in a moment with the with the pledge of >> allegiance. I allegiance 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. >> Good morning everybody and happy birthday Barry. Everybody, thank you everybody online. >> We'd like I'd like to request a moment of silence. >> A Venmo forum. I have my >> I think we should request a moment of
silence. >> All right. Do we have any changes to the agenda? >> Uh Madame Chair, I do have a a few minor adjustments here. Um I had sent you out a request for a liquor license for uh Music on the Mountain, which you would
have received. So, I would uh request to add that to the agenda uh for approval. It's timesensitive. It's June 27th. >> Uh the consent agenda. >> We add it to the consent. >> Um if you're comfortable with that, that would be fine with me. >> I'm fine with that. Is it
>> Yeah, we got it. >> Yeah, we'll add it to >> Yeah. A liquor license standard. >> I Yeah, again, I would be fine with that. So, um I noticed under um my information it says new generation.
Um that should be next generation minor. Um so just make that we'll make that modification. And then the last update that I have in the packet under the consent agenda from Mitch Lund Dean
regarding um the pick in the bid application for the drones. It was a bit confusing. So, I did get clarification on that and he was also awaiting some information yesterday which I sent out to you. So, the lowest bid um that came in for that uh withdrew. So, it wasn't
making sense to me until I asked the question. So, that uh that low bid bidder um withdrew. So, his recommendation is to go with Skitec. um he did um references as well as Skitec Solutions
had also done prior work and is a local vendor. Okay. >> So I just wanted to clarify that information for you on the consent agenda >> and that's uh number eight under consent >> number eight. Yeah. >> Uh yes I believe so. >> So we're keeping it in the consent agenda just you just >> I just wanted to provide
>> clarify all because it was uh the information that was originally in the packet included that low bidder. Yeah, I think uh Richard and I or we in at meeting we kind of said to bring it to finance to clarify a couple things, wasn't it? And I think that's what you
did. So, yep. >> Okay. Um can I get a motion to um accept the agenda or approve the agenda? >> I'll make a motion to approve the agenda with the changes. >> Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Any further discussion? Um, I did have one. Okay, go ahead. >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carried. >> Did you have something, Barry? >> Well, I have something on the consent
agenda that I had just a question on, so I'll wait till we >> Oh, okay. Um, minutes. Any changes to the minutes? I did have one. Um I I think we missed
two of the life-saving awards. Don and Kila Hansen are not listed on here >> and they they also got some but or they each got one. That was all I had. >> Madam Chair, um a kind of a
clarification on page three of three under land use environmental services under number one. Um, I I think that last sentence, 5% change order to be approved by I think who just needs a little bit clarification that that is
um how that's worded. It just it seems a little bit not clear to me. Well, because it's with with and giving the I think it should just say and giving the land use committee or administrator
um a 5% change order allowance instead of I mean it just it just says it's 5%. It sounds like it's that amount plus 5% automatically and it's not. I mean >> yeah it does seem like that if needed. >> Yeah, if Yeah, if needed would be or if appropriate or something. >> Y
>> Yep. But that was that was all I had. >> Yep. I didn't have anything. >> All right. Is that it? >> Motion to approve the minutes. >> I'll second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Approve.
>> Opposed. I mean. All right. Motion carried. All right. Consent agenda. >> Um Madam Chair, I just had a question on um and Mary, this is a question for you then. Under number four, temporary absentee voting location on that on that resolution, it
doesn't state how many days or did you want that to state be more specific? >> I will amend that. It is the Saturday before the primary. So, it's going to be August 8th from 9 to 3 and October 24th. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So, I will add that.
>> Okay. If that's appropriate to have that those dates because I didn't want it. >> Mhm. I think she just got clarification late yesterday. >> Okay. >> Or maybe even this morning. >> Okay. Anything anything else on the consent agenda? >> Well, Madam Chair, uh just under the
cash comparison, Mary, we discussed a little bit yesterday. I don't know if we should pull it and talk about it later or just answer it here. I noticed um public safety is up over 600,000 comparison from April to April, April last year to April this year. Is there
something significant in there that we Okay, that's all fine. You know what? I'll follow up with you later. Okay. >> I noticed that, too. >> Okay. Anything else? If not, I'll entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda.
>> I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> All right. I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carried. Do we have any open form? Come on up.
Say your name and address, please. >> Good morning. My name is Dell Jaskin. I live at 14025 West Lake Sally Drive, Detroit Lakes. >> Welcome. >> Thanks. I'm here because I would like to be appointed to the board of adjustments.
>> Oh, >> we have that on the agenda, Madam Chair, but we can do it now if you want to. Um yeah, I mean either um either one. >> Well, Madam Chair, I think this would be
a good time for you to >> introduce yourself and maybe go through some >> Sure. Yeah. Again, my name is Dell Jaskin. Um I moved to the Detroit Lakes area about 30 years ago. Um 20 of those years I was a teacher here in town. I
retired about 10 years ago and I have been currently working with my husband in the building trades. So I have had some exposure to zoning. Um we have seven kids, 13 grandkids, most of who live in this area and I would
like to get involved in the community and so I would like to be appointed >> to the board of adjustments. >> Anybody have any questions for us? Uh, Madam Chair, uh, just so you know the full circle here. So, Chris was gone for
our Pelican River watershed appointees last meeting. Uh, Chris was the third one that was on a fishing trip, but he's here now. So, there is they're married and Chris is on the watershed. So, just so you know. Yeah. >> And and this is the atlarge position, right? >> Yep. there.
>> Mhm. >> I guess can can you um can you give any philosophy on how you you know it's it's kind of an very important because the courts are the deciding after the you know if there's inappropriate action. Can you just give a a little bit about
your philosophy on how you would approach approach the decisions that you'd have come before cuz you know a lot of them are coming before to because they're not allowed under under our rules, >> right? >> So what would your philosophy be if someone comes and asks you um we want to
do this, >> you know, because we have a hardship and it's because we have a big house that we want and we want to we want more. >> Sure. I think you'd have to look at the specifics of the case. I think um it reasonable is always you have to be
reasonable within anything that you're considering how it affects things whether it be watershed things or um other so I think it would just be looking at it very detailed and sometimes we don't always get what we want but within reason we could I guess
that would be a good way of describing my philosophy on Okay. Any other questions, >> Madam Chair? Uh, this was posted. >> It was >> and I uh we had no applicants for it, right? >> Correct.
>> So, all right. I I'll move to approve uh uh our >> Mr. Chair or Madam Chair, um I think it would be more appropriate to do it under appointments. We're at open form right now. So I think we should just wait. >> Okay. >> I thought we moved this to the open form.
>> No. Mm- >> She signed up for open form. >> She signed up for open form. Yeah. >> So we'll we'll address it when we get to the appointment and agenda. All right. Thank you. No problem. Thank you. Thank you. >> No, I just said it was appropriate to speak if she wanted to >> discuss it her >> interest basically. Now being she's
going up there second me as well. >> Okay. >> Okay. Reports and correspondents. I'll go. Um Peggy, can you pull up those pictures? Uh has ever been everybody been down to
see Bucks Mills and uh Dunlocks? I I pulled up some pictures. Just took some pictures and asked Peggy to show them just so you you know what you're looking at here. This is Dunlocks. This is the new shelter. Remember, we're going to put windows in. We spent about 15 grand to fix up that old shelter there. I went
down and took some pictures and this is what it what it kind of looks like. Inside looks a lot better. There's the parking. Um, you know, we got a there's the watershed building in the background there, the old watershed building, but the parking was full. I went there on Memorial Day afternoon at the end of the
afternoon about 4 5:00 it was full. So, just futuristically, if we were going to expand parking, we'll something to think about. That's a picture from the backside with the new windows. It really needed windows in there because there was no light in the back part. It gets kind of
dark and damp in there. So, that really opened it up. >> Yep. And Bucks Mills, just to show you what the wershed did there. I mean, it was a That's a Bucks Mills uh road there uh that goes over the dam or not the
dam, the uh road goes over the river there. But very cool. I've heard lots of positive feedback about >> the day I was down there. A bunch of kids playing on the rocks out there. I just This has so much potential um just to be just a cool place. And
like I said, drive down there and take a look at it. That's the building that is owned by someone else. I would hope that they would build something there, put a restaurant, do something to make that look really nice. But if they ever want to sell it to the county, I would hope we would be interested in that. This is
from the dam looking downstream now. And there was a DNR representative with a with a metering stake on each rock. Each rock that you see there that was placed. Uh they put it exactly where they wanted it. And I think I got a picture here of the
old Yeah, that's the old dam. They didn't lower it. That is the old dam. If you can see it in there, that is the height of the river. It wasn't lowered. It wasn't It wasn't taken out. That was it. So the water levels, if people say water
levels change or we changed the water, we didn't. That was the water level. So I think that's it. >> Yeah, that's the road that goes through there. And but just some good news and some good things happening in the county. Uh Dave and I had transit um
water uh uh ridership is flat so far this year through April. Um we're budgeting, their budget year runs from June to June. So, uh, they're budgeting, uh, now. Um, it had to be in, I think, by June 1st. Um, we've got a new bus
coming in July. Um, a 14seater. The 14 seater, we did that because it doesn't require a CDL. Um, we're going to order a new bus. We got nine buses in our fleet. Um, we're going to be ordering a new bus. We're doing that so we can get on this year's pricing. Probably won't come till the fall or next year. Um, and
remember, our share, our county share will be 10%, which will be about $17,000. And and then just sorry Phil. >> Sure. >> Um along with that new bus >> if we wait we the pricing share increase will increase too. I think it's the is
Kevin here? I think it's 20%. So that's >> not only the B bus price increase the share that the county will be responsible for will increase. So that was the impetus for moving that forward. >> Anything else? >> No. um wershed had the wershed uh really
putting some time and effort into Camel Creek. You're going to be hearing that for the next six months because there's just a lot of effort going into that. You know what they're going to do there and and how that's going to roll out. Uh had a trail alliance committee meeting. Uh that was project 412. Just so you know, uh the Becker County website is
going to be the landing site to go out to all the snowmobile trail, biking trail people. So, we're going to be the kind of the host site before it goes out to their Facebook pages or websites. Uh, working on that. Had airport meeting. Um, we approved last year uh that apron
reconstruction. Uh, that'll be happening starting here June in June. Uh, right along Highway 10. You might notice some dirt work and some work being done out there by the road. Those will be some tie downs for some airplanes and stuff there. Uh, but that's a phase uh that's something we approved last year. Um and
that work will be done be do be getting done here on the move here shortly. Um I went to that CND regional uh study after our last the day after our last meeting. Um it was down in Elbow Lake this time. Each county was taking a turn
uh hosting. Um, so we got towards the end of our meeting and the MPCA has been online um, the whole time, listened to all our meetings and the representative from the MPCA, for lack of a better term, really went
off on the group. She said, "I don't want options. I want a plan." Like a plan like we're going to implement. And she went on and railed on us for about three or four minutes. And finally, I said, "These options are different plans
and they're all cost prohibitive from my perspective." And she did not like that answer. Um, and I didn't realize they're doing three other regional things in the in the in the state. We're just one of of of four
and this we're kind of coming to the end of it and they're all coming to the end of it. I said, "Well, what what kind of plan did the other groups come up with?" She wouldn't answer. or she didn't have an answer. So, I don't know what the expectation was out of her. But,
>> you know, I I kind of I said last meeting I said, you know what, I don't think we need to have the Stantech representative who did the study come in and present something because it was it was cost prohibitive. But kind of changed my mind here. I I want you guys to hear everything that I heard over the
last year. So, I would I would like to next meeting put 10 minutes or whatever on on the however many minutes it takes for you guys to hear the results of what that guy said and and uh um so that that's kind of what I kind of planned
out going forward. >> That's survey we took, right? >> Yeah, that's a survey we took. Yeah. >> And the resolution, you know, you suggested last meeting. So, >> so that this representative from MPCA doesn't like that. We didn't like what they wanted. >> Yeah.
>> Doesn't like that. We don't want to be a part of the regional. >> No. No. It wasn't us. It wasn't directed at us. It was directed at the group. I was the only county commissioner sitting in the group. >> Okay. >> So, and you know what? They they hold a lot of funding to to >> Yep. >> So,
you know, I she was not happy with she said, "I want a plan." And I said, "You've got four plans here. They're all cost prohibitive. I mean, it's the cheapest one." uh make our tip fee go up 140%. According to these numbers, which
there's a lot of you know there's a lot of you don't knows in the question. So >> I like I said I >> just as an olive branch I'd like the static person which they will do probably do it on Zoom um just to so you guys can hear may you know I've been spouting on this for the last year.
Maybe you hear it from a different perspective or something. the numbers aren't going to change, but just maybe something will stick out uh to them and maybe it'll help ease the MPCA's uh angst in all this. And I I don't know why she didn't say something six months ago. I mean, this has been very
transparent. So, um that's what I'm going to request and I I'll hope to get that on next meeting. Um, the other thing that kind of came out of that meeting is that, you know, we if the MPCA comes out with the rules this fall or next spring, we've got eight years of 2034 to implement whatever we decide to
do. Um, you know, as I look at things, you know, eight years is not a long time. >> By the time you plan something, design something, get the funding for it. I mean, four of those years gone. I look at Prairie Lakes. I look at our transfer
station. I look at, you know, so I guess I'm saying to do something, whatever we're going to do, um, is a little more urgent than maybe eight years away because we've got to know what we're going to do before we're going to do them. We don't really have any plans right now.
>> The one card we do have is that, you know, we have capacity >> uh at our facility, but, you know, they they they want to put liners on and and the sooner you do it, the cheaper it is. um not the cost of the line or the cost that the MPCA will add on to your fees
and stuff uh for for doing it. They they want to encourage closing landfills first. That's probably why she wants this plan in place which >> which is why she wants a regional right if she wants >> I you know >> some to close them.
