City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Call a city council meeting for Monday, September 21st, 2026 to order. Would everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. Call to roll, please.

Council Member Wilson.

Here.

Council Member Cordes. Here. Mayor Leen.

Here.

Council Member Bernatz. Here. Council Member Winchheadle.

Here. Any changes to the agenda? Seeing none, I'll look for a motion to approve the agenda.

Motion to approve.

Second. Motion filled. Second, Steve. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Item six, consent agenda. Look for a motion to approve.

Motion to approve. Second.

Motion, Holly. Second, Jake. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Item 8-1, a contract with Krause Anderson Construction for construction manager at Risk Services. Mr. Chansky.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, council. Going back a little bit in this process, on June 15th, the council authorized staff to issue a request for qualifications for construction manager at risk services. The purpose of a construction manager is really to be the city's representative when we get into construction for a project, specifically on this situation, it is the police department remodel and expansion project. Following a thorough review, vetting, and interview process, on August 17th, staff presented their recommendation of Krause Anderson to serve as the city's construction manager at risk. And at that time, the council authorized staff to begin developing a contract with them for your approval. So tonight we are presenting in your packet is an AIA owner construction manager as constructor agreement with Kraus Anderson's construction company for construction manager at risk services. Some details about this agreement. There are two parts with Kraus Anderson Services. The first is pre-construction, which is this phase we are in now. So as we are in still development of the designs for the police department remodel and expansion, they become part of our development team. they work with closely with us closely with bkv our architects one of the things they're doing now is taking where we're at with our development design and developing updated cost estimates so we are in a confident position of where we are cost wise and then we know if there's any changes or that'll need to be made to make sure we're staying in within the anticipated budget for this project The second and most significant part is construction. So should the council ultimately approve to go into construction for this project? Again, that'll be, there's still some number of steps to go, including a conditional use permit for the project. We got to get final design, construction documents approved. You have to approve those, authorize us to go out to bid. And then there's the bidding process and then the accepting of the bids. Those are still parts of this project that are still coming. So again, tonight is not final approval by any means. But should that happen, we go for bid, bids come in, you accept a bid and finally and formally authorize this project. That's the big part of Krause Anderson's work. Their fee for this service is 1.3% of what they call the guaranteed maximum price. And that's one other benefit we get with the construction manager at risk contract is over the next couple of weeks as we're finalizing design, a guaranteed maximum price for construction will be developed. That'll be agreed upon between Kraus Anderson and the city. So it will not exceed a certain amount. As an example, I want to emphasize this purely as an example, if the guaranteed maximum price for construction is $16 million, the fee to Kraus Anderson would be $208,000. What are you getting for that amount of money? The biggest thing is you're getting a site superintendent who is on site for construction 40 hours a week for the duration of the project. In addition to that, which is at this time anticipated to be about 12 months. So you get someone on site all day, every day of construction, representing the city, managing the subcontractors, ensuring that work is up to spec, working with staff, especially the building inspection staff, making sure everything is installed properly to code and to the specifications outlined by our architects. And then you also get a myriad of support staff, such as safety staff, other quality control staff as well. As I mentioned, the guaranteed maximum price, that is something that will be determined in the next month or so. That is something that will be brought back and formally adopted and agreed upon between the city and Kraus-Anderson. And then from there, we'll actually have our final formal fee for the construction services portion of the contract with Kraus-Anderson. So tonight, we are requesting that the council approve an AIA owner construction manager as constructor agreement with Kraus Anderson Construction Company for construction manager at risk services, and I'll take any questions that the council may have.

Thank you, David. Phil? I have nothing. Thank you.

No questions for me. I appreciate the work that we did for the construction manager at risk, shifting the responsibility of construction away from the city to know as an expert in that field what we're doing and putting it on an actual expert in the field. So I think it's a good move.

Jake no questions tonight, Steve. I have none as well. Thank you very much for all the work. Are you the next one, too? Oh, wait. No, we just need a motion. Yeah, I got an action, yeah. Look for a motion to approve the AIA owner-construction manager as constructor agreement between the City of Farmington and Krause Anderson Construction Company for a construction manager at risk services for the police department remodel and expansion project and authorize the mayor and city clerk to execute the agreement.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Motion to fill. Second. Holly, call the roll, please.

Council Member Wilson.

Yes.

Council Member Cordes. Yes. Mayor Leen. Yes. Council Member Burnett. Yes. Council Member Winchell.

Yes.

Thank you. 11-1, the Preliminary 2027 General Fund Budget and Tax Levy. Did I skip? I skipped. Oh, my gosh. I'm sorry, everybody. 9-1. I'm reading numbers wrong. Adopting Ordinances 2026-007 and 2026-008, amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code as they relate to the zoning ordinance and adopting a new zoning district map. Tony. Sorry again.

That's fine. I thought maybe I was hopping around. Good evening, Mayor, council members. This evening, I have two actions that are before you this evening. The first one is the zoning code amendments, which, as the council is aware, we've been working on this since 2004. So just about two years now, and we're at the point of hopefully having that adopted. And then in tandem with that is the zoning map amendment. That is due to some of the changes or reorganization that was done as part of the code amendment process. The zoning map needs to follow what the districts are that we identify within the zoning code. One thing I do want to mention with the zoning code amendments, with the piece that was brought to the Planning Commission, there was an error that had been identified in that. It actually had data centers as a permitted use within the MUCR and that was That happened by accident when the district was to take the place of the street master plan area, which did allow for. Data centers in the current code, so it's just a carry over that got missed. We did remove that because that was never the intent to include data centers within the district. So what's before you tonight does not have that in there. So I wanted to make that clear. The public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on September 9th of this year. The Planning Commission took public comment regarding the proposed amendments and zoning map. uh they did approve or recommend approval of both with a five zero vote uh the action that be that is before you tonight is uh by separate motion approve the following ordinances ordinance uh 2026 tac 007 and summary ordinance amending title 10 of the farmington city code zoning ordinance and then ordinance 2026 tax 008 main title 10 of the farmington city code the farmington zoning ordinance adopting a new official zoning map we do have beth richmond with us this evening from hkgi they have been working in tandem with us on these updates and she has a presentation that we'll go into a little more in depth as to some of the changes that are being proposed

