Based on the context provided and the dialogue within the transcript, here is the formatted version with speaker names identified. **Note on Mayor identification:** While the provided context lists Nick Lien as Mayor, the transcript from May 5, 2025, explicitly identifies the presiding officer as **Mayor Joshua Hoy**. Nick Lien is addressed during the roll call as a Councilmember. It appears the provided context describes the council after a later reorganization or election. *** [0:02] [Music] [0:12] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** [Music] We'll call the city council regular meeting to order for Monday, May 5th, 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. [1:20] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Call the roll, please. Council member Wilson. **Councilmember Steve Wilson:** Here. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Cordes. **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** Here. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Mayor Hoy. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Here. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Bernatz. **Councilmember Holly Bernatz:** Here. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Lien. **Councilmember Nick Lien:** Here. [1:33] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** All right. Any changes to the agenda? No. All right. Unless there's changes to the agenda, I'd seek a motion to approve. [1:38] **Councilmember Holly Bernatz:** Motion to approve. **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** Second. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Motion by Holly. Second by Jake. All in favor say I. **Councilmembers:** I. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** All right. First item is 5.1 under our announcements and commendation which is the peace officers memorial day proclamation. Chief? [2:02] **Police Chief Gary Rutherford:** Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, let me make that just a little bit larger so I can actually read what I'm looking at here. Uh, Peace Officers Memorial Day is observed annually on May 15th to honor law enforcement officers who've lost their lives or been disabled in the line of duty. Recognizing this day emphasizes our community's gratitude and remembrances of the sacrifices made by members of the law enforcement profession. Each year, communities across the country come together on May 15th to commemorate Peace Officers Memorial Day. The city of Farmington will honor the service and sacrifice of our fallen disabled officers by officially proclaiming May 15, 2025 as Peace Officers Memorial Day in Farmington. This proclamation reflects the city's ongoing respect and appreciation for the men and women who risk their lives daily to protect our community. Uh action requested uh this evening is to proclaim May 15, 2025 as Peace Officers Memorial Day in Farmington. [2:59] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you, sir. At this time, we'll read the Peace Officers Memorial Day proclamation. Whereas law enforcement officers across the nation serve with courage, dedication, and sacrifice to ensure the safety and protection of our communities. And whereas each year we honor and remember the brave officers who have lost their lives or been disabled in the line of duty while safeguarding the rights and freedoms of others. And whereas the men and women of law enforcement deserve the heartfelt gratitude of the citizens they serve as they willingly place themselves in harm's way to maintain peace, enforce laws, and uphold justice. And whereas Peace Officers Memorial Day, observed annually on May 15th, offers the citizens of Farmington and across the nation the opportunity to express our appreciation for the ultimate sacrifice made by fallen officers and to acknowledge the continuing service of those who protect us every day. And whereas the city of Farmington recognizes the importance of honoring those officers who have fallen, supporting their families, and reaffirming our commitment to the values of service, integrity, and bravery that define the law enforcement profession. And whereas lowering flags to half staff on May 15th and participating in memorial events pays tribute to those officers whose sacrifices will never be forgotten. Now therefore, I, Joshua Hoy, mayor, on behalf of the Farmington City Council, do hereby proclaim May 15, 2025 as Peace Officers Memorial Day in Farmington. Thank you, sir. Next item on the agenda is 5.2, which is National Public Works Week Proclamation. John, thank you. [4:47] **Public Works Director John Powell:** Mayor and Council members, 2025 marks the 65th annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association. States, provinces, cities, and other municipalities across North America are encouraged to celebrate with official proclamations in recognition of the contribution public works makes to our community. It's in the public interest for the citizens, civic leaders, and children in our community to gain knowledge of public works activities and to maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and public works programs. I'm requesting that you proclaim the week of May 18th to 24th, 2025 as National Public Works Week in Farmington. [5:26] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you, sir. At this time, we'll read the National Public Works Week May 18 to 24 2025 proclamation. Whereas public works professionals focus on infrastructure, facilities, and services that are of vital importance to sustainable and resilient communities and to the public health, high quality of life, and well-being of the people of Farmington. And whereas these infrastructure, facilities, and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of public works professionals who include maintenance workers, engineers, managers, and employees