Frequently Asked Questions
Credit River faces important decisions about taxes, infrastructure, growth, City facilities, public safety, and how we plan for the future.
This page provides straightforward answers to some of the questions I hear most often from residents. My goal is to explain where I stand, clarify how City decisions are made, and provide additional context on issues that have generated discussion during this election.
For topics that require more detail, I have included links to supporting information, City records, and additional background on the Truth Matters page.
Questions Index
About Chris & Leadership
Taxes & Financial Planning
City Facilities
Infrastructure, Sewer & Water
Growth & Planning
Transparency & Resident Input
1. Why are you running for reelection as Mayor of Credit River?
I am running for reelection because I believe Credit River benefits from experienced, steady leadership that looks beyond the next meeting or election cycle.
I have served Credit River since 2013—first as a Township Supervisor, then as Board Chair, and since incorporation as the City’s first Mayor. During that time, I have worked to keep our tax rate low, strengthen public safety and essential services, improve communication and transparency, maintain strong financial reserves and an AA+ bond rating, and prepare responsibly for the infrastructure and growth decisions ahead.
My approach is straightforward: listen to residents, rely on facts, plan carefully, and make decisions that balance today’s needs with Credit River’s long-term future.
2. What are your priorities for Credit River?
My priorities are responsible spending, thoughtful growth, dependable public safety and essential services, careful investment in roads and infrastructure, long-term planning for City facilities, and open and accessible government.
Credit River will continue to face change and development pressure. I do not believe growth should be accelerated simply for the sake of growth. Decisions about density and development should reflect the location, available infrastructure, surrounding neighborhoods, natural resources, adopted plans, and the long-term interests of the community.
At the same time, we cannot ignore aging roads, infrastructure needs, public safety, or future facility needs. Good government requires planning for those challenges before they become emergencies.
3. What is your position on property taxes and City spending?
I believe Credit River should continue providing dependable services while keeping our local property tax rate among the lowest in the state and demonstrating clear value for every taxpayer dollar.
I believe the best way to keep taxes stable over time is to plan ahead. Conservative budgeting, appropriate reserves, protecting our AA+ bond rating, and long-range capital planning help Credit River address major needs without creating sudden tax increases or unnecessary borrowing.
Before significant taxpayer dollars are committed, the City should clearly understand the need, total cost, alternatives, and public benefit. We should also pursue grants, state funding, federal funding, and other outside resources whenever possible to reduce costs to local taxpayers.
4. Did you support a 15% property-tax increase?
No 15% final levy increase was adopted.
The approximately 15.4% figure was the preliminary maximum levy established while the City was still developing the 2026 budget. Minnesota cities can reduce a levy after the preliminary deadline but cannot increase it, so the preliminary levy establishes a ceiling while budget work continues.
After additional analysis and budget workshops, the Council reduced the levy by more than $324,000. The final levy adopted in December increased approximately 3.6% and was approved unanimously by the City Council, 5–0.
A preliminary levy is not the same thing as the final tax levy.
[See the full explanation and City records on Truth Matters.]
5. Is Credit River planning to build a $21 million City Hall?
No. The City Council has never approved a $21 million City Hall or Government Center.
The approximately $21 million figure came from a consultant’s conceptual long-term facilities study that examined municipal needs over roughly a 30-year period. It was a planning estimate—not an approved construction project.
No $21 million building was authorized, no construction contract was approved, and no borrowing was approved.
The City continues to evaluate future facility needs because the existing City Hall was constructed more than sixty years ago for a much smaller township and has significant limitations. Studying future needs is not the same as approving a building.
[See the complete City facilities timeline on Truth Matters.]
6. Why is the City considering purchasing land for future facilities?
Credit River’s current City Hall was built in the early 1960s primarily as a township maintenance garage. Today it serves as City Hall, Council Chambers, staff workspace, and part of the City’s Public Works operation.
The existing property has limitations involving office and meeting space, wastewater treatment, parking, expansion, employee workspace, security, and future Public Works needs.
Purchasing land does not mean a new building has been approved. It is one option the Council is evaluating as part of responsible long-term planning.
Any future land purchase or construction proposal should be considered publicly, supported by credible cost information, phased appropriately, and approved only when the need and value to taxpayers are clear.
7. Was the City secretly pursuing a lease for City Hall?
No.
A Credit River resident and business owner suggested that the City consider leasing available space in his industrial business park as a possible temporary solution for City offices and Public Works storage.
Rather than privately negotiating a lease, I placed the proposal on a public City Council agenda so the entire Council could discuss it openly.
No lease was negotiated. No lease was signed. The City Council ultimately decided not to move forward.
Bringing a resident’s proposal to the full Council for discussion at a public meeting is not secrecy—it is how an open public process should work.
8. What is your position on municipal sewer and water?
Infrastructure should respond to demonstrated need. It should not be used simply to accelerate development, but legitimate infrastructure problems should not be ignored because of concerns about future growth.
This does not mean I support extending sewer and water throughout Credit River or accelerating development.
Several of Credit River’s oldest neighborhoods face infrastructure challenges. Country Court, for example, has aging roads, older septic systems on relatively small lots, and is located near an existing regional wastewater connection.
When major road reconstruction is already necessary, coordinating underground utility work can avoid rebuilding the same streets twice.
These decisions should be based on engineering, actual need, cost, available funding, and long-term benefit—not ideology.
9. Will every Credit River taxpayer have to pay for sewer and water?
The City Council has consistently maintained that properties receiving the direct benefit from municipal sewer and water should pay those utility costs through assessments, connection charges, utility rates, and other project financing rather than shifting those costs to taxpayers citywide.
