City Council - Regular Meeting

Mayor and council members, I appreciate the opportunity. Chief Price, thank you for the opportunity. I look forward to continuing to serve the citizens of Farmington. Thank you, Joseph. Thank you, everyone. I appreciate your confidence in us and uh I hope I will be able to um commit to that. I may not commit to it, but I will do that. And for that, I'll stand for any questions or comments. I don't have any questions. Just uh thank you again to everyone that um shows up and continues to serve and uh gives of their time, talent, and energy to help make Farmington a better and safer place. So, thank you.

And I mean no respect to Justin, but Mary, I've known you the whole five years now, and I know you will execute on this very well. So, you are a rock star. Thank you. Uh, Mayor Justin, congratulations to both of you on this promotion and excited to see what you can this role. Congratulations to both of you. We're going to head down to the station for a

feel free donation at least. Jess, just pretend they're still here when we do your part. Okay. Just pretend they're still here when we do your part. Okay. It's probably good enough. All right. New item 52, which will be the donation from Bees and Bington Police Department K9 program. Chief Seam.

Thank you, Mayor Mayor and Council. So, I'm asking uh Jessica Grizz to uh join here at the podium. Um start with the the story of we're here today. Uh it was several years ago that our records um had the idea uh Gina Wooten had the idea of selling coffee to benefit our can program because we're always trying to think of ideas to raise money for the program because it cost a lot of money. and uh she reached out and did a lot of work to try and connect with different roasters and um coffee shops in the area to try and get this collaboration going where we could make this happen and start generating some money for the program and it just never worked out. We wouldn't get calls back um no follow through or it's financially wouldn't work out for us. That was until Beans and Boots came to town. Uh I was in Beans and Boots and casually mentioned it to Jessica here and from that moment on it was never uh if this is going to happen just how quickly and then how successfully and it was incredibly successful right from the start. Um they've to this date sold coffee and donated the proceeds to the tune of $1,57.50. Um and that is incredible. And it's also incredible that it is literally the best coffee that I've ever purchased from a coffee shop. Ask anybody else. I I know I'm biased, but it is really good coffee. Um, so if you're ever in the need, please support a business that supports the Farmington Police Department. I ask you and I have this letter here, Jessica and uh, Beanz LLC. On behalf of the Farmington Police Department, I would like to extend our sincere appreciation for your generous donation of $1,57.50 Farmington Police Department K9 Program. Your contribution made possible through proceeds from the sales of back the bark coffee demonstrates a tremendous commitment to supporting public safety and the officers and K9 teams who serve our community each day. Partnership local businesses such as Beans and Boots are invaluable and have help strengthen the connection between our department and the community we are proud to serve. The funds donated will directly assist with expenses related to our K9 program and will ensure our K9 teams continue to receive training equipment and support

necessary to effectively protect and serve the residents of Fington. We are truly grateful to your generosity, community spirit, and continued support of the Farmington Police Department. Thank you for standing behind our officers and K9 teams. Sincerely, Chief Nate, Farmington Police Department. Absolutely. Thank you.

Welcome to say a few words if you'd like. Um, I'm humbled. Um, I am I have a big family history in law enforcement. So, when it was brought to me, again, like I said, it wasn't an if we can do it. It's a matter of how quickly I'm going to get it done. Um, and with the assistance of our baristas who hand drew the artwork for the bags of both of the Kine dogs, um, it's been it's been a huge hit for us. Um, and I think you really appreciate knowing that there is all the profits are going to support the local canine department. So, I'm I'm honored. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I'll let you guys go. Oh, sure. Jeez. Thank you again. All right, moving on to our consent agenda. Look for a motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Motion by Jake. Second by Holly. All in favor say I. I.

I. Items 71. And we have an ordinance amending changes in fees for license permits or other city approvals and services for calendar year 2026.

Hold on.

Sometimes killed me. So, um, thank you, Mayor and Council. Tonight, um, we're asking you to hold a public hearing to talk about an implementation of a new technology fee. We have been talking about the new online permit system that we're rolling out. It's something that we're very excited about. Um, this new technology coming with this online permitting system will allow for applicants to pay for a number of different permits online now using credit cards. And with that, what we're proposing is a onetoone fee to recover those credit card processing and merchant fees that would be charged to the city. The technology fee proposed would be for all permit applicants who choose to pay for available permits online with a credit card through the new BSNA option. It would be a 2% fee per transaction for credit card and debit card payments made online. It would be a $1.50 per transaction for AC or echek payments. And this is optional. So there would be no fee for transactions paid in person by cash or check which is done today. So again this is an optional technology fee that would be for those applicants that choose to use this convenience. We currently do allow um some transactions and with credit cards. And over the last three years the number of people using this option has increased. And now that we're going to be allowing a lot more permits available through the system, we expect that the number of people using this option will take off. And in order to make sure that the rest of the taxpayers aren't subsidizing this convenience, we're proposing this technology fee. And again, it would be

the 2% for online transactions for credit card payments, $1.50 50 for the AC and no fees for people who continue to pay in person by cash or check. It really will affect four different fee types and these are now the fee types that are available will be available in the online permit system. the fire service fees, the building permit fees, permits, fire service permits, building permits, the development, planning, development and subdivision permits, and then the special permits through the planning department. So, tonight we're asking the city council to conduct the properly noticed public hearing and at the conclusion of the public hearing, consider adopting ordinance 2026-004. With that, I'd stand for any questions.

No questions. Um, just to confirm the 2% dollar 50 are direct BSNA. That's not an arbitrary figure we came up with. Correct. It's to cover that one for one to cover what those charges would be that we currently are charged. Steve,

I have um the only comment I would make is I really appreciate the fact that we are expanding this and the rationale makes complete sense. So um you know the option is certainly available if somebody wants to come down and visit us, ask us questions, no cost, but um I presume other communities do exactly the same thing or at least I have to believe they do. So I appreciate the initiative to do this. I have no comment that they haven't already said. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing at this. Is there anybody that would like to come up and speak? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Any follow-up comments? No. Anyone? Do we need to make a motion to close the public hearing? Okay, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.

Second. Motion by Steve, second by Jake. Call the roll, please. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. We'll look for a motion to pass ordinance 2026-004 amending charges and fees for licenses, permits, and other approvals and services for calendar year 2026. Motion to approve. Second. Motion by Steve, second by Jake. Call to roll, please. Council member Bernat, yes. Council member Wilson, yes. Council member Cordis, yes. Marilene, yes. Thank you.

Great. Item 91 adopting ordinance 2026-005 reszoning property from MUCI to the subject propert that's a different the subject property is generally located at the northeast intersection of Pilot Knob Road and 28th Street West Tony.

