Local News

Council hears concern over land classification

FAIRMONT--It was standing room only on Monday evening during the Fairmont City Council meeting. At least nine people spoke at the start during the public comment portion and a few more spoke during the public hearing amending an ordinance establishing a rural and urban service district.

During public comment, each person gets three minutes to talk to the council. Issues shared on Monday with the council included a plea for action on the pickleball courts, concerns about building projects in Fairmont, specifically Rewind Med Spa's remodel project, a plea for assistance from the city with a lakes management plan and concerns with the way the Curly Leaf Pondweed removal project was handled.

After more than half an hour of public comment, the meeting continued. The first item of business was a public hearing and consideration of ordinance 2026-03, an ordinance amending ordinance 2025-03 establishing a rural and urban service district.

Last year, the council established criteria used to classify properties within the rural and urban service districts and properties were classified based on the criteria adopted by the city council.

On July 13, 2026 council approved the first reading of the ordinance amending the ordinance establishing a rural and urban service district and called for a public hearing to be held on July 27.

City Clerk Betsy Steuber prefaced the start of the public hearing by speaking about parcel 23.037.0145, owned by the Fairmont Cemetery Association, which was inadvertently classified as rural during the 2025 review.

"It is currently not being used as a burial ground and therefore it is not exempt from property taxes like the other portion," Steuber said for a portion of the land that is basically farmland near Lakeside Cemetery.

Brad Buhmann, president of the Lakeside Cemetery, said it is in a unique situation because there are 24 acres that are tillable.

"The city wants to turn it into urban and most certainly that property would never be urban," Buhmann said. "We do have a county tile that runs through the middle so we can't develop it... I don't know which category we fall into that you want to turn it into urban."

He said the southern border of the cemetery land is the railroad and Hobo trail and the north side is the George Lake Dam. On the east side is George Lake.

Buhmann further added that the city provides the property with no water and no sewer.

"I don't know how this property is going to be turned into what you want it to be. It's going to be agricultural until It will be a cemetery when we need plots," Buhmann said.

He said that the classification change will cost the association another $929 a year, which will be hard for the association to come by. In fact, back in 2023 the association actually went before the Martin County Board of Commissioners to ask if the county would take over operation of the cemetery due in part to financial concerns.

"We survive on donations and sales of plots," Buhmann said.

Steuber said that based on the criteria adopted by council, staff had noticed that this property was missed. She referenced a portion of the criteria, labeled number five, identifying properties currently designated as rural that are completely surrounded by urban district properties.

"That is what changed the classification of this. It was missed during last year's classification period," Steuber said.

Council Member Randy Lubenow said he talked to the Auditor/Treasurer who said that even if the land is going to be used for future cemetery use, if it's being farmed right now, it can't be tax exempt under cemetery because it's not being used for that purpose currently.

Buhmann agreed and said that they pay taxes on that farmland right now.

When asked who came up with the criteria, it was said that Civil Engineer Tyler Cowing worked with former Interim City Administrator Jeff O'Neill on establishing it and that it was later approved by council.

Steuber listed off some nearby properties that were now classified as urban. Council Member Britney Kawecki asked if the classification change met the criteria.

"Yes, that's why it changed from rural to urban, because of the criteria," Steuber said.

Council Member Jay Maynard pointed out that the cemetery surrounds the land in question on all sides except for the road.

"If the cemetery is tax exempt, does that make it rural, urban, neither? And if so, how does that affect the criteria five analysis," he asked.

Kawecki said that is what she wanted answered, too.

City Administrator Jason Baker said that, the way he looked at it, aside from the nearby lake, which is not taxed, and the cemetery land, which is also tax exempt, he would look at the next property after that that is taxed.

"If there was another piece of agricultural land that was right there...," Baker said.

Council Member Randy Lubenow said he would like for the city attorney with Flaherty and Hood to look at this item specifically.

"I think we need some legal clarification," Lubenow said.

Maynard agreed and said that if you look at the wording of the criteria, the property is not completely surrounded by an urban district property.

However, when tabling the matter was mentioned, it was said that the information needs to be turned into the county by Aug. 1 for next year's pay 2027 taxes.

Kawecki pointed out that neither Cowing nor O'Neill were there to explain their decision making process.

"Clearly there's criteria and Tyler justified it," Kawecki said.

However she said there could be concerns about other properties that had been justified the same way that come forward if the council makes an exception in this case.

After some more discussion on whether the council could table the item, Kawecki suggested the council just approve the ordinance with an amendment.

Council Member James Kotewa made a motion to approve the second reading and final consideration of ordinance 2026-03 an ordinance amending ordinance 2025-03 establishing a rural and urban service district with an amendment leaving parcel 23.037.0145 in on the rural service district, to be reviewed by staff and legal and revisited before next year.

"The reasoning would be that we don't have the adequate knowledge or ability to vote on it appropriately," Kawecki said.

The motion passed unanimously.