Good morning everyone. It's 8:30. We'll call this morning's meeting of the Klay County Board of Commissioners to order for Tuesday, November 18th. Our first item is the approval of the agenda. >> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. >> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Bayer, second by
Commissioner Ebinger. Any further discussion on the motion? >> Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. I >> oppose the same sign. Motion carried. Citizens to be heard. Do we have any
citizens to be heard on items not on the agenda? There are none in the audience. Do we have any online? >> None, Mr. Chair. >> We'll move then to the approval of bills and vouchers. >> I'll move to approve the bills and vouchers. >> Second
by Commissioner Krabanov, second by Commissioner Bear. Any further discussion? Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppos the same sign. Motion carried. Approval of minutes from
October 28th. Mr. >> Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from October 20th, 2025. >> And I guess we have an end November 4th. We can do them together if you >> All right. And also November 4th, 2025. >> All right. Do we have a motion? >> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Bear. Second by
Commissioner Abbinger. Any further discussion? Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose the same sign. Motion carried. Our next item, our 835
item is our state auditor final final audit findings presentation. And we have online with us, we have Karen >> from the state auditor's office. Good morning. >> Good morning. So, I'm Karen Stacken. I am one of the audit directors with the office of the
state auditor and I'm just here to present uh the findings from the 2024 um Klay County financial statement audit. Um so the county did receive an unmodified opinion on the financial statements and that is the best opinion you can receive. So it's the one that
you want to have. During our testing um we did identify three findings in total. Um the first one relates to internal control over financial reporting. Um that was identified in the report as finding 2024-001
and it's related to segregation of duties. So in that finding we just noted that several of the county's departments that collect fees lack proper segregation of duties. Um these departments generally will have one person that does um
they're responsible for like the billing, the collecting, the recording, and the depositing of receipts. And sometimes they're also involved in recording or reconciling bank accounts. Um just having all of those duties concentrated in one person could affect
the ability of county employees um to be able to identify any misstatements that could occur in a timely period. And so we recommend that the county board and management be aware of the lack of segregation of accounting functions and where possible try to implement
procedures um to ensure that staff are implementing the internal controls. So that was the finding related to the financial um internal controls and then we also did what's called a single audit
where we um audit some of the federal programs. And so for this year the programs that we audited were the 21.027 which is the CO 19 coronavirus state and local fiscal recovery funds um the child
support services which is 93563 and um 93778 which is the Medicaid cluster. So we did identify two findings and those were both related to the Medicaid cluster. Um both of these
actually related to the eligibility portion and the findings are similar. So the first one is related to um there's there's two different programs that are used to determine eligibility. Um one is METS and the other is Maxis. And so the
first one is related to the METS program. Um, so there we took a sample of 40 case files and we looked at the case files and compared the information in the case file to the information in the MET system. And there we had one
case file where it lacked um documentation for citizenship and one case file where it um didn't properly ident or document the participants income. And then when we got to the maxis side
of it, there we did test um 40 cases that were under the Maxis program. And there we had a couple of additional findings. There we had um one applicant's pro uh application wasn't processed for 107 days. Um normally they
should be done within about 45. We had six participants where their citizenship verification method didn't match the documentation that was in the file. We had one case file where it didn't document the participants income correctly. And then we had three case
files where it didn't document their um assets correctly. So the effect that this can have is that the lack of the updated information in maxis or the lack of verification of eligibility requirements could allow program participants to free receive
benefits when they're not eligible. And so just for the future, we recommend that the county implement additional procedures to provide assurance that the documentation needed to support the eligibility um is properly input and updated in the
system and that um program program personnel um follow up on issues in a timely manner um and that the county consider providing some further training to personnel. So those were the only findings that we had in the audit this year.
Yeah. Um, we do have a question, Karen. Commissioner Mojo. >> Okay. >> Thanks, Karen, for walking us through this. So, my understanding as part of that program that these folks um are updating, sometimes information is automatically um uploaded into a piece.
So, are we t are these program findings areas where in which old information could have been uploaded into that information as they're walking through it, or is that something separate? So typically what this the what the findings that we had would be related to
um when they'd have to do like redeterminations and people would have to bring in their information and then it would have to get updated into the system. So in a couple cases they were just data input errors. Um in a couple places some of the documentation wasn't in the file to support what was in
either the METS or the Maxis system. Um so >> okay thank you. >> Yep. You're welcome. Were there any further questions? >> We're good, Karen. >> Okay. Um, I just wanted to say thank you
for your time today and also thank you to the staff that worked really hard in putting the audit report together and getting us the information that we needed. >> Yeah. Thank you, Karen. When I sat through the um earlier report that you
had provided to us, um there were there were some comparisons to our cash accounts and our investments and all those types of things. part of the your routine report that you submit through your audit. And I did have a I
do have a couple of follow-up questions on a couple of those that I'll that I would like to do offline with you if that's all right. It's just um >> I just want some clarification on a couple of >> um values that we that we're reporting.
>> Okay. Um, yes. You could either send me an email or we could set up a call after the meeting if you'd like. >> Sure. I'll I'll be in touch. >> Okay. >> Okay. Anybody else have anything for Karen? Other than that, I mean, going to
Lori and your staff there, um Stacy, it's we've had um just continuously very good audit results and I in terms of some of those issues regarding the small departments. It is very difficult for us
to it and from a you also got to weigh things from a costbenefit standpoint to have multiple people working on a $500 account or something, you know. So it's some of those things it you know the amount of people that
you can have working on something it doesn't it's not cost effective to do is we put some have to put some trust in but then again the amount of money is so insignificant that I don't think it's a concern on our part. Um, but again, I
think overall the your your overall um the unmodified is what we always like to see and and um I Lori keeps pointing to Stacy over there that she's the she's the the one
in charge here. So, congratulations to the to everybody else. And I think the the areas that you did talk about, we have we have spoken with um um our social service department in some
of those areas on on some of those findings and u we'll deal with it. But again later on I just want to also point out that later today we're going to also be discussing the uh outdated software that we're that all these people have to use and
uploading a lot of this stuff and it goes to it goes to our great argument that we're having going to have with the state legislature right now uh trying to give us uh software that's u more in line with the current century.
So, so but but so hopefully some of that will be resolved with u with the u better software that's we're we're cert we're looking to get. So so with that thank you Karen and and um we'll look
forward to next year. >> All right. Thank you. Right. Okay, we are early for our Mr. Chair. We could I could do uh eight and and eight and or nine if it works
for the board. Um yeah, let's go ahead and do eight. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This morning for for your consideration uh is a is a a document of Klay County Board of Commissioners operating uh
guidelines. What this document uh would do is really establish the structure and and the procedures that you guys already are following, memorialize some of the the non-written policies that uh that we've had in in some different areas. Uh
and really I think our goal is defining defining the goals, the roles and responsibilities uh as commissioners. This isn't brought about because you're not doing something. In fact, I would say it's being brought about because of the great work that you do. Uh and uh again, as I've shared with you, I've
received multiple compliments uh on how you guys carry your meetings. And so, uh we're just looking to to memorialize uh this many of the many of the items that are part of this aren't just items that we do or but are statutes that are
required uh by county boards. Uh and again, we're just looking to to put these guidelines forward for some uh efficiency, transparency. And so with that, I would yield for any questions. >> Mr. Ev.
>> Yes. Um, and I can direct this to Mr. Melton or you, but uh, our attorney has had a chance to review this. I see that it's very clearly delineated with reference to Minnesota statute in in much of this material that we have
here. They're not we have in front of us at pick and I've had a chance to read it totally uh from end to end and I think it is an extremely useful document and it again it's nothing trying to
hem us in. It's actually shown where the lanes are for the performance of our duties under state law. So I think it's very well done and I'm grateful for the effort that was put in. Anybody else have comments? Yes, Commissioner.
>> I also concur with Commissioner Ebinger. If I would have been handed this as a newest member on here right before I applied or, you know, filled out paperwork to run for this office, I don't know if I would have, but no, it's very well well done. And yeah, I I would appreciate being handed
this earlier. Yeah. So, this is very very nicely done. I think it'll help out the next people that sit on this board tremendously. So >> I think a lot of it I think a lot of it might have you know as you said it it it goes to the involvement that that we all
do. Um I don't you know it's important for everybody to understand that this is a guideline and I I for one is would am somebody in elected position who I I need to know where my lanes are but I also need to know that I have the ability to speak up
when I need to speak up and you know and guidelines are not going to prevent me from speaking up if if I think it's important to do so. So um yeah, so I think you know from the I I thought back to this and I think we um in our
diversion board of authority we did something similar to this with our diversion board too was just kind of um yeah just so people understand the whole process. So anything else?
I would make a motion that we approve the Klay County Board of Commissioners operating guidelines. I'll >> second. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Abbinger, second by Commissioner Krabanoft. Any further discussion on the motion? >> Mr. Chair, >> yes, Commissioner Mojo.
>> Thank you. Uh my question in this um my understanding generally the committee reports is um when commissioners are reporting on that that's also needed for pdium reimbursement and so does that
need to be reflected in any of the guidelines or is that done earlier in >> uh we can make sure that that's uh that's clear uh making an addition >> I thought that Well, I don't it's not in the committee
reports, commissioner updates. Uh I did look in the compensation piece, but it's not mentioned on reporting. I would accept that change into my motion if
I have an office. >> If I if I um Okay. So, we have a motion in a second. Uh and you're looking at maybe amending just a friendly amendment to include Commissioner Mojo. And I'm just
wondering if I look at page 130 of 145 under board committees. I wonder if we could just expand that. >> I didn't know if that needed to be on board committees or if that needed to be on committee reports. You know, maybe maybe with that it would be whatever the
>> but I maybe maybe under the board committees it could it could be stated that you know the committee the reports will be provided to the board. I think that would cover it then I think that's a good
>> I'd accept that in as a an amendment to my motion. >> Okay. We that meet your with your approval. I think we just >> over wordsmith but you want to put the word in must >> well I I I you know and again it goes to
the statutes that require us to to report so in order to be eligible for the pdium. So >> if we can just ask Steve to put that proper modify that language in there. >> We'll do.
