Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. We'll call the city council meeting for Monday, May 18th, 2026 to order. Would everyone please rise for the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Call the role, please. Council member Wilson >> here. >> Council member Cordes >> here. >> Maril Lean >> here. >> Council member Bernat
>> here. Council member Winshettle is absent. >> Okay. Uh any changes to the agenda tonight? >> None. >> I have one change. a request to move six
TAC 14 donation from Beans and Boots um LLC to the Farmington K9 program under announcements. >> Jake look for a motion to approve the agenda as proposed.
>> Motion >> as amended. Sorry. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion by Steve, second by Jake. All in favor say I. >> I. And we have our announcements. The swearing in of our fire department personnel. Chief Bryce, can I take this one?
Good evening, mayor, council, and city staff. Uh this evening we'll be conducting the oath of office and badge pinning for two members of the department. And again our two members this evening uh that will be conducting the ceremonies for our lieutenant position which took effect April 6 of
this year. Uh Mary Olsen is an eight-year member in the department. Mary has served um as our new candidate mentor and has helped with the fire academy for the department. Mary is extremely active with the public education portion of our department and signs up for almost every event. Mary
has held the ranks of firefighter and crew leader. U Mary holds many state certifications such as fire officer one, fire instructor one, incident safety officer, fire apparatus operator, and a certified emergency medical responder. And this evening, Mary will be pinned by
Lieutenant Amanda Christensen. Justin Kelly is a seven-year member of the department. Justin has held the ranks of firefighter and crew leader. Justin has been a tremendous resource when it comes to our reporting platforms and is working with our members to increase knowledge and understanding of
our systems. Justin holds many certifications such as fire officer one, fire instructor one, incident safety officer, fire apparatus operator, and is a certified state emergency medical technician. This evening, Justin will be pinned by his son, Teddy. So, at this
time, I'll ask Mary and Justin to come forward and receive the oath. Raise your right hand and repeat after me. I state your name. >> I, Mary, >> as a fire lieutenant of the Farmington Fire Department,
>> as a fire lieutenant of the Farmington Fire Department, >> swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota. swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota. >> I will faithfully, honestly, and
impartially discharge the duties of fire lieutenant. >> I will faithfully, honestly, and impartially discharge the duties of fire lieutenant >> of the Farmington Fire Department. >> of the Farmington Fire Department. >> I pledge to carry out the duties of fire lieutenant to the best of my ability.
>> I pledge to carry out the duties of fire lieutenant to the best of my ability. And I will honor and respect the mission, goals, purpose, and policies of the fire department. >> And I will honor and respect the missions, goals, purpose, and policies of the fire department.
>> I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith and trust. >> I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith and trust. >> I accept so long as I am true to the ethics of the fire service. >> I accept so long as I am to the ethics of the fire service. And I make these
promises so solemnly, freely, and upon my honor. >> And I make these promises solemnly, freely, and upon my honor. >> So help me God. >> So help me God. So, I'll have Lieutenant Christensen and and Teddy come on up.
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, talents, and energy to help make Farmington a better and safer place. So, thank you. >> And I mean no disrespect 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 the rock star. Thank you. Uh Mary and Justin, congratulations to both of you on this promotion and excited to see what you can do in this role. >> Congratulations to both of you.
>> We're going to head down to the station for our cake and ice cream that we >> feel free. >> Thank you. >> The ritual stay for the 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 Beans and Boos LLC to the Farmington Police Department K9 program. Chief Seam, thank you, Mayor and Council. I'm asking
uh Jessica Grisome to uh join me here at the podium. Um start with the the story of why 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 K9 program because we're always trying to think of ideas to raise money for the program because it costs 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 uh 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 just 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, it's 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 $1,057.50. 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 for Jessica and uh, Beans
and Boots LLC. On behalf of the Farmington Police Department, I would like to extend our sincere appreciation for your generous donation of $1,057.50 to the 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. Partnerships with local businesses such as Beans and Boots are invaluable and have helped 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 help ensure our K9 teams continue to receive training equipment and support necessary to effectively protect and serve the residents of Farmington. 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 Seam Farmington Police Department. >> Absolutely. Thank you. Jess, you're welcome to say a few words if you'd like.
>> Um, I I'm humbled. Um, I am I have a big family history in law enforcement. So, when it was brought to me, again, like Nate 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 one of our baristas who hand drew the artwork for the bags of both of the canine dogs, um, it's been it's been a huge hit for us.