at all levels of government who are responsible for building, improving, protecting, and operating our nation's transportation corridors, water supply, wastewater systems, storm drainage systems, fleet, and other essential facilities for our citizens. And whereas it is in the public interest for the citizens, civic leaders, and children in Farmington to gain knowledge of and to maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and public works programs in their respective communities. And whereas the year 2025 marks, excuse me, the 65th annual National Public Works Weeks sponsored by the American Public Works Association, Canadian Public Works Association. Now therefore, I, Joshua Hoy, mayor, on behalf of the Farmington City Council, do hereby designate the week May 18 to 24, 2025 as National Public Works Week. I urge all citizens to join with representatives of the American Public Works Association and government agencies in activities, events, and ceremonies designated to pay tribute to our public works professionals, maintenance workers, engineers, managers, and employees to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our national health, safety, and quality of life for all. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Item 5.3 is the Top the Tater Days proclamation. Shirley, thank you. [7:34] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Mayor, before you tonight is a proclamation for Farmington's annual community festival now known as Top the Tater Days, June 26 to 29, 2025. [7:45] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you. We'll now read the Farmington Top the Tater Days proclamation. Whereas the Farmington Community Festival, known as Dew Days, was created in 1979 to celebrate that the citizens of Farmington drink more Mountain Dew than any other city. And you keep going. You've got that one, too. And whereas a city festival was planned to celebrate and the citizens of Farmington have continued to support this festival in our historic downtown to celebrate family-friendly fun and community pride since 1979. And whereas the festival may have changed its name, location, and activities over the years, but the one thing that has not changed is the citizens of Farmington who love to celebrate each summer. And whereas Kemp's has been a Farmington business for almost a hundred years and has committed to a multi-year partnership to be the naming sponsor of the event. And whereas the festival name has now changed to Top the Tater Days. And whereas Farmington City Code section 3-11-5 allows the city council to grant an exception to the ordinance section 3-11-4 prohibition which states that it is unlawful for any person to drink or to display in an open container any intoxicating liquor or non-intoxicating malt liquor upon any public street, alley, sidewalk, walkway, or thoroughfare within the city limits of Farmington. And whereas an exception to the ordinance will be made by proclamation for a specified period of time to accommodate a public, civic, or municipal activity communitywide, such as a celebration or festival where the public may enjoy local and regional music and arts activities, history, and culture. Now therefore, I, Mayor Joshua Hoy, on behalf of the city council of the city of Farmington, do hereby proclaim an exception to city code section 3-11-4 for Top the Tater Days from Thursday, June 26th through Sunday, June 29th, and ask that the citizens of Farmington join me in celebrating Top the Tater Days. All right, our next item on the agenda is citizen comments. Anyone wishing to speak, come up at this time. Remember that citizen comments is 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 5 minutes. The city council will not engage in discussion on your topic, but those requiring a response will be responded to by the next city council meeting. Go ahead. [10:14] **Gary Johnson:** My name is Gary Johnson, 22280 Bering Avenue, Farmington, Castle Rock, Minnesota. Uh, I am here to respond, Mr. Mayor, to your lecture a month ago. I was unable to be here the last meeting, so I think it needs to be responded to. I would like to say thank you for telling us to go to the Castle Rock Town Board. How could we never have thought of that? I wish I could say that, Mr. mayor, but we had been doing that for months. Not only Castle Rock Township people, but people residents of the city of Farmington. They went to those meetings, they raised their hands, they were acknowledged, and they spoke. I guess that's what it means to have a public meeting. I don't know if you can remember, but about a year ago, the first planning commission meeting relative to this data center project was held in this room. It was standing room only. And every single meeting after that relative to that was also almost standing room only. Mr. Mayor, I don't know what the population of Farmington is. Um 25-30,000. I don't know. Castle Rock Township has 1350 people. You tried to shame one Farmington resident in that lecture you gave. Guess what? Take a look at that percentage between the number of people in Farmington and the number of people in Castle Rock. Apply that percentage to everybody that was standing in this room. How many of them do you think were from Farmington? Everybody who spoke, spoke against this project. Everybody who spoke at every other meeting spoke against this project. They were not only Castle Rock Township residents. They were people from the city of Farmington and I wish for you to please acknowledge that. Thank you. [12:26] **Nancy Arstead:** Nancy Arstead, Beaumont Avenue. Can we please find out where our ethics complaints are at? A few weeks ago in a meeting, the mayor brought up labor unions, employee rights, vetting, and implied something might still be pending, which was not clear. Full honesty, we have never been told this before. This was brand new news. All we've