Preliminary budget review focuses on permit fees, police requests and a contentious pool debate

City staff presented a preliminary 2025 budget that prompted extended discussion about permit fees, police capital needs and the future of the municipal pool.

Jeff (city administration) opened with a high-level cover sheet showing major year-to-year changes and reminded the council that preliminary numbers must be submitted to the county by the end of the month before final adjustments are made. He said finance department line items show an overall reduction of about 14 percent driven largely by lower anticipated outside-audit costs.

On building and permit revenue, staff relayed an analysis from the building official showing Crookston’s current permit rates are noticeably lower than several peers; staff recommended aligning parts of the fee schedule with the lower denominators among comparable cities to reduce the subsidy needed to operate the building department without imposing a stifling increase. Council members asked staff to return with specific fee-schedule options and revenue projections.

Police budget discussion centered on wage pressures and capital requests. Police Chief Darren described a roughly 17.7% increase in police wages tied to potential union settlements and outlined capital asks including motor vehicles, safety equipment and technology; staff identified recurring contract costs for body-worn/interview camera systems that would be spread under multi-year agreements.

Several capital requests and safety items were discussed: Jeff asked the council to consider a $75,000 capital request to reconfigure doors and build security walls to protect the front desk at city hall. The airport budget includes a $35,000 local match to leverage approximately $1.4 million in hangar funding, which staff said would be revenue-producing once completed.

The longest and most contested section of the meeting focused on the municipal pool. Jeff summarized the numbers: a 2022 facilities study estimated about $1.2 million in repairs (he said inflation pushes that closer to $1.5 million), the city’s operating revenue for the pool is roughly $27,000 a year while estimated operating costs are about $329,000, and the school district has discontinued a roughly $30,000 annual payment tied to the swim team. Jeff said that leaves the city covering roughly $300,000 annually in net costs tied to the facility. He also said the League of Minnesota Cities advised there would be an annual liability cost of about $10,000 for a vacant building if the pool were closed and recommended demolition upon closure to reduce ongoing liability.

Council members debated several options: keep the pool open while seeking a long-term funding solution (bonding or a referendum), explore partnerships (hotels, the American Inn, Riverview therapy) or plan for demolition and replacement via a public vote. Several members urged staff to gather firm quotes for needed repairs and for demolition costs, to provide month-by-month usage data from front-desk sign-in sheets, and to run a community survey or referendum similar to past outreach on other capital projects. The council directed staff to leave pool operating funds in the preliminary budget while returning with detailed cost estimates, demolition quotes and stakeholder options to inform next steps.

Staff also presented parks-and-rec items — a conservative drop in campground revenue assumptions, potential changes to nuisance-mowing fees and new capital requests for ballfield improvements, port-a-potties and a guard shack at the campground — and discussed event and marketing strategies to better utilize the Community Sports Center.

Council did not adopt final budgets at the meeting; staff will return with the requested quotes, revenue details and options for the pool and fee-schedule proposals during follow-up meetings ahead of the preliminary levy deadline.