>> I'm not trying to read into any more than but I said really we can't even have a plan until we know what the new rules are and she don't like that either. Well, the another problem is you >> there's no solution. There's no hard solutions for, you know, oh, let's just, you know, they want to close the
incinerators, close. It's like, well, what are you going to do with your what what what do you do with the waste? It's like >> reuse, reuse, recycle. Well, >> I mean, I'm all for that, too, but it isn't going to >> obviously that just doesn't happen overnight. I mean, we have to condition ourselves to use less garbage and use
less. I mean, and the packing industry has to >> and I don't see that happening when we're getting most of our stuff by delivered by by FedEx and UPS now. I mean, it's like >> So anyway, the the whole group was kind of taken aback by her
really letting us have it. So anyway, that happened. And you have that individual's name that so we can I mean I think she put her name out there and let I mean cuz obviously people are going to be watching this and the state's going to hear it and say we're disappointed in how how that group was treated. That's that's
>> well from the MPCA. They're saying they're disappointed that we didn't come up with they spent 300 grand >> to come up with a plan. >> Come there and be actively participating in how you should move. How what's the solutions then? Well, the problem is there is nothing good for Becker County
in it. We lose control. We fill our landfill sooner and the tip fees go up there. We gain there is there there's nothing in it for us. Why would we do it >> and they don't like that? >> They would say Minnesota gains because we have a cleaner.
>> So, we can't go with that. It's going in the gar It's going in the ground somewhere. If you're going to >> I don't disagree with you. You you can't change the rules mid game and then expect us to pay for everyone else's. >> MPCA can do whatever they want it seems like. But I don't disagree with Barry. Richard or you or Barry. I I don't
disagree with any of that. I'm just the messenger here I feel like. So anyway, um okay. Uh highway Richard and I at highway uh road construction underway that Highway 39. They've already got it mil and and they're working on that. Uh need to back fill a maintenance
position. Um that's happening. Uh, one thing came up. We talked about at this meeting uh, the Spring Creek west of Ogma. We talked about that that wetland pasture here a while ago and we decided not to do anything with
that. Right. >> Correct. >> That's what I thought. >> Okay. It was brought up again and I I I thought we had decided because the h or the the fencing or whatever what the the guy wanted like a five-year deal and it it wasn't cost effective for the county. So, I thought I thought that's what we
did, too. We decided not to move forward. >> Okay. >> Um Barry, this one's might be for you. At the roadhouse out uh north of Corout, north and west of Corod a little bit uh on County 4 there from the roadhouse going west. Um some people have
requested a speed study of of Jim, our engineer. Um so, he's looking into that and that may be coming. >> Yeah, there's more there's more buildings down there as you as that area is growing. I think it's relevant because there's a lot of houses now
being or properties on Ida have sold across the road. So there's going to be, you know, more foot traffic across the roads from individual families. So >> So looking to lower it, >> I would imagine. I I have I haven't had too many requests to raise the speed limit in those. >> Well, it's 55 miles an hour right now.
They're talking with Jim. They're not saying they're doing it. It's just in the works. Um if you do do a speed study, you have to put it at what the speed study tells you you have to put it at. So we basically have very I mean there's very little there's some but very little flexibility on what what we
do with with we follow what the state recommends in all of our roads. I mean it's >> there's very little flexibility for the county >> after you do a speed study. There's no flexibility, >> right? >> We've done them in Lake View Township and you had to put it what they said.
Okay. uh Prairie Lakes uh uh they got a Ottertale County applied for a grant for a transfer station and ash facility. They got it. So, um we're included because we're part of the ash facility. So, we're going to form a
a subcommittee just to make sure we're very transparent with that. >> Joint powers is already difficult as Richard said. Um, now this is an offshoot of uh Prairie Lakes with the uh ash facility, but it'll help it'll help
use some of this ash and not fill up our ash facility. So, um, and we're starting to budgeting for 2027. Um, so I'm on the budget committee, so we're doing that. >> Was that the bonding that we got? >> Yes. >> Yep.$8 million. Yep. Rich and I had environmental uh 245th. Just some
clarification. We're starting the fencing on June 15th for 245th out there. We discussed cameras. Um I was under the understanding that that was going to come at a later time if it was going to come. We're kind of going to see what happens. Is that what the board decided?
>> Yes. We made no >> we made no. >> So we're going to do the fencing first and then we're going to figure out because if the the cameras would be more comprehensive because all of our buildings would probably need that. We got a pay station, a transfer station. Um, >> Madame Chair, um, I did have a
conversation with Steve with regards to the cameras yesterday and what we talked about is exactly what you had talked about all inclusive across the buildings. And so, um, my direction to him was, you know, looking at quotes for all of that and he can potentially, you
know, it may be cheaper if we're looking also in the future at cameras on the on the intersection as well. So, it made sense to me to have him include all of it. So, >> but for now, the fencing's going on. The cameras will be at a later date. >> We're slated for June 15th. Yes. Okay.
>> Um, we had a a bulk handling system, a guy out from bulk handling system, that's the name of the the uh the company. Uh, it's Murf Equipment, uh, recycling equipment. Went out there and kind of listened to his spiel. We have, uh, we have a very small recycling
facility here compared to all the all the ones he does. Um, but you know, we put in a grant last month uh for uh some recycling equipment. If we get that grant, you know, we need to decide exactly how we're going to use it. Um, our county volumes are are growing. Um,
Richard and I and Richard jump in here on this. We kind of go different directions on this. Um, neither of us I don't think are wrong. But, uh, as far as recycling, I'm proposing or if we're going to put in
all these all this equipment and it can handle more and we can get rid of people. I wouldn't be opposed. We're already taking two loads of single stream from Klay County. I'm not opposed to doing more uh of that. Richard, I'll let you speak for yourself, Richard.
Well, you know, so the we we've not been recycling doesn't doesn't pay for itself. It it is important to do it and I don't mind doing the recycling here in Becker County, but I don't want to take on everybody else's. So, we're doing
mattresses recycling. When when we started to do that, I was told we could sell the foam, we could sell the fabric, and we could sell we and now we can't sell any of that stuff. And it's just it's now it looks like we're going to end up burning it. Maybe I don't know
but and the organics is not doing what I would like it to be doing. People are not doing it. So, you know, the bigger machine you get, the more problems you can have with it. I I I I'm not opposed
to buying some machinery to to, you know, help. So, if we lose our EQUquick crew, uh, you know, to get rid of some of these >> temper employees. Yeah. I'm not I'm not I I'll I'll take a machine over a you
know a person they don't they don't cause you anything >> they're a little more reliable. >> Yes. But but as far as taking stuff from other counties I'm I'm having a hard time growing into some big thing that's going to that's >> you're back at regional. >> Yeah. I'd like to see something that we
can control a little better. So >> well and I I take the other end of that. Um and I there's no joint powers or anything for regional stuff. it wouldn't be that. We would be in control of our own destiny. We've got a lot of money into that murf already. We can handle more. Richie made a good comment. He said, you know, if we just take care of
our own, our equipment will last longer. Um, I take the other end. If we can if we can keep that stuff running, make an investment in it, help some of that, subsidize some of our costs. I mean, we're getting we're taking two loads of single stream from Klay County already.
We could take more if we had the capacity, which we don't right now. If this machinery gives us that capacity, I would want to take more. Um, let's let's get >> single stream include glass. >> Uh, no. But with this new equipment, it
could include glass. >> So, some of this new equipment, it separates the cardboard off the top. >> Obviously, you know, the the problem taking glass and single stream is it kind of contaminates it lowers your grade, I I believe on the rest of your, you know, cardboards and papers and
stuff. that part of this new machine would solve that problem. What I see when I go out there and watch is there's a lot there's a ton of cardboard coming in and you know you got cans and stuff and underneath the car you got to move the cardboard to even sort the stuff. This new machine would send the
cardboard right over the top it dump it in a pile you bail it would be untouched. >> Well, in my opinion as far as taking from other counties it's got to be either cost neutral or profitable. We can't have a a loss on it. That's kind of what I >> totally agree. Yeah.
>> No way would I put Becker County at risk. But there is a cost. These machines cost this. We're talking $800,000 to kind of retrofitive >> um the area and to get this machine in. So there is a cost to do it. Um >> so
>> if we get this grant uh that we're applying for, this conversation will probably come back. But you don't have to make a decision today, but it'd be nice to know and and you'll have to make a decision, you know, what what this looks like going down the road. So, uh, that's what we we talked about,
Richard. Um, >> yeah, that's that's all I got. >> All right. Who wants to go next? >> Oh, I'll let the birthday. >> Oh, thank you. Um, uh, had a Lake Aacy Regional Library meeting. Uh, and we are
change we change we the board voted to change the formula. So, we are, um, we are >> D Lakes and Becker County in the old formula. we're paying a higher percentage than we will be in the new formula. It's a cost basis formula that we're going doing. Um, we're not going
to we will come out the benefactor, but there's obviously losers in this. So, we're taking a a staged four-year plan. So, we still will have a a pretty good increase in their request, but it's it's less than what it would be. So, we're going to take four years to get back to
where to the cost um basis formula we're using. Um, so I think we were I mean if you want if it was a one-year flip, we probably'd be at a 0% for for one year. So because it's we will be asking for a
7% they're raising their a 7% increase and this brings us down to that five I think. So um there was a I think it was Pulk County was significantly higher. I mean we're talking 115,000 >> increase. So,
>> um >> it's we I thought that was reasonable to slowly go back that. But anyway, um so we got that done and we we were meeting in the new library system in there in the in the Luke building. Um it's beautiful building. Uh it my opinion,
very expensive building, but it's beautiful. >> Beautiful building. >> Um had the um Dave and I had the sheriff's meeting I think. Let's see. Um we had a um Mark Leilac
>> um came in and and discussed he works for the state to talk about the 911 the next generation 911 system >> um and and this how this you know and I think he we have these um events that that are happening this coming this week
I guess >> this week. Um, so if anyone's can go to those, I was hoping to go, but now with my daughter um going to the state track meet, I'm going to be going down there. State track meet. Uh, she's the top runner in her class and everything. No,
she's she's she's part of a good team. So, >> congratulations to her. >> Yeah. And the whole team and whole team and and and hope success for all the teams. Frezy had some good runners and I see congratulations to Miss Sanberg set
a school record over there in Frzy. >> Yeah, we had a a boy too but I can't remember. Grossman I think. >> Okay. And Leaf Shervy uh at Lake Park Ottoan is has set me records and hopefully um wish him all the luck down at the state meet. Uh anyway, back to back to us. Um
>> back to the reports. >> Um what was I talking about? sheriff's meeting about >> um anyway the sheriff's meeting the 911 um we're hoping you know there's money in our 911 fund now but that's it's going to be expensive and we're talking
you know few years down the road for planning um >> has there been talk about I I know we talked about it at one of our AMC district meetings of them increasing the cell phone >> charge I think right now it's like 25
cents We looked at that during the meeting and I popped up by my phone there's a there's >> so we're being taxed if you look at your bills. So the telephone companies is what I'm assuming is getting is taxing us additionally not only from state and getting a
Minnesota state telecom tax. There's also a Becker County telecom tax and a Becker County sales tax which comes to us but it says Becker County telco tax. >> Yep. >> And that is not going to Becker County. that is going to the >> providers
>> providers of the service. So I said and so and he and uh Mark was like I've never noticed that. So I'm like are they going to be help paying for this? They're getting they're taking monies now and it's significant money. >> Well that's what my understanding that money was for. >> Well
>> he didn't even he didn't even know about >> know it existed. So >> so >> how they can tax that like that without anyway. So that's not that's above and beyond the 911 tax. That's not the 911 tax. So, um, so hopefully when this comes through that there I mean there
will be funding available instead of us having to find all the funding for this cuz I would imagine this will be this changeover will be significant and it helps with and and Sheriff Glander can help me out on this on videos. I mean all the communication we're going to
that next level and um >> so yeah they can they can basically have a FaceTime call >> on a phone and it'll go right to dispatch. Oh, nice. >> That's kind of basically what it is. >> Commissioner Nelson. So, so 911 Next Generation. So, it it's more video
>> than just audio. What What are the things we're getting with Next Generation? >> So, so the state is has a will have a we don't really know yet because that's why they're having these meetings. So, the state has a will have a basic plan that every county will get and the state will
pay for that. Then they'll have other options that you can and one of those other options might be video calling or might be lo >> and is this more of a if I if I remember correctly from that meeting it's more of a transition to for them to locate the
cell phone versus >> right now our so many of our 911 >> go a landline which >> yes >> literally nobody has so it makes it difficult >> to find out so if I call from an apartment they can maybe know that I'm
at that apartment, but they have no idea where in that fourstory. >> Yeah, cuz our current system is >> 24 unit apartment. >> Maybe Sheriff Glander wants to expand on but there's you're you're not you're kind of where we are. We know it's big and it's we know it's coming and it's
there's like he said though there's lots >> there's each county I think will have options what what they want to include. Of course, every option has more money. So >> yeah, um >> it'll basically put the dispatcher right there so they see everything whether it
be a crash or assault domestic related. >> There'll be some video enhancement for dispatch to see on site too. So that >> so they can direct I mean that's one of the one of >> So there's lots to learn about it. Um
>> and and that's what these meetings are about is what do counties want? >> Sure. you know, that's So, >> so anyway, um back to sheriff's meeting. We had uh um we we reviewed the federal grant and then the state grant came in
afterwards and we we just said, "Yeah, that go ahead and approve that." Um had some discussion about the battery placement at the jail. Still, >> um Madame Chair, yeah, it was discussed at finance, but it did not make it in
the packet, so we'll put it in. Okay. Yeah, we had some >> next meeting. So, it'll it'll come before the board next time. >> Um, Sheriff Glander brought some discussion about mass gathering events if we should have some ordinance discussion on that um for like over a
thousand and then what some requirements for for patrol or you know >> that we should have. So, that probably will go through our ordinance review committee with Sheriff Glander um leading that. um had a early warning siren discussion for out at WeFest and
we support that as if if they want to put that in and that would be help connect to our dispatch and um there might be um some there would be benefits for us in long term but there Sheriff Glander said there's other areas that might also be beneficial for a siren
effect but you know we think of sirens but it's it's also an audio you can you can have you can speak it's just not a siren so >> um >> they had that storm out there last last year. >> The problem is we might warn them, but I don't know what you do. >> Go ahead. Go ahead.
