[laughter] Sorry, sorry. >> I'm like all the people that I wanted to. >> I know. I know. I know. >> I was. >> Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to begin. So, I'm going to have you take your seats. I'm glad to see such great conversation going on. So, everybody ready? Could Could the staff please roll the tape? Good afternoon everyone and welcome Welcome to the administration's libraries and budget committee. This is the administrator amendments for Monday, November 10th. Um and we u will begin with with um the uh open form play playbacks from the human services and helplines of business presentations. That was on October 23rd, 2025. Public comments on the budget are recorded after each budget hearing. And at the end of today's meeting, I'll give you directions on how you can comment on today's topic. Um, no calls. I I understand no calls were received uh following the previous budget hearing. So, we will move on. The next item on our agenda is approval of the minutes from the previous meeting of October 23rd budget hearing on the human services and health lines. Do I have a motion, please? >> Move approval. >> Second. >> Been moved and second. Any changes, corrections? All those in favor signify by >> I. The county administrator submitted her budget to the county board board on September 16th. The proposed budget totals 3.09 billion and is based on a property tax levy increase of 7.79%. The board adopted a maximum property tax levy increase of 7.79% on September 25th. Today we'll hear from the county administrator Jod Wetland who will present the administrator amendments. These hearings are intended to allow board members to understand what is included within the proposed budget. Additionally, these hearings provide a forum to gather public input on the proposed budget. This line of uh budget proposals and the complete 2026 proposed budget and the schedule for these hearings is available at www.henipen. us/budgets. At the end of today's budget hearing, we'll provide a call back number and other specifics for members of the public if you'd like to submit comments on the budget hearings. I would now like to introduce the county administrator, Jody Wetland, who will be going through the administrator inments amendments to the proposed 2026 operating budget. Welcome, Miss Wetland. >> Jericho commissioners. Thank you. Good afternoon. Um for today, I'd first like to have the opportunity to present um the administrator amendments. First, I would like to introduce Joe Matthews, the county's chief financial officer. Over the past weeks, you've heard from each of the county's lines of businesses and had an opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback to staff. Our teams have continued to review their budgets to identify any necessary opportunities or adjustments. Today, we are bringing forward 12 budget amendments to the proposed 2026 budget. These amendments make technical adjustments or modify department budgets to reflect new opportunities to leverage resources and support county objectives. This list is shorter than you may observed in the past for two reasons. First, the Director of Grants Management and Administration now has the authority to approve grants below $1 million. This change allows newly awarded grants to be resolved through an administrative process. Secondly, the proposed budget was assembled with realistic eye toward the challenges we face in the future both in 2026 and beyond. We are not bringing forward any amendments today that would reduce our contingency budget. This allows us maximum flexibility to address key priorities as we head into the coming year. Today's hearing provides the board the opportunity to vote on each administrator amendment. Following today's action, the proposed budget resolution I would recommend be laid over to the next administration budget and operations committee meeting. We are planning to bring one more technical amendment that will be brought to the December 2nd meeting which will help standard standardize accounting practices within the 2026 budget. With that, I will begin our first amendment. Chair, commissioners, amendment one is a technical amendment that we need to do annually. This amendment provides board approval to use opioid settlement funds for the 2026 budget as required by the county's agreement with the state. Chair Gotel, I will turn it back to you for the board's vote. >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> You want to explain further? Chair Gotel Joe Matthews can provide background please. Mr. Matthews. >> Yep. Madam Chair, um what you have in front of you is uh really a reconciliation. You may or may not be aware that for our opioid settlement funds that we received from a a large national lawsuit, those funds are allocated to departments on a non-lapsing basis. So the board authorized as expenditures for specific strategies. They would be laid out categories A through I uh that you can see in the or sorry A through M on the document. Each of those uh allocations remains in effect year after year unlike the rest of our operating budget which expires at the end of the calendar year. And so what you're seeing here is adding funding to existing allocations that you've approved in prior years. And then also in a couple cases making some adjustments because those strategies haven't needed as much resources and they're being reallocated to other areas. So this is not the totality of all the spending that's occurring on this specific amendment. This is really just a supplemental appropriation and allocation within that. The total spend in the 2026 budget of opioid funds uh is approximately $4.7 million. And so again, those funds remain available until they are expended and uh if you need more information, we're happy to follow up with more uh detail. U some of that was presented in the earlier presentations in the budget hearings. >> Do my colleagues have questions or comments? Commissioner Conley. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I do. I have two clarifying questions. Um, so thank you for the background and the total amount that's in the 26 budget at the at the over 4 million. That's that's great. I'm really I've been interested in how we're using these opioid um dollars since we got them. I do have some questions um around those categories. And then uh so the two questions I have, one is just a like a brief explanation of this um state subdivision memorandum agreement. I really just am interested in is that what guides how we can spend dollars? Is it like the state statute that guides how we deliver the dollars that we get from the state? >> Yeah, Madam Chair, Commissioner Connley, yes, there's an agreement. Um, so there's a national settlement, the state attorney general's office is involved, and then counties that are receiving those funds sign a memorandum of understanding or of agreement, and that's what governs how we implement this. So, it's all tied together. You're correct. >> Right. Thank you, Madam Chair. And then my second question was for the two items here, you know, I'm I I really think that a lot of money should go into prevention and I'm seeing that through the dollars that are spent in category A um in of course category H, but I'm interested in in three of them. Category C, it looks like that's 522. When that's in parenthesis, that means it's not staying. But connections to care, I think, would be important to continue. So, I'd like to have an explanation of that. And then this address the needs of paran the paranatal population. Uh we've got a lot of families who are um uh experiencing substance use disorder specifically opioids. So that's families, that's children, that's caregivers, and that's 50,000 that isn't staying there. I think it should be a lot more in stay. So talk me through that. And then the last one is there seems to be a lot of money spent in post-mortem. So that's the opposite of prevention. That's figuring out what happened after someone is has passed or has overdosed. So those three areas I would like some explanation on. Thank you, >> Madam Chair, Commissioner Connley. Uh I'll address the postmortem first. So that would be expenses incurred at the medical examiner's office that are opioid related and there are specific qualifications there. And so um that is typically paying for you know some hard costs. Uh Lolita is here and I may ask uh her to come up and speak to the other two. And again these are not necessarily uh we can provide you information with how much money is remaining in each of these strategies. And so again um just because we're reducing something doesn't necessarily mean that it's zero. But I'll defer to Lolita. >> Please turn the mic on. Thank you. Morning, commissioners. Um, thank you for that question, Commissioner Connley. Um, as to the, uh, pregnant parents, we have a collaboration that is, uh, now funded internally with child protection with Quiy. So, they have a um, a very guided and focused group that is looking at pregnant parents and how we keep the families together. Um, we also have an outside agency that we are working with in the community for the very same issue and for the very same focus. As to the medical examiner's office, it is one of the areas that is described in the MOA as available for funding and that is really due to the increase of autopsies that are requested in opioid deaths. And then I think the first question you had >> connections to care. >> Connections to care. We are really focusing on the community to give us a lot of the connections to care whether it's through the jail um coming out of prison uh whether it's in recovery uh coordinated um efforts through our internal departments as well. So we're doing a lot of that that you don't see right there, but there's lots of descriptions about all of that. >> Thank you. and a followup if I may please. >> Um, yes. So then, so that makes sense. Um, with the caregivers though, would you um would you say that even though we're we're using utilizing um child protection and our and that area and community partners that the the amount that we're putting in is not decreasing or anything for 26. It's staying the same. It's just internally plus. >> Yes, I would say there's an internal movement on that. And one of the things that always happens when we do the internal um or initiatives that we are progressing is that initially it'll start off sort of slow until the programming is is developed and then it's coordinated with the community. And that's exactly what happened here. So, as we move forward in the future, and you'll I'm hoping that you'll hear much more about this um the development of the strategies that we have, which are prevention, response, treatment, and recovery, they align with the MOA completely. And what we're trying to do is to sort of develop strategies in the future that reflect uh either pitfalls or um areas that are missing that we haven't looked at three years prior. And I think one of the things that we do do well here is that we pivot depending on what the um the issue is in the community with the opioid crisis and that's what we've tried to do. >> Wonderful. Thank you. Last thing for me on this and that's just that for the ME's work, right? Yes. Um, is there wouldn't there already be funds within the ME's budget to cover increased op autopsies or because of thatou or MOA um, we can pivot funds to cover that increase. I I just would assume that there would already be funds in that budget to do >> I'm going to return it to Joe for response and then I'll stay for any other follow-up you may have. >> Yeah, Madam Chair, Commissioner Connley. So, the medical examiner, their primary source of revenue uh outside of opioid funding is property tax. And so, over the last several years, we've really coordinated with them to try to make sure that uh we didn't become overly reliant on using the opioid funds, but given the as as Lolita said, the structure of the MOA, we did want to utilize some of those funds to offset some of their increased costs over time. um the way that the opioid settlement is structured, it's a long-term uh revenue source, but it's very heavily front-loaded. And so, uh one of the things that Lolita's team's been working very hard on, as she said, is making sure that we're directing resources where they're most needed. And over time, the medical examiner's office, you know, if opioid [snorts] deaths don't reduce, uh we will pick up more of that cost on the property tax side. >> I just wanted to add one thing. Um the it it doesn't seem like it's a logical choice to have the Emy's office funded through the opioid funds, but there's really a good reason for that. And the structure is that if somebody has died in their family of an opioid death, the services that are required and given by the Emy's office are really fundamental to how this family can move on or this neighborhood can move on because they want to know. Um they also want to speak about it. So um you know really um qualifying what has happened. It also helps with the data that we have of course but more importantly it is the structure that the emy's office has and sort of how they how they handle these horrible deaths. Thank you and thank you madam chair. I'll just say that um I really appreciate the clarification on on this. I I um have been interested in how these dollars are allocated for a while. So, this is super helpful. Um, I