Thank you mayor council members. Yes, this evening uh we are asking the adoption of ordinance 2026- 0005 resoning property from MUCI to industrial. Uh the parcel that the city is seeking the reszoning is for P14-02500-57-011. Uh it is at the uh norththeast uh intersection of Pilot Knob and 208th Street West owned by Santa Cruz Holdings LLC and it is specifically for the western 553 ft of the parcel itself. Parcel is currently split zone between uh mixeduse commercial industrial and uh uh industrial. Again, the 553 feet of the west side of the property is MUCI and the remaining 765 feet um of the eastern side is zoned industrial. Uh split zoning of the parcel does create some unintended challenges for development of these parcels. Um most notably, uh allowed uses are not the same within both zoning uh districts or classifications. Reszoning the western 553 feet to uh industrial would allow for easier development of the parcel while allowing uses that are consistent uh with existing uh adjacent industrial uses in that area. Do want to note Santa Cruz Holdings uh LLC did apply for and received uh plan commission approval on May 12th uh so last week uh of a site plan. that site plan uh which is included in your package labeled phase one. Uh this site plan is to get the parcel basically pad ready and includes on-site grading and installation of

storm water management systems. Uh if we weren't to reszone um this parcel, the building would literally be basically splitting the two zones in in half. So this is the uh the property or the site plan I should say. Uh again showing just the building pads um and the storm water uh facilities that would be constructed with that phase one development. The portion of property proposed to be reszoned is guided mixeduse commercial industrial within the the city's 2040 comprehensive plan. The mixeduse guidance allows for integration of commercial and industrial uses that are compatible with each other. At this time, staff is comfortable leading this guidance in place until approval of the 2050 update as it does contemplate industrial uses. Plan commission did review the proposed reszone and held its public hearing on May 12th. Plan Commission recommended approval of the reszone with a 40 vote. I will stand for any questions.

Great. We're starting down here. Okay. Sorry, Steve. Steve, we're starting with me. All right. Sorry. Um I watched the planning commission really good discussion and the developer did a really nice job kind of walking through their project too. Um so Tony, a couple of the questions that are I think kind of relate to what you probably answered last week. So we've got two parcels, we've got two pads, and is there any possibility that they could end up being combined into one for for a single use or are they envisioning two at this point? At this point they're envisioning two.

Okay. Um and then there was a discussion of cutouts both for the roadway and possibly the access points. Can you comment on that in terms of what if any options are out there with regard to that whether it's traffic or or kind of just that part of it?

Right. All right. So with the uh there would be basically two accesses for both right now. Um there would the way the sites are envisioned to be laid out is you'd have the building with customer parking in front and then in the back it'd be semi-truck parking loading area uh with access aisles on either side of the building. Um as of right now what is being proposed again are two accesses for each site. um staff is comfortable with those accesses at this time. Uh they could change depending on um what ultimately potentially gets built out there, but as of right now, this is what they are proposing and we do find it acceptable.

Okay. Um, is Dakota County aware of, you know, because Pilot Knob I I envision, I think many of us envision it's going to continue getting busier and busier, etc. And if we were to contemplate an intersection at 200 or excuse me like a full intersection at 208 and then of course what are we like an eighth to a quarter of a mile a pilot to 50 not a big distance but um you know even as we look across the western side of pilot which at some point will be developed um I do think we should make sure to let Dakota County know what's going on. I mean they probably would through their normal plat review process but I think we do need to give them

yeah this will have to go through they will have to plat the property um and that their contiguous plat ordinance it would have to be approved and that the main thing they look at at that is access and at this point they're not the developer is not proposing any access off of or onto direct onto pilot knob. Um in fact I don't know that the county would allow it. Yeah. Okay. Questions? No, the only comment I'd make I think what's kind of cool about this project and the planning commission comment on it too is that it's essentially ready to go.

So, you know, that is a huge investment by a developer that wants to work in our community and I that's absolutely worth noting um as opposed to having kind of shovel ready ground and go at it. I mean, it's literally ready to go, right? That was going to be my only comment. watched the planning commission meeting last week and sounds like the developer potential. They're working towards they're looking to come to Farmington. So, it's exciting to see that there's there's potential development here. Holly, I have nothing to add.

I guess my comment is probably more to tie a couple things together, but this was an example where we've had all these conversations with the planning commission about protecting our materials, right? And this is going to come in a few points down I think do but we there was foresight at one time to try and attempt to at least put a commercial on pilot knob in this location and from my understanding it is actually you you complicated the process by trying to do that right so in the in the in our grand efforts to try and do these things where we're you know fostering this commercial growth we end up hindering commercial growth accidentally right so I think it's just it's an interesting case study and how just because we go say put pink over this happen in this spot and therefore we'll get development the way they want. It doesn't always work that way and you have to consider the nuance of the marketability of the land underneath it and how it can present to people right and like I said I think that's going to come in to play down here a little bit too but I just I don't want it too rigid or thinking that like everything has to be perfect along the spot. We need to take the actual site into consideration when we when we draw these kind of things on our next gen comp plan here. So other than that like I said I'm excited to sit there with the the development down here. So, uh, I would look for, what's the specific one? A motion to adopt or 2026-005 property from Musi to industrial.

Motion. Motion to approve. Motion by Holly, second by Jake. Call the roll, please. Council member Wilson, yes. Council member Cordes, yes. Marilene, yes. Council member Bernett, yes.

Great. Item 11.1, consideration of acceptance of bid for sale of single family lot on 1979 Embers Avenue parcel ID4-56801- 01- 010. Thank you, mayor and council. tonight continue to consider the following resol following resolution. To give you a little bit background, we had a closed work session back in April where the city council directed staff to list the city-owned lot at 1979 Embers Avenue for sale. In November of last year, the city council had reviewed and approved a final plat for this area. At that same time, there was a public hearing held regarding the vaca vacation of the drainage and utility easement and that was approved at that time. And then in March, staff had an appraisal for the property prepared. We listed worked with an agent had the property listed and an offer was received. So tonight in another closed work session, the city council discussed the sale and the offer. This is the lot that we're talking about and the council has um directed us to move forward with accepting the offer. So, we're asking the council to consider resolution 2026-047. The sales amount for the lot would be $125,000. The buyer would be Distinctive Design Build LLC and the closing date for this property would be June 30th, 2026. So, with that, I'm available to answer any questions.

Indiana Ali, uh, no questions. We've had great conversation around this. I'm happy to see that, uh, it's a property that will be able to lied by someone and not maintained by city. You, Jake? No questions, Steve?

You're muted there, but just Okay. Uh, I mean, I have no questions either. I just wanted to make a comment that I in case nobody knew this, but I think we did an estimate of how much we've spent mowing this property over the past 20 years and it came in at something like 25,000 26,000. So, I mean, just these kind of little things where we have these cleanup projects where we can save ourselves some money. I really appreciate you guys taking the due diligence to solve them. I think you're a little bit happier to not have to mong travel uh or carry mowers all over the city as much. So, really appreciate everyone's hard work on this. So, uh, I would look for a motion to accept the for the sale of city- owned single family lot on Embers Avenue and authorize the mayor and city administrator to execute all necessary documents to complete the sale.