>> All right. Paul, did that meet your uh agreement for the friendly? All right. Any further discussion? >> Just a followup to your comment earlier. This is nothing new. This is what the board has practiced for years. Uh I think it's important to have clarification for future board members
and some of us that even been have been on here longer, but also for the public to know. >> Yeah. And I, you know, they the one the one thing that I did uh notice in here that um
under the role of the presiding officers and uh it talks about the board chair being the only being the one who would call for a work group. Um, you know, when we had some discussions and I think back to our discussions that we had with the
diversion board and and if you it it seems to me that you could you might have four commissioners who have an interest in wanting to have a work group and you might have a board chair who's adamantly opposed to that.
you know, I I I think we we should there should maybe be something in there that says a board chair or um um you know, well, I you can't even get into majority because then you're you would have been dis but I think if you any other two
commissioners >> um >> I almost wonder though is that is that something that in a point of contention a full board could act on in their meeting and call for and vote for in a situation like you're talking
about. >> Well, I I guess there's I my only part of the reason why we why we do have workg groups is that we like to be able to maybe spend more time and expand on a
certain topic than we would in a normal >> group setting. And so the all I'm saying is just the ability to or how you or who has the authority to call the workg group. >> That's what I'm saying. Then if the
board chair refuses the board can act to call you can create a motion to call a workg group at a >> but then we'd be going against the guidelines. >> But you said the guidelines are guidelines. >> All right. Okay. I'm good with that
then. Okay. All right. Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. The same sign.
Motion carried. All right. Um, let's see. Who do we have coming for will be here? Okay. Do you want to So, do you have budget stuff, Steve? if you want to.
>> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh over the last uh week or so, uh we've been working with public health and and social services just to make their final adjustments uh for what their uh what their grant amounts are. Uh we did uh
did see some adjustments that took our took our levy down from 4.93 to 4.8. 86 uh with those adjustments. Um and so that uh we did see a minor
minor decrease there. Uh we did I think I shared last week that we did meet uh with Troy uh Lori uh at the detox number. We did uh we did uh we've seen some trends again. We have been open for
about a year. Uh we've seen increases at the facility uh from a population standpoint uh starting in April. Uh one of the challenges that that we've had is as I shared I think in the past that we have we have hit our capacity already several
several times. Uh and so uh the the the uh part for Troy is he has had to staff up from a from a staffing standpoint uh a little bit higher than what he had potentially anticipated at the beginning. So, there's been uh been some additional costs that have come there.
Having said that, um in in talking with Lori, uh we feel like uh if the if it were the board's wishes that we would be able to uh have additional revenue or anticipate additional revenue of about $100,000. Um that would if the board's wishes were to address that, we could um
we could uh uh take that $100,000 off the what that number the funding number from Quinn's uh budget that gets transferred uh to uh to uh to the detox facility. Is that factored in as the 4.86 or not?
>> That is not >> Mr. Mr. Mayor. >> Is that a conservative number? >> Uh it it is is a conservative number from the standpoint that if uh if the uh population continues from April moving
forward uh that it would be a conservative number. I think I would add it in. >> That's great. >> Okay. Are we good with that? Yeah. Okay. >> Great news. >> We have anything else?
>> I I have one thing. I had uh a director reach out to me from 4G Advisory Group LLC. They are an audit group that goes around and audits company to see where they can save money. He reached out to me and said he would be willing to look at Klay County as a whole and it takes
about four to six weeks. I've met me mentioned this to Steve earlier and four to six weeks to see if there's any savings in the county in any department with anybody. And the way we would pay them is with the savings say we'd save
$200,000. We'd split that 5050. I just seen if that's an option if we want to go down this path. I've mentioned it to Steve earlier. We had a brief conversation on it. I just wondering if we want to go down that path and audit the whole county and see if there's sa
real savings anywhere. We wouldn't have to pay anything if they find nothing. The company's the main one of the main people's out of Morehead here. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, commissioners, I as was mentioned, we had a brief conversation. I don't know a lot about it. My my
understanding is is a majority of the work that they do is in private versus public. Uh and so um you know I I think that you know anytime that the the fee is based off findings makes me a little bit
nervous. I think we just got done with our audit um from the state. Um I know that uh I do know that Anna has been looking at at different programs uh to find if there's a if there's more of an necessarily an audit but an efficiencies
looking at departments. Um you know we do that. I feel fairly well uh as as a county, but certainly uh certainly something that we can we can look into. >> Commissioner Mojo, >> thank you. You know, I appreciate the
perspective and um the conversation that Commissioner Bayer had. I think it's important to bring that forward. you know, it it seems as though you are implementing some things in the leadership group with Klay County to make sure we're doing just that, auditing components that there might be
redundancies or areas for effectiveness. Uh I I will say that AMC is in the process of implementing something quite similar that has more to do with what are the state mandated components and then how does the county
look to reflect in and and see where the cost drivers for each specific county are with that. It seems to me something like that would would be a better fit once we have identified those specifically to to look at where there could be
potential savings. >> Commissioner. >> Yeah. Again, I I have some concerns when the individual the company that's doing this, their fee is based on what they find, particularly when they're private
sectorbased. Uh there's a lot of things in government that they may identify as wasteful that are actually requirements and mandates and um we could end up having to litigate who's paying what if we don't
agree with what their their identified cuts are. If AMC is looking at doing something similar, I'm all for jumping on that. But I don't know. But not questioning their integrity, it's questioning their perspective. is my
>> Yeah, >> Mr. Krabn, >> I I just my response to it, I think it's um uh I'll put it this way. I wouldn't be in favor of it. I I just feel I trust the leadership that exists. I think they've
shown even where we started at a figure of a levy at 12 and bringing it now down to 4.86 986 and perhaps some more. We have supervisors, administration that are all fine-tuning their process as
they go along. And we know that certain things will come into play that might be identified and then all of a sudden the state comes out with something else or or we find new ways of strategy between departments like public health and
social services where they make those adjustments within. I think we have very good management control. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. We are very close to our
Matt. Do you want to start getting yourself set up for All right, my watch says nine o'clock, so we are ready to um have the public hearing for Steve and Terresa Opt request for
platted subdivision. >> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to open the public hearing. >> Second. >> Have a motion by Commissioner Mojo, second by Commissioner Evinger. Any further discussion on the motion? Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I
>> oppose the same sign. The hearing is open. Good morning, Matt. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair and commissioners. Yes, this is a request for uh a plaid subdivision, the the final plat uh for a oneb block, two lot
uh subdivision uh located on the east side of US Highway 75, north of 90th Avenue South, about uh one and a 3/4 miles south of uh Morehead's um urban exp uh planned urban growth area and
about 3 miles south of Morehead. Uh zoning on this property uh base zoning is agricultural general. There is a little bit of flood plane fringe uh that would be on uh primarily on lot two. So this would be lot two.
This is lot one. And so property information, it's about 66 acres. Land use right now is currently agriculture. Uh there's no structures on the property. Um looking at the crop uh equivalency rating of this this would be prime farmland kind
of ranges from 67 um to 73 um which is once you get into the 70s that's that's good. There aren't any wetlands um on the property. It'd be two lots. One lot would be 10 acres um and then this is north just so
you know going this way. So 75 is down here. Um and then the other lot be 53.73 acres. Wouldn't be any internal roads. There'd be a direct access connection to US Highway 75. And they do have restrictive covenants as well.
Uh later this evening, the planning commission will hear an interim use permit request for a concrete readymix plant to be cited on lot one. Uh the concrete readymix plants are permitted as an interim use in this zoning district. So um we do allow them in the egg general zoning district as an
interim use. Uh there was not an interim use permit application for lot one formally submitted until after that October 1st planning commission meeting when the planning commission heard the preliminary plat. Uh just to give you a some background on
township action. uh September 8th, they did consider a request from uh an applicant different from this uh applicant for the plat to reszone and plat the same property. The township did deny those requests. Uh and then on September 23rd, they help heard a
request from the land owners for this plat. Um it was approved, but the township did voice a strong opposition to sighting of a concrete plant or other industrial use at this location. And the reasons they gave were loss of farmland, neighborhood concerns, concerns about traffic safety uh and potential
groundwater use. Uh we have received another uh number of public comments uh about this plat and the proposed use. Uh there are noise, dust, vibration concerns, uh water use, so quantity and quality concerns. Um highway safety just
being a 60 mile per hour two-lane road. Uh there's been some comments about long-term planning and zoning. So having an industrial use at this location disrupting progression and undermining long-term planning at this location. Uh cumulative impact. So recent um
commercial industrial development impacts have already been observed on US Highway 75 from from the public. Um county should be protecting rural character. uh the desire for development along this corridor matching the US uh
81 corridor in North Dakota just across the river. Um there was a comment about industrial development liming limiting the growth of Morhead to the south. Uh there's also a petition online um opposing the concrete plant but not the
plat um 131 plus signatures um for that. Uh we did additional comments. Uh MDOT did require an access permanent site plan. Um they don't at this time think there's a turn lane or traffic study required for the proposed site um and
use. And just to comment that there's about 1646 vehicles traveling daily on on US Highway 75. Um, for the proposed use, I think they're looking at potentially at at a peak
maybe adding 50 trucks a day to that. Um, but significantly less off off peak. Um, the planning commission did look at our how this platting request relates to the comprehensive and transportation plan goals and objectives. So looking at
our goal to recognize and protect egg character of Klay County and protecting prime egg soils from commercial industrial residential development. Um it would take about 10 acres of prime farmland out of egg production. Uh just in context we have in Klay County about
297600,600 acres of prime farmland if drained and about 154,240 acres prime farmland. Then they looked at the goal uh that we encourage an indust commercial industrial development that is in harmony with the egg and real character
of Klay County promoting value added egg commercial industrial development and egg service center areas and along transportation corridors and hubs. Um it would this proposed plat you know would allow for some of these uses would be situated on US Highway 75 which is a minor
arterial in Klay County. So, it's one of our major major roadways. And then looking at um our goal to encourage commercial and industrial development that is in harmony with the egg and real character of Klay County and to avoid or mitigate against um commercial or industrial development
that increases the potential for land use conflicts with rural residential or egg uses. Uh just noting where the closest residence is. It's about a/4 mile to the north. And then there's also a resident that's approximately point4 miles to the west of the proposed plat
as well. Um, and then the planning commission did make the recommendation to authorize the preparation of the final plat and sent to the board of commissioners for approval. And one thing I should say with the planning commission, um, when they were
considering this plat, um, they weren't considering it for specifically a I think it was in the back of everyone's mind that it was going to be for a concrete readymix plant, but they weren't considering it as as part of the plat. Um, just because a concrete
readymix plant was already being would already be allowed as an interim use permit in that zoning district. Any other qu any questions for me at all? >> So, so it was brought before the planning commission.
