Finance Director Michelle Petrick told the Roseville City Council that the preliminary 2026 city and EDA budget is $81,200,000, an increase of about $7.1 million that includes capital projects, personnel cost increases and several proposed new positions.

"The preliminary '26 city and EDA budget is $81,200,000," Petrick said, outlining a budget calendar that began in March and noting the council previously adopted a preliminary levy in September.

Petrick said the council had requested seven new police positions and 15 firefighter/paramedics; the city later learned it was awarded a federal COPS grant covering four patrol positions and a three‑year SAFER grant to support firefighter positions. She told the council the SAFER grant offset $638,000 in expenses but that the earlier-adjusted start date for firefighters increased expenses by approximately $850,000.

Petrick described three scenarios the council is considering: Scenario 1 (no franchise fees) reflects the positions and assumes offsetting grants; Scenarios 2 and 3 involve utility franchise fees that would shift some cost from property tax to monthly utility bills and could raise additional capital funding. She said the preliminary levy set in September was $33,000,009.94 (a 12% increase) and that the combined tax increase shown in the packet is 11.53%.

Petrick also reviewed how the levy affects a typical homeowner, reporting the combined 2025 monthly tax and utility baseline was $187.74; under Scenario 1 she showed a projected monthly tax levy of $205.84 (an $18.10 monthly increase) and presented alternative monthly impacts for the franchise-fee scenarios. On utilities, she proposed a 2% increase for sanitary sewer, a 5.5% increase for water, a 0% increase for storm drainage and a 3% increase for recycling; she estimated the utility proposal would add about $2.40 per month ($28.83 annually) for a typical residential consumption profile.

Resident Dwenda Jurdigan spoke during the hearing, saying she was surprised by her tax statement. "We had an estimated predicted $962 increase," she told the council, and described that as roughly a 16.2% increase on her bill.

Council members asked staff to compare a requested $7,000 contribution to a six‑month circulator bus service with the Metro Micro program to identify any overlap and to clarify funding sources. Council members repeatedly encouraged the finance commission to review the capital improvement program (CIP) and long‑term maintenance costs and to coordinate work plans with council direction.

No formal budget action was taken at the meeting. The council opened the hearing, accepted public comment and continued the public hearing and final budget adoption to the council's next scheduled meeting.