Uh, please stand for the pledge. >> I aliance 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.
[Music] All right. Agenda. Do we have any additions or corrections to the agenda? >> Um, Mr. Chair, I just before I get to the addition to the agenda, I just wanted to make a note that our systems
here in the county are down. So, the public is aware of that. Our phones are down, our internet is down. Um, just I want to make people aware of that as well as our website. So, um, it has been called in since, uh, early this morning and then working on it. We do have
temporary service in here for our teams meeting, but just so everybody's aware of that. Um, as far as modifications to the agenda under highway, we um would request to add a third reclamate
application. And then under planning and zoning, it may be wise to um switch the order as well as well. >> Yes. >> Perhaps put Prairie Lakes at the um at the end and let the others go. So, so
we'll move number one to the end and putting in number two above in in the planning and zoning. So, the Prairie Lakes will be last and then on the highway the the it's that it's the uh uh
the resolution um one I. So, it's 08251 I. So, we'll put that as number three. >> It is one eye, isn't it? >> It is. >> Oh, no. I had it but now I can't find it. >> Okay. >> Did you steal mine, Barry? >> No, I didn't. I found it. Found it.
>> Is there any is there any other uh corrections or additions to the agenda? >> The only other note is under administrator um I know Kelsey from the city is planning on to come here to talk about the tiff district. So he's in here perhaps we'll let him go prior to my report as well just so we have the order
down. >> Perfect. All right with that um I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda. >> So second. So, a motion by Phil, second by Barry. Any more discussion? All right. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. All right. Motion carries. All right.
Minutes of the July 15th meeting. Are there any corrections or additions to the minutes? >> I just had a couple clarifications for on page um two under human resources. I'm wondering if
um we should spell out HCSP and PFML on number one and number three >> just because some people might not know what that means. >> Yeah. >> The thing with the thing with those though, they have a resolution with them. >> They do.
>> I mean that's so I mean so to look into them you would go to the resolution. I did look in um right above that under EDA um the building blocks grant. Um, so the motion is second to round one of building. There's no resolution on that. So I think more detail should be given
to that one because it really doesn't, you know, explain. Yeah. Or we come with resolutions for those in and probably a list of um who those grants went to >> with with that in the minutes otherwise would be >> kind of a a mood point. >> Yep.
>> Is there any other >> um gohead? >> Just a couple minor things. Uh I think under on page two of three again under the administrator's report I don't I don't know what >> kudos to sheriff >> yeah I don't think those thing I mean if
you want to get into the details of those otherwise it it really >> um the first one is kudos to sheriff department if we're not we need to explain that or we some of these I don't think even need to go in the minutes if they're not I mean I don't think I don't think some of these items >> yeah if we're going to put that in there
we need to know Hawaii. We have kudos to share. >> Yeah, because there was some event that they did very well on anything. But >> um so let me think. I think that was >> Yeah, that's the only one I had. Does anybody else have any additions or corrections to the minutes? All right,
I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes. >> So moved. >> Motion by Barry. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Erica. Any further discussion? Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I. All right. Motion carries. >> All right. consent agenda. >> Do we have any items that anybody would
wish to pull out of the consent agenda? >> Mr. Chair. Yep. >> I don't have any items, but I I think it's noteworthy on the acceptance of the Dun Locks grant. We'll try to control I mean, it's nice to know that we're trying to control that buckthorn out there and and we got a grant for what was it 21,000? I think >> 21 and then so
>> we have we're having we're going to do inind >> service 3500 >> 35 30. Yeah, right around there. With that said, I would like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Second. >> So, we have a motion by Barry, second by Phil. Do we have any more discussion? >> Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I.
>> I. Right. Motion carries. >> All right. Commissioner's open forum. >> You're ahead of schedule. This might be the last time you're ahead of schedule. >> Um I I would like to No, go ahead. Yeah, bring it up. Sorry, Nate. I didn't mean to interrupt to stop you cold in your tracks, but thank you. So, um, if
there's anybody that's listed on here that's signed up for open form that would like to talk to the, uh, the mining project during planning and zoning, you can defer your time. You can defer to them. So, I'll call your name and you can just tell me and because we're going to give you public comment
time during that. So, anyway, so we'll start out here and I'm assuming most of you are probably that way. If I don't say your name right, I'm very sorry because I'm not good. Richard and I can you can help me on your >> Yeah, Richard can take that. >> All right. So, uh Brent Keane.
>> Yep. You're gonna talk to Tiff. You're gonna talk about Tiff. >> Yeah. >> Let's do that. Okay. All right. Perfect. Um Nate Hunter. Same thing. Okay. That's what I thought. Um Jim Coleman.
>> Okay. And you're in and K2. Okay. Thank you. And then Oh, boy. Lauren Kirsting. Did I say that right? >> Okay. All right. All right. So, we don't have anybody else listed. Is there anybody else that
wanted to speak during the open form? Another issue. Okay. So, we'll move on to reports and correspondence. >> I'll go. um had the watershed meeting on the 16th. Uh
>> Pelican >> Pel River wershed. Yep. Pelican River wershed meeting on the 16th. Uh we're still working on anou uh with their attorney. Um took on a snap zoom. I think Carrie was on there too. Um about the we were
talking about the the state shifting costs to the county. Well, SNAP is kind of a federal program shifting from federal to state. So, it all kind of trickles down, but we're we're the end. So, um but I had a question for you, little trivia question. How many
consumers of SNAP uh food assistance do we have in Minnesota? >> Want to take a guess? >> I used to know this because I went I attended a training the same couple. >> 53 531 >> 56,000 >> 440,000 in Minnesota.
>> Oh, I meant 531,000. Sorry. >> We got 6 and a half million people here. So that's and that one's starting until 2028. So there is some lead time on that. Had highway. We're going to talk about this reclamite project that's in our minutes. We'll get to that. Um do
some radar signs. That's actually in here too at two inlets. Um and one thing we did just start talking about is uh possibly uh paving 230th. So this is out by Forest Hills. I guess this has brought been brought up before. Um it's
a township road right now. Uh it's on the >> it's actually four townships. >> Four townships. Yep. It's on the the east side of Forest Hills and it goes down to county six where the gravel permit per uh pit is strata. Um that road just gets beat up. I was on
township our township and another Ununice Lake View Ununice had the south half mile and then Detroit and Ottoon have the north two and a half miles and uh they were talking about maybe trading roads or doing something. So it's just in the works. so preliminary that we
don't but we're going to we're going to keep talking about it and see if we can come up with a plan uh with that road. >> So the it would be the intention that the county would or the townships would. >> It's it's four townships that own the road right now and they they were talking about maybe trading out the road
for another county uh the county would take over that road or >> other county roads at the township that fit into there. It's mostly in Ottaban Township which is Rich Richard in Detroit >> and um >> yeah I've talked to those guys about it down there too. >> So when we when airport road closed
>> correct >> this this was in the discussion then that this road will get more traffic and >> it does >> um it might be something that the county can assist with. Well, after discussion with township and there's a road that the county has that's more of an a that more or less closer to a township road,
less traffic and um the you know, so it's it's discussions that I think are taking place now that should be and I think the timing of it is when there's a this road could qualify a township can make applications to the there's a grant
>> local road improvement program >> that they can qualify for and it would if they can get and this is a high this would be a highly sought after. I mean, this project would rate pretty high. So, I think township. Yeah. So, I think >> there's four of them involved. So, >> I think and it's a main throughway. So, I think if if when the timing comes when
they get that done and then we can then that would be a good time to um move forward. But I I think that's I think it's reasonable that if you drive that road ever. I mean, I don't drive it cuz it's so pounded so hard, >> so rough. >> Um >> it's and that's Yeah. And and there it
would people would use it a lot more if it was asphalt. >> I would use it. I mean >> I would use it too because when this town is busy in the summertime, >> you don't cut across. >> It is it's a good way to get around stuff. So >> So it also goes into with DOT. So there's two intersections right there
coming on to Highway 10. So maybe we were talking about talking with Shiloh and see if they could make that down to one intersection. All this is preliminary >> better line and >> correct le it'd be safer. So preliminary just in the works. So we had that. Want to make you aware of that.
>> It's already been in the works for okay >> five six years. So >> all right. Um uh Prairie Lakes our incinerator uh little increase about it's going to be about $88,000 increase to Becker County. Just things are going up. Does anybody know what the budget is for Prairie Lakes? You want to guess?
Prairie Lakes. What's the annual budget? 33 employees. They got a murf there and an incinerator. >> What is this? Quiz button. Come on. >> So, >> can we can we can we fail this? >> 9.9 million. >> About 9 and a half 10 million.
>> N I'd say about 9.985 million they operate on over there. It's a little increase. We're going to have to we're working on that through our budgets here at Becker County. It's five counties. Our share is 88,000 going out. Um took a trip down to uh Brainer Crowing County.
Uh looked at some solid waste facilities down there just to see if there's something we can do better. uh also looked at their parks um and maybe we can get those guys to start sending their mattresses up here for recycling which is a good thing. Uh they were sending them to uh Duth and at twice the
cost. Um planning and zoning uh we're going to talk about some of that here. We're going to talk about both things here. So go through that. Uh environmental um regional demo landfill. Uh Stantech is the uh engineer on that. Um it's district four which are 11
counties. Uh we have nine people on the committee. They've asked me to be on the committee and I have accepted. So I'm going to be on that that committee just to see what's what's happening with that. Um uh we talk about that or organics roll out is here in August. Um so we should
be getting going with that. And then the the big thing out at the murf um recycling the is it 5F or F5? uh we're trying to make some headway with that which F5 which may be uh some possibilities there to match up with our
IQ and uh program. So that's what I got. >> All right. Who'd like to go next? >> I can go next. Uh had a couple meetings. I had our EDA meeting um with Richard. One thing we were recently informed um by MMC CDC that we uh are actually
required to do them every year or not every year, we're just required to do them um on any of our lead inspection on any of our house public housing um >> homes that are older than 1978 and we have 13 houses of them. Um
according to MMCDC, it has always been a requirement, but there's an exception. there's been an exception if you send out an RFP and no one responds or if the quote um for the RFP comes back greater than 50,000. So this year two agencies
responded and provided quot,000 and one came in at 49,745 >> but they knew that number. >> So um >> all 13 >> to do all 13. Yep. So MMCDC is looking into this further. We no action was
taking taken on um moving forward with it, but it's something that we need to look into and possibly budget for 2026. >> What are they inspect? >> They're looking for lead paint. >> Mhm. >> But I think what what is member Erica the cure for it is to paint over it. Is
that what So why can't we just go paint over them? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I don't know. I mean, so I don't it it >> it didn't make any sense to me other than it's a to me shocked by it. >> I think if you paint all the all the interiors of the 13 houses be less and
they'd have all new paint. >> That's what it would be less. >> Let's just assume it's all lead and paint them. >> That's what I think it would be less than. >> Yeah. But >> so so anyways, more to come on that. Um we are also have the RFP bid opening for the Maple Avenue Apartments will be on a
uh August 15th. Um, and we're still hopeful that that project will be finished yet this year. That's the project where we're putting on the new siding, new doors, new windows, and the decks. >> Yep. The deck can't believe past code
years ago. >> Yeah. Uh, couple housing updates. We have 25 people on the waiting list for public housing. We are currently have 57 people with housing v vouchers with one actively has a voucher actively looking
for housing and then 148 applicants on the waiting list for the housing voucher. Uh we are meeting our housing committee will be meeting this month and hopefully bringing a recommendation on the MMCDC housing contract to the august EDA meeting as we are working on our
budget and need to decide on the levy for the EDA. So then that would come here um likely in September. Uh also had West Central Regional Juvenile Center. We got the cost for 2026 for the secure beds and that the
cost for Becker County this year is 353,571. I believe that is slightly down from last year, right? Yep. So it's slightly down from last year. And this is based off of a two-year look back period. If we would have had our meeting right after it, I could have explained it much
better. But it goes it goes off of your use of the um facility two years ago and what the current expenses are and then you get a credit for that and there's this formula that they figure it out. But um so for Becker
County it will be 353 571. Uh we also set the new non-member rate. So, if you are not a member of West Central, the rate is now $450 per day, which is up from 375. And then just one other
um update for the board. I did have a conversation with Nick Banks yesterday and he's hoping to come to our next board meeting to give us an update on um Toad Mountain, which is likely going to be purchased by the DNR. Um so, they he
just wants to come in. Um I think we have we have to approve of it because of the the funding and it then becoming a um DNR property. So I am going to the town the tot lake town board meeting on Monday just to inform them. I have let
them know that I do support it and it's really not I I'm not coming to ask for permission. I'm just coming to provide information. So >> So that would be for the entire property even though down by the lake. >> Nope. the the lake portion is not included where the cabins are, but the
bay part is. So part of the lake >> that little skinny point they would still have access from to >> walk in walk in. >> Yeah, they there is no intention for public access. >> Yep. So more information to come hopefully uh at our next board meeting,
>> Mr. Chair. Yep. >> Um had a couple Lakeland mental health meetings. the one of the um one of the kind of the highlights I got it's there's a new program that that um they're doing. It's accelerated
resolution therapy. It's a it's a new it's kind of a new way to look at how to resolve like um PTSDs or some traumatic event in your life that you have trouble with. Um I'm not going to explain it very well, but >> this is like rapid eye movement. Yes,
it's it deals with rapid eye movement and so the individual will come in, they don't talk about their problem, I mean the incident or whatever, but they walk them through it. The the therapist does. I mean, it's obviously much more complicated than I'm talking, but um
they walk them through this and they they revisit it and they visualize it as it happened. Now they said, "Now revisit now do it how you wish it would have happened." you know how how can you how can you make this outcome what you would have wanted and and again um it has to
do with they watch the the eye movement they don't they're not talking about the event to the person but they are walking them through the stress and and I guess it's having some remarkable success with with some you know with some a lot of people and this the really neat thing
about this too is that this can h this can be effective in as little as one to two meetings it's I mean it's not an ongoing thing So, I strongly suggest if someone has a traumatic event that they have issues with that they they maybe try this this therapy. >> Is this coming to DL you said?
>> Oh, it's in DL. She's um >> I got her I can't remember her name, but she was the one pushing it and and she thanked Lakeland Mental Health because you know they have ongoing credits that they need and but this this event cost more and they still allowed it and now they had 17 therapists within Lakeland
Metal Health and go get the training for this and I it's something kind it's a little bit different method I think. So it really would >> when I worked in child protection that was a it was a fairly new at that time and a lot of first responders have used it and a lot of
soldiers have you know veterans have used it. >> Um but it it is a great type of therapy for those with PTSD. >> Yeah. >> So it was kind of exciting and and so we we had a meeting up in Detroit Lakes and then we had a regular meeting and um
we're we're they're doing financially well so everything's looking very well. The problem in right now is Alexandria. They have a huge huge road construction right in front of the entrance. So, a lot of people are having trouble getting there because some days it's, you know, the route of traffic is difficult
because they're doing the whole sewer, water, everything. So, um they're struggling financially within that area. Um but overall, they're still we're still positive. So, it's a um it's a good good year. And their request next year, I just want to um is a 0% increase for any any levy dollars. So, they
recognize the the problems, but they also they also, you know, are are mudding through what their costs increase are going to be for the state's reduction in Medicare. And um so they're they're being hit with it >> and um it's it's a difficult difficult
year. >> Um Dave and I had Sunnyside and I got to tell you, we had some really great news. We got um employee retention credit from back in the co days of $560,000. Oh wow. >> Give or take. Um that did cost us just
under $100,000 to get for the company that that got that for us. But we are Mary I'm sure notices that we are doing very well and we are one of the few small nursing homes that is doing well and not and with this grant we are doing very well.
>> Um one thing Mary um I do want to maybe touch base with you. Um, we do have a loan with the county that's at about it's under 600,000 now, but we and we're paying interest on that, but we also have a reserve that Mary manages of now it's what 2.8.
>> I would maybe ask that we and we don't get any interest off that. So, maybe we can look at taking the interest off our loan because in some cases there might be advantages for nursing to have a loan when there's programs come out. So, I don't know if we want to pay it off, but >> um maybe it's a fair thing to say we
shouldn't pay interest when we have 2.8 8 million here and we have 600. So something we can maybe look at. >> Um anything else on Sunny side? >> So just one thing I I noticed. Well the the the employee the workforce board is
going is raised has raised up wages for all uh nursing home and >> that's a requirement from the state. >> From the state. Yes. >> If you remember that happened last year. So the that's coming into effect on January of 26. >> Yep. And so our we Sunnyside has done a
great job of increasing the wages to get them pretty close. But it is going to affect us about what they say about 15,000 >> $15,000 increase which um it'll increase the CNA's starting wage from 19 to 22 and then another individual from 2350 to 27. Another group 23
>> when I worked CNA I made $450. >> That's that's what I meant. I've been saying like CNA is now 2250. That's actually a >> a fair wage >> fair for starting. So um yeah um again Sunnyside's looking very
well there. Uh we did discuss the future of AI even in the nursing home and some of the coding and stuff. So >> um >> um also had sheriff's committee I we went over budgets I think except the disposal of the tires I think everything's on the agenda. Y
>> we have tires taken off from and they were they weren't adequate tires for sheriff's vehicles. So we have many sets of those tires. We are selling those. Um I thought we should try out and we approved this before. So it's not but uh they still haven't done it. So we are looking at
selling some lo on a local auction site because you know people can you you know tires are expensive. So if someone can get advantage of a good used set um I mean near. They're considered used but they're actually brand new tires. They're not they've never been used. They never been I mean they've never
been driven on. Well, maybe a few >> very low, >> very under under 50 miles probably. >> So, why can't we use them? >> Um, curiosity. They're like street tires and they need, >> you know, when you get a new car, the tires on it are usually for high, you know, >> for mileage performance.
>> So, they're usually a very hard no traction. So, >> Mr. Chair, Commissioner Nelson, why are we buying squads that don't have the right tires on them? >> We're getting them off the lot. A lot of them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> They're not specially made. Aren't the police cars specially made? They're not. >> We haven't. Yeah. And we we couldn't
even even hardly get them before. So, >> no, we buy the the vehicles and then they're equipped with all the equip. We paid >> to send them to a >> We pay a company. >> But these vehicles are just regular off the lot vehicles. >> Well, they're I think they're highway highway or sheriff's vehicles, but they're you know, usually you don't get
a good tire. That's I mean, you can get a They'd be fine if you're all cities, but if you start going in country gravel roads and >> gravel roads and private >> Yeah. Todd, please explain them. >> Yeah, there you go. They're not standard vehicle. They are the tires that come with them. They're
not suitable for some of the train >> for rural Minnesota. More city. >> Thanks for clarifying that, Sheriff. >> Thanks, Todd. >> Um, and we had courthouse. I think courthouse everything was >> uh yeah, the only thing that wasn't on
there was the uh it the on call. Judy gave us an update on the count the Clearwater County and the >> VPN. >> Yeah. She gave us an update on how many calls they have and what and stuff like that. So
>> additionally than what was brought to >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Well, no, she she talked about how and and and the funding for them. We we do it as a service to for the wider nation and for Clear Water. the committee decid thought that it would be
in the best interest for us just to us to keep doing that for those counties >> doing a service >> because we want we want to be the server. >> We want to be the host and we want to have our own server and yeah >> Mr. Chair would would those people
receiving benefits be considered helping out with the cost >> of the UN call? >> Yes. >> There was a discussion we didn't come to a real solid conclusion. It was >> it was would be It would be I wouldn't say
I think we figured it would be just a few thousand dollars and then you split that and is it is it >> is it >> is it worth time to to ask for that type of money? I mean and I don't think we deemed that would be >> we we kind of deemed it >> if it would have been a higher dollar amount it would be something we'd look at.