So moved. Second. Motion by Holly, second by Jake. Call the role, please. Council member Cortez, yes. Mayor, yes. Council member Bernat, yes. Council member Wilson,

yes. Great. 11.2's back up here. We're doing resolution 2026-046, the findings of fact and record decision on the Vermillion Reserve Environmental Assessment Worksheet. All right. Thank you, Mayor Council. Yes. This evening uh before you uh is the findings of fact and record decision for the Vermillion Reserve Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Swanson Hasamp uh Consulting LLC prepared the uh environmental assessment worksheet or EAW for the proposed Vermillion Reserve Residential Development Project uh which is proposed by Lenar. BAW was prepared in accordance with uh Minnesota rules chapter 4410. BAW assesses any potential impacts of the development and is used to determine if an EIS or environmental impact statement is needed. Uh the Vermillion Reserve development would potentially have up to 370 single family homes triggering the need for the mandatory EAW per Minnesota rules 4410.4300 subpart 19D. Uh just some brief history um on this uh particular property. Uh the city in October of last year did receive a petition for annexation from the Adelman family. Uh the property is located at the southwest intersection of 220th Street West in Denmark Avenue. The city council did review that petition for annexation on February 2nd and adopted ordinance 2026-001 uh which permitted the annexation of that property from uh Eureka Township. Then on February 24th of this year, a

notice of availability for that initial EAW was published in the EQB monitor and placed on the city's website. Um and then uh on May 13th, last week, Swanson has has consulting uh did prepare and submitted the findings of fact and record decision that are included in your packet along with the EAW uh the final EAW document. Um do want to note that a complete application has been submitted by LAR Corporation uh as of April 15th for preliminary plat petition for comprehensive plan amendment and petition for resoning and planned unit development uh for that development. Uh these are currently right now going through uh staff review. As previously mentioned, the comment period for the EAW uh did close on March 26th uh of this year and the following agencies did provide comment letters. Uh Dakota County Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the MPCA, National Park Service, Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization. Um all of these uh letters can be found in the packet that uh you have. Uh the final EAW has been prepared and updated based on these comments. Based on the EAW the response two comments and findings of fact the city as the RGU concludes the following. First uh all required all requirements for environmental review of the proposed project have been met to the EAW and the development process related to the proposed project have generated information which is adequate to determine whether the proposed project has the potential for significant environmental effects. Three areas where potential environmental effects have been identified. The city has included proper mitigative responses to be

included within the final design of the proposed project. Mitigation will be required to be provided where impacts are expected to result uh from either project construction, operation or maintenance. Uh mitigative measures will be required to be incorporated into the proposed project design and have been or will be coordinated with state and federal agencies during the application permit process. Four, based on criteria in Minnesota rules part 4410-17000, the proposed project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. And five, an environmental impact statement is not required for the proposed Vermillion Reserve development. Again, this is just one part of the uh development review process um that that development will ultimately have to go through. The action that is requested this evening is to pass resolution 2026-046 adopting findings of fact and record decision on the Vermillion Reserve Environmental Assessment Worksheet.

Very good. Olly, we'll start with you. Start with me. All right. So, uh, go back to, um, just the things that have led us to this point so that way a clear timeline of of where things are and how decisions are made from start to finish. So, we have a property that was previously in Eureka Township. The owner of that property was approached by a developer that wants to do a residential development in that area. In order for that to happen, they need to be able to hook up to city sewer and water. So the request from the land owner at that point was to be annexed into the city of Farmington acknowledging I think that was February correct

right acknowledging in February that LAR had interest in and was starting this process. So when we are looking at a lot of the information and it says here that annexation is in um in process that's because this was starting at the same time that we're at now. So the decision that we're making here is not a development decision. It is an acknowledgement that we have received this and we're recording it. so doesn't move the project to next phase beyond what this does. Right. Okay. That was all that I have. Thank you so much for presenting. All right, Jake. I appreciate your presentation, Tony, and I appreciate Holl's clarity with the timeline. I have no additional questions at him. Okay, Steve.

Um, couple questions comment. So, um, yeah, Holly did a stra kind of summarizing that piece of it. Um, I feel like we might be moving a little bit quickly on this and I do understand that we are talking about the EAW. We're just talking about the worksheet and I appreciate all the work that staff has put into it. Um, yes, it is absolutely correct that in order to hook up to sewer and water, they need to be in the city. No doubt about that. Where my concern lies is actually where I believe we are at right now. So, while it is true we are at this point, um, and I think Tony, correct me if I'm wrong, it sounds like staff has received like a preliminary plat or at least, you know, it's been stated that it's in there. And that's really where the heart of my concern is. Obviously, the preliminary and final plat is all very standard. Every city does that. Where my concern lies though, is this is not part of our comp plan at this moment and we are on the verge of starting our comp plan. I'm also very cognizant of the fact that we had a really really good discussion between us and the planning commission I want to say back in January February time frame where we discussed some of the unintended consequences that have happened with larger residential developments over time especially those that back into major roads. Um we know Denmark um 31 is a major road and it would be reasonable to assume that 220th will be a fairly busy road at some point in time too. So, my thought on this particular item, I'm going to oppose the EAW, not because there's anything that caused me any great consternation in the EA, but what I would like to see with this is I think this belongs as part of our comp plan discussion. We're talking about essentially 160 acres, 370 homes. It's the perfect type of um discussion that should be occurring within our bodies. and that's where I believe this kind of process follows. Um, so for that

reason, I'm going to be opposing this. It's uh not a criticism of the Adelman family who has given a ton to this community. There's no doubt about that. Um, but I believe that one of the foundational documents this the community works with is the comprehensive plan which is designed to kind of lay out the framework for the current 25,000 who live here and for the next 5 to 10,000 that are going to be moving in between now and 2050 or whatever number that is. So I think we owe it to the broader community to be a little bit more plannable and I feel like this is I think moving from annexation to where we are today was fine but moving um from the EAW to a preliminary plat without having studied the comp plan or gotten to that point is where my concern falls. So appreciate the work staff is doing. Um, and so it's it's it's really I think I feel more of a decision from the council in terms of how we believe the overall development process in community should go and I believe that the comp plan and our work between the planning commission and council is paramount. So thank you. Hey, can you refresh my memory from our conversation earlier this afternoon about how much time the state allows you in between uh the annexation and the EW and then between the EW and the next step which is preliminary plat. Right.

Right. Zone zoning is next. Sorry. Zoning would be next. Um typically you have a 60-day review period for zoning applications whether that would be um comprehensive plan amendments um variances things like that. Um with preliminary plat state statute does allow us I think up to 180 days for a preliminary plat um to be reviewed. Uh we can extend those windows um couple different ways if necessary. Um but generally speaking with like comprehensive plan resoning that's a 60-day um review um for uh council has to make ultimate decision whether or not to approve or deny. But

the next thing we would see before us is the zoning decision not a plan. Right. or they come together. They could come together how that would usually work.