Good evening, everyone. So I just wanted to, again, give a little bit more background on the updates that are related to the zoning code changes, and a little bit more detail for all of you. You've all been along for the ride, I think, at this point, but just some summary notes. So again, this project focused specifically on Title 10 of the city's code, which is the zoning title and specifically it was targeting certain areas because there was a full update that was completed about six years ago in 2020 and so this update was meant to focus on just a few specific areas of the code. So one of those is related to the structure of the zoning districts themselves, making sure that the zoning districts that you have in the code are supporting what the vision of the community is. One of the other changes is just looking at the structure and organization of the code overall and doing some reorganization to make sure that the code is as logical and as easy to use as we can make it. We also analyzed some of the uses, again relating to those changes in the zoning districts, to as much as possible modernize, simplify, and then synchronize those uses across districts so that the same terms are being used throughout the different districts where they're permitted. Uh, we also talked with staff to make sure that the procedures, specifically the land use procedures, uh, are reflective of current city practices. Um, so just making sure that what you have in the code is what the city has been doing or is doing today. Uh, then the few others here, uh, we looked at the code to make sure that it was compliant with state and federal regulations as well as court decisions. That's something that, uh, is just good to do every few years as things continue to change. And then again, making sure that the zoning district framework that we've created will hopefully be able to accommodate what we are anticipating, being the land use changes that are coming out of the 2050 comprehensive plan update. So trying to do a little bit of forward thinking as much as we can with that. So just going back a little bit further, as Tony said, the code update piece, that was started in 2024. But prior to that, there was a project that was a comprehensive plan amendment that lasted from 2023 to 24. That amendment and those changes that were discussed at that time, that was never adopted. But that is something that's anticipated to be brought forward as part of the 2050 update. And so as part of the zoning code update, we were trying to create that framework specifically for the zoning districts that are going to be able to support those changes that we believe are coming with that 2050 update. So while we've done as much forward thinking as we can, we are anticipating that once you get through that 2050 comp plan update process, there likely will be some minor edits to the zoning code that we're expecting following the adoption of that plan. just based on the policies that you choose and the actions that are included in that plan. So specifically related to the updates, just wanted to give you an overview on the major changes. We spent a lot of time focusing on the downtown area specifically. Really wanted to create, again, a zoning district framework, whether that's one district or multiple, that provides flexibility so that we can, as much as possible, encourage and support a thriving downtown. It has a mix of different uses, from commercial to residential to different public uses. With that, obviously we understand that in the downtown area there are existing residential properties. We want to continue to allow those as permitted uses in those areas. As those areas may change, we still want to make sure that the people that own property, residential property, are able to keep those properties how they are today as long as they want. So, the updates related to the downtown districts, there are a few that are just naming. So, the current B2 district, that is proposed to be renamed to DC, which is downtown core, so it's that dark red that you see on the screen. And then the RD district, which is the orange on the screen, that's proposed to be renamed to DR, which is downtown residential. So as far as the uses, the dimensional standards, those really aren't changing for those districts. It's the naming that's changing. The major change here related to districts for the downtown is the creation of a new downtown expansion district, or DE district. And so that applies in those lighter red or pink colors on the screen. And the intent is to apply that to areas that are adjacent to the downtown core district, so adjacent to the dark red, where future commercial expansion is supported, again, as property owners choose that that's what they'd like to do. So in order to plan for logical development in that area, there are some restrictions on where new commercial development can be, even within that downtown expansion district. So it can only be located adjacent to existing commercial or on corners of intersections where there's already commercial in existence. So it's not intended to have different commercial uses kind of pop up everywhere in that lighter red district, but it's meant to be a logical expansion of the downtown core. So I said the downtown residential and the downtown core districts, those uses that are permitted in those districts are staying the same. So in downtown residential, that's everything from single and two-unit dwellings up to townhomes and apartments. In the downtown core, that's more of a mix of uses, so different commercial, institutional uses, and then apartments as well. Downtown expansion really meshes the two of them together and so all of the uses that are allowed in the DR and the DC are allowed in the downtown expansion. As far as the dimensional requirements go, again, DR and DC, those districts are staying the same for the requirements. For downtown expansion, the dimensional standards are intended to be consistent with the DR or the DC based on what use you're talking about. If you have a residential use in the downtown expansion district, that'll follow the requirements of the DR district. If you have a non-residential use, that would be following the requirements of the downtown core. There are some additional standards in the downtown expansion district that we worked through as part of some of our joint meetings. So one is related to lot frontage and requiring that buildings be located closer to the street. trying to get that kind of downtown core feel. So a minimum of 60% of the lot frontage needs to include a building with its front plane between 0 and 15 feet from the property line. We also looked at parking. So a minimum of two parking spaces is required for all uses. For non-residential uses, there's a long table of parking requirements. if when you're calculating your specific parking requirements with that table if you get to a number that exceeds five spaces as a non-residential use then in the downtown expansion district you're required to provide 50 percent of those calculated uses access is intended to be either off of the alley or if there's a property that has access to two different streets it's intended to be off of the street that has the lowest functional class so local road versus a versus a collector for example and then lastly there are some screening standards that were included related to when a non-residential use or a larger residential building like an apartment is located adjacent to other residential property so that's the base zoning districts there were also a few changes related to the overlay zoning districts that i wanted to touch on So in the code today, there are three overlay districts. The downtown commercial, which is kind of that central red dashed area. Highway 3, which is the long blue area on the right of the screen. And then over to the left is the Spruce Street overlay, which is that green dashed area. And all of those are districts that establish design standards for those specific areas of the city. And so the changes that are proposed for downtown commercial, this is an overlay that would be applied to the DC and the DE districts specifically. And really what it's intended to do is bring forward those design standards in order to create a cohesive built environment and maintain the idea of a small town or main street architectural pattern. support an active pedestrian environment, and then be able to establish the transitions between downtown and the adjacent neighborhoods. So the design standards that are included in the downtown commercial overlay are related to building materials, building design, awnings, canopies, and then certain requirements for parking areas as well. The other two overlay districts, so the Highway 3 overlay and then the Spruce Street overlay, those are both proposed to be eliminated. And instead, the standards that are in those overlays are proposed to be incorporated into a general building design standards chapter. So instead of just applying to those two areas that were dashed, the blue and the green on the map, these standards would now apply to all new multi-unit residential, mixed-use, and non-residential development in the city. So those standards are related to building materials, facade design, transparency, awnings and canopies again, loading docks, and utilities. I guess questions about any of that before I jump into the map piece of this? why don't we hold all the questions for the end okay sounds good uh all right so the zoning map changes uh these again are specifically related to the district changes that were in the proposed zoning code update and so these are not we're not looking forward to the 2050 comprehensive plan and the future land use uh this these changes are specifically related to those district changes that i've talked about so uh this includes the parcels that are going to be rezoned to the new downtown expansion and downtown core districts. It also includes parcels that are currently zoned B3, which is the general business district. That district is being changed to B2 because of the fact that the current B2 district has now become downtown core. And so those are being rezoned to B2, which it's really just a name change. And then the other parcels that are being rezoned are the ones that are currently zoned Spruce Street mixed use. Those are all being rezoned to mixed use commercial residential because that Spruce Street mixed use is going away. So this is the proposed citywide zoning map with those changes. Again, really we're just focused on the changes that are related to the districts that have been updated as part of this code amendment. Again, we do anticipate that there will be some changes to the zoning map following the adoption of the 2050 comprehensive plan update and that future land use map. There will be some additional changes to this map at that time. And then lastly, we did have some technical updates that we worked more closely with staff on. So this was based on input and discussions with staff and then also the audit findings. At the start of this project, we completed an audit of the city code and just noted some things that would help make the code easier to use or bring it up to state statute standards or things like that. So you can see a little snippet of that audit document on the screen there. But really we were focused on a few changes to different procedures, use specific standards, and then some development standards as well. The other main change here is related to the organization of the code. And so you can see on the left is the existing structure of the code. It has six different chapters. And on the right is what's proposed with this update. So obviously we've broken out those chapters into sections. into several more. So you have five additional chapters. Hopefully they're a little bit more topic specific and clear so that it's easier for people to find what they're looking for when they go into the code instead of hoping that whatever they're looking for is in performance standards, for example. So again, the Planning Commission held that public hearing and they recommended approval of the zoning code update and the map related map changes on september 9th and so tonight council is requested to review the draft code and the draft map and then approve both of those both of those items i'm happy to stand for questions perfect phil

Thank you. I appreciate all the work that city staff and planning commission and the council, we've had many meetings about this and talked about it and it looks good. The only question I have is maybe an explanation. So the downtown expansion, just so people know if they end up selling their house, what if anything changes?

Uh, so if they sell their house, they can still sell it as a, as a house and people can move in and use it as a house if that's what they'd like to do. Um, If they do happen to be adjacent to commercial, they have some additional options or choices for what that property could be used for in the future.

Perfect. Thank you.

echo what Phil said I this is not new for us to see and so we've been we've been working on this for a while now most of the questions I had specifically related to it were answered even in the Planning Commission meeting so very grateful for them if either of you could take us back just a second and explain particularly for residents that are just catching up right now knowing that the 2050 comprehensive plan is includes land use and it includes a zoning component what is the reason for completing this component now because i there's a funding mechanism that's tied to getting this done so if you could just explain that little bit so they can understand what got us to here and then what comes next because we're not repeating it again most of the work will be done before we get there

Correct. What you'll see with the 2050 comprehensive plan will be new to the zoning map versus what we're trying to approve tonight. You are correct. The zoning update was part of the special funding that we got through COVID. So there's a timeframe to try to get that approved and expended. And we identified this as a potential option to look at the zoning code, reorganize it, make it a little more user friendly. So as Beth had mentioned, so that when people go to the code, they're not necessarily hunting for the information that they are. looking for. Right now our code, some of that information can be buried and can be rather difficult to obtain. So we decided to use some of that money to update the zoning code specifically for that. And through the entire code amendment process, the downtown expansion came up and all of that. So really we're just looking to do the zoning to reflect what we're doing with this amendment now. There will be additional changes with the 2050 comp plan as far as the future land use. I know council has mentioned a hundred times that they want to see more pink on that map, which is commercial. So that will be a large component of that 2050 update. And with that, that would require us to revisit the zoning map to make that in compliance with what gets approved with that 2050 plan.

And just one other point of reference, most of the effort here was focused on downtown core, downtown expansion. So it's not work that's being done for future land use. It's work that over the course of the next 20 or so years, as things naturally shift and adjust, it gives options to residents. It's not forcing them to do anything. So if you're quietly living in your home and you're enjoying it in the downtown district, you do not have to leave. You don't have to move. You do not have to sell. You don't have to sell to a commercial buyer, and if you are not adjacent to commercial or approximate to it as far as roadways are concerned, it doesn't affect you one way or the other. It would only be as development naturally occurs.

Correct. We were very intentional about that.

Thank you.

Thank you. Jake?

