, the fund has about $73 million in total capital outlay over the next 10 years, which is supported by the better part of $24 million in bond issuance, which is typical for street reconstruction funds. Looking out over the next 10-year period, issuing somewhere between $2 to $3 million dollars per year to support street activities for a City this size is fairly reasonable, and one bond rolls off another can be added on. He added that the debt load for this fund remains relatively consistent, but for changes in project costs and inflation in capital projects over time, it works well now because it is debt-financed in this way for about a third of the capital projects. The fund does have an annual deficit between 2027 and 2036, but again, by the end of 2036, it remains above the target fund balance requirement. Similar to the previous fund, with the five-year rolling average of 50 percent of the capital outlay, it does dip below and get close to the target fund balance, and 05/11/26 -14- DRAFT generally, that is okay. The third-party agencies, like a credit rating agency, understand that if the fund has resources, and the City is going to use them to deliver programs and services for the public, and at some point in time, the Council may need to spend some of the balance and replenish those balances in a reasonable time frame defined as three to five years after going below that fund balance requirement. This can be revisited during annual budget meetings with the Council to decide when that target fund balance will be returned in a reasonable time and what the Council is comfortable with. Mr. Tinter explained the Capital Reserve Emergency Fund, which has an established fund balance requirement determined by the Council and is designed to support unforeseen capital costs that happen in the community. The Council has adopted a policy that states that $1 million should be maintained in this fund, and that it has to be replenished whenever it is below that requirement. This fund did have a large outlay in 2023, and that created a negative fund balance in the total of just under $630,000 for the fiscal year ending in 2024. From 2025 through the budget year of 2026, the City has not made an effort to replenish the fund. This goes back to looking at a financial management plan, and Ehlers honors what the Council has adopted, and designed the fund to return to the stated balance requirement and make recommendations to make that happen. He stated that his team looked at a reasonable time frame to replenish this fund and right now, that is over a five- year period beginning in 2027, with levying about $260,000 in property taxes proceeding through 2031. Additionally, the City will have some bond funds that mature in 2025, 2026, and 2027 and it is ordinary for those funds to maintain a little excess balance and that is for special assessments that have interest attached to them so the City earns a little money on that, and the state of Minnesota requires the City to levy 105 percent of the principal interest the City has on their bonds for coverage sake, so the City does not have to dip into other funds. When those amounts get expressed over a decent period of time, those debt service funds tend to accumulate a balance. He noted that Ehlers is recommending using those balances as bonds expire and are paid off by the City, rolling them into this fund in order to replenish it consistently with the Council's state goals. This means the Council would levy those $260,000 annually and roll in $340,000 approximately, and by 2031, the fund would have $1 million, and the Council could fund any unanticipated circumstances or outright emergencies. Mr. Tinter noted that the City does not necessarily need the Capital Reserve Emergency fund, and while some cities do maintain separate emergency funds like this, they are fairly uncommon. Typically, a city would maintain a certain general fund balance, and if there were emergencies, the city would use money that was available in the general fund reserves to support unanticipated expenditures. This is not to say the City should not save money for emergencies, but from an accounting perspective, there does not need to be a different fund with fund balance requirements and a particular replenishment strategy. The Council could have money from the General Fund and make sure to honor the General Fund requirement, and if there are resources for emergencies or unforeseen circumstances, then the Council could opt to tap into those General Fund reserves. If the Council maintains its stated position, this is what he recommends to honor that position and replenish the fund in a fairly reasonable amount of time, spreading out the cost, while getting creative with some of the unspent debt service funds in order to reduce the ultimate property tax impact to replenish the fund. He added that one of the virtues of the financial management plan is 05/11/26 -15- DRAFT looking for money elsewhere, and oftentimes, they do find it. In this example, it was $340,000 that could be used to support the emergency reserves of the City. Mr. Tinter explained that the Technology Fund is also a Capital projects fund, and its primary funding source is transfers in from the general fund and is primarily supported by the property tax levy. Interestingly, even though it is constructed as a capital project fund, meaning that it should be used to support larger one-time expenditures, you would expect, with capital projects, most of its activity, $1 million of activity over the next 10 years, is actually funding operations. He noted that typically, he does not like to see capital project funds supporting operations, but for certain circumstances, much like the MSA fund, where some of the allocations can be used for operations. So if this fund does not have any capital outlays or a capital improvement plan, much as you would see with the other capital project funds associated with it, the City could actually collapse this fund into the General Fund and have those operations and current expenditures really of the I.T. division of the city funded by the General Fund, which is what he typically sees in other communities of this size. If the City did have Capital projects related to IT the classic example being large server or networks switch replacements website redevelopment projects or some thing of the lake there could be money left in this fund and spend its reserves on those capital projects but again his recommendation is identifying an actual capital plan in your annual budget development process to figure out what these capital project funds would and could be spent on. He noted that the other thing to keep in mind is that the Council would have to identify an additional funding source because right now, the transfers in are supporting those operating costs associated with the City's I.T. infrastructure, so if the Council opted to start spending money on capital projects, they may need to identify another