Okay. Um the reason I'm asking I guess is I'm trying to you know explain the whole scenario in the head is to to your point Holly this this was a developer who was outside of our jurisdiction. So outside of our comp plan so we would have no way to have a prior discussion about how this should be zoned right. We can't go into all of gas and all of Eureka and speculate on what happens if they want to annex them. We don't have an OA with Eureka. Um and so you know by definition when they come to us for these projects we are doing basic case studies right where what should this be on the fly it's not a comp plan and how do we pause and guide that correctly kind of comes down to you know a little bit of a fly because we have statemandated timeline we have to work within to make it the best decision that we can. Um, why I say that is, you know, if it if this is a case study, then we have to kind of go back up to the very highest level of what problems are we really trying to address here in Farmington. And by and large, we've we've made it earlier that we want more commercial development, right? Because we have this high residential tax burden. Um, and there's a lot that goes into that, right? Where we can't just, you know, there's just two ways to go about that. There's commercial as amenity and commercial as as a tax burden reducer, right? And when where we're at with one half of that equation is is a data center discussion, right? Which has its, you know, pros and cons and how people feel about that. But then there is the other half which is commercial as amenity and we seem to be able to get the data center and that type of industry coming in here. But the commercial as an amenity is a little bit more struggling and it's told that we need more population growth. So I guess where I'm going with this is how do you weigh out this decision about should this be residential when the statement is more residential may put more tax burden on us but it may solve our commercial problem. So that ties into kind of your concerns is I want more time to think through that but I think the appropriate place to do that is in the actual zoning discussion where we have the decision up there about what should this be and we have a timeline to

finish in with that. So I guess in the context what we're looking at right here it's the environmental assessment work and I don't have any particular concerns about that but do want to talk through this topic that you've expressed some very real concerns today and I want to be mindful of them and work through them in the 60 days or whatever time period before that. So I hope that kind of accommodates your concern at least a little bit. Uh can I comment? Absolutely. Okay. Um, mayor council, I mean, I think I I think Mayor Lyn, we might just have to agree to disagree on this. It's okay, too.

If bec I guess, you know, here's the reality. We're we're a community which um a lot of the not a lot, but I mean, we've grown through annexation. You know, we're we're kind of a unique community in in that regard. So, we're going to go through grow through annexation. We're going to develop through annexation, orderly annexation, etc. with our neighboring communities. And that's all well and good and that's you know we've had an established process for decades with that part of it. My concern is more specifically if the standard is that okay landowner A wants to go ahead and annex their land. Therefore we need to take immediate action on it. That's probably the point of disagreement where we're gonna have to agree to disagree because I think bringing in parcel by annexation doesn't immediately require us to do something even if the stated purpose is we intend to build 370 homes. I mean that's a lotable goal, you know, and we appreciate it as a community to kind of know what they're thinking. it doesn't replace how does this fit into our comp plan and it's such a massive parcel in in such an important area so close to our comp plan update that I just have heartburn over it and if I knew that we were approving EA and didn't have really the platting already inhouse going through normal discussions I probably wouldn't have as much concern over it um you know so I I don't fault our, you know, planning or community development department for taking the appropriate initiative so that they're all doing a fine job. I think it's more at our end. Are we going to deviate from what's really in in my observation process where um you've got land that's annex? It's farmland. You know, do we wanted to have and I don't want to put words in council member Bernat's mouth, but you know, she's made some really passionate comments. You know, do we want to have more pink on the map? you

know, we don't have as much color in some of these areas. When I look at, you know, Denmark Avenue and maybe 220th, we're looking at homes where I think we're kind of sabotaging oursel potentially a little bit where there probably could be some pink along those edges, you know, and and if we're moving ahead kind of at that speed, saying, "Okay, we let's use an example. 140 of these acres would be great for housing, but we'd sure like to be able to reserve 12 to 18 acres for neighborhood or or you know, drive, not the right word, neighborhood or neighbor neighborhood business, what have you. And by locking in homes to this entire segment, I think we're really short changing our opportunity. So, I think we're just looking at it from a different perspective. I I don't I I appreciate your thinking. I think I'm looking at it a little bit differently.

But if I hear you correctly here, your primary concern is owning of the property itself, right?

It's the fact that we are we are going from Yeah. And thanks for clarifying. The fact that we're going from, you know, undesated Eureka Township into Farmington and then bam, you've got this primo corner and it's all homes. And I think we're missing out on heat opportunities. I really do. And I think if we had a a blend of some, you know, I'm trying to think, I'm I'm struggling for words with the right zoning definitions, but if we had, you know, neighborhood business or you think about, you know, highway 3 and 50 where we have, you know, the the Tamre, you know, and related like that. I mean, I think those are the kind of opportunities that we are going to miss out on by locking this whole 160 in housing. And that's what concerns me long term. I I think my point is that the time to kind of weigh on that decision is zoning is in front of us, right? And I think that's because the EAW is what's in front of us right now. But

no, and that's that's a fair point. That's a really fair point. But where I'm saying, I think the process has gotten a little speed, is if it is true, which Tony has confirmed that it is, that staff is looking at a preliminary and final plat right now and potentially reszoning, which is super common. We do both at the same time. It's very common that we would do that. I mean, with a plaid in front of us, are we going to say, "Nope, we don't want that." I mean, you see what I mean? Like, now we're like, we're right at the moment where it's like we're almost a little bit too late, but by the time that plat comes to us, we're really too late. That's and that that's my worry.

So, I guess the reason for my question earlier is a lot of that speed that we are being put upon is mandated by the state though, right? We were trying to just make date headlines on these, right? they they applied and were under certain requirements, right? So, I think it's it's our obligation to kind of try and learn as much as possible before that deadline expires to be favorable to the developer and encourage that healthy relationship and remove those roadblocks. But at the same time, if we reach the end of that timeline and we're not comfortable at the zoning decision, then that is our time their teeth in and say, "No, we're not comfortable where we got to on this one." Is I think that's where I'm at with this. Can I ask Tony a question?

Sure thing. So Tony, um say the um commission gets this in a week sometime in their June meeting, July meeting, whatever the case might be, and it's as described as 370 acre, 370ish homes spread out over 158 acres. Um if the planning commission were to say we reject this idea entirely, we need to see a different mix of uses in the area. Of course, NAR is in the business business of building homes. They're probably not going to have a comment. So, what would how would we respond to that as a city knowing that want to protect the integrity of that relationship, but say, you know what, this doesn't we like it, but it doesn't quite meet exactly what we're looking for here.

Right. At that point, if they did that, that would be a negative recommendation because it's aation from plan commission to council. Um, so eventually that recommendation would come before council at that point. True. But I mean does it create a problem for city if they present something which we've taken our due diligence to review and you know one of the bodies are see that's what I'm saying mayor that's my concern. Okay. So all right. Thank you. That's all the questions I have. Thank you.

I think we're all good then. Um I appreciate you appreciate your comments though Steve. Thank you. Sorry I got unlock here. I think we are looking for a motion to pass resolution 2026-046 adopt findings of fact and record decision on the Vermillian Reserve Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Motion to approve. Second. Motion by Jake, second by Holly. Call the role, please. Commissioner Wil Council member Wilson, sorry. No. Council member Cortez, yes. Mayor Lean, yes. Council member Bernett, yes. Thank you. Thank you, Tony.

Thank you. Item 11.3, the appointment of Nate Layer to the planning commission to fill a vacant seat through January 2026 2028. Where you pass?