will say that, you know, it was refreshing to see uh that those overdose deaths are coming down a little bit through our health uh budget hearing that we had. And so, with the majority of these dollars going towards that post postmortem work, perhaps in the near future, we might see that some dollars can be reallocated back to some of the more um prevention to keep people from dying in the first place. So, I appreciate all the work that you do specifically in your office uh and I'm supportive of this. Thank you. >> Other comments or questions? Okay, then we're ready for the vote. All those in favor signify by I. >> I posted. >> Um item two is Henipin Health Chair, Commissioners. Amendment two recognizes the final updated rates for Henipin Health along with updated assumptions about the 2026 enrollment. This will result in 57 million of additional revenue and related expenses in 2026. Commissioner Gotel, I will turn it back to you for the board's vote. Do I have a motion? >> Second. >> Been moved and seconded. Miss Ren, Commissioner Gotel, Chair Gotel. Mike Herszing is here and can provide background. >> Welcome. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioners, I'm Mike Kerszing, the CEO at Henipin Health. Uh, this amendment is to our 2026 budget. Again, adjusting our overall budget as we have received our final updated rates for 2026 for our prepaid medical assistance plan, our Minnesota care products, and our special needs basic care products. As um Miss Wentland said, these finalized rates will mean additional revenues for us as well as some expected increases in claims experience due to emerging experiences of our members. We are expecting increases in membership to continue into 2026 due to changes in our local Medicaid market. Uh we're projecting about a 10 to 15% increase in membership growth in 2026. Um, and I'd be glad to take any questions that you have. >> Colleagues, any questions? Go ahead, Commissioner Eden. >> Thank you. Um, and Mr. Herszog, you know that I've raised just concerns in terms of what it looks like. And then, um, Jody, just the increase and what we know about what's coming in the future potentially if Medicaid if January 1st of 2027 comes. the I guess what I'm I have concerns about how rapidly you're you're growing and what that looks like for us and what discussions because you're saying that there will be increased revenue but there's going to is that going to be able to cover the cost of the growth and so I just think at a certain point it be it's a conversation we as a county need to have about where is our max point and I haven't really heard that yet and so I guess I would love a little bit of context on that. I'm fine for that for this year, but as we look at for next year, I think we really need to be having some tough conversations here. >> Yes. Thank you, Commissioner. Um, we can put together and I think we have put together some estimates in terms of at what point our growth um becomes, if you will, a negative for us. uh we we do foresee uh with that 10 to 15% growth probably getting around 37,000 members by the end of 2026 and I think we feel with where our reserve levels are that is about where we want to end up too that you know you do reach a point where um because of the growth in members you need to have more reserves um to cover your costs and we think that with where we're at and with where we're growing and the rates that we have that we will be in a good spot. Um, with what is in this amendment, we are adding to our fund balance in 2026. Um, to the tune of about $9.6 million is what we're projecting right now. Um, we did receive additional rate information on Friday of last week from the state. um moving uh increasing our rates retroactive to July of 2025 for 2025. So, as we've discussed in our Henipin Health Governing Board meetings, um those rate increases for this year will move us into that above 200% risk level of risk based capital. Um uh and so we're feeling really good right now about where we are for 2025 and we think that this also moves us into a better place for 2026. 2027 is something that um we are keeping our eye on definitely actually um we are talking to an outside agency that is uh helping us think about strategy and I think that for one of our first quarter probably 2026 Henipin Health governing board meetings that would be a good area for us to focus on with you as we we're pulling information together >> okay go ahead commissioner Fernando >> uh thank you Madam Chair great uh topic commission I think that would be a good early briefing um or topic for a meeting to get ahead of the 2027 outlook. Um two things, one to the action before us, I think it's a $9 million swing, right? It's not actually or or is it 9 million added of fund balance? I want to double check added. So, we thought we were going to use >> some amount yes >> of fund balance and instead of using any fund balance, we're adding 9 million. I want to make sure I'm >> correct. That's always a favorable swing in front for a budget hearing. So, thank you. Wanted to clarify. And then the second um and I think this is why uh Commissioner Eden's strategic feedback right topic is important. Um because my I am deeply concerned about when we grow. much of the growth that you're discussing here is because of um products leaving the market, if you will, and therefore residents potentially not having a practical method of being insured. So for me the the volumes aspect is important but u my my concern would be let's pretend that everybody exited the market at the same time or I just how how we're seeing the the health access and health stability which I know we've talked about at length and we'll be working on um for all of 26 and beyond I'm sure but I wanted just to flag uh flag that aspect that this growth um is in is in large part because of other products exiting the um exiting the market and therefore residents likely not having a practical path to be insured if I'm saying that all correctly. So, thanks for the clarifying. It is a $9 million contribution. That's quite the swing. Again, favorable for a budget briefing and I look forward to this topic being brought uh back before us at least a few times next year. Thanks, chair. >> Any other questions, comments? Okay, we'll take the vote. All those in favor signify by I. I >> I oppose. Motion carries. Item three is workforce development. Miss Butland chair, commissioners, amendment three is also good news. Workforce development department was initially notified of a funding cut this summer. In October, they learned that almost all the funding would be restored. Amendment three provides budget authority for this additional state funding allocation. Commissioner