We'll call the city council regular meeting to order for Monday, December 1st, 2025. Would everyone please stand 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 roll, please. >> Council member Wilson, >> here. >> Council member Gordes, >> here. >> Mayor Hoy, >> here. >> Council member Bernett here. Council member Lean >> here.
All right. Any changes to the agenda? >> None. >> All right. I'd seek a motion to approve the agenda. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion by Holly. Second by Steve. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All right. Moving on. Our next item is citizen comments. Anyone wishing to
speak, come up and do so at this time. Or that citizen comments are a time for anyone to address the city council on matters not on the agenda. Those speaking should state their name and address and limit their comments to five minutes. Council will not engage in discussion on your topic, but those requiring response will be responded to by the next city council meeting. Go
ahead. >> Thank you, uh, Nancy Arstead, Bulmont Avenue. Thank you, Attorney, uh, Attorney Schmidt, for clarifying the city's position at the last council meeting. But to be clear, my public comments at
your November 17th meeting were entirely accurate. Minnesota statute 462 requires cities to zone based on compatibility and impact. That is the standard, not simply grouping unlike uses in a list.
The city absolutely does designate the list of uses in your codes as comparable in impact because that is what a zoning district is. Zoning districts exist specifically to group uses with similar or compatible impacts so they can
coexist without harming each other. If the city places child daycarees, gyms, restaurants, offices, and hypers scale data centers in the same zoning district, then legally and practically the city is declaring them compatible.
If the city attorney wants to say a daycare is not the same as a data center, then we agree. Then the logical conclusion is they should not be in the same zoning district, but they are in Farmington. That is the problem.
A a quote list of things that could go there," unquote, is the definition of permitted use, and that it and they all get automatic approval. When something is a permitted use, it is preapproved with no additional zoning analy analy
analysis or scrutiny. A hypers scale data center being placed on that list means no public hearing required for zoning, no conditional use scrutiny, no impact comparison to neighboring uses, and automatic approval. When something
as large, loud, and infrastructure intensive as a hypers scale data center gets the same automatic green light as Anna's Bananas or Anytime Fitness, that is a zoning failure. Minnesota law expects zoning lists to be
based on similar impacts. Zoning districts must group compatible uses, separate incompatible or high impact uses, prevent land use conflicts, and protect public health, safety, and
welfare. If a use has 708 megawws of power demand, millions of gallons of water consumption, hundreds of semi-sized generators, 80 foot buildings, roundthe-clock noise, vibrations, emissions, and industrial lighting, putting it into a light
industrial zone does designed for daycarees and retail is not compatible. It is mclassification. The city attorney's explanation actually confirms the core issue. She said when the code was adopted and data center and
a data center was added, it was simply the choice of the council at that time and that was an appropriate choice. That is precisely the problem. It was a policy choice that reflected a 2014 era data center, not the post2020
hypers scale AIdriven mega projects that now exist. It may have been an appropriate choice at the time, not sure, but it's not now. And the city has done nothing to update it, even as hypers scale development continues to
explode. Track took full advantage of that outdated code. And then you took advantage of your residents. My statement was not an exaggeration. It came right from your zoning code. Under the city's own ordinance, a brew pub must undergo higher zoning scrutiny than
a hypers scale data center. So does a convenience store with gas, a theater, and a dental lab. And they get a public hearing for zoning. But a 350 acre hypers scale data center does not. That is not an overstatement. That is your ordinance.
The city attorney's logic proves that the code needs to be fixed immediately. If she is declaring openly that these uses are not compar comparable yet they are legally treated as if they are comparable and the council intentionally put them
together then there is only one re responsible conclusion. The zoning code is outdated and urgently needs revision. That was the point of my speech and the city attorney's comments actually reinforce it not contradict it. Again,
the AUR AR put and plats. You approve do not substitute for proper zoning. Zoning controls where it is, not how it's designed. I am formally asking Tony and your planning commission to revisit hypers scale data centers in your coding. When can it happen and how can
it be put on an agenda? Finally, going to the Castle Rock Township's meeting minutes from November 2023, your city administrator, Lynn Gorski, presented to the Castle Rock board wanting to put a data center on the 315 acre empty property. I'm sure
you remember the minutes read in Lynn's presentation, the proposed data center would be done in multiple phases over 10 to 15 years. Zoning for data centers is usually industrial. The stated land should increase in value if changed to
industrial zoning. Those are your words. You can look them up. Please change your outdated zoning codes. Thank you. I'm Jeff Shhatler. I live at 22420 Calico Court, Farmington, Minnesota. Council Mayor, thanks for letting me
speak again. Nick, I forgot to respond to you last time for two meetings ago. I had made a comment that you guys have not done anything for us. Um, I do acknowledge that you and Holly came over that day along with a few other council members and you guys did make a call
when you were there. Made a lot of them calls too and a lot of emails. I had Kristen and D at my house a few times. So, that's a sign of what happens when you work together. Something can change. Um, everybody that's been to my house acknowledged it's too close. It's going
to be an issue. They're obviously not going to respond when I ask them for anything. When you guys do, they respond. Work together with with your residents and with your neighbors in Casser. Um, I got to believe had you guys actually sat down at some of the meetings and said, "What will it take? We're going to bulldog
through this if you don't work with us. What will it take? What are some distances? Can we give you a guarantee on those wells for the people there?" things would have been different. What Nancy just talked about, the zoning, it's a huge issue. Um, you're letting this go into residential. You're letting
it go anywhere. This data center is bigger than your guys' entire neighborhood. Um, remove the houses, three houses next to you. Place these data centers there. That's what you're doing to us. This is residential. I kind of get the school property. You buy next
to a farm field. We've all seen farm fields, empty land turn into industrial, turn into anything. I don't get taking residential and turning it into this. Um, do a little better. You got two lawsuits going. You got concerned
citizens. We're worried. We're nervous. Um, there's true impact that happens from it. We're up here every chance we can get to talk about it. I don't know how else to get your attention and to to figure out a way to make things work. Take the first opportunity you have to
walk away from this project, but hold hands with track. Let them come back. Are you guys monitoring and watching how they're dealing and negotiating in Canon Falls? They just agreed to give Canon Falls what, $700 and some thousand dollars a year to their schools. Why don't we negotiate that? This is for people and
for the children and to make the town better. Why don't we get some of that? That's on top of that tax revenue. That's threequarters of a million dollars a year to the school on top of the tax revenue that they're giving off the bat. Now they're discussing putting in a park for the people. Would have
been nice leave that park for us that was there that you guys sold that you want to put a water tower on. Now you know some of those things show a sign of a good neighbor coming in. Tracks offering 250 ft to every project they've put out there. They put in no special
consideration to us or to residents or to neighbors or to people or the impact. She said she put her best foot forward. She put her best foot forward in Canon Falls and every other project that they've applied with the same exact setbacks. They don't care about people. They don't care about you. They care
about cheap land and cheap power. Go back to the table. Let them walk away. If they walk away, bring them back. But negotiate this time. You actually have a sellable product in a couple different areas in town. Meta could have made use of this land. Meta would have wrote the same
guarantees that we've been asking for and given the right amount of space. He'd have gotten about the same revenue off them. Why not do something to renegotiate and get it done right instead of sitting here fighting with your residents forever? You've got two lawsuits. I've
said it from day one. You put it in my backyard with no safety precautions for me and my family and you put lights up on my house for 5 years like that happens at Meta. There's a whole another lawsuit coming. I'm not joking. It's not an exaggeration. I've talked to everybody. The U ofM's been to my house
twice now. They're starting a whole program of students on the impact on data centers. They're willing to monitor this for free and take the case on. Do something pro, you know, provide some protection for your people. 250 ft. Those lights are going to be on top of
my house for 5 years. Meta's still on. Drive by there tonight if you're bored. Go by there. It's crazy with the snow how much brighter it is when the snow's there. I'm 250 ft away. I was out there the other night when it snowed. You can see that light a thousand feet away now with the snow on the ground. Imagine
that in your homes. So, do something. Talk tonight too about your budget. Talk about how much of it's data center related. How much of the staff that we're hiring is related. You know, we got assistant administrators. John, you got a couple assistants. Um how much of this water trunk upgrades?