I'll take this. Mayor and council. Thank you. Um due to the appointment of Phil Winshidle uh to the Farmington City Council on April 20th, a vacancy now exists on the planning commission. To fill that role, we brought it to work session on May 4th for a discussion. And at that discussion, there were three different options that city council had discussed during the work session and that was to select from the existing applicant pool from the most recent planning commission recruitment process which happened in November through December of 2025. The second was to initiate a new application process and the third option was to direct appointment. City Council had very good discussion and the option that they directed staff to move forward with was to select from the existing applicant pool from the most recent planning commission recruitment process. And with that being said, um the city council gave direction to contact Nate Layer for the appointment for the planning commission. And Nate was interested and he has went through all of the conditions. And so tonight, I ask you for the approval of the appointment of Nate Lemire to the planning commission to fill the vacant seat through January 2028. And with that, I'll stand if you have any questions.

Steve, you can go first, assist. No questions, right? None for me. Congratulations, Nathan. Look forward to working with you. I'd look for a motion to approve the appointment of Nate Layer to the planning commission to fill the vacant seat through January 2028. Motion to approve. Second motion by Holly. Second by Jake. Uh, call the roll, please. Council member Cordes, yes. Mayor Lean, yes. Council member Bernat, yes. Council member Wilson, yes.

Great. 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?

David Pritzoff 2255 Aken Road. I just want to make a comment about the the data center. I think you guys should listen a lot to about the public. You have cities that are putting moratoriums on this. You have cities that can't uh they feel they don't they can't provide enough water. Cities certainly way bigger than we are. Um when you look at other cities, what they're doing, it stands to look at why are we doing why do we think it's such a good idea when bigger cities and I say brighter people are turning them down and saying we don't want them here. It's just I mean Apple Valley one down because they don't think they could pro provide water. They're not near the vermilion either and it's like, you know, they don't they're not going to wreck something of their heritage, but you know, they turn it down. I don't know why we can't open our ears and eyes and and do the same. Um, the other thing I want to speak about is that EA um when I was on a council like this 20 years ago, but still memory does uh stand with me. Just because somebody's from a township and they want to be annexed in, doesn't mean you have to say yes to the annexation or the application. You don't have to. So if I agree with council member Wilson I mean it's your processes are on one development you follow it to on the next one you don't and you make processes up as you go along because you wouldn't have to approve this that application you have the uh the comp plan that Steve said that you work on what's the big what's the big hurry I mean the out from the outside looking in and the meetings that I've been with been to I've never heard the council you requesting the EAW and that's the council's, you know, when when when you're making developments like this and you're bringing stuff to to the city, that's a that's a policy. That's a procedure. That's what the council does. And I sit here and look at this just from the outside looking in. I I don't think you guys knew what was going on until it was presented to you. I think the staff was telling you, okay, here's EAW. We're going to have 370 homes out here. We want to do this. You know, they

have to hook up the city services. When we were when I was on the council, you have to go through the Met Council for Musa and make it making sure that everything can handle it. You just don't bring something in. I've said it a 100 times at this podium. You're leading a horse to water and there's not going to be water there for us to drink. You're you're going you always so far down a road like like mayor like you said, you're going to wait until the next step and then you think you're going to say no. It doesn't work that way. You look at look at your past. Look at this tree the way this is going. You say yes, yes, yes. And then you're forced to say yes. You turn around and say, "Oh, you know, this this uh agreement from on the center, oh well, it's better than the last one. It's not good, but it's better than the last one." You have to stop. You have to look ahead and and not get down not get down those roads. I've said it a million times. You just keep going down roads that you can't you can't correct yourself. How far you want to go with this one? You know, now you're in a time crunch. Oh, we got to do stuff is within 60 days. It's like slow down. You have develop You have areas to develop here. If you think putting 300 houses here is going to bring the grocery store, look at the history. In 20 years that I've been on the council, we don't have that. And we've been building houses. You know, it's either going to come or it's not. Not because you're going to force 300 homes. That's not, you know, that the property is not even in the city right now. Just take a look at it and follow your processes. You got a comp plan coming. I was at that meeting. I mean, you want to do things the right way. Then you want to pick and choose which ones you want to do the right way. It's ridiculous.

Good. Anybody else?

Sier Township. Several residents sent all of you a letter last week with a request. In light of the new water promises by the developer and water numbers that don't jive with each other, we are asking for answers and an amended AUR. I assume you received it. We didn't get a reply. We are actually asking for a full EIS. At the absolute minimum, we are asking for an amended AUR with a public hearing before this project moves for further. The AUR that was approved one and a half years ago discussed a water cooled system with a max water discharge of over 800 million gallons water per year. Track says it will need only 50 million gallons water demand per year. That looks like a major change in the cooling system. Why do we think this other than the obvious major drop in water? Well, NPR reported it in a in April article that track plans to use more modern cooling technologies to reduce water use. So, what new cooling technology is track going to use? You have an obligation to find out and tell us. Families and kids live over there. What new environmental impacts come with it? That's your job. Less water used for cooling often mean more energy needed? Will more energy be needed now? How much more? How does that affect the total power demand? What does that how does that affect infrastru back up power needs? If now some kind of closed loop, what fluids are being used? Refrigerants, corrosion inhibitors, biocides, where will they be stored? How much will be stored? How will it be contained? How will leaks be detected? How will it be disposed of? Will it go into waste water? These are environmental questions that the AUR did not address. It was the only environmental review you gave us to protect our families. A very wimpy document that gives no in-depth review. That is why we asked for an EIS. Closed loop low water cooling and also mean more equipment, different equipment, dry

coolers, air cooled chillers, condensers, large fan driven heat rejection equipment. What kind of equipment will be used now? Where will it go? Will it be near homes? How tall is it? How many units? How often will it run? These fans and extra cooling equipment can also be all mean a lot of extra noise. Constant industrial noise. What about the noise? What extra mitigation will be required? Do they run all night? What about cumulative noise now from all buildings running together? And then there is the heat discharge. Huge environmental concern. The heat has to go somewhere. If the heat is not going to be carried away through water and evaporation, then where is it going? With dry or closed loop, heat is often rejected into the outside air. So, we're guessing right now. How will the heat be discharged? Where? What will happen on a 95 degree day if this thing is pumping out hot air, 340 acres of it, right next to our homes? What about all that heat near the CH stream? Inver Grove just approved a one moratorium on data centers. They join Egan and Rosemont now. Wright County looking is looking at one this week. They are all watching you. All of them are watching you. Are you going to slow down and start protecting your residents? For anyone watching, if you agree with what you just heard, please sign our petition for the city to to we are asking them to slow down, get these answers. Go to the Facebook page Farmington Data Center Watch. Again, that's Facebook Farmington Data Center Watch. Please click the link and sign a petition. Please do the right thing for this time. I'm assuming you'll get back to us. Thank you.

Anybody else?