received are letters saying that our ethics complaints were internally reviewed and dismissed. So, can you please tell us, were they truly dismissed or are they still pending? If so, pending with whom? Please, we ask for a clear answer by the next city council meeting. Someone to please tell us the truth with sufficient description. The mayor also mentioned our lawsuits. I understand legal limitations, but these ethics complaints are separate. They are about city staff behavior, not litigation. Please understand my private emails were taken without my consent and used by your city staff. They were not public. I did not authorize your city staff to share them, distribute them, use them to further the city's agenda. And yet they did without my knowledge. They knew they were private. They knew what they were doing. And they did it to a large group of us for seven months. Dozens and dozens of emails. Think if your personal emails were compromised and used without your consent in the same manner and then imagine complaining to the wrongdoer or the city and they told you that they had every right to do it. I think you would be upset too. Please understand I've been personally wronged. When I submitted the complaints backed with clear proof, the city administrator told me that our complaints were unsubstantiated and dismissed. When I asked how that could be, citing your own employee handbook and the rules that were broken, I was told to submit a data request. Submit a data request. I've spent over $600 on data requests from the city and I wait and I wait and I wait and I'm still waiting. Now I'm told that's the only way the city will respond. That doesn't sound like accountability. It feels like obstruction. I'm not beating up staff. That couldn't be further from the truth. I'm calling out an ethical breach against me by city staff that caused harm to me personally. What would you do if you were me? I'm standing up for myself and begging the city for accountability. I know that your staff has been amazing to you. You will have to forgive me if I don't feel like your staff was amazing to me. I'm also grateful one council member wasn't swayed by those developer talking points that your staff distributed to you elected officials very early in the process. We're grateful for that independence and thank him sincerely. We truly do. Unfortunately, four out of five of you voted the way the developer and the staff wanted you to. To me, the talking points looked pretty effective. Why does this matter so much? Because if you do this to me, you do it to someone else. Your staff said it's okay to do. What guarantees any business you might have a dispute with in town or any other group of people have that your city staff wouldn't do this very same thing to them if given the opportunity. If your staff could somehow gain access to their emails or sensitive material, see something left open on a desk or leave a computer open, is any business or any resident safe? By dismissing our complaints, your city staff is sending a powerful message to those who live here and own businesses here in Farmington. The city of Farmington loses its integrity if this behavior is allowed to stand. That's why it matters. Thank you. [16:55] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you. And Amy, you'll be able to respond to Nancy's comment by the next city council meeting. Correct? **City Attorney Amy:** If that's what you'd like. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Yes, please. Yep. Good evening. [17:03] **Esther Vargo:** Uh, my name is Esther Vargo, 3094 225th Street, Farmington. As the city has made its position clear, I'm hoping to reach those of you who are listening and looking at this recording. The mayor told us last time that we are not welcome to speak here because we are not residents. Well, I checked and anyone can speak at a city council meeting. I'm a taxpayer of this county and ISD 192 and my mailing address is Farmington 55024. The mayor said we should complain at Castle Rock. We do. However, we are within our rights to express our complaint to the city as the city is imposing harm upon us. I have a very sad example of a city overstepping a so-called public interest versus private properties. You probably heard of the Kelo versus New London where the city of New London used eminent domain to take private properties to give to a private developer with the assistance of the Supreme Court. The Kelo fiasco cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars with nothing to show for it. The carefully vetted municipal plans that formed the basis for the Supreme Court's decision proved to be illusory. Eventually, the city of New London and one of the Supreme Court justices extended an apology to Susette Kelo and her neighbors. Just a bit too late, a few years too late. The development project was abandoned—a vacant lot, not generating any tax revenue for the city. The promised thousands of new jobs and 1.2 million a year in tax revenue had not materialized. A neighborhood once teeming with families who resided here for generations. Sounds familiar. Clarence Thomas, associate justice of the Supreme Court court stated, and I quote, "The deferential shift of phraseology enables the court to hold against all common sense that a costly urban renewal project whose stated purpose is a vague promise of new jobs and increase tax revenue, but which is also suspiciously agreeable to Pfizer Corporation, is for a public use." Something has gone seriously awry with this court's interpretation of the constitution. Though citizens are safe from the government in their homes, the homes themselves are not safe. End of quote of Mr. Thomas. And this is what the city of Farmington is doing. Instead of Pfizer, we have a so-called technology park disguising a major industrial development. And this is all from Wikipedia. I'm not making