Um, and I think people really appreciate knowing that there is all of the profits are going to support the local Farmington Canine Department. So, I'm I'm honored. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. I'll let you guys
go. >> Oh, sure. >> Oh, 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. We have an ordinance amending changes in fees for license permits or other city approvals and services for calendar year 2026. Hold on.
>> Suspense is killing me. Okay. >> 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 and debit 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. >> Thank you. >> Um, just to confirm, the 2% $150 are directly from 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. >> Okay. Steve, >> I have um the only comment I would make Diana 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. >> Okay. And I have no comment that they haven't already said. So, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing at this time. Is there anybody that would like to come up and speak? Right. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Any follow-up
comments? >> No. >> Mayor, 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 role, please.
Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. I will look for a motion to pass ordinance 2026-004 amending charges and fees for licenses, permits, and other city 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 Musi to the subject propert. 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 2026-00005, reszoning 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 ft of the west side of the property is MUCI and the remaining 765 ft 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. The 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 related 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 the
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 the parcels 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 28th and then of course what are we like an eighth to a quarter of a mile 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 a heads up. >> Yeah, this will have to go through they will have to plat the property. Um and that would be part of their contiguous
plat ordinance. it would have to be approved and that the main thing they look at at that point is access and at this point they're not the developer is not proposing any access off of or on to directly onto pilot knob. Um and frankly I don't know that the county would allow
it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> No. Well, the only comment I would make I think what's kind of cool about this particular project and the planning commission commented 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,
>> Jake? That was going to be my only comment. I too watched the planning commission meeting last week and sounds like the developer and 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. >> Great. Holly, >> I have nothing to add. I guess my my comment is probably more trying to tie a couple things together, but you know, this was an example where we've had all these conversations with
the planning commission about protecting our arterials, right? And this is going to come in a few points down, I think, too. 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 all over this map in this spot and therefore we'll get the development the way we want. 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 when we talk down here a little bit too. But I I just I don't want to get too rigid in our thinking that like everything has to be perfect right along the spot. We need to take the actual
site into consideration when we when we draw these kind of things up in our next gen comp plan here. So other than that, like I said, I'm excited as they are with the the development that's coming here. So, uh, I would look for a mot. What's the specific one? A motion to adopt ordinance 2026-005
resorting property from MUC to industrial. >> Motion. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Holly, second by Jake. Call the role, 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, we're asking you to consider the following resol following resolution. To give you a little bit of 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 be utilized by someone and
not maintained by the city. >> You Jake, no questions, Steve? I 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 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 mow lawn quite as much and travel uh or carry mowers all over the city as much. So, I really appreciate everyone's hard work on this. So, uh I would look for a motion to
accept the bid for the sale of the 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 roll, please. >> Council member Cortez,
>> yes. >> Mayor, >> yes. >> Council member Bernat, >> yes. >> Council member Wilson, >> yes. >> 11.2 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 Councel. Yes. This evening, uh, before you, uh, is the findings of fact and record decision for the Vermillion Reserve Environmental
Assessment Worksheet. Swanson Hascamp uh Consulting LLC prepared the uh environmental assessment worksheet or EAW for the proposed Vermilion Reserve residential development project uh which is proposed by Lenar.
The AAW 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 subp part 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 and 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 a availability for that initial EAW was published in the EQB monitor and place 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 to 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. Holly, 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 we have a a clear timeline of of where things are at and 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 Lenar had interest in and was starting this process. So when we are looking at a lot of the information and it says in 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 it doesn't move the project to a next phase beyond what this does. >> Right.
>> Okay. That was all that I had. Thank you so much for presenting. >> All right, Jake. I appreciate your presentation, Tony, and I appreciate Holl's clarification of the timeline. I have no additional questions at this time. Okay. Steve.
