Minneapolis Has Underbudgeted Public Safety Overtime for Years. The 2027 Plan Begins to Fix It.

Police and Fire overtime exceeded their combined overtime budgets by $82.2 million from 2021 through 2025. The mayor’s 2027 proposal puts far more of that recurring cost into the budget, although it remains below the City’s August forecast.

Minneapolis budgeted $3.3 million for Police and Fire overtime in 2026. In materials prepared for a September 10 City Council presentation, the City’s Budget Division forecasts spending $27.8 million.

Mayor Jacob Frey’s 2027 recommendation would raise the two overtime budgets to $20.9 million. That is a $17.6 million increase over the published 2026 budget, but it is still $6.9 million below what the City forecasts spending this year.

A larger overtime budget does not necessarily mean more overtime work. When a department already relies on overtime, increasing the budget can recognize a cost the City is already incurring.

Before going further, it helps to keep three kinds of numbers straight. The 2021 through 2025 figures are reported overtime overages. The 2026 figures are August forecasts published in the September 10 budget presentation. The 2027 figures are proposed amounts in the Mayor’s Recommended Budget, which the City Council can still change.

The overtime gap did not begin in 2026

A City budget presentation shows that Police and Fire overtime exceeded their overtime budgets by a combined $6.5 million in 2021, $12.3 million in 2022, $15.5 million in 2023, $16.8 million in 2024 and $31.1 million in 2025. The City forecasts another $24.7 million over budget in 2026.

That adds up to $106.9 million over six years, but it is not six years of actual spending. The reported overages from 2021 through 2025 total $82.2 million. The remaining $24.7 million is the City’s August 2026 forecast.

An overtime overrun is not always a department overrun

The $106.9 million figure does not tell the whole story. It measures how much overtime exceeded the overtime budget. It does not show that the Police and Fire departments exceeded their total budgets by the same amount.

Police shows why. The City’s annual financial reports show that the department remained below its final General Fund appropriation, the amount it was authorized to spend, from 2021 through 2024. That happened even while its overtime account ran over budget. Lower spending elsewhere in the department covered the higher overtime costs.

Fire did exceed its final department appropriation in each of those years. In 2025, both departments finished over their final General Fund appropriations. Police spent $255.1 million against a final appropriation of $226.7 million, a difference of $28.4 million. Fire spent $97.2 million against $90.4 million, a difference of $6.8 million.

The 2025 financial report says the Police overage came mainly from overtime and costs from contracts related to the settlement agreement. It also lists an $8.6 million lease expense with a separate financing source to cover it. Fire’s overage came from overtime and back pay under a settled union contract.

So it would be wrong to say Police overspent its entire department budget every year. The records support a narrower conclusion: Police repeatedly spent more than its overtime budget, while savings elsewhere sometimes kept the department within its final appropriation.

Vacancies can explain part of the mismatch

An unfilled position reduces regular salary and benefit costs, but the work does not necessarily disappear. Police shifts still need coverage. Fire stations still need crews. Other employees may work extra hours to fill the gap. As a result, a department can spend more on overtime and less on regular compensation at the same time.

Overtime, by itself, is not evidence of waste. Public safety departments operate around the clock, and emergencies, leave and minimum staffing requirements can make extra hours unavoidable. The budget question is whether a recurring cost should continue to be treated as an exception after it appears year after year.

Vacancy savings can cover overtime and keep a department within its legal appropriation. But they do not make the original overtime line a realistic estimate of what the City expects to spend. They can also make a larger future budget look like new activity when part of the increase simply corrects a budget that was too low.

The City had planned for overtime before

Minneapolis did not suddenly discover overtime in 2026. The 2021 adopted budget shows that officials knew about the pressure years earlier.

That budget placed $3.5 million directly in the Police overtime account. It also projected another $5 million in overtime as staffing declined. The Council put the additional money in a Public Safety Staffing Reserve held by Finance and Property Services. Police could receive the money only after the chief reported to the appropriate Council committee and the Council approved a transfer.