this up. The Supreme Court's ruling meant that Kelo, her neighbors, and every property-owning American face the threat of losing their homes and businesses to a private developer under the guise of raising tax revenue and creating jobs. I quote Wikipedia. Pfizer, which received major tax breaks to move into New London and was the intended beneficiary of the promised private development project, closed their New London facility right before its tax breaks ended. The moral of the story here is that a local government can overstep private property owners rights based on promises that have no guarantees of materializing. So, Mr. Mayor, you said last time that you are confident that you'd win. Maybe so. But if Farmington wins, sadly it would be the repeat of this unethical Kelo case. Thank you. [20:56] **Nate Ryan:** Thank you. Nate Ryan, Camrian Way. Um I kind of like I'd like to talk about three major points tonight. So the first being is we are just kind of passing that year mark and a year ago I sat at this very podium and talked to the planning commission about what their actions were going to be and what they were actually considering. Those things were about zoning and to me that's this what this project has been about the entire time is about zoning and not a—not a good way to rezone a property for the right reasons. Uh and I'm still here tonight to continue that talk and to continue that conversation hopefully. Um, this project is an industrial project. There's no question in my mind or anyone's mind that this is an industrial project. We know that because on the EAW that was submitted, it says it's a 100% industrial project. This is nothing about mixed-use commercial industrial. This is an industrial project. We know and we're starting to learn that the company was giving you talking points and trying to convince and help you along. Make that stretch that they were going to be uh mixed-use commercial industrial because we all know that not only is this a major departure from not only the local planning zoning laws, rules and regulations, it's also a major departure from departure from the regional zoning rules and regulations as well majorly because this is an industrial project. So it's kind of interesting. So the you know we we kind of I think that many of you are like well no it's not industrial project is coke refinery industrial project is like the gas that we have over here but interestingly the where the other data center's going is already zoned 100% industrial so that's an industrial project too you're trying to pigeon hole this you're trying to put this—put this project here um because you know it doesn't fit under 100% industrial you know that the Met Council or the county board or even your local attorneys here would never say let's put an industrial spot right between two neighborhoods. But what you don't know is what you don't have as defined clear objection of what does industrial mean. Industrial means that—that industrial under that—what it means to most of us is how it looks from the outside. But if we start to look at the amount of energy, the water, the power that this thing is going to use, that is an industrial use. And I don't think that any of you really dug into that—what you know what does this look like? What—what you know is this an industrial project? Can we define what that is? Industrial in your city code. This meets a lot of that. There is out—there is going to be outside storage. Those generators being a big part of that. Yet you still want to approve this project anyways. You still want to make this project go forward. We also know that this project is industrial just purely based off the amount of energy that—that—that this project is going to use. I've already mentioned this, but just the electricity alone, it's going to be one of the, if not the one of the largest consumers of electricity in the state of Minnesota. That right there tells me that this is probably an industrial project because there's no big smoke stacks because it doesn't look that way, right? So, doesn't mean that it's not an industrial project. 100% industrial project. And I think that what's scary is like I said last week or last council meeting is that um and I called you all puppets and I'm not going to apologize for that. But if you're just taking the talking points and reading um like you did last meeting and you're just reading those things, that's where you get into trouble. And frankly, that's what this lawsuit will be over in the end is zoning issues and you just blanketly saying, "Yes, we're just going to approve an industrial project." And that's wrong. That's wrong. It's so wrong on many levels. The other thing that you may or may not have considered is um the last person talked about is we do have rights. We have property rights in the state of Minnesota. We have property rights and those rights exist. Um this project, um, is something that I just had the word in my mind. Um, it's not blight. It's, um, oh, I can't think of that. Shoot, it just—it just popped out of my mind, but hopefully it will come back to me. But basically, uh, obsolescence is what it is. So, there is obsolescence that occurs in a neighborhood. And obsolescence occurs in—in an exterior factor like this. There's functional obsolescence like if your house is all cut up and you can't get from one room that's functional obsolescence. Exterior obsolescence is exactly what this project is going to be. So mainly because it does fall out of the zoning rules and regulations that are set for mixed-use commercial industrial. Those being height restrictions in your own city code. It says when you do a um when you do a a PUD—a PUD basically a plan unit development—that you're not going to supersede the existing code that's there. Well, in mixed-use commercial industrial height of uh the height restrictions are well above