>> I think that the White Earth Nation had three calls and the Clear Water had two. >> So our recommendation was not to >> not to pursue. >> Mr. How how much was the total cost on that? >> 20 >> 26,000 and change. >> I mean, we we want to be theo we want to
be the host. I mean, we don't want to >> So, >> okay. >> Do you do you have anything else? >> No. >> All right. Richard, did you >> No, I had environmental with Phil and county, the highway with Phil and then
EDA with Erica. I don't have anything to add any one of them. So, >> I'll be I'll be quick. I had a couple. Um, we had the West Central Economic Development District Board, which is the West Central Initiative plus the EDDD combined together to make that big
acronym. Um, basically we there's a there's a several things we discussed because we only meet quarterly, but just two things. Um, they so they're just like a lot of other government agencies, sub counties, their budget goes from July 1st to January 30th the following
year. Um so they uh they actually in that period of time had 34 they what what West Central Initiative does is it it loans money for economic development to our region and our region basically is is uh
>> I think there's 11 >> district four pretty much of our AMC district basically and so they had 34 loan applications and 24 approved and they also uh tried to spend they they their goal is to spend at least 82% of
the money they have in their pool to loan out every year. Um, and then we did have a resolution for a revolving loan fund which basically is when people pay loans back then that money goes back to the West Central initiative and then they have it in a pool and we have to
have a resolution every year to allow West Central to loan that money back out. So that's kind of how it works. And then they then they had the two two act two people from the University of Minnesota um u come in and talk about actually the the West Central Initiative has a
partnership with the University of Minnesota. It's a climate adaptation partnership >> and they talked about you know we we all know that we are having more severe weather than we have had you know just just as as an example. Um, and then one
of the things is does your they asked us does your county have a hazardous mitigation planning and do you have funding for hazardous mitigation? >> Ask our safety committee. >> Yeah, I don't Yeah, >> we don't have any funding. >> So, and that's just one thing. And then I have a quiz since Mr. Since
Commissioner Nelson had a quiz. I have one too. I haven't had all my coffee. >> So, since 1885 in our region or in Minnesota actually, how much has the >> how much has the uh uh temperature raised since 1885 in Minnesota? What percentage? >> What percentage? >> Yeah.
>> How many degrees? >> No. Well, >> 85%. >> No. >> 12. >> Just picked out a number. >> 3.2%. >> Oh, well, that's nothing. Just kidding. >> They they said the climate people said
that's a huge amount. Okay. I 35% we'd be boiling in a pot. >> Well, don't ask questions if you don't want. >> Yeah, that's true. >> So, then I had a DAC meeting and originally back a few months ago, Tina
uh Senator Tina Smith was planning a walk through through the DAC to just check out the facility and see the see how things are operated and and so forth. and and it was cancelled because of the you know obviously the assassinations that happened in in in the cities. So then just a few a few
weeks ago um she had two of her staff members come through and check out the DAC and it was very positive. They wanted to see the programming. They wanted to see the need for funding from DHS to and why why it's necessary that we have facilities like this. So it was
a great great uh great thing for the promotion of our DAC toward actually cuz Mo the vast majority of the funding for the DAC comes from uh Department of Human Ser or human services in the state. So that was that was helpful. And
then a couple other things um we started uh we're starting to plan for a proposed building expansion. Um we have our first building committee meeting next week. So, we're going to discuss we we already we've met with the the whole board has met with the architect and now we're
going to do kind of more planning on what we want this expansion to look like and so forth. Um the DAC is actually doing pretty well financially. Uh we we our clients are up and so we have more funding coming in
and and we're we're basically doing doing really well. Um I also had a Heartland Trail meeting. Uh it was a very interesting meeting. It was at Lions Park in Freyszy. Um the whole the main purpose of the meeting at the end was to dedicate the trail which which is
at which is a is AC the trail head not trail head but the trail ends across the road from Lions Park and we had a ribbon cutting ceremony and the TB was there and so we but that was the main thing but we also talked about um the trail
study routes from Dun Locks to Bucks Mills the partnership for health. remember we we they're going to pay for the majority of it. We I think decided to put some money in the city has and so so the Lake Township. So that's that's going to happen. There also is still
that roughly $500 $500,000 funding remaining from the 200 >> three grant 23 grant >> 23 was it 20 or 20? Was it 20 grant? Yeah. And that has to be used by
December 31st of 27. And it cannot be used for any new studies or new construction. It has to be Jim, correct me if I'm completely wrong. It has to be used for uh current um places on on the trail from Frzy to Detroit Lakes. It can
be used like for stuff inside of Frzy going through Frezy or going through Detroit Lakes. But it h but so we're going to meet this this fall as a committee and kind of come up with a plan of how we want to use that money. Is that did I say is that Oh, we can do it but on but it has to be
on that section of the trail, right? >> Well, if it's >> within Becker County with Okay, it's within Becker County. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I'm Okay, that makes sense now. >> Um and then uh it was just really nice to meet all of the people that you see
online or or don't have a face online and meet him in person because they all showed up. So, that was pretty interesting. Um, one one thing I have a individual that contacted me that would like to help on that or anything they could do to help that trail from um, Dun Locks to
Bucks Mills. They were really excited about that. So, um, >> awesome. >> Keep me in the loop and I'll pass that info on. >> Um, I do have a question for Jim Binky's here. Um, I saw that the city of Ottoman had a meeting on the in the intersection on Highway 10. Were you involved in that?
>> Yes. Um I didn't I wasn't aware of it but uh could you was what was the discussion on the was that stop lightss at highway 10 they're just starting a study to look at access management stoplight brought up other options they're looking
at also partnership for help with the city we're looking at new intersection sidewalk. >> Yeah, I I would if you appreciate if you could u include me on any meetings in Ottoman. >> Okay.
>> Okay. And then and then I also had a historical society meeting. Um we are pretty close to planning the event for October 11th at the pavilion which is the last of currently is planned to be the last official event in the pavilion before
it's before the new one is constructed. Um so basically they're going to have we're going to have uh in the morning it's going to be there's going to be bingo in the morning. There's going to be a poker band and there's going to be some some sing single or some acoustic
acts. Yeah, it's it's And then there's going to We tried to get Robbie V to come, but he had another engagement. He wanted to come, but but uh cuz that would because his his parents when they were 15 met at the pavilion, so I hope anybody knew that. >> I don't even know who Robbie V is.
>> Uh yeah, he's he's Bobby V's son. You don't know Bobby V? Okay, that's fine. Should I >> a singer? >> No, he's a singer. He actually >> I know poker music, >> but I don't know. >> And then and then they're going to cap off the night with uh 30 32 below
playing at the pavilion. So, it should be a good plan. We're we have a we have another historical society meeting after at this afternoon or tonight. Uh and we're going to probably approve this plan. So, then the last thing I had is the Becker County Fair was put on
>> Oh, yeah. >> Uh was it two weeks ago now? Where's it last week? >> That was >> two weeks ago and it was it went really well. Um I'm sure we'll get a a report eventually from the fair board members of how how the fair went. Um the rodeo
was Wednesday and Thursday. I it it it was it's a great event. It wasn't uh it's not a hugely attended event, but it was good. Um the derby derbies were good. the all the, you know, auctions and the shows and everything. And >> I did attend I did attend the the
auction and there was well over $100,000 raised again for >> our Becker County youth. So kudos to all of the community members that came. It's always I'm I did not start attending those livestock auctions until I became a commissioner. So this is my third one
and I'm always in awe every year at the money that is spent on them youth. So I think it's a great investment to our youth in the >> agriculture. >> It was it was another record year of say or >> I want to say I heard 130,000 but >> I don't know the number. >> Don't quote me on that because I might
be wrong. >> Um as well as as well as the fair went I I want to express our prayers for the recovery of the individual in the fire. I don't have not heard how how he's doing, but um um anytime you have burns involved, it's a it's a scary thing. So just just for the family and the
individual um know that we're praying for you and and your recovery. So >> yep. And then we also serve pie and ice cream to the seniors. So that went really well. >> And I was going to say something about qualifying, but I found out that I qualified too at 55. >> You you qualify for a senior.
>> Yes. I I gave >> You guys are old. >> That's good. That's we we know who Robbie V is too. >> I know. >> All right. Does anybody else have anything else for reports and correspondence? All right, let's move to appointments.
So, let's start out with Mr. Cowwell. >> Is he hiding? >> Yeah, we get [Music] you get to put up with me here. So, You're going to we're going to do your oath office or your repeat after me.
>> I had to do this is only the second time I've done this so I'll probably screw it up. So So please raise your right hand. Um I Jason Cowwell do solemnly swear >> I Jason Cowell do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution
of the State of Minnesota. >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the State of Minnesota. and that I will faithfully and impartially execute >> that I will faithfully and impartially execute >> and discharge the duties of the assistant county veteran service
officer. >> and discharge the duties of the assistant county veteran service officer >> in the county of Becker, state of Minnesota. >> in the county of Becker, state of Minnesota. >> According to the law and to the best of of my judgment and ability. >> According to the law and the best of my judgment and ability.
>> So help me God. >> So help me God. >> Congratulations. Thank you, sir. Glad to have you here. [Applause] >> Oh, I'm sorry. I should have had Would you just introduce yourself and
say who you are and what you've done? >> Sure. Thanks. You bet. >> Want to sit down? Sure. [Music] >> Good morning. Thank you for having me here this morning. My name is Jason Cowwell.
I uh lifelong member of Becker County or resident of Becker County. I was born in Detroit Lakes here just up the road. Uh went to DL High School, joined the service after that. I spent 29 years with the Air National Guard in Fargo with seven deployments
uh most of them overseas. Um applied and was accepted for this position. Um I'm very very excited about working with the veterans. Um, for years my father Dave Cowwell ran the VFW. He ran the veterans organization for the
Avenue of Flags. So, they've always been a part of my life and I really really look forward to uh moving that into a career. But, uh, do you have any questions for me? >> No, just welcome. >> Yeah, welcome and thank you for choosing Becker County. I >> love this county.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Yeah, I do. You want it? I just put it in that fold. >> Yeah. >> All right. Do we have any other appointments? >> All right. Let's move on to our county
administrator. >> Um, do you do you want me to go or >> um >> We talked about >> was what time was Kelsey >> that we have we have Keen and >> Yeah. However you want to do. Let's just go right to to the the tip to the resolution.
>> So, yes. So, we're going to we're going to you guys would you guys like to come up and please and then just state your names. >> Nate Hunter. >> Uh Brent Keane >> and then Yeah. So, we're talking about the TIFF the
project 44. So, go ahead. >> Um yes. Um uh Highland Lake View Apartments is what we're looking at getting a tiff for. It's a 36 unit apartment building uh looking located located um just above the kind of the Holiday End on Highland Drive. Um just
uh um with the housing study that came out here was that last fall. >> Last fall. Um we were following through with some of the recommendations that the housing study came up with. And as you guys are aware, you know, the cost
of housing is extremely expensive and just trying to make sense um of the um cash flow of the building and everything. Um so just kind of you know costs of construction, you know, in some cases have tripled and doubled. So, um
the we applied for a workforce housing uh tiff um that puts us uh in front of all three uh uh districts or uh uh the city um Becker County and um >> school >> the school board. So, we all have to get approval through you guys uh to move
forward with that tiff. So, it's it's a nine-year tiff. um it's mandated by the um the state and um but it has to have all three approvals and plus it has to fall into a 1% um vacancy rate within a 15 mile radius of of Detroit Lakes.
>> How many units? >> 36 units. >> 36. Does anybody have any questions for Nate or >> I'll move to approve resolution 8251 D. >> So we have a motion by Phil. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Richard. Do we have any more
discussion? >> Well, Mr. Chair, I'm I mean I think it's a big deal when you do the the tiff programs and for what um with with the housing shortages. This is you know it's a the apartments and you know better
better to in my opinion if it was homes but um the housing shortage is significant. >> Um so I I don't we shouldn't take this lightly. I think this is a program where we can move forward on but this isn't something that we just traditionally have just easily done but this is a I I
think this is a reasonable and and um good way good especially in this day and age in today's world right now um this is a good program to enhance this attractiveness for the developers for it so >> and I think studies have showed too that younger kids want apartments like they
don't want to own homes so I think I so I Apartments do make sense for this area. >> Well, we're quite short of housing. I can't remember what the numbers were. >> Yeah. >> And we look every every month we look at ways to do housing and
>> it boils down to the cost and and investors and we're short of them. So, >> Mr. Chair, Commissioner Nelson, you said not to take this lightly. What What did you mean by that? I mean, we need housing. Everybody said that. What? >> Well, I mean that it's a reduction of taxes. So, it's a shift and I mean we
get abatements or I mean it >> it's it just you don't do this lightly. I think this is a good reason, good cause, but >> we don't everyone that comes through here isn't going to get approval of a a tiff or um I mean there's been businesses that have asked them before
and I've been opposed to them and I mean I mean this is years and years. We don't get a lot of them and this is the reason why because it is it is a in my opinion it should be a high threshold to get this. >> Mr. Chair, one thing I think is very important that you don't run these out
25 years. uh this is a nine-year correct tiff as I understand it. Um I think that's reasonable. We need the housing and you know to give up that T. I mean it's not if they don't go through with it. We don't have the housing anyway and it's only generating in the tax that it
does right now going forward. So yeah, but I I agree. Don't take it lightly. To me it comes down to how long it's going to be a lot of times. But >> Nate had something to >> You covered it. Thank you. >> So do we have any more discussion? I see Larry's here, but Larry, if if you speak, we have a
>> happy to answer them. I agree with Bill. What you're really doing here is you're not giving up taxes. You're ensuring that there will be a tax base increase in >> Yep. >> It's got the green light to go so far, Larry. So maybe uh maybe not not not
anymore. >> Don't jinx it here. >> I changed my mind. No, this is very good project. >> So, so we have a motion and a second. Do we have any further discussion? >> Have you gone and I'm assuming the city
have you gone in front of the city or the school board yet? >> We go in front of the school board tomorrow night at their special meeting and then we go to the development authority on Thursday morning and then we're at the city council meeting next week. >> Okay. >> On the 12th, I believe. >> Okay.
>> So, yeah. So if we everything is approved, we would break ground this month yet. >> Okay. >> Oh, nice. >> Cool. That's awesome. Yeah. >> All right. Any more discussion? >> Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. All right. Motion carries. >> Best of luck. >> Yeah. Good luck to you guys. Thanks. Thank you.
>> All right. Carrie two minutes. >> So So yes, go ahead, Carrie. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Um just a few updates for the board. Um we are working diligently on departmental budgets.
Those were uh due by the departments. I believe it's today. Um majority of the departments have gotten preliminary budgets to us. So we were plugging numbers in and seeing where we will end up. And as you all know, we have a work
session next Monday at 8. And uh my hope would be that we will have some um numbers for levy kind of where we are standing at that point. And so one of the main focuses on the budgeting cycle as you all know we had special general account um we had several items that
were coming out of there that weren't budgeted within departments. We've went through there um several of us to make sure that we have all of those items budgeted for within the appropriate departments. >> Mr. And to that um if you look if you
looked at our budget to for today you saw that the one of the recorders funds is in a negative. So we've been paying other fees out of that recorder fund. Um that that gets you know that's paid for by uh documented register or recording fees. So we're going to have to shift
that over into the general those some of those expenses over into the general levy because that's at a negative and we can't I mean no negative spend. Um, so that's going to be a cost moving forward also. Just >> Yes, >> that's just one of that's just one of the things that we've been and we knew
that that we were going to end up negative deficit spending on that eventually. So now unfortunately now is it's come to fruition that we will now have to shift that over into >> Yep. Um so with with the um the the watershed
building um that has been signed off on and the the check went out. >> Did you vote for that? I can't remember. >> I did not vote for that. >> Do we want to bring it back up and chat about it some more? >> So that that that is moving forward. Um
we did have uh we did utilize our safer assure uh the company that we contract for with for our safety training. They did do a walkthrough of our facilities last week. So we just got the written reports. I believe it was within the last day or so. So we're going through those to make sure that we can make any
adjustments and that's just really for our own benefit to see, you know, they are very helpful. they go through and and give a lot of suggestions about modifications or um changes that we should be looking at or things that they've seen as they did their their walkthrough of the building. So, that is
in process. Um the benefits committee did meet and I don't believe either of the commissioners maybe made it. So, I'll give a quick update on that. Um the RFP is out. We are um requesting bids for um medical insurance because we're
expecting a significant hike in our premiums for county employees for insurance. We haven't gotten final numbers, but we just want to ensure that we are getting, you know, the best price for our employees and for the county for insurance.
Um let's see here. I did take a uh the opportunity. Um I met with the food pantry and uh I asked if I could go over there because I wanted to see the facility. I'd never been through. It's quite the operation. I don't know if we've all >> and they are seeing a significant and he's going to probably come back here in
September and give some additional stats to the board. Um, but we talked about his request uh for appropriation. And he just spoke to uh the uptick in the the families that they're serving and um seeing more uh homeless population here
in in this location. >> Yeah. Just just a quick note on that facility. I I'm going to use Sandy Gunderson's words. She's in the ground. Um, if I don't know if any of you ever went into the old uh uh food shelter, but it was not the
new one is amazing. It's bright. It's it's it is grocery shopping. >> Everything is lighted up and and in words, you know, Sandy said it makes the people that come in feel appreciated and important and wanted. So that's huge for
Becker County. >> Yeah. And you know, one of the reasons why we it is the way it is is because of the SNAPED program, which >> is unfortunate that that has now been eliminated, but that that is their model that they they can't come to food shelves and >> try to implement and Becker County did a
fantastic job doing it. So, >> yep. >> So, the other just um interesting, I think, tidbit, a takeaway for me from there was that um Dale did speak to the size of the families that are coming in. um big big families um
multi-generational families and that's probably we talked about our housing uh situation here and the and the lack of affordable housing. So what they're seeing is you know um extended family living all in one unit. So big families coming through the the food pantry as
well. Um there is a meeting on um at the department of corrections probation I'll be going to it's a kickoff for the F5 program that's coming in mentorship and so um with that there's also some discussions that I am having with
environmental services better futures and I have a meeting I believe with uh two of the three judges here really what we're trying to do is staff the better futures um that recite that mattress recycling program and their mission really is to give second chances to um
uh individuals coming out of jails and prisons. Um so we are working uh closely with uh Department of Corrections and they're referring people. So we're hoping that we'll have see an uptick in our staffing there. also really looking at um with the loss of funding for our STS crew and some of those what can be
done with that new program that uh pre-release early release of those individuals waiting uh for their uh finalization of their court uh court appearances and charges and whether or not um some of the um those individuals
perhaps could be utilized as well. So that's been an ongoing u process. Um, going back to I know I referenced the um the work session on Monday and perhaps this um the board I I don't believe that's a pdeium meeting. So that might
be something that you want to um decide. >> It's a and I think I mentioned this was it to Piggy that we should probably get a list of all of our meetings and to especially for you know you guys are fairly new what the practice is if it's a pium or a mileage only. Mhm.
>> So, maybe we can get that list going. And >> yeah, I looked for a list and uh the chair believed that there was a list at one point. I couldn't find one, but I'm still uh >> There should have been a list from January. >> Yeah, it should be in the January packet. >> Yeah. So, I got to go back. I found the
resolution, but I didn't find the list. So, >> Mr. Chair, did we did we decide on 8 I know you had asked about a 8 o'clock meeting versus 8:30. Do we decide on a time 8 o'clock? >> 8 o'clock. We're going to start earlier. Yes. Is is there any do we want to make
it a is I mean is it a pdeium meeting or do if it isn't do we want to do we want to worry about it later it's I mean I think you have to make just make the decision one way or the other.