Uh there was no discussion uh through that process of a concrete plant. >> There was there was some dis there was some discussion about that because that was essentially but the decision was not necessarily based on that. >> All right. Any other questions of the
board at this time? All right. Public comment. Do we have the applicant here? Would the applicant care to speak? Good morning. Uh my name is John Lowry. I'm with Lowry Engineering and I'm here on behalf of the land owner, Steve Oatrell, uh who's also a local resident
here. So, um, Steve and his wife own this property and they have an individual who would like to purchase 10 acres and as, uh, Mr. Jacobson said, uh, there is an intention for a concrete readymix plant and that application has
been applied for, uh, as an inmuse permit and will be heard this evening by the planning and zoning commission. So, I think um I'd just like to define that what we're here today is not the use that's proposed on this property, but the ability to plat it into a 10acre
parcel. The ability for Mr. El Patrol to create a 10acre parcel that is sold without an interim use permit uh as permitted uses underneath the egg zoning. And uh that's an agreement, you know, that's an understanding to between
two private parties and a later discussion I believe on what the uses are going to be or can be on that property and we'll go through the proper procedures and channels to uh to obtain those approvals. So um
you know we can certainly get into some of the details of the the concerns and uh uh questions that have been raised about this. we'd be happy to. Um I I don't know that this is the right forum for that. As I said, it's it's this is about creating the 10acre parcel, not
the proposed use at this time. So >> yeah, that so and that Matt, that's my question. So, you were saying that that if if this zoning is is approved or
what we're doing here today is approved that the concrete plat would would automatically fall within or are we making a change for the uh zoning? >> So, Mr. Chair, there is no zoning change. concrete readymix plants and
asphalt batch plants are currently allowed as interim uses under the current zoning. >> Okay. Um the the connection here would be um with the plat being for a commercial or industrial use. Um
I mean the connection might be would would it be likely that the readym mix plant permit would go forward without the plat? I I don't know. Um because there wouldn't be a change in ownership. It would have to be like a lease situation. Um just speaking to
concrete plants that are in either our um agricultural general zoning district or our resource protection aggregate zoning district. Um most of them are I mean some of them are on one-year interim use permits, some are on five,
some are on 10. Um but they're typically um tied to specific jobs or the potential for jobs. um they get taken down, they get broken apart, they get moved around. Um there are a couple that are more permanent. Yes. Um but one of
the reasons why it's allowed as an as an interim use uh in the egg general zoning district is for that that reason. >> So what's the purpose of them going to the planning commission tonight? >> That would be for that interim use permit for the
>> that's still required. Wow. >> That would still be required. Yep. No matter what, that would have to be required. So, >> um, even if this without this plat, if they were seeking to just put the concrete readymix plant on this 66 66
acre parcel, they would still need to go for an interim use permit. And that would that that would be the path that they would have to take for that. >> Okay. This is loting off 10 acres that be sold off and be >> right.
But that but by by doing that they're they're not guaranteed the interim. >> No, >> until they go through the planning commission process. >> Correct. >> Okay. I just I'm trying to put this puzzle. I was trying to read this earlier and I I thought I'm gonna wait
and ask my questions here. >> Yeah, Chair Campbell. Great questions. It It's not a simple manner, but it it's part of the process to to work through and and that's, you know, we've been in conversation with the county staff and just working through the process here.
So, creating this parcel so that he has the ability to sell it is is the first step and I think he has the right to subdivide his parcel here, fronting highway 75, create this 10acre parcel. >> Well, when I, you know, when I when I look at the, you know, I'm just from my
standpoint, when I when I look at the subdividing and the in, you know, I I think land owners have rights, you know, and and for us to say that we're we're not going to split something up
um because it's prime farmland. It's also privately owned. And I think we, you know, from my standpoint, I think owners have, you know, maybe that's their, maybe that's their future finances is based on the
ability to sell that 10 acres, but fashion. So I from that standpoint I you know I I would I would side from that standpoint with and I'm just I'm just talking about the
prime eggland argument here that we you know that I don't want to say that somebody can't sell their land because it's prime egg land. >> Mr. Matt, could you uh distinguish the difference between an interimm use permit and a conditional use permit? I
know the difference just so the board knows the difference. >> Yeah. So, that's a um Commissioner Campbell and Chair Campbell and Commissioner Bear. Uh a conditional use permit is essentially a a land right. So, um if a conditional use permit is
granted, it runs with the land. And um the only way that it could be terminated or revoked is if the conditions of the permit are violated. Uh interim use permits are uh not a land right. Um they're either their expiration is
triggered by either an event or a specific deadline or point in time. With batch plants, it's 99.9% of them have um specific deadlines. It's not an event that that necessarily but whether it be
one year, 5 year, 10 year. Um um and also with with that too, if the conditions of the interim use permit are violated, that um would be a grounds for a revoking of of the permit. >> So with that being said, even if this
does become a concrete plant in five years, it could be back into farmland. So it runs with the applicant, not with the land. So that's there's a difference there. >> That's can be time specific. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And Mr. Chair, if there's ever an ownership change as well, um that permit
would automatically need to be renewed. >> When the uh when the the planning commission, they they held a public hearing >> for the plat. Correct. >> The plat. >> Yep. And in that public hearing process, the the notice
had no information regarding what is now the intent of a part part of that land. Right. >> It was it was just about the plat. Correct. >> Just about the plat. And so the you know from from that standpoint you know the and again I think I'm I'm
trying to separate the difference between what we're doing in in terms of should we or should we not allow this to go from one lot to two. >> Sure. >> That's what we're here for today. >> Mhm. Um, I don't want to get ahead of the planning commission in terms of a
hearing tonight because, you know, obviously based on what you've said, there's there's many people that are opposed to this and did they have the ability to raise that opposition at that previous planning
commission meeting when they when some of them may not have known what was the intent. This time they will, right? Isn't it? So, what's on the planning commission tonight? Is it about the concrete plant? >> Yes, Mr. Chair, that is correct. And yeah, concerns were raised at the um at
the planning commission meeting. A lot of the concerns that I conveyed. >> Yeah. But what I'm saying is that there might be others who weren't aware based on the previous public hearing notification. >> Correct. Yes. >> About about the concrete plan. >> Correct.
>> That's that's that's the issue that I have there. Um, >> Chair Campbell, if I may. Yes. Um, you know, it we're not trying to be >> it was a question of what you do first and we applied for the intermuse permit
to make sure that it was known and that there weren't, you know, we're not trying to go behind anybody's back. We understand the concerns of the neighbors and and um, you know, want to work through the process >> as it's supposed to work. Um,
so I think I think as you said, the opportunity is there for to raise those concerns and properly go through the process. We could have held off on this application and went through this morning and then applied and been hurt in a month or whatever,
but you know, to not try and you know, we were trying to be forthright with our process. >> Well, I apologize if I gave the impression that something was being done underhandedly here. That's not at all what I was getting at here, but >> um
>> we we'd appreciate the consideration with the understanding, you know, it's fully well known that that there's going to be consideration tonight. I think this is a separate process that also needs to occur. So, we would appreciate the support of creating the 10acre parcel, understanding that there might be implications for what happens
tonight. So, >> all right. Um any other public comments? Thank you. >> Come on up and you state your name, please. And >> morning. >> Good morning. Uh Dan Moore. I live at
846 14th Street South. I would be on the northeast corner of that property right across the road. um when you talked about and as he if I can just do keep this short but he applied for a permit
for 13 buildings previously and at that time there was talk of a concrete batch plant possibly going in there. I was told that that had been dropped. Since then I've received no notices that this was going to come in. I found out
from the neighbors there that this was coming up. So I was a little disappointed there. um when he says this doesn't lead to the that it's a separate meeting or whatever, it does lead to the possibility of the batch plant. and um
on a separate issue. And um when his first 40 acres were plotted and they were going to put concrete and dirt and other things on that property, um he said that there would be, you know, a little bit of concrete stored
there, some dirt and some clay and and that's fine. But, you know, now he said that there would be like maybe three days a year of uh concrete cut crushing. Well, this last year there was a month, month and a half
of it. The piles got so high that I called just to see how high they were going to get cuz I shoot across that property before it was there to get my Wi-Fi and I never got a response back. I just so once once this stuff goes into
play, things happen all the time that um are kind of brought in and it's just um it's just not good. when they did the substation by my place last summer, two summers ago, um they actually took the
black dirt off and hauled it over to their site and not just his trucks, but the gravel trucks and everything else literally destroyed that road. They pushed my road out. Now, instead of mowing it going up at a taper, it comes
up like this because the road got pushed out from so much. So, you start getting all those trucks and the equipment and everything and it just not only the valuation of your property, but roads and everything around it just get beat up, destroyed.