>> Yeah. Um and we disc we just had a brief discussion about the impound area in storage. Anything else under sheriff? >> Um um the only other meeting I had was joint powers meeting and and we just um
I think we're going to we're going to ask them to come and present to counties to to better. So counties understand what the what the role is of that. Um and our our meetings are pretty much just get information from different agencies or you know it's a presentation. >> Madam Chair, Mr. Nelson joint powers
>> joint powers of the red um the red board. >> Oh water. Okay. >> So the red river basin commission. So what we do then is we for this board we elect representations for that the big board you know. So that's the importance of it. if you don't if you're not at the
table, you don't I mean so many of these counties just um aren't there. So, but if you if you don't want to have input, then that's fine. But >> yeah, um so that was it. >> I just had one one more thing on transit I just realized. So, last this last
year, we cut Saturday service because we needed to meet budget. Um, and we're we're going to review we'll review it later this year, but it's probably going to happen again. But it might this time it might be more. It might be actually an entire route, a daily route that it's
a possible it's part of it is the state's not funding us enough. Um, it's we've been Kevin's doing a great job of battling with him to try to get us funding better, but it's possible. So, with that, uh, we get about 90 thou
$91,000 in fees for that bus. Um, last year we had to take December off because we weren't going to meet budget. This year we talked about from September to December, possibly eliminating a route. Um, it's all depends on what what the finances look like. The big thing that
has hurt us is that we had a pay increase for all employees and the federal and the state government isn't they're not recognizing that. Um, so >> and and and one thing that doesn't really solve it is raising the fees because now the state and federal
government see that you have more money in your reserves. So now they're going to give you less money. >> But one thing I I saw too, I didn't know this before last meeting, is that >> there's some other counties like Ottertale Express, they levy dollars for
I didn't know that. >> Wadina County does too. So just FYI. >> All right. Any other? >> No, that's it. It's all ahead. >> Richard, go ahead. >> I had highway with Bill. I don't have nothing to add on that. And then um
environmental. And I'll just say one more thing about growing our environmental is part of the problem is these commodity prices. They change so much. Sometimes the stuff is worth nothing and then we got to pay to haul it or some of it can't get wet either.
You can't have >> snow cover. And so we we'd be looking at building a building and storing some of this stuff for who knows how long and then maybe burning it. It's really an uncertain
future. Um but and that's all that's all I had. >> All right. Um we had um Rich and I had EDA and just an update on the lead painting lead paint testing. Um last
report we had said that we had thought we had completed the lead paint testing which if you recall it was a $75,000 um quote for us to complete it. Well, we have found evidence um >> I think Mary did um in the basement in
our old EDA records where we have found residence uh or evidence that that has it has been completed on all but three of our houses. Um, so we're waiting to get word from HUD on if we need to do them or what our next steps are, but it will obviously be significantly cheaper.
We were looking at doing 18 houses, I believe, and now we would be down to three. Um, we did question why they weren't done, and Mary explained that back then the years that they those houses were built were wrong on the records. Um, so we we didn't think that
they met the criteria to be done. Um, so they weren't done, but so we're waiting to hear from HUD um on those. Just some housing updates. Uh, we do have 25 public housing units. They are all full with 23 families on waiting lists. Um,
housing vouchers, we have 49 families with vouchers. Um, we have five or six families on the street searching for housing and 230 families on the waiting list. Um, Maple Avenue is full. That project for the siding and updating the
doors and decks um should start in mid June and I believe it should be done then um um by the end of the summer. Our West River Town Homes has one open unit um that they're currently flipping and preparing for a new family. There are
six on the waiting list. So um that will be filled shortly. One of our Highway 34 homes um it's currently occupied. It's not one of our public housing um homes through HUD, but um we're looking at
getting some quot done um that needs to be done there. Richard went out and looked at the landscape. We think that it might be just landscaping, but there might be some um foundation issues. So, we're getting some quotes to see how much that will be. Um then we also
approved a a business subsidy policy. We made some amendments to our current business subsidy policy. Um, but that won't be coming to until the next board meeting when Cody gets back. Um, I also had a Mahubi meeting and I just wanted
to recognize a couple um people that we have a a board member Dana Laney and a family development director or the Mahooi family development director Megan Hernandez. Um, both won awards at the Minap Conference. So the MINCAP is the
state um community action program conference in April. Um Megan won the alleys and action award which recognizes former clients who exhibit high achievement giving back to community um tenacity to overcome barriers and
inspire others to take back positive beat the odds and view challenges as a new way to grow. So um that's a a pretty uh big ac accomplishment. She is a current Head Start teacher or she was a Head Start parent and then climbed her ranks through to where um where she is
now. So kudos to her. And then Dana Laney um she won the Steve Chadwick Advocacy Award. Um and that award goes to a staff board member or client who demonstrates a persistent commitment to reducing poverty, is an effective advocate in addressing root causes, and
is a leader in the local or larger community. Um so those that know don't know um Dana, she has been very involved in many different areas, not just Head Start. She's been um involved in Head
Start since 1991 when she enrolled her her three three-year-old. Um she's been on the policy council since 1992. She's been on the board of directors since 1996. Um she volunteers for 10 years at as a
tax aid volunteer at Mahubi. Um and she served nine years on um the Frezy School Board. So pretty big accomplishment. So kudos out to both of them. Um we also Mahubi also administers our CCAP or
childcare assistance for Becker County. Um and they did a case review and there were no um no errors found. So, a certificate was issued by the Department of Children, Youth, and Families for this accomplishment. Um, and then just a
update on energy assistance. There were over 5,000 energy assistance applications submitted this season at Mahubi. So, that's the five county, not just Becker County. Um, five county. And over $2.6 million were dispersed to pay for um heating, fuel, and electricity.
So there there is some concern at Mahubi with the rise in heating costs now this coming um year because it doesn't the the funding is not going up um and with the the fuel cost that means less for
the residents. So um so we that's one thing that they're watching through the summer and um as we move into the next heating season. So that was all I have. Anybody have anything else?
All right, we will move on to appointments. Anybody do we have an appointment for the Kra Wershed? >> U Madam Chair, I think we have someone that has a name that has been given to us, but we have not confirmed it and
received any information from them. So I'm not I don't think that's >> appropriate appropriate to appoint them at this time. >> Okay. >> Okay. Then our next appointment is planning and zing zoning board of adjustments.
>> Madam chair, I'll move to approve Dell Jask as the atlarge >> appointment. I'll second. >> All right. Any further discussion? >> Just Madam Chair to confirm that there are no other applicants at this time. So >> okay. All those in favor say I.
>> I. >> Opposed. >> Motion carried. Madam >> chair. Welcome to the board of adjustments. >> If I may, uh Chris wasn't here at the last meeting. Chris, did you have anything to that you want to say about the watershed being on the wershed? Um >> well, you you guys understand
with Terra that we have um some big decisions to be made in our future. And so we're gonna our intent at this point >> is to start slow and work our way into whether we're going to go with a fullon
administrator and a full-on staff if we're going to even make that potentially taking on um maybe larger and more capital improving projects. Um so I think uh be patient with us
some big decisions to make coming up. M madam chair, I want to um thank Dell for putting her name in the hat because this is a this is a big job. I mean that and and it has, >> you know, legal consequences for your actions, too. And thank you for doing it and it's a thankless job. It
>> is thankless job. >> Um so you'll get a thanks right now before you start and hopefully you get some afterwards. But um my advice would be um you know just weigh the weigh the weigh the whole situation and be be u
just keep keep the best interest of the county and at your at and that's all you can do and make informed decisions. So congratulations very much. >> Thank you for doing it cuz um I when I >> you can see the list of candidates that want this. When my district was open, it
took me a very long time to find somebody and I convinced my brother to do it. So, >> all right. Thank you, Dale. Welcome. >> Thanks, D. >> Okay, on to >> Look at the time. >> I know. We're We're doing good.
>> All right. >> And Barry's even been talking a lot. >> Did we Did you get that cake, Mary? >> Mary, >> no. >> That was your role. >> No cake. >> No cake for you. It's my birthday, so we're having cake, but Mary didn't get it.
>> Should have at least had balloons, Mary. >> Okay, Carrie. Uh, I don't have the cake either. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, the first, uh, item, um, I guess the sheriff's not in here. Um, I did receive a letter from the uh board of peace
officer standards training postboard with regards to or review over at our sheriff's department that they had done on their training records and training training records and uh standards and uh the letter that I did receive indicated
that our department did uh pass that review. So, I just wanted to make the board aware and congratulations to the sheriff's department on that. >> Cere's still on the cake. She gave me a cake. >> I know. I saw um other dates that I wanted to rem
remind the board of. Um there we have our district meeting this Friday in Fergus Falls. Um and that starts at 8, I believe. And we also have our board of equal our county board of equalization coming up here. That is on a Monday
night, June 15th at 6 PM. So, just wanted to make note those are um are it's on the list out. >> Madam Chair, since that'll be before our next meeting. I've actually I'm working on resolving a conflict for that night. I didn't know that night was going to be there. Um is everybody else we need to
have quorum there and I'm not sure I can make it. Is everybody else? >> I will be here. >> Richard, >> 15th Monday. >> I wouldn't miss it. >> Do you will you remember it though? >> I don't know. That's another story. >> How about if we send you a calendar invite >> 15th? >> I just got some new post.
>> June 15th. >> Stick them around. >> I'm going to try to make it. But I I'm not >> Do we have somebody that's been trained? That's the other thing, right? Correct. Dave's been trained. >> I I Yes, I >> I have not. So, >> I don't know if I'm still valid or not. >> I will I will.
>> Mary, you've been trained. And Mary is another voting member of this. Yep. >> Yes. So, she'll be here. Okay. Thank you. >> And what time does that start? >> 66:01. >> And I will, just so everybody know, I
will not be at the district AMC meeting while you're speaking. >> I'm Yep. I'm going to let Barry do it for me. >> Oh, >> I am not. I'll be at the state track meet >> on Friday. Oh, so you won't be there either. Okay. >> Are you going to be there? >> Yes, I'll be. >> Oh, darn. Speak.
>> I know. I get I get fall and told. I I get it. >> Okay. All right. So, moving on on the items. The next item is I have and it was included in your packet. I don't know if uh you want to come up front in case there's questions for you. Um this uh brilliant idea came from our board
last time of how to capture some funding. We had reviewed, as you recall, um some potential of whether or not it would be financially feasible to look at the community corrections model. and we came to the conclusion that at this point
that wouldn't be in the best interest of the county to look at doing that. Um so we were looking at the potential um of how to capture some revenue because we know there's probably going to be an increase coming before the board um with
regards to our pricing, our contract pricing with uh the DOC with regards to probation um services. So with this um what you have before you was a policy that would allow Becker County and uh
the probation office on behalf of our county to collect supervision fees from those that are under supervision through probation and have been ordered by the court. Um, so the policy I received a lot of information from Brian and I condensed
it down into a policy for um, consideration by this board. Um, so I I'll stop there and see if there's questions that uh, maybe you have or it's pretty straightforward. Um, it does uh there's many statutes that are cited in here that allow us to proceed with
this and again um, we're hoping to generate some additional revenue to offset cost increase that we're expecting that will be coming. The only thing I just want to make note is we were going to and and maybe it's
maybe this can be addressed in the resolution the next thing but just making sure that we did make note that it is in the resolution it says effective July 1st but I think we were when we talked about it was going to we wanted to make sure it was to clarify
effective July 1st for new >> Yes. And I did have that conversation uh with with Brian just so that we're on the same page, but I can certainly include that wording in the resolution when I when we get to that item. >> Yeah. But we we were he was of the
understanding that that's what my intent was. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Just to clarify the language, though I can certainly do that in the resolution. Um, madam chair, commissioners, uh, the only thing that, uh, uh, we would request on this, just as with any other, uh, funds that come in, is that, um, they are held, uh,
within the probation line, um, for the the annual year, and then at the end of the year, um, um, we can decide as to what they'll be used for, for correctional services, etc., um, with you as the commissioners deciding where
that can go. The other thing that can uh really help out is offset some of the costs that uh are provided for programming um testing all those types of things that can take place throughout the year. We typically um have enough um
resources on our end to cover that. So making sure that uh we just hold those funds within the probation line for that annual year and then at the end we can decide what uh how the county can use those funds. >> That's what we typically did before on
Mary's end. So it it would drop in that same line. So >> okay. >> And I should make note I did send this also to Mary. I didn't um I assumed she was fine with it. She didn't provide any feedback. So >> Okay. All right. So, any fur or any
um questions on the policy first, the probation supervision fees policy? If not, I would entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve one I. It's one I in the packet and two I on
the agenda. So, I believe it's one I just noticed it now. So, I'll make a motion to approve uh zero. Just >> make a motion. I'll >> make a motion app for the resolution. Why? >> And what about the policy? I did two separate items. I'm on policy. Sorry.
>> Can we do them both agenda, Dave? >> One eye and two I. That's a >> I I think you should do a separate motion on the policy and then go to the resolution. >> Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve the policy. >> Thank you. >> All right. We have a motion from Dave. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second from Barry. Any further discussion?
>> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I'll make a motion to approve one eye. >> Motion carried. And then we have a mo a motion to approve two I from Dave >> one I >> that's what I meant one I >> second >> and Barry second. Any further discussion?
>> Um madame chair just with that I just wanted again to make note that I'll make a brief modification on there to indicate that it's for new cases starting July 1. So, yep. Just to confirm, all new cases, gross misdemeanor, misdemeanor, and felony starting July 1, uh, will be assessed
the supervision fee of 100, 200, or 300 depending on the offense level, >> which that fee schedule is included in the policy. >> Yep. >> Okay. Madam Chair, Brian, what you said you're going to keep that money all in one account until end of the year,
>> June 30th of next year. >> And then and then is that do you come to the board and you best give us decision how to use that within probation? >> 100%. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Exactly. >> Um, one other side question. Do I
probably know this, but does probation deal with juveniles? >> Oh, yeah. Yep. We have a full juvenile case load. Yep. And that's uh Aaron Rundle was our juvenile agent. Yep. >> Okay. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Opposed. Motion carried.