>> Um, couple questions, comments, Tony. So, um, yeah, Holly did a nice job of 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. So, 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 Edelman 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 planful. 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 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 like more of a decision from the council in terms of how we believe the overall development
process in the community should go and I believe that the comp plan and our work between the planning commission and council is paramount. So thank you. Okay, Tony, 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 EAW and then between the EAW and the next step which is preliminary plat. Right. >> Right. >> Or 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 a couple different ways if necessary. Um, but generally speaking with like a
comprehensive plan amendment resoning, that's a 60-day um review um before uh council has to make ultimate decision whether or not to approve or deny. >> But the next the next thing we would see before us is the zoning decision, not a
plat though, right? >> Or they 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 in the
head is to to your point, Holly, this this was a developer who was outside of our 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 Castle Rock and all of Eureka and speculate on what happens if they want to annex in. We don't have an OA with
Eureka. Um and so you know by definition when they come to this with these projects we are doing basically case studies right where what should this be on the fly it's not in a comp plan and how do we pause and guide that correctly kind of comes down to you know a little
bit of on the fly because we have statemandated timelines that we have to work within to make it the best decision that we can. Um, why I think 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 our pillar 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 there's 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 our 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 traction and that type of industry coming in here. But the commercial as an amenity is a little bit more struggling and has told us repeatedly 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 a tax burden on us but it may solve
our commercial problem. So all that ties into kind of your concern, Steve, is I want more time to kind of 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 of what we're looking at right here, it's the environmental assessment worksheet and I don't have any particular concerns about that, but I 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 next 60 days or whatever time period we do have for 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 Lean, we might
just have to agree to disagree on this. It's okay to >> if be 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 a unique community in the 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 going to have to agree to disagree because I think bringing in a 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 laudable goal, you know, and we appreciate it as a community to kind of know what they're thinking, but 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 the EAW 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 been in in my observation a process where um you've got land that's annexed in it's farmland. You
know, do we want it 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 and 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 driveby is not the right word, neighborhood or you know uh neighbor neighborhood business what have you. And by locking in homes to this entire segment I think we're
really shortch 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 the zoning of the property itself, right?
>> It's the fact that we are we are going from Yeah, thanks for clarifying. the fact that we are 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 huge 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 three and 50 where we have, you know, the the Tamarak, you know, strip mall 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 into 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 when
the zoning is in front of us, right? And I think that's my point is the EAW is what's in front of us right now. But >> no, and that's that's a fair point, Nick. That's a really fair point, but where I'm saying I think the process maybe has gotten a little speedy, 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 plat 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 you are being put upon is mandated by the state though, right? We are trying to just make state deadlines on these. >> Correct. they they applied and were under certain
requirements, >> right? So, I think it's 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 to put our teeth in and say, "No, we're not comfortable with 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 let's say the
um planning commission gets this in a few weeks sometime in their June meeting, July meeting, whatever the case may 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, LAR is in the B 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 we 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 a recommendation 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 the city if they present something which we've taken our due diligence to review And you know, one one of the bodies are see that's 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 to unlock here. So I think we are looking for a motion
to pass resolution 2026-046 adopting findings of fact and record decision on the Vermillion 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 Leilene, >> 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. We already passed. >> 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 one 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 Lay Meer to the planning commission to fill the vacant seat through January 2028. With that, I'll stand if you have any questions. >> Steve, you can go first this time. >> 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, 20255 Aken Road. I just want to make one comment about the the data center. I think you guys should
listen a lot more 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. City certainly way bigger than we are. Um, when you look at other cities and what
they're doing, it stands to look at why are we doing why why do we think it's such a good idea when bigger cities and much I'd say brighter people are are turning them down and saying we don't want them here. It's just I mean Apple Valley turned one down because they don't think they could provide provided
water. They're not near the Vermillion River neither. 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 and do the same. Um the other thing I wanted to speak about is that EA
um when I was on the 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 on one development, you follow it to a tea, 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 uh comp plan that Steve said that you're working on. What's the big what's the big hurry? I mean the out from the outside looking in
and the meetings I've been with been to I've never heard the council you know requesting the EA 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 the EAW. Here, we're going to have 370 homes out here. We want to do this."
You know, they have to hook up the city services back when we were when I was on the council. You have to go through the Met Council for Musa and make 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 it to drink. You're you're you're going you always go 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 the history the way this is going. You say yes yes yes and then you're forced to say yes. You turn around and say well you know this this uh agreement from on the data center 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. You got to do stuff 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 a 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 up. I was at that meeting. I mean, you want to do things the right way, but then you want to pick and choose which ones you want to do the right way.
It's ridiculous. Good. Anybody else? Nancy Harstead Castle Rock 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 in an amended AU. 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 of water per year.
Now 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 tracked 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 means 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 infrastructure? Backup power needs if this is now some kind of a closed loop. What fluids are being used? Glycol, 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 wastewater? 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 lowwater cooling can 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 also 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 are guessing right now. So 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 trout stream? Inenver Grove just approved a one-year moratorum on data centers. They join Egan and Rosemont now. Wright County looking at look 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 this, if you agree with what you just heard, please sign our petition
for the city to to we are asking them to slow down and 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 the petition.