So, I have Yes, it will go to later tonight and I will be back again, but I have some pretty big concerns about this. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Well, I might answer to the first part of your statement because we had talked about those subdivisions in
there and and when we said it was going away, I guess my intention was communicating that it had gone away for those parcels, the possibility is what I had meant, >> right? And and to my understanding, you know, I'm not against people. He owns a property to put the 13 condos on there,
whatever. you know, it's up against the highway and sometimes when things get built, the condos, you can talk to the people or whatever and they can make it look neat and decent. I understand that. But most of the time, you get out in the country and you get condos or whatever
and there's junk piled all around all over. And you guys don't get to see it, but the people that live there see it and work around it. So, um, not trying to stop him from doing business, but at the same time trying to protect what I've been there for a long time. I grew
up there. I've been there since ' 66. So, thank you. Any other comments Schoffelt 921614 Street South I also have lived on the property since 73
and we're just so against this. It's just so much more noise and trucks coming by and he's talking uh 50 more trucks a day coming out on 75. He didn't say that they're going to be turning against traffic, stopping traffic on 75 to turn into their property. There's no
turn lanes and then like Joe said about the cement factory or the grinding the cement last year that went on forever and they had track holes out there was just clanking. They're making noise and beeping all day long and I'm outside a
lot and it just bothers you. And then you got the water issues. We have a couple different neighbors that have ran out of water and had to redrill wells this year. So where's this water going? How long is it going to be there?
And then um 90th Avenue, it's a cut across from County Road 10. And I live right on 90th Avenue and it's that's the gateway to gravel. You know they're going to be coming down this little gravel road with their trucks. They were when they redid the substation. It was just constant
trucks going by and it's a narrow road. If you met them, you had to stop and literally stop and pull over because trucks weren't moving over. They just fly right on by you then. Well, obviously it's awesome farmland and I am a farm laborer. So I am for that
which I know you You have your opinion on that, too? Well, then you got the beeping and the when they dump their trucks, you know, they pull ahead and bang their boxes to get their truck empty. You hear that all day long. I'm I'm 4/10en of a mile away. I was the one that was 4/10 of a mile
away from this. And it's it's just not what we really want. I have several neighbors that voiced the same opinion. They couldn't make it here today. That's it. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> Matt, I have a question for you. Um, a
number of years ago, there was somebody who wanted to business that wanted to do something on Highway 75 South and Mindot required a turning lane.
Uh is there has what's MDOT's uh discussion on this been? >> So I did reach out to MDOT, excuse me, and sorry. And basically what they told me was just based on what they have received from the applicant for the
concrete readymix plant that um and and this plat um that they wouldn't require a traffic study or turn lane just based on the >> they would not >> they would not. Right. Their main concerns were just about the shoulder paving on the access.
>> I agree. I thought that we it seemed Morehead Marine seems to yep come up in my brain. I think the discussion was with Morhead Marine and >> that's what it was >> and Mandot did think that that would cause >> significant effects to 75. And that's
where I I also, you know, I I do live down there, so I, you know, I do have concerns with those trucks pulling out without MDOT having some sort of turn lane requirement. >> It just seems that Did Did somebody say
50 a day? 50 trucks? >> That was the the peak um at the peak. Um typically I think they were looking at maybe 10 10 a day. And that speed limit there is 60. >> Yeah.
>> Do we have any other comments from public? >> My name is Laura Walker and I'm canol but I'm a walker and we I have a five generation farm there that Laura >> did you want to >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> There you go.
>> I'll hold that down here. Um it's been five generations of our family have been out there farming that land out there. So we have a lot of um legacy I guess and I feel like the idea of the growth of Morehead I really would like it to reflect a lot of what's going on on the
Fargo side as well and not to be so industrialized on this side. Um there are concerns. I'm going to speak for the Bannerman's because they're they live right there as well and it's their golden years. they're retired and now to have beeping and truck noise and um just
for their safety and concern. I don't personally live out there. We have family members that do and that farm out there, but it's it's kind of devastating to that area. It's not really what people have envisioned for that area. And same with the environmental
concerns. Um we just want to respect and and keep it, you know, to its true culture of the farming community that it is. and honor that. And so I know that that's not what's on the table right here. And I know that but it is indirectly it's going to be voted on in
that regard. And I talked to Mandot. I was the one who started the petition because a lot of people weren't informed and it was just a very very few people. So that's what I feel like there needed to be a voice out there for those people that this is going to directly impact.
And so because I felt like the last because there is a batch plant I believe right out there already on this property or not their property but right next to it. So I feel like that's already been in play. Why do we need another one that's going to only increase more
industrial use in that area is kind of going to set the standard. And but my concern is we're going to be up. It's going to be a lot like North Fargo with sewage lagoons and trucking companies. And I'm not about progress. I love the
fact that Morehead could be a community with churches and schools and parks just like the Fargo site. We've got Brierwood. We've got the Fargo Country Club and there's churches and schools and green space. That would be awesome if Morehead does tend to and this is
kind of the last area that Morehead can really grow towards because everything else has been pretty developed out in that area. So, I feel like if I can speak up for the people that didn't hear about it and we're just trying to be a voice of of those area of the farmers
and of the legacy that's been before that. It's been a hundred years our family has been out there and the old farmstead is still there. And so, that's that's all I have to say. >> Thank you.
>> Any other comments? question uh for the applicant again. I um if if this plat or if this if this proposal was not approved um or or if they uh I should say if if
the planning commission um rejected these this concrete plant >> um would the would the applicant still have gone through this this portion just splitting that
into a 10acre piece. >> You know, uh that that's a difficult question to to answer. The two are definitely tied. You know, the the the the proposed use precipitated the creation of this lot, but um you know, I I think the intention is to add it into
a 10acre parcel at this point in time. So, um, you know, there were there were a few comments made and and again, I know we're here to consider the plat, but but I feel like, uh, you know, some things should be could be addressed a little bit. Um, you know, the mindot
piece, the the applicant is more than willing to follow all requirements and safety. I think MDOT's pretty conservative with with their requirements. And so if we're underneath the threshold to require improvements, um that you know that we're not
dictating that that if Mandot was going to require it, it'd be on somebody else's dime, which is the case right now. So you know, we'd be happy to build out anything that they're requesting. The truth is, you know, and we we we made the application some time ago to
MIDOT before this went to the township and and they're just not that concerned with it. That's the truth of it. it's underneath the threshold of their concern and like I said, they're conservative with that because they get it in on the developer dime and so if they had any concern, they'd be
requiring it. Um the the the crushing was brought up a little bit, you know, and I Steve's involved with that and he said they crushed a few times on there, maybe two days total last year, but there's the other concrete plant that is also
crushing. And so I think there was a little bit of confusion maybe on what activities are occurring on the the property to the north that that Steve is part owner in. Um, you know, uh, traffic that was also brought up on the township roads and
this plant's going to be fronting Highway 75. So, and they they they're for sure going to follow any requirements for hall road restrictions and and uh, respect the loss of the land. Um, and I think
another point that was brought up was regarding the Bannerman's and and Steve's been personally in contact with them. So, you know, he's they've spoken on their own behalf. They don't need somebody to speak on their behalf. >> I I think that's fair. We do have the statement in here that the Bannermans
were opposed. I mean, so it what she commented on was not out of line with what we have from Bannerman's. >> Sure. Well, I guess different conversations have been had and maybe better communication is needed between the
Bannermans, but uh um >> you know, this gets down to an issue of we need facilities such as this to continue to own and operate in the area in order for Fargo Morehead to be in
business. And as she mentioned, there's a concrete ready mix plant directly in this vicinity. And there's probably not a more perfect spot for this location. You know, the county came up with standards and setbacks and restrictions and beyond
that for the visual impairments that that were mentioned that that's a valid concern. And I think there's conditions and things that we can do today that'll be discussed further tonight in order to improve on that. and and maybe not even
meet in the middle, but go beyond that and provide screening and provide uh lighting, you know, down lighting and other things to reduce that noise. And they'll hear tonight, but we're in favor of that. You know, they they want the freedom to use their land in a
productive manner, but also be good neighbors. And I don't think that's an unreasonable request. you know, they they have the right to use their property and and their enjoyment as does this land owner and and that's what we're looking for. So,
>> all right. Um, so the the action that this board is being asked to take is >> basically the plat, >> dividing the plat. Um be because even prior to this and because everybody who's here is
concerned about more of the actions that are going to be ongoing this evening at the planning commission level. Uh my question Matt is for all parties involved. Uh if we were to prove this plat today
and they go in there tonight and the planning commission were to approve the request, do the landlorders do the land owners
have the right to appeal that to the county board? the if they were to approve it, the the appeal would go to um either the district court or court of appeals. >> We just changed that just recently.
>> Normally, it used to come to the county board if you appeal. >> Yeah, it would go to >> Wait a second. I think we're He said if the applicant gets the approval, he's not talking about the applicants appealing. He's talking about the residency.
>> I'm talking about I'm talking about tonight if if the planning commission were to approve what they have before them, assuming that we've done what the request is this morning
and they approve it. We have a lot of people here who are in opposition to this. What is their method to challenge that? would have to be challenged in district court or the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
>> I see. Yeah. >> Yes. Oh, Commissioner M. Did you >> ask if there's any other comments? >> Oh, yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Do we have any other comments? If not, Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. >> We have a motion to close by
Commissioner Bear. Second by Commissioner Abinger. Any further discussion on that motion? Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Oppose. The same sign. The public hearing is now closed.