>> Madam Chair, thank Brian and Wade and Carrie um for putting this together. I know it was a >> reading through it. It's a significant piece of work you had to do. It wasn't just something you threw together. So, thank you. >> I appreciate that. Thank you. And thank you, Brian. >> You bet. Thank you all. >> Thanks, Brian.
>> Thank you. Um, madam chair, that's all I have. >> Um, what about the pdium? >> Oh, pdeium. I I guess I do have one more. >> One more thing. >> Um, I was asked to put this on the agenda. This is just to allow for pdeium for any of the commissioners that are going to be going to any of the training
in our um area for that next generation. Um, since it's been requested to get as many PE Well, it's not really training. It's more of a collaboration event. Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve a predium and um for the NG 911 collaboration events um this week if any
commissioner um is able to make it attend. >> Do we want it just this week? >> Just for this standalone item. >> Is that what it is? >> I I don't know of any other >> I don't know of any other ones. >> Yeah. And I haven't heard Leave it at that for now and address it later if
>> I would agree. >> All right. You second, Phil? >> Yes. >> All right. Any further discussion? Um, I just want to make note too, just for the board's information that I am planning on going. Judy, our IT director, is going and I know the sheriff, uh, some of the members of his team are also
going on Thursday to Bamiji. So, we do have representation from from our county. >> Okay, good. >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Motion carried. >> And I hope I hope someone I can't make it, but I hope somebody can get up there and go to it, but
>> I can. So maybe we can't anyway. So it wouldn't make any difference. But if you have the opportunity, >> okay, >> coordinate with Carrie if you are going, I would think just to make sure we don't have more than two. >> Mhm. >> Yes. >> I'm not able to go. >> Madam Chair, just one other item. Uh
tomorrow they're doing a drone training with the sheriff uh down at the fairgrounds. So I'm going to go down to that. So if anybody else wants to come, that' be great. We shouldn't have three there. Same thing. >> Okay. Now that is all I have. No, that is all. Thank you, Harry.
>> No more on that uh extended day for proclamation day. >> Uh no, I've got >> you. You already got your award. >> All right, Steve. >> Morning chair. >> Good morning.
>> Morning. Got a couple items today to talk about. Uh first one is a request to amend our tip fees out at the Solid Waste campus. Um this came up to through our committee. Our tip fees for demolition
materials are significantly less than what they are in uh Ottertale and Medina counties. And so as a result, we're getting more demolition and waste coming in. And uh when we compared what we charge for out of county waste versus what these other
counties do uh the recommendation is to increase our tip fees or out of county waste to make it somewhat similar to what they're doing on their end and in those counties. So this would increase our tip fees to uh from 135% of our
incount tip fees to two times what they're charging. We'd charge twice as much for out of county waste coming into Becker County than what we would charge our residents. This the way the resolution is written, this
would be applicable for going into the future for our future tip fees too. >> So I just >> So we double them. >> Yeah. Is there any issue three times, right? >> Correct. >> So is there we is there any is that going to be a problem? Are they going to
we can still get Ottertale stuff or do we get a lot of Uttertail stuff? Well, Ottertale is three times for out of county. >> So, if a Becker County resident wanted to go to Ottertale, they would charge you. >> No, no. That's what I'm saying is if someone from Ottertale is going to come to Becker County because it's two times, not three times. No, >> that's what I I don't I don't really see
this being a big issue. >> If somebody from Ottertale >> would go to Ottertale, they wouldn't pay three times >> their out. >> Yeah. No, I understand that. I'm just saying because they're more than out of county.
>> Sure. So now our out of county tip fees will be higher what than what their incount tip fees would be. So there's not that incentive for them to bring it to us. >> Okay. Any other discussion or any other questions for Steve? >> Madam Chair, I will move to amend the
tip fee schedule for outofcount CND waste. >> I'll second. >> So >> resolution 1D. >> Thank you. >> All right. Any further discussion? >> Yeah. one thing and this is this is for the rest of this amended year and going
into the future like Steve said. So yeah. >> Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I >> opposed. Motion carried. >> Thank you. Uh the second request is to uh hire a seasonal worker, a one of our
pay station or we have two pay station clerks and both of them retired this last month and we've hired back one and we're looking at hiring back another one. We're in a process of it's been posted. Uh we don't get we don't we're not getting very many applicants. And
then also internally we have part of our clerical crew has got some health issues. Uh one of the clerks volunteered or she didn't volunteer. She's wondering if uh we could use some help in the future. >> One of the clerks that retired has volunteered to come back seasonally.
She's wait 30 days. So she's retiring and this is just a request to be able to >> Madam Chair, I have a question. >> Sure. Uh >> in the cost analysis then there's you didn't show any benefit of of employees out. So is this an addition? Do you anticipate a $6,96
increase or are you saying this is going to be within the >> this whole budget in that off in that area anyway? It would be >> and that's I mean that's kind of significant to me if if it's you're you're short staff so you're you're not
>> this is a temporary thing to fill for budget >> but you know what I'm saying in the cost analysis it doesn't reflect any any shortfall in in full-time regular pay which there is >> which there is that's >> that's what I'm saying >> so so just to get you you've have one hired already
>> we have one hired >> you have a vac and then you have a vacancy for one of the people that retired is willing to fill that vacancy until you hire somebody else temporary. >> No. Yeah. She's she'll she's willing to come back and help train them and then that's what I mean. >> As we have shortfalls through the summer.
>> So, okay. >> So, she is her vacancy is going to be filled by somebody else. She is going to come back as the temp to help train everybody in. So, there will be an additional person there. >> Yeah. That's
>> temporarily for you know, up to what did we say? 30 >> 67 days. >> 67 days. >> 67 days. But I think this 6,000 is for 8 hour days. >> She might help on the training, but really it's to help cover when one of
those clerks or somebody else takes vacation the summer. >> Okay. >> This is just a short-term thing to get us through this summer. It's not >> Madam Chair, um we're talking about an uh an additional uh position, seasonal position. So, I just want to advise the
board that we will need to be posting this position. I know we're talking about an individual and it's potentially that may be the highest qualified candidate or the only candidate, but we um I just want to make that clarification. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Well, Madam Chair,
>> good. >> Well said. I've heard I've heard some a little bit of conflicting things saying this is a person that's going to come in and do some training possibly and and I don't I don't know if I could support someone just coming in and doubling up just for training. um if they're filling a vacancy at at a window that we need
someone there and when there's no one there you do training I mean helping or teach other but >> and he said to cover vacation >> right but because there's a short staffed not I mean if we're full staffed
I don't I wouldn't support this >> currently we're down two people >> so I'm just making sure that this is not going to be a hit on the existing budget. It will be within your budget item. Your line item for
employees between full-time part-time is is going to still be within budget. >> We are >> with this expenditure. I don't want to that's what I'm >> I don't want any increase in overall budget on that those line items for the
year. >> And if I can get that I'm fine. >> Sure. No, I don't have any. >> We'll be under budget actually, I think. >> So, and if this is approved, that's something that we you'll watch. And if it is to the point where it's >> we're going to go over budget, then
since it's >> Madam Chair, also just to clarify, this is a one time. This does not this does not make this position permanent in the next in 27. Correct. This is not >> what he's asking for is for this to end at this the end end of the year. and he
expects that there won't be a need for this position at the end of the summer. This is classified as a seasonal temp position. >> Right. But this will >> 67 days, but we don't antic. No, it's not moving forward. >> Okay. I'll make a motion to approve. >> Second >> 1H.
>> All right. Any further discussion? >> The only other discussion I would like I would like to review the flow out on transfer station because I truly believe that we are having too much. I I think you can charge when you come into the gate and and uh get your quantity
numbers. Um I think we're adding an extra step in there and I think through time I think we could reduce our needs out there for employees. >> That's my opinion. If no one else if you guys don't do it, I guess we don't. Let's vote first. >> Yeah. But I'm just saying I would like
you to review that in committee. That's all I'm saying. >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Motion carried. Do anybody have any >> Commissioner or Madam Chair, Commissioner Nelson, can you dig down on that a little bit because I'm we're we're on I'd like to hear what you're talking
>> about it and I'm not sure that he's he he may be on to something when you pull into the transfer station and then you and you someone comes out, they look at your load, they write what what your tonnage is or what your yards are, what your bill is. Basically, they don't have a dollar amount, but then you go and you
dump and you go and you pay. Nobody checks what you dump. Nobody. You go in and they go they add it up and then then you pay. Why don't when you come out write this down what you what your quantity is. This is your bill and pay it right there. >> That's what I'm saying.
>> And then go out to tone. >> Madam Chair, Steve, >> you guys discuss it at committee. We don't need to talk. >> Well, I' I'd like to hear it here. If if if it rises to board discussion, I' >> I mean, we have Jim's not here. We have 15 minutes. >> Sure. That's a good question. Uh we used to do that in the past and there's a
reason we got away from that. >> There's two reasons, two main reasons. One is when it got busy it back up. So we'd have traffic that would be backed up down the road. Well, people were waiting. They would come in to dump and they'd pay. It just takes that much more
time for that transaction to all the way through resulting that you'd have a backup. The other thing is, >> okay, let's go there. Let's examine that. What took so long? >> What part of that? What part of that took long? people weren't ready to pay. People didn't have appropriate change or
I mean now you have a a pad like this. Here's your bill. You take a credit card, you tap it, and you're done. >> If you invested in the infrastructure to do that, >> well, we're looking at now we're looking at infrastructure when we're looking at our needs in that. I think this should
be part of it that you have look at that you have enough infrastructure that you and you could require >> you could require and most people and if you could have exceptions but you could say we are taking electronic payment only >> only yeah >> I mean and if there's a case where you have to take cash you pull them off to
the side and they may take some little bit longer but I mean if you want to flow through quickly have your have electronic payment ready >> I mean I think those are >> I think those are reasonable things to look at >> Madam Chair Commissioner Nelson And so you're saying when we pull into our two
lines in the transfer station, we can have everything done right there. >> Yes. >> Do your thing and exit without >> returning. >> Return. Yeah. And then you can go out to Township Road and you can close the exit. No, I'm serious. I'm serious. You
>> It could be It could be a whole float difference. You could go out. Yeah. And that might be >> Steve, why don't you put it on the agenda for >> There is software that would that that you can that can do that kind of transaction, but it would take an investment on the county.
>> Yes. And we're looking at investing through cameras and that's all the same technology. So >> the other thing is part of the reason we split that up in the past was that the state auditors wanted to separate the people that write the ticket from the
people that are accepting the cash. That was the other thing is >> and there's >> segregation of duties. Absolutely. >> And there's no way that we can comply with that >> countywide regardless. I mean, that's a that's a hit that's going to happen on our audit every year for the rest of eternity because you cannot segregate
when someone sits at the auditor's office to open an envelope and hand it to someone else to pull the money out. I mean, there are some things that are just not. It's electronic. >> It's a lot It's a lot. It it's different if you're the one writing the bill versus the one accept. >> Madam Chair, Commissioner Nelson, I
mean, segregation of duties is I mean, it can be done. It is done in organizations. Now, >> are you saying that just can't be done at the county? >> It cannot it cannot be done with without hiring extra people to open letters and hand that open letter with cash and or payment to another person. That's how
that's what segregation I mean, if you had to comply, that's what it would be. So, you get a you get a property tax statement up at the auditor's office, you'd have to have someone open it, have someone else sitting next to them, hand them hand it to them. I mean, that's what segregate I mean, it's no county gets that without that.
>> That's that's not exactly what segregation of duties as I understand it is. >> I think we're going down a Mary. Is that >> going on a rabbit hole here? Right. Basically >> there's >> basically the person who collects the
money cannot be the person to take it to the bank or in a account payable. >> Person who puts in the purchase order cannot be the one who creates the file that pays the check to avoid that person
creating a check that no one else is reviewing. So, Madam Chair, so as this looks out at the out at the transfer station, it would be someone coming in. Here's my load. Here's $20 cash. The guy shoves it in his pocket. That is what we're trying
to afford. >> No, you'd have electron. You'd have a receipt. They could do that now. I mean, honestly, yes, you could. You just don't give them a slip >> and they go out this other door. Other way. >> Well, there isn't another way to get out right now. >> They go out the township way.
>> Not Not yet. Wednesdays that gates open all the time. >> Okay. >> This will be a conversation to be continued on environmental. >> Smart Kirk. Go Wednesday. Jim is here Wednesday. >> Thanks. >> Come on up, Jim. >> But what I'm saying is we cannot get
away from segregation duties completely ever in the county because we'd have to hire too many people to to do that. >> That is that is not true. I do not do that. >> Yeah, we have we have a hit. Mary, have we asked I'm Have we had a hit from the
auditor's office for segregation of duties every year since we've started? >> Yep. >> It's accepted that you cannot in this model. >> If it's accepted that it can't be done or at a government level, why do other
people other organizations do it? Well, >> very much. It's again it's at the county level it's an an acknowledgment that there is a possibility of ways to to >> Mary in in that same segregation study or or since we've taken a hit how much
do we know of any money that's been embezzled from the county stolen from the county over the past >> No absolutely not >> okay >> you look like you took that person >> okay Jim's here to provide um a summary of our 2025 Becker County annual report.