How much of that's for the budget is is data center related that we don't know if we're getting. Are we putting the cart before the horse? Are we spending money that we don't have in hopes to get a data center there? Talk about some of that tonight. Ask those questions. You
know, how much are we spending to accommodate a developer? How much work and time are we putting in for them versus how much work and time are you putting in for your residents that are here every other week asking for it? I've emailed a dozen times to all you. I ain't got a response from anybody. So,
this is my only way of communicating with you. So, anytime you guys know how to get a hold of me, I'd love to hear from you. Uh, good or good evening, mayor and council, um, city staff. My name is Nate Ryan. I live here in Farmington. Um,
last time I spoke at the end I I asked, you know, for you guys to not blight on us. And the the city attorney came back and said, "Well, it wasn't the proper use of the term blight." And so afterwards, I approached um uh Mrs. Mrs. Schmidt and and just said, you know,
when's the last time that you were there? When's the last time you drove by the property? So this summer it was it's overgrown. It's abandoned. That's what I It's It's dangerous, right? um if you go out there, you know, they the
golf course owners in an effort to recoup some cost and uh hopefully save some money, they they tore up a bunch of sprinkler systems and you know that's a regardless if you're supposed to be out there or not. Um you know, young people find their way out there, I'm sure. And
you know, they're they're on property, yes, that they're not supposed to be on with, you know, earth that's been moved. That's by that definition, I mean, that's that's blight. It's exactly what it is. And when I gave that speech and when I talked about that at the planning commission, that's exactly what I was
talking about. Don't blight on us. Don't make this property sit abandoned for years before it ever gets developed or ever gets sold. I know that you receive complaints about the ditch and not mowing any of the ditches. It wasn't mowed this year. It wasn't upkept. So,
um, when I brought these concerns and brought this definition up to Miss Schmidt, she's like, "Well, that's not what you said." I've watched that video. That's exactly what I said. I simply said, "Don't blight on us." And that's exactly what's happened. And it's happened because you're trying to put an
industrial use into a not a spot that doesn't should not be industrial. I keep saying it and I'll continue to say it. I am not against data centers. I see the benefit. I see the tax revenue. I see the benefit of a small amount of jobs that will be there. Yes, they're
highpaying jobs. I see the benefits of it. What I don't see is the benefit of putting an industrial use in between two neighborhoods when it was zoned non-industrial. When we made buying decisions there, when we decided where we wanted to raise our families,
yes, someday it would have been a h a housing with a great park with a beautiful park area. Yes, it would have been that someday. But to ever expect that it was going to be industrial, it's not what any of us expected.
Just it's just simply not at all. And I would encourage Miss Schmidt if she'd like to talk about anything that I say and she wants clarification on that, invite me back up here. I'm somewhat of articulate person. I'll be more than happy to explain what I said, how I said
it, and why I said it, and I'll be able to back it up just like I backed up the word blight and what occurred at that property this summer. So, um, you know, that's I feel like we're just kind of like tit fortat kind of thing. And that's
frustrating spot to be in. It's a frustrating spot to be in for you. It's a frustrating spot to be in for us as residents. You know, we're just kind of like nitpicking at some of the words and some of the things that we say. In reality, you're jamming an industrial use into a spot that it just does not
need to go. And what's scary is that you you don't I don't even see the end of these lawsuits that are going to continue to happen. Just I just don't see them. Uh it's crazy. Um I've got friends all over the state. I've been
very fortunate that I've worked um all over the state of Minnesota. I've been to every single county. There's 87 counties in Minnesota, by the way. I've been to every single one of them. Um I fished in most of them, which is awesome. I played golf and far less of them. But but no matter where I go, um I
meet people and throughout that and as this I don't know who's putting it all out there on TikTok or YouTube, but every single time that I get up here, um I get text messages from people. I got a text messages from someone up by Hermantown, uh from Cook County. I've
got friends in Max. I've got friends up in uh Lake County and Warro County and Roso, like all the different places. And uh you know, even out west, like western Minnesota, you know, up by Hut uh not Hutchinson, but uh Ortonville and other places, you know,
these these folks, these small town folks are recognizing that a data center is coming to them. And what this is doing, all of us, not just me, but what this is doing, it's educating them. So, it's wonderful when I get a text from somebody that's in a 300 person town.
It's fantastic because they're going and educating their councils. When this comes to them, when a big developer comes to them, they're going to be like, "Whoa, wait a second. This Nate guy who I met, you know, 10 years ago or 15 years ago or, you know, helped me on a
real estate trans, whatever." They they remember and they recognize that that guy's here every week. every single time he has an opportunity. Anytime that we all have an opportunity to come up and speak to you, we do. I don't want the spotlight. I don't I don't care about views. I don't care
about hits. I don't care about any of that. I just want you to not put an industrial use in a spot where it doesn't belong. That is my sole purpose of being up here. It's not to debate about the word blight. It's not to debate about whether or not or where,
you know, whether or not it's a going to cost me money in my housing market. Um, it's not to debate, you know, anything other than this is an industrial use. Pure and simple and it does not belong here. Jake, it doesn't belong here.
Doesn't belong here. Mayor doesn't belong here. Holly, I know. And I could see it. You took a stand. You did something that very few people I ever see do. You stood out in that lobby and you talked to us
like a human being. That's what you did. And you listened. I could tell that this vote was very difficult for you. But at the end of the day, what's crazy and what really makes me sad that you
chose money over us. That's what you did. Nick did the same thing. He didn't come out in the lobby. I gotta give Holly credit where credit's due. It takes a extremely strong person to do that. Just frankly, an amazing human being to do
that. Somebody who I would vote for. But to choose money over us, over your own people, your own farming tonights, guys, just doesn't belong here. Um,
we'll see you at the next meeting. Take care. Anyone else? Seeing none, we'll move on to our consent agenda and seek a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Motion second. >> Motion by Nick, second by Jake. All in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. >> Next item is 81. This is the public hearing for the final 2026 general fund budget and tax levy. We'll go ahead and open up the public hearing at this time. And Kim
Excuse [clears throat] me. Um, good evening, mayor and council members. Tonight, I'll be walking through the proposed 2026 final budget and property tax levy for your consideration and adoption. The presentation will look somewhat familiar. It builds on what was shared in September and includes final updates and adjustments based on new
data and refined estimates. Our focus remains on transparency, strategic investments, and long-term sustainability for the city of Farmington. As required by state law, cities must certify the final levy to their county auditor on or before five working days
after December 20th. This year, that's December 26. This final step ensures we remain in compliance with state law and ready to move into 2026 with a balanced and transparent financial plan. The final levy cannot exceed the preliminary levy
adopted in September and the amount we're recommending tonight remains the same. This timeline shows the full budget process. Since the preliminary levy was adopted in September, we've continued refining the budget. We've made modifications to the budget based on
updated cost estimates, staffing adjustments, and strategic decisions. Tonight, we are holding the required public hearing and asking council to adopt the final 2026 budget and tax levy. Before we dive into the slide, I want to
clarify that this section of the presentation is focused specifically on the general fund, not the total levy or the full city budget. Later in the presentation, we'll look at the total levy across all funds, which includes capital, debt, and the enterprise operations. But for now, we're just take
talking about the general fund, which supports core city services like police, fire, parks, and administration. This slide compares the preliminary general fund budget adopted in September and the final version we're recommending
tonight. The preliminary budget was 20.3 million with 73% funded by property tax levy and 27% from non-t tax revenues. The final budget is proposed at 18.84 million with 79% funded by the levy and
21% from non- tax sources. The main reason for this change is how we're budgeting for enterprise fund salaries and benefits. In the preliminary budget and in past years, we budgeted most of the costs in the general fund and then transferred the money to the enterprise funds,
specifically water, sewer, and storm water to cover their share. In the final budget, we've shifted those salary and benefit costs directly into the enterprise funds where the work is actually being done. This change improves transparency and gives us a more accurate picture of where dollars
are being spent. As a result, transfers in from other funds dropped from about 1.86 million in the preliminary budget to 423,000 in the final version. So, while the general fund budget looks smaller, it is not a
reduction in services. It is simply a more accurate and transparent way of budgeting. This slide shows how the general fund expenditures are allocated across departments. The most notable increases are in two areas. Administration due to
the 2026 election year and some internal staffing shifts and fire due to the transition to a full-time fire department which includes hiring six full-time firefighters. It is the key driver of the overall levy increase and we'll talk more about that
later in the presentation. On the flip side, there are a couple areas showing decreases. Both engineering and municipal services are down because we've reallocated those salary and benefit costs out of the general fund and into the enterprise funds. As I mentioned earlier, you'll
also notice a significant decrease in transfers. In the past, we levied primarily through the general fund and then transferred the money out to other funds. Now, we're levying directly into the funds where the expenses occur, which eliminates the
needs for these outgoing transfers. I'll provide a slide later that helps illustrate this change. Again, these reductions don't reflect service cuts. They're the result of a more accurate budgeting method, one that shifts costs to the funds where the work actually
happens and gives us a clear picture of our operations. This slide shows how the general fund is allocated by type of expense comparing 2025 to 2026. As you can see, the largest portion now about 73% goes to
salary and benefits. That's typical for a service-based organization like ours, where most of our work is done by people: police officers, firefighters, parks and public works crews, and administrative staff. The increase in this category for 2026 is driven by
several factors. We've added new positions, including the six full-time firefighters and positions in HR, finance, and public works. There are also general wage adjustments and a refined comp workers comp estimate which added about $240,000 in citywide
costs most of which impacts the general fund. You can see purchase services and supplies remain fairly stable. Capital outlay which is very barely visible in the graphs is still a small portion of the general fund since most
capital purchases are budgeted in separate funds. And finally, you'll see a sharp drop in other financing uses. And again, that's because we've reduced transfers out from the general fund. As mentioned earlier, we're now levying directly into the funds where the expenses occur.