The record is um what we have in the record is what's been part of the packet as well as the public comments today. All right. Uh what's the board's wishes? Mr. >> Chair. >> Yes. Commissioner Mojo, >> thank you. I serve on the planning commission, but Commissioner Kavanagh uh
attended this meeting uh for me, so he was part of the dialogue and I think can add some additional comments on that. Uh you know, when we look at what future land uses are, I think those that conversation is very vital and very needed and important and I think the the
avenue for that will be this this evening. I uh do live in Kurts Township. I attended the Kurts Township board meeting I think we had on the 23rd and there was a long dialogue about future land use but also the request before us
today and um I appreciate uh the fact that we're talking about um prime farmland and the values of fi prime farmland and the importance of um retaining that character. I'll also remind the board that um not everyone
can afford farmland. Uh so uh when you have newer families that maybe want to settle in Klay County, uh buying a a quarter section of land isn't always in the financial cards for folks. And so by doing a a parcel split and making a
10acre piece that does become a avenue for additional folks to maybe attain uh purchasing farmland if you know if the if we don't talk about a batch plant or uh concrete pieces those those pieces I live on a on a a parcel of farmland that
was quartered out that my family could afford and and so I think that's important to talk about too as Klay County is the fastest growing county outside of the metro area. So, those are important components. Um, I also say that um, you know, while a 10acre split
might not raise a flag for Highway 75 access, I would I would guess if you were to look at that corridor of development with the new the new parcels that are out there with what Knife River and the batch plant is, um, we're getting to a threshold in which, um,
someone who's driven that road since she could drive will be an access issue. uh we are approaching accesses on that that piece. When you look at residents, not only the one on the river there, but that whole kind of um section of land that's served by Highway 75 access, we
will have issues. And um I I've worked with MDOT a lot to know they are conservative and I will say when they get to hearing how many trucks will be coming in and out of that piece, we'll have some issues. Um, you know, I I'm really torn as I believe the the
township officers will were also in that dialogue about um what future um uses could be understanding prime farmland is important. Understanding we're also in this growing area which needs to be served by product and I understand that.
Um, but when I look at what's ahead of us today, what is not today, but tonight's different, but right now with this parcel split, um, you know, I I don't see anything um that I can vote against this. I do have concerns about
other pieces, but when we talk about a parcel split, I I'm not seeing anything right now where I can vote against. >> Commissioner Kraboff. >> Yeah. Thank you. I appreciate all the comments. Um I guess uh I disagree. Um I
I think that the um in my opinion uh uh when we look at the um 2045 comprehensive plan I'm reading this the land use for agriculture recognize and protect the agriculture character of
Klay County. protect prime agriculture soils from commercial, industrial, and residential development. And it's not part of the I think I heard Matt say it's not part of the comprehensive growth plan right now. Is that correct
or did I misunderstand >> Mr. Chair and Commissioner Campbell for the for the city of Morehead? >> Morehead. Okay. Thank you. Um but I I just think this um continuing to build and especially when
we start and I uh from the hearing that we had at at the U planning commission I asked why does it need to be uh there and they didn't uh the reason he wanted it there is because
that's where Mindot told him he could have one uh access point and that's why it's there. But the idea of um you know just creating more development when I think there are other opportunities for things Clay County for him to do the
same thing. I um I'm opposed. >> Commissioner Bear. >> I believe what's sitting in front of us right now is to for the the flat and what happens tonight happens tonight. And I believe I appreciate everybody coming but I think their concerns are for what tonight's meeting would be
about. I believe in front of us is a plat and I'm in favor of the plat. >> Commissioner Abinger. >> Yeah, I I think what we have in front of us, we have to take it face value.
What the planning commission does tonight and subsequent to that, what if it if it requires litigation, that's a different matter. But we we don't want to be in a position where we're restricting people from using their or from
using their land uh in a manageable fashion. And in absence of the other issues that have been brought up, this is a fairly simple transaction and a simple request. So I'm
going to be supportive of it. >> With that, Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the El Patrol subdivision final plant based on the planning commission's recommendations. >> All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Bear, second by Commissioner Ebinger. Any further
discussion on the motion? I'm going to point out that um I agree if this if this were to be brought before us and that had there not been any discussion of a concrete plant, I think there wouldn't be the
hesitancy on the part of this board to uh to go along with this. So the issue is the is the concrete plant and that's an issue for tonight and it's an issue that the planning commission is going to have to deal with tonight. Uh I'm disappointed that the
appeal process if it were to be approved that our own Klay County people couldn't come back to this board. U that but again we're we're the ones who made that decision to have it go to district court. Um, and again I going back to the
land issue. I I firmly agree that uh we had somebody talk about the uh lifelong time on on their family farm and they you know they probably want to see that for several more generations.
But we also I've also seen that we have family farmers who decide that they want to move on to something else and they don't want to be restricted from their value of their property in
being able to do what's best for them. And so that that goes my argument goes in opposition of what Commissioner Krabnoff was saying is that by hell or high water we can't do we can't let anybody do anything but farmland.
That's the farmer's choice. It's their it's their invested in it and it's their right. So I'm going to uh I'm going to support this motion. Uh, I I hope the planning commission
strongly hears the concerns of all the residents tonight. So, any further discussion on the motion? Any further discussion? We want a roll call vote on this one. Roll call vote, please. >> Commissioner Carvinhaft.
>> No. >> Commissioner Mojo. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Campbell. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Bear. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Abinger. >> I. Motion carried. All right, we'll move on. We have our next public hearing is a request of a
platted subdivision for Scott Menthy. >> Make a motion to open the public hearing. >> Second. >> We have a motion to open and we have a second by Commissioner Bayer. Any further discussion?
Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. I >> oppose the same sign. The public hearing is open. All right, Matt. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a request for a platted subdivision final plat uh for this is a
uh 12 one block 12 lot residential subdivision. Uh it is located uh west and south of Holly on the east on the west side of um of Mariah Lake. Um and its zoning is egg general and the
overlay zoning on this property is general flood plane shorland special protection. So as I mentioned it's for uh that oneb block 12 lot residential subdivision. The plat name is the oaks on Mariah Lake subdivision.
The 67 acre par parcel currently used for agriculture. There aren't any um structures on this property. Uh the crop equivalency rating on this is varied, excuse me, 24 to 67. Most of it is not
prime farmland. There are three major wetland complexes on the property kind of running um from the south up to the north. Uh this larger one um is where that general
flood plane uh is is located. The developer did work with the um SWCD and the board of water and soil resources. They did a wetland delineation. They had a what's called a technical evaluation panel meeting. So that's where they all meet and um review all the information
about wetlands and make a determination of what's a wetland and what's not a wetland and what's upland. So, the improvement plans for this uh subdivision, it's an 11 residential lots ranging from just over two and a half acres to over eight and a half acres. An
average size of uh just over 4 acres. There'll be one 15 1/2 acre outlot kind of in the middle here. >> Uh one 24 foot wide road uh which would be named 7th Avenue South. Um they do have storm water management and restrictive cover covenants as well.
Uh the sewer would be um private. The lots do have space for two drain fields. Those have been marked out too on uh the preliminary plat. Private wells. Uh nearby well depths did range range from about 55 to 88 ft uh with pump tests ranging from 15 to 40 gallons per
minute. Our minimum requirement is five um for this. So, here's just kind of a closer look at where the the road comes in off of um 200th here and then kind of follows along this high spot between the lake
and this wetland then terminates in this culde-sac right here. Um these lots would be all shoreland lots and then these lots would actually be outside that shoreland area. Uh township action. So, Holly Township did approve the preliminary and final
plat. They did adopt a road resolution for 7th Avenue South, which is a requirement before this board can make any consideration. Uh they also did enter into a road agreement with uh the developer. We haven't received any public comments or uh comments from the DNR on this at
all. How this relates to our comprehensive um and transportation plan. Um we have a residential land use goal to provide opportunities for quality rural residential development in Klay County. The planning commission found this to be
the case to encourage development of agriculture and conservation subdivisions that cluster residential development uh on small lots and provide for shared open spaces. Um this is not necessarily a conservation subdivision, but the developer did um working with
their um engineering firm kind of design the layout of this to um uh lessen impacts to environmentally sensitive areas as such as wetlands and floodplane zones. Uh and then make sure that it's consistent with all of our shoreland standards as well.
Uh we do have a objective two to per permit large non-farm residential development if a portal portion of the property is preserved or converted to a use that retains a rural character. Um a lot of these um lots will have just because of the wetlands on the property
um a lot of um uh open space and in undeveloped areas that'll help preserve that that rural character. and then avoiding or mitigating uh any residential development on or near environmentally sensitive lands. And as I mentioned before, they had a um worked
with Clay SWCD and Bowser to delineate and avoid wetlands. Um they don't have any structures or uh roads proposed within flood plane areas and the development setbacks would meet or exceed those those standards. I just want to go back to the uh
and it's a little difficult to see, but one thing that was kind of um useful that the developer provided was potential spots for uh a drain field, um an out building, and a um
a residence for each of these lots. So that was kind of nice to see uh meeting all all the setbacks there. So any questions for me at all questions applicant? Good morning.