I think both my questions have been answered. I was going to ask about the downtown expansion options, as Phil and Holly both have already mentioned, and then just how this runs.

parallel to the comp plan and and feeds into the final comp plan so i have no other questions at this moment steve all right i apologize i'm probably going to take a little different track on this one um all that although that being said i do really appreciate the council and the planning commission have really had good discussions staff has provided us good information um I want to go back to the core piece, though. So I believe this was April of 2024 that we initiated the contract. Was it somewhere about there, Tony?

September of 24. Okay.

So I've worked through a few different comp plans through a couple different segments on the council, and typically zoning follows as kind of the kind of the execution or the, you know, the kind of putting dots and colors together from the comp plan vision. So the consultant already pointed out that we're going to have to go back and update the zoning map. So what's the urgency of doing this today? Because we've already expended the money on the contract. We should have back when we executed that. So I'm trying to figure out why we would do this today and not just wait.

Well, I think the only way you would wait is if you don't approve the amendments, because the amendments would drive the necessity to update the zoning map. Due to the creation of the new downtown districts, it requires that update to the map. So that's really what's driving the need to update the map is the creation of the new zoning districts. Okay.

Okay. So let me turn to that new downtown zoning district. And I really am appreciative of staff's time on Friday going through this. And just having a talk through of it. I just have not reached the comfortability with this downtown expansion at all. And here's what I worry about as a council member. You know, I think this is just how I look at it. So I'm not trying to project what anyone else would, how anybody else would look at it. I really have to take a long-term view of the community and what is 2050, 2060? And my kids are coming to visit me at the cemetery. I mean, not trying to be funny about that, but really the city is gonna outlive any one of us. So any decision any one of us makes right about this time is gonna impact the folks in the future. And while it is 100% true, that residents can maintain their home, from my standpoint as a council member, that's not the vision I want to see downtown. And I think we want to do everything we can to preserve residential housing in a very attractive area, very attractive portion of town. So kind of taking that into consideration, And Tony, I gave you this extreme example, but I'm going to ask it again. So if I look at page, I'm going to have a hard time pulling up the page right in front of me here, but fast food restaurants are permitted as a conditional use in this expansion area, correct?

Correct.

So I can think of a couple areas. So this is the type of unintended consequence that I worry about, okay? Yeah. I'm just going to put it out there. Don't criticize me. I love Chipotle. So if I was a commercial developer that was looking at a parcel of land in an area that was adjacent, and maybe I worked with that particular establishment and maybe worked with one or two others that could go in that area, as long as they met the conditions that we have established as a city, I believe they could build there, correct? That is correct. So then we go back to the previous comment or the previous discussion points. That to me is a really severe conflict of the peaceful enjoyment of those people to live in those parts of town. Now, if we said my second favorite food, donuts, and said, you know, let's put a donut shop, which, you know, might have walk-up traffic, shorter hours during the day, what have you, maybe next to a... you know, a trendy beverage shop, for example, that might have a different outcome. But I just, for me, and, you know, I respect, obviously, my colleagues' opinions on this. Just for me, I think I just worry about the unintended consequences of what could come in the future. And I don't, for me, see a compelling reason to do anything for sure now, or at least until after we pass the comp plan. So those are my thoughts at the moment.

Thank you. May I ask one question to that, I guess? Just real quick. You may. This is still in line with kind of your opinions during the many discussions we've had about this topic since the start though, right?

Oh, this is, yeah. I mean, if you recall, Mayor Leaning Council, When we met to talk about this with the Planning Commission, I think one of the very first comments that left my mouth is I'm very concerned about unintended, unknown consequences. And I'll tell you, when it comes to conditional use permits, as long as the developer meets conditions, we can't deny that. We'd be sued. That's right in state statutes. So, you know, if I think about, you know, Minneapolis or St. Paul or other older communities, like even Farmington, I suppose you could say, but communities which have a lot of intermixed retail and housing, it flows. You know, I could take Grand Avenue as maybe more of an extreme example where you see businesses, bars, you know, specialty stores and a home in a home. And I think maybe it's been that way for a bit. I guess I don't worry about some types of shops, but I can't distinguish between whether I'd like a boutique shop or a children's toy store versus a fast food restaurant. I mean, they're all essentially permitted. And that's the consequence I worry about. Yeah.

I just wanted to make sure that they weren't new because this all sounded very familiar.

Yeah, no, I mean, I am very appreciative of all the work the Planning Commission has done, the staff has done, the council has done. I just arrived at a different viewpoint on the issue, but thank you.

That was going to be my point, as I know this was many discussions, joint work sessions with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission was here. It should be no surprise to them when there were 10 different opinions about everything we were doing here. It's coloring the map, and as you said, you heard 100 times, more pink, all these things, right? And there's going to be 10 different opinions. And so, no disrespect that you have a different one than anybody else. There were nine others that had maybe eight, because Phil got to double dip a little bit there. you know, it was going to be tough to reach a solid consensus. So I appreciate that you guys did consolidate this very well. And I do appreciate Steve's concern. I hesitate to everyone kind of has a fear of what a business looks like when it comes in. Right. But we've kind of been firm on this. It's kind of been the theme of the night that we have to do or we want as a council to do something to increase the opportunities for business to come here. And this was a way to attack that, just as I colored the map more pink in ways that were logical. And we kind of worked through a lot of hard conversations to get here. So I appreciate all the hard work. My screen went to sleep on me, but I'll look for a motion here for a second. One second.

Mayor, Council, if I recall, I think we have two separate motions on this one. We do.

So I will do my separate motion. I look for a motion to adopt Ordinance 2026, Tax 007 and Summary Ordinance amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code, the Zoning Ordinance.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Motion, Holly. Second, Jake. Call the roll, please.

Council Member Cordes?

Yes.

Mayor Lien?

Yes.

Council Member Bernatz? Yes. Council Member Windschuttle? Yes. Council Member Wilson?

No. Thank you. And I will look for a motion to adopt Ordinance 2026, Tax 008, amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code, the Farmington Zoning Ordinance, adopting a new official zoning district map.

Motion to approve. Second.

Motion, Holly. Second, Jake. Call the roll, please.

Council Member Bernatz. Yes. Council Member Winchell. Yes. Council Member Wilson. No. Council Member Cordes. Yes. Mayor Lee.

Yes. Thank you.

Thank you.

Now we're on item 11, the preliminary 2027 general fund budget and tax levy. Lynn.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Tonight we are presenting the preliminary 2027 budget. And before Kim walks through the details, I wanted to provide a little context about the work that has gotten us to this point. Developing a city budget is a significant process. The team spends many hours working through the budget line by line, department by department, by looking for efficiencies, evaluating needs, identifying opportunities to continue providing high quality services to the taxpayers of Farmington. Every priority and department request that comes forward is taken seriously. At the same time, we recognize that every dollar we spend ultimately comes from taxpayers, whether through traditional property taxes or other sources of revenue. That responsibility is something that we do not take lightly. And again, I'll say that again. That is something that the whole team does not take that lightly. Over the past five years, we have put a great deal of work into planning, prioritizing, and establishing clear direction for the City of Farmington. That work helps us make more informed decisions about where resources should be invested and how those investments support our long-term goals. As we move forward, it is important that we continue to follow the process and to make data-driven decisions. while also balancing service levels, community priorities, infrastructure needs, employee resources, and overall financial health of the organization. The budget we are presenting tonight is where we are at today. It is the preliminary budget and there will be continued discussions, questions, adjustments, and decisions as we move forward in the process. Kim will walk you through where we currently stand in the 27 budget, and she will also provide explanations of how the property tax levy works as a whole, including how the city's portion of the property tax bill impacts the residents and businesses of Farmington. Our goal tonight is to make sure that the council is a clear understanding of where we are at, how we got here and the decisions that still need to be made as we continue work towards the 2027 budget. With that, I'll turn it over to Kim.