Catel, I will turn it back to you for the board's vote. >> I'll move this. >> Second. >> Any any comments, questions? Good news. All those in favor signify by I I motion carries. >> North Point Wellness is number four. Miss Wellland chair go commissioners. North Point has also has good news has been awarded $1.6 million in grant for the time period October of 2025 through 2030. Since this grant is more than $1 million, the board will need to approve acceptance of the grant. The separate bar will be brought forward to approve the grant agreement. This amendment 4 is adding the 2026 portion of this grant to the budget which is about $322,000. Commissioner Gotel, I turn it back to you for the board's vote. >> I'll move this. >> Second. >> Questions, comments, >> please. Commissioner Conley. >> Oh, just an overwhelmingly supportive comment on this one. This is incredible. Um, I learned a lot about the state um, approving something of the sort around recovery sites, safe recovery sites. This is something that has been talked about for a very long time in communities that are hardest hit. Um it is no secret that some of those communities are right in the district that I represent, but we have been asking for something like uh safe recovery sites. Um and so I am proud of this. I am going to leave this meeting and scream it from the rooftops of my neighborhoods. uh but the street outreach, the health, safety and wellness services, access to hygiene and sanitation, which is something that just does not exist formally that I've seen. And this is just going to provide so much um to residents in and around the neighborhood uh and community that North Point serves and beyond. So, I'm just overwhelmingly ecstatic that um this grant allows for North Point to establish this. It will be wildly successful. It takes care of the basic human needs that people regardless of where they are in life need. And I am looking forward to the day where I see multiple um safe recovery sites just pop up all over Henipin County. So, uh just overwhelmingly pleased. Thank you. I just want to say that the need is so great. So, this is really something I know that as I toured some of our um shelter sites, I know that we have some medically critical folks in some of those, but there's not anywhere near enough beds to safely care for these folks. So, this is exciting news and I'm sure when we hear from North Point next year um sometime in the briefing, it would be really nice to hear about the dollars and what's going on and how we're being successful about implementing this. I I too agree to this because as we we hear about some of the immigrant places that are they are establishing the government has not provided hygiene and quality care or safe water and those kinds of things and it really matters to people's well-being and how they come out of things. So I'm really excited about this too. Other comments or questions? All those in favor signify by I. I >> opposed. Motion carries. Um if it's pleases the board I'll move we could move items five six and seven together so move >> second been moved inside this is climate resiliency environment and energy then two environment and energy uh miss wetland I'll let you introduce these and then we can have conversation chair go commissioners amendment five provides an additional 200,000 to the climate and resiliency department to support community programs that are eligible to use solid waste enterprise funds the amendment also reflects a technical change how our budget incorporates accounting rules using enterprise funds in other departments. This is why this amendment appears to be a budget neutral for the climate and resiliency department. The revenues being raised by the solid waste enterprise fund and the expenditures will ultimately be held by that fund. The work will be performed by the climate and resiliency department. Amendment six authorizes the Environment and Energy Department to increase the excess cardboard fee from $150 to $300. There's no budget adjustment related to this amendment. Increasing this fee creates an incentive for haulers to properly manage cardboard at the point of collection and covers the cost of staff time to work with the hauler and waste generators to identify ways to recycle cardboard instead. And amendment seven is a companion to a separate board action request the board the board will be considering on November 18th which will ask the board to establish two environmental advisory boards. The community environmental advisory board and the youth environmental advisory board. This amendment will provide funding and one FTE to environment and energy in order to provide staff support to these two advisory boards. The FTE will be repurposed from elsewhere in the county. We do not intend to add a new FTE through this amendment. This amendment also increases the environment and energy department budget by 150,000 from the solid waste enterprise fund, a nonpropy tax revenue source. Commissioner Gotel, I would turn it back to you for the board's votes. >> Okay, I'll start with Commissioner Eden and then Commissioner Fernando. >> Uh, thank you um for that. So with this um Miss Wentland I on the CL so I just came from the the University of Minnesota's extension committee and one of the things that was brought up was um an urban agriculture initiative grant that was given through our county's climate and action and resiliency funding. And so it looks like we're creating a some of that funding will go some under the same kind of umbrella will be going to creating a new youth advisory group. But what we were just talking about at the extension committee is how their 2026 budget that they just received, which is going primarily to uh parts of Minneapolis that are underinvested in are they're expecting 20,000 less and the distress that was caused at that meeting. Dan Rogan, I know that you're a part of it and you had a a person there, but um I really would like us to figure out how we can find there. It's going to be 20,000 I believe short. And so while we're creating this new possible initiative, I really want us to be looking at how we funded something that's already going on right now that's building community trust. And so um I we can follow up online offline, but uh it just I it's genuinely creating something new when we already have something in the community that's engaging youth I think is really important to keep that funded. >> Any comments please? Mr. Matthews. Uh, Madame Chair, Commissioner Edlesen, are you referring to the extension budget that we we budget for general county purposes or for the grant for the urban egg program? >> Madame Chair, uh, Joe Matthews, it is not actually a part of the