>> Okay. So do do I entertain a motion to >> I mean what constitutes a PDA meeting or maybe we we start there. >> Well >> I mean that that I've never understood that. I know which ones, >> you know, my committee meetings, >> the standing committee meetings are >> that's what I do. So I don't know like
what what is the definition >> in the past I mean if you're not on a committee the you don't get a pretty I mean you go if you want to attend um a watershed meeting then you're not on you if you want to attend the township
meetings are not pa meetings so you have a constituents they're not pa meetings. Yes. Um, board of adjustments in the past has not been a PDM meeting. It's been mileage only. Our board meetings are not PID meetings. So, >> um, >> I think you call you ask someone to go attend meetings and you that's
>> that's a pdeium meeting. That maybe the line. So, >> and board of adjustments isn't. >> No. And then the the other meetings that have been PDM meetings like when we worked on the comp plan as a board that was that was a PDM. >> That was a PDM. >> And then when we do our road tour as a board, that's PDM. I
>> it has not been a it it's been back and forth. So >> it's been back and forth. >> Not consistent. >> I think you maybe you ask for maybe you just drop a rough policy and we >> go from there >> and go ahead >> and then we can address it at our next meeting. >> Sure. Okay. >> Perfect. >> Yep. I
>> Mr. Chair, um Carrie, so my first time going through this budget, what what are the what what is the expectations on on Monday? What do we need? Do we bring our departments we're on? Do we bring that information? Those budgets. We're going to go through all those budgets or what exactly are we? >> The highlight for the work session and
there was an agenda that Peggy was putting together is really the bigger departments um budgets. That was the request of the chair. >> So, we're all all going to look at the budgets, >> the bigger departments and then we'll give I'll give a summary of the smaller departments because most of that is wages. And my hope would be that we'll
have some discussions about the where the levy's going to land, what the appropriations are that are being requested and what that all looks like in the big picture, as well as starting some conversation about some planning for capital improvement. >> I would also like to make sure we
discuss the the appropriations to other agencies. That's what you on that's on the radar. Yes. >> Okay. And they've all got the requests in also. >> I think we have most of them. I think we're missing one or two. Yes. >> If we don't receive them, I'm assuming
it's a zero. >> Okay. >> Mr. Chair, uh, one other thing, Carrie, um, I I in my subcommittees where we've been talking about this this new paid family leave thing. We're creating a line item for that. Is are other departments doing that so we know exactly what that is? That line item.
>> We do. We do have the amount for that. And if you recall, we went out for uh, a bid process for that. We were able to get a better rate than the state rate, >> right? 94,000. But I'm talking about all those >> in in all of the subcommittees, they'd have a line item for it. >> There is a line item number. Yes. Yeah.
Right. And the Yeah. The split on there. Okay. So, that has been included as well. >> Thank you. >> Um and I I think that's all I have. >> Okay. Does anybody else have anything for Carrie? All right. Let's move on to
human resources. Tiara, >> good morning, Tiara. >> Good morning. So, I have three items for all of you to review today. The first item is a full-time custodian 2 position. So, this is one of the career letters that was brought forward with
the job descriptions earlier in the year. Um, it was approved as a job description, but now there is an individual that does meet all of the qualifications. This was not budgeted for for 2025. However, maintenance did budget for two
maintenance 2 positions. So, there is enough money left in their budget to cover what the cost difference would be. Um, it's approximately 1,600 increased cost for the remainder of the year for this position and they have a remaining
4,300 left in their budget. Do we have >> approve 1G? >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion, a second. Motion by Barry, second by Erica. Do we have any more discussion? >> All right. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. All right. Motion carries.
>> Okay. The second item is on behalf of the sheriff. Um so this is for a temporary full-time deputy position. We have one deputy who is out on an extended leave. So, um, we are requesting to backfill that on a
temporary basis for a six-month period. Um, by the end of that six-month period, we should understand better, um, if that individual is going to be coming back or not. And there is, of course, a cost upfront to fill this position. However,
we do get reimbursed for the wages of the individual that is out. >> That's why we kind of pushed this back a little bit. Yeah. um because we wanted to make sure that that was reimbursable and then um found out that it was so we're >> fine of moving >> the committee's good
>> Mr. Chair >> through MCIT insurance. >> Yeah. >> Oh okay that was my question. >> Uh no actually through the state >> through parah >> sorry >> hidden insurance >> who pays it? >> Uh the state would be paying it back. So it's the um parah disability program
>> and then >> it would be the state. Uh would would we revisit this again in six months then? Or >> I was just going to ask if we could if the person's not back, we could reassess then. >> Correct. We should have a pretty good grasp on if they would be returning or not at that point and either bringing it
back to extend the temporary position or potentially bring it back to fill it completely. >> If if the if the position if there becomes a position vacant, it would be up the sheriff's discretion then whether he needs to come back or not because it's within budget. then it would be filling that budget budget
>> budget position. >> So if that >> if the position resigned or retired or whatever and he chooses to to fill that full-time, he can without coming back to us because it's replacing a that was the decision
that was made. >> Yep. >> So Mr. Mr. Chair, if I may. Um, so this is a the reason we put a timeline on this so that going into this, the person that takes that position knows that it's a potential position that after 6 months will no longer be so that everybody's
aware of the situation going into this. >> Can I request, Mr. Mr. Chair, can I request that we revisit this in 6 months again or you said >> it will be it will be revisited in 6 months if it's a if it's a >> temporary >> add-on temporary
>> but if the if it has resolved itself it will not come back. >> Okay, that's that's fair. Okay, got it. >> All right, do we have a we have do we have a motion to approve one E? >> So moved. >> All right, we have a motion by Erica. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Richard. Any more discussion?
>> All right. All right. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Motion carries. >> All right, Tiara. Next one. >> So, the last item that I have is a revision to the career ladder policy that has come before you. I think this is now the third time. Um, we
anticipated this coming up. Didn't anticipate it being so soon. So, we do now have an individual that if they do make a move in a career ladder, they would be running up against that that they've already had their anniversary date pass in the year. We have not ran into this yet. So that is where I'm
requesting to put the within the last 6 months. So potentially somebody could go up to the five month almost six month period without getting an additional step. But over 6 months it just feels like that wouldn't be fair for the
employee. and in this one and and the previous ladder, I I think we're catching up to what our I mean, it's unfortunate. We're still catching up to the the our change in our >> So, in the future, these we will not be h seeing these
>> modifications or changes in career ladders, but um right now we are and uh I think it's I think it's appropriate. So, make a motion to approve. >> All right. So, we have a motion to approve the changes to the career policy change to the career lines. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> So, we have a motion by Barry, second by
Erica. Do we have any more discussion? All right. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Thanks, dear. All right. Let's go to Highway Jim. >> What? Yeah, I know. We're moving along. >> I think we have it. >> Yep.
Yeah. >> Good morning, commissioners. Um for your approval today, um Highway's got a few items here. Uh first item is a capital outlay request uh to purchase uh another pair of speed signs.
Um, currently the county has one pair that we kind of move around the county at different locations based off of complaints of speeding and requests and that. Um, we get a a lot of demand for these signs and in the different areas
and some of them are way out in two inlets and others are around the lakes here quite a bit and uh I know Psford is get we get requests from them and so we talked with the sheriff's department and we came up with some money. We would like to get another set so we can kind
of cover more areas and maybe focus on leaving signs in the area for extended period of time to kind of well those speeds and uh with these signs we can monitor when that speeding is occurring or if it's resolved itself with the
speed signs. So um our signs here are for $11,266. Um they've gone up about $1,000 from uh last year when we purchased them, but uh we do have budget our money in our budgets to purchase these signs. So,
we're making that request to you. >> Are these signs going to be mobile? I mean, they're not going to be in one spot the whole time. >> Well, they are still mobile. Uh we are considering, you know, uh certain areas leaving them for more extended periods of times. You know, with the number of crests we get in summer, they kind of
sometimes are only in an area for a short period of time and then things reoccur. So maybe we could have one set that we leave for, you know, maybe half a summer and then move it someplace else where it needs along for half a summer and then we have some other areas we can concentrate, you know, moving around and
hopscotching. But um sometimes it is more effective if you leave that sign permanently until people get adjusted. And >> is there any data that's collected on this? >> And we can collect the data and see if it helps. we can turn the signs off, you know, to see if all of a sudden it
starts reoccurring, you know, and still keep collecting those data. So, it's >> w with the radar >> with the radar and stuff like that. So, um it's a good tool, I think, and with the amount of requests I get, uh I think, >> you know, we'll we'll balance the use of
them. And I know when you look at places like Two Inlets and Pansford, that's quite a stretch to send extra enforcement out all the times. We get those complaints out there and but uh >> Well, I I tell you, you don't speed through Ottoman anymore. I can tell you
that. >> Not because of a speed. >> Yeah. I I tell you what, I I I'm not a I mean, I don't think the county should be putting up these very often. I I they're just expense. I mean, 11,000 for two of them. And um I I I just I just question
the I mean it it gets to a point where we can't have speed signs radar speed signs everywhere. That's >> No, but they are they do they do work and people and so if if we move them around I agree, Barry. We we can't we can't have them everywhere, but we we
should have them. They do work and we if we move them around the >> I know they make me slow down. >> The only thing that works is a ticket. >> Well, no. I mean, I I I I understand where you're coming from, but I I did tell Jim yesterday in finance that I I would for
sure advocate for an additional one because I get calls every very often from the Ponzford area and and if you know where that Ponford area is, there are houses very close to the road. Um and and I think it's gotten better since
we don't have that detour from the Highway 34 construction, but um those that live there say they do help. >> And I they slow me down when I I slow down. >> There's some people that think that's a high score sign though.
>> I I do know that >> in Lake View Town. >> Two inlets. >> I got the data in Lake. Yeah, >> I do know that two inlets is a >> Yeah, >> I've I've gone through there not 30 mph pulling my boat and didn't realize it till I was Yeah, I broke the law. >> Um, >> you broke a lot.
>> I know I know that there's places that help fund these also like in the in the villages or is that is this being helped fund up by >> not there? It's not >> well two inlets is a little bit difficult. I mean, they have a the church there and the grocery store. They
don't have a lot of particip I don't know if the lake association would >> contribute to that. >> Isn't it the township that did it in Corrant? >> Um, correct. Yes, they did. Y >> Mr. Chair, uh, Commissioner Nelson, Lake View Township did this, too. And I
operated the sign. I moved it weekly in our township where people had requested and, um, I did collect all the data. Um, so I would suggest that that we do try to collect the data to see if these things are making a difference, but I kind of agree with Barry. I think they
should be limited. I'm I won't be against this, but um uh we need to have some some data. Uh the sign can be off and still collect the data, I'm sure, or it can be on and and you would be able to judge if the speeds are lowered. My
my findings in six years of moving these signs around every summer didn't lower the speed a bit, but you always got somebody coming through there at 2 a.m. that was seeing for high score. >> Yeah. >> And that's the that's the person the people remember. >> Yeah.
>> No, any photo >> picture, no camera. >> No. >> All right. Do we have a motion? I'll make a motion to approve the I'll >> second >> $1,266 for two signs. >> So, we have a motion by Erica and a
second by Richard. Do we have any more discussion? All right. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. >> All right. Motion carries. >> Uh, next item. Uh, we're requesting uh uh dispose of county property. we would
like to put up for sale uh two of our um pup trailers which we use for hauling aggregates and and that um these are old trailers that are no longer functioning two of them a 1994 trailers. So, um, we sold one of these, I don't know,
maybe five, six years ago, and they they have some attraction to certain people. Some people, you know, who farm might want to use them or >> Do you have serial numbers for those? You might >> uh, probably. >> I think you'll need those to sell them. So, um, I'll make a motion to authorize
the sale of two 1994 Clement Pup trailers with the serial numbers. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion by Barry and a second by Phil. Do we have any more discussion? Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. All right. Motion carries. All right. Jim, >> final item that was uh added as an extra
item is a uh approval of a quote. Um we are, if you recall about a month ago, um asked to go solicit quotes for this reclamate asphalt rejuvenation project that we're using on Highland Drive, Westlake Drive, and Richwood Road. Uh we
received one quote back uh in the amount of 93,84864 um from corrective asphalts materials. Um we're that's right in the range where we thought this is right around a $1.15 a square yard which is very competitive. A
>> dollar what? A >> $1.15 a square yard. >> Yeah. Um, so we're recommending approval. >> Do we entertain a motion for one? I >> I'll make a motion. >> Motion by Richard, second by Barry. Do
we have or second by Phil? Sorry. Sorry, Barry. I insulted you again. >> Didn't Phil. Uh, do we have any further discussion? >> Jim, what what is the difference between this and Seal Coat in in price? You said this is 15. This is very comparable to what we would probably expend on seal
coat. Uh, you know, if we do townships, you know, help them out, we charge about the same rate. >> Normally, seal coat if it was contracted out is more in the range of $2.50 a square yard. So this is uh a good savings and it's been demonstrated to
perform well as we're going to be using it as like an initial application in our areas like the cities and that so we don't have that sand and that >> it's uh one of the um one thing that's good about it uh we don't have to restripe the road um >> stripes
>> the dust that we put over top of it wears off shortly after. And >> is it a sand or a dust you put on it? >> It's it's a limestone. They call it limestone screenings kind of. Yeah, it's finer than it. It's not rock. >> Do you Do you sweep that off then? >> And then it's Yes, we sweep that off and
that's part of the contract as well. >> Okay. Oh, they're doing the sweeping too >> on the roads with curbon gutter. Yeah, I think we'll be doing Richwood Road uh going out west there where we don't have to sweep or have curb gutter. We could sweep it into the shoulder. >> Okay. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a
second. Do we have any more discussion? Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. All right. Motion carries. All right. Thanks, Jim. >> Yep. >> Uh, land land use and environmental services, Mr. School.
[Music] >> Morning, Mr. Chair, board members. >> Uh, we have actually there was three requests today. One was on the consent agenda. Was that approved? >> Yes. >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you. First item is a capital purchase request
to buy a compactor truck. We brought that to the board previously and uh there was some questions on information. We did get some data for those if you want more information on the different units. I do have it here if you're
interested in looking at it. Uh we did reach out to the vendors and there's uh the type of motor that's a packar motor that's in this and that's standard pretty much in these when they put them together. Uh the pricing is
based on state contract pricing for the chassis and then the box is based on sourceful pricing. So it's about as low of a price as you're going to get. Uh we talked about this in the environmental services committee about a rotation to rotate these through every two years and
uh this would be the so if we did this it would be we would have it a rotation established and then in the future we'll get a better ret uh resale price on the old ones and then uh buy one so and we could budget $200,000 a year roughly for
new ones uh moving forward. Any questions? We're not sure about that though, Barry. I'm not sure about if we're going to get trade if these are if we can trade these in every two years. We're not sure if that's going to work, but we are short a
truck right now and and we're starting that organic program, too. So, I I don't know about trading them in every two years, but >> I just I just was going to say that time flies. I mean, I mean, we've been in this recycle business. I mean, the last
How old is the last truck? I mean, the first truck we got till we >> 2010. >> Yeah. 15 years. It's >> Yeah. >> And the backup one is a 2012. And it's >> the back was the second one we purchased. That's it. >> Not that one's not doing so well. >> Yeah. And that's not
>> That's No, I was just Yeah, >> time flies. It just seems like yesterday we bought the bought this truck. So, >> Mr. Chair, I uh I I asked Jonah. I said about those plow trucks because we have our plow trucks in service for about uh 12 years. Um they're on a rotation. They
put on about 18,000 miles annually. Uh they try to get rid of them at about 225,000 miles and or 8,000 hours. Our 2021 I mean that's our usable truck already has 153,000 miles on it. Um they
put on about that's about 38,000 a year and the repairs this year have been about 9100. It's got 7,500 hours on it. I mean, our 2021 is almost to the point where our plow trucks trade off annually, not in miles, but in hours.
Um, our 2023 has 60,000 miles on it, uh, and 4,000 hours already. Um, we're going into organics. I mean, we're going to be running those trucks a lot more. We, at some point, we're not going to have the ability to have a down truck. Um, >> we really, really, really can't have one
down now. Well, our 2012 is getting a transmission putting in it, isn't it? >> There's some work that's being done on it. >> So, that's not the transmission. >> No, it's not a full transmission. There's some issues with it. >> All right. So, do we have >> I'll move to um purchase uh
here. I'll move to purchase this uh a new truck. go forward with purchasing a new truck for >> compact >> compact >> compact truck second >> for 3722. Is that good for both of you? >> Yeah. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a
second. Do we have any more discussion? >> Mr. Chair, um I know I'm not going to I'm going to support this, but the only way we can reduce costs is not produce so much garbage and recycling. I mean, we should package better as a as a
country and not not waste so much. I mean, I think that's the only way. I mean, look at the expense recycling has for us. It's it's not cheap. It's not it's not free. Um, very costly. I'm not saying you don't do it. I'm saying
everyone and I'm just I'm as probably guiltier than most people, but we should just try not to try try not to have so much garbage or try ask industry to package better. And I mean that's that's just my soap box for >> Mr. Chair, Commissioner Nelson, we these
discussions that we have I mean we go to the philosophical high pitcher thing just like you're talking about, >> but we have to implement too. I'm not and and these are some of the C we're trying to do more. We're laying out an organics thing that we're we're trying
we need to get buy in which maybe or maybe not we'll be getting to next year. >> I remember uh former administrator Brian Berg talked to an administrator from another county. He was from India and he asked what what how do they resolve all this? He's like we don't have we don't
have this type of garbage. We we don't we we reuse we I mean it's a totally different lifestyle. So >> Mr. Chair, we we were down in Crowing County and they were just they have a landfill which we don't. We had a
demolition landfill but we don't have a garbage landfill. They had one and you know they it'll be available for another 50 years. Um they were dumping their cardboard and everything in there. I said, "Do you guys have these re recycle stations around the country like we do?" kind of thought everybody did that. They
said, "No, it's too much work. >> It cost too much." >> People throwing their garbage in there cost too much. So, >> this weighing out of cost to the taxpayer versus doing the right thing. I mean, these are things we struggle with in our meetings. Um, >> and I think we are doing the right
thing. Um, for those that you don't know, we are a member of the incinerator in PUM. So, our garbage tipping fees are higher than counties that just fill the Fargo landfill or Crowing, but those are not ava those will not be available in the future. Fargo is already starting to
restrict us on theirs and um so we're lucky that we did get involved in it. Of course, >> this is all paid through by how much it costs for garbage, your tipping fees. This is in general tax dollar. This isn't but it's you pay through it through your garbage and the assessment on your property taxes. So,
>> yeah. So, just so you know. So over there to burn it, to incinerate it costs about $150 a ton. That's going up a little bit more this year. To take it to Fargo or Grand Forest is $65 a ton. It's a lot cheaper. But the question is, is that the right thing to do? >> But then there's transport up there.