Uh Beth, good evening, Mayor Council Nate Ryan Farming. So, so it's really concerning I guess. So we were told that Farmington was in major constraints and we didn't have enough tax base because we didn't have enough u you know industrial manufacturing type properties all across Farmington and rooftops homes actually cost farmington money. They don't make Farmington money. So that was said in this chamber that was said by the previous mayor that was said by some of you and that was definitely said when the previous mayor met with us as residents. Um and and now you're now now you're taking land in again and you're you're adding more households which is cost the city more money and at the same time you're saying well we have to protect our citizens by adding a 2% charge to your credit cards because we don't want the citizens paying for that but yet we're just going to you know continue on with continue on building homes that cost us money which all the citizens are going to have to somehow dupe that money for as well. I don't truly don't understand your your decisions and what we're doing. If what we were told was true and accurate that residential homes cost the city money, why why are you doing this? This doesn't make any sense to me. It makes zero sense to me whatsoever. Um I I don't get it. And a question that I that just about those services, if you want to answer in your comments, I looked at that and I believe that that service fee had 2% was for all of the services it looked like. So like if I want to pay my water bill credit card, is that is that 2% more? No. What about if I you know what are services because it was in the services book and the attachment and all the services listed there. So anyways um so we keep bringing talking about moratorium. So I was one of the if the first if not one of the very first people bringing this moratorium up and the attorney here sat there and said no we can't do that. No that's we we can't do that. How did all these other cities do this? Right? How how did how do they all do that? And there's not been significant they own they own one property. I will say that likely if we

had a moratorum, they still build the data center on the golf course property, but that other property would be highly impacted. And would that interrupt their interrupt their plan? Would they still want to move forward the data center just on the golf course property? I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But a moratorium can happen. You're seeing it as just mentioned in Rosemont in Ingrove Heights. You're seeing it in potentially countywide. So, what more do we have to do to to come on you guys? Like, this is something that can happen. So, and if if your attorney is saying it can't and that you get sued just by doing a more, then why are there not lawsuits already in Rosemont? Why are there not lawsuits in immigrates? What What do their city attorneys know that that ours doesn't? I hate coming up here and just sound like I'm just a complainer. I'm not not just complainer. A moratorium is a viable option out of this and it puts it on hold for a year. Even if it does affect this project in that year, then maybe we can look at requiring an EIS, right? You required for this project came up, you required a more stringent for homes, an EAW versus an AUR. An AUR compares two projects against each other. An EAW looks at a specific project roughly 30 questions, 30 questions, but it does just look at one very specific project. an EIS gets down to the Navy. Why wouldn't you want EIS on a major industrial project? Why wouldn't you want that forselves? I mean, to hell with any of us. Why wouldn't you want that for yourselves? If your own children, why wouldn't you want that for your neighbor? Even if they live two miles away, which most of your neighbors do, or three miles away, why wouldn't you want that for them? Why wouldn't you want it for somebody who's looking into Farmington? Did your, you know, who watches this, does your city protect you? Yeah, they they did a great job. They got an AU AR. that compared projects against each other. One of which was a housing development and with Lakeville having was a moratorum. Gosh, I wonder why these developers are wanting to put homes in Farmington.

You guys do an EIS draft draft something for a moratorum on data centers. You have that. It's in your legal perview to do that. And if she doesn't tell you no, find someone to tell you yes. It's there. These people work for you. You do not work for them. We Anybody else there?

Good evening, Mayor Council. My name is Mil Shami from Castle Rock. Uh I just like to make two observations. I wasn't planning to speak but first observation is uh often time at the beginning of the public hearing is mentioned that if uh there there will be a response by the time of next meeting I've been coming to a lot of these and seldom offer the response to what has been proposed. So if the decision is not to respond please take that off. The second observation is the migration of the public comment period to the very end. If the input from the public regarding what you're planning to discuss is important if you value the public's input, maybe it is best to bring to the beginning so that you get some feedback from the people on what you're going to decide. If not, then just get rid of the public comment period altogether. That's just an observation from a unbiased person.

Thank you.

Anybody else tonight? Oh, lost my voice. How's it going? Uh, Stephen Anders Jr. Farmington. Um, I just want to come up here and talk for a minute because it is mental health awareness month. Um, and obviously that's something I've been talking about for a while. Um, I spent basically the entire month of April in Utah in a residential treatment facility for first responders that suffer from PTSD. And while I've come to accept a lot of things, um, I want to highlight some some good and bad. Um, I want to I want to write I want to read out the quot my very first quote that I wrote down uh, when I was in shadow. Um, when you learn to accept instead of expect, you'll have fewer disappointments. Um, I've I've I've taken that to heart. So, stuff I'm here to talk about tonight, while I'm going to talk about my experience, I'm not here to change what's happening or happened to me, but I really really want you guys to make changes for the next person that's in my shoes because tragically the idea is there is going to be another first responder here in Farmington that's suffering from mental health. Um, I'm I'm not first. I'm not There's been several the last last few years. Tragically, we've had several first responders. Um, and so I bring up my time in Utah because I hear and and again I want to I'm I'm trying to be positive. I need to point out some things. Um, I spent 30 days out of state handling my mental health because of my service to the city and I'm here quite often. I hear a lot about team Farmington and and I and I believed in team Farmington. I love team Farmington. I think it's amazing. But my entire time gone, no one from the city of Farmington reached out to my fiance to go, "How can we help you?" And so, like, how how was I a part of Team Farmington during my eight and a half years of service to the city? Like, I feel like someone should have reached out and said, "Hey, Michelle, do you need something? Your your fiance's in another state. You could talk to him maybe one or two hours

a day. He didn't even have access to his phone." Um, so that's that's my that's my um maybe kind of negative observation um that I wish you guys would just kind of think about and I hope maybe the city administrator HR can come up with a better plan and how to handle a situation like mine going forward. Uh some positives um I want I will mention council member Cordes and Kelly. Um I've started doing uh through my time at Chateau I started doing 22 push-ups a day in honor of the 20 the 22 plus veterans cuz it's more 22 um that that kill themselves. um on a whim, one of my friends that's been doing it with me suggested we do it last Friday at the um at food truck uh event in Empire and Council Member Corders and Kelly joined us. So, thank you guys for that. I really appreciate that and that meant a lot to me and it does show like there is progress being made. Um I also want to call out uh I was at I think it was last Thursday I was at a an event put on here in Minnesota and there was a Farmington fire or sorry Farmington police officer there. Um, so that that's those are good things. I do think that the the fireside's lacking a little bit and I think that needs to be looked at. But I do want to call out some very positive things because the training I learned in Utah was amazing. Absolutely amazing. And it's and it's things that should be happening here in Farmington. And so I just want to applaud that. Um, another thing I want to call out really quickly is there was some handshakes right when I when we exchanged. I didn't come in because of the uncomfortableness of being around the fire department, but there was some handshakes there. So, I want to call that out. Um, and just acknowledge that the good with bad. Um, I mentioned about the 22 push-ups. I would invite every single one of you, including everyone that's listening here, uh, to join me every single weekday at 6 p.m. Rain or shine, snow, blizzard, I don't care what it is. I will be on the bridge at Biscane, um, basically at the intersection of Million River Trail doing my 22 push-ups to honor those 22 plus veterans. Um, and lastly, I just want to say to anyone that's out there struggling with their mental health, you're not alone. You are

absolutely not alone. You're seen. You're heard. And this world is a much better place with you in it. And I cannot stress that enough. No matter what your mind is telling you, you are the world is so much better with you here. Reach out and get help. Thank you. Anybody? All right. On the round table, Amy. Oh, sorry. Sorry.