Thank you. Thank you, Lynn. Good evening, mayor and council members. So tonight we are presenting the 2027 preliminary budget and tax levy. Before I dive into the presentation, just want to make a note that this presentation will be made available online. So if anybody wants to review it after this meeting, it will be available for review. here this evening because state law requires cities to certify the preliminary tax levy by september 30th the amount adopted tonight will appear on the proposed tax statements mailed in november the key point to emphasize the final levy adopted in december cannot exceed the preliminary levy so tonight we are establishing the maximum levy while still giving us the upcoming months to refine the budget based on updated information It's also important to remember that an increase in the city's tax levy does not automatically mean the same increase in individual property taxes. And we'll walk through that later in this presentation. This slide shows our annual budget timeline, which outlines how we move from early department work all the way to the final budget adoption in December. We begin in May when departments start entering their initial 2027 budget data. And then through June and July, finance reviews the information, departments meet together, and we work through the budget, as Lynn indicated, often line by line to understand the needs, pressures, and opportunities. Even though compliance is only required at the fund level, we typically go much deeper because it leads to better planning and clearer decision-making. So by August, we hold our first council work session to review early draft and gather direction from you. Additional work sessions follow, which leads us to tonight's milestone adoption of the preliminary levy and budget. Budget work does not end tonight. We will continue to work throughout the coming months. As we receive more information, residents will receive their truth and taxation statements, which will show the proposed levy that's adopted tonight. But again, that's just our estimate and it may change before we adopt the final budget in December. Key message is that our process is structured for transparency accuracy and thoughtful refinement We don't build a budget in a single step. It evolves over months of work of detailed review and collaborative discussion The numbers presented tonight are preliminary We will continue refining the budget as new information becomes available in the months ahead Before we move into more detail, I want to begin with a strategic framework that guides our budgeting decisions, the City Council's strategic pillars. They shape how we prioritize investments and evaluate needs. These pillars include quality business growth and retention, community engagement, infrastructure support, and employee engagement, culture, and wellness. These help connect individual budget decisions to the broader priorities Council has set for the community. You'll see these pillars reflected throughout the 2027 proposal in our public safety investments, infrastructure improvements, and organizational needs. They serve as the foundation for why we fund certain items and how we allocate resources. So this slide highlights some of the key influences on the 2027 budget. And we've divided them into three main areas, and together they explain why the cost of maintaining services continues to rise. First, we have the operational cost pressures. These are inflation-driven costs that affect every department, things like rising wages and health insurance, and higher costs for fuel, utilities, contracted services, equipment, and materials. Personnel makes up about 73% of the general fund spending, so increases in these areas have a major impact. These pressures reflect the higher cost of maintaining our existing service levels, not expanding them. Second, we have the capital reinvestment needs, taking care of what we have. The city continues to face required maintenance across facilities, equipment, and infrastructure. Many of these needs come directly from condition assessments with some major projects that are in the preliminary stages right now. Making these reinvestments now helps prevent future service disruptions and avoids higher long-term costs. Third are the departmental budget pressures. Departments face several service-level demands that require additional resources, including added positions to meet growing operational needs. In some cases, departmental requests exceed the non-levy revenue growth, meaning we need to prioritize carefully to ensure each area has what it needs to meet expectations and minimize added levy increases. Overall, these budget influences reflect the cost of maintaining the services residents depend on and ensuring we continue to provide reliable, responsive operations across the community. So on this slide, I wanna walk through some of the key investments that are included in the 2027 budget. And these really show the residents what they receive for their tax dollars and how we're aligning spending with the city's long-term priorities. And these have been grouped into four areas, organizational capacity, public safety, facilities, and infrastructure. So first we're investing in organizational capacity, and that's essentially making sure we continue providing the same level of service residents expect. We're also continuing to work on the compensation and classification study, which ensures our pay structure is competitive and reflects market conditions. And we've included funding for organizational space needs assessment so we can evaluate whether our current facilities support staff effectively as workloads increase. Public safety is a major area investment again this year. Last year we added some full-time fire and we're proposing to add additional full-time fire staff this year along with a police sergeant. We're doing this to ensure adequate staffing and maintain reliable emergency response. There's also some equipment that we're planning to replace for the police department, ballistic plates and weapons. which is a routine but essential part of keeping our officers safe and properly equipped. As we discussed even earlier tonight, we're planning for the proposed police department expansion and remodel to support both current needs and future growth. Facilities are another significant focus of this budget. We're facing a roof replacement at the central maintenance facility, which is currently being held down in places by sandbags. We have major repairs to make at the ice arena. And we have some replacement condensing units and furnaces at fire station number two. And finally, we're continuing to invest in our streets, trails, pavement maintenance, and park improvements that are listed under infrastructure. Some of the improvements that are proposed in 2027 for the parks include those at Pine Knoll, Meadowview, and Silver Springs. And those are funded through the Park Improvement Fund. So they don't rely on levy dollars. But there's other projects like the trail improvements that come directly from our pavement and facility condition assessments. And these are data-driven decisions. These infrastructure investments ensure that the places residents use every day stay safe, functional, and well maintained. Another key piece of the 2027 budget is our continued transition from leasing vehicles to owning them. Leasing made sense a few years ago when vehicle availability was unpredictable. But as those leases expire, we're moving toward ownership. The team has met and we have decided that this is in the best interest of the city. The challenge, however, is that the leases don't expire evenly. So you can see in this slide that we have 14 lease expirations in 2028. So we're looking at developing a plan that doesn't create those big swings, right? And we also have some issues with if we were to have all 14 of those vehicles be replaced in 2028 is having our fleet team being able to handle the transition of equipping those vehicles. So we need to come up with a realistic plan that balances all of those items to help stabilize that we are proposing to use public safety aid, and that is included in this budget. we shift to the capital improvement plan i just want to give a high level look at how the proposed 2027 budget connects to the city's long-term needs this is representative of our 2027 through 2020-31 capital improvement plan and we're still actively amending this document and looking at our projects primarily in 2027 but also 2028 is as and we go further into the into the future It helps us look beyond a single budget year instead of making decisions one project at a time It allows us to plan for facilities infrastructure and equipment needs That we will need over this course of several years crew includes things like facility lifecycle needs streets and trails stormwater improvements and equipment replacements and Importantly, these are not needs that have suddenly emerged with a 2027 budget, for example in 2026 we had $16 million in that plan and 2025 9.3 million 2024 7.6 million this graph here represents about. 68Million over the course of 5 years. I will say that this includes the 20Million dollars that we have as a placeholder for the PD expansion and remodel. So that's a good chunk of it. Um, we want to let everyone know that the purpose of the simple, it prevents us from getting caught in a cycle where we only react when something breaks. Instead, we're looking ahead, identifying needs early, and planning the funding over multiple years so the impact is smoother and more predictable. And even though we're not going to get into reviewing specific projects tonight, the key point is the proposed 2027 budget is part of that ongoing planning process, not something that was developed in isolation for a single budget year. provide some concept of other than like the PD expansion that's included in this plan, right? We sometimes have annual projects that we do. So mill and overlay, equipment replacements, street construction, parks improvements. So a lot of those things are in there. Water storage facility. All of those are kind of included in this. And we have in the past few years, obtain some CIP software that helps us as well to get better at that planning process and try to encompass everything that we foresee in the coming years to make sure nothing slips through and we're ready and we're prepared. Central focus of this year's budget is making decisions based on real information. We're really leaning into the data we have now available. And that includes things like payment and facility condition assessments, fleet ratings, compensation and classification data, utility rate models, long-term financial planning tools. All of these help us understand the true conditions of our assets, how services are being delivered today, and what financial obligations we are likely to face looking ahead. And it's important to know that these tools don't make the decision for us. They simply give us better information. It helps us see where our needs are emerging, where priorities should shift, or where we should invest now to avoid larger costs down the line. So bringing all the pieces together, and I apologize, these numbers are kind of small, but I need to fit it all on one slide. The proposed levy is about $21.69 million across all funds. This is an increase of about $2.2 million compared to last year. A big part of that increase supports the general fund. That budget totals 21.1 million in 2027. And that remains the core of our day-to-day operations. When we're speaking about the general fund, the levy contributes about 16.6 million of that. So a good chunk of the general fund is funded by levy. But there are also other revenue sources like licenses and permits, state aid, charges for services and investment earnings. Beyond the general fund, we also have some levy increases in other areas or levy that supports other areas, debt service, capital projects and equipment, facilities and maintenance, economic development, trail and pavement maintenance. So this budget supports our core services, invests in public safety, reinvests in facilities and infrastructure, and meets our long-term financial commitments. Now I want to focus a little bit on the general funds. And so we're looking at, as I mentioned with the previous slide, a general fund budget of about $21.1 million. And 79% of that is funded by levy. And again, as I mentioned previously, there are other sources, like the licenses and permits that account for about 5%, intergovernmental, 6%, fines and forfeits, 6%, and then the others that make up the remaining amount, investment income, miscellaneous, and transfers. Now let's take a look at the general fund expenditures, which shows how the city allocates resources across departments. So comparing 2026 to 2027 numbers, a few areas stand out. So public safety shows the largest increases. Police increases from about 6.7 million to 7.3 million. $4 million and fire increases from roughly $2.98 million to $3.51 million. Most of this reflects changes in wages and benefits for our current staff, but along with the new positions that I mentioned previously in both departments, three full-time firefighters and one police sergeant. General government is also showing a little bit of an increase, about 3.41 to 3.71. Again, this is primarily due to the rising personnel costs. And then we also had the addition of a communications position in 2026 that was not included in the adopted budget. It happened mid-year. Community development also shows an increase of about $300,000, but this is largely driven by the LAHA dollars that we talked earlier tonight at the work session, local affordable housing. In the 2026 budget, we didn't show that expense in transferring the LAHA dollars to Dakota County, and this one includes that. So that is the reason why there's a difference there. And then there's also a notable increase in transfers and even though we shifted last year in 2026 to avoid as much as possible to having the transfers. Coming out of the general fund into other funds, there are a few situations where we're needing to do that one is. subsidizing the arena, so we do have a transfer to move some money from the general fund. into the ice arena to make sure that that is balanced budget. And then also we have some revenue coming in from the USDA rent. And for accounting purposes, we need to account for it all in one place. And then we're shifting some of those dollars over to help with facility improvements. So that's what makes up the transfers. This is just another look at the general fund expenditures, but by category. So again, as mentioned previously, salary and benefits make up the largest portion of our general fund expenditures. And this is typical of most cities. So this is not out of the ordinary. If you look at any other city, you're likely to see something similar. We rely heavily on our people. Salary benefits increased from about $13.7 million in 2026 to $15.4 million in 2027, reflecting wage adjustments, benefit increases, and staffing additions. These costs, as I mentioned, count for about 75% of the general operating costs. Materials and supplies, just rising slightly from about $844,000 to $932,000. Again, that's mostly driven by inflation. Capital outlay, that one, you can barely see that on there. You don't usually see capital outlay in the general fund that we keep that primarily in our capital project funds. I overstepped the purchase services and other charges. That also remains fairly stable, moving from about 4.7, 4.1, 4.1. This really hasn't changed much. And that accounts for costs like utilities and contracted services. So overall takeaway with this slide, general fund is driven by people, by the employees who deliver services, and by the central cost of operating those services every day. Included in the city's preliminary budget is a proposed tax levy. As shown here, the certified levy is projected to increase by 11.3% from 2026. The city's levy represents the total amount the city needs to collect to fund services we provide to the community. It does not necessarily equate to what people are going to see on their increases in their tax bill. A lot of attention gets put on that levy increase, but it's not necessarily the best benchmark. It doesn't tell the whole story. There are several factors that influence what property owners actually pay. One of those is fiscal disparities. Fiscal disparities is a metro-wide program designed to balance commercial industrial tax base across the region. At Farmington, we currently benefit from the program. So we receive funds that lower our certified levy. So you can see the 21.6 million proposed for 2027, fiscal disparities of nearly 2.9 million reduces To the net levy actually paid by our tax payers and spread out across all of our taxable properties net so 18.8 million. Another major factor in talk is local taxable value or tax capacity. Significant increases in tax capacity are often the result of growth and development. So as more properties are added to the tax base, the levy is shared across a larger number of taxpayers. So again, the city's levy is the total amount we must collect. How that amount is distributed across properties depends on tax-based changes, property types, valuation adjustments, and classification. There's a lot that goes into the valuation and the amount that people actually pay on their tax bill. And in just a moment, we're gonna walk through some of those illustrations to try and provide a better understanding of how that works. before we do that just want to take a quick moment here to show how the levy is being proposed to be allocated in 2027. the city's proposed levy for 2027 again as 21.69 million which reflects an increase of about 2.2 million uh or 11.3 percent as i mentioned previously um The levy supports more than just the general fund, even though it's the biggest portion up there, the general operation, but it also breaks out into helping us with purchases of capital equipment, our capital projects, economic development, our facility improvements, again, the roof that we have to repair over the central maintenance facility, ongoing trail maintenance. ongoing pavement maintenance, which should be like mill and overlay projects every year. And then also we have the debt service that we've committed ourselves to from previous issuance of bonds. I do want to note with the debt service that we did utilize fund balance to bring that down or otherwise that amount would have been more. So here I want to take some time to just walk through some very simple illustrations. Again, these are illustrations. These are not actual. But to just provide some more understanding of how the tax system works and try to simplify it as much as possible. So this first example shows the simplest case. One home. and the city's tax levy. And in here, it happens to be the same because we just have one home, but one home's paying the $1,500 that the city levy. The city's decided we need to collect $1,500, and so that's a set amount. And again, here it matches the one home. So if we move to this illustration, we add a second home. So in this example, each home is now valued at $300,000, so a total of $600,000. The tax base grew, doubled from the $300,000 to the $600,000. City levy, again, illustration example, went from $1,500 to $2,000. That's an increase in the city levy of 33%. But because we have that larger tax base, one home actually saw a 33% decrease because it was spread across more homes. So each home paid $1,000 each. So even as a city might increase their tax levy, impact on individual property can be smaller than what the levy increases. So now instead of changing the levy, we change the value of one of the homes. So we have the two homes valued at $300,000 for a total of $600,000. They each paid $1,000. Now we add the home one, they did a little remodel, and now they have a valuation of $400,000 versus $300,000 of home two. So total home value is $700,000. The city levy did not change. One home, their taxes went down and the other one went up. So again, even though the city's tax levy, the amount that we need to collect did not change, 0% change, the home still saw a difference. So here we introduce another important part of property tax. calculations tax capacity. So two properties can have the same market value but contribute different amounts to the tax base because their classification is different. So residential, commercial, industrial properties are taxed differently under state law. In this example, the residential homestead property's tax capacity is calculated at 1% of their value. So $400,000 times the 1%, $4,000. There's another tier that would be added if the property's value were to be $500,000. Again, it's very complicated, but we're trying to keep it very simple. The commercial properties, however, are taxed at a higher rate. They're taxed at 1.5% of the first $150,000 and 2% above that. So that's why homeowners might see one pattern of change while commercial properties experience something entirely different. this example trying to bring it all together so we double the city's tax levy so it goes from before to at two thousand dollars to after four thousand dollars so city levy went up a hundred percent but at the same time we add a commercial property into the mix has the same value as home number one. But you can see that the commercial property, because of the calculation, they're going to pay a much greater portion of that $4,000 than the home value that $400,000 would. So this is a powerful example why levy changes don't necessarily translate directly to what individual property tax changes and it's not always the most meaningful benchmark to focus on. Big takeaway, city establishes the levy, it's a set amount that we need to collect. Each property's tax capacity based on market value established by the county determines how much of that levy it pays. as the tax base changes individual impacts shift so an increase in the city's levy does not mean that every property experiences that same percentage increase the distribution depends on valuation changes across the entire community so now that we walk through that how the living interacts with property values and tax capacity i want to bring it all back to farmington's estimated numbers for 2027. All of those illustrations that we just looked at were designed to show one core idea. Again, the levy amount is the total amount the city needs to collect. How that amount is shared across individual properties depends on valuation changes and tax capacity, not simply the size of the levy increase. For 2027, the average home value per Dakota County is about $379,300. That's up from $370,300 last year, which reflects a 2.44% in market value. Based on the current estimates, the city portion of property taxes for the average home would be about $1,900 per year, 1907 to be exact, or around $159 per month. which is up roughly from $1,844 per year or $154 per month. So if you do the calculation, that calculates out to about a 3.5% increase in the person's taxes or about $5 per month. I do want to remind that this is an estimated average. Again, hopefully the simple example that we provided indicates that there's a lot of variables that can happen to indicate whether a home's gonna go in this direction or not. So it's just an estimate, tried to give some perspective of what our homeowners are looking at for their tax increase. At this point, we're asking Council to take two actions tonight. First, to approve Resolution 2026, Tax 076, adopting the preliminary 2027 budget and setting the preliminary tax levy collectible in 2027. And second, to set the public input meeting, our Truth in Taxation hearing, for Monday, December 7, 2026 at 7 p.m. And as always we will continue refining the budget between now and December as updated information comes in That concludes a presentation for this evening and I'm happy to take any questions and I would also say that this is Right. I bring it all together in numbers. I am presented it to you tonight But however, it's the team that puts it together. So they are here as well if they have any specific questions Thank You Kim start with Steve