Please do the right thing for us this time. I'm assuming you'll get back to us. Thank you, Nancy. Anybody else? Uh good good evening mayor council uh Nate Ryan Farmington resident. So
I just I find it so just really concerning I guess. So, we were told that Farmington was in major money constraints and we didn't have enough tax base because we didn't have enough um 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 uh 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 going to 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 with building homes that cost us money which all the citizens are going to have to somehow recoup that money for as well. I don't I truly don't understand your your
decisions and what you'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. None. Um I I
just I don't get it. And a a question that I that just about those service fees, if you want to answer it in your comments, I looked at that and I believe that the that service fee at 2% was for all of the services it look like. So like if I want to pay my water bill with
credit card, is that is that 2% more? No. What about if I you know what other services? Because it was in the services book and the attachment and all the services listed there. So anyways um
so we keep bringing up and talking about moratorum. So I was one of the if the first if not one of the very first people to bring this moratorium up and the attorney here sat there and said no we can't do that. No that's we we we can't do that.
How did all these other cities do this? Right. How how did how did they all do it then? And there's not been significant they own they own one property. I will say that likely if we had a moratorum they could still build the data center on the golf course property but that other property would
be highly impacted and would that interrupt their you know 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 moratorum can happen you're seeing it as just mentioned in Rosemont in Inenver Grove 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're going to get sued just by doing a moratorum, then
why are there not lawsuits already in Rosemont? Why are there not lawsuits in Grove Heights? What What do their city attorneys know that that ours doesn't? I hate coming up here and just sounding like I'm just a complainer. I'm not. not just a complainer. A moratorum is a
viable option out of this and it puts it on hold for a year even if it does affect this project and in that year then maybe we can look at requiring an EIS. Right? You required for this project that came up you required a more stringent for homes
an EAW versus an AUR. An AUAR compares two projects against each other. An EAW looks at a specific project, roughly 30 questions. 30 questions, but it does really just look at one very specific project. An EIS gets down to the
nitty-gritty. Why wouldn't you want an EIS on a major industrial project? Why wouldn't you want that for yourselves? I mean, to hell with any of us. Why wouldn't you want that for yourselves and for your own children? Why wouldn't you want that for your
neighbor? Even if they live 2 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 and say, "Does your city protect you?" Yeah, they
they did a great job. They got an AU AR that compared two projects against each other, one of which was a housing development. And with Lakeville having a housing moratorum, gosh, I wonder why all these developers are wanting to put homes in Farmington.
If you guys do an EIS, draft draft something for a moratorum on data centers. You have that. It's in your legal p per purview to do that. And if she's going to tell you no, find someone to tell you yes.
It's there. These people work for you. You do not work for them. Anybody else tonight? >> Good evening, Mayor Council. My name is Mashami 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 would 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 that 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? Stephen. Oh, lost my voice there. How's it going? Uh, Stephen Enders Jr., Farmington. Um,
I just want to come up here and talk for a minute because May 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 Chateau. Um, when you learn to accept instead of expect, you'll have fewer disappointments. Um, and I' I've taken that to heart. So, the 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 reality is there is going to be another first
responder here in Farmington that's suffering from mental health. Um, I'm I'm not the first. I'm not There's been several in 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, but 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 get to talk to him maybe one
or two hours a day. He doesn'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 can come up with a better plan and how to handle situations like mine going forward. Uh some positives. Um I want to I want to 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 22 the 22 plus veterans, cuz it's more than 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 the 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 some 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 that Chateau 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. Um, I do think that the the fire side'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 I just want to applaud that. Um, another thing I want to call out really quickly is there was some handshakes tonight 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 the 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 Vermillion 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 are 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 else tonight? All right. On the round table, Amy. Oh,
sorry. Sorry. >> Hi. I'm really new at this. Um Jenny Grouden. I live in Farmington. I would like to know know all these people said things that I've been thinking about the data center thing happening and I would just like to know when are you going to
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? Um I just would like to know when this is because it's just really important
like you 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 Yes. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Now we're on 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 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's 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 final plat. And once that is done, um
certain rights vest in the in an owner or an applicant 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 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 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 tracked uh applications. Um,
one other difference is that, you know, in in my review of the of the moratorum orientatorum ordinance, sorry, it's a little harder to say than I thought. um in at least in Egan is that um
they didn't their moratorium does not is not a complete ban on the development of of data centers period. It it it makes it a it has certain provisions related to you know the size and scale of of of
data centers that may be allowed that already exist 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 I'd also just note that um the AUAR that that was undertaken for the tracked pro 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 about what is
going to go there eventually once this the the final developer um proceeds with a project. So an AUR is looks at just scenarios that um that are hypothetical and at this point there still is no
specific development plan that's been proposed on either the former golf course site or on the school district parcel that the council I 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 it's not a it's not a one it's just not
the the point of the process that you're in. The AU is was the appropriate tool at the time based on the information that was available from the applicant. Um,
and then of course with the other issues that are part of the lawsuits that the city is a is a party to, there are environmental issues that are raised there that also constrain what the city um how the city can respond to requests
for information um about any of those environmental issues. we have to we have to protect the city's legal position in that litigation at the direction and guidance of the of 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, Holly. >> I have nothing tonight. Thank you, >> Jake. Um, I'm going to steal little thunder from Kelly and Chief Nate
tonight, but uh, they put on 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 uh, 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 opportunity. Um so this is something I
started with my therapist in Utah. Um and it's it's 22 wall push-ups. So, it's 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 wall 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, not I don't know honoring, but thinking about the 22 plus the numbers far higher than 22, but that's the number everyone tosses around is 22 veterans a day. That ends up being if that's the number we
use, that's 7,744 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, and
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, things you got to be grateful for. And lastly, it's a it's a chance to make a connection with a few people. This the the 22 push-ups takes
less than a minute. So like it 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 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 it to the mayor.