>> Good morning, commissioners. Yes. Um, each year we provide you with a annual highway report of our finances and work accomplishments for the year. Uh, this is required by state statute. So, that's why you receive this every year. Um, we
essentially account for all our monies that come in, the state aid funds, the our sales tax funds, exterior funds from local other local a federal funds and grants that we get and um and our levy funds. Um, this book here, it's included
in your packet and if you'd like a hard copy, I can get your hard copy. Otherwise, I could we'll probably just send out a a nice PDF that if you want to store it somewhere and so you don't have to peel it out of the the uh packet here today. But, uh anyways, uh last year was a a
big year for us. Um $10 million in construction, uh funding coming from many sources. Um state aid funds, uh our sales tax funds, we used approximately 2.6 6 million of
our sales tax funds. Uh we had a number of grants on our project last year that helped support our funding. Um so um I know that uh we did some shuffling of funds. We did uh an advance on our state
aid funds of 1.4 million to uh do some accounting shifts. Um I'm pleased to say that uh uh based on our um aotment this year, we received almost 4.9 million and with the projects that we programmed uh
deducting all that uh we still have uh 1.9 million in our state aid account uh for future use now. So we've we've essentially overcome or made up the advance amount that we borrowed last year. Um
other activities obviously our maintenance crew does a lot of work uh maintaining our roads uh preventative maintenance and that approximately about $4 million worth of work was done by our maintenance crew which includes you know the the chip sealing that we do. Uh
obviously snow and ice is a huge part of it during our winter seasons and doing other road surface repairs and uh traffic surface striping and things like that and our rightway brushing and and weed control uh there. Um
this report kind of details those little areas. Um you can look in the report and find all the detailed numbers for all of our construction projects there. Um, you can look at all of our assets, uh, our trucks, when our trucks
were purchased, how old they are and the value they are. uh our buildings uh you know what we when they were built and things like that. Uh, one thing we talked about in highway committee, you look at some of our oldest buildings,
uh, uh, our shed out in Ogum or in Pansford, I believe that was in 1956 it was constructed and then in Lake Park, that's another old facility. It was 1958. And we just had brief discussions that
we're going to start looking uh you know at what we want to do in Lake Park to maybe replace that building or rehabilitate that building and and start planning for that. Maybe get it in our 5-year plan. We would use state aid funds uh to uh rebuild that facility out
there. Uh other than that, I think um >> Madame Chair, uh Jim, uh you can use state aid funds in maintenance or road to redo a building >> like in Lake Park that you're talking about. >> Yeah, we can use um our maintenance or
construction funds. Yep. Either or >> fully no percentage. >> No, no. like well there's uh well like in our new facility we used uh a full year's aotment uh to uh you know put towards financing uh our new facility so
we would use the same we had used our construction funds essentially >> I didn't know >> or or maintenance funds we may defer possibly you know buying a a plow truck you know that year that we might do a building rehab uh we would just look at what made sense at that time and the
best way to finance it. I would look, you know, I would hope you look at or we look at that a little bit in depth to see if if it's um where what location would be best served and you know for the for a for a little sub
subplace should it be more rural or should you know is that the best >> madam chair commissioner Nelson we did discuss that a little bit in highway where the locations are where they the best locations would be the Psford one we had talked if that did go away we'd move that to our Osage uh facility
there. And then we did we were going to look at the Lake Park one a little bit. Is that the best location for it if we do have >> Yeah, we we would consider that and we'd also reach out to uh probably the city to see if they would have any needs. You know, certainly could look at a joint facility if they need extra spots or
not. Uh but obviously we haven't started those conversations, but that those are things that we look at when we uh plan for a new building. you know, Lake Park Township has a right on Highway 10, they have their >> their building there. Um, so that's another spot that might be utilized. I
mean, if you're looking at putting up a new building to partner with the township either, you know, also or the city or the township, but they have a nice right on right off Highway 10 by those storage buildings, they have a nice spot that anyway.
Um, well, this is no formal action except uh a motion to accept the report so we can have it in the minutes and that. Uh, if you have any other questions. >> Madam Chair, I'll move to approve the 2025 Becker County annual report. >> All right, we have a motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second.
>> Madam Chair, it should be accept probably not approved. >> Just accept. >> All right. >> I I got I just have one question. Sure. Um, under this year's budget, I I think I found we we budgeted for 3.5 million
for sales tax. Are we on track for that? >> We have them in our >> I looked the numbers the numbers looked very similar to last year. >> Yeah, this month was down a little bit or the last month reported was down a little bit. >> The beginning of the year was was a little bit high. So, I think those those
numbers are fairly equal to last. February is the last month I came in. 229 was last or 227 was a number last year. In February it was 232. So we're >> last year's sales tax money. >> 3.8 >> 3.8 >> should be.
>> Okay. >> Any further discussion? >> Madam Chair, I would like to recognize Angie for and because I know she it it this these are these are reports are a lot of work and and I know she put a lot of time in and and the rest of the gym and the rest of the staff. Um,
these are these are a big deal. This and and if you want to find any information about any of the roads or any of the projects, this will have it. So, >> thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thanks, Angie. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? >> Motion carried.
>> And then, um, I'll just if I could provide a little construction update. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh, Westlake Drive uh, they just started pouring the concrete today. It looks like they will finish that uh north lane uh today and pending weather
this week. Uh finish the the rest of it down to uh uh the Lakeside Tavern or whatever uh on Minnesota Street or um Lake Street, I'm sorry. But uh it's looking very nice there. Um out in the
eastern part, we're working on 39 and 40 there. Mhm. >> Uh 39 has been all mil and reclaimed and uh we have one more pass with the reclaimer and then we inject our base one stabilization project on 39. Uh they
will be finishing up the first pass of the reclaiming machine uh probably today and then they will start ash this week pending weather again. uh they make that second pass with the ash and incorporate that ash into the uh uh the the base
material and uh we have three segments out there. We're kind of we have a segment that will have just the ash in. We'll have a segment with base one in and then we have segment with concrete stabilizer. We're going to kind of just see what performs the best and we'll
measure the strength of the road just so we have that data to see, you know, what's the best value and provides us the most strength in the road. Um, so it's a nice little project. Uh, I know Phil mentioned earlier about the
grant that Ottertale received. they'll that'll help, you know, build a storage facility where that ash will be more readily available for the counties to use and plan projects. And uh we may even look at incorporating that into some of our gravel roads and stuff, you
know. So, I'm I'm sure we could probably between the counties eat that. Uh that I think they're looking to get uh 10,000 tons used annually was what they generate. We produce about 10 to 11,000 ton annually and if we don't have to put
it in our facility, our storage facility, that would be good to use that. We're actually looking next year, we're having a hard time finding someone who will put some of it into their roads next year. This was our year. Um so yeah. >> All right. Well, thank you, Jim.
>> Madam Chair, one more thing for Jim. Um yesterday, I received a compliment from for the highway department. um gentleman um said on number seven we the grade widening up there. He said he said said it's so nice and it's so much more they just he just he's a farmer and he was
driving semic he said this is so much better than you know the there was no recovery and there were steep ditches he said that just uh he said he actually sent a letter I think to to maybe Jonah or Brian or you um but just just know that when those improvements are made
they're I mean and there these these improvements that we do are >> you know in our lifetime forever in our lifetime so um this sales tax money and that's what we can do more than just maintaining what we have. We can improve
those. Um and I I I know that it has potential to save lives. You know, when you when you do drive off and there's no shoulder, there's there's easy chance for a rollover. And now we have some recovery time. And and uh I think I think when we get to Metro, they don't
realize that our roads still are not up to where they should be. Um, and that's what we have to keep telling them down there and saying, you know, we're not where we should be on these these roads. And that's a pretty high maint high traveled road and a high truck usage for for what we have. So, um,
congratulations on, you know, when you get those compliments, uh, like to share them and and I it goes to the board's direction, too. And, and we want to make those improvements to those roads and, you know, continue on. We can't do them all at once. um financially it's just not realistic unless we I think Klay County actually
took a bond out one year and and uh did a bunch of projects and and move forward like that. But um thanks again Jim for your for your work and thank your whole staff. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Jim. >> All right we are going to take Rick till 9:50. Apologize to the board.
>> Not not what not received. >> Not accepted. >> I mean, it is Barry's birthday. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Do I got to do I got to sing it to All right, on to planning and zoning. Good morning, Kyle. >> Good morning. I have planning commission recommendations for you from May 27th.
Um the first being John and Jenna Barry. Um requesting a conditional use permit for transportation business to include temporary storage of homes and structures. um recommendation was to approve with conditions and findings. Conditions
include uh a limit of three years on the on the conditional use permit. Um that's partially due to I guess seeing how well the business operates and then also the applicant did indicate that there was plans to move this business in the
future. Um condition two was a review of the conditional use permit um required after 18 months. Three temporary structures must fit within a designated 2.81 area acre area
um defined as being 350 by 350 located 460 ft from the south property line and 320 ft from the center line of County Road 26. Condition four, trailers being scrapped
must be removed within four months. Um that condition is relevant to trailers that are basically removed from a property um by the applicant and then prior to being accepted at a landfill, there's items that need to be removed
from them. Um and then number five, applicant has four months from date of approval to get the current structures moved into the designated area which is that 350 by 350.
>> Well, Madam Chair, I'm I mean I'm not familiar with this property. Um >> it raises some real concerns immediately with me just reading through it. I mean I don't but I I have no idea. haven't been contacted by anyone, so I I can't
>> We got a lot of emails from the um for the planning commission. Yeah. Got got a lot of emails >> um opposing it. >> Well, just reading what what >> what it is, >> it's I would be very disturbed if this was in my I mean, next to my property. I
mean, just reading what you know, some of the conditions are if you're putting those conditions on, that's what's happening. you know, the T, you know, it's a demo site basically. >> Ye. Yes, I I agree. And I I was hoping that the applicant would have been here so he could have provided more
information. Um I was not at planning commission when he first um when his application was first presented to the planning commission. Um so I don't I'm not aware of like how how he does things. Um, not nothing in the
conditional use permit application really says anything about scrapping and how he's going to handle that. Really, the conditional use permit is storage and transportation of >> trailers being scrapped must be removed within 4 months. >> That's that's a condition that
>> So, I'm assuming there I mean, you know, you have an assumption then that >> but that's being removed. What if you keep some of it? What you know, what if you salvage some of it? So, I drove by it on Friday and and it does say it is not visible by the the highway and it is
it is it it is pine trees, but you can see >> the houses back in there and the the scrap um pile. >> Well, this is your area and I'm not familiar with it. You I mean, if you want
>> another another thing that was brought up that the the driveway that he goes into words from there. I want >> is um the the neighbor has the he he only has a easement. So the driveway to go into
the the business home, whatever, um is a easement. And it doesn't say you can't use it for commercial, but it doesn't say you can. I don't know that that is a thing for us to decide, but that is to
me it is a concern for and that the land owner was also concerned about it. Um, >> Madam Chair, I it's not a scrap site. There is some scrap there, but I mean, if you're going to single him out, we got a lot of scrap in the county, I
guess. Um, as I I went out and looked at it. I took some pictures. You're viewing them now. Um, >> no, I'm not. >> It's a It's a transition place to haul to stop over. He bought a trailer. It stays there. When he sells it, it goes to another place. Um,
>> or scraps it. So, or or or scraps it. Yep. >> Is that a trailer? >> That's the pile of the scrap. >> Oh, that's not a trailer. Okay. There is It's scrap and there's a pile of tires there, too. I mean, so I mean I >> So, is that any worse than 50 other
properties I could show you in Becker County? >> So, we're we're going to >> No, I Hey, so that's >> I >> this we're talking different things though. This a commercial property versus private properties. >> Yeah, right. Correct. and and you can have this this is a business and I think
this is a needed business but in the pro if it's proximity next to adjoining land owners that are living there then I then I have that's where my concerns come in it's the joining property owners that have will this have a negative and I don't know and I don't they're not here so I'm asking
>> I mean so when you when you go north on 26 his property is right here the driveway is shared with another property they do not have a home there at this time it's They have a camper and a a seasonal, but they're they plan to someday make it their home in the next 3
years while this business is supposedly there. I'm not sure. Um, but then you go around the corner and right on the back side of the property is Washington Drive, which is all residential. Um,
you can't see the the houses and the piles as much from the north side where the Washington Drive is. Um, but you can on 26 as you're going north. Um, I'm also a a
little concerned with it being scrap and we're we're within the shoreland, right? >> No, >> this isn't >> this is 1,000 ft. Well, the the corner of his property is like 700 feet away, >> but but this where he's >> where the site is. No, but the property.
Yes. >> How big a property is it? 100 acres. >> Uh, no. 38 was 38 something. >> Well, I with my I mean, I'm not familiar with it. I will look for Erica to >> Yeah.
>> see how she wants to proceed. >> Um, I'm I'm not I'm not for it. Um, I'm only one person, so I'm not going to tell anybody else how to vote. Um, I do like that the planning commission
put some limitations on there. I did I did make a suggestion at the planning commission that was not taken that a fence at minimum be um around the the the property or not the property, the
2.81 81 acres. That will have at least on the would be the west side. >> The west side from the south side, >> you know, where you can where you can um
see the homes and the >> So, this is the area that I took the pictures from. This is walking through an alleyway. This is his farmstead. This is his barn and his house. These are where those trailers were lined up. Here's where the scrap was right here. The tires were in between these trees
here. Here's the road, the shared driveway, which I don't know that that wouldn't be an issue. It's right on the quarter line, but all you have to do is bring a couple loads of gravel in. You solve that problem. >> I would also note that many of these trees are not there anymore. >> Yeah, you you you the trees, the pine
trees are up the lowest branches are up six feet. So you can kind of see it through here, but it you were talking about up here too, right Erica? You can kind of see it from here too, this road >> if you look real hard. But >> but there has been significant there has
been significant logging. >> Yeah, there has been Yeah. Um, I Madam Chair, I I I I like the idea of reviewing it in a year and a half. Kyle, you said it was for for three years. Was it going to end after three years? Was that going to be the length?