>> Well, transportation, those are some of the big costs and higher. It's all very very expensive no matter how you >> The other the other thing with the incinerator, once your garbage is burned to that, I mean, it's it's most regulated industry in the state. There's no the risk is done. >> Yeah,
>> we are liable for eternity for every ton of garbage that we bring to any landfill. We're forever liable. So if they have a major deal in the Fargo landfill, we are still responsible for our percentage of garbage hauled there. So we have that risk. So we're
>> and with an incinerator, we are using our like >> we're reusing some of the >> Mr. Chair. Yeah. So we we got we incinerate. you can reduce what you bring by about 80%. Produces ash. We have a ash recovery facility um out
closer to New York Mills. Um we just got a grant to get a big hoop building to store that ash so we can we're going to use it on two of Becker County roads yes next year. So yeah, I mean but these things all they cost money >> and then they use the steam for >> the steam uh goes to bond guards and
toughies to to power their facilities there. So, >> I've always always um said that if you want to support your local businesses, you can't get m much more local than Bombgard cheese. So, if you're buying cheese and and tffies to >> that benefit us as residents of Becker
County because they're buying our steam to to So, we're >> Anyway. >> All right. Cheese. >> Yeah, it is good cheese. I agree. It is. >> That's where our milk used to go. >> Yeah. >> Make that cheese. >> So, we have a motion and a second. Do we have any more discussion? You can tell when we're ahead of
schedule. Commissioners like to talk. >> Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I. All right. Motion carries. All right, Steve. Next item. >> Uh the second item is Mota power easement that's going across our property uh just to the south of our Solid Waste
campus. Last time we brought that forth and there were some questions about where it was going to go. Um a little bit about the mount of the easement. Uh this easement would be going to parallel to the existing power line but just to the
south of it. Uh it's going to extend 50 feet 100 ft to the south parallel to it. So there'll be maybe a little bit of land clearing. This is going to be a much smaller line. It's a single pole. And then once it hits the railroad to the uh east, it'll go south towards
Detroit Lakes along the west side of the railroad tracks. whereas the main power line goes north. Um I did talk to the individual that was in charge of the easements. You obviously can't make it online because we have a computer program or computer
issues. Um but that's just an average uh rate that they presented to all the individuals that were asking for that they were asking for easements from. >> Well, I think the main main question I had was the rate. I think it's I think it's a very low rate, but I think it's
also parallel another easement that we already have. So, it's not if it was a new easement, I think it would be much different. >> And then you then you start looking at it. I don't it's benefiting benefiting residents in the area. So, I'm not going to
>> I I don't think we should nitpick and try to >> up that rate for a few thousand. I think it's I think it's a cheap rate, but I think we can move forward with my opinion move forward with it. >> Yeah. And then I know that last last year in the city there some businesses
had to come up with plans if power if the power was going to be turned off because it was so hot that they there was not enough juice to power everything. Um one of those just happened to be uh dynamic homes cuz my brother works there so I know that and
this I'm assuming will help in the future help alleviate that issue. So yeah it's needed. All right. All right. So, do we have a motion to approve the minota power easement request? >> I'll make that motion. I'll second. >> Okay. So, motion by Richard, second by Phil. Do we have any further discussion?
>> Mr. Chair, I just note that it's uh that it's the price of 12,240 for the easement in the >> Is that okay with the >> All right. So, we have the motion and second and the price. Any further discussion? >> Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Motion carries.
>> Thanks, Steve. >> Thank you, >> Judy. information technology >> or it's just ironic that you're coming to the board today with tech. >> How's our internet coming along, Judy? >> They're uh I just uh when I walked in I
I just heard they're working on the uh air conditioning and they're expecting that to be done probably I think probably by now about 45 minutes and once we get the the the room cooled down then we will start turning stuff back up. uh it turns off automatically so it
doesn't uh ruin things. So uh that's that's where we're at on that. >> Mr. Chair, Judy, just because this is happening now, do we have a service contract for that or how how is that >> facilities question or maintenance question? I don't know the answer to that. Um that would be more of a Brent question.
>> Okay. Okay. >> But I will find out for you and let you know. >> All right. Go ahead, Judy. So today I'm bringing forth our Office 365 renewal for the end of 2025 through 2026. We signed a three-year contract last year with a company called Liftoff who we've
been using uh since we started with Office 365. Uh it went up from last year. I think we if people remember that and we're now uh the amount for this year is 101,67204. We do use um the majority of our of our
accounts is 325 we use for um people that need Word, Excel, and that's about 98,000. And then the rest is people that just need they don't need all of the apps. So we we try to kind of skinny it down. There any questions on this?
>> And this is a renewal. So >> Yep. I'll make a motion to approve the 365 contract for an amount of 10167204. All right. So, we have a motion by Eric. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Barry. Do we have any more discussion? >> All right. All in favor signify by
saying I. >> I. Motion carries. >> Thank you, Judy. >> Mr. Chair, just Judy. Uh, and and it is an unsung hero of of protecting Becker County, too. Uh, I'm sure most of you have heard St. Paul got hit with a with a big ransom. Was it a ransomware? I
believe so. >> Um so and that will devastate a county. So Judy is trying her best to and there's no guarantees but I think you're doing a wonderful job protecting us and um even commissioners are taking tests quite often to try to keep us safe. So
>> some of us are passing them too. >> Mr. Chair taking them. >> Uh Judy. >> Yes. >> Um you know with this VPN >> that we're providing um can you explain again? You explained this to me once, but so we have to have somebody on staff 24 hours a day, right?
>> We have people on call 24 hours a day. We do not have people on staff. They work we work from uh well, somebody comes in fairly early and then we work till about 4:30. It's kind of the normal hours and then from 4:30 until the next morning uh we have somebody on call. So
we are facilitating that for Clearwater County just for >> we're initially facilitating that for uh the sheriff's department at Becker County. >> So So give me an example how that work. What happens an officer out in their car something isn't working.
>> Certainly this the the call would come from dispatch or it might I mean it could come from an officer. Um it really depends. Um, I can go through a lot of examples if you'd like me to >> give me a couple examples. Just a couple of the big ones that we can anticipate would happen for 26,000. That's what
we're paying for it. >> Uh, well, it's it's not it's not that it's that they're paid to be on call. It's not what the event was >> to fix computer problems. Right. >> About I I think one of the ones that sticks in my head is we had something
called Crowd Strike. Crowd Strike is a thing that keeps us safe. It is malware. Crowd Strike about a year ago. I think it was July 20th or something right around there. They'd made a mistake when they sent out an update. It
made it so nobody could log in. And by nobody, I don't mean just in Becker County. I mean throughout the throughout the the nation and the world. Um, so that was one of them. And that took down pretty much the whole country. So you
solved that problem or you facilitated >> uh we facilitated solving that problem with the help of a vendor with the help of crowdstrike with the help of the state of Minnesota. So there were a number of people working on it and I think we got that call about
midnight and I think by 4 or 5 a.m. we had the we had the way to fix it but the problem was we had to touch every single PC in the organization. So that's what we spent our time doing. And again, from beginning to end, I suppose it was about a 12hour iteration. From midnight till
about noon is when I think we got the majority of the stuff. Yeah. Everybody's PCs back up. The first things we did was was the servers. Then we we went from there and those were all done before most people got in and then we started doing the people as they uh you know as
they came in. We'd go to their desks. >> Okay. Then then so like this switching gears this St. Paul thing are we >> I mean vulnerable. Everybody is vulnerable. >> Uh cyber cyber security. >> So we're just trying to mitigate whatever >> problems we see out there.
>> Depends on what's going on. Absolutely. >> By the time we have it figured out, they're one step ahead of us. >> Absolutely. They the way they use I AI is very effective as it's very effective the way we try to use it too, >> but it's it's it's there are very bad
people out there. >> Okay. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Thanks, Judy. >> Thanks, Judy. >> Yep. >> All right. Let's move on to Mr. Piper for EDA. I just wanted everybody to know that I went to high school with Cody's dad, so he makes me feel really old.
>> Well, hope I don't have any stories on. >> Um, morning. Uh just have resolution 08251H donation from Essentia Health uh for the board to accept a donation of $5,000 from Essentia Health.
>> Cody, can you explain a little bit what the donation will be used for? >> Sure. Uh it was stemmed from a prior grant proposal uh collaboration with multiple entities, city of Detroit Lakes, Frezy, Project 412, uh multiple
departments here, staff at the county. Um it was a broader grant proposal um countywide. So the intent was that it would score better. We didn't get that grant, but the funds were earmarked already uh kind of as a matching uh
appropriation. Um, and they decided that they wanted to donate it anyway to implement for the uh uses of that uh the purpose of that grant, which was to put amenities uh in some designated or
pre-identified locations along already uh in place bike infrastructure throughout the county. So kind of like primary um travel routes for alternative transportation and stuff like that. But we already have some locations picked
out and uh pre- discussion with these uh the other entities and cities and stuff. So, this will just be used to um essentially appropriate to each of the entities and then um you know depending on if there's any
changes to the the cost and stuff like that, it would be the response of each entity to pick up the the extra. But >> so so but Cody, tell me if I'm wrong here. Um each entity will receive $1,000. Sorry. Yeah, that was the intent was to just
>> we had five locations that were identified and we just split it up evenly. >> All right. >> Do I have a motion? >> I'll move to approve resolution 8-251H. >> All right. So, we have a motion. >> Motion by Phil. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Eric. Could we have any more
discussion? >> Just a thank you to Essentia Health for um for donating this to help our community. >> Yeah, that is a big big thank you. All right. So, we have a motion to second. All in favor signify by saying I. I motion carries. Thanks. Thank you, Cody. >> Thank you,
>> Mr. Sheriff Blander is the next contestant. And we also have a special guest from the jail. >> I don't feel like a contestant, I'll tell you. >> We'll see if the price is right.
>> Well, I'll try to explain it. Uh, good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. I have two items today. The first one is resolution 08251F. It's a personnel request for two full-time corrections officers.
And why there is a need for that is we have uh a pool of part-time uh positions with uh funds that are not getting used. They're variable hour positions. And
uh as of uh yesterday when I printed this out, our budget for 2025 for part-time uh corrections officers is 562,229. uh as of date uh and we maybe I don't know if it's accurate as of yesterday
but uh we've used $25,786.15 or 37% of that out of 67% for the year. So, we would like to move funds to the full-time uh line item and hire two
full-time corrections officers to uh which are much needed um in place of the uh I shouldn't say in place of the part-time but just to use those those funds. Uh currently we have uh a minimum
of six positions or six uh six staff members that have to be on duty at all times. When somebody is sick, we have to we can't just operate with five or four. We need somebody on staff.
>> Well, when is brought to committee, Mr. Chair, um we discussed this is all within budget. is transferring the same dollar amount from parttime over to full-time because we can't um and there's a lot of the some of the full-time people that are on staff >> aren't putting in hours. and they're not
available and and uh >> part time >> I mean the part-time and then I'm thinking that some of the overtime reduct will be reduced for >> reduced a lot >> for this too because we're at very full-time we're at minimum staff so to just have a couple I don't know if you
call them floating or or not but um there >> um we just I just think it's if you can't >> if you have are having trouble filling those with part-time >> and you're un and it's within your budget if That's the way we can go. That's the way it should go. It's within
It's It's within I said if it's still within your >> budget >> budget. If you just transfer those dollars, then I'm fine with doing that. So, >> and then also too, the anytime someone fills in that's a full-time person because we're minimal staff. That's all overtime for the whole shift. So, that's
a And I think your overtime budget is already above, isn't it? Budgeted. >> Well, we according to this uh we've used half >> used half. We're about on pace and but it's typical that our overtime budget is higher than in >> Yeah, it will be higher. Yeah. And and then that should be able that we should
be able to save there too. So >> yeah, that the overtime budget will will definitely be reduced and this has been talked well thank you for having the special guest me here today. >> But uh yeah, this this this budget has or this overtime budget has been been an issue for a long time. But uh like
sheriff had had mentioned, we can't go below certain number of staff. And um what what really gets us in um what makes it hard is trying to fill any sick or vacation or anything like that. Um and I would say probably within the last 8 to 10 years, there's been a a shift in
our part-time worker that's available. Uh I would say I believe all of our part-time staff minus one or two that are are looking for um further law enforcement careers and stuff are uh working full-time jobs. Uh, I would say 10 years ago, we had a
lot of part-time people that were coming in trying to get a full-time job. I'm just not seeing that that anymore. So, I would say we've been vastly under under our budget for part-time uh for uh we did a a couple year look back, but it's
it's been probably 10 years that we've been under budget. >> So, for just just for clarification, so we have the budget in our current budget from part-time for the remainder of the year, correct? And our goal moving forward to to fund these is to to
transfer what is would have been budgeted for part-time and put that into full-time. So we're not budgeting any more money. We're just shifting >> exactly >> it through. Okay. >> Yeah. >> And I think also uh cost savings for this as well. You have a roster of
part-time people that we are funding, training, those kinds of things, uniforms and uniforms. um access to UKG all those types of things. So really looking at you know minimal hour standard or re reducing of
that pool if those >> I just want to reiterate we do have some very good employees that do work in those positions. >> Yes. >> But just a lot of times they're not available because of their other >> commit >> commitments. Yep. >> All right. So I will make a motion to
approve 1F. Do we have a second? Second. >> All right. Motion by me, second by Barry. Any further discussion? Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Motion carries. >> Thank you. Item number two is a request
for a mobile radio for a squad through Motorola. This is on the state contract and the price is $6,4512. And this is in our budget. >> And we question this to it. And um we
are we are in the lower this is not the newest technology either. >> No it's not. >> Sheriff Glander explained to us that the new technology is even more expensive but we're trying to be a little bit so I'll make a motion to approve the purchase of a radio.
>> All right. Do we have a motion by Barry? Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Eric. Uh any more discussion? Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. All right. Motion carries. >> Mr. here or Commissioner Glander. Sheriff Glander. Uh we fest prep for
Wefest. Is everything going okay out there? Is >> we we moved in yesterday? Um >> I see campers also moved in. >> Campers are moving in as we speak. Yes. Um we have our command post there uh our emergency trailer and we will be on site
fulltime tomorrow morning at 6:00 a.m. >> We're not leaving the county alone. Uh we do have, you know, people assigned to the county as well. Uh but yes, we will be out there until at least noon on Sunday, if not later. >> And everything is streamline.
Everything's going well. >> Yep. According to plan. >> Yeah. Okay. All righty. Thank you. >> All right. Thank Thank you, Chris. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. We will take a break. Thanks, Chris. Yeah. >> Until 10:00 a.m.
There are more seats up front here. If anybody would like to sit instead of stand, you can do that. Um, so we are going to start with number two under planning and zoning instead of number one. We'll do number one afterwards. So, so Kyle,
please, please. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair, commissioners. Um, I have planning commission recommendations for your consideration this morning from July 30th. Uh, the first being a change of zone from agricultural to commercial for Eminem Properties LLC. Um, recommendation was
to approve, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yeah. >> Um, I I think this is definitely a I think we all agree this is commercial property. Um the concern that been in the past is we don't have very good rules regarding example parking. Um and
I think we're addressing that at the county. Um, so I was I was kind of curious, could we, if we approve this today, can we can we ask that they are following our new requirements for parking for businesses because um I've
run into problems in my district before with with businesses that change uses and now all of a sudden the parking is a big problem. Um, so that's that's where I think initially too that's where the concern was because we don't mean we don't know what businesses are coming in. there's going to be different
parking requirements depending on the type of business. Um, but this is commercial property. I I don't have a problem with that. But that's where my concern is for future use. But, um, you're off highway. I, you know, I think people will I mean, you're not like a
spot one here. This is that whole it's a pretty big area you're looking at. So, you're going to have to But that's my concern is um future parking issues. I don't know how you you address that. If >> Mr. Chair, uh,
until we get to our parking ordinances or whatever, could we table this? Are you guys looking to get going quickly here? This >> get going. >> Yeah, I think I think before um, >> so they they'll have to go back through
the platting process, which will take a little bit of time, and then obviously winter will fall upon us. I think all of those parking requirements will be in place prior to any you wouldn't have any construction until 2026, I'm guessing. >> Can we just if we make the motion to
approve contingent, this will follow our new parking requirements for for commercial. I mean, we want to mimic reason. I mean, we're just looking at reasonable requirements like the city maybe what mirror what the city has. I don't even know. Um, and again, I'm sure your businesses,
you know, will have the adequate parking they need. It's just it's just that something that it's the concern that was initially brought on this development is how do we regulate parking on specific businesses and um that would be my my concern. So, you it's multiple businesses going to be in there
eventually. You I'm >> that would be the plan. Yeah. And but since it's on the high highway, they would have to on Highway 10, don't they have to get like frontage road work with MDOT? >> Well, you put in a turn lane, right? >> We we paid 100 grand to put in a >> Yeah, it's a turn lane. We built a road,
you know, that the lot on the property. >> Okay. >> So, was that motion then? >> Well, I would I just Mr. Sure. Just to be fair, I don't know that you could make something contingent on a change of zone like you >> that they don't know what it is yet. >> But like I said again, I think those
parking requirements can be in place prior to these businesses coming in and they would have to follow that. >> Sure. >> I that's I'm I'm fine with it. I think this one's a little bit different, too, because >> you're not going to be parking on US Highway 10. I mean that you're you're
the overflow parking will be within that whole area. It's not it might not be good and we might get complaints and you know but >> Mr. chair. So, Kyle, if I understand you right, what we're deciding is switching from agricultural to commercial use. >> Yes. >> They'll still have to come back with a
plat for what the businesses are and and then >> No. So, they'll the plat will go to Ottoan Township and it's been there once. >> Um but there was a little miscommunication. So, in December of 22, this change of zone was before this board. Um it takes a four-fifth majority
to change a zone and that was a 3-2 vote. um it went to Otaban not knowing that and now it'll have to go back and everything but so the township has that subdivision control. It's one of the six. So >> this plat will go there um
immediately. Well, not maybe immediately but pretty close to following the >> I think our comp plan shows that this commercial area. It's just that the >> you know there are those concerns that should be moni there's couple and I don't even know what anything else would be but parking is one that's a concern
but I think you're you're within yourself. I mean it's >> and it's a new business. It's not a old business that's >> right. But it would be the second business that took over a b a building that would fall under poor parking if it changed use. If once it's commercial it
can do you know a lot more things. You know what happened to us was an office space turned into a restaurant. Well, the office space requirement parking was four and now the restaurant is 40. You know, I mean, it's that's where the big change would be. >> Mr. Chair, Kyle, how do we how can we do
this if we pass this today? How how do we do that? >> Well, again, I mean, I I would I don't think you're going to have any construction complete until 2026, and we would have that updated by then. So for today, it's just a motion to change the zone from agriculture to commercial. >> That's it.
>> I make that motion. >> I'll second. >> So we have a motion by Erica and a second by Richard. Do we have any more discussion? >> I Mr. Chair, I I think this area right on Highway 10 is um and it's got commercial use right next to I think it's a a very appropriate place for
commercial property. Um, so >> and the mayor from of Ottaban came to the planning commission and spoke in favor and and really hope that we would pass this. So, so >> all right. So, we have a motion second. Do we have any more discussion? >> Okay. All in favor signify by saying I.
>> I. >> All right. Motion carries. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thanks, Mike. >> Thanks. >> Uh, second item from July 30th. Joyce Mang requested an after the fact conditional use permit for day and overnight parking during Wefest. a recommendation to approve uh with the
condition that they follow the county traffic plan um in place between the sheriff highway department township and county or uh we fest themselves um which is subject to change depending >> this after the fact when we fest starts tomorrow
>> well they've been doing it for a few years >> okay motion to approve concur with planning all we have a motion by Barry and a second by Phil do we have any other discussion All right. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. All right. Motion carries.