That arrangement gave the Council another chance to review the spending during a volatile period. It also kept part of the expected cost outside Police’s regular overtime appropriation.

The City had planned for overtime before 2027. What changes in the mayor’s new recommendation is how much money would go directly into the Police and Fire overtime budgets.

What the 2027 recommendation changes

Frey’s recommended 2027 budget would raise the Police overtime budget shown in the City’s documents from $2.3 million in 2026 to $16.5 million in 2027. Fire would rise from $1 million to $4.4 million. Together, the two overtime budgets would increase from $3.3 million to $20.9 million.

That is a large change in the amount budgeted for overtime. But it still does not match the City’s August forecast. The proposed combined amount is $6.9 million below the $27.8 million forecast for 2026. Police would be budgeted $5.3 million below its August forecast, and Fire $1.6 million below.

That does not mean the City should simply copy the 2026 forecast into the 2027 budget. Staffing levels, contracts, leave usage and operating needs can change. But City officials should explain the assumptions behind the lower 2027 amount.

The recommendation also includes more staffing spending. The administration may expect recruitment, added staff or other operating changes to reduce overtime. The published materials do not say how much each change is expected to save or how quickly it would make a difference.

The larger overtime budgets begin to address this recurring mismatch. Putting more of the expected cost directly in the budget does not create the cost. It makes more of it visible before the year begins.

That leaves a separate question: Why did the gap persist for so long? The pattern spans several budget cycles and involves both mayoral recommendations and Council adoption. The available records do not show who set every original overtime line from 2022 through 2026. The evidence does not support blaming the full history on one office or one group of elected officials.

The records show a recurring budgeting practice. Minneapolis used overtime to maintain public safety operations while budgeting far less than the City spent in that account. Lower spending elsewhere sometimes covered the difference at the department level. In 2025, it did not.

The recommendation is not the final budget

The 2027 proposal is still the Mayor’s Recommended Budget, not the final adopted budget. The City Council can keep the overtime amounts, change them or reduce them before adoption.

A more realistic overtime budget is not an argument for unlimited public safety spending. It gives elected officials a clearer starting point for deciding what to expand, reduce or reorganize. If officials expect overtime to fall, the final budget should explain which staffing gains or operating changes will make that happen.

The proposed increase should not be read as a plan to add $17.6 million of new overtime work. Compared with the published 2026 budget, the proposed overtime lines rise by that amount. Compared with the 2026 forecast, the proposal remains $6.9 million lower.

Each comparison answers a different question. The increase shows how much larger the proposed budget lines are. The forecast comparison shows whether those lines are close to recent operating costs. The annual overage history shows that the mismatch has happened repeatedly.

The 2027 recommendation does not answer whether overtime is too high, whether staffing plans will reduce it or whether the proposed amounts will be enough. It does put much more of the expected cost on the books before the year begins. In that sense, the plan begins to fix a budget that has understated Police and Fire overtime for years.

How this analysis was made

This analysis uses the City’s 2027 Budget Overview Presentation for the 2021 through 2026 overtime-overage series, the 2026 overtime budgets and forecasts, and the 2027 recommended overtime totals. It uses the 2027 and 2028 Mayor Recommended Budget for department context and proposed staffing changes. Department-level budget results come from the City’s annual comprehensive financial reports for 2021 through 2025.

The overtime figures compare what each overtime account spent with what the City budgeted for it. They are different from the Police and Fire departments’ overall General Fund results and from the audited citywide spending in the Minneapolis Civic Ledger.

A note about the numbers

The City’s source materials do not match on one point. The displayed Police overtime budgets imply a $14.2 million increase from 2026 to 2027, while the named 2027 Police overtime change item is $13.1 million. This article uses the displayed 2026 and 2027 totals and does not treat the $13.1 million change item as the final Police overtime budget.

The City’s presentation shows how far overtime ran over budget each year, but it does not include every original overtime budget, later revision and final amount spent from 2021 through 2025. The 2026 figures are August forecasts, not final spending.