funding source to support the capital improvement plan. He noted that the council could have really robust conversations about that during the budget development process, but if the City does not have any capital projects he recommends the money is already coming from the General Fund, it should be put in the General Fund and save the extra accounting work. Mr. Tinter noted the Central Garage Fund is actually set up as an internal service fund, which means that it charges other funds of the city certain service charges to fund both its operating and capital activities. Due to that, the targeted cash is the working capital balance for this fund, which is actually six months of operating expenses less any depreciation. He noted that depreciation is a non-cash transaction, so he does not really worry about it when putting together the target working capital amount. As mentioned, the fund is funded by fuel sales service charges for operations and maintenance of the City's fleet, and then service charges related to contributions from individual departments and divisions for their equipment that will be replaced at some point in time in the future. He explained that if a Department buys a new pickup truck that cost $50,000 it will be replaced in 10 years then the charge would be set up annually for that department to pay $5,000 per year into this fund so when that pickup truck reached the end of its useful life, the City has $50,000 sitting the fund and could replace the truck and go through the entire process again. He added that these funds do function well for that purpose, and are common in other cities, both for vehicle and equipment replacement. Because of its current structure, the fund supports about $21 million in capital outlay, and when talking about the summary of the CIP, because of the resources that currently exist in the fund from an ending cash perspective, there is no debt plan related to the three fire trucks that the City will take delivery of later this year. The thing to keep in mind, much like the CIP fund, the City has been operating under the perception that this fund does not have as 05/11/26 -16- DRAFT much money in it needed to support the equipment and vehicle needs of the community, so before the Council foregos any of the debt under this current anaylisis they should talk with the Public Works Department and work through the annual budget process to reevalute the capital plan for this fund. He added that staff at Ehlers had the understanding that the City, for many years, was trying to figure out what to buy with what they have, but with this analysis, the City may be able to replace things sooner and may not have to issue debt for those fire trucks. It is possible that the Council decides there are more needs and this fund does not perform as well, so there is an opportunity for more analysis on this fund, with discussion internally to deliver the equipment, vehicles, and other items the community needs to function. As a general rule, the City should not finance a depreciating asset, but that is not to say the City cannot do it or should not do it. Mr. Tinter added that he does not want to say the City does not have to issue equipment for fire trucks, but because of the perception that existed around this fund, it is worth reevaluating the CIP and seeing what other needs could be met through these current resources. Another thing to keep in mind is that if the City buys certain vehicles sooner, the City gets a more fuel-efficient and safer fleet, which is a positive thing, and the City would actually be saving money even though it is spending a little more money because replacing vehicles sooner gets better trade-in values. Mr. Tinter noted that he works with a number of communities that actively monitor the market and make choices in that fiscal year to trade-in vehicles, a couple of years sooner, because of what they are seeing in the secondary market, and again, they get more money to deliver more vehicles, and those vehicles tend to be more fuel efficient and safer. Overall, this fund needs more analysis to figure out what is possible. He added that the chargebacks for these funds have not been analyzed since 2022, and in the review, the service charges for operations and maintenance currently do not meet the outlets' related operation and maintenance costs. The service charges related to equipment exceed the service charges that are needed to replace equipment, so essentially, the Department is not charging enough for service and overcharging for vehicle replacement now. Mr. Tinter stated that despite some of these challenges, the fund is still performing well and has all the resources that it needs to deliver on the capital plans of the city. The City just needs to really reevaluate that chargeback structure and make sure the individual Departments and divisions are paying the appropriate amount for the costs that they create for the fund. Mr. Tinter continued with the Centerbrook Golf Course fund, which operates as a special revenue fund, so it does not operate as a pure enterprise. He noted that he has set a targeted fund balance of about 40% of the operating expenditures. This is a little lower than what the council saw in the other funds, and that is primarily because the golf course is a seasonal operation and is not open all year, so it does not necessarily need to maintain as high a balance related to its outlays. The primary sources for funding are charges for services in green fees and purchases made in the clubhouse, and there are transfers coming in from the General Fund. He added that the Council is aware that the operating revenues are insufficient to support the operating costs, so the Golf Course does operate at an operating loss, and in order to mitigate that, the City would have to craft a funding plan. He noted that from Ehler's perspective, if the City wanted the golf course to cover 100 percent of its operating costs, it would need to increase the annual charges at the golf course 5% every year through the end of the projection. In the meantime, in order to resolve the negative fund balance that currently exists, beginning in 2027 and through 2031, the City would have to 05/11/26 -17- DRAFT transfer on average $231,000 into the fund. This would mitigate the negative fund balance and build fund balances, and then beginning in 2031, those transfers in would go down to about $42,000 a year to maintain the fund balances until such time as the operating revenues become sufficient to cover all the operating costs. Essentially, the City would be increasing the fees over time, and once those fees hit a certain level, they can cover operations, and in the meantime, the City would have to continue transferring money into the fund. Right now, according to the financial management plan in 2027, that transfer would be estimated at $155,000, which is the same amount planned in 2026. The amounts of those transfers would have to increase through 