Budget Mania: Wrapping Up the Year with Speed Budgeting

“How do we move Minneapolis forward together, without tearing it apart first?”

This week, the City Council passed a budget that included a record-setting 71 amendments, a mayoral veto, and an eventual City Council override of that veto.

Many praised Mayor Frey for standing firm against what he described as the council’s “fiscal irresponsibility.” In his weekly update, Mayor Frey stated:

“The Council’s proposed budget would add $6.53 million in new cash spending, undermining the City’s financial health by depleting critical cash reserves and diverting funds away from core services to fund new, unvetted, ward-specific projects.”

The City Council, under President Payne’s leadership, viewed the veto override as essential. In his newsletter, Payne justified their actions and amendments:

“Through the Council’s amendments, we were simultaneously able to reduce the tax levy from the mayor’s proposed 8.1% increase down to a 6.8% increase while also prioritizing meaningful investments in public safety, homelessness, environmental justice, and much more.”

The Disinterested Bystander

Bystanders of this process may find themselves confused about who is “right” and what the outcome means for Minneapolis in 2025. The sheer volume of last-minute maneuvering makes it difficult to untangle. A detailed analysis of each amendment to assess its merits would require more space than we have—and likely bore most readers. However, there are a few key takeaways for casual observers:

1. A fractured process: The last-minute shuffling of millions of dollars at the end of a months-long budgeting process highlights a lack of collaboration and goodwill among the parties involved.
2. Opaque decision-making: Winners and losers were chosen based on individual priorities, with minimal transparency.
3. An unsustainable tax levy: While the tax levy was lowered, it remains too high. The prospect of shrinking city government to match reduced revenue—driven by the end of federal funding and a significant downward valuation of office buildings—has been deferred to next year.
4. Questionable economic focus: Economic development appears to prioritize funding nonprofits and city staff over broader business growth.

Council Member Jeremiah Ellison summed up the process during the final City Council meeting of the year, stating (paraphrased), “It’s an election year, and there was political posturing on both sides.” This sentiment feels accurate. Budgets reflect priorities, and the mayor and City Council remain deeply divided over what those priorities should be and how to fund them effectively.

There is little evidence that private businesses will benefit from the conflicts and compromises seen in this budgeting process. Initiatives to create jobs or strengthen the local economy—still struggling to recover from the pandemic, the Uprising, and extensive construction—seem to have been deprioritized.

For people starting a new business, expanding an existing one, or investing in the city, a stable, predictable, and supportive government is key. Unfortunately, Minneapolis instead presents an image of chaos, rancor, and dysfunction at city hall. For many, this will understandably prompt a second thought before risking their savings here.

What to Expect in 2025

Many residents in our liberal city feel disheartened after Trump’s victory. The appetite for more electoral battles may now be limited to diehard politicos. Both sides of the current budget debate will likely use it to rally their bases, driving enthusiasm and donations. Meanwhile, many residents focused on their families, neighbors, and jobs may choose to disengage from the conflict altogether. This could lead to yet another low-turnout election, where the loudest and most organized participants manipulate our outdated and confusing caucus process.

As we look ahead to 2025, let’s remain hopeful but realistic. Winning public trust will require more than dueling press conferences and polished press releases. Voters need to see candidates articulate a clear vision for a future Minneapolis—one that is growing, vibrant, and relatively safe. Part of that vision must include making the private sector feel welcome in the city. This doesn’t mean framing the private sector as the solution to all our problems, but rather recognizing that supporting it cannot be an afterthought.

Progress will require redefining inclusion, moving beyond simplistic divisions of “us versus them.” True progress for Minneapolis will require an attitude of mutual respect and a commitment to listening to differing viewpoints. It will take a mindset focused on collaboration, asking: “How do we move Minneapolis forward together, without tearing it apart first?”