Owatonna Council digs in about EAW requirement

The City of Owatonna is pushing back on a state organization’s claim that the city did not provide sufficient – or fully accurate – information before making a decision on the future of the proposed public safety facilities.

The State Historic Preservation Office, or SHPO, wrote in a letter last month that the city had not formally requested a consultation with its office or with the Minnesota Office of the State Archeologist.

The consultation is required because of the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act, SHPO said, when “significant archaeological or historic sites are known … or predicted to exist” on non-federal public land.

In Owatonna’s case, the city has proposed building a new police station on property it owns within the West Hills Campus.

The history

The campus was home to the State Public School for Dependent and Neglected Children, where about 11,000 children lived from 1886 to 1946. It was a precursor to what became the current child welfare system.

It now houses Owatonna City Hall, Little Theatre of Owatonna, the Owatonna Arts Center, West Hills Social Commons and more, many in the original buildings from the school. One of the former cottages for orphaned boys now houses a museum – the only kind in the country; there is a cemetery that is the final resting place for nearly 200 children who died while at the school.

The entire 42-acre campus is on the National Register of Historic Places.

The City of Owatonna bought the property in 1974; occupants of the various buildings lease them from the city.

The project

After assessing the city’s facilities needs over the past several years, it became clear to city officials that the current police station and fire hall needed help.

The fire hall was built in 1906 – when firefighters were still responding to calls with horse-drawn water wagons.

The police station operates out of a former bank building that dates from 1968.

Issues include water leaks and sewer line issues; insufficient training and meeting spaces; inadequate HVAC systems; limited room for equipment, vehicles and staff; and what city leaders believe is a lack of space for future growth and enhanced emergency response capabilities.

Multiple options were considered – and rejected – before settling on a plan:

• Move the police temporarily into a city-owned building on Bridge Street
• Tear down the current police station
• Build a new fire hall on the site of the current police station
• Build a new police station on the south side of West Hills

That would leave the 1906 fire hall empty; it, too, is on the National Register of Historic Places.

On March 3, members of the Owatonna City Council adopted a five-year Capital Improvement Plan and gave preliminary approval to issue up to $65 million in CIP bonds to pay for the public safety facilities.

The backlash

Perhaps surprisingly, the cost of the project seems not be the biggest issue with Owatonna residents.

Instead, there has been strong opposition to the proposed site of the police station – and a distrust based on what the residents see as a lack of transparency.

Before the March 3 vote, there had been no public hearings held about the project, though an open house was held Feb. 3. No formal public input was accepted.

In response to the bond vote, a resident petition containing more than 2,300 signatures was submitted to the city on April 2, asking that the decision on the public safety facilities be put to a vote.

That will likely happen, though the city could also scrap the project entirely; come back with a different proposal; or wait a year and bond for the same amount in April 2027. A formal decision has not been announced.

Additionally, residents requested an Environmental Assessment Worksheet be completed to assess the impact of the project at West Hills.

What followed is a veritable alphabet soup of organizations, all weighing in.

Two issues

The request for a public vote and the request for an EAW are two completely different issues, but both are critical to the project.

The City’s public stance is that an EAW is not necessary: The project is small; there are no wetlands, public waterways or flood plains involved; there will not be significant road work required.

At the March 17 Owatonna City Council meeting, members approved a resolution that denied the EAW; part of that resolution said that “city staff and consultant have consulted with the State Historic Preservation Office and the State Archaeologist about the project.”

That, SHPO said, “does not accurately reflect the status of the consultation.”

Once again, there are two issues at play: letting SHPO know about the proposed project at West Hills, and asking for a formal consultation of the project at West Hills.

SHPO’s letter made it clear that the organization had not been asked for a formal consultation – which requires the city to submit several documents related to the scope of the project.

The materials were not received by SHPO until March 19, two days after the vote by the Council.

“When was the first time SHPO was made aware of the potential project?” Councilor Nate Dotson asked City Administrator Jenna Tuma.

“January of 2026,” she replied, “so they knew of the project.”

That is true, as verified by an email obtained by the Steele County Times – and has nothing to do with a formal request for a consultation.

It’s the lack of the consultation request the SHPO letter is referencing – not whether or not the office knew about the project.

What the law says

The city “followed all the rules under the (state’s) Environmental Quality Board … and had legal advice guiding us through that process to make sure everything was checked,” Tuma told council members at their May 5 meeting.

While the parameters of the project do not trigger an EAW by the EQB, it’s a different story for SHPO.

“They don’t have legal authority to tell us what we can do and what we can’t do,” Tuma said of the state organization, “but we do want to be good stewards of our property, and have their input.”

The city has worked with SHPO multiple times in the past, including most recently with the new seating project that is planned for the Little Theatre of Owatonna, in historic Merrill Hall.

But SHPO has no role to play in the proposed police station, Tuma said, “because we don’t have a building for them to provide input on.”

The word “building,” though, isn’t mentioned anywhere in the state law that discusses work on the National or State Historic Register of Places.

State law Minn. R. 4410.4300, subp. 31, specifically says the rule requiring an EAW applies to “the destruction, in whole or part, or the moving of a property that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.”

“All 42 acres of West Hills are contributing to the historic district,” said Melissa Zimmerman, one of the people behind the push to move the project. “The land itself is part of the designated historic property … this project impacts that historic property and should have triggered a mandatory EAW.”

Opening dialogue

Residents dismayed at what they believe was a push for new facilities without public input have appeared regularly at city council meetings to speak during the public comment portion.

By policy, councilors do not typically respond to any comments made, but have just as regularly made comments criticizing the backlash and asking for input.

Council member Dan Boeke recently warned the public not to believe everything they read online or in the newspaper, accusing residents of spreading “half-truths,” and news media of using “sensational and inflammatory” information instead of facts.

At the March 3 meeting, following the vote on the CIP and bonds, several people spoke – all of them supported police and firefighters, they said, just not the project as presented.

That seems to continue.

Another open house was held May 9, inviting the public to speak to members of city administration.

“Why did it take a reverse referendum (for a vote on the project) before residents finally got a town hall on May 9?” Zimmerman asked during the May 5 council meeting. “The public is here. People are showing up.

“People are participating,” she said, “but participation only works if the government participates, too.”