>> I didn't think that was necessary either, but it got in there, so I just read it verbatim. >> Um, >> are we done? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, we're done. Yeah. All right. We're done early. >> Uh, last item. Old business from May 28th, um, 2025 is a Prairie Lake
Investments LLC requesting a conditional use permit for mining operations. Mr. Chair, are you going to are you going to take testimony or >> Yeah. So, um we have some people that deferred from uh the open forum. The uh
is is there going to be is there anybody that is going to speak Kyle on behalf of most people? You Okay. So, is there anybody else that would like to also speak for even though the attorney is is going to speak? Okay. All right. So, um, which
which would you prefer to do first? >> Makes no difference. >> Let's get let's get the >> Do you want the Do you want the applicants first? >> I would like the applicants first. Yes. >> Those in favor? And >> Yeah. And then then after the applicants are done, we'll we'll take the people the regular people. Then then we'll take the
attorney. Is that okay? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> You want more than one of you? >> Is that you want more than one of you? >> I can I can move. >> Fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and board members. I'm just here on behalf of Lake
L Prair Lake Investments LLC. >> Matt, I don't think they can. Okay. >> Yeah. State your name, Matt, and your address. >> Matt Hadstrom, Detroit Lakes, Minnesota. >> So, again, I'm here on behalf of Prairie Lake Estates LLC um for the mining and
um gravel pit operation on Highark Avenue. I want to tell you how this project started. Okay. I was playing pickleball one day at our Detroit Lakes Community Center and Dale Tweed, who just recently lost his wife to cancer, had leaned over to me and said, "Matt,
would you like to buy a farm?" I said, "Absolutely, sure, Dale." Just kiddingly. And I said, "How much?" He told me the price. I said, "Dale, thank you very much, but no, I'm retired, but I I don't want to do that." Um, a
week later I was talking to my son about it who's been looking for a house for three years and uh told him it's a a friend from pickleball wanted to sell his farm 100 acres out off Highark Avenue. He goes, "Dad, we should go take a look at it." Sunday afternoon we took a drive. He just happened to be in the
driveway. His garage door open. Went and talked to him. He showed my son the house. Gave the whole tour and my son fell in love with the house. We left the property. He goes, "Dad, I would like that." I said, "Oh no, I was in trouble." But he also mentioned this to
another friend of mine that was at pickle ball, Nick Bowers, because there's no way I could do this on my own. And Nick goes, "Matt, if we sell this house to your son and 10 acres and we have 9 acres left over, we could potentially do something with that." So
then the wheel started touring. I went back, met with the seller and he was agreed that he had a price and we offered him that price. We went and we bought the property, not knowing what I'd be sitting here today with all these people back there
staring at the back of my head cuz I want to read to you what basically what I've gone through. Okay, these are some text messages that were sent to the seller of the property who
had recently lost his wife to cancer says, "Hi, Dale." That's not the one I want to read first. This is the one I want to read first. It says, "Just so you know, the tally of your mistake has personal and financial coast." And the
meant cost, close to 10,000K thus far, not to mention the loss of sleep, amount of stress on all of us. My biggest question is, why did you come to my place and lie to my face? You knew better. I told you many times that dad and myself could show you how to develop
your land. You left over a million dollars on the table for two to scarf up and turn into something that Sue would absolutely oppose to. Sue is the deceased wife. Another one. Sorry, but I got to ask man
to man and please be honest. Do you feel like you got betrayed by Bowers or do you know just how bad you screwed all of us? Second question, when the class action suit starts, would you testify that you were misled and taken advantage of? had to ask both just upfront with
you. I have contacted Minnesota State Ethics Board and have demanded an investigation into Bowowers and all constituents on the board and have already forwarded all information about this situation. Yes, there will be consequences for dirty actions. Myers would have paid the same or more even
before you were final. Sorry, but I feel an explanation deserved. I'm out $300,000 and my daughter lost her future and life inheritance. I don't receive a copy by noon. That'll say it all. Wish you the best, friend.
Another neighbor. Hi Dale. Jeff and I have been meeting with the county neighbors discussing the proposed gravel mining. We would like to know if you'd be willing to write a letter that would forward to the county commissioners for would that would like for the June 17 meeting if you're misled or feel like
you're going to happen um to happen against your this was going to happen against your wishes. also stating that you did get an offer from someone else who wanted to mine gravel and you turned them down. We'd very much appreciate your input and help fight this, but we understand if you decline. Here's the
seller's response. I am not writing a letter. I was not misled by anyone regarding the use of the land. I did not turn another buyer down due to their proposed use of the land. The people who purchase this land are good, honest
people and will do their best to honor the property and I support them in their endeavors. I wish you well the seller. So this is what I have been going through since May.
It has not been fun. I'm not a developer. I don't write awesome applications for grapple pit operations. I didn't even know this was grapple pit operations until the county said it was a mining and gravel pit. All I want to do is develop 90 acres of land into 31 2
and a half acre lots. Unfortunately, 20 acres of this land isn't buildable and we can't put a township road on it with the elevations that are there. So, we hired a surveying company. We hire a engineering company
to come out and tell us what we need to do. We're we're trying to do everything right here. We're not trying to pull anything over somebody's eyes. So, the engineering company says that you you need to remove 250,000 cubic yards of gravel to make those lots buildable and
put a township road on there that's going to be maintained by the township to their specs. We we got a hold of uh water and soil, had them come out because there was a chance that there was wetlands out there. They were out there twice to double check. There's no wetlands there.
Okay? And I'm not the expert. I'm just saying what they told us. Okay? They were at both tech panels. I've gone to three planning and zoning meetings, two tech panel meetings, and this is my second meeting here. And we also met with the
um Lake Ununus Township and they they approved this project. Nobody was concerned about it. Okay. But as this has gone down the road, things have happened. People have gone door to door starting rumors. I'm here
to tell you this isn't an active gravel pit. This isn't a 20-year gravel pit. This is land that needs to be leveled down so we can develop it. So, we could have 31 lots where residents could build homes in Becker County. I wish I was
here proposing to you a 36 unit apartment building >> because that would kind of fly right through, but this is just a 31 2 and a half acre lot development. It's not a gravel pit. >> Please don't comment if you're not
speaking up front, please. So, it's my understanding is if you want to take gravel off of this property, you need a conditional use permit. Correct. >> To sell it. >> To sell it. >> Yes. To sell it. >> So, all we're trying to do is is follow
all the steps. We got the condition use permit. We went to Becker County soil and water. We went to the township and we we hired a survey company. We hired um these companies to do the work for us
so we can do this in Becker County. And I think all of you got this one too. Does this look familiar at all? You probably got emailed to you just a couple days ago. Um no idea who the individual is, but I I can read from this because he mentions one name in
there which is the neighbors on on the most northern end of it. Um probably I don't know is a friend. I'm making assumptions here and I probably shouldn't make assumptions. Um, but I I've sat through all these meetings
and and and just been been beat up basically for trying to develop some land in Becker County and I I'm just here to say that I appreciate your time and I know that you've guys have heard a lot of stuff about this and I just appreciate what
you do. And last but not least, I do have a here a land alteration permit for Becker County. So the issue right here is not about this huge project with and the scope of this project is not huge. It it's not
it's it's not a stratos gravel pit. It's two local guys trying to develop some land. And unfortunately, one part of it is not developable in the state it is. But we're willing to work. Hey, I've met with the neighbors. Okay. I've met
the two closest neighbors. I've been in both their chouses and talked to them and I I don't know what else you know else I could do but I've probably taken up most your time
but I I did want to mention um two names that I met with and I spent about half hour in their place Dean Miller and Sue Spitzer. Okay, they are the one closest to this project other than my son who's on the other side who's closest and I had a very very
nice visit with them. They're very nice, kind people. And the last thing I want to do is interrupt their lives. And I told them that this isn't going to be an active gravel pit. As soon as we can get this gravel out of there so we can do the reclamation, we're done. It's done.
Okay. And the sooner we could do that, the better. and and and I think they were relieved to hear that. My only regret is I didn't go to them right away before this whole project started. So, um I just want to thank you for your time
and uh I appreciate appreciate you. >> Thank Thank you, Matt. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on behalf of the the proposed operation? >> Okay. So, um yes.
I would just suggest I'm Tammy Norard with the law firm. >> Would you like to go ahead of them? Okay. Sure. Please go ahead. Please go ahead. Yeah. >> Because otherwise some people might wonder what I'm going to say and they might decide, well, I better get up there just in case she doesn't say that. And this might just kind of tighten things up if you don't mind. Okay. Um
I'm Tammy Norard, Bogle Law Firm. Um, and I'm speaking on behalf of a number of people. And just to avoid having a bunch of people coming up here, I would just ask for a moment if people that are opposed to the cup could just stand to at least show you um who who is um
opposed to this conditional use permit. All right. Thank you very much. Um, I was a little surprised, I mean, this morning, but also when we were here on uh July 15th about the EAW to hear the developers say, "Well, this is kind of a personal attack and somebody's just jealous that they didn't get the right
to um to develop this property." But you can see these people that are here in your um commission room today, and these aren't people that are jealous about somebody getting to develop some property or getting favor a favorable treatment or getting a jump on anybody else. These are there was four over 400
people that signed the petition for an EAW that have concerns about this project. Um and I think you have to take that seriously. There's a number of people here that are saying this is not the appropriate place for a active gravel mine or crushing facility. Um
what we have here is um you heard emotional emails from people. This isn't a decision you should be making on emotions. You're the county board. You have county ordinances. your job is to determine sighting safety and to make sure nobody's creating a nuisance uh for
their neighbors. Um, one of the other things that the developers said on July 15th and today is saying, "Hey, this is just two local guys. We're not, you know, we're not developers. We're not in the gravel mining industry." And frankly, that's what my clients are concerned about is that they are they're
asking you to just, hey, just let us open a gravel mine. Let's do some crushing. We've never done this before. We don't have experience in this, but don't worry about the neighbors that live 100 feet away and 200 feet away. Their residences are 100 and 200 feet away from the property line. And the
concern here is given the lack of professionalism in the submissions that you've received that don't comply with Becker County ordinances that, you know, and I don't dispute that these are great people and that they're great community-minded people. Um, and yet
they're not experienced developers by their own admission. And so that is the concern. um with my clients, you're being asked to set an industrial facility in the middle of a neighborhood. And like I said before when I was here in July, you're setting
a precedent and you have to treat similarly situated people similarly. And so the next time you have somebody saying, "Oh, I've got this kind of industrial use right next door to some neighbors." Um there's 11 lots that um that are adjacent to this 90acre parcel.
There's three residential subdivisions that are right in this area and there's houses right next door. There's vacant lots that are being offered for sale for um you know rural residential uh summer homes, just rural homes for people that want that don't want to live in the
city. Um and so the question is, is this the appropriate location to have a mining operation? And I think it's kind of interesting that the developer got up here and said, "Oh, this isn't an active mine. Don't worry about it. It's nothing." Well, read the application. The application says 5 years, 700,000
cubic yards of gravel out of this facility, mining and crushing. They have they've now said um in the finding a fact that they've um suggested that that could be 350 based on the planning commission's recommendation, but the application itself was 700,000. And so,
I mean, that's where it when you hear somebody here say, "Oh, it's not really a gravel mine. Don't worry about it. It's nothing like that." that that's not true and you know your job is to look at you know your ordinances did they comply and is this the appropriate place to have this now if this were just a development and I think this is an
option you have um you know maybe this should just be a development and if they're going to clear that site take clear it off take the rock out and go crush it in an appropriate place where there is aggregate crushing operations may you know they could if they have a connection with an active gravel mine um
they could haul that off and go crush it and sell it. Um, and this is the the biggest concern or one of the biggest concerns of my clients is we don't want a gravel crushing operation in the neighborhood. And and >> stop you right there just because I want clarification on what you just said. Is what she said true? If if they without a
gravel mine permit, can they remove the gravel, crush it, and sell it? >> Still be a sale of material there. So that would >> it would have to be a conditional on a >> it would have to be a stipulation on the conditional use permit. >> That's what I thought. Thank you.
>> So our first position our first position is to deny the cup. The second position is if you're going to grant it, you should require take the rock off and take it off site because these neighbors don't need a gravel crushing operation 100 or 200 feet from their homes. Um
because that is very detrimental. There's a lot more noise, there's vibration, there's dust. um a lot of these problems that we're concerned about um would be minimized um or just not as significant if in fact we can have the the uh gravel crushing
somewhere else. Um I mentioned in July and you didn't want to talk too much about the application, but this is an inadequate application. I think the the operational plan honestly is is the worst operational plan I've
ever seen. um your statute or your ordinance says that they have to submit a mining operational plan and we have a one-page document and there's a number of things that they're supposed to identify as part of their operational plan and they're supposed to inventory the material and that's where it's you
know it's the 700,000 and that's where that number came in. Um timetable staging oh just up to five years probably five years. um top soil management plans. Their response is, "We're just going to trip the or strip the top soil and put it to the side." Okay, they're supposed to submit a plan,
a top soil management plan, and it's a sentence. We're just going to strip it and put it to the side. Um there's supposed to be an erosion control plan, which is very concerning for the neighbors, right? You're dealing with erosion issues, stability issues. if this is a hill that's going to be taken
down, what impact is that going to be having on drainage or stability of the neighbors? So, they're supposed to submit a plan with this. And their response is, we'll submit a storm water plan to the MPCA that doesn't address erosion control and it doesn't address
stability concerns. And this is something that has a direct impact on the neighbors. It says they're supposed to submit, your ordinance tells them they must submit a screening plan. and their screening plan is simply well the topography hides it and we'll pile some materials up. And so they just want to
dig out some materials and pile it up around there and call that a screening plan and that's going to take care of silt and dust and noise and vibration and screen the activity in this neighborhood that's 100 ft from homes.
Um what are you going to do about noise? They're supposed to submit a plan for noise. And they just said setbacks, the topography, and the hours of operation will keep the noise from being a concern. The dust, the plan for dust, they just said, "Oh, we'll put some we'll put some material on the roads."
They didn't even get it. They didn't get that there's a concern about dust coming from gravel crushing operations when you're in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Again, these are the types of things that concern my clients that live around the area. Um, and so this is not an operational plan. This is some of
these aren't even full sentences. It's just a few words after these topics and it's it's just insufficient. Um, another thing they had failed to submit is a restoration plan and remediation plan and that just came in yesterday. So, I'm sure most of my clients haven't even had
the opportunity to look at that or see how they feel about that restoration plan. Um, I think what this should tell you is there's a lack of professionalism. There's a lack of experience. Um, there's a minimal effort to comply with your ordinances. That should concern you. That should be a red flag if if no if they're not really even
going to try hard to um comply with your uh ordinances. And my my neighborhood residents and people in the area have significant concerns about health concerns. This is um pristine lake country. Uh they're concerns about concerned about additional traffic on
the roads. They're concerned about wetlands, groundwater recharge, um some drainage issues, health concerns. um the staging plan just non-existent uh and that's something they're required to
be uh putting in. Okay. So, so as a whole, I think the submission that you're asked to review is it simply doesn't meet your standards and you as a county board have an ordinance for a reason. You should require people to submit what the ordinance requires.
Otherwise, it's deficient and I think you should deny it and have them come back with a more full robust plan if in fact they really want to um move forward with a gravel mining operation. Um and based on their comments that this isn't really a gravel mine, well, maybe they
shouldn't be developing a gravel mine then or asking for a permit. Um in your ordinance, it requires you to make a finding that this cup is not going to harm the use and enjoyment of other property owners in the vicinity. That's the standard that you have to say this
will not harm other people in the vicinity. And I think it's interesting when you look what the planning commission did. The planning commission heard testimony and they looked at it and they basically tacitly acknowledged that there it's going to cause a problem. And so what they said is, you know what, to minimize this problem,
we're not going to let them do anything during the summer months. They're not going to be able to do the crushing operation um and during the summer months. And so they're acknowledging, yes, this is a nuisance. this is a problem, but we're just going to limit the the months that you can do it. And
those are two diametrically opposed positions. And when your statute, your ordinance says you cannot issue a CUP if it's going to adversely affect the use and enjoyment of the neighbor's properties, it's from saying that you don't have another option but to deny this conditional use permit. Um,
similarly, you have to make a finding that it's not going to diminish the value of the properties in the area. And there's lots for sale out there for development. And if there's going to be a, you know, active gravel mine next door for five years, I can't imagine
anyone's going to say, "Great, that's the perfect lot. This is Nirvana. I want to buy that lot and develop a beautiful rural residence on that lot." When it's going to be an active mining facility for 5 years. So, I do think it absolutely affects the ability for the adjacent land owners to develop their
property in the way that they're already permitted to develop their property. um in this area. Another thing that you have to find is that it won't impact the or it won't impede the development of adjacent properties uh or vacant land to develop for rural residences. And again,
that's just my comment. Um in both the valuation of the property and the lack of being able to develop it, I think both of those things are impacted. And I don't see how you can say they're not. And I think that that mandates a decision that that this cup has to be denied. Um the county has to make a
finding that adequate measures have been taken to address odor, dust, noise, vibration. So you have to make that finding and you had an expert panel that convened and some of you were at that expert panel and your experts were saying, "Yeah, there's probably some problems here that should be looked at a
little bit further." And I recognize and appreciate that you had the 3 to2 vote on the EAW, but you've had experts tell you that there were concerns here. And yet you as a county board have to make a finding that there's adequate assurances here and adequate measures are going to be taken so that you're not going to have dust. You're not going to have
noise issues. And this is what your your operating plan says is not even a sentence on a lot of those topics. Um for pollution control, they just all they say is well, we'll work with the MPCA and get that figured out. And that's that's not um that that's not
appropriate. It's just measures to avoid and prevent pollution will be established with the MPCA. That that doesn't say anything, you know. So, they didn't come to you with anything. And then they're asking you to make this finding that you have to make and you have to make the finding in order to pass this that adequate measures address
any problems with dust and noise and vibration. And that's where I think that you can't make that decision. It will be arbitrary if you make that decision. Um, so I and at this point I I want to make a point of something that came up in the July 15th hearing and I raised it
because I feel compelled to raise it and that is um, Commissioner U. Varberg mentioned he said that um that this is that there's a lack of gravel mines in the county that don't sell to Fargo. that there's a lot of them that sell to Fargo and that he personally will be
able to get a better deal coming to a gravel mine like this. And so basically admitting that there's a financial advantage to him if this gets permitted. And when something like that is said and admitted on the record and it was on tape, um I think that that's a personal
pecuniary interest where a commissioner should um abstain from voting on something that's going to affect them financially. And so I'm just I'm just raising that. I have to raise it. >> I wanna I wanna I want something else on the record. They're going to be making class five there.
>> I bought I've bought so little CL I was making a comment about people in my business, but I do not buy class 5. I bought two loads of class 5 this year. I didn't buy any
class five for the last four or five years. I am a septic installer. I use clean wash sand. I use rock, crushed rock, and I use black dirt. And I can
prove to you that I don't buy class 5 once in a while. I'll buy a couple loads of it. I do not sit here and look for ways for me
to benefit from this position. So, and I can I everybody who knows what I do for a living knows I use wash sand, crushed rock, and black dirt. And there isn't any of that for sale there because
what I do is septic systems. So, >> and I I wasn't making an accusation. And I was just basing that the comments that you made you raised. You said there'd be that that your business relying on this would be a financial advantage and if you're buying class 5 and they're selling class 5.