Thank you very much, Kim. Kim, can you go back for a reference in a minute or two to that slide about all the components that go into the circle about data-driven decisions? Because I do want to bring that up. Not sure if it's going to be picked up on the TV. So this is an interesting fun fact. I decided, and I think there might have been a comment that I saw out there, you know, why is it that, you know, Property taxes, you know, why do we have to pay property taxes to the city? Why can't we have a different mechanism? What's up with that? And our modern day system, so I'm not trying to talk to anyone. I'm just saying this because I didn't know this. Our current property tax system actually originated in 1849 before Minnesota became a state. It's modernized over time. But at least at the time, and it continues today, it was the only way that that legislators elected officials at that time could figure out a way to fund local governments or more particularly roads infrastructure that was needed and of course now you fast forward to 2026 and it seems like you have an endless supply of jurisdictions that want to tax you which brings me to my main point and I probably heard more from residents this year approaching the budget than any other year with significant concerns, you know, cost of living going up, increase in costs and everything. And yes, this is only the preliminary budget. One thing I will say for sure, since Lynn has been here as our administrator, this preliminary budget has never been, our final budget has always been a little bit lower. Not because of pressure from the council, but because of new information, as you pointed out, maybe grant funding that we've been looking at has come to fruition, et cetera. The other reality I looked at with this budget is, one, you know, I've had a lot of questions because, you know, we're talking about infrastructure and we're also talking about the police station and funding our police department. The police department probably next to the roads or certainly right up there with our trails, excuse me, trails police and fire even garbage collection back in the day but those are all rated very high services and some of the most expensive decisions that we are making this year are based on those departments and making sure that they can serve all of you you know people might question well you know do we need an investigator or all this different stuff and it's a good question very fair question And I would say that those requests that have come from our departments are absolutely needed requests. I would also point now going back to this chart. You know, when I started this tenure on the council, I guess about six years ago, our infrastructure, our pavement management plan, things that you see up there that we're doing, fleet ratings, none of that occurred. And I will tell you, I could give credit to every single department director that's here tonight, but I'll tell you one of the most valuable tools that I've gotten as a council member is facility condition assessment and pavement condition rating. That pavement condition rating is what allows me as a council member to say, okay, I know that the condition of this road is a 15. Um, because somebody at the city, one of our engineering folks, one of our road folks under John's team has went out there to look at it. Um, I know that we need to do something with our parks because Kelly's team and the park maintenance staff and the other folks have went out there to look at that. And we have a park and rec commission that studies that. We've got a really good financial plan that, you know, that Kim, that you've worked with. I mean, I could, I could spend five minutes in every bullet point there. Um, You know, do I get excited about an 11% tax increase preliminarily? No, I don't. But do I think it is a justifiable use of taxpayer money for what they are going to be getting, the deliverables from the city? I absolutely do. So, you know, I will be, as I think all of us probably will be, looking to see if there's ways that we can sharpen the pencils even further, see if there's opportunities, probably more so, see if grants that we've looked at might be coming to fruition. But I am pleased with what the staff has come up with, working under very, I think, challenging conditions, knowing what the market and everything was looking like out there to come up with a really sound budget. So, Kim, thank you.