So then So this is just a >> He'd have to come back. >> He'd have to re >> if he wanted to if he wanted to extend it. Yeah. >> Kyle, um, in 18 months, what do you expect? I mean, you're going to go out there and review this conditional use permit, right? >> Yeah. I would expect it not look any
worse than it does when we were there. That would be my expectation. >> And if it is, >> then it would have to come back before you for a consideration. >> Well, would this come up to the blighted property? >> No, we can we can pull a conditional use permit at any time for anything if
there's cause. Yeah. >> If we have cause, >> Kyle, have we ever pulled a conditional use permit? >> Not my tent, chair. No. >> But we have had one that we put on the agenda and it got corrected immediately. the problem got corrected immediately. >> I would also note that this
has been happening. I mean, he's been running this business without a conditional use permit. Like, this isn't something that he is now deciding to do. He's been doing it for I don't know how long, a couple years it sounded like. Um,
my understanding is he didn't know he needed a conventional use permit. Basically, the conversation between our office and him started because his father owns Victory Homes in Pelican, I believe is where that's located, and he's talking about purchasing that
business um through the state lure. They need some type of approval from our office. So, he basically called and said, "Hey, I have this form." And I'm like, "Well, that's not something you can operate on your property without proper permits." So, that's kind of how
we got here. And my my and this is why I was hoping he would be here so I could ask him some questions about the scrapping. Like what is he doing with the >> tires? >> The tires like it's all in a pile now with everything. >> The tires are probably being used
because he's moving homes, right? So he probably has a handful or more than a handful that he's taking and axles and things like that. >> But this was a discarded this was I mean the picture that Phil had was probably 50 tires of junk. They're all just there. No rims. It's just
>> What one of my concerns is it was mentioned by one of the people that came the the neighbor had said that he was burning a pile. He it sounded like there was a bit of a a confrontation between the two. Mr.
Barry said he had a permit for it. Um and >> if it's brush can't burn anything else. >> Well, I don't know. And that's what I don't know. I don't know that it was brush. don't know that it was a pile of debris either, but um you know, you
don't think of any of that at the moment. partly because I guess I didn't realize this was such a um more of a of scrapping uh trailer houses versus so I don't know when you're take take taking them apart if
you are just out in the open what's happening on a windy day with all the insulation and the you know so lots of questions that unfortunately cannot be answered now because he's not here. Can you can you take a full So he was it explaining to
us some of the items that couldn't be brought to the landfill. Do you like He said that you had to take a water heater out before. Is that something you require? >> They're if they bring a demo mobile home out there. >> Yeah.
>> They have to clean it out. But we would accept all that stuff. It's just that we don't want a trailer loaded full of garbage out there. We have to pay, you know, we have to charge for it. So for them to take it apart, do you think I have to make sure it's not? >> And he's not here to answer this. I was
more curious on what level he does disassemble them to. >> Um >> I mean it's a it's a good service. Um, and if it's a three-year permit, I it's one thing, but um I think
I don't you could table it to our next meeting if you wanted to have them answer questions. >> I don't think we can because it's already been tabled once by the planning commission. Correct. >> Oh, I could I could >> We can extend it by 60 days with reasoning. >> Madam Chair, what what would tableabling bring? Do you need any new information
or you just want to ask the owner more questions or what what what question would we need answered by tableabling? >> What what are you doing with the salvage? How >> for me it's likely not going to change anything. >> What are you burning? >> He said I don't know about the burning. I asked him about the salvage pile. He
said he's trying to get a a rolloff thing from the iron place here in town up there and he just hasn't got around to it yet. That's what I heard say. Kyle, did you hear something like that? >> Iron scrap. Yeah, this is >> there was >> Yeah, it's scrap. >> I didn't >> tires. There's wood.
>> No, the tires are in another. This is mostly I think mostly >> there's a tire there. There's wood there. >> I think I think you know you could put you could put the restrictions on it now. >> I mean, you could say um obviously no burning that but that's already that's already law. I mean
>> Steve, we already have that. So if he's demoing stuff and he's got piles of demo, we do have rules in place that say has to be contained. >> Has to be in a container that's secure. >> So if he's taking apart a mobile home,
he's got a lot of old insulation, for example. You're never going to reuse that. You'd have to keep that quote in a >> in a container of some sort. You can't just pull the stuff up and throw it into a pile. eventually that somebody will do
something. >> It didn't look anything like that last one. >> I don't know. I've never seen this place. >> Wait till that one. >> Well, you could put the restrictions on, you know, no burning must comply with. Is that county or state demo rules? >> Those are county rules.
>> County demo ordinance rules. Uh you could have no trees cut, no more for buff, you know, for you want to keep the the screening with the trees. So no no more reducing the screening.
>> Madam Chair, Kyle, if we approve this in 18 months, you go out there and it's worse. >> What what happens from that point forward? We pull the conditional use permit. >> Yes. >> Which will take a month or two. We we send him attorney letters. You got to get the >> I mean, if he was operating without a
conditional use permit, it would be a misdemeanor. >> Okay. So, by three years, it probably by the time we get around to doing all this stuff, judging by bladed properties, >> you could reduce that 18 months. >> What? That was maybe my question. Does
that 18 months seem logical? >> Half of three years. >> Yeah. >> I don't know. Does that seem applyable or just be >> remember you can always review it. You can review it any day you want >> technically. Yes. >> I mean, and we can if it's violating the terms of the if it's violating, then you
can pull it. But if it's not violating, you just don't like it, you can pull it. If I was going to recommend, I'd recommend do with approval with those with conditions on with the conditions stated and conditions that you know, no
more no more reducing the screening of trees. >> Um, and >> no burning. >> Yeah. No burning and and complying and be aware and comply with the county ordinance demo rules. >> Do you want to make that motion?
>> Well, I I mean, I think Erica needs to be somewhat comfortable. votes in her. >> Um I mean I I like though I'm I'm still not for it. I I like having those additional rules. Um
you can I mean even not removing any more trees, you're still especially come I mean there it is pine trees but there is al there are are also leaved trees that come fall you're going to be able to see it more. Um, so
>> I'll make a motion to uh approve this conditional use permit with the expansion of of uh no more tree removal. >> Okay. >> And uh >> for screening purposes >> for for screening purposes and uh no burning which I think
>> that's kind of already is foregone. >> Correct. and and follow demo rules, demo county rules >> and they have to just be aware of that. >> No burning of like demo. I mean, >> yeah,
>> correct. >> If he has a fire at >> brush or whatnot would be acceptable. >> That's my motion. >> Did Did you want to add >> Oh, sorry. >> I'll second. >> Okay. >> And Mr. Chair, I think you should um
I think you should make sure you say com concur with planning and zoning and these additional >> Yeah, >> absolutely. Uh Kyle, one other question. Um the four months, okay, there's a pile of metal out there right now since that was there before. If this does get
approved, does that get to stay or does that got to go too or can we make it a >> I told him when I was there when we come back in 18 months there shouldn't be any scrap on set. >> Okay. So that includes the tires, all the stuff. >> I said scrap I said that pile that we
saw. I said to be in good standing that you know and have a a good image that should not be here. Okay. And that's where I I expressed to him I you know a lot of people will say I hold on to this because the price of metal is going up or down. I said that really wouldn't be relevant. You should just have this gone
when they come in 18 months or we come. I would I mean I would suggest that that both you and Commissioner Jeepson go along with me and you know a couple members of the planning commission and just >> and I would also make sure he understands what um Steve had said of if
if he's demoing correct me if I'm wrong if he's demoing trailer houses they need to be contained in a demo rolloff. >> He's going to have to figure out some >> like it it can't be just in a pile until he wants to get rid of them. That's that's not >> the demo is a concern. I you know the
scrap pile it's not going to blow away because that's metal the >> insulation would be a problem. >> That's what you want to make sure and styrofoams and >> I noticed no insulation styrofoam in the trees. I wasn't looking for but I didn't notice it like up at our transfer station. >> That's what complying with demo county
rules would cover that. >> Yeah. And I mean to to my knowledge what he's doing is like if if he picks one up and there is household items in there, he's getting rid of that. He mentioned something about smoke alarms. I don't know if they he
mentioned smoke alarms and water heaters. Um I don't think he's again I'm >> He's not demoing completely. He's just making them compliant to >> I think he's ripping stuff down to the studs and things like that. taking out sheetrock or
>> he's not. >> I don't believe so. >> So, can I can I amend my own motion to include cleaning up the scrap that is there, the tires that are there, that is included with this? I mean, I know it was there before if we do approve this, but he needs to get all that cleaned up.
Does that make sense? >> Yeah. Is that >> Richard, will you? Yeah. >> Okay. The only other thing I wanted to note is that one of the frustrations for me is in his conditional use permit application, it mentions nothing of
scrapping. It's only storage and transportation. So, if we approve this and we're saying it's okay for it to be a scrapyard essentially, if we're allowing scrapping, that was not a part of what
was presented to those that were were given a notice. So, that's my biggest concern, but >> that's fair. So in I mean we we should be approving
what is in the conditional use permit. >> Madam chair, so with our additional amendment, he's got to clean that up. What you see there now? >> Mhm. >> He's got a uh no burning. So it's got to go in 18 months. If you go out there and it's worse than it is now,
we pull the permit. And I mean that's the way I see it. >> If we approve this, that that's the way I see it. Yeah. And I could re we could recommend that, you know, you mentioned that he get a >> a roll off. You you could stipulate he has that on site.
>> I don't want to tell him how to do his >> I'm just I'm just >> Well, it's part of that's following the county ordinance. >> Well, that's from demo. >> If it's a pile of scrap or in a rolloff, you don't want to you don't want to have to have a >> rent a roll off for that whole time. that.
>> But if it's a pile of scrap and it's not excessive, >> the scrap iron I can handle being in a pile more. So then >> and because to rent a roll off would would not be >> that would beensive. >> But if you if you have a scrap garbage >> if you have a pile of scrap iron, one
would assume it would be just scrap iron, >> right? >> Not a pile with wood and tires and >> I think it should be added no tire pile. I mean, seeing a pile of tires, I mean, that's >> because >> to your to what we did this year, they
could say, "Well, we're just going to hold off. We're going to stockpile and then wait till the county has a discount." And I mean, I it I just think tires are >> tires get full of water and they just become a I mean, not a very good environment for >> Maybe you could limit the amount of
tires cuz he might >> Yeah, but he might always be having some tires. He might always be doing that. He might. So >> you can certainly clarify it by scrap tire. I mean a pile of 50 tires. They're not. >> Yeah. No, there's no reason for a pile
of 50 tires. I don't know. A few tires. I don't know how you'd >> You would estimate there was 50 tires in that pile, wouldn't you feel? >> Yes. around the Yeah, definitely around the >> I mean if it's usable tires I but >> or but if you're if you're constantly
taking them in if there's 20 tires or 10 tires I don't think that that's if he's >> if he's working on it and constantly >> doing it. >> Yeah. That's not a huge buy although I would
but >> All right, we have a motion in a second. Any further discussion? >> All right, I'm going to call a roll call vote. >> I will vote yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> No.
>> Yes. >> All right. Motion passes. >> So, we wanted to know what our commissioner in that area Yep. >> felt like. Yep. >> Well, she asked me first, so >> I could I could vote no on it just because he's not >> I'm glad we have I'm glad we got some
things in place. Let's make sure we follow up on those and sure you will. So, >> all right, next one. >> Uh Stephen and Sarah Scadam requesting a conditional use permit to operate a therapy and wellness center. Recommendation was to approve. >> Is everybody familiar with where this
one is? >> Yes. >> I mean, it's very very much fits in with surroundings >> crossing gas station. >> Yeah, >> I think it's the one house left in that area. >> Yeah. Um, again, concerns that I have
with with this would be adequate parking and I >> I mean, being we don't have any parking requirements for our businesses. This is a condition used for therapy and um it's not commercial so it can't switch over and I think that would be the concern. therapy. You're talking a couple cars at
a time maybe. But parking is something that we need to >> We did talk about that >> and it there there is enough she thought that the parking that was available there was sufficient for she didn't
think she said it was sufficient for what what they need. And I think if you look at the property, it does show that there is. >> Yeah, I'm I vaguely familiar with it, but I I just something that we have to keep an eye on is if there's adequate
parking for the business that they're applying for. >> Yeah, I agree. Madam Chair, Commissioner Nelson, we did ask about it and I don't remember the conversation went off to something else, I think, but it >> she I mean I just remember her saying that parking was sufficient and that
there wasn't >> now remember saying that. >> I want to say there was like six spots or >> Yeah, I think that's I thought there was six spots. But if that's parking behind someone, you know, how is that? Yeah, >> I again
this will have a negative effect on her business if it's not appropriate, >> but I think it's something that the county for we should have a when we have a conditional use like this, we should require showing where the parking is on on a site map. >> Oh yeah. And she currently I don't
remember where her business is now. She I mean she's running the business now. She's just grown out of it. Madam Chair, >> the Greystone, >> I don't remember where, but >> Madam Chair, Kyle, could we uh dig down on the Does this need to be approved now
or can we >> approve it now because I think it's got >> I I think it does need to be approved now solely because there's a sale pending >> and this is >> I'm fine with it being approved. I just want us to look at that when we address things and I think there's
>> but but but you're not if it's if it's approved and there's not enough parking and people are parking on County Road 6. We don't want that. >> Well, they cannot park on county road. >> They will. >> Well, you can make that a condition. >> No parking on county road. >> We can make a condition on a county road to no parking anytime.
>> In the application, she says, "As of right now, there's adequate parking. As business grows, we will expand parking as needed. >> We can we can define that better if we want. >> I just think in the I mean, we didn't we don't require that now. I think in the
future we require parking spaces and for conditioning. >> So this is the house right here, right? So this is overs. Here's county six. It's right here. It's this property, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> I believe there's adequate parking. >> Yeah.
>> For this, not there would be a bar and restaurant, >> right? No. Yeah. >> Be different. Mhm. >> So, um I'll make a motion to approve concur with planning and zone. >> I'll second. >> All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I.
>> Opposed. Motion carries. >> Kyle, do we have something for parking like for situations like this? Do we ask the question? That's what >> there's a there's a question in there. Yes. But we could start requiring, you know, more detail. >> Maybe even just how many parking spots do you need?
>> Sure. How many employees and how many parking spots and >> do you need now and do you anticipate needing down the road something? Yeah, >> absolutely. >> Do we have anything in the zoning ordinance that requires number of is that just for bars and >> uh no like number of parking spots per
square foot or something? >> Yes. So there's sometimes it depends on square foot of building >> type of business. >> Type of business. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Then there. >> So we have something in there. >> We do. >> Okay. All right. Next one on Prairie Lake Investments requesting an amendment.