Overall, this breakdown reinforces that the majority of the city's operating budget is dedicated to the people and services that directly support the community. As mentioned previously, in 2026, we're taking a more transparent approach to how we allocate levy dollars. In the
past, most of the levy was collected in the general fund and then transferred to other funds to cover expenses. That made the general fund look larger than it really was and made it harder to see where the tax dollar tax dollars were actually going. This year we we're
levying the dollars in the funds where the expenses occur ra whether for equipment facilities or maintenance. As you can see in the diagram on this slide, the 2025 structure shows most of the levy flowing through the general
fund then with internal transfers out to the other funds. In contrast, the 2026 structure shows those same levy dollars being certified directly to the appropriate funds like capital equipment, building maintenance, and trail
maintenance. This change doesn't increase the total levy. It simply reduces the size of the general fund and makes the revenue sources and other funds more visible. It's a clearer, more accurate picture of how we're using public dollars and it improves
transparency for both council and the community. So, up to this point, we focused on the general fund, which covers the city's core operate operating services. While the general fund gets the most attention, these other funds play a critical role in supporting operations,
maintaining assets, and planning for the future. This slide looks at the full city budget and levy across all funds including special revenue, debt service, capital projects, enterprise, and internal service funds. As you can see in the
table, the total 2026 budget across all funds is just over 77 million. That includes funding for utilities, infrastructure, equipment, and long-term maintenance. All of which are essential to keep the city running smoothly. Some
of these funds like utilities, liquor operations, and internal services are primarily supported by user fees and internal services or I'm sorry, internal charges, not property taxes. But others like capital and maintenance funds do
receive support from the levy. Now that we've shifted shifted to looking at the full city budget, this slide highlights some of the key investments included across all funds, not just the general fund. One of the most significant areas investment is staffing.
The 2026 budget includes nine new positions. Six full-time firefighters as part of the transition to a full-time fire department. One position in human resources, one in finance, and one in public works. We're also investing in
transportation planning with funding for two studies. In terms of equipment, the budget includes about 1.3 million in fleet and equipment purchases. These include police fleet replacements, a John Deere tractor and skid steer, a
dump truck, and a compact wheel loader for salt handling. These investments ensure that our teams have the tools and staffing needed to continue delivering reliable, responsive service to the community. Continuing with highlights from the full city
budget, this slide focuses on major investments in parks, facilities, infrastructure, and natural resources. First, we've budgeted nearly 1.7 million for park and trail improvements, including a new skate park. In the area facilities, we've allocated about 1.1
million for planning and deferred maintenance. That includes scope and design work for a potential police building expansion, HVAC upgrades at the central maintenance facility and structural and mechanical improvements at city hall. On the infrastructure
side, we're investing $11 million in street and utility improvements. This includes street reconstruction, extension of water and sewer trunk lines, and planning for additional water storage to support future growth. Finally, we're continuing our commitment to emerald ashbor mitigation with
$600,000 budgeted for tree removal and replacement. These projects are funded through a combination of levy daughter levy dollars, grants, and dedicated funds, and they reflect our ongoing investment in maintaining highquality services and
spaces for the community. Now that we've looked at the full city budget and the major investments planned for 2026, this slide gives an overview of the total proposed property tax levy across all funds. The total levy for 2026 is 19.49 49 million which
represents a 12.98% increase over the 2025 levy. As you can see in the chart, the largest portion, the levy totaling about 14.87 million supports general operations. This includes staffing, public safety,
parks, and other core services. The remaining portion of the levy is distributed among several other areas. Capital equipment, capital projects, trail and pavement maintenance, building maintenance, and debt service. While not
all city services are funded through the levy, some rely on user fees or grants, the levy remains a primary funding source for many of our most essential services and long-term instru infrastructure needs. This breakdown helps show how we're using levy dollars
to support both day-to-day operations and strategic investments in Farmington's future. Now that we've seen the total proposed levy, want to take a moment to revisit the d what's driving the increase and why it's necessary. Again, one of the most significant
factors is the transition to a full-time fire department. This change alone accounts for about onethird of the total levy increase. Today, our fire department includes two a few full-time leadership positions, the fire chief, deputy fire chief, and
fire marshal, but all of our firefighter positions are currently paid on call. While those full-time staff may respond to calls, the city relies entirely on paid on call firefighters for emergency response. Like many communities, we are
facing growing challenges with recruitment, retention, and response times under this model. The 2026 budget proposes hiring six full-time firefighters, a major step toward building a more stable and sustainable staffing structure. Moving to a full-time model will help us
ensure faster and more consistent emergency response, improve training readiness and coverage, and reduce burnout and turnover among our current team. This chain reflects the growing needs of our community and helps ensure
that we're prepared to meet those needs, not just today, but well into the future. Beyond the fire department, the levy also supports new positions and human resources, finance, and public works, general wage and benefit adjustments across departments,
including a refined workers comp estimate. We're also seeing inflationary costs, especially for materials, services, and contracts. In addition, the levy supports capital equipment purchases and ongoing maintenance for facilities and trails, both of which are guided by long-term
plans. Finally, a portion of this increase is tied to debt repayment for past investments, including street reconstruction projects and the recent remodel of the Rambling River Center. Together, the proposed tax levies help us meet current needs, plan for the
future, and continue delivering highquality services to the community. As we consider the proposed investments in the 2026 budget, it's also important to think about the risks of underfunding and what's at stake if we don't move forward. In public safety, underfunding
can lead to slower emergency response times, staffing shortages, and increased burnout, especially in departments like fire, where we're already seeing the limits of the paid on call model. When it comes to infrastructure and facilities, delaying maintenance often
results in longer, higher term costs, whether through emergency repairs or full replacements. It also affects how residents experience and value city services. Operationally, underfunding can mean delays in equipment replacement, reduced
capacity to meet demand, and fewer resources to respond to growth or changing service needs. and strategically can cause us to miss opportunities to modernize, fall behind peer cities, and lose momentum on
long-term goals. Delaying investments in staffing, equipment, or infrastructure may provide a short-term savings, but it often leads to greater costs down the road. This budget is about balancing today's needs with tomorrow's responsibilities.
So, what does it mean for residents? The average taxable market value of a residential home in Farmington is now $353,75. Based on that, the estimated city portion of the property taxes would be about $1,820 per year or about $15 more
per month than in 2025. As shown in the chart, the actual impact will vary depending on the property's value. For example, a home valued at $300,000 would see an estimated increase of about $135 per year, while a $500,000
home would see an increase of about $250 per year. It's important to note that this reflects only the city's portion of the property tax bill. Other taxing jurisdictions like the county and the school district also impact the total amount residents pay. But this gives a
general sense of how the proposed city levy would affect the average homeowner in Farmington. This slide provides a summary of the final 2026 budget and levy. The top portion of the table shows the general fund revenues and expenditures budgeted
for both 25 and 2026. The difference between the two numbers is what provides us with the general operating levy, the amount necessary to balance the general fund budget. Below that, the table lists the other levies that are part of the total
property tax levy, including the EDA levy, debt levy, and the miscellaneous levies for capital equipment, building maintenance, trail and pavement maintenance, and other needs. When you add all of these together, you get the gross tax levy. The increase from 2025
is 12.98%. After subtracting the fiscal disparities distribution, we arrive at a net tax levy of 16.84 million. The resulting tax rate when you take into consideration
the net tax capacity is just over 51.5%. This amount is just slightly higher than what was presented in September and that's because we had some new figures from Dakota County in October. I think it's important to clarify that a
12.98% increase in the city city's levy does not mean every property owner will see a 12.98% increase in the tax bill. Indivo individual tax changes depend on how a property's value change compared to others in the city. So the value
increased more than the average taxes may go up more. If the home value increased less, taxes may go up less or even decrease. And um also just to mention I did take a look at the Dakota County's property tax
statement and there is a percentage down in the lower left right hand corner and just to make a note that that is the cumulative property tax increase when you take to cons into into consideration all the taxing jurisdictions. At this point we've completed the
presentation for the proposed 2026 budget and tax levy. Tonight's meeting also serves as a required public hearing. So, we'll first invite any comments or input from residents in attendance. After that, we're asking the city council to take formal action by approving the resolution to adopt the
2026 budget and setting the final property tax levy collectible in 2026. And if needed, I'm happy to answer any questions and provide additional clarification. >> Thank you, Steve. Any questions for Kim?
Would this be questions and comments? >> So public hearing usually this is the time where we can offer either comment or question. If there's an applicant, they would come up and we would ask them the same. Then we open it to residents. Then we close the public hearing and
then we can deliberate and you can ask a follow-up question or comment. It's kind of up to you as to whether you do it now or later. Um, Kim, under the finance position, I just want to clarify that because I know in the budget or excuse me, the audit that's frequently brought
up as kind of a diversification and and kind of not just having one control over the finances, but to have that a little bit more diversified. Um, does this further achieve that goal in addition to just the general workload of the department? >> Absolutely. I mean we have a small staff
so that any added positions does help in separating the duties more. >> Okay. Um, and I do have to say I, [clears throat] you know, was blessed to be elected to this body back in 2005.