I'm really new at this. Um, Nick Groudens, I live in Farmington. I would like to know all these people said things that I'm thinking about the data center thing happened and I was just like to know when are you going like implement the moratorum? Um, are you going to do anything about it? I mean, I don't think that that was answered. Was that answered? I just would like to know when this is because it's just really important like I said you know many cities and not only in Minnesota but other places have done a moratorium thing and I think that's a smart thing to do because there's so much happening in the world right now that you know maybe by then things will have changed you know and who knows but it's just too I don't know any just had to get that off I guess thanks

thank We're on a round table.

Uh, good evening, mayor, members of the council. Um, I think it I think since the word moratorum keeps coming up, if it's okay with the council, I'll make a comment on that. Um, I I will point out first that I don't advise the other cities that have um adopted uh moratorium ordinances. Um, so I don't know all of the facts that go into their decisions. Um but I can tell you that my understanding is that the difference between what what they have done with their moratorium and what Farmington situation is is that they do not have projects that have already proceeded to the point that the tracked project has in in Farmington. the the council has approved a preliminary and fine plat and once that is done um certain rights vest in the in an owner or an afflict in this case since it's a joint um application between the school district and tract on at least on the school district parcel. So if the city council wanted to adopt a moratorum for any other part of the city you're perfectly it within your authority to do that. Um, if the city council were to adopt a moratorum with the intent of uh putting a a stop to any to the project that's already been approved for preliminary and final plat um that there would be legal risk to the city um for litigation from the parties that you know from tract and from the school district who have had their preliminary and final plat approved. Um, so there's there's a little bit of a difference between where other cities or counties might be in their processes than where Farmington is with the process that's occurred so far with the with the track uh applications. Um, one other difference is that you know in in my review of the of the moratorum orient moratorium ordinance is a little harder to say than I thought. um in at least in Egan is that um

they didn't their mortorium does not is not a complete ban on the development of of data centers period. It it it has certain provisions related to you know the size and scale of of of data centers that may be allowed if that already exists there you know a number of of different characteristics. So there there is a functional difference between where other cities are and where the application that this council has been um working with for the past couple of years. Um I'm happy to answer any questions about that. Um and also just note that um the AUR that that was undertaken for the track project or the tracked approvals simply because there's no specific developer with site plans. I mean there were plans that were submitted with the applications that you know were hypothetical what is going to go there eventually once this the the final developer um proceeds with a project. So an AUI is it looks at just scenarios that um that are hypothetical and at this point there is no specific development plan that's been proposed on either the former golf course site or on the school district parcel that council is considering. So it's it's difficult to from a procedural standpoint to be able to say that you can just at this point order an EIS or an EAW. It's just it's it's not not a it's not a one it's just not the the point of the process that you're in the UR is was the appropriate tool at the time based on the information that was available from the applicant. Um and then of course with other issues that are part of the lawsuit that the city is a is a party to there are interamental issues that are raised there that also constrain what the city

um how the city can respond to requests for information um about any environmental issues we have to we have to protect the city legal position in that litigation at the direction and guidance of the litigation council. So if the council has any other questions I'd be happy to answer them. Um, but that those I just thought those comments might be helpful to clarify a couple of the questions that came up tonight. Very helpful. Thank you, Paul. Have a good night. Thank you.

I'm going to steal a little thunder from Kelly and Nate tonight. But, uh, they put two great events over the weekend, the food truck event with Empire and the police department open house. And I just wanted to thank you both and your departments and the, um, City of Empire's parks and wreck commission as well for planning those events. I think both of them had easily over a thousand people at uh, each event. Um, and that is all I've got tonight. Jake, Steve,

um, I know this is going to sound unusual. I I I think a lot of us know what the 22 push-up challenge is. And, um, regardless what anyone's thoughts are about our former mayor. He was as big of a champion for mental health awareness um, and suicide prevention as anybody that I've met. But I was kind of hoping that Stephen uh if you could come up and just expand exactly on what that is because I want I want you to relay to the community exactly what that is. I mean I think we all know many people here know what it is but

yeah certainly thank you for the um so this is something I started with my therapist in Utah. Um and it's it's 22 all push-ups actually. You're leaning up against something so you can kind of change how difficult it is or isn't. Um, and and what it is is, um, I prefer to do it over a bridge where there's moving water. Um, so that it's it's 22 push-ups, 22 ball push-ups. Um, and it's a way to put a little bit of positive energy back into the planet. Um, right. It's running water. It's flowing. It's feeding everything, everything that's growing. So, you're just putting that little bit of positive energy in there while you're also, you know, honoring. I don't do honoring, but thinking about the 22 plus, the number is far higher than 22. That's the number everyone tosses around is 22 veterans a day. it ends up being if that's the number we use that's 7,7404 veterans every single year that kill themselves. Um so it's a way to just kind of think about that and maybe kind of think try to think of ways that we can right bring attention to that and and bring that number down to zero. Right? That's the goal is zero. Um at the same time it's it's a good moment to just reflect on your own personal mental health and how things are going and how your day was to be grateful for. And lastly it's a it's a chance to make a connection with the people. This the the 22 push-ups takes us in a minute. So like it's it's just a short amount of time where you can connect with other people on on kind of like something like that and just say, "Hey, how's it going?" and and have that conversation with each other.

Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry I completely broke protocol with that. So I'll acknowledge that um Mr. Ryan, but um I wanted I wanted to call that part out primarily because we're approaching Memorial Day weekend and for a lot of veterans um it's a sensitive topic. So I admit that I completely broke protocol for calling on him. Um I guess I'll defer to the mayor.