>> Uh request an amendment to recorded document number 715209 for reduction from 350,000 cubic yards to 50,000 cubic yards of material extracted in the described 20 acre area. Uh amendment will include no crushing of
material. Uh also includes the sale of existing excess top soil from the plat of Prairie Lake Estates. Um and then there was a There was one. So, it was recommended to approve um
with findings and with the removal of the requirement for BMS um through the first conditional use permit. There was a requirement for like 7 foot BMS to be created around the mining area. Um
not deemed necessary anymore. Um, >> yeah. And it, um, I don't remember who it was that said that at the meeting. >> Saw Ed Clim was one of them. >> Yes, Ed. Thank you. That said, I mean, really >> unnecessary. >> The BMS are unnecessary because BMS are made with the top soil.
>> So, they're made for like >> Well, >> and the top soil is going to be >> I think crushing would be the big one you want the BM for if you're reducing. But, I think we have a gentleman would like to address the board. Mhm. Yep. >> Morning, Jeff Seltinger. Hi, Mark
Avenue. Uh I'm not here to oppose this at all. I'm just uh looking for some assurance that the quantities are uh are kept to what they're asking.
>> Madam Chair, I I saw the look on your face when you got the answer that you weren't satisfied with. Um, uh, the stuff is weighed going out, isn't it? Or does it have to be are >> not necessarily? Um, >> so that that's kind of what you were,
how do you know 50? >> Yeah, up approximately 10,000 cubic yards of black dirt. >> Uh, 9 to 11, 8 to 12, 7 to 13. Um, it's a big black dirt pile out there. I
think if they surveyed it, you'd know exactly how much you had. And if it's 20,000, then that's not approximately 10,000. >> What What is the concern? >> Difference.
>> The amount of trucks going by my house, I guess, and the noise and the dust uh created by this operation, >> Madam Chair, the road is dust guarded, right? >> Yeah. So the dust that'll maybe the dust from the facility, but once it gets on the road,
>> I guess is the concern that there's I mean the pile's there, correct? >> There's a pile of dirt there. Yeah. >> So, and you're okay with them removing that pile of dirt? >> Well, as long as it's approximately >> Are you worried about yards? >> Are you worried about there's more that they're going to do more excavating
somewhere else? No, I'm just worried that it's there's going to be twice as many trucks as what they're asking for. >> So, you're all estimates though in doing this kind of work. And actually, I was out there and the the development is
looking very nice and absolutely nowhere near the problem that was brought up here in all the >> the problem was never the development. Well, it it no, the problem was removing material and and to make a development,
you need to remove the material to, you know, there wouldn't there would be no sense in leaving a pile of black dirt there. What has to go has to go. Um, and once it's done, it'll be done. Um, and so I don't know. My question, and this
is for you, Kyle, is the the request is to sell the 50,000 uh cubic yards of top soil. >> No, that that's so you previously approved 350,000 cubic yards in the in
the 20 property. >> That 20 acre portion was basically the topography was >> hilly and whatnot. Yep. and they wanted to remove basically that material to make it salailable loss. >> So that 20 acre portion now is going to
remain um or it's not going to be developed. >> Mhm. >> Um so the amount of material can be reduced immensely and then there was also found to be not enough aggregate in that 20 acres to be making gravel. So
that is being reduced to 50,000 cubic yards of basically pitr run sand and that sand is going to be used um in portions for prairie life development um to build to get their lots in buildable shape and then also if there's any
projects in vicinity that also need material. So that's 50,000 cubic yards of sand. The 10,000 cubic yards of top soil is in an existing pile that was stripped and was excess amount of black
dirt that's piled there currently. So it's 10 and >> the 10 is what is being sold >> and the 50 will be sold to and the concern is is that this 10 this pile of
top soil might be more than 10. Correct. >> If it is more than 10, what does is it does it have to stay there or can he get rid of it and just not sell it or like so I I I want to be careful
that we're not putting like this it doesn't necessarily mean that you're still not going to have the trucks there. Like I don't know that limiting it is going to necessarily limit the trucks. And that's I guess my question. So, I mean the it's an approximate
number, right? >> Um and then that number was basically given by a contractor >> that that's what the contractor believes to the best of his knowledge >> is 10,000, >> right? >> So, I think
know when you're looking at that, I I think I'm not going to say that the contractor can get within a thousand yards, but they should certainly be able to get within >> a few or 5,000. I mean, I don't think If he says there's 10 there, there certainly should not be 20. >> Madam Madam Chair, I just remember when
when we initially went through this, it was 700,000 cubic yards, I think. I think we cut that in half and now we're down to 50. >> Um, as far as trucks, I I get your concern with the trucks, but it's going to be a lot less than
>> I don't know how they need done, >> Mr. Chair. Madam, it's really hard to do this kind of job and make money sometimes. And when somebody starts limiting you can you can take this you it just needs to be done and once it's done it'll be open
>> just a reminder our job is not to ensure the contractor makes money or the developer I mean that's that is >> no >> so what I what I >> shouldn't tie their hands so that they can't and that's what you're you want to tie their hands and it just the it's a
big investment this is America you know you can't own five acres and grow 400 acres around you. Let Let the guys They're doing a nice job. It's beautiful out there and it's going to be nice. Let them do their job and try and make a buck at it. They We We can't tie their
hands so they can't make a buck. If there's 15,000 yards, let them sell it and get it out of there. >> Um Okay, >> Madam Chair, I'll move to approve the amended amendment to the recorded document number 715209. >> I'll second. >> I just want to make sure. Did Did that
include the Burm? >> Uh no. Burm. that but the con what >> if you would just >> you have to >> concur with no BMS >> you have to concur with the find the pling and zoning >> because then you're agreeing to what their condition >> was part of the amendment
>> and that was part that's I just that's what I was making sure was that was part of the amendment okay >> um madam chair um I guess does it say exactly the ac the number of
square cubic um yards for black dirt >> approximately 10,000. It says I just want them to follow the rules. >> I just want them to be able to do the job. I just bought a pile of black that was 5,000 yards and when I hauled it
away, that's what they estimated. When I hauled it away, it was seven >> in the in our thing. It does not state any amount of >> No, it does not. >> You know, in a mining operation plan, it's estimated total cubic yards of material to be extracted. 10,000 cubic yards of excess top soil and 50,000
cubic yards of >> so I think we want to and I think it's probably clear in there the 10,000 cubic yards of top soil is not on the original 20 acre gravel pit that's on >> hauled over there now >> oh it's >> I don't know if it's on the pit >> right there
>> it's been hauled up to the basically the south line of that 20 acre piece they put it all in one pile >> okay so just so it's reflected in the motion that That's that's all that's allowable then to be moved is that so that the
current pile which is estimated about 10,000 cubic yards give or take a 10%. >> Is it all in one pile? >> It's all okay. So there's >> I don't even know that we could >> Well, I'm just saying >> we should say give or take 10%. I thought we just say what's in the pile.
>> Just let them all out of there. >> Then I just uh Nick, I just had another question. And then you um I think Kyle said or referenced that the 20 acres now is I mean you don't have plans. It's not in the works anyway the 20 20 acres to
be developed >> at this time. But you're not saying ever. You're just saying at this time >> not in our not in our ownership lake investments. >> Okay. >> Um I which I think it's going to sell to headstroms. Are they at some
>> Yeah. I mean, I I just don't like some of the, you know, like some sometimes we get ahead of ourselves. This is not something we're saying it'll never be be developed. I mean, we're and we shouldn't think that. I mean, we But >> no, the only reason I stated that is if the applicant did sign a written
agreement with um the opposition surrounding or not, there's some members that were in the lawsuit that were that did not live next door to it, but they signed a written agreement and that was included. I believe that that 20 acres would not be developed, right?
>> And that would be by that >> very lake. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. Did we have everything in the motion that we needed? >> It was in the amendment. So or yeah >> um >> right there >> to give you some satisfaction maybe um K
our K the office will monitor that to make sure that that's complied with just the pile. I mean, I I do think it's piled and you're not disputing that that pile can go and I don't think a contractor will be off by a significant amount on that. And if it's
>> I don't know there's any other >> I mean my my only thought is is what if it's 15,000? Are we are I mean are are you okay with 15,000? >> I do you know what I mean? Like we know what the pile is. >> 15. I'm not okay with 20. I'm okay with
50. I'm not okay with 100. >> Could we um >> nor trucks that go by my place to >> There's ways happy I am. >> There's ways to measure um measure that measure piles and and Jim and I were having a conversation
right before and there's some fairly, you know, easy ways to do some of that mapping. So, um maybe maybe even internally we can ask that we do some measuring of the I mean this the pile as long as we're close we're going to be fine but the the topography of the land
too to make sure we're going to be >> close we've already had a contractor out to the best of his knowledge says it's >> right I'm thinking more about the 20 acre parcel on the 50,000 to to make sure that we stay within somewhere >> reasonable on that >> the contractor's already broken the
rules So I think and we can do that just internally. It doesn't need to be part of the conditional use because it's 50,000 and we can we can measure that um we can send out measuring crews to make sure we stay compliant with that. >> You know I I hope we don't do that. I
hope you know because when you start saying I don't want trucks and I don't want this and I don't want that. Then that's that's really tying people's hands and you're tying up their investments. And you know, if you live in town, you can control your your
probably your neighbor house is going to be there. But when you move out into the country and want to control everything around you and make it really hard to develop, we're short of housing. We're short of people who want to invest money and go through all this cuz this
is very stressful and it's really it's really a hard way to go. Madam Chair, it is stressful and and >> but I think I think what we're saying here is not necessary. >> The the request is 50,000. >> If they wanted 100,000, they should have requested that. >> Follow the rules. >> If they want 50,000, we say yes, we want
to make sure that that stays within the rules. What is wrong with that? That's what they're asking for >> because now you say you don't when you do this for a living and you move large amount of dirt and you make developments and you want somebody to pinpoint all this and I want this many trucks to go
by my house. That is not America. And if you what you're saying what I'm saying is let them let these people develop. >> No, what you're saying is you can do whatever you want out there. Yeah, that's what you're saying because you're saying 50,000 is not >> I'm saying don't buy five acres control
everything around you. That's what I'm saying. >> You are saying what >> madam chair >> what you're inferring is if we have apply we allow a 50,000 cubic yard and we're fine with that but you what you're implying is they can go out and do
whatever they you want because we don't want to have measure that. That's what you're implying when you're saying what you're saying. I'm saying the 50,000 should be 50,000. I'm saying I do it for a living berry and the contractor just add yards but seven. So
>> we have a motion and a second to concur with planning and zoning's recommendation of the amendments. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. >> Motion carried. Madam Chair, I would like to um ask the zoning office either
with the zoning or or um highway to go out and do some sort of measurement to have a aerial view some in some way to measure the 20 acres to see that they're remain fairly enclosed with the 50,000 cubic yards. >> That's not in this in our vote.
>> I didn't ask for it to be in our vote. >> Yeah. Well, I hope that we don't do that. I hope we let these people do their job because we're we're going to do it at every to every development. We're going to go and measure it. >> Okay. >> Move on
>> on to zoning ordinance amendments. >> Okay. >> Um the first is requirements regulating wind, solar, and data centers. Um, essentially just trying to get ahead of one of these
being applied. Um, within Becker County, there's always the option to put a moratorum in place if something does get applied for. Um, basically none of us are experts in data centers, wind energy or solar energy. Um, so this is a
mechanism just to put in place. So if one is applied, it at least has to come before you. at that time. There'll probably be many people speaking um about the application and we could certainly learn more at that time. Um it doesn't mean in the meantime that we
won't continue to try and figure out um if there is some good regulations that we could be looking at. Um I think for data centers, we're they're way ahead of their time. Um, I know if we can look to someone like AMC to put some language
together, but if I were to bring you language regarding data centers, it would be pure speculation. >> I can't tell you, >> you know, what they entail or anything like that. And that kind of goes with wind or solar, too. Um, because certainly when I bring you some
language, I need to understand if it's going to be prohibitive or it's going to encourage people to come here. And that's something I got to be able to tell you, and I can't at this time. So if I put something in place, is that welcoming it or is that saying absolutely not? And maybe we want to be
one way or the other. Maybe we want to be in the middle of the road, but that's something that I got to identify before I give it to >> Madam Chair. Are we taking these one at a time? >> Um I'm I think we can do it all at once if if everybody's okay with it, but I think
going through and >> Yep. No, I agree. Okay. Um, >> did you need more direction on the the first one? >> I don't think so. No. >> Okay. >> Um, just so we have something in place again when we make them conditional um
that leaves the door wide open for you to say, "Hey, limit this or you know what I mean?" So, we made it clear um at at the planning commission because just for the rest of the board, um Renee Keyser, the water resources manager for White Earth, was there and she was the
one that had asked for us to put a moratorium and really what Kyle made clear to her is really right now we have nothing. So, there is nothing if somebody would want to come there's we have nothing to say they can or can't or what they need to do. So, um this really is just to get something on the books.
So, >> they have to come to us. they have to come to us and we can have some control over >> um I think they have to come to us up to a certain point. >> I think once you get over a certain size they don't have to come to us. >> Oh >> they go to the state >> they just get a for like for
>> for data centers too solar >> I was going to say solar and wind. Yes data centers. >> Yeah probably maybe something with the PU I'm not sure right >> five I think it was 5,000 >> point there. Madame Chair, Kyle, where
did you get where did you come up with the language that we're going to be voting on here? Is that something other counties have used? >> No, basically we number one, we wanted to make it conditional. And then at the zoning ordinance advisory committee, we just discussed where these should or
shouldn't be. Um I believe we said that solar could be in the shoreline district and wind and data centers may not. Mhm. >> Madame Chair, this is uh just specific to um the data centers. I know this has been a hot topic in other counties as
well and some have done moratoriums until they have all their ducks in a row and and deciding what you know and the others as well. So this is not a unique situation trying to be dealt with in our county. This is across the state.