And I will say the biggest challenge I had was trying to wrap my hand. I mean, I would spend hours trying to figure out these transfers from different fund to different fund to different fund. Finance directors at that time um, you know, did as good a job as they could of
trying to walk through it. But then it it was never easy to walk through the numbers. And this is I mean for residents who are here or watching, they may not have a full appreciation of this. This is a massive improvement in
both transparency for the council and for for the general public. Um but I just want to commend you. I mean, this is huge to have this accomplished. um the transferring money was is just it doesn't feel it feels goofy and I just
really appreciate the job you did with that. Um lastly, I did want to comment about the fire department. You know, I'd be remiss if I didn't, you know, compliment Lynn and Matt and maybe even our former chief and others who,
you know, to get to this point, um, of having a full-time fire department. Um, it took a lot of research. It took a lot of crunching numbers, looking at call times, presenting that to council. And you
know, for anybody that may have attended that work session, which as a note, all of our work sessions are fully open to the public. Um, you know, it was very clear that, you know, a core function of the city was really not being met with the levels of
service that that really residents should expect and in fact our townships should expect as well. So, I just want to compliment you, Matt, compliment you, and anyone involved with that transition. Um, you know, I'm sure there are some in the community that are thinking, well, you know, we're not the
size of Minneapolis. We're not the size of St. Paul. We're not the size of Lakeville. Which is all true, but the reality is when you can't get consistent on call staff to to be there because they have commitment to their family, commitment to their career, whatever,
you have to explore other models. And we had a really good thorough discussion with the council a number of months ago. And you know, while I'm not terribly excited about a new million dollar spend, I think it's a very good investment for the life and health and
safety of our residents. So, just want to thank you for all that. Jake, >> um, I'm going to piggyback off of what Steve said about the transfers and Kim, maybe you don't know the answer to this, but is there a reason or a benefit to
doing it the way we had been doing it versus the levying for the specific funds? Just out of general curiosity, I don't know if there's a pro or a con to either way or is it just that's the way it's always been done. >> I think that's probably just a preference. It's the way it's always
been done. I will say though with the shift that we're making with the salary and benefits, I think part of that was probably just due to some of our limitations with the accounting system or the financial system that we have for payroll. [clears throat] >> Um, and I just want to call out I really
like what you [clears throat] said, Kim, about balancing today's needs and tomorrow's responsibilities. I think that's true of this budget. And like Steve said, it's not easy to see these increases, a million dollars for fire and increases here and there, but it's I
think what we need to do at this point in time, >> so I have actually just a a couple questions that will hopefully help clarify this for people that are listening. I where a lot of us are are talking about or so far everyone has mentioned um the way that the the
structure is set up. Can you explain previously when everything went into the general fund and was then moved between all of the different spaces? Did that give an allowance for floating within those spaces? Meaning that if we thought we were going to have a certain amount
going into this fund, but it was needed somewhere else, it provided flexibility for that move to occur. Or did that not happen? and how or how does that or does that not change in the way that it's done now? >> Well, I only can speak for a couple
years. Um, but generally when we set the budget, we had that already specified in the transfers budget. So, there was very limited I mean we didn't flex from that really without bringing it to council, right? So, if there was
something that changed throughout the year, then maybe that transfer did change or transfer to the funds. But basically what we were levying that was set up at the beginning and we put that into the funds. >> I appreciate that clarity because I think sometimes the the idea behind more
transparency is that what was happening before wasn't good. It wasn't that it wasn't good. It was just that it was happening in a way that wasn't clearly visible in the same way that it is now. So I appreciate just a little bit more clarity around that. Um
I had another thought. I wasn't really sure why I was Oh. Um, it really has to do, again, Jake brought this up. Um, in the position that I came into a few years back, we saw the outcome of
waiting to do things that needed to be done sooner. Um, what happens to maintenance when you defer maintenance for a really long time? What happens to our streets when we're not paying attention to what the needs are and we're cherrypicking where things go? What happens to trails in the same
situation? um as residents and also council members, it's not always the case that um we're excited for the same things um when we're looking at a budget. But what I deeply appreciate is knowing because we've been talking about
this since well actively for four months now uh and longer than that is that we don't we we collectively have a group of department heads and staff members that are working together to make sure that all of the parts of the city are running to the
best of their ability and that we're not continuing to delay things that need to be done because it's uncomfortable to do them. There's nothing about these particular meetings that's comfortable. Talking about budget, talking about budget increase is not a fun conversation. It's not a fun
conversation in your private household. It's not a fun conversation in a public forum, but it's a necessary conversation if we don't want to repeat past mistakes in in those particular areas and if we want to look forward. So, that's all I have to add, but appreciative for
everything that you clarified and all the work, >> Nick. I think I'll pick it back on the fire thing. You know, in my point of view, I said this before, but the best time to do this was 10 years ago. The second best time is right now. Um, this is
something that we've needed. It's painful, but that shouldn't stop us from doing the right thing. So, um, [snorts] it it's painful, and like I said, I'm not I'm just as excited about it as you guys are, right? But it just needs to be done. I had one question about, um, I
guess the water tower. off the top of your head, how much of that comes out of the actual water fund? Because we've had some of that squirreled away for some time, right? I don't mean to put you on the spot. I'm sorry. Rough rough numbers are fine. >> I'd first defer to the finance director
to respond to that question, then I'll add to it as needed if that's okay. >> Sure. So right now that in our capital improvement plan, we do have that coming out of the water fund and there is sufficient cash in there to support that. >> I just wanted to be clear because it
shows kind of in that slide as if you know it's just an 11 million number and it might make the assumption that that's part of the levy and it is not. We've been saving for this for some time. So >> Right. >> Thank you. >> And if I might add, uh sometimes what gets referred to as money that was set
aside for a water treatment plant, >> right? and that's not included. That's in a separate fund for such time in the future that that might be needed. Uh it provides funding to start analysis and planning and things like that. But um that when we talk
about setting aside, that's usually the context in which I've heard that is the treatment plan. >> That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks. I'd also like to clarify that I've been here since 2021 and that discussion of the creation of
the water tower h was started in I think 2020. So this is not a new water tower. This is the same water tower that we've been talking about for for years, but we did take a pause on it in between public works direct directors, city engineers, and uh we waited for John to come and
and he's picked up that project and he'll bring us home on it. >> I know it predates to me because David talked about it with me when I first started here. So, I mean, I remember the topic. So, thank you. And if I could expand on that, it got so far as to the point where a site was identified, an
appraisal was ordered for a site in late 2021, I believe. Um, but uh with new staff and uh doing a what started as a midcycle update of the comprehensive plan, we want to be sure that we're providing uh the storage that meets our
future needs. and if those needs change or the location of those needs change, we wanted to be able to pivot and provide, you know, and uh make sure that we can serve that. And so that was part of the reason for the pause also is to make sure we're hitting the target we
need to to support future development. >> Outstanding. While we're on the water tower topic, I'll add a little bit more context because it was 2019 when um we conversed about the locations of the proposed
water tower and there was like $6.7 million that was sitting in the in the water fund that could cover the cost at the time of it. And former council member Donnelly was very adamant that we do not build a water tower um without having a plan for controlled development
because it's going to start aging from day one. And this was right after we had approved the repainting of the tower, the refinishing the repainting of the tower that's on pilot knob. Um two sites were identified, Flagstaff and the seed property. Seed property fell into foreclosure, staff changes, etc. and
Flagstaff doesn't have the appropriate infrastructure in place to allow it to a be built and then be utilized without accelerating the depreciation of the asset. Hence the Flagstaff study for 2026. So just a little more context for
those that hear it talked about nearly every year and now start to do something with it. So >> I'd have been fine with one person answering, but thanks for four of you answering. [laughter] that piece it a little together over time. Any other comments or questions,
Nick? You good there? >> Um, a lot of the points that I was going to make were were hit by my peers. Um, I'm only going to say one piece about fire and and I know that it's it gets talked about a lot because it's a big
it's a big piece, right? We've it is onethird of the total amount, but it's not all fire, right? Um, there are six [clears throat] full-time positions. And I think one of the most important things for our residents to understand is that there are standards for response time.
