Council approves one-year, $17,849.23 budget amendment for Burnsville Festival security after ethics debate

The Burnsville City Council voted to amend the 2026 operating budget to provide a one-time $17,849.23 payment from available general fund balance to cover private security at the Burnsville Festival and Fire Muster.

The request, presented by Fire Chief (speaker 9), was framed as a short-term measure: "a onetime general fund budget amendment in the amount of $17,849.23 that would be funded from fund balance," he told the council during the meeting.

Council debate centered less on the dollar amount than on whether a council member’s volunteer leadership role with the festival created a conflict of interest. Council Member Dan Keeley (speaker 1) said his involvement is unpaid and voluntary and argued that it does not meet the legal standard for a conflict. "Because my involvement is strictly voluntary and carries 0 financial interest, there is no legal conflict of interest, and I am fully qualified and obligated to represent the public on this matter," Keeley said.

City Attorney Jared (speaker 11) told the council that courts apply a set of factors—sometimes described in practice as the Lehi factors—when assessing noncontractual conflicts, including the nature of the decision, any financial interest, how many officials share the interest and whether other review mechanisms exist. "Those are the kind of factors that the courts will look at," Jared said, and he added that the legal determination is ultimately for the council to make.

Council Member Gustafson (speaker 5) said she has recused herself in some past votes and urged clearer policy language for legacy events; "this festival is a 501(c)(3). It's a private festival," she said, arguing the council should treat sponsorship differently from core city services. Council Member Kara Schultz (speaker 4) said she would support a one-year amendment but pressed staff to clarify policy so the council can avoid repeated, ad hoc requests.

Council Member Workman (speaker 7) said he supported funding the security for one year so the festival and city can "hash out" distinctions between public safety and private security.

After discussion and a friendly amendment allowing each council member time to speak, the clerk took a roll call. The vote was Yes: Keeley, Schultz, Workman; No: Gustafson, Kautz. The motion carried.

Council members and staff said they plan to review festival policy and security responsibilities over the next 12 months rather than commit to ongoing funding. The budget amendment is a one-time allocation for the 2026 event; any future funding would require further council action.