>> No, I didn't say it a financial advantage for my business. It will not be a financial advantage for my business because I don't use that. And everybody in the county that knows me knows I do septic systems and you do not put class
5 in septic systems. But there will be advantages for everybody down there who's using who's building new homes. The townships will have advantages. The county will have advantages because there is they they don't offer a lot of
that material is not offered to them and it will be now. But I have plenty of proof that I don't use class enough class 5 to to benefit at all from this. So I think
on behalf of my clients, I would ask you to deny this conditional use permit. If you do approve this conditional use permit, I have a number of suggestions of what should be on the conditional use permit as um requirements and conditions. The first one is that any
material should that's being removed should be removed and brought elsewhere immediately and not crushed on site because this is not a location. Okay, development is fine, right? Development into a rural residential subdivision is consistent with what that area is being
used for. Um this it's not consistent to have a crush a mining and crushing operation for 5 years in this in this area. And this isn't something if they need to remove material in order to put the road in, they can remove material and putting the road in some fall and
not adversely affect their neighbors for up to 5 years while they're slowly mining and crushing on that facility. So I would say the condition number one should be that there's no crushing um no mining and no crushing. They can remove the material and take it off site if
they choose to sell the material. Um, I think that they should be required to um have a detailed operational plan and a staging plan uh that are approved by the county board because that hasn't been
submitted to you yet. Um, I think that they need to have a reclamation bond. I think that's something your planning commission also recommended. Um, I think there has to be a wetland characterization. There needs to be a storm water plan of course that's approved. Um I would say
there should be no explosives used on site. There should be no vibration. There should be no smoke emissions that are darker than a number two on the powers um micro regulation chart. So that would
make sure that it's not getting um undue visual uh pollution. Um, no fly ash, no dust, no fumes. They should prepare and have approved a fugitive dust plan. There should be no waste disposed of on
site. There should be no tree piles left on site. Uh, you need a road maintenance agreement with the county and the township for any roads that are impacted. Um, there should be no backup alarms. Uh, they should have the white noise
backup alarms because they're operating in a residential area. >> What is that? I never heard of those. >> They have so that you don't have the really loud, you know, screeching when you're going backwards. There's like a white It's like a a low pitch frequency >> vehicle. >> Yeah, it Well, it's just kind of Yeah,
it's a kind of a low loud >> um sounds like white noise. Um, so it's something >> that doesn't have noise there. So, there's a noise that comes on. Yeah. >> I didn't realize that was acceptable by OSHA. >> I didn't think that was either. Is it >> is that acceptable?
>> I What was proposed is that the backup arms >> Yeah. >> Well, and I'm sure that the loud backup alarms would be um in compliance with MSHA, but I'd be asking for, you know, any kind of lower um lower pitch or
white noise backup alarms if possible. The reason I asked because I've asked that on in different and it's you have to have backup alarms. I mean it >> Yeah, >> but the different kinds. Yeah. Not the screeching high pitch necessarily. >> I didn't realize >> I mean it's part of the reason that this doesn't belong in the middle of a
neighborhood right next to two homes 100 feet away and 200 feet away is operating an industrial facility that has constant backup alarms going off. It just kind of it underscores the point. Um, also they should have a noxious weed control plan and follow the law on noxious weed
control. They should be restricted on how many semi trucks are entering and exiting the facility per day. Um, they should be required to safeguard the neighboring properties if they're taking
a hill down. um with regard to slope and setbacks from the neighboring properties because you don't want them to be mining in their area and end up having part of the neighbor's property fall in or have erosion concerns. So those are significant issues. Also, there should be fencing because this is in the middle
of a neighborhood. Again, you can have little kids. What little kid wouldn't want to go play in a gravel pit? And so there should be fencing to make sure that the children in the neighborhood are safe. Um, you should have a restriction that says no material can be brought on site. So,
if you were to allow any crushing on site, no material from anywhere else should be brought in to be crushed on site. Um, I think 5 years is unrealistic. If the if the developer saying, "Oh, I'm just doing a development. Don't worry. It's not really a gravel pit." Why would they need five years? Um, I think, you know,
two years at most to get that material off and out of there. there. You know, if they're truly going to be developing a housing division and getting a road in there, you think it would be in their advantage to get the material out, get the road in and get it um on the market. I would ask you to limit the hours. I
think 8 to 5 would be uh sufficient for for any activity on site. Um there's a lot of concerns about Jake breaks in the neighborhood if you're suddenly adding a lot of trucks. So, we would ask that there be no Jake breaks and to the extent there are violations. Um, so I'd
suggest first violation is a $500 fine, second violation $1,000 fine. Third violation for anybody entering or exiting this facility, I would say it cancels the conditional use permit. Um, any for the reclamation plan, I'd ask that the reclamation is done within one
month. Um because again this should if this is truly just being done in order to develop it should be you know clear out the material that's needed put the road in and have the remediation done within 30 days of the end of the actual material removal.
Uh and that's all I've got. Are there any questions? One thing you said not bringing material in, right? >> Is that specific for like I don't I >> Sure. Can you certainly that? >> Yep. So, like what I'm asking for is if
you do have a conditional use permit and if they're out there excavating big chunks of rock >> um that they have to remove from the site, they will have to put that in a you know trailer and or some kind of a big um >> to move it and take it elsewhere to
crush. And what I'm saying is if you allowed them to crush on site, don't let them bring in trucks of big material to come in and say, "Oh, we got the crusher set up right there anyway. So, let's just bring in this other material and crush it." >> So, you're saying if we were to allow crushing, >> right? Right.
>> No bringing >> right any other material in. But my our first position is please do not allow them to crush on site because this in the middle of a neighborhood is not where you should have gravel crushing operations. >> Is all is is the material do you need clay to make this class 5? Do you need any other material,
>> Mr. Chair? Maybe if we want to have those discussions, we come up and ask. >> Well, I want to we want to name and and >> Yeah, we'll wait we'll wait till Tammy's done and we'll have you come up if that if that works. Yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Tammy. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Um, please come up and then say your name and and what you're why you're here and where you >> Sorry. Senberg. Senberg excavating. Do you need to add material to make class 5? Have you >> from from the drill logs and and they're
very minimal at this point? There is clay on site. So, we do not need it. >> All right. That was my question. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> Does anybody else any for Mr. Sen? >> So, so if we were to say no crushing, how would that affect your
>> great plan? how >> um in order to make the class five and stuff we want to make it has to be crushed in order to haul it off site um it makes it monetarily not sellable
and crush it somewhere else >> and you're talking crushing for two weeks a year >> yes right now right now your permit states that we have to be crushed we have to be done before Memorial Day or And we can start after Labor Day. Am I
right on that? >> Yes. >> Yes. So, we would have to do it before it. Um, I can't estimate, you know, estimation would be two weeks. I can't, you know, say it wouldn't go a little over or a little less, but we would do it in the times that your permit said.
Yes. So, >> does anybody else have any questions? I might after we >> Yeah, I I was saying I might have that more too. >> I'm good. >> Yeah. >> Um, for the record, would you state your address, too? I think >> Oh, yeah. Sorry.
>> Uh, 48990 County Highway 17, Verus, Minnesota. >> That's just for Peggy. >> Yeah, it's just for Peggy. >> That's fine. >> Thank you. >> All right. I would I would entertain um anybody that would like to speak opposed oppose the gravel pit. Um, also if
you're if your comments have already been stated, please uh don't restate them. Um, and then um try to limit your time as much as possible. I I know we haven't limited anybody else's, but if there's a lot of you. So, is there anybody that would like to come
up? And then when you come up, please state your name and your and your address and then go ahead. Hello there. I'm uh I'm Jim Coleman. I live at uh 11128 Dakota Beach Road. It's out on Lake
Melissa. We've been there for 81 years and we've appreciated everything this board has done to make our life out there so wonderful. My dad built a cabin out
there in 1922. It's still there. Still looks good. We've enjoyed every minute of living here. And again, I say we appreciate everything you've done to improve that. However, over the last 10 years, our
environmental has become worse and worse. Many times due to the smoke from the fires, all the traffic, all the wee fest, all these great innovations
that make it harder and harder for us to breathe. I'm at the point where I have a very tough time speaking. My wife who was an RN for 35 years worked in the respiratory area and she is very very
concerned about this motion. She had to leave today. So we would like to just really uh I'm concerned about the position of these folks have but I'm even more concerned about my position is the way you folks are going along on
this just isn't the right direction. You need to take a hard look at this and say what is in the best interest of our people. Our people that live here, not necessarily our developers in the area.
And yes, there's many, many areas that they can get gravel from. It doesn't have to be right next door to my house, Phil. It doesn't have to be next door to your house on Lake Melissa either. I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate it. So, I
would certainly hope you would all take a real good hard look. Mr. Varberg, I had your services. They're great. But if I were you, I'd recuse my vote. If there's any thought that I might have an
advantage to this, I would step back and say, "No, I'm not going to I'm just not going to vote." Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. [Applause] I
Is there anybody else that would like to come up? Please, please state your name. And I'd like also like to remind the crowd that if you're not speaking that please do not make noises, clapping hands. We appreciate you not doing that. Thank you.
>> Good morning, commissioners. My name is Monica Douglas, and my husband and I have been a part of the community here in county for over 50 years. 16 years ago, we purchased 7 and 12 acres of land in the Lake Ununice Township. And eight years ago, we made
our dream come true as a reality. We built our retirement home here on that land. It was a very peaceful, beautiful place where we hoped we would spend the rest of our lives. The site of the proposed gravel pit lies just a little bit more than the length
of a football field to our property, and we're downwind. This is more than just a disruption to the landscape for me. It's a direct threat to my health. I was diagnosed a couple years ago with
a chronic lung disease called bronchioacttois. Even though I never smoked a day in my life. It causes a permanent damage to the airways in my lungs. And breathing is already a daily challenge for me, especially with the smoke, which I'm
sure some of you have noticed, too. Any increase in airborne dust, diesel fumes, or even the fine particulate matters will make the challenge even more dangerous for me, even life-threatening. According to my pulmonologist,
the dust and pollution from a gravel pit are not hypothetical risks. For someone with my condition, they're a guarantee of worsened health. They can trigger infections, serious inflammation, and a permanent setback.
Living next to a gravel pit operation could mean that I would have to leave my home, which we worked really hard to build simply to breathe safely. I'm asking you, please do not approve this gravel pit. The consequences will
be devastating for me and others in the neighborhood like me, and there are several. I respectfully urge the Becker County Commissioners to put the health and the safety of the community ahead of profits. Approving this permit would
place the interests of a single commercial operation over the well-being of dozens of families who have interest invested their lives here. And the long-term consequences of that decision would be irreversible.
Thank you for your service in representing all of us in our community, especially those of us who are more vulnerable. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to please come up and then please state
your name and your address? [Music] >> Good morning or afternoon. I'm not sure which we are right now. My name is Lauren Kirsting and I am uh uh I have a a shop uh at Meadows Lane. Uh I received a a uh notification from uh the
commissioners uh planning and zoning that I was in that area of of concern. I have 10 years of planning and zoning uh uh experience myself. Uh and it is an interesting experience. Uh I look back on and and think about some of the difficult times we went through. One of
the things that we were told um every meeting was always remember the comprehensive plan. Always refer back to the comprehensive plan. What have we told people we're going to do? So that when anybody came and said, "I want to build here. I want to buy this lot." we
could tell them what was coming up behind them, around them. Uh, Commissioner Nelson mentioned about consistency on the plan with the commercial and saying it's nice to keep consistency. I don't understand how this kind of got through uh the planning and zoning commission from the standpoint if
they'd have looked at that part of it. How is a potential a gravel pit consistent with uh all our residents? I have a 42x120 shop. I have my collector cars in there and I just enjoy going down there three, four times a week. I
my car almost knows how to drive without me uh because I'm I'm from uh West Fargo and I drive down here all the time. We have a lake place on Lake um Ida. So, we spend a lot of time down here and it's my pe it's my peaceful getaway. Now, in my situation, I can keep my windows
closed, my doors closed when there's when there's dust out there. So, I can survive that. I don't like it the idea of that whole thing, but that's what I'd have to do. My biggest concern is my sister Monica Douglas has a health issue and I'm just absolutely beside myself
why we wouldn't think of that as the number one thing that we have to you know you people have to address that is important I think you know one of the things that we also learned when I or I learned when I was on a commissioner is that we considered the opposition to
something on a cup that was important to us as as a commission uh uh that dealt with that. So when you see so much uh opposition uh to this, I guess that tells you something that when we bought, we didn't know that anything like that was even possible. So I would highly
recommend too that it not be u approved on the basis of consistency uh as well as as as those of us who purchased some property down there that we absolutely love and and it's nice property. It's there's really nice properties down there. So and again, I thank you for
your work, too. I I I know the difficulty from uh commissioners who have to make the final decision. >> Thank you. Yes, please come up. Remember to state your name and your address. >> My name is Judy Dawson and I live at
22490 Sens Beach Drive on Pelican Lake. I'm literally one mile from the gravel pit proposed area. Thank you guys for all that you do as well. Um, I walk that road on a daily basis, that mile stretch of Highark Avenue almost every day. I
actually sold Dale and Sue that land many years ago. So, um, you know, I I know the land and I know the area. I live right there and I'm concerned about the the traffic, the gravel trucks. I drive the downer road on a constant
basis as well and those trucks are a pain as always. Um, Phil and Barry, these trucks are going to go right by your place, Barry, Phil, they could go down your place, but you know, can you imagine if you lived on between Unison Ma and those trucks are going through
that area? That that already is a terrible area for traffic and and stuff like that. And it's it's a very small road. I can't even imagine if that would be coming by through there. I can't even
imagine it. And um so anyway, I just think that it's it's a sad deal. I'm sorry that you're a victim and I'm pretty sure I know someone that would buy that property from you for what you paid for it if you don't want to be a victim and none of this would be happening. So anyway, I I hope you guys
vote against it because I think it would be very detrimental to the entire Lakes area. And you know, I also sell real estate. You know, the property values of Pelican Lake. Obviously, you know, we've also got the issue of the the um you
know, itch in the water and you know, this is a big deal. So, it's a big deal for all of the property area for something like this. It's detrimental. So, I hope you vote against it. >> Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to to speak? Yes, please come
up. Just remember to state your name. >> Good morning. I'm Dave Douglas. Before I start, man, I'm sorry I shouldn't. Those kind of comments are unsettling at best. So, this is not personal. Okay.
Good morning everybody. Today, I'm asking each of you to vote. You're going to vote today. Vote with your heart and your head. Use your eyes to look around this room at the people who shown up not just today, but in past meetings, neighbors, families, community members who are asking you to say no to this
gravel pit. Use your eyes to read the written comments, letters, concerns submitted by residents. Concerns about health, safety, air quality, traffic, and the lasting impact this project could have on our community. And use your heart because this decision isn't
just about trucks and gravel. It's about health, safety, and the well-being of people who live here. We've all heard the principal rule of uh real estate is location, location, location. Right? This is a poor location for this gravel pit. This is uh you look at the Highark
Avenue where it comes off to 138. That's one way. There's only two ways out of this place. You go north or south on Highark. You get 138. That's only a short stretch, but you're coming out into a blind hill. 93% of County Road
138 is a protected by no passing zones. That should be concerning. So, if you don't like that, let's go let's go south on Imark. Okay. That'll take you out to Counter Road 20 in Pelican Lake. We go to we go to St. Mary's Lake Church every Sunday and I drive that road
frequently. Um people walking, riding bikes, and they don't have the benefit of that stretch over there of that walkway that's further further west. So, it's very concerning. None of us are anti-development, but this gravel pit is simply a bad
location. This is about putting people before profit and doing what's right. I thank you for your time, your service. I know the weight of the decision you hold today is big. We all understand that. So, I'm just asking about vote no request. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Any would anybody would anybody else like to come up and speak? >> Okay. So, we are going to close the public comment unless one of us commissioners request someone to come up and do some explanation for us.
Um, >> we we don't have Wi-Fi yet, do we? No. >> About noon. >> According to Judy. >> Okay. >> No, I just I I have the I I read it. I just the reclamation. >> I have copies if you'd like.
>> Yeah. I'd like I think Eric has [Music] Thanks. Oh, the fact no the the >> the reclamation that he sent us.
>> Yeah, I don't have I I I read it so I know what it says. >> Thanks. [Music] >> The reclamation that >> land >> that one that I got
Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> May as well start. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> The dialogue. >> Um I think the first thing and it's been brought up I think by someone here today that you look at, you know, we just spent a pile of money on the comprehensive plan and there's no
mention of a gravel uh industrial area in this area. This is a res, you know, it is a residential area. um as the developers are pursuing residential area. There's no question this that's what this um should be and
and will be. Um with that with that said, I don't you know I don't think this is appropriate for a gravel pit. I think this for that 5year is a I mean it's just not it's not reasonable in my op mind and and if you
I think that will cause cause harm to the residents that live there. I know Matt and I want to start. Matt and Nick are are great people. I mean, those the the negative comments that they've received are not justified. I know both of them, and that's that's not they're
they're trying to they're doing a project and I I think that's admirable. They're, you know, the end product will be a benefit to the county. So, they um it's not the project, but the crushing and the gravel pit part of it are a concern. Um,
I'm I'm just it's it's not a comprehensive plan. I I think that's part of it. I think you I mean, you mentioned you talked to Dean and Sue. Dean and Sue are very good friends of mine and I know exactly where they live. They are going to be the most impacted people on this project and
>> other than my son Chris >> and they are they're they're good people. They're willing to compromise, too. I I don't think if they had the choice, u Dean said they'd rather not have it at all. I
mean, that's that's the obvious choice. Um, so looking at this, I I would I could support removing the gravel. I mean, removing the product. Um, it's the crushing and the mine, you
know, this and I don't think they want a gravel pit. And they've said that numerous times. We don't want a gravel pit. So, is there a is there a way? I mean, and I I think uh Tammy mentioned the no no crushing on site. Um, and I know that
would be a hindrance to the the contractor that wants the wants to sell this, but that might be a solution where it it it will reduce the negative impact on the on the surrounding area. That's
>> and the only problem with that Barry is that That's such a small part of the problem here. I understand nobody wants the trucks. Nobody wants the dust. Nobody wants any of this stuff. But the crushing is not that's a very that I
don't know where these guys get their crushers. Some people rent them. Some people have somebody come in and do it. They come in, they do it as fast as they can do it, and they're gone. And and so the problem is the trucks are still
going to be there. The loaders are still going to be there. They don't need a permit for any of that. The only difference so there will be some inconvenience and noise. The crusher doesn't Most of your dust comes right from under the truck tires.
That's just the way it is. So they're they're not going to there's not a huge gain by not putting that crushing it and putting in a pile. There's just not a huge gain there. And we already know that they can haul everything out of there. And that's loading it and hauling
it there. That's that's the everyday noise and the everyday inconvenience that's going to be there. And we already know they can do that. And that's the only reason I nobody wants a gravel pit next to their house. That nobody does.
Uh but unfortunately it's it's it's a necessary thing for any development and and people are gonna when they're building homes. I talked to a woman who called me yesterday and she's building a new home and
Yeah. So I mean we're not it would add a lot of cost to it. I don't know that they would I've never heard of anybody you know I shouldn't say that. Uh rollog they used to haul it out and crush it in one spot. um they're not doing that anymore. It costs a lot more money to do
that that way. And I I don't I don't know what the big benefit is if if if they're going to come in and crush once a year and it takes two or three weeks to do it and there's a huge cost impact to them. Um
I guess that's what I >> Well, the time Mr. Chair, the time frame, too, I mean, is is not reasonable in my opinion. I and I and I know uh the developers now got a land alteration permit. Um Kyle, that that is a one-year permit extendable for a year.
>> They could apply year after year. >> So that that permit can be ongoing. Um in my opinion, I think that's that's how the developer will manage the parcel that's going to be, I assume, approved on the 11th. um they can do most of
their work without this mining permit um in the next two years. This if we approved the permit today if it was approved with it whatever conditions are on it they have two years to enact that. Correct? >> Yes. So what what I'm saying most likely
will happen is the contractor has the opportunity to do internal work on site and for two years and then you have to enact then two years the clock on this this conditional use permit starts when it it if you don't do it within two
years it ends it it's dissolved. So once two years passes then you can start this start this permit and you can go you know as as is five more years so it can go on I mean that's a long that's a sevenyear project
I mean potentially if you approve this >> so I mean I think that it should be reduced to a one year you'd have the time before that two year I mean they have the internal time and then the clock afterwards would be a one year a one-year time slot
to to do the any off sale on offsite. That's >> apologize. >> Happens to all of >> I mean I I think for me I I I have to agree with with Barry. I think when we look at it this the the dust is going to
happen no matter what, right? because because we're going to be moving the land or moving the >> well that and I would want that minimized with dust control on the road. A lot of gravel pits don't have that and they're
very dusty but that's where most of it and I would not >> I would not vote for for that operation if we didn't dust control it. And >> you mean the internal roads, >> huh? >> You mean the internal roads? >> The internal roads. And I believe they agreed to do the
>> township road there too, didn't you? >> Yeah. >> Well, that would be a township agreement that we'd have to >> Yeah. But I want that I want the hall road in and out of there because that's where most of this dust and they're going to have they're going to be hauling that stuff like I said either way.