When you have a 95ish% paid on call fire department, um, predominantly medical lift assist, daytime calls for the most part. We tried implementing duty crews with COVID and the restrictions. We worked around it for a long time. We have talked about this
with the previous chief with our current chief about how do we how do we make this model move going forward um and it wasn't about like where are we as in size relation to other cities it was what are the demands of this community and the reality is we also support the
adjacent townships through fire contracts and we're not just staffing for Farmington we have to staff to cover a much larger area um those contracts are going up as well and I mean that's it the scuttlebutt's already out there. It's being talked about. Um this
increase is not solely being um burdened on or the burden of this increase is not solely placed on our residents and our businesses. that's also being placed on the residents of the adjoining townships who have to pay similar increases as we do to make sure that this model works
that it is adequately funded um our department is staffed so that we can respond within the standards that um are set forth by outside agencies. So there's more to come with this. There's definitely um we talked about quarters
and you know things policies there's there's a lot more work behind the scenes but um fire is one-third but it is not the number one thing here. Um you know a lot was said too about the transfers. I just appreciate cleaning it
up um going through this now six years and watching the transfers in and out and just trying to better understand where the money is going, how it's being allocated and spent. Um this is a commitment to one of our pillars of transparency and making sure that you know people can see I mean we're not
bringing in a million dollars to turn around and put 800 here and hide 200 over there like squash that. It's this is about just cleaning it up making it so that I mean our audits are always good. Um they do talk about the controls and with additional staffing will help
um put more things in place to ensure that our audits look even better than what they look. Um, but I I do have a couple specific questions in regards to some of the comments that were made during public comments. Um, and I'll start with John. We're not building the
water tower in 2026 in response to a data center or any other singular development. Correct. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Lyn and David, we are not hiring the proposed positions in response to any singular development, including a proposed data center. >> That is correct. >> Correct.
>> Okay. I hope that answered the question. I don't have anything else. So, at this time, we'll open it up for any public comment. I appreciate you answering those questions. Um, it it would make sense if some of the up hiring in staff is to accommodate future
incoming business. That that would make sense. I don't think that you're hiring jobs specifically to accommodate a data center. My question was more along the line of how much are we spending to accommodate them? Some of this is for them. It's a guarantee. Some of it's for them. Are they paying their share or are
we paying for it as residents? Has trapped I don't know. They were going to pay for 50 improvements, 225th improvements. They're going to pay for infrastructure improvements. Are these water trunk and mainline infrastructure upgrades related to the data center at all? and is track chipping in on that?
These are questions that people honestly deserve to know. We don't even know if we're getting one. You guys are positive we're getting one. We're hoping that if we get one, it's a lot different than what we see. But how much of this are residents paying for? I get that budgets go up. The fire team, that's a big deal.
Um if we do get a data center and the rate we're growing, we're going to need them either way. So, I understand all that. Um hopefully that they're equipped and willing to take on what's coming. You know, that's all I got is I'm just honestly curious how much of this are we paying for as residents. You know,
people have to put in some to attract a business, but we know what business is coming in they kind of need to attract themselves to and put a little bit in. So, all I got >> is there anyone else wishing to speak or raise question?
>> Um, I just uh Nate Ryan again. I just have a just a few questions. So, where where is the proposed water tower going to go? >> There is currently not a designated location. >> Okay. >> The the official position of where the water tower was going to be located was
it was going to be placed um dependent on naturally occurring development. >> Right. So, um we why are why are water towers used? like what I mean I understand what their
point is but primarily to around development why would you want a water tower say close to a data center or why would you want a water tower close to you know development what's what's the benefit of that >> mayor and council members u the water
towers don't serve specific developments they're part of our trunk system like large diameter mains our wells and pump houses they support the city system as a um strategic location of water towers where the service areas are going to be
needed makes a lot of sense. Uh but also some cities put wells in field well fields where they're all in one location uh with the possibility of having to do future water treatment. So there's two different u mines u or approaches to
that. Um the location uh originally that was uh analyzed was on the north on the was north of 190th on the west side of Highway 3. Uh that development north of
190th is not moving forward right now. But from an elevation standpoint, it's still an attractive location because um the higher you go, the better you can support the demands of the system, the pressures and the and fire flows and
whatnot. So if you build it in a low area, you have to build the tower that much higher. If you build it on a hill, then you need to construct as much tower and it saves us money. Um so we um have a site study underway. Uh we're looking
at that site. We're looking at the existing um daisy nol site and how that could be utilized as far as water storage. And we are looking at something in the southeast part of the city simply from a um
sustainability reliability standpoint. So if all of our water is coming from one direction and something happens to a trunk man or something, do we have a way to back feed? We're always looking in the water system at looping the system. So if we have a break, uh we can back
feed those property owners uh from another main or another connection. So it's not you run a water man and that's it. We want to loop it. It keeps the water fresher and allows us to back feed where needed. So, um those are the three general locations that the initial site
studying uh sighting study looked at and that's we've got preliminary results on that and we're taking a look at those. >> Yeah. So, that so that was my that was thank you for saying that by the way. Right. So, you want water towers in places that are high primarily due to
pressure, right? You want the amount of water pressure, especially for when it comes to fighting fires. And you have to have enough pressure in the system to make sure that if there's a fire on the opposite end of town or there's one over here that you're going to have enough pressure and your trunk lines and
gravity is your best friend, right? Because gravity is free. Whereas, if you're trying to do pumps and you're trying to move things through pumps, it's that much more expensive. So, that was my that was my my point of asking that question. And I obviously know what water towers do, but I think that
putting them closer to a data center provides them with free gravity, free, you know, free areas. So Lynn just said, you just said that they're definitely not because of a data center and not because of that. Yes, somewhat because of development, industrial development,
but they the reason that you would want it close a big water tower is pressure. And it it makes a lot more sense for that because then not only that, but all of the water that goes out, the waste water, is it less expensive to utilize gravity or is it more expensive to
utilize pumps? >> How much is a pump? >> Well, we won't get into the engineering conversation about the dynamics of a water tower tonight, >> right? But that's that's my point is that we're we're adding things in the budget. We're looking at budget items like a water tower to specifically say,
"Okay, well, you know, let's raise taxes to support a water tower." When in reality, can you can you just take out of your water fund? Is it is it a can you just can you just take money anytime that you want out of your water fund? Is that allowed or is it water money have to be spent on water?
>> For one, to clarify that the water fund is funded by user fees. So, those are utility bills and it's not tax levy dollars. >> Correct. >> Right. But so that means that you can't take out of your water fund, right? Anything that's user fee related in your water has got to stay there. So to say that like, oh my gosh, we've got all
this money on our water fund. It's there because you can't take out of it. You can borrow against it and you have to repay it, but you can't just go and say, well, you know, now like the congressional people do with our social security, that money is in the water fund because it has to be there. Is that
accurate or not accurate? Um the reason that we have the water fund and the sewer funds is also to support infrastructure. >> Right? So you're not answering my question at all. Right? So you're not you're not saying like we we we can't take out of your water fund and that's
why money's there because it's funded by user fees just like you can't take out of your sewer funds, right? Your sewer fund is your sewer fund because it's also by a fee that's there. So my point of that is that you guys are all just like, "Well, the water tower is
not going there because of this. It's not going there because of it's going there because we all pay for it." That we're that that's why you can't just go and steal money out of your water fund. Want to go to jail? That's a fantastic way to go to jail very quickly. So that's awesome, but you you
can't just go steal. Of course, that money's there. Of course, those funds should be funded. You can borrow against them, but you can't just go take the money. >> I'd just like to clarify that that that's the reason why we had those funds is to build those funds in order to pay
for water manes, um, water towers, whatever the case may be. But that that is the purpose of those funds. It's not stealing from those funds. We're just we're generating the revenue that way in order to pay for those things. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. And I'm not suggesting that you're
stealing from those funds. I'm just saying, >> well, you certainly I mean, Nate, >> those funds are there because that they're supposed to be there. That's my point. And to say that, well, we've got money in these funds, so then we should just spend it. You know, >> nobody said that. >> I don't think that that's accurate. So, you wanted to spend it back in 2019, not
you personally, the the council as a whole. But, you know, that that's my point is that of course that money is there. It should be there. It shouldn't be somewhere else. So, that it shouldn't be. Just simply just shouldn't be. So my other um my other you know
uh just comment just you know about just about taxes and it seems like we relate it like so in sales like there's this thing it's called reducing the ridiculous right like oh this thing's only like $4 more a month or $3 more a month you know why don't you buy 10 of them you know kind of thing and that's what you all are doing you're reducing
it to the ridiculous the amount of $40 or $200 or you know $50 it's only $40 a month well that's fine And I totally get it. Like I want to see everyone prosper, but not only are not only are, you know, potentially,
you know, taking $200 a month, $200 a year, whatever, $300 a year. Um, so you're taking that money and it's whatever 30 $33 a month, something like that for whatever the math is. So, but you're taking that money and you're not
realizing that everyone else is taking that money else, you know, from there. So just based off the calculations, she said that taxes are going to go up for some, they're going to go down for some potentially just depending upon the value of your home and and how that fluctuates. So in my case, it's not 12,
it's not 12.9%, it's 13.3%. So based on the value of our homes, but everyone is out there asking for more money. The schools are asking for more money. You're asking for more money. The countyy's asking for more money. The gas pump's asking for more money. At some
point, the people who live in $500,000 houses, they're not going to be able to afford those houses. They have to go somewhere else. All because well, it was it was just $30 a month. It was just $40 a month. Yeah. From everyone from the
everyone who has their hand out. So, what doesn't matter. So, thank you for your time and I just like to see taxes stabilize or go down. I know that we got to raise them every year somewhat, right? Things just go things just cost
more. But just these huge these huge raises. I looked at mine like city ports and taxes in 2021 was like 1,800 and this year it's going to be close to 2600. That's not 30 bucks a month. So that's
it's real money. It's hundreds. So and I don't know where like where do you get it from? get a job at the city. Anyone else wishing to ask question or make a comment? Um Sarah Fry, I live in Executive
Estates. Um, I have a question because my household water bill went up 17% from 24 to 25. So that's the cost for services.