Would you like some time? Thank you. So what if what the attorney said is true, I just like you to think about this. So she said that we don't know what the development is going to be
because we only have a site plan which clearly lays out a data center but we can't have a moratorum 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 moratorum. So
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 say, well, we can't do a moratorium and specifically call out data centers. And she's right. Egan did not specifically call out data centers. And I never said that they did. I never said that all data 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 moratorum back at that previous meeting 20 megawatts or less that'd be
great we can probably get the setbacks 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 D a building plan at
all? Have you even seen a building plan from them? 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 tract, a data center development company. At no point did the 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's come up here and say, "Hey, we want an application for uh changing zoning." All of that was done by the applicant who was tracked, not the original land owners. And it
wasn't until the date wasn't until recently when the um when the Olsson sold their property do they have those vested interests and vested interestes 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 like you guys are getting played. That's in the playbook. That's that is clearly in the playbook right there of 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 centers." How do you know a data center is going to go there? If we Why would that even be a legal issue if you don't know what's going to go there? You're you're saying, "I have no clue what's going to actually
be built there. I don't know if it's going to be a data center." And then you say, "Well, we can't have more attempt against data centers because, well, they're going to put a data center there." Come on, guys. Come on. I sincerely appreciate the time that you re-recognized me and I understand why
you did it. >> No comment. >> Oh, I wasn't completely >> I'm sorry. >> Sorry for the confusion, Mr. Ryan. I appreciate your comments. I was also going to add um I want to give a sincere
thank you to uh 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. >> Thank you mayor and council. Tonight we had an EDA meeting 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 invite our 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 I 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 we'll 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 now
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. >> Thank you, Deanna.
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 uh 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. >> Uh, good evening, Mayor and Council. Want to take the 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 in putting on this event, it wouldn't happen. Also want to thank the commission for sat 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 and 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 Strum Brothers. They're rocking ukulele band. Uh, so Wednesday, uh, May 27th, 700 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, and VFW Post 7662. So, I hope to see everybody next Wednesday at Music in the Park.
>> Thank you, Kelly. Chief, >> uh, Mayor Council, thank you. I first want to acknowledge the 11 members of our citizens academy that graduated back on the 6th, uh, two weeks ago, come w this coming Wednesday. Um, it was a, uh,
from all reports, a great program put on by Sergeant Cassie 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 out and experienced uh the police department. And um Kelly, I don't know if she'll be
invited back because I think hers was actually the most popular booth uh with the skate park uh diagram and she had a lot of interactions. So, um, but, uh, all kidding aside, it was a great event and thank you for coming, all the citizens as well. So,
>> okay. Uh, I do want to also say thank you to Mr. Mcnite 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 I've known Justin from a past life, too. So, 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 for a long time and she's just this calm and stable presence in the fire department that's I don't know, she just brings an uplifting atmosphere to the department that I love. Um, I owe both Kelly 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 a track meet uh each time. So that's why I was unable to attend it and I swear I was not purposely avoiding getting bitten by
the dog um for the demonstration. So thank you Steve for volunteering for that one. >> Actually volunteered >> thank you for not being me. I think um sound like it was a good time. 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. And 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 why am I going to go seek
out ways that way? I will scrutinize things on the merit of what is brought before me and the topic that's in front of me. To your point, David, I will let things go down a road and I will analyze them as the thing comes in front of me because that is what the process says to do and that's how I'll be consistent.
You guys can shake your head. That's okay. Again, it's what the process is and I'll stick to it. I'll stick to my my convictions on that. So I'll look for a motion to adjurnn. Motion to journ at 8:38. >> Second. Second.
>> Motion second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. We're adjourned at 8:38.