>> Um, >> but I think we have to look at this. I guess where I'm looking at it is this this is you do look at our our land use our comprehensive land use plan and this isn't an industrial area. Um
so where I but it is housing so I mean the which this is going to lead to housing. >> Yes. >> Um but I don't know that I can agree to having crushing on the property for the sake of the neighborhood. Um that that
to me is my my biggest issue is the crushing um you know the the mining using explosives whatever um some of the things that um Miss Norard um asked for
us to consider. Um but I also look at this as they the only reason they're doing this is because they want to sell it. if they didn't want to remove and sell it, they we wouldn't be here.
Um, so that's just my thoughts. I'm not sure where I stand in it all, but I also would agree on the um the length. I I don't think five years is appropriate. I would um I in my notes that I had made myself last night, I had I think two
years, but um I I I do think that five years is too much. Do we know about um what the percent of rock crushing would be like of this 350,000
cubic yards that we're asking to to remove? How much do we have a percentage of what that would be? How much of that would be crushing? You want >> my answer? Do you come off Matt and Yeah, please. Because what I've learned in this whole
process is you can say anything. >> So I'm going to say zero. >> Well then I'll say no crushing. >> Okay. >> I mean that's that's >> when there's zero. How can you say no crushing? >> Because there's no need for it. >> Right.
>> Okay. But that's what I've learned. But in in in listening to to some of the comments is I'm I'm I'm beside myself. I I really am cuz what what they're saying, you know, um
explosives. Okay, there there's no explosives out there. That's that's a silly request. Here's another silly. >> It isn't a silly request, though. When you consider what a gravel mine is, >> right? So, I mean, and that that's that's where I think we have to consider and where they're where they're
considering it is when you see what constitutes a gravel pit, it is the rock crushing, it is the mining, it is the explosives. So, that that is where they're coming from. >> Yeah. But that's not true, Erica. No muses
explosives around here to get gravel out. They don't do that. >> Then it's a mute point. >> They'll use the rock. Yeah, it's a mute point. >> Yeah. It's not. He's He's right about that. That that that is >> I do have a question and maybe this is for Mr. Songberg. Um do you So your plan
is to use roughly 200,000 yards in the in the in the reclamation of the of the uh >> or to to do the infrastructure to build the roads. So does that gravel need to be crushed >> that they're going to use the internal
gravel? You'll need you'll need gravel crush for your >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> For your infrastructure. >> So, and with your experience with with gravel pits, but um are there gravel pits that don't do crushing on site?
>> Um everything that I have known and been around is on site. It's too costly to haul it off. I believe we have approved gravel pits since I've been here that have had conditions of >> We've we've approved boro pits. I know.
And that's I mean the boro pits that don't have that don't crush anything. So it's the same thing. It's a mine. It's a gravel. You're mining the the product out. Kyle, can a individual can say they say say you approve or
disapprove this, but in the next two years if the developer's building and hasn't not applied or taken advantage of the conditional use permit, can they bring a crusher in for their own use? >> I would have to say yes. If you I mean, if you wanted to make some gravel for
your own. >> Yes, that's that's what I'm asking. I mean, >> I think we could prevent that. I would, you know, >> I'm I'm just I mean I just putting the cards on the table for everyone to know what what can happen regardless if the how this moves forward, >> right? >> So So
>> just to clarify what you're saying, Barry, is >> if they are not >> two years from now when we don't have a conditional use permit, but they have a pile of sand, gravel, whatever that needs to be crushed, they don't need a permit as if they're going to use it themselves. I'm saying yes, but if if we approve
something today and they don't activate that for two years, >> in the next two years, if it's for their use, they can bring a crusher in. I I believe >> I I don't know how you would say no. Like I said, >> to use for their own road usage. >> If you were built, for instance, your driveway is quite lengthy. If you came
to me and said, I would like to mine some gravel at my own home and build this road. >> I don't know what >> I don't I don't think we >> I don't know what mechanism we would use, >> right? So that's I'm just I'm just looking like you know like you would
like trying to get put everything on the table and to show that you know this how we how we move forward how this can move forward. But when you when you add those things together, a one-year, in my opinion, a one-year permit isn't
so outrageous because you have that time beforehand. And that's that's how I because I always look I maybe it's my deceitful mind and you know how I look at things. I always look at what will what can happen to this? What will be you know what are the what are the most
>> um Mr. else. I understand where you're going with this too, but you can't have so many conditions like we asked how many truck loads a day, what are the hours operation? What's the time of the operation? We understand you can't reduce all those down where it's not it's not even a viable project anymore.
>> I mean, I can understand, you know, we already reduced our hours. We already reduce when we can crush and then then they're asking for I want to tell you how many trucks are going to go out a day and I want this done between 8 and 5:00 and then I only want it done within
a 12-month time frame. >> I think >> you can't have all those things. >> I think I think we are familiar with with people's requests and how how >> how it works. >> And a 12-month time frame could be extended. Correct. if at the end of the
12-month time period. >> No, it would have to come back. >> Yes, it would have to come back. >> I'm just saying it could happen though. [Laughter] So again, I think the the question in front of you is
um can they profit off removing this and making it class 5 and use it on township roads and county roads? or are we not going to allow them to do that
with you turning this the cup down and we have to do it without maintaining the roads without without your permission. So that I think that's that >> well we certainly do not look at whether you can make money off the project or not. That's not a that's not a cons
something that we take into >> it's been brought up though. Well, I mean from our decision-m that is not a >> right >> I mean >> agree >> best to you but >> whether whether or not it's a >> Yeah. >> you know some of the things that that I
was on site and one thing that I would ask and I and I think they're they're doing it already is the approach where you come off that property is farther south so it's less impactful to Dean and Sue's property so it's farther away from them closer to your sons I think. >> Yes. Um,
>> and we we even put it on my sons if necessary. >> So, I mean that that is a positive that they've already I mean I think already doing um >> and and I want to stay as far away from Dean and Sus as we can and make it I don't mean they have a beautiful place there. If you got to go there, you got
to see his two chandeliers he made. They're awesome. And I I do I want to bother them? No. They have a wonderful beautiful place there and I want to be as in the perfect world they would even know we were there mining but you you
know that's not going to happen. There is going to be and I I warned them that I said this isn't a 10-year project. It's 5 years. I wish it would I hope it's two years. Um, but we're going to get it out of there as fast as we can
without restrictions and get you back, put the reccomation plan together, black dirt, seat it, and have have it just like it is right now. And and that that's that's our plan for this property. It's it's not for a gravel pit or a mining operation. And I've I've
said that before. So, >> well, I I I think you are being honest when you say you don't want a gravel pit. I mean I I believe you I but I don't know how because we don't want that either, right? >> But what what constitute what where where is that and how do we
how do we state that because I I mean and I think we disagree a little bit on length. I do think a shorter time is I I think a contractor would would love to I mean if I'm a contractor I'd love this to go 20 years. So I when I have a something closer by I have the product close. I mean that's it's common sense.
Um, but I think if we're not worried about contractors potential future projects, I think this can be done a lot your project can be done done a lot quicker in my opinion. >> Yeah. >> And and and and that's my wish too.
>> Richard, maybe you can answer this for me. In a typical gravel pit that's mined, how much of the top soil is typically mined? >> Usually, they don't mine any of it. They'll push it off to the side. Mhm. >> Some of it is sold because top sales,
top soil is, but I don't know that they do that there. I don't know how much that they most of the time you don't have any extra to sell. So, what they'll do is they'll push it all off to the side. >> They'll take the gravel out. They'll push it all back over >> and and you saw in the mining plan what
it is to build a seven to nt burm on the north side >> and the west side. the event and you also saw in there that you know storm water there will be no storm water it's got will be retained on premises on that 90 acres it's not going
to run off in the neighbors you know one of the other comments was Jake brakes and and this is quite a coincidence because I have a I just had this last weekend someone complain about Jake brakes on Becker 1 um in the project and Jim Jim's not here but in
Becker one using their Jake brakes coming down to stop at Highway 10 and there it's an overuse and very so I I had that conversation and Klay County has an ordinance against Jake bras um and something that we might want to look at but um a Jake break going in that
area in the Lakes area was absolutely would be not appropriate in my opinion. I want to address one other thing is safety which is is top priority and um as I stated before at at the last meeting I I live 100 ft from a gravel
pit that was mine for seven years and that is right on the curve. If anybody knows where Bleachers Barn restaurant is, it's right on that curve. Very, very dangerous. Thousands of trucks came out of there over the seven-year period. And
I am happy to report there was not one accident. There was not one child ran over on their bike. There was not one walker hit by a truck. And and this is just from personal experience that I I I live this what
they're they're complaining about. I what this is coming down to Barry and you know this that it's just okay to have gravel pits just not in my neighborhood. >> Yeah. I think the uh the only one thing I would like for safety concerns would be a um and I think the county would
provide this a um car approaching or approaching traffic when you come out from Highark Road and make that stop sign. There should be a and there's those available where you have approaching traffic because that that >> that crest of that >> we discussed that already in planning
>> would be would be very uh concerning >> but that I I do believe that and there is a number of places in the county that could benefit from that um approaching traffic. In your mining plan, you have 200 350,000
cubic yards to be extracted. >> Correct. >> And I'm I'm just asking for clarification. 150,000 cubic yards of that will stay >> for your roads or >> the estimate was 25,000
was needed for the interior road. So then the engineer told us that we had to remove the rest to have it off premises to make those lots to grade to make them buildable. And then this is a number that we came up with. This is a number we we paid
Apex $20,000 to do all the work, the copography and everything. We paid them that amount of money to come out and to because we're to tell us what we need to do >> to I thought at the planning commission >> I saw a higher number 50,000 was
mentioned in 200,000 like 150,000 was >> what was required on site and 200,000 was what was going to be >> removed >> removed >> I there was different numbers than your 25 on I >> that was before >> well I thought John was involved right
away and give you the number when he gave you the number >> I believe what you're talking about was before they come out with their report of what needed >> to go both ways That would have been at the very first meeting, correct? >> The very first planning commission back
in >> was it May? >> June. >> How long have we been doing that? >> Yeah, I think it was >> June. >> June. Yeah. >> And that's the number I'm >> Is that just the township road that would go through go through or does that that include any usage by people that
buy the property? that doesn't include token. They'd have to do their own stuff, >> which I'm I'm glad you brought that up. Um the product on if we didn't have to haul in, there would be opportunities for people who buy lots and need to build their driveways to have it right
there without having trucks go down Highark Avenue >> and delivered to to site, which I I think is is is a a benefit to the person buying the lot. It's also a benefit to the neighbors. So then it would be more than 25,000 yards if you were going to do that.
>> It certainly could be. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Mr. Chair, >> can I >> Yeah, please come up here. Mad, you can just just switch through. >> It's all warm for you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Um I just want to given some of this
conversation about um can we, you know, could they crush on site if they needed the material on site? I mean, if you deny the conditional use permit and they need 25,000 cubic yards to build their road, apparently you're saying they can do that on site without a conditional
use permit. So, what this really is requesting is, do we open a commercial um forale gravel operation in the middle of a residential area? And that's where I think that's the question that you guys have to >> decide is is this appropriate? and know
that if you say yes, you're not going to stop anybody else from doing something like this into the future. And next time somebody says, well, this isn't conforming with your comprehensive plan. Uh, and if you say, you know, well, we're not going to allow it. It doesn't conform with our comprehensive plan. They're going to throw this in your face, saying, well, you don't follow
your comprehensive plan here. You put a industrial use in the middle of a residence. And so I guess that's where I'm saying you can allow this developer to succeed and to have their residential development and build their roads at no cost crush their gravel on site that
they need to put the road in. But why do you need to allow them to have this huge economic industry that's an industrial use in the middle of a residence or residential area? And I think that's the question that's being posed to you. And I don't know why you would do it. I think it's a terrible precedent to set.
And they could use the big rocks for decor if they have this big wonderful divi subdivision. There's huge rocks everywhere that look beautiful and they can have that as, you know, decorations for the land owners that are buying those lots. There could be lots of uses for that. And then you don't have the
truck traffic, you don't have the dust, you don't have the safety hazards, you don't have to have the township road agreements. And it just seems like that would be a win-win. You're going to have the trucks no matter what you do. The trucks are going
to be there. And that this is it may be worse if you push it. >> Shorten the time. >> The truck the trucks are >> if you got if they're if they're given a shorter amount of time, I'm going to tell you they're going to get more trucks and there's going to be more
trucks. And if there's nothing to say what they can do there that if if you tell me I got so many days to get this out of here, I'm going to get every resource I can to get it out of here. That's if and so how many trucks do you want? I mean I
So that that's not that's not the best thing either. a lot of trucks is not >> if there was if you were allowed to have the crushing and and have a pile. Say this say you an example would be say you did some site work prior to I mean
with the land alteration permit and you are ready for and then you apply for your permit and get the crusher in there. Say it say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say say I make a motion for a one-year mining operation and they get this hu they get
this pile crushed that's sitting there um and then after the year the the the mining project is done but we have a pile of gravel there and that can be removed in the next within the next five years >> is that is that doable or if that is
that a you know >> I don't know how that works for those guys because usually they don't make that big of piles. No, exactly. >> And they try and so they're trying to, you know, you're going to have >> So I think we have to also think of we we have to have a compromise. We can't
think of what's best for the developer and what's best for the ex the excavating company >> and then not think about what's best. Like I think we have we have to >> have a compromise. >> We could make things worse for for the
neighbors by if if we make the wrong decisions. we could make things worse for them. >> But I think a contractor's only and correct me if I'm wrong, but I a contractor's only crush if they got a sale. >> Well, usually they'll crush a a a pile and then they'll sell it. And when
that's gone, they'll crush another pile. And five years is not a long time to get that gravel out of there. It's just not. Everybody seems to think that that's a long time. That's not a long time. >> Well, it is a long time. might think >> I don't think in the life of a gravel pit it's not a long time but the life of
a residence >> come out of there in that time frame I called gravel that's county they move high side >> Kylie can't you got to speak in the mic uh he just stated that another gravel
company in the area said their maximum that they've hauled out or their a reasonable amount was 70,000 annually 70,000 yards um annually. >> Pardon me. >> That would probably be a high end. >> The high end would be 70,000. That was
for another um >> but again um >> but then you're asking for more truck traffic. And I >> I I agree that we have to look out for these people and that everybody has to be looked out for here. But just something that sounds good could maybe
end up being worse for you. Well, >> and we know that they can take the material out of there without any anything. They so they can have a lot of trucks and this is >> well >> I mean I what we can't control we can't
control. what we get in control. We >> But we can think about the implications of this and not >> try and get that stuff hauled out of there as fast as possible and not have two years of >> Well, we can limit it to 100,000 also. >> Yeah, we can
>> instead of 350 >> the material though, but don't they have to remove you need to remove so much? >> Again, you are talking about a developer's wishes what they want their end product to look like >> their their their scale. That's that
that's that's not what our goal in here is to make sure that that it's accommodated. I mean that whether whether they want it flat on sea level. We that's it's that you can't take you can't make your decision because this is
what our what we want our end product to look like in my opinion. Um what if they wanted to what they want to add product? I mean those to get what he I mean maybe maybe those lots would have to be 5 acre lots to be sailable instead of 2 and a
half acres. So what I'm saying just because that's what the most profit would bring you doesn't mean that that's what we need to go with that's >> would did you want to say something please come Matt
>> you said the developer this this is from Apex engineering this isn't this number is not from me this is what they said that had to be taken off material >> to achieve your goal >> to make it buildable Again, that's your
goal. >> Your goal is to make every two and a half acre lots buildable. And when we I mean, there are lots in this county that aren't buildable because of this. I mean, the steepness and and when So, I'm just saying that
>> this is not where every every lot may not be buildable. >> Let me understand this though. Now, you have a permit to right to to make these lots. >> Yes. >> Okay. So is is there a limit on what you could take out of there right now? >> No. >> Those No.
>> No. >> So right now he can take the 375 or whatever it is. That's what I'm saying. He he he can already take it. >> Um >> cuz wind that there's going to be a road project out in that area like I said
again in 2028 and we could just leave it because if the if the county doesn't need it at that point, we we we don't need a cup. >> Mhm. And they can they can build a they can put a plant on there for asphalt. They can do the whole nine yards. And do
I want to do that? Absolutely not. Is it an option? Absolutely. >> But >> but that's not an option we can consider. >> And that's not something we can control. >> Yeah. >> Right. Well, well, I guess you can because if we can get off there, there's
going to be nothing for the project to for us to get rid of. They got rid of it in three years and they're talking three years from now that they they're looking for some aggregate and sorry even though we're a half mile from you we don't have it.
>> There is a lot of aggregate if you get in the lakes area there's lots of hills and knobs that you especially you get south of south in the over by Becker one that I mean it's not quality gravel but there's fill all all over >> and homes.
>> Yeah. So I mean I think the bottom line is what's now we can't control everything but what would be reasonable in our in our approval to the to the neighboring properties. I do I do think
with with where the proximity to Dean and Sue there's my example of how close they are. They are um they are the ones most impacted and I have had conversations with both Dean and Sue and they are I mean they are good people.
They're not willing just they're not just saying no that I don't want anything and they would like nothing but they understand that you know something's going to happen. >> Yeah. And so >> and be honest with that that that was the endgame I feel of this was have
nothing happen. Just put the cattle back out there. Oh, I'm sure for some. >> Oh, >> yeah. Yeah. >> Nobody nobody none of us likes change. >> I think everyone here included. Yeah. >> When it affects us. So, >> y
>> um I think as much as I would like this to just to be easy and say no, this shouldn't there should be nothing. I do I do feel that there is an opportunity to remove some of it. But I think the time frame and the um
so I mean I I and I haven't heard from a couple commissioners so I don't know what they are going to what they're thinking. So, I'm going to just start this and make a motion um to concur with planning and zoning with the alterations of a one-year
project uh dust control on the Hall Road, no hallin product, no crushing on site uh with a lake ununice road agreement and Becker County road agreement reducing it to 250,000 no Jake breaks and again a one-year
window. So, I just want So, I just want to make sure clear. We got one-year project window, no crushing on site, 250,000 yards instead of 350, right? >> Yeah. >> Um, that can be removed that can be removed and sold.
And then what? What else? There's two more. And no Jake brakes. >> And again, just reiterating the one year. >> Yeah. And then um did you say anything about you said dust control with the with the township >> on and on the hall road
>> that's got to be in conjunction with Ununice Township, right? Correct. Am I correct? >> Internally is internally >> internally is them but Ununice Town. Yeah. Okay. >> Road agreement, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yeah, >> Mr. Chair, there's a motion. >> Yeah, there's a motion. Yeah. Well, we have to have a second in order for us to have discussion. >> I'll second. >> So, we have a motion and a second. We
have a motion by Barry and a second by Erica. All right. Now we can have some please call. We have discussion. >> So the planning commission held a special meeting and there was some findings adopted by that body. Um since then you move the mic over.