Would you like some Thank you. So what if what the attorney said is I just like you to think about this. So she said that we don't know what development is going to be because we only have a site plan which clearly lays out a data center. We can't have a moratorium because we can't specifically target data centers, but we don't technically know what's going to go there yet. Well, if you don't know what's going to go there, then you can have a moratorium. So, oh, half of that is true and the other half may or may not be true. And I think that's the legal gray area that lawyers live in and they love it, right? That that's what you you should like to litigate that gray area. And that is the gray area. You can't say we don't know if there's going to be a data center there or not. And then have a site plan for data centers and then oh, we can't do a moratorum and specifically call out data centers. And she's right. Egan did not specifically call data centers. And I never said that they did. I never said that all data state centers were going to be stopped or done. Right. What I said and what I quoted if you look back at previous meetings when I talked about the Egan moratorum um 20 megawatts or less and I even suggested that you allow that in your moratorium back at that previous meeting 20 megawatts less that'd be great we can probably get the specs that we want we can probably get um you know smaller buildings probably not 50 feet tall so and then they can still build their data center you're not you're not you're not stopping them from building their data centers right you have not approved a building plan at all have you even seen a building plan from have you given them final approvals on any of those things? And she says, well, we at the time they didn't know what they were going to do. It was a hypothetical situation. At no point has this been a hypothetical situation. Think back to those original meetings. The only people who were here advocating this were from TR, a data center development company. At no point school district come up here and say, I want my land to become part of um become part of Farmington. I want to be annexed in. At no point did the Olsson come up here and

say we want an application for uh changing zoning. All that was done by the applicant who was tracked, not the original land owners. It wasn't until the day wasn't until recently when the um when the Olsson sold their property do they have those vested interests and vested interests are very very clear in state statute. That's why they're moving dirt right now is to acquire that vested interest. That's why they're doing these things. I keep coming say you guys are getting play that's in the playbook that is clearly in the playbook right there them having vested interest and if you'd like to have a discussion I'd be more than happy to talk about it but you can't say well we don't know what's going to go there and then say well you can't stop data how do you know a data center is going to go there if we why would that even be a little issue if you don't know what's going to go there you're saying I have no clue what's going to actually be built there if it's going to be a data center and then you say well we can't have a more attention against data centers because well they're going to put a data center Come on, guys. Come on. I sincerely appreciate the time you recognizing me and I understand why you did.

No comment. I wasn't completely I'm sorry. Sorry for the confusion, Mr. R. I appreciate your comments. I was also going to add um I want to give a sincere thank you to David Mcnite and his family uh for the incredible donation. We accepted a U donation in our um earlier in our uh consent agenda and the Mcnite family has continued to be a significant contributor to that uh senior center. So great uh much appreciated. Also want to thank Chief Seam and the entire police department for a great weekend. So thank you very much. Yeah.

Thank you mayor and council. Tonight we had an eating and I just wanted to call out that we had Dakota Electric representatives at the meeting tonight which is one of our partner organizations and we're continuing along the same trajectory that we had last year where we invited partners in our economic development partners in to talk about um it's really to share information to hear from them about their mission and really to talk about how we work together and to provide that education and thought it was a very great deep conversation that we held today and I just want to express um my Thank you to their team for coming in and my thank you to the EDA for having that conversation tonight. Um, and I also want to to just point out and um point out that we are very very close to launching the BSNA um application which is the online permitting for the building department. And tonight the ordinance that was in front of you is very clear in the packet what that technology fee is for. And it will be to allow us to again have that onein-one fee um to collect back for those services those um that be able those fees that we'll be able to collect the convenience that will be offered through that permitting system. It's very clear in the ordinance language what that applies to. It's a convenience for our customers. I know that we have a lot of customers that will take advantage of this and I'm very grateful that we're able to offer this convenience um through the building department. the fire service fees that will be allowed through that um and that that we'll be able to collect application fees for the planning department as well. So, thank you for moving forward with that. It's um moves us a step forward in the additional customer service that we can provide. So, thank you. That's all I have.

You John, thank you, mayor and city council members. Uh for the public's information, as part of the consent agenda, you approved the Flagstaff Avenue corridor study. Uh this will provide critical information to help us with that comp plan update. Uh it will look at Flagstaff Avenue from County Road 50 all the way to our north border. A short segment of that belongs to Dakota County from 195th to 200. So they're paying paying a small portion. Uh but there's a lot of roadway planning going on in the area including Dakota County's plan to connect 195th over to Cedar Avenue also. So this is very timely and very important to help us with our transportation planning as part of our comp plan. Thank you, Kelly.

Good evening, mayor and council. Want to opportunity to thank both the park and rec commissions from the city of Farmington and city of Empire for a great food truck event on Friday night. Like uh council member Cordis said, we had well over a thousand people. So without their support and putting on this event, it wouldn't happen. Also want to thank the commission for Saturday morning turning around and then going to the police open house. So, they were there late Friday night and then Saturday as well. Want to thank the police department and specifically Captain Solder for the invite to the police open house. Parks Recreation has never had a presence there before. Um, and we definitely enjoyed being there, so hopefully we can attend again next year. Hard to believe it, but already next week is the first music in the park. Um, next week it's going to be the Brothers. They're a rocking ukulele band. Uh, so Wednesday, uh, May 27th, 7 p.m. at Ramling River Park. I want to just uh uh thank the sponsors of this evening's events. Castle Rock Bank, Farmington Youth Hockey Association, Hobo Sierra Jewel State Farm, NBFW Post 762. So I hope to see everybody next Wednesday at Music in the Park.

Thank you.

Also, thank you. I first want to acknowledge the 11 members of our citizens academy that graduated back on the 6th, two weeks come this coming Wednesday. Um it was a uh from all reports a great program put on by Sergeant Jesse Redmond. Um and uh I think it's going to be building into more of those events in the years to come. And then again, thank you to all of you and all of our partners that joined us at the police department for our open house. Uh it was a incredible day, better than you could ever ask for. Uh the weather was was insane and we had a lot of people that came and experienced uh the police department and um I don't know if she'll be invited back because I think hers was actually the most popular booth uh with skate park diagram and she had a lot of actions. So um but uh all kidding aside it was a great event and thank you for coming all the citizens as well. So uh I do want to also say thank you to Mr. Nate and Miss Grizz for their donations to the city. Those are obviously very generous. I want to say congratulations to Lieutenants Olsson and Kelly. That's always very exciting. Like I said, I've weirdly known Justin from a past life dude. It's kind of funny to see a small town connection kind of like that come back. But like I said, Mary's been around a long time and she's just this calm, stable presence in her department that's I don't she just brings an uplifting atmosphere to the department that I love. Um, I owe both Kell and Nate the same uh, thank you for your efforts, for your food truck and open house. Same apology for missing both of your events and the same excuse that for both of them I was coaching rack meat uh, each time. So that's why I was able to attend it and I swear I was not purposely avoiding getting bitten by the dog um, for the demonstration. So thanks to you for volunteering for that one.

Thank you volunteer.

Thank you for 90 I think. Um, it's always a good time though, so I really appreciate it. Um, you know, to to the conference out here. I think I'll keep them short tonight, but I think you you know I'm available Mondays, Fridays, I'm sitting right there. You can come talk to me whenever. Some of you have, some of you haven't, but that's what I'm here for is to try and talk through these things one by one. I've heard a lot of statements like, you know, you have an out this way, you have an out this way, you have an out this way. I think the default position you're starting from there is that like I want to find excuses to make it go away when in general I've been favorable to the project. So I'm going to go seek out ways that way. I will scrutinize things on the merit of it is brought before me and the topic that's in front of me. To your point, David, I will things go down a road and I will analyze them as the thing comes in front of me because that is what the process has to do and that's how consistent. You guys can shake your head. That's okay. Again, it's what the process is and I'll do it. I'll stick to my my convictions on that. So I'll look for a motion to adjurnn.

Motion to adjurnn at 88. Second. Second. Motion. Those in favor say I. I.

I. We're at 838. Heat. Heat.