Steve, Jake. Kim, first of all, thank you for your thorough presentation tonight. I think it did a very good job of explaining everything that went into this budget and then what it will look like for us as taxpayers. And thank you to the leadership team for your collaboration in building this budget this year. A couple of questions for you, Kim. Of that 11% increase that we're going to see on the levy this year, do you know what portion of that is...

driven by let's call it the cost of doing business increases in labor contracts inflation ongoing projects etc i mean it's hard to put a number around that especially for some of those items outside of the general fund but if you're looking just at the general fund which it counts for the most the primary or majority of that tax levy right probably about six percent is what we saw in increases for just maintaining that current level of service right so what we have for agreements with our unions and inflation for products and contracts that we might have in place. We're looking at just the 6% to do that.

And then that remaining 5%, and I know you touched on this throughout the presentation, that's made up of our investment in public safety, our reinvestment in infrastructure, and really things that we at this point, need to continue with. So it is, I mean, I think Steve kind of mentioned it before. It's a no-frills budget. It's 11%. Seems like a lot. Like you explained, it won't be that much on our tax bill, but it's kind of what we need to do at this point. Anything less would be not good moving forward. Right. Correct. Thank you, Jake. Holly?

um absolutely thank you so much for the work that goes into this for um from every every perspective of it i appreciate the the detail put into the presentation as well um without repeating anything that was said the only thing i guess i want to draw attention to is where we are adding staff and actually more importantly where we are not adding staff so specifically that we did add a communications position in the middle of 2026 which was something that we have heard and and we know was a necessary app but then beyond that outside of public safety there are no expected or approved additional hires for the rest of the city that's correct that's all that i needed to do confirm that wait thank you phil

Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Thank you, staff, for putting this budget together. When you look at the budget, you see the public safety investments and improvements. Nate, I'll put you on the spot here, but can you just explain what you're looking for as far as PD vests, the plates versus an actual vest that goes into somebody's uniform allowance, and then just the weapons in general, like understanding so the community understands the replacement and the needs for why you're doing it.

Sure, thank you, Councilman Mayer. The ballistic vests that we're requesting for next year are plate carriers that our officers would use when responding to high-risk calls. Every officer is currently mandated on patrol to wear a bulletproof vest have you that they wear every day but this plate carrier is rated for rifle rounds so when you're going to more of a high-risk call a weapons call they would put this plate carrier on to protect them from those rifle rounds although they're already issued those with those plates are past their recommended use time and With new developments in those plates, they become a lot lighter. The plates that we currently have are really heavy, really cumbersome, hard to put on, and officers aren't going to want to wear them for very, very long. The new plates, similar price, but significantly lighter and more useful. And then with the weapons, our weapons have used life on them. We shoot regularly to maintain our qualification. As we expand rounds through them, they wear out. They're worn every day out in the street, running, getting in and out of squad cars. They wear out, and we can't have those weapons failing on the street when we need them. So they do have to be replaced at a regular occurrence to make sure that they are staying in a good condition.

Perfect. Thank you. And I appreciate Nate. You put together the open house this weekend for people to come actually look at the PD understand why. We're doing this, you know, it's certainly a need. It's not, we're not out there wanting certain specialty items in a new expansion and building. So I appreciate that. And I think the community does too. I think they've had positive remarks from that. Um. You know, as far as the budget goes, um. And preliminary, I'm not impressed with the increase. I don't want an increase. I 100% fully support public safety, fire, that type of things. I just think there's other ways that we can try to get the budget to where it needs to be. Um, but like somebody said, fine tuning that pencil and making it sharper. Um, whether that is, you know, job descriptions, looking at each job, um, salaries, benefits, things like that. So, um, that's my thought on it. I appreciate everybody, all the work.

Thank you. I'm going to probably echo mostly what Steve said is, you know, for five years, I've been doing this cycle, I think it is my fifth one. And every year, I just kind of said the same thing where you showed that chart where we want data driven decisions. And if you can show me the data, the need that I would not feel any guilt about approving the number behind it, right, as long as we approve the need behind it. And year over year over year, you've done that with, you know, a great job to all the department heads presenting that with the Pavement Condition Index and Facilities Index and all those things. This was probably the first year that I think I kind of broke my own rule when I asked you guys at the start to try and get it down to the 50, you know, near the 50% effective tax rate. So it's a challenging time. I really respect the work you guys put in to try and bring that down. I know there were sacrifices made with the fire department and some of those shuffles that we made, but I do appreciate that you guys made that extra effort. But at the end of the day, you know, you look at the chart of the bullet points you have on there, that is... in the kindest way that is the most boring list I could possibly imagine of things to spend money on in this city, right? Which is exactly how we kind of want it around here. We are a very lean city. Our expenditures per resident is the second lowest in Dakota County, right behind Apple Valley. in no way do I think we're being frivolous with any of these things when we're throwing this money out there. I think that we're living in a reality of the world where operating costs are kind of just going up in a way that are difficult to control with things like the paid leave and all of the things that are affecting our headcounts and how staff are here and what that means. It's just a pain that we're going to learn to live with here. I appreciate everyone's work and compromise in this cycle. With that, I will look for a motion to approve Resolution 2026, Tax 076, Adopting the Preliminary 2027 Budget and Setting the Preliminary Tax Levy Collectible in 2027.

Motion to approve. Second.

Motion, Steve. Second, Jake. Call the roll, please.

Council Member Winchittle?

No.

Council Member Wilson? Yes. Council Member Cordes? Yes.

Mayor Lee?

Yes.

Council Member Burnett? Yes.

Yes.

I will look for a motion to set the public input meeting for the final 2027 budget and tax levy to be held on Monday, December 17th, or December 7th, 2026 at 7 p.m. So moved.

Second.

Motion, Jake. Second, Steve. Call the roll, please.

Council Member Wilson. Yes. Council Member Cordes. Yes. Marilyn. Yes. Council Member Burnett. Yes. Member Winchell.