>> The planning commission adopted some findings at a special meeting held in I believe it was June. Um since that time frame uh our office has retained Kristen Nearing Gartner and she is online. um she provided us some findings with conditions um that were given to you
yesterday. Um so concurring with planning and zoning, Mr. Chair, would be different than what was provided to you yesterday. I just want to clarify that. >> Okay. >> And we have that >> with within that document there was 12
um 12 conditions. It's we got it yesterday or no just now and yesterday. >> It was emailed yesterday. >> Yeah, it was emailed yesterday. We also have a paper copy. >> So you would ask that we just concur with this and instead of this
>> instead of the instead of the planning commission? Yes. I would ask that you adopt these findings provided to you yesterday >> and that's fine with the with me as the motion maker. >> Findings of fact. >> There are major differences from what you guys just >> there's a couple differences yesterday.
Yes. But the The first set of findings we would basically nyx and we would adopt these and then go through them to make sure that they are adequate to Mr. Commissioner Nelson's condition >> changes changes within. >> No, I just want to make an objection for the record because you were provided
with a findings and a document approving a conditional use permit with all the reasons for it before any of us showed up today. And so that would just mean our testimony means nothing. And so you're being asked just to adopt something that was sent to you yesterday
um without incorporating any of the testimony and it's your job as the county commissioners to make the findings and so I wouldn't be talked into just adopting whatever findings >> Mr. Chair and and these the changes that I made would be overruling any the the findings. So it' be we'd be
incorporating the the conditions that the motion maker and second put on the with the findings of fact. Well, and for the record, we could have adopted findings today that was denying this application. We we could do that as well. So
[Music] >> Kyle with with the motion and the voice conditions they would supersede what's what we've have in here um is adequate for our motion. I think yeah add I think I would go through these one by one and then
>> if we have to amend them um >> so the if that is okay with you >> I I would like I would like I would like to ask the motioner in a second if they would be willing to amend the one year to two year
because right now how much how much time if he doesn't crush if he just hauls out the material how much time will he have to do that with the permit they have Wow. >> Well, one year and it's it's a $100 permit. So, he could come in every year. >> So, he could come in. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And the conditional use permit.
>> And on on your motion, Barry, he doesn't have that option. >> The he's got the land alteration permit now. >> Yeah. That's what I mean. We're actually going backwards. So, better off not to have anything from us right now and just go with what he's got.
>> That's that's how I kind of stated or explained. he can do as much prep work for two years as he wants with that land alteration permit. And >> so technically that gives him it's giving him three years. Two years with the land alteration.
>> Here here here's the issue I have the one year crush his own. >> Um we've we've already stated that the removal of 250 yard let's say let's say he's going to keep 50 200 yards is not going to be able to be done in one year.
So that's why I'm saying two years would be more realistic to have it removed and and you know what I mean? Have it sold. >> Does that make sense? >> Yeah. When you say a large operation >> remove 70,000. >> Yeah. That's what I'm saying.
>> And you're giving us a one year to remove 250,000. Um the math doesn't add up. >> That's that's all I'm saying is >> we could reduce it to 70,000. Well, that's still that he's better off. So, what you're doing is he's better off
with nothing then. Really? >> He can't sell off site until for that one year. >> If he if he doesn't have anything, he can't sell anything. >> Yeah. >> He can move on his own property and and stockpile and >> and remove.
>> You can remove I said sell anything. >> You just can't sell. >> Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Yeah. And I'm I'm I understand that. I'm just saying would it would you be open? Would you two be open to amending your motion from one year to two? That's that's >> I'm not. >> Okay. >> At this time, no. >> Please do not make comments. We are
deciding. So, thank you. >> As we stated, if after a year >> he needs to apply for another permit for additional sales, we would be back here. As unpleasant as that may be, I mean, we we would be back
here to to address it again. I just think we we have to consider everybody um and and how this affects everybody. And I think this is the best way. Nobody wants to be back here to to do this in
one year or three years, but hopefully in three years everybody here will realize it isn't a big deal and maybe we won't have so much controversy. Um, but I think for now this is this is I agree with Commissioner Nelson and
then I would stick to a year. >> So So Kyle, do do you want to go through the specific the specific not matching up conditions right now or >> I would and and I'd just like to make sure that I have I would like Yeah, I would like that
>> accurately. So I think if we can go through them one by one and Commissioner Nelson, if you want to modify them or what have you, that would be great. Uh so the first condition is Prairie Lake and any successor and any interest must comply with the mining and reclamation plan submitted on July 29th, 2025.
>> Page on first 10. >> Uh 10. >> We got to find page 10. Do I have that one? >> Would you like to snap a picture of this for >> She's got a copy. >> She's got a copy. >> Um I'm sorry. >> All right. Go ahead. Number one number
one is Prairie Lake and any successor and interest must comply with the mining and recommendation plan submitted on July 29th 20125 except as specified specifically modified by these conditions. So that's number one >> as as modify. Um
>> basically what it's saying is if it's an exemption if these conditions modify that plan then it would still be binding. I think the modification then would be >> what it would be modifying is the number of cubic yards the time like
the additional conditions that we would on we'd add. >> It's a catch-all. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Number two, normal mining operations are restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Crushing hours are restricted 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p p.m.
Monday through Friday. >> Hey, please I'm going to ask you one more time to please not make comments. >> Number number three then the crushing maker only um would be deleted at that with this motion. >> So >> number number three would be deleted as
would the crushing hours. >> No, the mining operation >> according to according to his motion. Yes, he said no crushing. So that would be removed. >> Okay. So, can they still crush their own stuff? >> Yep. >> Yes,
>> they can prior to the pri I mean I would to make it cleanest prior to the one-year mining on before they act for the would be the cleanest. But let's move on.
>> So, three is eliminated on your motion. The hour number two is good though, right? >> Except for the crushing hours are restricted to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. >> Delete that last >> number three is deleted may only occur before >> is the intent of that to put up as much
material as possible and then basically material can be sold in a one-year time frame. >> Is that what I'm understanding? >> What was the repeat that? Well, there's this side conversation about crushing their own material. So,
if if if they wanted to go crush, again, most of the time it's not going to be a 100,000 yards of material in one pile. It's going to be like 5 or 10,000. So, is the idea to say, "Hey, um, go crush as much as you can in this 2-year time frame, and we'll let you sell it in one
year." >> That not with this motion right now. the mount the crushing now would only be for for your use or for your personal use. You I mean >> so if they crushed if they crushed 50,000 and they used 25,000 they could
not sell that excess >> according to our laws that would be a no. >> Okay. >> According to our current >> I just want to make sure. >> Well because actually when they do crush you know they always crush more and then it gets left there. Can they leave there in a big pile or what can we do? because
you're making it really this is making it really hard for these guys to operate and >> they're not there won't be the crushing would be limited to their road only is what that's I'm trying to make this clear so if this were to pass and we leave here >> Yep. >> the ground you you're only creating
class 5 for your own project. >> It could be for their own project offsite too for your own use offsite. >> They wouldn't be able to sell it. Yeah. So >> with that being said, we we can crush as much as >> we can crush as much as we want as long
as we don't sell it, >> right? >> And there's no restriction on ours. >> No. >> No. >> No. And there's no no restriction on how many truck loads? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. when you when you >> during the year of your conditional you
or during your conditional use per >> no he's saying he can crush his material right now if he's not if if you're not selling the material these conditions don't apply >> right correct that's our land alteration permit
>> I would disagree with that >> I don't >> that's the very premise of having a conditional use permit for a binding he's asked for mining and crushing You're saying no crushing, >> but that follows. >> That would say no. >> I don't know that I agree with your take on Mr. Chair.
>> I think that's a discussion, a legal discussion. >> That's a legal discussion for some other time. So, my understanding is that that >> have legal counsel online if you'd like to ask. >> Well, yeah, let's ask her. If there's a can a person can a person that's operating on their own land crush
a product or use a product in their on their for their own property or their own use. >> So I'm Kristen Ner as Kyle said I have been working with the county um as as the county's been navigating this application. Um I will
say you know I am unable because your internet is down. I'm unable to access your um ordinance right now. Also, I cannot consult the ordinance language specifically. Um, and and so on that front, I mean, I'm going to defer to Kyle on this. And if Kyle's uh
understanding of the ordinance is that you know the definition of mining or an extra extractive use requires um or or is part and parcel with a commercial you know sale of that product then um you know if the selling is not happening um
then the restrictions from the conditional use permit and um that would require a conditional use permit wouldn't apply. But again, I don't have the language in front of me right now because the um the ordinance isn't accessible to me. >> So So to be fair, we're not saying for
sure either way right now. We'll have to >> It's not spec mining is not specific to crushing again. So if you have a farm and you were to borrow 50 yards of material for your driveway, we would not require a conditional use permit for that. And again, mining is not specific
to crushing. You're not going to require a cup for each individual that borrows three yards of material off their property. >> That would be the same instance here. The ordinance doesn't say, "Well, you've you've crushed now 10,000 yards. Now you need a CUT." It's >> I don't think we have I don't think we
have anything in our ordinance that would would say that. >> And that's what I said earlier. There's not a mechanism in place. Um would it be the the intent of anybody that someone's going to go crush 200,000 yards and give it away? No. That's not rational. That's not reasonable and no reasonable person
would do that. But could you? Right now I would say there's no mechanism in place. >> I and I think I agree with that and and I maybe that's the ordinance we look to. I don't think it's going to happen but >> right it's not reasonable or rational. >> No.
>> Okay. Let's keep moving. >> Um >> number four >> BMS no less than seven feet or no. Well, you would get rid of number three as well. Number four is BMS no less than 7 ft in height from the existing average grade of the property must be placed along the
entire north and west perimeter of the project site consistent with the site plan before any mining or crushing activities may occur. Removal of soil from the project site specifically for purposes of constructing the burm shall not constitute mining activities for purposes of this condition. BMS must be
maintained so as to avoid erosion and to comply with state and local law on noxious weeds. So the only thing that we would remove on that would be in the third third sentence or the third line would be or crushing activities because we're not allowing that, right?
>> Well, yeah, it's >> not. Am I correct on that? >> Just the word or crushing. >> Yeah, that's what I mean. Or crushing. Number five, no mining may take place within 500 ft of the residence located on parcel 170368.006
between the holidays of Memorial Day and Labor Day. >> You're good with that one? >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Prairie Lake and any successor and interest must enter into a road agreement with Lake Ununas Township addressing increased wear and tear on Highark Avenue dust control and placement of truck traffic warning signs
for the area. That can that agreed it does you mentioned on the other ones about I'll hear the next one. >> Number seven, dust control measures must be utilized on the project site designed to reasonably prevent dust from reaching neighboring residences.
Number eight, low frequency backup alarms must be placed and used on any of the equipment required to have alarms in accordance with MSHAW and any other applicable agencies. Um, number nine is reiterating number six, but Prairie Lake must provide signs
indicating truck traffic for the area. Number 10, Prairie Lake and any successor and interest must comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all permitting requirements and conditions imposed on such permits related to operations on the project
site. Number 11. All mining operations must cease no more than one year after commencement. Prairie Lake or any successor in interest must provide written notice to the county in advance of commencing
mining operations on the project site and upon termination of mining activities. Number 12. All reclamation must be completed in accordance with the reclamation plan and within no more than one year after mining operations on the project site have ceased.
So what your motion was is we would add an additional of limiting it to 250,000 yards and no Jake breaks. And I don't >> I don't know if we can enforce the no
Jake breaks as a individual or as a project specific. >> I don't know, >> but I think it's something that >> um >> we should look at as a county. >> I think we will be looking at as a county ordinance. And I and it's not very often they're used, but >> most dump trucks don't have Jake brakes,
>> but it's some Well, all the ones in going into Lake Park hauling concrete out do. You know, if you if you look at the down here, they don't. But >> again, the Jake Briggs is probably not a non But recognize that that's a community concern.
>> It's probably not enforceable is what I'm saying. We can it can stay in or come out, but it's >> Kristen did reiterate that as well that that would be problematic to enforce. So, >> so we can remove the Jake brakes, but notice know that >> Yep. >> So, then I want to just make it clear.
So in the first before the the conditional use permit is good for two years. So within that window >> when they're using the land use >> no it's it's it's it's it's good for two years till you start it >> right >> that's what I'm trying >> they have two years to get it start implement it >> implement it okay that yeah that's the
word I was going so and and while using the land alteration use permit they can crush um rock or grab for their use >> for their personal use >> personal use now after that is out and the conditional use permit come when
they cannot crush rock for their personal use. What about the already crushed rock? Can that be then sold because with the continuous use for it's not being crushed? >> Um the one thing we did miss is on here
I believe I said no no no hauling in product. >> No, we did not say that. Oh, did >> I think I said that in my motion because I have it listed here. Oh. >> Um, >> I got it down. >> Um, but I I don't think I don't think
there's a lot of rock on this. It's not a lot of big rock on this site. >> No, >> I don't think it's a >> Mr. Chair, uh, >> this almost makes it impossible for them. >> It really does. It's so to do >> there's not this is not a compromise
>> and it could be worse, I think. >> Yeah, I think it is going to be worse. Um >> and and it should there should if this is not a compromise in any way, shape or form >> and it it shouldn't be like this. >> How how it will make it worse.
>> He can crush as much as he wants. He can do >> well they're not going to the sale thing is the the big thing it >> but if you're going to be in a big hurry to get the material out of there that's that's going to be very interesting. you're you're going to have so much more
truck traffic than you would if you sold >> load by load. >> I don't agree with that because I think there's only so many places that want that want and need gravel at certain times. >> So the restriction of time will restrict the number of loads. You're going to haul as many loads as you can get sold
regardless. >> Well, they're not they're not this is not something they this is not a product they can sell very easy. This is just at this point it's just Phil, you know. >> It's just Phil. >> That's what it is. And so, um,
>> but we're giving them an opportunity to be able to sell it where without that they wouldn't have an opportunity to sell it. >> Yeah. But nobody's going to want to buy it. It's so it's not there's no,
>> you know, that's it's just not. And I I would like to see a compromise. This is not a compromise at all. These guys aren't there. There there's nothing here. It's It's very unfair. Um
this is not a compromise. This is something different. >> I I Yeah, go ahead, Mr. >> Well, I was just saying we have a motion to second unless you either want to make amendment to it or or alter it. I I call a question. I will I will propose an
amendment if you guys are okay. I would propose that um keeping it one year and allowing crushing. >> That would be my proposed amendment. >> It's your motion. >> That's No, it's my proposed to amend
your motion. >> You I'm not changing it. If you want to amend make a motion to amend, you make a motion to amend with your changes. >> But we have to vote on this motion first. >> No, you make your amendment during this motion. Okay, I will make a motion to amend.
>> Make a new amend. Make a new motion. >> Make a motion. >> Let's Let's vote on this. >> We got We got a motion, a second. We're in discussion. Let's >> You can make What you're asking to do is to amend this current motion? >> Yeah. But is don't we have to allow the
>> You You can make a motion to amend our motion to what you're asking. >> And you need a second after that. We mo we vote for the amendment and then you vote for the after afterwards. That's what you're asking. >> Correct. >> Okay, I got you. So, I'm going to make
>> an amendment motion to change the one year to two years and to allow crushing. Do I have Do I So, I've made that motion. I've made that amendment. Motion. Do I have a second? Okay. My motion dies. My amendment dies.
All right. So, now >> got to go back to the original. >> Go back to the original zone and call for a vote. All right. So, we have a motion by Commissioner Nelson and a second by Commissioner Jeepson. Um, we'll do we'll do a roll call vote to make it easier for us. So, um, all all
in. So, say I or nay if you are >> just start my end. >> I'll start with Commissioner Nelson. >> I >> I >> no. Nay. >> Nay. >> All right. Motion does not pass. I'll move to make the I'll move to make the uh request for
conditional use permit for mining operations as is listed in this report. I'll second that. >> The original >> with no >> just to clarify, you're you're not making any amendments to >> you're not changing the
in the findings. >> Correct. That is correct. >> So it could be worse. >> I I don't see in any way, shape, or form how it could be worse with ch with reducing and changing. I there's no there's no possible way you can make
this worse. He's Well, you go five years now. You're you're allowing it seven years. >> Well, you you made it impossible for these guys to operate. They almost got to sell the property. So >> So I mean, he could >> they can move dirt on there, but So if
the cup commenced in one year even, but they they could move dirt on the property for another 10 years. The timeline has to be from when it starts in that you have that many years. You can't say 5 plus two or 5 plus one. >> You can say 5 plus two because you have
two years before this starts. If you don't act on this within two years, it is nothing. It is dissolved >> afterwards as well. Aiden could go >> you could not sell anything afterwards. >> Not sell but he can't sell in that 2-year time frame. >> No, he can't. But he can do all you can
do all the work on site. You can stockpile. You can prep this whole thing for what you need >> and then you have now you have 5 years more. >> I don't think he's going to >> you're making I'm not going to I'm not for two years. >> I'm not speculating what can and can
happen. I'm saying what what's possible and you're extending this to a seven-year project up to a seven-year project and then like Kyle said, anything after that is ongoing. So, can you make it worse? You just made it worse and no question about it. Well, I wanted a compromise and you did not give
us >> You didn't vote for You didn't second the second the amendment. >> That wasn't much of a compromise. >> I'll make I'll make another amendment to the motion. >> Well, we don't have a second yet. >> Oh, >> no. I bill motion. Richard second. So, I'll
make another amendment to the I would like to make an amendment that they are they are not allowed to introduce any other material from another place to crush. And I don't know if we can control the Jake brakes, but I'm going to put that in there. >> Oh, you can't.
>> We already established we can't. >> We can't. Okay. And then I would also like to have the conditional use permit good for three years. So, do I have that's my my motion is to initial use permit for three years. Um, no introduction of any
out exterior material to be crushed. >> And those are my so if they if we gave them point of >> order I have a motion. I have I have a motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay. Mr. Commissioner Nelson. >> All right. Now we can discuss.
>> So now if they have three years they can go five. They have two years prior to this has to take effect >> before it expires. >> Before they start. >> So they can work two years on site then apply for it before the and then have
three years to do commercial activity >> and there's still the crushing allowed >> and the crushing is still in there. >> So what would basically we need to >> I need to know the first day they sell a load of gravel is what everyone's saying. So if you they could crush
50,000 yards and leave it sit there for two years and that would get it to a 5year period. So B I don't know >> well until they >> I've never looked at it that way. I guess I don't >> Well, I'm I'm saying worst case scenario. I'm get I'm putting out there
what can and >> will would possibly be done. >> Did you are we discussing your amendment? >> Yes, we are. So, it's changing from five to three. >> That's it. >> And then not allowing um exterial material
>> coming in >> come in and then keeping it at 300 350,000. >> Who seconded? >> I did. >> Very seconded. So now we have So we are so
>> we're voting on allowing the amendment. The >> amendment. >> We're voting on allowing then then do we have to vote on the motion after that? >> Okay. So >> you're amending the motion. >> You guys are confusing me. >> I'm trying to tell you. >> Thank you. All right. So we'll take a we'll do a roll call vote on >> Hold it. So it's from 5 years to three years.
>> Yep. >> And no exterior material brought in to crush. To crush to crush. >> Yes. Okay. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a second. So, we'll take a roll call vote. I >> I >> I >> I
>> I >> I >> All right. So, the amendment passes. >> So, now we have to vote on the motion. >> Motion which includes a three-year project rather than a five. >> Yep. So, >> but still crushing >> the changing of facts or the finding of facts will as we went through will go
back to the crushing. So it would be the original only alter the >> the time >> time frame and then no no no product brought in. >> Yep. >> All right. So we have a motion a second. Uh we'll do a roll call again. So >> nay >> nay.
>> You understand? >> Are you voting? >> You said no. >> No. Hold on. What? Okay. We amended the motion. >> Yeah. >> This is to switch it to three years. >> Yes. >> The motion on the table states three years with no product brought in. Otherwise everything concurs with
planning is or concurs with the findings >> then. Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Motion passes. >> All right. We have anything else for the good of the order? >> I do not think so. >> We are journ.