2031. The other thing to keep in mind is that, similar to the Technology Fund, this fund does not have a current capital plan to support its needs or deferred maintenance, so if bridges need to be replaced at the golf course or there are significant improvements or deferred maintenance on the clubhouse, that money would have to come from other resources like the CIP fund. It is actually fairly typical for communities that have golf courses to use other funds to cover certain percentages of their operations and understand that the capital outlay may need to come from other funds. He added that this plan is under the assumption that the Council wants Centerbrook Golf Course to cover 100 percent of its operating costs, but oftentimes local governments understand golf courses of a certain stripe, like a nine-hole golf course, may not cover its operations, and the Council could give guidance about a certain cost recovery ratio that they would like to see the golf course perform under. He explained that this cold looks like the Council asking the Golf Course to cover 75 to 85 percent of its operating costs, and transferring money from other funds to support the difference, recognizing that the Golf Course is an amenity that the Council would like to keep in the community. Ultimately, Ehlers made the choice and assumptions in order to inform the long-term financial management plan, but the Council could adjust, though, to recover less money than this projection over the next year. Lastly, while the money is significant, looking at the better part of $300,000 to $400,000 per year, when looking at it against the balance of the overall size of the City, this is not that meaningful an amount. He noted that he is not trying to minimize several hundred thousand dollars a year, but when weighed against the materiality of the other City operations, it is not really as significant as some of the other activities in other funds. Mr. Tinter continued with the Heritage Center Fund that operates as an enterprise fund. As an enterprise fund, it is designed to be a business-like activity, meaning that it charges for services and its fees should fully fund 100 percent of the operating activities, and as the Council knows, that is not currently the case with the Heritage Center. If the Council looked at 50 percent of operating expenditures as the targeted cash balance, the fund would not recover until 2036 to be above that target. Much like the golf course, there would have to be a rate increase between 2027 and 2030 at a rate of six percent per year, and between 2021 and 2036, a 5.5 percent rate increase per year would be in order to get the fund in the position to start creating operating income. In 2031, with this in place, the fund would return to an operating income and shift from an operating loss. The Council would still have to do something to support the financial position of the Heritage Center, and as a result, the financial management plan actually recommends a $1.6 million interfund loan from the General Fund in order to support the negative cash position. This interfund loan would have an interest rate attached, and it would be known to the Council, as it would be adopted by resolution. Over time, the fund would return to profitability while making those interfund loan payments with interest back into the General Fund. This would allow the City to 05/11/26 -18- DRAFT earn a reasonable rate of return on its investment in order to protect the financial position and build the financial position of the Heritage Center. Mr. Tinter noted that while the $1.6 million figure is eye-popping, the City is still transferring this money in and is just doing it at the end of the year. The accounting rules basically say that a fund cannot be left with negative cash at the end of the year; after adding up all the revenues and expenses, the negative balance has to be settled. In order to do this, the City would transfer money from the General Fund to the Heritage Fund, and on the books, it would read due to, and due from. The interfund loan recognizes the financial reality of the Heritage Center, and it attaches an interest rate related to the support the fund is getting right now from property taxpayers by virtue of the transfers in from the General Fund. The interfund loan is also a more transparent way for the Council to address this issue, rather than making adjustments at the end of the fiscal year and then ultimately still having it presented to you as a part of your audited financial statements, but by then, it's too little too late. There is transparency that the Council learned about it, knows about it, and understands that it exists, but is not making any positive, active choices about the financial health of the community, and is going through the motions and satisfying the accounting rules related to how the fund should function. Given the challenges of this particular fund, the more transparent and reasonable way, especially related to the interest component and the fund expected to function as an enterprise alone, makes more sense with transfers that should be paid off at some date in the future. Unfortunately, the due and due from do not always get settled and just get wiped out, and those are losses that should be avoided. Mr. Tinter continued that he wants the community to understand and wants the council to make active choices about what is feeding into this fund and how it is going to function over time. He noted that between 2022 and 2025, the operating losses have gone down significantly, and the fund is on a fairly reasonable glide path to return to profitability by 2030 to 2031, which is primarily because the financial model is built on the 2026 year. The 2026 year is the budget year, and the income goes down, and that is because cities budget more conservatively than what they see in actual results. This fund continues on the same trajectory between 2022 and 2025, but it is quite reasonable that it would return to profitability sooner than what is presented in the model. If the Council authorized the interfund loan, it could be paid off earlier, since the Council has total determination about how the loan functions. This would mean that there would be a fund, the money would be paid back, and the fund's interest would return the money to the General Fund. He added that he would like to stress that this fund does not have a capital plan, so even while looking at the numbers, and it looks like it will return to profitability over a reasonable period of time, if there were capital activities, improvements, and deferred maintenance, the Council would have to look at other funds to support that between now and 2036. In 2036, the fund will have a pretty reasonable operating income and could potentially start supporting some of its capital activities in the interim years. He noted that the Council could potentially consider having those operate as interfund loans as well, but that