that. So you're creating obsolescence by allowing this to come—to come—to come through. And I sure hope that you're looking to your city attorney or the attorney representing you in this lawsuit and asking these questions because as I started this conversation a year ago, I warned you about these things. I also warned you the fact that the um that the agreement between yourselves and Castle Rock that along that east side there is a 150 foot setback already that exists there for utilities. So, and I think that unintentionally you probably um you—you probably created a cloud on title with the golf course property by not examining that, not dealing with that. I'm curious if the Olssons were ever paid for that. So, they're clearly not being paid enough or as much as—as the school district is for their property. I mean, all that information is public. I'm not making accusations. Um but I definitely think that that is something to look at. So, and again, the zoning portion of it is the biggest piece—is the biggest piece of this project that just shouldn't be there. It's crazy to me that—that you just do whatever your staff says that you're—that you should do. So, and you don't take into consideration all the other factors that—that happen that have happened or that are going into this project. It takes a lot of time. I understand that. It takes a lot of time to read. It takes a lot of time to understand what your city staff is saying. It takes a lot of time to do your own research because if—if they're pushing you, they're only providing you one side of that. I think that's wrong as somebody who's supposed to protect us, protect the citizens of Farmington. I'm not going to rehash that from my last conversation. Hopefully, my points were well made. The second thing, um... [27:40] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** I need to wrap it up because your time's expired. [27:43] **Nate Ryan:** Yeah, I'm really actually happy because that is my second point that I just like to point out here. So, one of the things and is when I got done with my speech last—last week, my son in the car ride home said, "Dad, why did you get off the podium? You have a first amendment right. You can—you can talk." He's 10 years old. I'm actually very thankful that our public school system has made him realize that he does have first amendment rights and what those rights mean. And he used it in the right context. We allow swearing in our home, but the rule is is that you have to use it in the right context. You have to use it in the right way. And you have to be able to repeat to mom or dad exactly what that word means. And he did with—did that with the first amendment. And I just—I just find it so interesting that—that you do have a—come a public comment period, but then you try to limit it at five minutes. Last week, a person before me spoke for over six minutes and you didn't remind them. You didn't say anything to them. But when I get up here and start to speak, you're five minutes right on the nose. You're like enough, enough, enough. So there has been many times um throughout throughout this country where our first amendment rights are trampled on. I'm just going to read something to you. This is what the Supreme Court said about that: "Profound national commitment to the principle that debate on the first time that I mentioned it was Boston wide open that may very well include vehement, caustic, sharp attacks on government and peer public officials." [28:55] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Nate, by doing this potentially what you're—what you're doing is called viewpoint discrimination. Actually, it's called rules of decorum. So, and as the presiding officer of the meeting, that is one of the rules that I get to enforce. It's one of the rules that's actually granted to me by the state of Minnesota and the constitution. [29:20] **Nate Ryan:** So, it's very interesting that you bring that up in the state of Minnesota. Do you know the court case that—that was—that was decided over? Do you understand what that was? [29:28] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Nate, your time is expired. So, that court case was actually through a um a independent school district court case. That's—there's official business that still needs to be conducted. And if your attempt to hijack this meeting is to prove some point that I have somehow single-handedly chosen you at a time constraint, you're grossly mistaken. [29:50] **Nate Ryan:** Your time is viewpoint discrimination. I don't think that you're doing it against me. I think that you're doing against my viewpoints, Mr. Mayor. So, and anyone else in that elected body can also trump you. They can allow me more time. All they have to do is make a motion and say, "Hey, I'd like to give Mr. Ryan more time." That's all that you have to do. And I understand that you may not want to do it, but I would also encourage you that you are potentially doing viewpoint discrimination. [30:15] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** If there's anyone else wishing to speak, you can come up and do so at this time. Otherwise, we will move on with our agenda. [30:23] **Nate Ryan:** Every opportunity that I've given you says that—the last thing um to file a civil rights complaint, right? [30:29] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** So, just sue us. That's your answer to everything, Mr. Mayor. Just sue us. No, it's not. Just sue us. You want to make a point. Make a point. That—that—that's what—that's your answer to everything. It's just sue us. Just spend your personal money and just sue us. You don't like what I say, just sue me. It's not about what you say. It's about the rules of decorum. Do—do you know that as the presiding officer, I have the ability to not even allow citizen comments. [30:54] **Nate Ryan:** I do know that, Mr. Mayor. Absolutely. And