If um let's say we would have an application for a data center specifically, would we have the ability to put a moratorium on it at that time? >> Yes. >> But okay. I just want to make sure that that's >> after application >> I believe. So
>> could we verify that just to >> I know there's certain steps that we have to go through, >> right? >> We learned that in the feed lot one that >> but >> not from our administration. >> Yeah. No, no, >> I believe >> not you >> after. >> Okay. >> You certainly still have, but I can
clarify. >> Yeah, let's just clarify. Um, >> we had that assumption otherwise we probably would have been ahead of this a lot farther. But knowing that you can do it the safeguard, but I will verify. >> Yeah, verify that we can. If not, then it might be a good idea for us to
consider >> Okay. Any other >> the only thing on data centers? I mean I think there would I mean you you probably if you want to get kind of specific on them I think there should be a a setback on all recreation lakes >> and maybe environmental too. I mean
>> well for data centers I think we said not in the shoreland >> but that's only 1,000 ft. >> Oh >> but >> we could just increase that. I mean a data center should shouldn't be within thousand feet of a recreational lake. I mean, >> no. >> I mean, because they're I mean, a data center, what do they take up? Hundreds
and hundreds of acres. >> Mhm. Well, potentially. Mhm. >> The one I think in >> Harwood town >> is >> Harwood. Yeah, the one up I think there isn't there one up by Duth area? >> No. Anyway, something to
>> Okay. Anybody have any other questions on the other amendments or do you want anything to point anything out, Kyle? >> I don't think so. Oh, on the other one. Yeah, on the other ones. >> Absolutely. Um, letter B, um, there was some comments in there regarding
vegetation alterations within the shoreland area. Um, lengthy discussion on those amendments themselves amongst the zoning ordinance advisory committee. Um, I just want to say I believe there is 12 people in that room. So, these
things have been very vetted. Um but through the DNR's comments, um anytime you have basically an amendment that affects a shoreline district, we have to have DNR approval um that is consistent with their model shoreline ordinance. So there's some comments I believe in your
packet that we we got from them. Um one of them I'm not sure we could win the battle on and that's regarding steep slopes. Um, a lot of our discussion around steep slopes was that >> when you think steep, you you probably think something that's vertical, right?
You know, a steep slope, I believe our definition is change in elevation of 6 ft and 50 ft. >> Which is not much. >> Wasn't it 12 to1? >> I thought it was 12%. >> Or 10 to one. 12
>> a percent. I thought it was 6 and 50. It was a Yeah, the length of the room was a foot or something, you know, was very >> Yeah, it so it just prohibiting stuff in that in those areas is very restrictive. We're not talking bluffs and things like that. We were all
in agreement that they should be protected. >> I don't know that we could win that battle or what I should say not battle, but the DNR does have um an allowance for flexibility. And one thing I would like to point out
that I believe we should pursue with them is they also so not only the steep slopes but there was uh basically the we we created this new amendment for view corridor. So
basically anything um 50 ft wide for one/ird of your lot. So if you have a a 70ft lot you're going down to you know one third 60 foot lot you're going to go down to 20. If you have 300, it's still limited to 50. Anything in that area can go. Um, if you have currently have one
and we come out there, you know, it's very pleasant that you have one or somewhat, we're not going to let you do another 50 or something of that nature. But outside of that corridor, we wanted to allow basically the removal of brush and small vegetation. And the DNR is
saying no to that. And for me, it's I understand there's, you know, purposes for screening and things like that, but that is an enforcement nightmare to tell people that you cannot take brush on your property or establish a yard outside of that 50 ft.
>> Um, I don't think you should clear cut it. I do think you should be able to take, you know, that brush. Um, 2 in at 4t, that's a very, it's about that big. So, anything bigger is going to remain. So I guess
>> and is that what you're currently did you hear back from the DNR on? >> No, you know, I haven't spoke with them since the planning commission yet. >> Um kind of wanted to come here and get some guidance and maybe take a couple of
you back with me and see if they give us some lean. >> Mr. Chair, Kyle, as I look at this vegetation in the shore impact zone, they crossed out every steep slope. >> We We did though. You said the red are are from >> we crossed out. >> The DNR stuff is
>> I thought that was the DNR DNR stuff. >> We did >> and they're indicating that it has to remain. >> Okay. >> That's that's something I can live with because that's not saying you can't do it just requires a permit. That's that's fine. Um but not allowing people to clear that underbrush and stuff like
that. >> They're going to do it. Um so then you're constantly in a remedy of saying we need to fix this, you know. So, do you think the DNR would be receptive to us to be able to do that or >> Well, I I certainly think it's something we could pursue. Again, like I said,
there's they do allow some flexibility. Sometimes it's a give and a take type thing. Um, and maybe, you know, looking at that, it's like one of their things was without a permit. I mean, if we told them it would require a permit to do that and we would be monitoring it more
closely, I think we could maybe get somewhere. Um, but that's just right now we're allowing it. We don't have the corridor, the view corridor, but we have the 2 in and at 4t. Um, >> but if we approve the way it is, it
won't be DNR approved as of right now. >> Right. So, I mean, I we could just consider approving it as is >> with the intentions of going and and trying to get that fixed. >> Um, I I guess I could probably live with that. to get which one fixed?
>> The two the two the underbrush >> the underbrush. >> So you're saying approve it with the steep slopes in there? >> No. No. The >> Yeah. I don't think I'll win the steep slope battle of you know and I mean the group was and I agree with them. They did not like steep slope language just
because of how restrictive it is. But I don't know that we'll get anywhere on that one. >> Um >> so are you saying put that back in and fight for the other one? >> Yeah. And I mean we could agree right now to their additional approval letter um and we could put all this stuff in place
with the idea that we are still going to negotiate and I bring this back. >> So approve approve it right now considering all of the DNR's recommendations with the understanding that we're going to continue to work with the DNR to um
allow what we want or what we have had in there. >> Yeah. And I guess my point there is I I wouldn't want to scrap all everything we've done. >> Yep. >> Because there's a lot of good there. >> Just that one hangup. Like I said, I could live with the steep slopes. We can definitely work around that.
>> But that little underbrush that's >> Madam Chair Kyle, um it was my opinion before we started or not my opinion, it was fact that the the model shoreland ordinance by the DNR was was less restrictive than what we had.
Is that true or is it still true? >> It could. Yes, there's points of it. Yes, because we don't allow we didn't have that view corridor before. >> So, we were much more restrictive in certain areas. >> Yes, that is more restrictive than what the state is. So that's what when you
try to negotiate things that's what you >> so and that and that to your point um we may not want to move forward with the vegetation because we already we have that to negotiate right with right
so if we we adopted this today we're probably giving up that >> so we can eliminate the 50ft corridor for today and say give us the 50ft corridor and allow the brush to be taken >> yeah out of the corridor >> we could do Yeah, let's do that.
>> Is that a good plan? You think K or >> I I think just going back and at least talking with them because >> Yeah, I mean not allowing that underbrush. I mean that you're not allowing somebody to develop >> if we stay with the state shoreland standards they are allowed to take the underbrush. Correct. >> No,
>> not out of the 50ft corridor. >> If we keep >> No, the 50ft corridor can be clear. >> Yeah, but out of that corridor you can't you can't take the two diameter and 4 foot high out. You have to leave them. But so then basically your yard is 50 ft wide, >> right? >> Which doesn't really make sense.
>> No. >> Okay. >> Well, you're that's just in the shore impact zone. >> Yeah. It's not your whole yard. It's just >> But it could it's the front of your yard. I mean, >> and that's So there again, I mean, trying to get
>> buy in from people to say, "Hey, you can't basically." You're right, Barry. it, you know, it is only the short impact zone, but I just feel like you're going to have people taking that stuff. >> I >> when it's on the books saying you can't. >> Yeah. >> Have people calling saying, you know,
this is occurring. >> And trying to go there and tell somebody that you can't take this brush is like >> I've been there. Jeez. >> So, what do we want to do? take away the 50 foot corridor and
>> I don't I don't know what I don't I'm not getting what we have to bargain with with the state on that brush. >> I >> you know what I'm saying? What what to what leverage do we have with them to argue it? >> Well, we're not currently we're more
restrictive than them right now with that view because we're not allowing that. So I think well I mean we would maybe have to give up that view corridor to be able to take that underbrush but I almost wonder if
>> we do allow a view corridor. >> We do not currently take basically any vegetation that's under 2 in and 4t in height. anything that's dead, disease, or hazard. And you can trim trees, but we do not have anything in our ordinance that says you
can just swap 50 feet. >> So, you can't take out live trees. >> Not right. >> Yeah. In the currently. Yeah. Currently, >> this would allow you. >> Yeah. >> So, to your point, maybe there isn't, the more I'm thinking about it, there maybe there isn't a lot there to negotiate with, but
I still think it's something we pursue. But maybe if we ask them if there's something in here that I think you can use any section of the shoreline district. I don't think you have to necessarily >> give vegetation or vegetation. >> I think let's try it. >> Yeah. >> If >> Yeah. >> If it doesn't go anywhere and we have to
go with what the state says, then we go with what the state says. But >> Well, I mean, we we have to give we have to we have to be more restrictive in something to get that >> which we are. It sounds like, >> but I mean we I don't >> Madam Chair, I'm more confused now than
I was before we started this conversation. I I I will move forward with it with your recommendation, but I sit on the subcommittee and I'm confused. I maybe that was watershed that had a view corridor. Okay. Well,
>> okay. anything. >> I I want to just mention the the hours and that and the discussion at that ordinance review committee. How how detailed and and we and I'm like the devil's advocate and try to figure out what would a what would a someone with a
>> how could you interpret this to most enhance your own you know your benefits and so that there was it's it's a lot of work and a lot of discussion. So it um just a thanks to those guys and ladies that do put the time in on that on those >> and there's a lot of consensus on it.
It's nothing. >> Kyle, what are you looking for at at letter B? What are you looking for? >> Um nothing. Just basically the understanding that after today I'll be trying to have further conversation with them too. >> But but for today's purposes, are we
following the DNR's >> I think we can >> follow DNR's >> okay >> recommendation. Yeah. >> Okay. Any other ones you you want to point out about CDE or F? >> Um or anybody have questions?
>> I got one question on letter D. Um page 166 or just the creation of membership. Does this so it says uh uh the commission shall be composed of 11 no more than 11 uh each commissioner
appoints two blah blah blah. The county board may appoint one or or more commissioners to the planning commission as a liaison and then it goes right into terms. A term shall be for a period of not more than four years. Does that apply to I know we I know we appoint
ours every year for the for commissioners, but that just applies to the the other people on the planning commission or is it so maybe that sentence should be before that one? >> I don't know. Does that because when you read that it says well >> you're not limiting the commissioners to
ser >> I mean am I all right with that >> I think it should state the ter there there are unlimited terms or years for any I mean >> we don't have a restriction there's no term limit >> there's no term limits >> no they just need to be reappointed
>> every four years the >> right but not the the >> yeah we're we're appointed every year >> every year >> so that that just makes it a little confusing for someone that doesn't know that commissioners are appointed every year and there's no term limits.
>> Just add maybe add on the line that there are no term limits and the commissioners on commissioners don't have voting rights on the board. >> No, they do. >> Then it doesn't m doesn't >> it doesn't apply to them that >> maybe that should be >> that term thing should be above where the commissioners are appointed. So it
applies to just the >> Oh, so just so just say each each commissioner shall appoint two members and and the board of adjustment shall appoint one. A term shall be for a period of four not more than four years. Becker County Board
>> may appoint one or more commissioners. So we're just putting that sentence before that. >> We're just flipping morale. >> But >> and then say there's no term limits, right? >> I would you could say not appoint to the board though. They're appointed as a liaison to the board. >> I think it says that in there. Yeah. the Becker County Board Planning
Commission as a le liaison. Yeah. >> I mean, actually, what I would what I would suggest is the Becca County Board may appoint one or more commissioner to the planning commission. I'd say let's just put that as the last sentence because a lot of these other sentences in there do
relate not to the commissioners. >> Yeah. So instead of trying to move everything around, let's just move that sentence to the end of the paragraph. >> Yeah, >> that that should that would be easy fix. >> This is the most simple one to change. And >> Yep. >> We're having this much conversation
about that. >> All right. Anything else? >> Um yeah, just two things I want to point out that in that DNR letter, just to be clear, there's conditions in there that have to be met and then there's recommendations. >> We would only be following what has to
be Yep. >> Um >> so follow the DNR requirements, not recommendations. >> Yes. >> Um and then under requirements for structure definitions. Um we've
eliminated sidewalks, fences, driveways, and retaining walls. Purpose of that for sidewalks, fences, and retaining walls is those typically I mean you have sidewalks that go all the way to the lake. you have a retaining wall within a sideyard setback or the lake fences you
have on a property line. Um so they they don't meet setbacks typically. Um but driveways um I would certainly like that to be removed as a structure because they are
often placed in areas that don't meet setbacks. But I just want to note that there is comp there has been complaints. There's active complaints on driveways not meeting. Just want to be clear and upfront about that. Um that one
sometimes could garner some confrontation, but again they they often don't mean it. Um when people subdivide land, they normally will go right to an approach or something or um >> you're not talking about pvious surface. You're just talking about setbacks. >> Setbacks. Yes. they will still count
against you. >> Okay. >> There was one question on the DNR about perviews. Now you remind me of that. They said that statement that we had in there that crossed out about 25%. Is that we have that obviously stated somewhere else?
>> We do. Yeah. Because you know notice in their comments they said being redundant. >> Y >> but we removed that not to be redundant and they're telling us to be redundant. So >> yeah, we do and I'll back. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I I So yeah, that makes sense. >> Okay.
>> Um the building height one that where it says proposed outside of the shoreland, should we say shoreland district? >> Yes. Okay. Any other discussion? >> Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve. >> I'll second it.
>> And just to to clarify, we are approving >> and following the DNR require requirements. >> Well, >> conditions the conditions, >> not necessarily >> approving our ordinance change with the with the conditions of DNR with
accepting the conditions of the DN >> the required >> the requirements, >> not the recommendations. Okay. >> Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. >> Opposed. Motion carried. >> Madam chair, again, uh, thanks to Kyle for Yeah, these these are
>> a lot of work >> tedious in words smithing these things because every every little thing means something else. >> All right, thanks Kyle. All right, meeting ajourn.