would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, again making sure the fund remains financially solvent. This operation is not that unusual, and part of the reason it is having challenges is because of the pandemic and facilities like this being shut down, and it is taking some time to recover to that level of profitability. This fund could recover in a reasonable time frame, but would have to be monitored closely, and rates would have 05/11/26 -19- DRAFT to be adjusted. The interfund loan would have to be considered, and a balance would have to be struck on how to finance the capital. Mr. Tinter continued with the General Fund with the adopted position of 50 to 52 percent of next year's expenditures for the fund balance policy. This number is unusually high, and the office of the state auditor recommends somewhere between 42 and 50 percent of next year's expenditure, so the General Fund is on the very high end of that range. However, when there is a higher fund balance requirement, this fund is constructed to make sure that the Council honors its fund balance requirement as its stated position. As a result, the Council would have to levy additional taxes in order to protect the financial position of this fund and meet its fund balance requirement between 2027 and 2033. This would result in $1.15 million levied annually from 2027 to 2033, and $1 million levied annually between 2034 and 2036 in order to support the fund. In total, that means $11.1 million would be needed in additional funding sources for this fund to maintain its fund balance position over the entire projection period. Generally, the primary cost of any General Fund for any city in the state is personnel services, usually to the tune of about three out of every four dollars are expended from the General Fund. Modifying or adding any full-time employees to the organization would change this analysis. He added that the General Fund has not met the target fund balance requirements since 2022, and it does not actually return to that level until 2031, and that does include levying that additional $1.1 million. Mr. Tinter continued that if the City ever talked to a credit rating agency issuing bonds, one of the questions would be why the City is not following the policy of the minimum balance in the General Fund. There may be good reasons, and it does happen in communities, but generally, things need to be remedied in a three to five-year time frame, and the General Fund will take closer to 10 years by this projection. He noted that if the Council were to make those adjustments, the estimated increase in the property tax levy would be 9.5 percent and would cost the median valued homeowner $199 a year. Mr. Tinter noted that, as the General Fund balance requirement is high and anticipating concerns around the 9.5 percent in the potential property tax impact, and on the recommendation of the Interim City Manager, he has prepared an alternative option to change the fund balance policy to be a range of 40 to 50 percent. He stated that he likes to see a wider range because a narrow range of 50 to 52 percent handcuffs the policy direction of the City Council, as it has to operate within that range, and that might not be reasonable. The Council could continue to have conversations around this and settle on 45 percent, understanding that any given year it could change by a couple of percentage points, but plan to stay within that 40 to 50 percent navigational beacons. If the Council were to make those changes, the fund balance would meet the minimum fund balance requirement every year of the projection. There are no additional full-time employees in this projection, and he noted that it is hard to know what will happen between now and 10 years from now, but the fund would point in the right direction and would not go down. If the Council made this adjustment, it would save the City in terms of additional funding sources to the General Fund about $3.3 million over the next 10 years. The property tax increase for next year would go from 9.5 percent to 6.1 percent since the City would not have to levy additional taxes to meet that higher fund balance requirement, which is unusually high. The 6.1 percent property tax levy is a fairly reasonable year-over-year increase, especially in this inflationary environment. This would also 05/11/26 -20- DRAFT still allow the Council to replenish that Emergency Reserve fund, and if the Council chose not to replenish that fund, that number would go down. In the longer-term projections, next year in 2028, the levy would go down to 4.2 percent and continue to go down until 2031 to support debt service. Mr. Tinter continued that with this second option for the General Fund, the property tax for a median home impact goes from $199 down to $123 in 2027. Mr. Tinter summarized across the plan itself in the General Fund, the Council should consider revising the fund balance policy and monitoring full-time position needs throughout production. For the EDA fund, the council should consider living directly into the fund or consider combining the HRA and the FDA funds. For the Central Garage Fund, the Council should review chargeback revenue calculations and consider funding fire trucks with cash rather than debt. For the Centerbrook Golf Course, the Council should consider raising rates consistent with the financial management plan, monitor General Fund transfers, and consider establishing target working capital requirements. He noted that for the Capital Emergency Reserve Fund, the Council should consider a plan to replenish the fund or consider combining it with the General Fund. The Heritage Center Fund should consider raising rates, assist with the financial management plan, and consider an inter-fund loan to offset negative cash and help build balances. The Council should also consider establishing a target working capital. For the Technology Fund, the Council should consider combining it with the General Fund or consider developing a CIP for the fund. He noted that other considerations include establishing a target fund balance for funds in the financial management plan to give the Council the ability to make decisions in a more timely fashion. Mr. Tinter noted that the next steps include any feedback the Council may have, and from there, the plan can be updated and refined if needed. He recommended that the Council review it and update it on an annual basis because of activities in the golf course, Heritage Center, Emergency Reserve, and the General Funds, but over time, it may be possible to transition as those funds and the Council get more comfortable in a financial position. Mr. Tinter asked if the Council had any questions. Mayor Grvaes thanked Mr. Tinter for the presentation and noted that the plan is very helpful. Councilmember Kragness noted that this is what responsible accounting looks like with the government, and she appreciates seeing the financial plan and planning for the future. She added that the City’s