My name is Scott Manthy and uh I live in Eglund Township just east of Holly and uh had we had moved out there in 2012 and the kids grew up in Holly High School and now they're getting older and they're looking for a spot to bring
their families back to our married and one's not yet and uh so was looking for a place. I actually looked at this property once in 1998 when it was on a on a foreclosure sale with the prior owner and uh wasn't able to buy it at
that time and I saw it come up for sale with Pipers and we got to looking at it and went out with my family and looked over the land and um actually the first three lots on the south side of the lake will be looked at for their properties and also the first three on the west
side of the property. So they can have back lots if they want to build a shop or something like that. Um grew up on a farm so I like large lots not small city lots and uh want to definitely keep our kids in the area. So looking to sell the
lots to the north to help defay some of the cost of the of the development and uh but then would do the road ourself. we have the equipment to do that and uh have done had that experience before and uh want to make a really nice place for them to have their homes they'd all be
on the end of the road be low traffic road because of you know only eight residents off the new road and uh they're looking they're excited about it looking forward to it and hope you'll consider it. So, in terms of the of the road,
would that become Township Road? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, that part's been >> handled with the township. Yeah. That's where the road agreement came in. And >> but you're you're going to build the road. >> Yep. >> And you're going to you'll obviously do it to >> Yep. >> specification >> because uh they'll have the township
engineer. Okay. Uh Jade from Apex and Detroit Lakes. >> Okay. >> I've spoken with him and my engineering firm, More Engineering, that designed the road. They they've also visited with him directly >> and I think our I think requirement is our county engineer has to sign off on
this. >> Yep. They'll all Well, there's no I talked to him and there he doesn't sign off on it. >> Okay. >> It's the they got to >> part of the review process. >> Yep. >> Okay. Right. Questions? Any other comments?
Well, I this is a to me this is this this matches the story that we've talked about for a long time and the need to be able Commissioner Mojo talked about a little bit earlier the ability to um expand in certain areas where we have people who grew up uh living on a farm
or living on big acres like you talked about and they're and and if we don't allow some sort of expansion some of these rural areas, you know, these kids and grandkids are not going to be able to move back to those rural areas and to the to the large lot. So, this is this is exactly
why um I certainly support this type of development. So, yeah. Anything else? Any other comments? Do we have a motion to close the hearing? >> Yeah. Make a motion to close. >> All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Krabanov, second by
Commissioner Mojo. Any further discussion on that motion? Any further discussion? Yes. >> Yeah. I'll just make a comment again. when I was at the planning commission and uh I believe there was no opposition. Uh every it was a unanimous vote uh for I'm very excited for this
family. I made a comment about it the other day. They the three kids even have the lots picked out already. So I thought that was pretty fun. >> Was there like seniority who got >> or did you arm wrestle for it? priority
to give it by who gets the most work. >> Yeah, >> I like it. >> Anyway, I I truly appreciate what they're doing out here and I think it's wonderful and I'll fully support it. So, with that, I'll make a motion to approve the Oaks Maria Lake subdivision final
plant based on the planning commission recommendation. >> Second. >> Uh we have a motion by Commissioner Krabnoff, second by Commissioner. >> Did we move out of we didn't move out of public? >> Oh, yeah. I Yes, that's right. Well, we didn't >> we didn't I don't think we have
>> Well, we didn't we didn't we didn't vote and we had a motion to second his discussion. So, let's just >> let's vote on that first. All in favor of that motion signify by saying I >> I >> oppose the same sign. Motion carried. Now, you're okay to >> as read.
>> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Krabnoff, second by Commissioner Mojo to approve the final plat. Any further discussion? Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I.
>> I. >> Oppose the same sign. Motion carried. We are going to take a fiveminut break. >> In session here, we're going to take our 9:35 item at >> 10:06. All right, we have an opioid
presentation. Um, >> oh, excuse me. >> Yeah, we have Quinn. Yes, >> I was going to give it to Anna. >> Oh, that's right. Our 9:30 item we're doing now. Yeah. Item number
>> We're doing item number five. Maybe we should go back on break and start over. >> Good morning, Quinn. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair and commissioners. Thank you. Uh, I'll go whenever you want me to go. That's fine. Um, so I am here today to request a
motion approving a letter of support for some modernization advocacy uh with some of our information systems. Um, as you're aware, but for the community to know, social services is facing a significant turning point in how we administer our essential safety net programs like medical assistance and
SNAP. With Minnesota's statewide human service systems in the midst of long-awaited modernization efforts, we are simultaneously preparing for substantial changes stemming from the recently passed one big beautiful bill, which I know I spoke to this board about a few months ago. Uh these changes
include sweeping new administrative mandates that will directly impact our day-to-day work. Some of the most significant changes are the new work requirements for certain Medicaid recipients, mandatory six months eligibility renewals instead of annual monthly address verifications, and
quarterly cross checks with Social Security Administration's death file. These changes will dramatically increase the workload for our eligibility workers uh who are already managing complex and growing case loads. The reality is pretty clear. Without modernization, the only way to meet this increased demand
and these these uh added burdens is to continue adding staff and that approach is just not sustainable. Uh we're already seeing the strain on our workforce and relying solely on staffing growth to absorb these changes right now. And we know that that's not a long-term viable solution. Um compounding this challenge, the federal
government is also reducing its share of the administrative funding that counties rely on to support this work by about 25%. In essence, counties like ours are being asked to do more with less by the state and federal government at a time when the complexity and program rules and the volume of the work is also
increasing. Combination of new requirements and reduced funding underscores why system modernization isn't just helpful, but it's essential. So, the systems that I'm referencing are Maxis, METS, MEC squared, SSIS. These are fragmented and outdated. They're
really not equipped to meet the demands of today's real world situations and the clients that we serve, let alone tomorrow's. Without streamline and in integrated tools that support autom automation, reduce redundancy, and improve data accuracy, we risk failing
both our own staff and the residents who depend on these services. If we cannot increase efficiency through technology, we'll be forced to make difficult decisions about service levels and local funding commitments. So, that's the context in which I'm calling for a strong county- centered approach to this modernization effort.
And I've attached a letter of support uh addressed to the commissioners of DHS and DCYF emphasizing the need for shared governance, sustained local funding, and an equal investment in counties of all sizes. It also emphasizes the urgency of this work. Modernization must not only
happen, but it has to happen quickly uh and it has to be done well. Uh, social services is ready to be a collaborative partner in building a modern human services system that works for residents and staff alike. But without decisive action to modernize the tools we use every day, we will not be able to meet
the demands of the new federal requirements without passing the burden entirely onto the shoulders of our workforce. Uh, I did attach a draft letter for your review. Uh and uh at the request of Commissioner Bear on my copy, I did add Representative Jim Joy uh to
be CCD into this as well. With that, I would yield for any questions that you may have. >> Yes, Commissioner Bear. >> I know I reached out to you on that one. I'd also like to see Representative Gander CCD and Senator Johnson. They represent three four townships on the northern half of Klay County just to
make sure we hit them all. >> Yeah, I was going to mention that as well. Representative Gander is in a position of committee power uh on those and that would be helpful as well. >> Gander and who else? I'm sorry. >> Senator Johnson. >> Thank you. >> Well, this is a you know, this is a good
letter. It's something that's been it's on a it's on a high priority uh at this county board level as well as at AMC. Uh we had a we had a report given this morning by our auditor and and there was a couple of findings in there that we that we talked about you Quinno I think
you were part of that audit findings >> and part of that I think can be attributed to this outdated you know some of those some of those things that were missed uh if we had a better updated system probably would you know
would have improved that. >> Sure make it easier. I did I did listen to that this morning and I kind of dug into that a little bit just for this board. A few of those things were so the examples of the errors that were found. There was a missing signature page on one of the cases. Everything else was done 100% correctly. The application was
there, but the page where the signature wasn't included in our files. Um we had two cases that were transferred from other counties where the application didn't come with in the transfer and we were dinged for that. Um we had uh two
two situations in which the application itself uh was entered correctly but not uploaded into our electronic filing system. Um and about four others where we simply I would say we made a mistake where there was data entry errors um there. So I just wanted to follow up as I did hear that from the audit
>> doing that. >> Yeah. Well, this I think this is a good letter. It's timely and it kind of coincides with um Just one question. So the 40 million that we got last year,
right? It one was toward technology improvement, right? Correct. >> Do you know um and I thought that was I could be wrong. That was put toward SSIS. >> Yes. That was all your marked towards SSIS modernization. Can you tell me a little just briefly a little the
differences between these four that you you know and uh does one work into another? >> Sure. >> Um there's not as much crossover as we'd like to see. So uh Maxis and Mets are primarily and MEC squared are primarily
the ones that our eligibility workers in our financial services division use. That's to handle SNAP benefits and MA benefits. U Mets is the medical system. Maxis is the SNAP is the SNAP system. SSIS is a completely separate program and a completely separate system that
our social workers use for disability services, adult and behavioral health, child protection, things of that nature. There is no the programs do not communicate with one another at all. >> Okay. >> Which that would be a very helpful thing to be able to have.
>> Okay. Thank you for that, Mr. Chair. Yes, Commissioner M. >> Thank you, Gwen. Thanks for providing this. I think it's the best first step as we continue that march forward towards telling the story of the
inefficiencies in a time when we are all trying to find uh reduced fraud risk, uh enable our staff to do the best work possible. This is the number one priority that from going to all 10 of the association of
Minnesota county's district I heard uh we understand that we want to limit fraud in any um in any department that we work with and for our staff to have the tools. This is it. uh you know to
make sure that that signature page is included while they didn't have to work through 15 minutes of of worthless questions to get that piece. It's my understanding that making sure that both of these commissioners on here have this information is important, but
also maybe if it would be of support from this entire board once we know who the committee chairs are for the legislative session to make sure that this letter is forwarded to them, both uh DFL and GOP caucuses need to have this as part of the dialogue. But I I
fiercely support what we're trying to accomplish here. >> Absolutely. All right, Commissioner Abinger. >> Mr. Chair, I make a motion to approve the letter of support to the commissioners of the Department of Human
uh services and Department of Child, Youth, and Families to support modernization of efforts for social services technology system. Also add to that uh the appropriate legislators who have been identified during our discussion. >> I'll second that. Okay, we have a motion
by Commissioner Edier, second by Commissioner Bear. Any further discussion on the motion. All right, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose the same sign. Motion carried. Thank you, Quinn. >> Thank you so much.