And now there's a capital projects item, the third largest item in this budget for 610,000 that by my estimate looks like it's mostly water and sewer trunk. And I could be completely wrong about that. So
I guess I would like to know what is the capital projects. What are the capital projects that are being planned for 2026? I I'll lead this one and I'll let the finance director correct me. Um so
specifically um capital projects are usually trunk improvements. So uh for instance um a development like Vita comes in and they extend water man and uh the city uh wants to loop the water
main system. So we pay for a trunk to be extended from County Road 50 to Vita Ativa. That's our cost. That's not the developer's cost. That's a trunk improvement that we're making. Similarly, Vermillion Commons, uh we want to extend trunk, sewer, and water on 220th Street so we can loop that
entire development currently served from the east. That's a trunk improvement. That's a capital improvement. Those are the sorts of things that go into the capital budgeting. uh you know larger trunk project system benefits things that benefit the system as a whole.
>> And I I would just add that part of that for 2026 is the potential police building expansion and we put about $500,000 in there to because we don't know what that is going to be. But you know, we've talked about that expansion for a while. So that
amount is what we have in there for the budget just to get that project started. Any other questions or comments? >> I don't know exactly where it was, but what portion of the trunk and water line is for the data center? Do we have an
idea of a a rough rough cost? I know it was written that I think the 225th Go ahead. >> Um there is nothing for next year to serve the data center. We don't have a specific demand identified. All we have
is planning and approvals. And you know, a lot of those we actually pushed out a year. So there's nothing except in the long term that would be considered related to the data center or related to serving the southeast area of the city in general. Um, right now we haven't
done any improvements specific to the data center whatsoever. >> Good enough. Thank you. >> Yep. Anyone else? All right, I'll close the public hearing at this time. Uh, we'll go in reverse
order. Nick, any final comments, questions? >> Nothing additional. I think I had had the same thing that you said before and just it's been very nice for [clears throat] excuse me throat surgery um for the three or four years you know Kim and your predecessor before you was
lucky enough to have amazing detail and never being too confused about where I needed to look for line items in the budget or if I wanted to ask a question about a particular area that it's just spelled out nice and clear once you have that kind of table in front of you. So kudos to you guys. and say that the first time through. But no other
questions, >> none for me. Thank you, >> Jake. >> Just want to thank Kim and the rest of the administrative team for [clears throat] all their work on the budget and for responding to all the questions tonight. >> Steve, um I do want to add a comment and
I always appreciate when residents are here. quite frankly, uh, all the times that we have kind of a vacant audience, it's kind of like, boy, I wish a few people would show up. So, I do appreciate folks showing up. I do want to make a comment because it is true that the cost of everything is going up.
It's hard not to notice that the cost of government is going up. The cost to buy goods and services wherever you shop at is going up. Um, and that includes our staff. And I do want to comment that,
you know, and it's been said multiple times, Lynn and Lynn in particular has done a phenomenal job of bringing top talent to the city. It is a cost to have top tier talent at the city and you want to
retain them just like you would in a private business. Whether it's a small business, large business, you want to retain the amazing talent you have. And so you see one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, you know, about a half a do about 10 to 12 folks here
that are paid by the residents of the of the city. Um, you see probably about a hundred, 125 that are not. And boy, am I happy to have every single one of them working on behalf of the taxpayers because they do an amazing job. and you
know the cost to have really high quality talent um it does increase every year. We've also gotten mandates from the state legislature that we don't appreciate that every other business in the in the state has had to deal with. Um we are not immune to a lot of
mandates that are forced on us by other units of government that we have to pass on to residents. Wish we didn't have to do that. Um, and so I just thought I'd, you know, point that out because there is a cost to really talent. Uh, there's a cost to
to the talent that we have. It's a peopledriven organization as you pointed out, Kim, and I very much appreciate the investment that we make in our team. So, in the last last six or so budget cycles that we've
gone through, um we started with a >> um we started with a zero a negative.59 or something and they've incrementally increased. You've had COVID, you've had all the things. Um at the end of the day, we we made a decision a few years
ago and we said we're going to go one of two paths. We're either going to just let everything deteriorate. We're going to keep the budget as low as possible and squeeze out of every single corner and what's left is what's left. And the
reality is there's not a lot to squeeze. Like you look over the last couple of years, probably the most frivolous spending arguably you could say is the Rambling River Center. And for those that use that building, they'll say that that is
decades overdue. We have for too long not been maintaining our roads, our core infrastructure. We have not been investing in our community's future. That's not a it's not a shot at anybody
at any one group at any period of elected leaders in this city's history. It's it's just reality. We have not kept up with the cost of deferred long-term maintenance. And when we went through and we did our facilities our facility needs assessment over the last two years
um there are astronomical numbers and I will continue to say this going forward. You can expect to see something in this ballpark for the next decade. Period. And if you think that there's another
alternative, run for council next year. get involved and show us because it's all public. There are not the corners that can be cut that we think there are. We can start taking parks offline. We can start removing paths. We can start diminishing our level of service and
then see what see what you're left with. That's not a good strategy. So, yes, for for some homes 150, for some homes $500 a year, whatever it is, that is a very small investment to make in this community's future.
Um, and just seeing the projects finally get done. Um, I know there's not a whole lot of people that are complaining about parking at the ice arena anymore. That was a capital project that had to get done. There are parks that are getting taken care of. Flee Fields was taken care of.
Um, the list goes on and on. And whether you're in government or you're in the private sector, the cost of retaining a high-erforming team is a borderline non-negotiable. Um turnover is one of the most expensive
lines in a balance sheet. The cost of hiring and training and retaining people. We have a phenomenal team. We have committed to what it's going to take to make sure that we can deliver the highest level of core service to the residents of Farmington. Um but it
doesn't it doesn't happen for free and so nobody likes a a 12% or north um number but that is the requirement to make sure that we continue to deliver high level service.
So I'm I'm appreciative of my peers and all of our teammates that contributed towards working to get this where it is. Um, and with that, I would seek a motion to approve resolution 2025 tag 085 adopting
the 2026 budget and setting the final tax levy collectible in 2026. >> Motion second. >> Motion by Nick, second by Steve. Call the role, please. >> Council member Gordes, >> yes. Mayor Hoy, >> yes. Council >> member Bernett,
>> yes. Council member Lean, >> yes. Council member Wilson, >> yes. Thank you, Kim. All right, the next item on our agenda is 82. This is a public hearing for the implementation of first dues fire inspection testing and maintenance
solution and ordinance 2025 tax 008. I will open the public hearing at this time and Chief Price. Good evening and staff. uh first do inspection, testing and maintenance, also known as ITM solution, is a secured
cloud blaze performance uh that empowers authorities having jurisdiction to streamline and modernize how they manage compliance with fire and life safety uh systems by designating the intake and review of thirdparty ITM reports. First do enables fire departments to replace
insi insufficient manual process with a centralized automated system that improves enforces reduces administrative workload and enhances public safety. Some of the key benefits for the ITM um is drive uh is driven 100% code compliance by ensuring all systems are
properly inspected, tested and documented. uh centralizing inspe uh inspection data in a single secured portal eliminating spreadsheets, emails, and paper reports. Again, [snorts] it streamlines report submissions through a user-friendly portal for service providers.
Automation notifications for overdue inspections, deficiencies, and upcoming renewals and unlocking actual insight via real-time dashboard and and analysis for smarter enforcement. It also improves communicating accountability and it also helps with fire prevention
workflow uh to help departments do more with fewer resources. With first two ISTM fire departments can proactively enforce code compliance, improve system reliability and better protect the community. Uh this evening limited ability to maintain oversight of fire protection
system has become increasingly challenging. Uh many life sa many life safety systems go uh uninspected. Um we have one fire marshal who has approximately over 300 plus buildings in the city that they have to do an annual inspection on. Cannot get into the every single
building for the entire year. Therefore cannot get to every um sprinkler system, fire alarm panel, any life safety system. So therefore without a inspection report, we don't know if that system is actually operational or if it's in a good status.
Again, a lot of these portions uh a lot of these large portion of these systems um are not regularly inspected annually increase risk of non-compliance. Again, lack of maintenance drives false alarms. Um I do not have the data in front of me of how many false alarms that we've responded to this year, but I do know
that that number has been decreasing since the fire marshall has been going in and doing these annuals uh doing the annual inspections along with follow-up inspections. Again, the authority having jurisdiction of the Minnesota uh state fire code 2020. Uh we do have the authorization and the authority to ask
for all reports. Um the digital tool enables better compliance again which modernizes the ATM platform. Uh like first do uh first do is our actual system of record. So we do all of our incident documentation, our scheduling, um training, everything is through the
first due portal. This would be another module that is added to uh that platform. Again, this addresses these challenges uh that the fire department requests approval to implement first due ITM solution, a secured cloud-based platform designed to digitally manage
and monitor thirdparty inspections, testing, and maintenance reports for the fire of life safety systems. Again, uh just to reiterate a little bit, this will help to achieve full compliance, c uh centralize inspection data,
streamline our reporting submissions, automate notifications, leverage data for smarter uh enforcement, modernize pro uh prevention workflows, maximize existing tools and first do and strengthen our community with safety.