budget is more than just numbers and tells what the City's priorities and their values are, so it is important to make sure that the council is focusing on that. When looking at these numbers and figuring out what they mean long-term, it's important not to just plan for today or react to a crisis, but plan for the future and to prepare for these things that are coming. She added that it is important to the residents to be transparent in how taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and responsibly, and this presentation shows that. It is also important to reinvest back into the community, and that is why the City had those dollars to invest in mental health and youth activities. She added that she was happy to see that Ehlers used to come up with creative accounting in using those debt service dollars and replenishing the Emergency Fund, which the 05/11/26 -21- DRAFT Council has not seen before. She noted that she also appreciated the mention of a due and due from on the balance sheet between funds for transparency, versus a transfer being done. Councilmember Moore thanked Mr. Tinter for this financial management plan and noted that cities should have this as a blueprint for transparency and due diligence as elected officials when setting a property tax for the residents and businesses. She commended Mr. Tinter for highlighting that in the Central Garage, they have not been recovering enough service charges since 2022. She added that she wanted to make it clear that she would not support a $1.6 million interfund loan to the Heritage Center, as this is something that has been operating at a loss for 10 years, and there is no guarantee the Heritage Center would be able to pay the City back. She continued that there seems to be some consistent rental income and positives at the Heritage Center, but she does not know why the City has not thought about selling it, and there are water towers there on the historic register, but nothing else is. She asked if the loan is for $1.6 million now, and what it would cost in a few years. She continued that the General Fund balance has been discussed being reduced for years, as the City has not met the minimum requirement in 10 years, and 40 to 50 percent adds more flexibility. She added that Mr. Tinter made assumptions about new positions, and she wanted to add that the Council needs to diligently look at modifications or potential elimination of current positions, as they move forward with it being 75 to 80 percent of the costs. This was discussed last year as well, but the General Fund is still not looking rosy, and the Council needs to consider that as they move forward with budget discussions. Councilmember Moore continued that she loved the idea of paying cash for fire trucks and having a more fuel-efficient and safer fleet with higher trade-in value, as that has hampered the City in previous years. Councilmember Moore added that by the end of 2024, with the previous catering management at $1.2 million, the Heritage Center will need an interfund loan with no guarantee that the facility will be able to raise rates or have an increase in rental income to pay the City back. Councilmember Jerzak noted that this comprehensive plan will only be effective if this Council and future Councils monitor its effectiveness and make necessary adjustments. On page 102, the one thing to keep in mind is that those are all assumptions, and the Council needs to pay close attention, particularly with today's gas prices and diesel fuel for Public Works, as costs continue to rise. When looking at the $199 projected levy increase, and if that was the only increase the residents had, it would be pretty easy to convince them to get on board, but there are also taxes, increases in fuel costs, food costs, referendums from the school board, and county increases, and all of that is multiplied, so the Council has to be very careful with increases. On page 109 of 157, the capital reserve fund, the Council is already planning on levying at least one point starting in 2027, and whenever the levies start, he was told there is no flexibility, and when the Council starts committing to levies in advance, it leaves less money to deliver services. He added that he wants the Council to be aware that there is already no COLA in the budget, health insurance costs have gone up, and union contracts that will need to be settled have all increased. While a zero percent levy increase is not realistic, the Council still has to be mindful of what the community can afford, overall. 05/11/26 -22- DRAFT Councilmember Jerzak continued on page 110 of 157, without capital outlays, and he is not sure why this fund is not being combined with the General Fund. He noted that if the City is able to pay cash for fire trucks and save hundreds of thousands of dollars, then that is absolutely what needs to be done. He noted that he was employed with the City when the Technology Fund was created on purpose, but it has not come to fruition. There are things coming up, such as creating a new website, which has been in discussions for a while, and that is an expense because the City does not have the Staff capacity to do it themselves. He noted he could concur with the state auditor and government finance recommendation on page 114 of 157 and changing the General Fund threshold to 40 to 50 percent, but his only fear is that if that threshold drops, it makes people think there is more money available to spend, and that is fine, as long as there is never an emergency or unexpected costs. He commented that Mankato and Bemidji had huge storms this year, and both cities talked about not having immediate money accessible to respond to certain things, and that ability to respond is essential in a situation like that. He added that not having the Emergency Response Fund makes him nervous, and it can be moved to the General Fund, but the Council should be wary about that. Councilmember Jerzak noted that on page 115 of 157, the levy is at 9.5 percent, and Mr. Tinter made the comment that the average that came in last year was about five percent, but that is not just Brooklyn Center. He noted that on page 117 of 157, changing the minimum requirement for the General Fund to 45 percent would be the lowest amount he would support, but the City never met the minimum requirement anyway, so the math did not add up to him. He added that while this plan should be reviewed annually, he would like a presentation in six months to see where the City is at. Councilmember Jerzak continued that he would be very reluctant to consider any loan for the Heritage Center until he had a comprehensive study that looked at actuals, trends, values, and food services. He noted that previously had reserves, and does not have that money anymore, so if a $30,000 oven goes out at the Heritage Center, that money has to come from somewhere, and there is no capital money, even when it was allegedly in its profitable years. He added that he was