All right. Now, we'll do our 9:35 item, opioid prevention and harm reduction program update. Good morning, All right. Good morning, Mr. Chair and commissioners. Uh, thank you for the time this morning to share some progress
updates on our opioid prevention and harm reduction program, as well as a status update on our Klay County opioid settlement funds. Just some quick definitions for context before we jump jump in. Um, opioids, probably most of us are pretty familiar,
but just a recap of what those are. A broad class of drugs known for reducing feelings and intensity of pain. Um, these are very potent, very addictive drugs. And we have both prescription and elicit opioids, uh, things like heroin,
fentanyl, oxycodone, etc. Harm reduction is another term you'll hear me reference quite often. Uh, harm reduction is really at its core is about meeting people where they're at. It's an evidence-based approach that really focuses on minimizing the negative
consequences of substance use, both for that individual and for the community as well. With harm reduction, like I said, it's really about meeting people where they're at with the understanding that not everyone is ready for treatment and we can't force them to that stage of readiness, but we can try to keep them
safer and save their life. um make sure they're alive and continue that connection with them, trying to help them to that point of readiness. Some examples of harm reduction include things like nlloxxone distribution and access to nlloxxone and corresponding education. Fentanyl test strips are
another example where people are able to test their drug supply for presence of lace substances like fentanyl. Um and syringe service programs like the one in Fargo is another example of harm reduction. Nlloxxone versus Narcan. You'll hear these terms commonly used
interchangeably. Nlloxxone is the drug itself. It's the medicine that reverses opioid overdose. And Narcan is Nlloxxone, but it is a name brand of the nasal spray version. All of the work under this program has been grant funded thus far. So, just
wanted to give a brief background on that funding. We have a few different grants from the Minnesota Department of Health. Uh the first is our substance misuse and suicide prevention grant. This grant really focuses on that really upstream prevention uh specifically with
youth in Klay County and looking at those different shared risk and protective factors when it comes to both suicide and poor mental health and substance use. So the factors that influence both of those things. This is a four-year grant. We are in year two and it's $500,000 total.
Next from MDH is our drug overdose prevention grant. Um, this is another four-year grant. Again, we're in year two of this $200,000 grant. And with this grant, as it sounds, really focuses more on overdose prevention and harm reduction. We work pretty closely with
our Churches United uh shelter and their entities and Klay County HRA under this grant, which I'll talk about later. We've also received two different awards from the FM Area Foundation. Uh the first was last year for a $10,000 award
and then this year again for 5,000 to support our efforts. And lastly, our CHB has a cannabis and other substances prevention grant or CEUP grant as it sounds really focuses on cannabis prevention and other substances like
tobacco and opioids. So some of my work is housed under here as well and that was uh split that funding is split between our CHB. So around 55,000 for clay for year 1, around 75,000 for year two. Opioid settlement funds are um come from
legal uh settlements with opioid manufacturers and distributors for their role in perpetuating the opioid crisis. And these funds are really intended to address the harm caused by the opioid crisis by supporting efforts like
prevention, treatment, recovery, and harm reduction services within the community. Overall, the goal with these funds is to save lives, um limit opioid related harms and risks, and uh continue to increase community coordinated
response and capacity to address this issue. These funds do come in waves and both the timing and the amounts of these waves are somewhat unpredictable because each settlement is structured differently. For instance, we have some settlements where we will receive all of
the payments over a four or fiveyear period whereas others are more drawn out. So, we're about 2 years into an 18-year timeline and we will continue to receive payments. uh roughly another 2.5 million is estimated over the next 16
years. That number and that time frame is a bit fluid because we are able to opt into additional settlements as they become available. So until they uh go through all those legal hoops, we don't know those exact amounts. To date, we've received a little over 1.3 million. As
you know, that first million did go to our new detox withdrawal management facility, expanding that bed capacity from 16 to 32. So, that leaves us with a little over uh $330,000
to um use for what we see fit um or what is decided by the commission. And with that um money that we have left over or the money we have right now is most of that has come just in the last couple of months from various settlements.
As we move forward with our programming, um we anticipate needing roughly around at least $100,000 annually to really sustain countywide efforts and make sure that we have that coordinated community response. we will have opportunities to partner
with different community organizations to get the funds out into the community and to make those dollars work effectively uh with more of those grassroots efforts as well. You may have heard of other counties or cities opening an RFP process for their uh
settlement funds so eligible um community organizations can apply with projects centered around this to receive that funding. again putting more money out in the community to expand the work. Can I just really interrupt quick?
>> Thanks for this slide. I am really excited about the work that Klay County Public Health has done with this board to address a lot of different areas with the opioid settlement dollars. And the work that we're doing with the treatment facility is just enormous. And we heard
earlier about the need and how it's growing. And as we talk about so many different layers of how we address this crisis, the treatment component is just so heartwarming to me about what we're able to do with this. I appreciate this is on there. >> Thank you.
Are there any other questions? We can pause at this point talking about settlement funds. If there's any questions about this before we move forward with more program updates, >> I've got Okay, go ahead. >> I've got one question. across the river there. They were uh using spending money on crack pipes and methamphetamine
pipes. Are we using any of that money for that? >> We are not. No, we do not have a syringe service program um on this side of the river. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yep. >> The 100,000 that you're saying needed annually. >> Is that is that for staffing?
>> Uh for staffing staffing and for program expenses as well. Uh we estimate this just based on the different grant funding sources that we have right now and how that funding is utilized to support our efforts. >> Okay.
>> Any other questions? Okay. We will move on to some more program updates. So when I started at Klay County a little over two years ago, this was a brand new position, a brand new program. So was really able to build it from the ground up and with that was
able to make sure that all of the different program components really align with evidence-based practices and align with those recommended strategies for using settlement funds. Although this was all grant funded thus far, one big chunk of my work is really
education, prevention and awareness. Uh one training I provide is an overdose response training. This training focuses on uh background on the opioid crisis, really how we got to this point. We also cover signs and symptoms of an overdose,
how to effectively respond using Narcan nasal spray, and we also cover good Samaritan laws, so what people's rights are when carrying and using Nlloxxone in good faith, as well as responding to an overdose, whether they are the person overdosing or if they are with someone
who is overdosing. So, we educate on what the law says their rights are. And then we also make sure during each one of those trainings to uh let people know where they can find other harm reduction resources in the community through this training. Uh this is done
with a variety of community organizations. It's open to any group that is interested, but I do regular trainings at the shelter monthly and in our jail regularly and with treatment groups around the area as well. So since October of 2023, 871 people have been
trained in overdose response. We've also created and distributed many different education materials and awareness materials trying to address the stigma around substance use and keep people informed as well. Some of those materials include things like good Samaritan law uh nlloxxone and harm
reduction education where those resources are risk of lace substances and connection to treatment and other resources as well. Under our grants we have had the opportunity to translate some of these materials as well which has helped us reach even more people and
helps with accessibility. One really exciting program we have is called the one program um or opioid and nlloxxone education program. This is a collaboration with NDSU's CAP center under their school of pharmacy. And NDSU
actually created this program. It's an evidence-based program that they have implemented throughout many sites in North Dakota. And we are actually the very first site outside of the state of North Dakota. Um so bringing this to Minnesota was very exciting. What this is is a screening tool for pharmacists
to use. And so when someone is prescribed opioids, the pharmacist is trained in how to use the screening tool to see if there is risk of opioid misuse, addiction, and overdose. From there, they use the results of that tool to then provide interventions such as
education with the patient. Um, they can also contact the patient's provider for followup. They can refer to outside resources, but they also provide things like nlloxxone, medication disposal bags for proper medication uh removal and then education materials as well. And
that is really where the public health partnership comes in here is we provide the funding for the program making sure that all of the pharmacists are onboarded and trained by NDSU and then we provide the materials like the nlloxxone, the med disposal bags and the educational materials. We do have
fouries currently under this program in Klay County and they're listed up here. Um most are three of them are in Morehead and then one is in Holly. One of the things we're very fortunate of in this position is uh having really strong community partnerships and one of
those is with Morehead Fire Department and uh this has really helped us identify system gaps and ways we can improve our response to the opioid crisis. One of those gaps that was identified when I started in this role was our followup and connection with
individuals after an overdose. So, what we've done with this new system change is partnered with Morhead Fire Department and a treatment provider, Beth's Place. And how this works is the fire department at the scene of the overdose will connect with the individual and say in so many words, "We
have someone who can follow up with you. We have people who want to help you." Um, and really, they're taking that contact information of that person for that follow-up and then putting the referral into the overdose response team, which is led by Beth's Place. Beth's Place then makes contact with
that individual within 12 to 24 hours is the goal and that window was decided because it's a very critical time um after that overdose. Oftent times what we've seen is someone's readiness after an overdose for maybe seeking help or uh
wanting to go to treatment, things like that is a lot higher. And so reaching them during that critical window of time instead of just having no follow-up at all is very important. We continue to grow this partnership um including law enforcement as well. We are working on a
new software platform right now that law enforcement, public health, fire and treatment would have access to to really have a more coordinated effort and to see be able to track a little bit more who's followed up with who. As somewhat of a sister program to this overdose
response team, we have a Narcan leave behind program and again this is with our partnership with Morehead Fire Department. uh they leave Narcan behind at the scene of an overdose either with the person who overdosed or with family or friends or those around. The intent
behind this is um to keep saving lives and to again keep offering that connection to resources. Uh someone is at risk of overdosing a second time after their Narcan wears off. It's only active in the body for about 30 to 90 minutes. So that makes these leap behind
programs quite important as well. We do a ton of nlloxxone distribution under this program. That was one of the very first priorities when starting in this role was becoming a nlloxxone access point and making sure that the residents of Klay County had access to
free nlloxxone. Um it is an expensive product. It's about $45 a box. So making sure that people have barrierfree access to it is important. We have many different distribution hubs. Um, we of course are able to give it out to people
at public health by individual request. We have spots at our shelters. Our detox offers to people when they are leaving uh jail as well. Our HR buildings have some nlloxxone kiosks where people are able to grab supplies and connection to
resources and our food pantries as well. I've also partnered with our campuses to make sure students have access to Nlloxxone and education and we've stocked all of our county AEDs with Narcan as well. And of course, anyone who participates in overdose response
training is offered Narcan too. Uh through this, we started our distribution in February of 2024 and we have distributed 304 3,483 doses thus far. In terms of harm reduction supplies that
we offer outside of Narcan, um under our overdose prevention grant, we do work closely with Churches United and with Klay County HR. The harm reduction that we supply um or harm reduction supplies we have in addition to that Narcan are things like the fentanyl and xylazine test strips, which is an evidence-based
strategy and wound care kits and safer sex supplies as well. So again, the intention behind these things is to reduce disease transmission, keep people safer, and keep them informed. The through line in all of this work really has been collaboration and
capacity building for the community's response. I do co-coordinate two different coalitions. One is the Red River Recovery Initiative. This is a crossber collaboration led by um me and then my counterpart Robin Lickisel from
Fargo Cass public health and we have a variety of sectors on this coalition representing everyone from health care to treatment people with lived experience um and really our focus is overdose response and overdose prevention with this group. I also co
co-coordinate a rethink mental health and substance misuse coalition. Again, going back to some of our grant funding, um this coalition focuses on that really upstream prevention more with youth looking at those different risk and protective factors that influence
suicide and substance misuse. We do collaborate with the harm reduction center in Fargo and their syringe service program. Um while we are not a syringe service program, we know that they provide services to Minnesota residents and with our partnership where
we can help address needs is really just by by providing the nox zone for the Minnesota residents that they see. Uh with this partnership too, it also helps us really stay informed of what's happening in the community when it comes to substance use based on the clients that they are seeing and hearing from.