we have talked about that. I understand that you may not like me personally, but I please don't talk down... [31:05] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Pretty bold assertions to be making, Nate. So, pretty bold. Mhm. Your time is expired. If there's anyone else wishing to speak, they can come up and do so at this time. I'd just like to remind every—there's a couple of sound bites in there for you, Nate. Your time is expired. Just like to say congratulations to the new—new police chief. I'm surprised that you didn't pull it out of the consent agenda. [31:36] **Terry Pearson:** My name is Terry Pearson, 2475 225th Street West. I don't represent any organization. The last time I checked, I'm a natural-born American citizen. The city of Farmington has been heavy-handed when it comes to the rezoning of property that butts up to mine. And again I say, is a hyperscale data center development healthy and safe to be located 250 ft from my house? I am not alone in saying no. We are living in a dark time in history when people with money and influence are attempting to take away our individual power. While some people have been silenced, I will use my power to speak the truth to all that have ears. Thank you. [32:16] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none, we'll move on to item seven, which is our consent agenda. I'd seek a motion to approve the consent agenda. [32:35] **Councilmember Nick Lien:** Motion to approve. **Councilmember Holly Bernatz:** Second. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Motion by Nick, second by Holly. All in favor say I. **Councilmembers:** I. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Move on to new business 12.1, which is amend title 8, chapter 11 of the Farmington City Code regarding right-of-way management. John, thank you. [32:55] **Public Works Director John Powell:** Mayor and city council members. This is a followup to the extensive conversation we had on April 7th with regard to right-of-way management, our permitting process, and challenges we've faced in the past year, as well as the increase in number of right-of-way permit requests. We've taken that conversation and with the assistance of the city attorney and the city clerk have converted into ordinance form for your consideration. When developing the construction specifications, we used the specifications already used by Dakota County for their right-of-way permit. So, we didn't start from scratch and we wanted something that was proven and workable, but we modified it slightly for our own use. Um key areas addressed on the revised code and ordinance form are the requirements for communication with property owners including local points of contact for the facility owner and contractor as well as advanced construction notification. This includes mailed notice, door hangers in advance. We also referenced the city municipal separate storm sewer system MS4 requirements and erosion control specifications. This is directly the result of our permit requirements that we have an obligation to the MPCA to adhere to those and the contractors need to adhere to those. We've more incorporated the traffic control requirements per the Minnesota manual on uniform traffic control devices. And finally, one of the key issues is incorporating winter season requirements to minimize right-of-way permit work during times of hazardous road conditions and uh low visibility. So, we don't want contractors out there working uh even if it's nice out today, they start work and it's not something that happens overnight. We don't want them to have equipment or stockpiles or anything like that in the way of traveling public or for snow and ice control. From a budget standpoint, our budgeted revenue for utility permits last year was $23,740. The actual was $80,017. Uh based on the changes we've um recommended here and with some assumptions about how much time the engineering technician spends, that would result in about $55,200 in cost. So, we believe that the fees we collect this year will cover the cost of the engineering technicians additional time in this regard. So, we're not recommending a fee increase. Uh, with that, we're requesting that you approve and pass ordinance 2025-002 amending title 8, chapter 11 of the Farmington City Code regarding right-of-way management. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. [35:45] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you, sir. Jake, any questions? [35:47] **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** Uh, no questions for me. Thank you, John, for putting this together after our lengthy conversation a few weeks ago. [35:53] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Steve? [35:54] **Councilmember Steve Wilson:** Um, yeah, I—I guess sort of similar to Jake, um, you know, John, when you presented this to us at a work session, I thought it was extremely well organized, well researched, a lot of good detail. I would like to um request, if possible, maybe give council an update, I would say November, December, on how some of these changes have worked out. Maybe kind of give—give an idea if uh to the best of what we have at that time the revenue receipts that we've come in. Um and I guess I would encourage you to monitor that because I know at our—our work session we were talking about dedicating um you know one of our you know senior folks to that particular activity. So, I think we definitely want to make sure that um receipts come in as expected. So, that's what I have. [36:45] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you. Holly? **Councilmember Holly Bernatz:** Nothing for me. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Nick? [36:50] **Councilmember Nick Lien:** I think Steve hit the point that I was after is just making sure. I know you said there's no fees right now, but I do want to make sure that we basically cover our costs at least. So, keep an eye on that one. [37:02] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thanks. Yeah, I don't have anything to add. We—we had a very healthy conversation during work session about um why this even is coming forward and the amount of right-of-way uh utility work that's being done through different providers. Uh albeit good net benefit to our residents, but at the same time there's uh a logistical process and there's costs incurred and uh just something that we're you know having to uh think a little bit more broadly about. So, I—I appreciate you and your team's due diligence. With that, I would seek a motion to approve and pass ordinance 2025-002 amending title 8, chapter 11 of the Farmington City Code regarding right-of-way management. [37:45] **Councilmember Steve Wilson:** Motion to approve. **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** Second. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Motion by Steve, second by Jake. Call the role, please. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Bernatz. **Councilmember Holly Bernatz:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Lien. **Councilmember Nick Lien:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Wilson. **Councilmember Steve Wilson:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Council member Cordes. **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Mayor Hoy. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Yes. Thank you. [38:10] **Public Works Director John Powell:** With that, we would uh publish the summary ordinance and we will actually reach out to every um communication company and contractor to share the fact that the ordinance has changed to make them aware of it so we can gain compliance. [38:13] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Thank you, sir. Thank you. Round table. Amy, you'd start. [38:15] **City Attorney Amy:** Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um just a point of clarification on the—your request to me to follow up with uh one of the speakers from public comment. Um on the assumption that the follow-up would be regarding the ethics complaints that were filed. I would note that the—the city has a separate attorney for employment. Um so with your permission, I would defer to that attorney to make the response and I can work with the city administrator to make sure that either I or that attorney respond appropriately if that's okay with you. [38:50] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Please and thank you. **City Attorney Amy:** Okay. Thank you for the clarification. We'll work with Flaherty and Hood. Thank you. Anything else to add? Well, to prove that I don't take myself too seriously, as a followup to last—your last meeting, I would just say that I have nothing further to report. Requested—here's my Kentucky Derby hat. One of many in my collection from my hometown. I just for anybody else's reference, I did grow up on a horse farm in the horse business in Kentucky. So that's why it's my—my holiday. [39:31] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** I was mostly just curious if you picked the winner or not. **City Attorney Amy:** I did not. No other questions from me. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Nothing. Holly? [39:35] **Councilmember Holly Bernatz:** Um well, in the consent agenda was a a pretty big and pretty special um what would you say—change uh to the police department and just a robust and exciting um congratulations um as hard as it is going to be to not have Chief Rutherford's antics and sense of humor and whatnot as a part of um my regular interactions. Uh I could not be more pleased um than to welcome you into that position. So congratulations, Nate. [40:19] **Councilmember Nick Lien:** I will just echo what Holly said, Nate. Congratulations on this well-deserved honor. [40:35] **Councilmember Steve Wilson:** Um I want to congratulate the high school theater program for the amazing work that they did and all the talented high school men and women who uh were part of Guys and Dolls. It was pretty darn amazing. Um and also Kelly, I—I don't know, you know, we've talked about this a little bit before. I get—Okay, so for anybody who drives the roundabouts, um, Pilot at 195th, Akin on 195th, um, from my perspective, it's terrifying in the sense of the crosswalks where the people cross and where the bikes cross and cars are watching. I mean, I'm waiting to get rear-ended because I'm going to slow down and stop. So, I guess I'd really, you know, there's obviously a lot of bikers out there. Um, you know, and the reason I bring up Dakota County is we've talked to them about moving further back those cross areas so that way traffic can see them, especially kind of in the blind area. Um, and even though we're kind of at the bike, you know, running season already, Kelly, maybe there's a possibility they can throw up a sign of some type. I know signs are one of those deals where, you know, you kind of notice it for a month or two and then it kind of becomes invisible, but I just want it to be on their radar that, you know, I think it's a big issue. Um and then um la—you know lastly Nate, super excited uh to have you uh promoted. I know that the acknowledgement um on our agenda today is really just kind of the formalish announcement but that we have your kind of celebration and swearing in coming in. So looking forward to you taking over and uh you know obviously we're going to miss the chief too. So it's a exciting transition. [42:16] **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** I too would like to congratulate—congratulate Chief Rutherford on his official retirement on May 30th. And I'm guessing we're going to have a big party. I haven't been asked to—to coordinate that, but I'm not the party planner. So, congratulations