not pointing fingers at anyone because that market has changed considerably. The Council needs to have as much information as possible before making those decisions, but it is clear that the Council can not continue to ask for money from the outside to subsidize a private wedding or a corporate event because, ultimately, that money has to come from somewhere until the Heritage Center is profitable. He stated that until he saw a comprehensive plan laid out for the Heritage Center, he would not be comfortable doing an interfund loan and would have to see the data. Mayor Graves asked about the EDA fund and if the goal is to have 50 percent of the operating expenditures, and right now, the percentage of that money is coming from the HRA fund, and asked what needs to happen besides potentially combining the HRA and the EDA funds. Mr. Tinter noted that the main issue in the EDA fund specifically is that it is funded primarily by transfers from the HRA fund. Those HRA transfers are insufficient to support the costs associated with the EDA fund. He noted that his understanding over previous years, the City has increased the amount of full-time employees, and the current full-time employees have been allocated to the EDA fund, and that is because of the reserves that are available in that fund to support those costs over time. It was probably done initially to help save the property tax levy based on direction from 05/11/26 -23- DRAFT the City Council. He noted that two things would have to happen, and that would be to either raise additional property taxes or find other funding sources to support the full-time employees that have been allocated to that fund, or reduce the costs in that fund, likely by reverting the allocations of the full-time employees that are currently in the EDA fund to the General Fund. Mayor Graves noted that this seems like a chicken-and-egg type of situation. She added that in budget meetings, when looking at the EDA fund, it has been one of the smallest slices of the pie chart, and the Council recognizes the importance of Economic Development in the City, because the more Economic Development that happens with businesses and larger developments, the less tax burden is on the residents who actually have to pay. While they could reduce full-time employees and save roughly $200,000, then the City would no longer have the same Staff out there working in the community building the City’s tax base. In the long run, residents may have to pay more because the City does not have the development that it would like to have. Mr. Tinter responded that the Mayor is correct, the residential properties pay a one percent class rate and commercial properties pay a two percent class rate, and the argument for economic development is that if the City expands the tax base related to commercial industrial property,, the City grows that piece of the pie,, and it can absorb more of the property tax burden than the individual residence. If the city does pull back on certain economic development initiatives, it may hamper the ability to expand that tax base. He added that he was not suggesting reducing the number of full-time employees related to economic development, but rather to reallocate the cost of those full-time employees from the EDA fund back to the General Fund, because the EDA does not have enough current revenues to support the current expenditures. The EDA fund balance will decrease over time and eventually need transfers in from the General Fund to support its costs, and if the City is already supporting those costs with General Fund transfers, then it should save the transfers and assign the costs to the fund that is transferring the money anyway, especially since the General Fund already supports some economic development activities. Mayor Graves thanked Mr. Tinter for the additional context and noted it will be helpful for discussions later during the budget period. She stated she sees the importance of having an Emergency fund, but is not happy about how the City plans to have it, and is not 100 percent convinced that it necessarily needs to be as high as it is, and would be interested in moving it back into the General Fund. This would allow the fund to be in compliance with its own policy by trying to work toward having an emergency fund for some of the reasons stated by fellow Councilmembers. As long as it is categorized in the General Fund as emergency funds that cannot be used unless necessary. She continued that she would be in favor of changing the General Fund target balance of 40 to 50 percent, as it makes more sense and adds more realistic flexibility. She added that she does remember a time when the fund met its minimum requirement, but that was back in 2015 or 2016, and the last 10 years have been a rollercoaster. Mayor Graves continued that she liked the comments made about reevaluating the CIP for the Central Garage Fund, and reevaluating chargebacks, as well as services that may be undercharged. She noted that she wanted to make sure the budget and plan have equity and fairness, and to that point, she does not want to replenish the emergency fund on the backs of taxpayers, and there might be better ways to fund that, in her opinion. As far as the Centerbrook Golf Course, it is unrealistic to get cost recovery to 100 percent, and most golf courses of that size are not getting a 05/11/26 -24- DRAFT cost recovery of 100 percent, so that needs to be revisited with the Council. Regarding the Heritage Center fund, she does feel like it is headed in the right direction, even though it has been a point of contention with the Council. She added that she would like to get more information about it, as Councilmember Jerzak suggested, and there has been a conversation around getting a feasibility study done as well. She noted that she would be in favor of an interfund loan accumulating interest, especially since the City is already making transfers to the Heritage Center at the end of the year, and the Council needs to recognize it as more than an enterprise, but the value to the City and benefits to the area businesses, as it is beneficial to the image of Brooklyn Center. The Council would be remiss not to recognize the amazing employees that work there, the hotels that are all around it, and if the Council wants to bring more money and revenue into the City, it does serve an important economic purpose. She noted that, to Councilmember Moore's point, it has been an issue for a long time, but over the last few years, it has been trending in the right direction more than it has in the past, and there are people interested in investing in it, which means there should be a CIP for that fund, as well as for the Centerbrook Golf Course fund. Mayor Graves noted that the golf course probably does not have quite as many needs as the Heritage Center, but it is unlikely that the City will be able to sell it due to some of the environmental components of it, and it would never likely be