extension budget. It is actually a grant that comes out of the, um, the CL the county climate action and resil resiliency funding. So, it is a separate grant and they have staff that are funded on that grant. And so again, I just if we're putting if we're appropriating and moving 150,000, I don't want to see us not fund something that's already ongoing right now that's built up within the community because they're going to have to cut staff. So support this as long as we're not taking away from something that's ongoing because their funding has gone down uh for this new budget year. >> Yep. Madam Chair, thank you for the clarific clarification, Commissioner Eden. So, this is adding $200,000 in funding uh to the budget that will be available that uh Director Chaman Solace will be using climate resiliency. It's our understanding that this will fund that $20,000 program as part of her budget and so she'll have that available. That's that's our understanding from this. >> Madam Chair, just one more followup. This program specifically is for North Minneapolis and I would love maybe if we could follow up after this because it is what I'm understanding is that they're going to be losing um possibly 60% of their budget from this new year. And so if we're if we're looking and it there was a range that was given. But if we're going to be funding something that's creation of something new, I think we need to make sure that we're we're funding something that already the community has been engaged in and that we're seeing trust and building up. Um so again coming it's a separate grant out of excite of extension. So if we could just follow up on that. Thank you. And I'm done. >> Mel Commissioner Eden staff will follow up and we will loop back with um clarity on that and what the funding is. Okay, Commissioner Fernando. >> Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. I was just want to note that on the top sheet, I believe it should either say en environmental advisory panels or community advisory panels just for um consistency with the language on page 10. That's all. Thanks, chair. >> Note that change that. Any other comments? Go ahead, Commissioner Connley. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, two things, probably three. Um, Commissioner Ellison, I think that I was I had a question mark by what you were referring to and I think that's amendment seven, which is the new Yeah. So, not the ignite and fortify, but the amendment seven. I just had a question mark on the dollar amount, too. Uh, I love that we are considering bringing youth into uh our work through environment and energy and through just environmental advisory work. I've got a group of youth students that are really invested in climate action and climate change. I could see them being a part of this group. But if there is youth action that's already sort of established through the Henipin University partnership, then yeah, I'd love that that same followup. Um I I um wanted to just thank I know I was very um open about how unique Fortify and Ignite programs are in our county and in our communities and what they do. And so I appreciate seeing these dollars added to um to those programs to continue uh just the really incredible work that that is happening through that. As you all know, I am a gigantic fan of urban agriculture and and just the ways that we reach people who typically aren't reached when it comes to weatherization of their homes or aging in place and the supports that we can provide through that. I think that these two programs staying within the climate and resiliency portfolio is the right move and keeping them funded at adequate levels is the right move and I think that should be ongoing. Um the other question that I had is actually it's not a question it's more gratitude. So thank you for that. And then additionally amendment six uh I think you all heard very clearly during the budget briefing. [laughter] I I think when this came across I said let's double it. Uh and there was some nods. So thank you for this. I do think that we are bold as a county when it comes to zero waste and what we want to see achieved when it comes to accelerating zero waste. There's no reason that excess cardboard uh coming into the herk uh and again when I was touring it that was uh six years ago but it was still very much burned into my memory how much wet cardboard was coming up in that gigantic claw. So I think that the excess cardboard fee increasing to 300 is the right move and this is great to see in these amendments. So thank you. Later we can talk about what that additional uh you know revenue beyond might be used for but I mean possibilities are endless here. But the fact that we are we are saying no, you're going to be fined more for what is not allowed in this space is really aligned with um our not only our closure goal of 2028 soonest, but also just accelerating the fact that we don't need um stuff that doesn't belong in the herc. And so uh this is a solid move to say that we're serious. We're being bold and we're accelerating that work. So thank you. Other comments? I just want to say I agree with Commissioner Connley. I too I saw whole truckloads of cardboard being dumped and I was just appalled and of course we find them and everything. We don't have a lot of levers. People don't realize when they're here that we don't control as much as they think that we do, but where we do we can make a difference. And so I want to thank the staff for listening, hearing, and uh acting on this. So other comments or questions? All those in favor signify by I. I opposed. Motion carries items. Uh I'd like to move the capital items together. That's items 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. Is that okay with my colleagues to move? >> I'll move it. >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Um Miss Wetland, chair go commissioners. Amendment 8. This amendment is for a budget increase of $600,000 for the Cedar Avenue reconstruction project between Lake and 24 streets in the city of Minneapolis. Since the administrator's proposed capital budget was submitted earlier this year, project development for Cedar Avenue has advanced through final design, where higher costs were revealed than originally estimated. By approving this amendment, we can move forward with the Cedar Avenue project currently scheduled for construction in 2026. This amendment also coincides with an upcoming board action request for various agreements with our partner agencies. Amendment nine will establish a new 2026 capital project for suicide prevention along the Washington Avenue Bridge. With this new project, a grant of $6 million will be provided to the University of Minnesota to