Yes. Thank you. Citizen comments. Comments are a time for anyone to address the city council on matters not on the agenda. Comments from speakers must be informational in nature and may not exceed five minutes. The city council will not engage in discussion or debate in those five minutes, but will take the information and issue a response to those requiring one by the next council meeting. When you come up to the podium, state the city or township that you live in. As part of the protocol, it is unacceptable for any speaker to slander or engage in character assassination or discuss personnel complaints at a public council meeting. As such, speakers will not be allowed to identify city employees either by name or position or to identify any other person by name during the public comment period. If one does, their comments will be deemed done. Please address your comments to the council as a whole. If decorum cannot be maintained during a speaker's time, the council will recess to allow decorum to be restored. Upon return from recess, citizen comments will resume, provided order can be maintained. If order cannot be restored, the meeting may be adjourned. Is there anyone who would like to speak tonight? Somebody's got to go first.

Yeah, someone's got to go first, I guess. Paul Putt, Farmington, 20150 Erickson Path. I'll first just start and say thank you to the few people who reached out after my last comments to, first of all, apologize on behalf of some people. Obviously, it wasn't them who, as I got a threat, as I mentioned the last time I was standing up here. So I just want to say thank you to those people. There are good people who, even if they disagree, have said, frankly, that's not acceptable. And so I just want to start by saying thank you to that. I think we need to get to that place. There's a couple of places that I'm engaged with with our social media. I'm going to start with parks because, frankly, my loving wife is on the parks board. And quite frankly, there's been discussion of the parks. First and foremost, the skate park that has been there has been a topic of discussion. It has been a work in progress for about the last five years. Trust me, I've been hearing about it from my wife. I see Kelly Omlin nodding her head. It has been something that is not new. It has been talked about for 20 years, and as I posted on one of the Facebook videos that there were previously movable skate park elements that were deemed unsafe and therefore removed about 20 years ago, and those were removed for safety, which makes sense. However, there was a group of young citizens, teenagers, who came up to the parks board who then advocated for it, which is what we want. We want advocacy from our young people for what they need. Teenagers are often underrepresented at parks because we think they're past it. They're just going to, you know, sit at home, play video games, or go to the local sports at the high school. Well, some of them want an event for them. Doesn't mean it's for everybody. It's not for me. Trust me, I'm going to fall on my butt if I tried to skateboard. I don't assume a lot of us adults are going to go there. But just because it's not for me doesn't mean it doesn't belong. And I really want to salute Kelly Omelette and the parks for doing that work, and Skate Park is getting there. They used their money effectively. They doubled their budget by finding a grant, and they were able to, and they're working hard on it. Now, there's some complaints that it's being placed where the ballpark is. I don't want to speak to that. My only question would be, where was the advocacy for the ballpark at that time, five years ago? It's easy to say in an election cycle, September and August, why are we building that thing when it was going on for five years and people worked hard on it? And they were taking your comments, and you deserve that. The same thing can be said right now for Rambling River Park. Just today, a person mentioned the Rambling River Park and said there's nothing fun there for kids. At least the old thing that was there was fun. I'm quite proud of the work that Kelly Omlett and my wife did on that park, for the fact of the matter is that it's an inclusive park. I'm going to say that again. It's an inclusive park. Persons with disabilities, I have one. are able to access that park. Now, that park may no longer be your favorite park, but that might be the absolute only park some of our citizens in Farmington can go to. And putting that park there, again, was 2022. I feel like because it's easy during an election season to say our taxes are too high, we heard our tax thing, and to say, I don't use that thing, therefore I don't need it, That that's an easy, low-paying fruit to try to get someone's vote. What's hard is saying, I have a whole community to think about. That's what your jobs are. The whole community. Citizens with disabilities. Citizens who are teenagers. People who are, as I heard Mr. Wilson say, many years out from us. And I really strongly want people to look not only forward, but also backwards at the decisions. Looking back at things like our $5.5 million bonds for Vermillion River crossings that was in fact put in with a bond where it was smaller amounts at the beginning and then blew up. In the words of former Mayor Paul Larson, well, we gambled and we lost because nothing got developed there. There are members who were on that council who made decisions that then put our financials at, different places, because we wanted low taxes at the time. We wanted low taxes then. It made us good. Well, we kicked the can down the road, and now we have to deal with our infrastructure. I wrote an op-ed. We have $67 million, thereabouts, maybe 70 now, that we have to deal with. We have to deal with the development. Mr. Seam, I only have 30 seconds. I'm going to leave them for you. That was a wonderful presentation at your police office. I don't know how many systems went, but my kids love the donuts. And frankly, everything that you have there is a need. And I can't imagine anyone who attended your presentation who knows anything about police that would argue that there is not 100% need with that expansion. So thank you, and thank you again for doing the hard work for all of Farmington.

Good evening, Mayor and Council, City Staff. My name is Nate Ryan. I'm a resident of Farmington. So I'd like to talk a little bit tonight. I know that it seems like it might be over, but this whole data center thing. And I really just want to explain a few positions. And because, as Paul Putt mentioned, it is definitely low-hanging fruit to come out there and say that one resident this one time opposed a... An expansion of housing. So that way, everyone just must be, you know, everyone who opposes the data center opposes housing must be against anything that happens in Farmington. I'd like to remind the council that on many accounts, myself and other residents have said that we would have happily had what was zoned there as residential and that this is not the place for a data center. And just because one resident said something 20 years ago in 2006. that that now just confirms the fact that we're all just against any development at the at the golf course that is b as in b s as in s so we are not against development at the golf course and i am speaking for myself and others who have come up to this very podium and said that exact same thing those folks made their buying decision just as i did based on the golf course someday being residential property And tonight, I don't even know that you understand what you did when you voted on the map. You effectively changed the zoning map, not just for the downtown quarter, but for the entire city. Do you realize that you did that? Do you understand that that's what that vote was for? It sure as heck wasn't explained to anyone here. And it wasn't explained in the presentation that the consultant gave either. You effectively changed the zoning map for the entire city. That's what you did. And I don't think that some people who are out there for election understand that. And again, it's also low-hanging fruit to say that I've done my research. I went to data centers. Well, the three data centers that you went to in Iowa, so the Apple one is 40 megawatts. That's very far away from the 705 megawatts that's proposed. Also, that Apple one sits on industrial zoned land, pure industrial, not mixed use commercial industrial, pure industrial. When it's built, when it's fully built out, that Apple will be 200 megawatts. The Microsoft Ozium right now is 131 megawatts. Again, very different and very far away from 705 megawatts, which is proposed at the site there. And that one, when fully built out, will be 1.7 million square feet and a full 800,000 square feet less than what's being proposed there. By the way, The Ginger facility is, and I don't know exactly which ones you went to Microsoft, so I'm naming them all, but the Ginger facility was 64.8 megawatts. The Alvalon was 43.7 megawatts. And Meta's Altoona, at the time that you went there, I don't think it was in full capacity, but if it was, that was only 350 megawatts. And if you look at, again, all of those are on zoned industrial land. That has been my biggest complaint. And I think that is the biggest complaint for anyone else here is that you change the zoning of that land. One resident, 20 years ago, said they didn't want residential built there. And what they were actually against is the higher density homes that were slated to go there. They weren't against the R1, right, which is a single family home. They were against the higher density homes that were planned to go there. So when certain candidates go out there and they get on Facebook and they say, I did all these things, that's a bunch of crap. It's absolutely... I will almost say that it's a lie, but it's definitely disingenuous to say this one resident, this one time mentioned something about being opposed. I have never said that I was opposed. There are others who have moved out, have said that they did their research and the research pointed that it would be residential homes. No one that I know of was opposed to that. Yes, somebody said it 20 years ago. Good job pulling it out of a deposition. So the other thing that I just would like to mention just in terms of taxes is there's a home in Rosemont that's worth $608,000 and they pay $2,100 to the city. And I understand that it is definitely in terms of tax capacity and the difference between commercial slash residential, between commercial slash industrial property that's there. We've hired somebody at Farmington to bring in commercial, residential,