and thank you for setting us up for success in the police department. And Nate, we're looking forward to um your new role and you have big shoes to fill. So, thank you and congratulations. [42:47] **Assistant City Administrator David Chanski:** Congratulations, Nate. David, we're looking forward to having Karina Short join us as our newest senior support—senior administrative support technician at the front desk. Um, she should be—she's scheduled to join us on Wednesday. So, we're very excited for that. Um, congratulations, Nate. Looking forward to working with you for many more years. Gary, we've still got you on payroll for 24 days. [43:14] **CED Director Deanna Kuennen:** Thank you, Mayor and Council. I just echo what everybody else has said. Congratulations Nate and congratulations Gary. [43:24] **Public Works Director John Powell:** Thank you, mayor and council members. Uh the 2025 street improvements will have the pre-construction meeting tomorrow. So residents in that neighborhood can expect us to uh send out a notice for a neighborhood meeting where they can meet the contractor and the inspector that'll be working on the project. As well as uh on this project, we've initiated a process where we're doing inspections of houses uh prior to construction starting to look for cracks, deficiencies in the foundations, things like that, and documenting it, making that available to the resident. So if there's a issue that comes up during construction that we have some point of reference for that uh information and obviously congratulations to Nate. Well-deserved and well-deserved to you chief. [44:12] **Parks & Rec Director Kelly:** Thank you. A week from Friday uh Friday May 16th is the 4th annual spring food truck event at Stelzel Ballfield in Empire. Uh we have eight uh confirmed food trucks. It'll be from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m. I do want to say uh send a huge thank you to both the Farmington Park and Rec Commission and City of Empire Park and Rec Commission. It's a—it's a great joint effort to—to do that event and um last year was great. We probably had over 1,300 people there. So, hope to see you next Friday. And then the following day, Saturday, May 17th, the veteran steak fry at the VFW is for the Rambling River Center. Um that is from 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. Uh $17 gets you a grilled Von Hanson steak, uh potato salad and dessert. I do believe there'll probably be lemon bars there. Um if you're available on that Saturday, hope to see you there. Yep. Um and too, just want to congratulate uh Nate. Look forward to working uh with you and Gary. Going to miss you. Um but congratulations. Well-deserved. [45:09] **Finance Director Kim Sommerland:** I too want to extend my congratulations to both Nate and the chief. Um, also I wanted to highlight on tonight's consent agenda, they were the preliminary 2024 um, financial statements and it looks to be a strong performance with the general fund. We will have the auditors still working on the final statements and they will be back probably in the next couple months to present those statements to the city council. [45:34] **Fire Chief Matthew Price:** Thank you, Chief Price. Gary, it's been an honor and a privilege. I wish you the best of luck. Nate, we got some work to do. [45:48] **Police Chief Gary Rutherford:** If I had known my antics were going to get called out, I totally—I totally would have brought my own Kentucky Derby hat. Yeah, I do. Um, thank you for all the kind words. Um, I guess I would close with uh excellent choice. Congratulations, Nate. Um, Chief Siem is going to serve the city well for many years to come. You guys are in good hands for sure. Thank you. [46:40] **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** I'll save my remarks for you till the 23rd. I—I don't know if everybody knew you still had a meeting to go. It made it sound like this was going to be your last one, but it's not. If you feel like I've been reminded that I've got 24 days of work left to do to the guy who's had the clock going for six years or whatever it is. Yeah. Uh Nate, you—the pool was very good. Um you—you had some very good competition and early on there was a lot of talk about internal external like do we go and I think at the end of the day like when you do the right thing you always end up with the right result and we absolutely ended up with the right result. Um you did exactly as we expected you to do. You um you've taken over the deputy chief position um and made it your own already. And the way that the team has responded and the feedback that's been received um is nothing short of amazing. And I'm not going to say you have big shoes to fill because I think his are technically smaller than yours. However, uh Chief Rutherford has—has um provided exceptional leadership in a time of transition for our community and there is no doubt that you will continue on and you will make it yours and you will lead um in the best way possible in the way that the men and women that you serve with need to be led. Uh and you'll take that department to the next level. and I—I couldn't be more um fortunate and privileged to be um jump seat to that ride and watching how you're going to continue to develop that team. So, congratulations and there will be more at your official of office and all the things, but um in the interim and now because it's public, uh congratulations um chief appoint. Um I don't have anything else to add. So, with that, I would seek a motion to adjourn. [48:38] **Councilmember Jake Cordes:** Make a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:47. **Councilmember Steve Wilson:** Second. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** Motion by Jake. Second by Steve. All in favor say I. **Councilmembers:** I. **Mayor Joshua Hoy:** We're adjourned at 7:47. [48:50] [Music] [Music]