Road reconstruction is treated differently. Historically, Credit River has assessed approximately 60% of roadway reconstruction costs to benefiting properties, with the remaining share funded through the City’s Capital Improvement Fund.
The City has also pursued state and federal assistance to reduce costs for affected property owners.
[Learn more about infrastructure, roads, sewer and water on Truth Matters.]
10. Does sewer and water mean Credit River will become another suburb?
No single infrastructure project determines Credit River’s future development pattern.
Development decisions are governed by comprehensive planning, zoning, available infrastructure, environmental constraints, surrounding neighborhoods, legal requirements, and decisions made through the public process.
My position is that growth should be thoughtful and deliberate—not accelerated.
Density should fit the location and available services rather than being applied uniformly across the City. New development should protect natural resources, include appropriate transitions, pay its fair share of infrastructure costs, and strengthen Credit River rather than diminish what makes the community special.
11. What is your approach to growth and development?
Credit River will continue to experience development pressure. The realistic choice is not between change and no change; it is whether change occurs deliberately and at a pace the community and its infrastructure can responsibly absorb.
I do not support accelerating development.
I believe each proposal should be evaluated based on its location, infrastructure, surrounding neighborhoods, natural resources, adopted plans, legal requirements, and public benefit.
I also believe new development should pay its fair share of infrastructure costs.
My goal is to make sure Credit River plans for change so that the City—not circumstances—has the greatest possible ability to shape its future.
12. How do planning and zoning decisions work in Credit River?
Land-use decisions must be based on adopted ordinances, the Comprehensive Plan, applicable laws, professional review, and the facts of each individual application.
City staff first reviews an application and determines whether it meets applicable requirements. The Planning Commission then reviews the proposal, holds public hearings when required, and makes a recommendation to the City Council.
The Council receives that recommendation and the complete record before making the final decision.
Councilmembers must approach applications fairly and cannot promise a predetermined outcome before the facts, legal standards, and formal application are presented.
Public input is important, but decisions must also comply with the law and the City’s adopted plans and ordinances.
13. Do you listen to residents who disagree with you?
Yes.
Listening does not always mean agreeing. Elected officials have a responsibility to consider resident input along with professional analysis, legal requirements, costs, adopted plans, and the interests of the entire community.
I have worked to expand opportunities for residents to participate by supporting meeting livestreams, helping develop the City’s early website and public-record resources, proposing neighborhood town hall meetings, responding directly to residents, and regularly attending community events.
Healthy disagreement is part of local government. I will continue listening respectfully while making decisions based on the full record rather than simply the loudest voice.
14. What happened to the resident committee’s recommendations on City facilities?
After residents raised concerns about the consultant’s long-term facilities study, the City Council paused further consultant work and created a Government Center Citizens Advisory Committee made up of Credit River residents.
The committee spent months reviewing alternatives and eventually presented recommendations to the Council.
Councilmember Bill Markert moved to approve all of the committee’s recommendations, with an additional soil test at City Hall. That motion did not receive a second.
Councilmembers expressed concerns that the recommendations focused primarily on remodeling the existing building and did not fully address long-term land, wastewater, Public Works, employee workspace, security, and future facility needs.
The committee’s work was valuable and appreciated, but the Council concluded that additional long-term planning was necessary.
15. Why did you propose changing the livestream requirement for Council workshops?
During the Council’s annual review of its bylaws, I proposed discussing whether workshops might allow more open and productive working conversations without livestreaming—an issue residents had raised with me.
The proposal was made publicly and discussed at a public Council meeting.
The Council chose not to make the change, and workshops continue to be livestreamed.
My broader record on public access includes establishing Credit River’s livestreaming capability during the COVID emergency, helping develop the City’s early website and public-reference materials, and proposing neighborhood town hall meetings.
I believe transparency should be judged by the full record, not by one proposal that was openly discussed and ultimately not adopted.
16. Who drafted Credit River’s City Council bylaws?
The City Council appointed Mayor Chris Kostik and Councilmember Bill Markert together to research bylaws used by other communities and prepare a draft for Council consideration.
The draft was then reviewed and amended by the full City Council before being adopted unanimously.
Like most City policies, the bylaws were the product of collaboration—not the work of one individual.
17. What does fiscal responsibility mean to you?
Fiscal responsibility means more than simply focusing on one year’s tax levy.
It means maintaining dependable essential services, budgeting conservatively, preserving appropriate reserves, maintaining the City’s strong bond rating, planning ahead for roads and major capital needs, and avoiding situations where future taxpayers face sudden large expenses because previous Councils failed to prepare.
It also means asking whether every major expenditure is necessary, what alternatives exist, whether the timing is right, and whether grants or outside funding can reduce the local cost.
The goal should be stable, predictable finances and clear value for taxpayers over the long term.
18. What experience do you bring to the Mayor’s office?
I have lived in Credit River since 1997 and have served the community in elected office since 2013.
I served as a Credit River Township Supervisor from 2013 to 2021, served as Township Board Chair from 2015 to 2021, helped lead Credit River’s transition from township to city, and have served as Credit River’s first Mayor since incorporation in 2021.
That experience has involved budgeting, roads, public safety, land use, infrastructure, regional planning, staffing, intergovernmental relationships, and many of the long-term issues now facing the City.
Experience matters—but how it is applied matters even more. I believe it should lead to thoughtful decisions, independent judgment, and an understanding that today’s choices will affect Credit River for decades.