Carolyn Kiefer, Castle Rock Township. Let's look at some of the hidden cost issues and unanswered questions about this proposed data center. Where will track get the power for 708 megawatts? 708 megawatts, unbelievable. Look at how much energy the Prairie Island Nuclear Facility produces, do you know? We're at over two thirds of that. Why do they need all these hundreds of backup diesel generators? Do you think they will install them and not use them? Have you talked to anyone who has been around any of these generators? There are two of them at the Burnsville Hospital. Every time they run them, people complain about the diesel. Dr. Michael Cork, who earned a PhD in biostatistics at Harvard School of Public Health in December and is now a postdoctoral researcher, has conducted analysis showing the air pollution from these data centers could result in serious health and economic impacts. Analysis shows that the health impacts of on-site fossil fuel power at one data center in Virginia, and this data center is tiny compared to what you're proposing, much smaller. In March of 2006, a new independent analysis finds that emissions from the data center's permitted onsite power system in Loudoun County could result in 53 million to 99 million per year in health-related damages, driven primarily by premature death and respiratory and cardiovascular disease. When large diesel centers use fossil fuel turbines for power in populated areas, even modest increments in air pollution can have real health consequences, said Dr. Michael Cork. Their analysis shows that emissions allowed under the facility's permit could lead to about 99 million in health damages. Emissions from this data center permitted on-site power, which includes 51 diesel generators. You're allowing hundreds. Big difference there. The fine particulate matter is widely recognized as one of the most harmful air pollutants to human health. Extensive scientific evidence shows that long-term exposure, including at levels below federal standards, is associated with increased risk of heart disease, stroke, respiratory illnesses, asthma exacerbation, and premature death. The study shows that just one data center with fossil fuel turbines does to air quality. Data centers already bring disruptive, damaging environmental impacts before adding on the fossil fuels. Using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's COBRA health impact model, the data center's facility, the small one in Virginia, permits emissions for 53 million to 99 million per year in health-related damages. driven by an estimated 3.4 to 6.5 additional premature deaths per year across the impacted region, along with additional costs from non-fatal hospital admissions, asthma-related outcomes, and lost productivity. For this data center's annual impacts remain at this level, the total estimated health damages are in the millions. and over five years in the billions. Air pollution does not stop at the property line. These emissions from this facility that you're proposing would affect also nearby communities and neighborhoods. Dr. Cork says, and I quote, he say that we can't solve a problem we haven't measured. Right now permitting decisions for data centers are being made without any clear accounting for public health costs. And that gap means health damages are systematically left out of these important decisions. Independent, science-based health impact analysis is part of how to close the gap and bring these costs into decision-making. I am asking you to slow down, ask questions, impose regulations on the proposed facility. You are the RGU. You are the regulatory unit. You must require some monitoring, impose fines if they're not met. What being proposed is unprecedented. This is like the largest is unprecedented. As far as nobody can tell me of one larger in the United States and you want to put it by established residential homes. Unbelievable.

Thank you. Anybody else tonight? Roundtable, Amy.

Good evening, Mayor, members of the Council. I'll make two comments tonight. One is to correct a misstatement that I made at the end of last week's meeting in response to a question from the Mayor. I did follow up with the Council the day after the meeting to clarify this. I just wanted to make it clear that under Minnesota Statutes 412.191 Subdivision 2, special meeting can be called by the mayor or by two members of the council and when the mayor asked me that question I didn't have this statute front of mind just proof that I can't memorize every statute so I'm sorry for causing any confusion but I just want to clarify that and then there was also another little bit of back and forth at the end of the meeting and I also wanted to clarify that when it comes to the election for the mayor's office on the ballot in November, the city clerk can probably answer this better than I can, but I just wanted to point out that the way that it works is because of the timing of Mayor Hoyt's resignation, with more than two years left on his unexpired term, this is the reason why the city is having a special election to fill that seat. And under the statutes, council was required to fill the vacancy created by that resignation which you did when you appointed uh councilmember then councilmember lean to be mayor um but there's still two years left on that on that term to to be finished and that's why the special election is on the ballot this fall and under the statutes um the person who is elected in November, once the clerk certifies the winners of all of the races, and they are qualified to take the office, that will happen right after the election. They don't take office after the first of the year, on the first Monday of the year, the way the two elected council members will so if you had any other questions about that i'm happy to answer but like i say this the city clerk could probably say it better than i can but that's all i have tonight thank you thank you amy i'm not going to put her on the spot this time uh phil nothing thank you holly

Yes. So thank you to those individuals who raised their hand to be election judges. We approved additional election judges on the consent agenda. Also, I was able to spend a little bit of time at the PD on Saturday morning and grateful for the work that's being done to engage residents there as well. Nothing about the project is particularly new to me. Nothing about the PD these days is particularly new to me, for good reasons, not bad. But ultimately, I'm grateful for those residents that are coming to learn a little bit more about what's going on. And there will be another opportunity. I'm sure Chief will mention that when it's his chance, but there's another opportunity this week. And that's all I have for tonight.

Thank you. Jake? I got nothing tonight. Okay. Steve? I have no comments either. Okay.

Nothing for me. Thank you.

Is everybody tired?

On the election side of things, absentee voting has started. We are here in City Hall 8 to 430 Monday through Thursday and 8 to 11 on Fridays for it.

Mr. Chansky? Nothing this evening. Thank you.

very quickly, mayor and council. I just wanted to let everybody know that there will be a open house for the new business music mart that will take place on this Thursday at 2 p.m. So we encourage everybody to attend who is able. Also on Thursday evening will be the last downtown socials night. And we also encourage people to celebrate our downtown and participate in that. Thank you.

Mr. Powell. Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. A couple of quick project updates. Willow Street, the bituminous base is on, and most of the boulevard restoration has been completed. And the 2026 Street Improvement, 2nd Street, the underground utility work is about 99% done, and they'll start the road work at the south end this week as the site becomes drier. Thank you. Kelly?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Starting this week, the playground equipment, the 5-12 structure, and swings at Prairie View Park will be replaced. We're replacing equipment that was installed in 1999, so almost 27 years old, so it's definitely seen better days and needs to be replaced. We'll celebrate the new equipment with a ribbon cutting in October. We've invited the students from Farming Elementary School to join us for the ribbon cutting. If you remember, they helped select the equipment with the Parks and Recreation Commission. and then another project update. So we're excited about the progress at the skate park. If you haven't seen it, go to the city's website under project updates. We have a drone video from last week. So thank you to Tim and his team for getting that video or that footage and for Jeremiah for putting it together and posted on the city's website. I believe it was also shared on the city's social media today.

Thanks.

Thank you. Kim?

Nothing this evening.

Chief? I just want to remind everybody that Thursday, September 24th, is our community blood drive. Again, every two seconds, someone in the U.S. needs blood. All donors, again, if you come, receive a complimentary cup of award-winning firehouse chili. Again, to schedule your appointment, go to RedCrossBlood.org, and then in the sponsor code, enter Farmington Fire. It will be up at Station 2 from 1 to 7. There is a link also on our Farmington page if you want to go and do it that way. And last, I'd like to say thanks to everybody who came out to the open house last Wednesday. Weather was phenomenal, and it was a lot of fun, and everybody enjoyed it. So thanks.

Hey, Duke, I don't want to put you on the spot and ask you about award-winning chili, but I'll leave you be. Chief, other chief.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Yeah, the open house on Saturday was a success. We had quite a few citizens come out, ask a lot of thoughtful questions about the project and the current state of the police department. It was just a fun morning meeting people and walking through the PD and just explaining our story, just to make sure that at least people are informed and if they had any questions we can answer them for them we have another open house that's tomorrow night from 5 30 to 7 30 so please if anyone is interested in coming and seeing what the building currently looks like and what our plans are stop by say hi have some coffee with us on take a stroll through the pd Tonight, two positions were approved for hire at the police department. Our two CSOs that we have lost through promotion and another CSO leaving for another agency are being replaced. So we're very excited to get two CSOs back on the street. They're very helpful for us and take a lot of stress off of our officers. And then also, we are currently hiring a police officer, another replacement officer. And that posting is open until the 28th. Thank you.

Thank you. I won't draw this out much later. We've been here a while. But I did want to touch really quick on kind of Amy's comments about why did I do the meeting in kind of isolation? And why did I choose the time I did? I mean... A few things have been true during this whole thing is since becoming mayor, I've tried my best to try and be open and listening to people's ideas and feedbacks and criticism as harsh as they may be at times. It is useful feedback and should be used going forward. Why didn't I do it in the last five months? For obvious reasons, there was a lawsuit going on. It is probably dangerous territory to try and touch zoning ordinances in the middle of a lawsuit. As some people might've noticed the state of that lawsuit appears to be changing and and we kind of have an opportunity here where we're moving into some newer territory and it's time to start having some of those discussions again. Why did I do it by myself? Honestly, it's because it's election season and it seems to be the prominent topic in town. I didn't want to give any sort of impression that I was colluding with any people who are running, whether it's out there, whether it's up here or anything about here. I wanted to keep this. Me personally, I am trying to stay as neutral as possible during all of this. This is not my campaign. I don't want to. I'm not campaigning from up here. I'm not campaigning on behalf of anybody else. I am just doing my best to feedback in the time that I have left with me to do what I can in these last 44 days, whatever it is. So that is the explanation for why I called for this one in a little bit of isolation. It wasn't a power move or anything like that. I am literally just trying to protect the neutrality of a situation. So I hope people can understand and respect that. I will look for a motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn at 8.51. Second.

Motion, Jake. Second, Holly. All in favor say aye.

We are adjourned at 8.51.