Uh there no financial impact to the city, no cost to the fire department nor building owners. There is a small uh reporting fee that is paid by the 30 third party contractors when they submit their reports to the ITM module. Uh so this evening again we're to hold the public hearing take public comment
and we asked to approve first use ITM solution to support the fire marshall's office and improving enforcement of life safety requirements across the farmington fire rescue service uh area bypassing it. For that I'll stand with any questions. I do have the fire marshall with me uh for this.
>> Thanks sir Steve. Dick, >> none for me. >> Holly, >> no. >> Nick, >> uh, maybe it's a tickytacky one, but in the first kudos for not specifically naming the software in the the ordinance
that right not stuff in around the fee though being kind of hardcoded in the ordinance. What how hard is that to change should that fee change suddenly? >> Uh, so if we want if we decided to change the fee schedule, it just be an amendment to the council for approval.
this the $25 is pretty much standard uh through anybody who's been using the ITM module. So, we just we stayed with the exact standard that everybody else was using. >> I was just wondering if it's easier to word it as in alignment with a fee schedule or an existing fee schedule so that it's just done as part of that
activity. >> Uh we don't have this in a fee schedule because we've never had okay >> in an ordinance before and due to the fact that this is uh part of what we would have to enforce through an ordinance. That's why we're uh doing the ordinance in title 5 chapter 2 at this
time. >> Minor point. I'm not overly going to lose sleep about it. It's not hard to change should we need to, but >> um so [clears throat] Cliffnotes version for uh the average person saying, "But I don't understand." Contractors go into a
business, do work um that is outside of a typical annual inspection. This is an automated way for them to provide their notes for us to receive notification and communicate through rather than coming in the following year and saying, "Oh, you had work done." And then digging
through and trying to find the records of the things. Is that >> correct? Uh the Minnesota State Fire Code requires all third party contractors to send us their reports, which we out of 300 plus businesses, we get about 60. Uh, so we do not know whether or not these life safety systems
are compliant unless the fire marshall goes in and does the inspections. The other thing they do is there's a little pink sheet out of the white, yellow, and pink. They do their inspection. They sign off on the thing and they stick it up by the sprinkler ariser or the the heads. And that's the first time we see it when we walk in to read it. If there
was a deficiency, we're not going to know until we go in and look at it. And then the fire marshall can write a correction order at that time. But it could have been six, seven months that it was out of service. Perfect. Thank you. I don't have any other questions. I appreciate you bringing it to us and finding um yet
another valuable resource for um us to provide a higher level of service. So, thank you. With that, I'd seek a motion to approve ordinance 2025 tag 008. Oh, I'm sorry. Let me back up. It's public hearing.
Any residents? Any questions, comments? All right. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing at this time. We have any additional comments, questions? Nothing. I'd seek a motion to approve ordinance 2025 tag 008 amending title 5, chapter 2 of the Farmington City Code as it
relates to third party protection and control inspection, testing, and maintenance reporting. >> Approve. >> Second. >> Motion by Steve, second by Jake. Call the role, please. >> Council member Bernett, >> yes. >> Council member Lean, >> yes. >> Council member Wilson, >> yes. >> Council member Gordes,
>> yes. Airhead. >> Yes. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> All right. The next item on the agenda is 83. This is a public hearing for license renewals for 2026, including on sale and Sunday intoxicating club on sale and Sunday on sale wine. 32 beer
and intoxicating malt liquor license renewals for 2026. I will open the public hearing at this time. David. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. A public hearing must be held to issue or renew on sale intoxicating liquor, on sale Sunday liquor, on sale
wine and beer, 32 beer and intoxic intoxicating malt liquor and club on sale liquor licenses. All application All applications, fees, and insurance have been received for the following licenses, have been reviewed
by Chief Seam, and are recommended for approval. for on sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses. The applicants are a This Little Piggy Catering at 22280 Chippendale Avenue West. Bourbon
Butcher Farm Town Brew Hall at 20700 Chippendale Avenue West. Kelts Pub and Grill at 2003rd Street. Elcharo Mexican Restaurant at 120 Elm Street. Farmington Lanes at 27th Street. Farmington Tap
House, Long Branch Saloon and Eery at 309 Third Street, Los Enchiladas at 1850 Pilot Knob Road, Sweet A, Pizza Man at 409 Third Street, and The Mug at 18450
Pilot Knob Road. For club on sale and Sunday liquor license, we have VFW 7662 Sipple London Post at 4213rd Street. And for wine on sale and strong beer license, we have Lighthouse Kitchen and
Cafe at 9538 Street. >> Thank you, sir. Steve, any questions? >> None. >> Jake. [clears throat] >> Nick? >> Nope. >> I have none. is a public hearing. Anybody wishing to come up, comment, ask
questions? Nate, I just had uh Nate Ryan, I just had a question about um the THC beverages. Is that included in this ordinance? >> No, this is that would be that's the se it's a separate license. >> Okay. I was just curious about that. So,
thank you. Any other questions or comments? >> Mr. Mayor, if I could just would note that the city doesn't issue licenses for anything related to THC. That goes through the Office of Cannabis Management from the state. >> All right.
All right. Seeing none, then I will close the public hearing at this time. Any additional questions, comments? All right. Seeing none, then I would seek a motion to approve uh the aforementioned liquor license renewals for 2026.
>> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion by Holly, second by Jake. Call the role, please. >> Council member Lean. >> Yes. Council >> member Wilson. >> Yes. >> Council member Cordis. >> Yes. >> Mayor Hoy. >> Yes. >> Council member Bernett. >> Yes. >> Thanks, sir.
All right. Round table. Amy. >> Good evening, Mayor, members of the council. Um, I don't have any comments to offer tonight. Nothing new from that would to respond to from public from the public comment section of the meeting. Um, unless you have questions for me about any legal issues. I That's my
report for the week. >> Thank you, ma'am. Nick, >> uh, as you can see, I did not in fact get a butcher. So, I'm very appreciative to the excellent surgeons that I had at the Mayo Clinic and happy to back here with all of you. It is Christmas time,
so I hope everyone is able to get out and enjoy the season and all the lights and all the stuff coming up in the next few weeks. Way too much to list out here, so I'm sure you all have it all written down, so you'll do it anyway. So, that's all. >> Um, my only comment is something that I
already reached out to both Eric and John about earlier today, but just uh a big thank you to our public works uh team. We had two snow events over a holiday weekend and these are things that we just take for granted that, you
know, within a reasonable amount of time our our roads are going to be cleared again and we're going to get in and out of our driveways and, you know, within a certain amount of time travel is going to be safe. Um, but that means that there are people that um took time away from their families on a holiday weekend to be able to provide those services. um
and uh just publicly saying uh job well done um to to those teams and how grateful I am uh personally that that's the kind of group of individuals that we have working here. So, thank you for that. >> Jake,
>> um to go along with what Nick said, there are a slew of Christmas and holiday related events this weekend. Um, I don't want to steal anybody else's thunder, so I'm just going to touch on two of the events of that night. Um, but the night will culminate in the second
annual lighted holiday parade at 7:00 p.m. with the Rotary treelighting ceremony to follow at the lot next to Homestead Community Church. And thank you to the folks at the Rotary, the City of Farmington, and Homestead Community
Church for the work that they've put in for to the events this weekend. I have nothing tonight. >> I'd like to make a comment about the lighted holiday parade. And this is a request to all the parents out there. Please make sure that your children stay
behind the barricades that are set up because it can be a very dangerous situation at night when people are driving vehicles down. So that would be my big ask. And then also um thank you for all your kind words that you provided during the budget. Kim, you did
a phenomenal job explaining um in detail of of what we did this year. So, thank you. Um and thank you for the whole team. It's not easy to go through all of the needs of the city and we know we can't do it all in one day and we take
that responsibility very seriously. So, thank you for all your hard work, everybody. That's all I have. Thanks, >> Julie. >> I just want to say I appreciate all of our liquor establishments getting their paperwork and payments in on time, our
police staff taking care of the background checks, and to David for presenting it for me. Thank you, >> David. Um, mayor, council, I've got actually two things tonight, both budget related. First, um I want to again thank you for the support um by adopting this
budget. I just also want to give a little bit of insight um to the public on kind of um one of my roles when it comes to budget obviously the personnel related pieces um which is one of the biggest parts of the budget and especially when you saw nine positions being added um for 2026 and that's those
are a lot of additions. I don't think it's been a while since the city had that many additions in a year. Um but when we are looking at personnel um you know we do take that as Lynn said we take that very seriously. Um so some of the considerations we do take in effect when we're looking at adding personnel is you know one are we being as
efficient as possible with the resources that we have. Um and then also looking at um what are things that are are are there services not being provided? Um are there projects not getting done that may have a negative effect on the on the community um if they continue to go
undone. um what kind of unfunded mandates or mandates are being put on the city. I would say in HR we just had we have two of them and last last year with paid family leave as well as no tax on overtime. Um and then we also look at
um are there areas of um savings by adding staff for example maybe reducing um professional services or other other things by adding a position. Uh we also do look at other ways um to fund positions um outside of the tax levy. Um
and for this year, one of those was through the safer grant to try to help fund the the six full-time firefighters. Um I do want to commend Chief Price and our grant writer Carrie Kubichek on putting that safer grant together. I think that was a huge undertaking. I think they spent weeks putting that
together. Um unfortunately decision makers in Washington decided that other uh communities that already had full-time fire were a little more deserving. Um but uh again we still appreciate your your support um in moving forward um with that that needed
addition. Anyway, and the other thing I just want to do is again I want to thank Kim uh for all of her her hundreds hundreds of hours of work and um over the last eight plus months on this budget and her dedication to making the city's finances more transparent and
understandable. Um I also want to let people know she did that also while leading um the city's most significant software conversion in um almost the last 25 years and that actually goes live tomorrow. So, thank you, Kim. That's all I have.