re-developed, and the Council would not want a big vacant park with nothing going on in it in the middle of the City either. She noted that the Council needs to be very thoughtful and intentional about how they approach the golf course. Mayor Graves continued that she agrees the Council needs to monitor the full-time employees throughout the projection. She noted that she is ok with combining the EDA and HRA funds, as long as there are no restrictions on what can be done with the EDA money once it is in the HRA fund, but because the money is already being transferred between the two funds, there does not seem to be any restrictions. The most important thing would be not to let the housing-related funds get lost in the sauce. Regarding the Technology Fund, she was here when the fund was started, but it was started because the City did not have the money, and there was something that needed to be done. There will be upgrades that need to happen in the future, but that does not necessarily mean that there cannot be a CIP for that as well, or maybe the Council assesses if they want to do a CIP because those investments need to be made, or if it is not that significant, it could be rolled into the General Fund as well. Mayor Graves asked about other considerations, and Mr. Tinter had suggested establishing a target fund balance for the financial management plan, but she was confused about that. She asked if that was a reiteration of what was already said, or if there was something else that Mr. Tinter was pointing to that the Council should be considering. Mr. Tinter noted that it was a reiteration, and if the Council is looking at the EDA fund, the target fund balance in that fund is the Ehlers recommendation and is not the adopted position of the City Council, and only two funds have a fund balance requirement: the General Fund and the Capital Reserve Emergency Fund. One of the recommendations is for the Council to adopt fund balance positions for each of the individual funds to help provide more guidance during the budget process. Mayor Graves stated she would very much be in support of that, but asked if, when a balance gets set for these funds, it is a percentage or a dollar amount. Mr. Tinter noted that typically it is set as a percentage of the next 05/11/26 -25- DRAFT year’s operating or capital expenditures, but alternatively it could be set as a percentage of that fund’s revenue stream. It depends on the individual fund, and it depends on the cash flows as to what makes sense. It is typically represented as a percentage for two reasons: one to make sure that the fund balance reflects the activity of the fund, so if the Council were to add projects, full- time employees, or programs, the fund balance requirement grows with it; and to better understand the carrying costs related to the fund, and over time, inflation will increase the outlays related to the fund. He noted, for example, that he would not set the Capital Reserve Emergency fund at a fixed $1 million because a million dollars is not what it used to be. It is also important to keep in mind that if there is some type of natural disaster like a windstorm, and roofs are being replaced for $300,000, and the fund has $700,000, that money is going to be gone very quickly. Oftentimes, when Councils use fixed numbers, it tends to get set and then forgotten, and the fund becomes inadequate to meet the requirements of the fund. Mayor Graves asked how the financial management plan helps the Council achieve a more value- driven or equitable budget. Mr. Tinter noted that the budget and the financial management plan satisfy a number of different requirements; it has to be adopted for legal purposes, it is something that the City has to do for reporting purposes, and is needed to authorize expenditures for compliance purposes, but it is also a values document. When looking through a budget and financial statements and seeing what an organization spends its time and money on, he can generally tell what that organization values. The financial management plan helps the Council weave together all the different requirements, the legal ones, the compliant ones, the values, and the statutory ones, and serves as a vehicle for discussions around equity to occur both in advance of the annual budget development process, and in the case of this financial management plan, potentially over the arc of a decade. This gives the Council a more robust discussion among the senior Staff and elected officials about what the values of the City of Brooklyn Center and the greater City Council will be 10 years from now. In this way, the plan serves as a roadmap that provides instruction for future bodies about what this Council was thinking and applying resources to. This plan gives the Council the opportunity to explore those concepts and talk about what it means for this particular organization at this particular point in time. Mayor Graves stated she appreciated that, and really wishes that there had been a plan when she started on the Council in 2015, and the first four years that she was on the Council, there were no deep budget discussions. The Council watched presentations from Staff, and there were not a lot of back-and-forth discussions in those meetings. That started to change in her second term, largely because of other things that were happening in the community. The Council also did not have this kind of contextual foundation to have productive conversations, though, either, and that is also probably true since she has been the Mayor as well. She added that even though this is the fourth year of her third term on the Council, it is better late than never, and she hopes that this sets up future Councils for more success and more respectful dialogue around issues, values, and money that the City is expected to use with the residents in mind, but also with fiscal responsibility. She thanked Mr. Tinter again for his presentation. Mayor Graves noted that the meeting cannot go on too much longer because the Council is not voting on anything tonight, and there is one more agenda item ahead. 05/11/26 -26- DRAFT Councilmember Jerzak stated he did not want to ask City Staff to do more, but it would be helpful if Staff could answer why the EDA full-time employees were transferred into the HRA fund. He stated he knows it is because of the Opportunity Site and the expectation that it was going to take off, but that does not happen overnight. Councilmember Moore asked if the Council was on a time clock. Mayor Graves stated they were not, but it is 9:00 p.m., and there is still another item on the agenda, and there has to be a vote to stay past 9:30 p.m. Mayor Graves noted that this item is coming back, and this is just the first step in the process of the financial management plan. Councilmember Moore stated that the Council is there to do the business of the people, and if there needs to be a vote to extend for discussion purposes, she is more than willing to do that. Councilmember Kragness noted that another benefit of financial planning is the Central Garage Fund, which is a great example; it has no debt planned, and shows that the City is very good at planning those expenses and being intentional about the stewardship of that fund. She stated that Councilmember Jerzak made a comment about having a presentation every six months, and it was requested before to have a cash flow analysis so the Council is not waiting to address any hardships, and a cash flow analysis on a regular basis will be more helpful. Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to approve the presentation of the Five-Year Financial Management Plan. Motion passed unanimously. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8a. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 RENTAL LICENSE PROGRAM – SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Nyquist introduced Community Development Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong Thao to walk the Council through the second reading of this Ordinance. Mr. Thao noted that the first reading of the new rental license Ordinance Amendment was brought to the Council for consideration on April 13, 2026, and the first reading was approved by the City Council. Mr. Thao recapped the changes made to the rental license, which would be the performance-based rental license program, and implement a rental license that is valid for two years. The rental license will be issued administratively by Staff and will no longer go to the City Council for approval. Periodic reporting will be provided to the counsel on the rental license program. The rental license will be issued prior to passing the rental license inspection. The rental license inspection must pass within 90 days of issuing the rental license, and 100 percent of units will be inspected every two years. The Ordinance would allow for a rental license transfer if the transfer fee is paid, and the rental inspection has passed within six months of issuing the license. 05/11/26 -27- DRAFT Mr. Thao noted that if the rental license application does not pass the inspection within 90 days after the license has been issued, the rental license application would be considered incomplete, and the rental license would be canceled. The property owner would have to reapply for a new license. The new proposed ordinance will remove several requirements, including the eight-hour crime-free housing training requirement, the requirement for a crime prevention through environmental design CPTED inspection requirement, the submission of an Action or Mitigation Plan, and will also remove Police calls for service as a determining license type. Mr. Thao explained that tonight is the second reading of the requested Ordinance Amendment and a Public Hearing. If the Ordinance is adopted tonight, the change would go into effect 30 days following newspaper publication of the Ordinance language. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Moore seconded to open the Public Hearing for Ordinance Amending Chapter 12, Sections 12-901, 12-902, 12-906, 12-908, 12-910, 12-911 through 916 and Section 12-1504(4)(b) of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances regarding Rental Licensing and Vacant Property Exceptions within the City of Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. No one wished to address the Council. Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak to close the Public Hearing. Councilmember Jerzak moved Mayor Graves seconded to approve the resolution for summary publication of the aforementioned Ordinance Amendments in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to approve the second reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 12, Sections 12-901, 12-902, 12-906, 12-908, 12-910, 12-911 through 916, and Section 12-1504(4)(b) of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances regarding Rental Licensing and Vacant Property Exceptions within the City of Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 11. COUNCIL REPORT. Councilmember Moore reported on her attendance at the following events and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Shared that she attended the 44th Annual Prayer Breakfast at Living Christ Mission Church, 05/11/26 -28- DRAFT along with Councilmember Jerzak and the Police and Fire Departments. • Shared that there is a conflict this Saturday (May 16) between a Spring Into Action event at the Community Center, and the Public Works Open House at the Public Works Garage. She asked if those events are both City- sponsored. Ms. Heyman responded that the spring into action event is not occurring on that weekend, and the Public Works garage and the cleanup event are happening out of the Public Works Garage in concert with the larger open house. Councilmember Moore stated that is great, it is one event in one place, from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on May 16 at the Public Works Garage. Mayor Graves reported on her attendance at the following events and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Shared that she attended the Police Ceremony with Councilmember Kragness and Councilmember Jerzak, where three new Officers were sworn in, as well as several City Staff, and was happy to see the diversity of the three new Police Officers that were sworn in. • Shared that she attended the Cultural Arts Leadership meeting to help plan for their next meeting. • Shared that she attended Ilhan Omar’s Annual Mayor Luncheon for Senate District Five, and it was the best one she has ever attended, and was hosted at 42 Pub. • Shared that she attended the Osseo School Board meeting and listened to several staff from the Indian Education as well as the youth who have been participating in Indian Education, including her 16-year-old son, who spoke on behalf of the great work that happens through American Indian education, the programs that are offered to students. • Attended the Reimagine Black Youth Mental Health Summit, which was the third annual Summit of the folks that are doing that based out of the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance with Youth. • Shared that she attended a tree planting with Great River Greening and met several Public Works Staff that she had not met before, along with some youth involved with Youth on Board through Brooklyn Bridge Alliance with Youth. • Shared that there is Music in the Park tomorrow (May 12). • Shared that the City received its recognition for 2025 for being a Tree City again. Councilmember Jerzak reported on his attendance at the following events and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Shared that he attended the Crime Prevention meeting and the Police swearing-in ceremony. • Shared that he attended the Highway 252 Task Force meeting. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Moore moved and Mayor Graves seconded the adjournment of the City Council meeting at 9:18 pm. Motion passed unanimously.