construct the improvements as specified in the 2025 omnibus transportation bill. In order to accommodate this grant, the county's regional transportation sales and use tax funding has been reallocated from other projects for these improvements. This action also authorizes the negotiation of two agreements with the University of Minnesota that outline cost participation and maintenance responsibilities for the Washington Avenue Bridge. Amendment 10 adds the Franklin Library planning study to the 2026 to 2030 SIP with funding available in 2026 to begin work on this project. County administration thanks the CBTF for making this recommendation and we are pleased to support it. Amendment 11 adds $1 million to the cost participation and partnership project to better align the timing of locally led projects and modernizing Henipin County's traffic signal systems. And finally, amendment 12 is a package of three items related to the capital projects for district courts. The district court public safety facility administration area remodeling project is being added into the 2026 to 2030 SIP with funding in 2026. Funding for the accessibility modifications project is being reduced as a result since the remodeling project will address accessibility issues in the project area. And finally, the government center remodeling project planned for the C8 floor is being removed from the SIP altogether with no impact on the 2026 budget. Commissioner Gotel, I will turn it back to you for the board's vote on amendments 8 through 12. Commissioner Fernando, excuse me. Was it you? Did you raise your hand? I'll grab you first. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. And then I'll go Conley and Eden then you. Okay. >> Thank you. Resound. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I did raise my hand I think during the presentation. Um resounding yes for the Franklin project. Just wanted to express my um appreciation there. And then I think I have two questions for amendment nine. Just logistically this the Washington Avenue bridge. So they are fully responsible for the design construction. Um help me understand the um should this come back before us or not or is it really a grant award? Um and if it a little bit our process would be great. Thank you madam chair. >> Chair goals. Commissioner Fernando Lisa Cern is here and can provide background. >> Welcome Miss Cernney. >> Chair Catel Commissioner Fernando. Uh this amendment before you simply just puts the budget in place for the county to issue that grant. You will see brought before you in the near future two agreements that the that the Henipin County Board will need to enter into with the University of Minnesota both related to construction oversight and responsibility of the bridge as well as ongoing maintenance. >> That will be in early 2026. >> Got it. Yes. Absolutely. I see. So it it is it's a project that was placed with us then. It's not actually placed with the university. I'm I'm right. part of how we arrive here is because of a because of multiple perspectives regarding um quote unquote ownership of that physical area. And I I was I'm wondering how that will how that discrepancy will be concluded throughout this process if possible. >> Chair Gatell, Commissioner Fernando, this is a complicated piece of infrastructure in our system. It has numerous uh agencies with interest. And so from a Henipin County perspective, we need to maintain a certain level of oversight of the construction of the project simply because it is major infrastructure. We will be partnering with Mindot. Um that is not something that the University of Minnesota typically manages. And so that's where the agreement that will come before you in the future will cover kind of the details of the I'll say engineering and construction side of it. But the process that we're bringing before you today simply creates the capital budget I see >> for the $6 million as um identified in the omnibus transportation bill. >> Okay. So, Madam Chair, um it sounds like there'll be much more need for clarity on this and I'm interested in making sure that uh conversations are happening as early as possible regarding that. And I'll I guess I'll just leave it at that for right now because this is intended to create the SIP line essentially um to be compliant with state law, right, is what I'm hearing. Okay. Thank you. And then for um for number 12, amendment 12. So to so to clarify the so the courts essentially are seeking to just kind of rep prioritize their own projects in some ways as a way of thinking about it, but there's a few projects here. One is one is being removed, one is being sequenced. So one way of of thinking about amendment 12 is uh a different sequencing of the court's capital plan. Is that correct, >> Chair? Go tell Commissioner Fernando. That's correct. And Dan Rogan is here and I can provide a little back further background information if you'd like. >> Sure. >> I'm surprised whenever something's removed. So that's why. >> Welcome, Miss Rogan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair and Commissioner uh Fernando. You're correct that it is really just a rep prioritization. Um, subsequent to the capital budget coming before the board, we had additional conversations with district court and the project that's being added back on is their number one priority for for right now. and the C8 reconstruction um is being removed in part because uh district court isn't positive at this point that they're going to need uh another in custody courtroom on C8 based on the work that we're doing on C 20 through 23 which is going to allow a number of incort um uh custody um courtrooms. So the removal is uh so that we can see how the courts function on all of C uh the sea tower uh going forward and if there is something that's needed we will we would u you know work with the courts to bring it back um back into the capital budget but at this point uh we're asking that it be removed. Happy to answer any other questions. >> Yeah, Madam Chair, I I thought that with what was described, I was just surprised to have it be half a million. And so that's why if it's if it's if it's our partners or clients or tenants or roommates or whatever you want to call it, if they're sequencing amongst themselves with a relatively minor financial ch net change, I think that that's always a good outcome because we don't want to be spending money that that um that they wouldn't want to use right away. So I think that's all favor favorable. And then just my last comment on the the 6 million with the with the bridge. Um, yeah, my I just the the from my perspective that was such a peculiar way for this project to be established. And so I'm interested as early as possible to have clarity on responsibilities on roles. Um, and individually I would prefer not all that 6 million to go to construction. And I know I've said this before that I would prefer if there was a serviceoriented approach, but I know that that was not compelling at the time uh in the conversations I had. So I I it's not about the amount of money. It's just for for me it was such a peculiar way for a project to um arrive to us. Um and we will implement it. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Commissioner Connley. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I was going to start somewhere else, but I just want to riff off of that for a second. Um, Commissioner Fernando, because I do think that perhaps there's signage that we could add to bridges. You know, when you are on the Washington Avenue Bridge, you can see several other bridges away, right? I wonder if there's like hotline numbers or some sort of messaging that Henipin logo whatever that we can put on our owned bridges that give support and resources uh for people who are along those bridges and thinking about it. So that service enter serviceoriented approach is something that I'm very supportive of. Um and yes this was a peculiar way to come uh to this. There was a lot of advocacy but also so many different levels of government. It just became confusing for me as a part of that level of government one of those levels of government. Um so yeah happy to to see what comes before us in the future in terms of more detail. Um but authorizing this capital I think is important. Um, so there's my thoughts on that. I want to move to Cedar Avenue uh because wow, thank you. I know residents in that area are very very excited for these improvements um to uh to come to fruition as soon as next year I think 2026. And so I just wanted to ask a question that has been asked by me, asked to me by residents is whether or not the bridge uh between Cedarfield and Little Earth is part of the overall construction. I know I remember asking what ownership looked like of that bridge, but residents have told me time and time and again that that bridge is old. It prevents sight lines. It's concrete, so it's not really a pedestrianesque bridge. It's more people can hide behind there and crimes have happened around that bridge, shootings. Um there's a lot of activity with that bridge. So it crosses over the construction area. I wondered if uh reconstruction of the pedestrian bridge between Cedar Field right past I what is that south of East 24th and Little Earth might be part of this project. Mel, >> Commissioner Connley, Lisa Sern can provide background. >> Thank you. Welcome back. Chair Gatell, Commissioner Connley, I do I'm phoning a friend here. I do not have an exact answer for that. I know that has been a a part of the conversation um with both the city of Minneapolis as well as the Little Earth community and making sure that we um make a number of different safety improvements in that area. I will find out and I will follow up. >> Okay, great. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. And just a reminder, is that is it a city that's the city that has ownership of that? That's okay. um happy to hear about uh what updates might come of that and um uh if they're um if that should be a part of it because I know a lot of times these reconstruction projects happen in conjunction with the city if that's something that they're willing to take on and if so um I'd love to help amplify community engagement around what that bridge should look like. So thank you. Uh, one other question question for me. Uh, it might just be a comment. Um, oh yeah, just a just a clarification on amendment number nine, which is the Washington Avenue bridge. It does say that the reallocation of this funding has an impact on the delivery of other county projects. Do we have have we identified which county projects would be either delayed or impacted by the reallocation of funding? Chair Gotel, Commissioner Connley, Lisa Cerny can provide background on that plus provide some clarification around language to this board action, please. Thank you, Mrs. Cerny. >> Thank you, Miss Wentland and Chair Gatella, Commissioner Connley. Uh, let me go back and correct myself from earlier. Included in this action is also the authorization to negotiate the agreement. So, I I apologize. I I misstated that earlier. So, first I want to correct that statement and then um Commissioner Connley, yes, we do know at least one project that has been pushed back in our CIP and that is Marshall Street Northeast. Um, in order to bring forward the $6 million, we need to push that further out. And it just tightened it makes us it it makes us tighten our belt and think about when other projects come in at different prices, how do we continue to balance our overall CIP with the revenue sources that we have available? >> And Madam Chair, for the Marshall Street Northeast project, how far did we have to push it? >> Chair Gatell, Commissioner Connley, at least one year. So, um, but again, we're still working through the community engagement process on that. So, more information to follow. >> Thank you. Thank you, >> Commissioner Eden. Stay up there, Lisa. [laughter] Sorry. Um, so I want to talk about the Washington Avenue Bridge, too. So, with the six million, do we know um if we are going to be able to have any say because it looks like the money is going to the University of Minnesota, which is interesting. And then Met Council is getting that money as well. Are we going to be able to have any say in the design and the safety reviews? Like what what does that look like? >> Chair Gatell, Commissioner Eden, per the legislation, $6 million were required from the from Henipin County to be brought forward and $2 million from Metroransit Met Council were brought to the and they go to the University of Minnesota. There's been a group of staff that have been working on the detailed design both the structural component as well as the suicide prevention railing and I know there has been ongoing conversation with both the family as other as well as other organizations that have experience and knowledge around suicide prevention um as it relates to finalizing the design. The desire that the University of Minnesota does have is that this get taken care of and and rebuilt as quickly as possible. And so there's conversations in a in a whole host of different places related to this. >> Madam Chair, just follow up to that. So when will it be rebuilt? When do they have a time frame of when that's going to happen? >> Chair Gell, Commissioner Eden, the goal is that something start to happen in 2026. Now, the reality of renovating a railing and making it fit and all of those sorts of things is is where I don't have an answer because it hasn't been bid yet. Um, but the goal is that it would be starting in 2026. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. And I just would say, you know, there was actually we they they tried signs actually. They tried Angela that um M Commissioner Connley, that's a great point. They did try signs, I believe, towards the last year. Um, and this there was three to five deaths there when I was going to university and that was a long time ago. So, um, I'm I'm very much supportive of of the I mean, it's too bad that it had to be legislated. Um, which is interesting, but very supportive. >> Commissioner Anderson. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, following up or continuing on the the conversation around uh, Amendment Nine, the you uh, it was touched on a little bit. Thank you ear uh Commissioner Connley for the bringing up the impact of the other county projects. I'm wondering if we can get a full list of the impacted projects um that used to get to this $6 million. Um, and you know, I I think that everybody sees the need to it uh of performing the work, but the way that this went um I mean, I think we need to be transparent about the impacts that it has when the legislature um grants uh a source of money for the counties to determine how best to use it. and then dictates how it's best used uh outside of our process. So, um I think we need to better understand what that means for for our process. Thank you. >> And I have a I'll let you stay up there because I do have some specific questions about number nine. I think we're we're all feeling this one, right? Um and some of my questions were already answered, but who is going to have ultimate ownership of this after this is done? Do we know that or is that going to be negotiated? >> Chair Gatel, the ultimate ownership of the bridge will continue to be Henipin County and through the maintenance agreements. That's where we will lay out responsibility for maintenance. So, for example, today the lighting is the responsibility of the University of Minnesota and the railing is the responsibility of Henipin County. So the agreements get into a very >> um detailed itemized list of responsibility and what that means throughout a calendar year >> plowing and so so knowing bridge bridge construction we're adding weight to that bridge and are we going to have final say on that design for that because I'm concerned about that bridge >> chair could tell that is exactly why we are needing to enter into these agreements that lay out this very specific ific uh responsibility especially as it relates to the structural integrity because this bridge does have a light rail line vehicles as well as a multimodal component on that second level. Yeah, I realize that. And so I just I'm also concerned about other bridges along the way. Um because we know that what happens in these instances, we've seen in other parts of the country that when they can't jump off one bridge, they'll go to another. And I'm just wondering what the cascading effect is going to be. And this is just a comment. And I am concerned because our bridges are aging and that not all of them can be retrofitted as easily. And this is not easy. This one is not easy either. and and and so that's that's my general comment is that and I I know as we look to the future to redesign bridges and put them up we will be doing some things differently but for right now we have a lot of aging bridges we have the most in the state I I already know that from the tab um that I work on. So I have just a lot of concern about some of those kinds of things. So any other final comments? Uh items um 8 through 12 have been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by I. I >> I opposed. Motion carries. >> Um and we have addressed all the administrator amendments and based on the feedback my colleagues. Um we do not have any commissioner amendments. So we're going to cancel a committee meeting on November 20th. I think everybody's office already knows this. Um, if there's no further questions or comments from the committee, we'll move to item 4A, which is old business. So, we have an operating budget is amended today before us. I move to progress this item, the 2026 operating budget to December 2nd administration operations and budget committee. Do I have a second? >> Moved and seconded. Any please >> comment. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, it sounds like there's a technical >> Yeah, >> um I would appreciate if it could be published for in advance for public comment perhaps. That's what I'm asking. Yeah, technically everything else for those following at home. Technically everything else with our budget process does have opportunity for public comment. Um and so as long as that's published early enough, then technically December 2nd also has public comment and of course truth and taxation that evening. Okay, that that's all I had chair. >> Thank you. Thank you. So members of the public watching this budget hearing can call in and leave a recorded message that will be played on the board at the next budget hearing. If there's not enough time to play comments recorded, they'll be sent to commissioners. Um, your comments should be related to the specific budget hearing. Recorded messages will also need to follow the standards which are the same standards as personal comments. Callers must need to state their first and last name for the record. Callers will need to adhere to the rules of decorum as outlined in your posted guidance and address addressing the board. Comments will be kept to two minutes. Comments that are made beyond the two minutes will be left unheard. Um to record a comment, um call 612-6883545. If you're watching, it's up on the screen probably by now. The line is going to be open for 4 hours. I'm going to call it at 1:00. So 5 till 5:00 p.m. um we'll leave the line open. Again, the number 612-6883545. If you want to send an email or a letter to your commissioner, you can do that as well. To speak in person at a board meeting, please attend the annual truth and taxation meeting uh December 2nd at 6 p.m. 2026 proposed budget. Information and hearing is available at www.hennipen. usbudgets. Thank you, Miss Wetland and staff. Um, >> chair, vote on the layover motion. >> Excuse me. Oh, the layover. I don't Yeah, don't know why it's >> moved and seconded. Just haven't voted on it. >> Sorry. All those in favor signify by I. >> Hi. >> My my my mistake trying to run through this fast. Somebody's got to get out of here. Um, so thank you, Miss Wetland. Thank you, staff. Um, the committee is now in recess. >> All right.