>> Thank you, John. >> Mayor and council members, I appreciate your support. Public works, all of public works appreciates your support from a budgeting standpoint. And from a uh wanting to do provide the best services possible for our residents and
have the best facilities and do things when they need to be done, that all goes into the budget. Uh appreciate your moral support with the snow event. Um um despite the holiday weekend, we had a very good response. We only had maybe a
handful of Farmington fixes um you know, yard damage and and mailboxes. So, uh it went very well for a a really the first big event of the season. You will notice uh now that we have the salt shed, we'll be staging some salt in there. So you'll
see some trucks hauling from the Dakota County garage up to the salt shed so you can have trucks ready to go when we have an event coming. Usually there the trucks are pre-loaded so when the crew shows up they hit the roads. Uh and having it in the salt shed h saves them
having to go down to Dakota County, pick it up, load up. Um, it may not be obvious, but if you're driving a 5-tonon truck that's empty in a snowstorm, uh, on icy roads, that can get a little dicey. Uh, and as much as we can limit
empty trucks going around and we can fill them, uh, at the salt shed and at the facility instead of having to drive to fill up, uh, that's a big help. >> Thank you. >> Just a quick question for you. Um, we currently do not brine. [clears throat]
Correct. >> Uh, mayor and council members, in the CIP, we have uh ordered, we just received about a month ago, brine making equipment. So, brine is one of the um snow and ice control methods that we
really haven't used in the past. Just salt water uh to about a you know, a prescribed percentage concentration. We use that really for two reasons. uh we can pre-wet the salt so when it's dropped on the roadway it reduces the
bounce and scatter. Um you know it stays on the pavement and it doesn't go off into the shoulder into the dishes from a water quality standpoint. And second of all, we can use it to anti- ice. So uh we can load a brine uh have a truck with a tank and essentially spray the roads
with the brine before an event starts. We can't do it if it's raining and changing because it just washes off. But, uh, if we anti- ice, uh, it it weakens the bond between the ice and the pavement. And when we plow and remove
the snow and ice, it's easier to scrape up. Uh, so it's there's really a multitude of uses for it, but those are the two primary uses we'd have for Brian. And we'll start producing and and our new trucks will have all the Brian equipment. So, uh, we're looking forward to that.
>> Thank you, Kelly. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Uh, tonight was the first day of the holiday lights tour. Um, if you were here before the meeting, council member Bernan said said had said she had a hard time getting out of her driveway and uh uh just so you know, Captain Van Dorne, she
has a Toys for Town basket in her uh called the sack and they already emptied it twice. So, the tour is posted online um on the city's website and also show social media. Uh council member Cortis mentioned about Saturday. Saturday morning we also have the secret holiday shop 9:00 a.m. to noon at the Rambling
River Center. Uh, Council Member Wilson, I hope you're going to come and help us again this year. I know you've helped in the past. Um, but stay downtown all day Saturday. I know Homestead Church is having a their Christmas carnival and the library is having an event at uh, as well in the afternoon and then we'll cap it off with the parade. Uh, then just a
reminder, next Monday night at the Rambling River Center, December 8th, uh, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. is the skate park design workshop. Um, Spawn Ranch will be in town that day and that'll be the workshop and uh get to put input on the skate park. Uh, in talking with them
last week early, I think it was Tuesday, they already had people uh 44 people fill out the design survey and 11 were in progress. They said that was really good um engagement already. So, the survey will be up for uh three more weeks, I believe, but um please uh come
to the design workshop uh next Monday. >> Thank you, Kim. I also want to um extend my appreciation to the council for your leadership throughout the budget process and also to the collaboration of the
entire management team. Um without that collaboration, we wouldn't be in the spot where we are, but we everybody came together and I appreciate that. And secondly, um like David alluded to, we are working through a new software conversion. um team will be on site
tomorrow and starting tomorrow for three weeks. So we'll have a team of about like six to nine people this week and then 3 to five for the following two weeks and just getting the system up and running and making sure everybody's trained in. So we're looking forward to
that. But as part of that process, um there is some interruptions with the online payment system. So, we've tried as much as possible to make sure that the residents are aware of that those interruptions. Uh, we have information posted on our website on the online
payment portal and we'll get that up and running as soon as we can, but I can't give a date at this point. >> Thank you, >> Chief. I'd just like to thank all of you for your support. Um it's probably been
about seven and a half months of making the full uh full-time happen. Um on the 15th uh with the agenda, I will have the six individuals sitting here um to show this will be an historic event
of first time having full-time staffing running 24 hours a day, seven days a week. So, thank you for, you know, listening to all the data that I gave, talking about everything, and for your support throughout this whole entire thing. Thank you. >> Thank you,
Captain. >> Good evening, Mayor, council members. Uh, the only thing I would add is Toys for Town is up and running, but it'll be uh coming to a close here pretty soon. I think we're going to look to start picking up from the collection sites next Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. Um, so
if you're looking to donate, uh, get that done within the next week. I believe we are at record levels. I I believe Chief Seam told me today we have over 160 families that are signed up, uh, representing, I think, somewhere
north of 425 children. So, um, thank you to everybody that's contributed to that. The wrapping event is December 13th at Farmington High School at 9:00 a.m. So, there'll be as many people that can come out, more the marrier because there's going to be a a lot of work to do. So,
thank you. >> Thank you, sir. All right. So, Toys for Town to start. If uh if you have not in years past ever been a part of it, um it is one of the single greatest things that this
community does. Even if you just show up and help pick gifts, um you can help, you can help pick gifts, you can help wrap, you can help deliver if you'd like. Um I know that there's a lot of people that choose not to deliver. Um just sometimes when you see your your
fellow uh community members um as recipients, it creates a dynamic. So that I know there are there are always volunteers that are willing to deliver, but um that is an area that we always seem to fall a little bit short on each year is just the willingness of people
to want to deliver the gifts. Um but if you have not been a part of it, please take an hour or two hours out of your day on Saturday. Um usually we start at like 9, we're pretty much wrapped up by noon. um please like just a little bit
of time and it is an absolutely life-changing event to be a part of um this weekend. And I know Jake and Kelly both alluded to um some some higher points on Saturday's list of events, but Homestead does have their Christmas
carnival uh Saturday from 10:00 to 1. Uh list of events, there's a window contest. Um the voting is open from 9 to 6 on Saturday. Uh there is almost every business downtown is going to be a part of that. Uh they're also running specials and deals. You have the secret
Santa shop at the Rambling River Center from 9:00 to 12. Uh the Christmas carnival from 10:00 to 1 at Homestead. There's a uh dragon art egg surprise at the library from 2:00 to 4:00. Uh there's a couple of food trucks at 6:00. The lighted holiday parade starts at 7.
The Rotary tree lighting at 8. And then there's um carols with the high school's new dimension um live jazz in Homestead. There's some craft and letters to Santa um at Homestead starting at 8:15. Um a list of some of the businesses that are
participating in the window um the window contest is Main Street Salon and Apparel Company, Market on Oak, we have Gerster Jewelers Homestead Community Church, um Homestead Community Corner, Bow Boutique, Lovely Paws, Beans and
Boots Coffee, Janie's Home Team, uh Sierra Jules uh State Farm, the Farmer's Daughter, uh Premier Bank, and the Rambling River Center. So, there's going to be a lot going on in a very short window. Basically, come downtown on Saturday at 9:00. Stay till 9:00 p.m. and there's going to be a plethora of
things to do. Um, as always, be safe. Uh, drive slow. Look out for the kiddos walking to school in the mornings and afternoons. And I would seek a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Motion by Holly. Second by Nick. All in favor say I. I. I.
>> We'rejourned at 8:44. >> [music]