grant funding. We are constantly uh seeking new funding opportunities, keeping an eye out for grant opportunities that would be good for community organizations that we work with. We've collaborated on applications before or shared with organizations
encouraging them to apply as well. Data evaluation innovation again is really part of everything that we do. making sure that it's evidence-based, driving um all of our decisions based on data. And one of those projects that we're working on is a pilot project
called MN OD alerts or Minnesota overdose alerts. And this is under uh the Minnesota Department of Health. And what this looks like is uh the Minnesota Department of Health has access to real time data around substance use and
overdose uh much more expanded data than what we would have at public health. And so they monitor that for spikes, clusters or new emerging drug threats. And then they are able to assign a tier level of alert and notify public health
who then really mobilizes our response team which is that Red River recovery initiative. those different sectors. From there, we can have a more coordinated response. They provide recommendations for each tier for how a community should respond to a potential spike or a cluster or a new drug.
Again, this is a crossber collaboration with that group. So, this impacts the entire Fargo Morehead area, not just Morehead and Klay County. We've also gained access to OD MAP over the last year. This is um an overdose tracking system that traditionally law
enforcement only had access to. They were inputting um when they would respond to an overdose call or when they have an overdose report, they would input that. So that was really our only tracking tool for overdoses. And now we have public health access to that as
well. And EMS has started uploading data. So it's really expanded what we know about substance use and overdose in our community. We get listening session and community feedback quite often. Um, college students, community partners, overdose
response training participants, those with lived experience in the jail or at the shelter um, in treatment as well and our different coalition members. And this really helps us to identify where we have those gaps and guide our planning for the future.
Lastly, just some upcoming priorities in this program. I am working on getting a few sharps disposal kiosks uh put in place across Klay County. This is something that we don't have on the Morehead side. Um many people have shared that they have to go to Fargo to
dispose of sharps. And this is not just elicit sharps. This can be sharps for any medical conditions as well. So this is uh one place we want to invest in a little bit more with our grant funding. Making sure that people have safe accessible spot to dispose of sharps. We
also are working on an opioid prevention and awareness media campaign under our CEUP grant um that cannabis and other substances grant and again just to make people more aware connect them with the services and resources that we provide. >> Annabelle, can I um Commissioner Moses?
>> Yeah, absolutely. >> Thanks for highlighting the sharps disposal kiosks. You know, Commissioner Campbell and I serve on solid waste and we talk a lot about medical waste and but making sure that our solid waste department employees are um safe.
>> I think a coordination with Corey on how we, you know, if there's an ability to have something at the resource recovery for more of that that piece. I have animals. I've got, you know, I need to vaccinate animals, too. So, it's something that affects me as well, making sure that we dispose of those in
a better way. So, I appreciate you bringing it up. >> Absolutely. Thank you. Yeah, that is something that we have grant funding approval for and we have some grant funding to support a medical waste company contract as well to help with some of that. And lastly, we will continue to search
for grant funds to sustain this work and plan for our settlement fund dollars as well. And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> All right, any questions? Commissioner Abinger,
>> just a comment. Uh, two years ago when we realized we had some a funding source and we needed to do something about the o opioid crisis, um, we hired you and you have done a remarkable job. you've become part of this community and reached out to a lot of different
entities that um needed needed their efforts coordinated and I just uh this is a great example of uh people who have have the skill and the ability to bring something on board and make it work. So I want to thank
you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Anything else? Thank you for the update. >> Great. Thank you. Well done. >> All right, our next item. We're just
about back on schedule here. Next, we have a uh request approval to consider the early retirement incentive program. Darren, are you going to come on up for this? Anna come up on this too. Uh she may have some more information that I may
have to rely on her for, but uh thank you for this. Um several weeks ago, the PIC was tasked to come up with a possible um early retirement incentive program for Klay County. uh scenes at the the budget and the levy and
everything and we're looking at any possibility to possibly save some money uh next year. And so uh the the I ran some numbers uh based on who we have right now and that's this
sheet that you'll see right here. And so I'll walk you through right off the bat on what this sheet is telling you. And then uh I've got some stats here as well that we can discuss. Um so the sheet will show you the the uh age,
the years of service, the pay scale, and the sick leave hours that that person has available to them as of uh this was at run on November November uh 14th I believe. Um
then taking the years of service and the percentage of payout. So for instance, the first person would have 45% of their payout for sick leave, which means they would have 440 hours that we would pay them uh if they were to leave employment
right now. Uh they would get their sick leave severance. Uh then I took their wage and their payout amount, which would be 14. I'm just using the first row as an example here and talking through it. The payout would be $14,962.
The benefit that we would incentivize for this program would be one year of benefits and an additional $9,600. So the total payout total payment payout is in yellow there of $24,562.
>> Darren, can I just interrupt just for a minute for a little bit of background on that part? >> Yes. So when the pick committee discussed and how that $9,600 was arrived at was we originally had one number out there >> and then we started looking at the
potential of the ability to pay or to at least have have enough incentive to pay the premium for at least one of our county insurance policies. >> Correct. because I think the number that we started off with was less than the
9600 when we were talking about it within our within our pick committee, but then the suggestion was was and I think the 9600 does cover one of them. Is that am I correct, Anna? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Uh it covers the $2,600
health deduct that premium, excuse me, not the deductible, the premium, the single dental, and then continuing the basic life for 18 months. Okay. Right. I just I just for the board, I wanted them to have that. >> And and just for a little bit of history, uh we did have an early retirement program back in 2010. It was
right before I got here, so I wasn't really a part of it. Um but so this isn't something new that we've done. We've done this before several years ago. Um so then, uh I ran the 2026 yearly county contribution of what the
these individuals have right now. If you see the 17,028, that would be a single grandfathered plan. If you see the 20,532, that would mean that that person has a family plan. As you know, uh going
forward, as of 2020, we have a non uh non-grandfathered plan, which anybody that would be hired at this point would go into that non-grandfathered plan. So for instance, the first person has a single grandfathered plan. The new
person replacing that person would have a non-grandfathered plan and that would be a single county contribution, which would mean a savings of $5,388 per year. Now, that's if they take a single plan. The family plans are the
same. So if you go down to the 20,532 and then you go across, you'll see zero because grandfathered and non-grandfathered, if they take a family plan, they get the same amount. If a person currently has a family plan and then they we hire another person to come
in and they take a single plan, there would be even greater savings there. But if somebody goes from a single to a single grandfathered to a single non-grandfathered, the savings would be $5,388 per year. The other uh column there is
what I did is I took somebody's wage at step 12 and how much we pay them every year and then compared that to what we would pay somebody on the same grade at step one. So, for instance, that first
person at grade 12, there's a $20,592 difference. So, the blue column that says total, that's taking the county contribution savings plus the difference between the step one and a step 12 for
that year would be $25,980 savings. >> Does that also add in the colas? This is just for next year. >> Yeah. >> So this would be uh >> Yes. I believe I added the
>> would be happen regardless. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> This is just comparing >> Yeah. >> apples to apples on the >> right >> on the grid. >> Correct. >> So for that individual uh on row number one, the to the total savings to the county would only be $1,418
>> for the first year. >> For the first year. Now, uh, Commissioner Campbell has pointed out that that's for the first year. Going forward, there would be obviously savings going forward because that person is not going to be paid at step 12. They're going to be paid at step two
and three and four and up until they get to step 12. the 2027 savings for that same individual >> or that same just that line item that we're talking about that that $1418 the second year that'd go to $25,980.
>> Yep. Because you're not paying out the uh the the payout that >> Well, I I take that back. It it's but then we would also assume that they would have got gained two steps. >> Correct. So, so you have to take that
into consideration. I did some math there that I figured on an average two steps at $5,000. I I did but I think that might be a little bit high. >> But >> yeah, that's >> but still you're talk you're still
talking 20, you know, in excess of 20 grand. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Once you look at, you know, steps three, four, five, that's that's higher math. I didn't get that in high school. So, um I did run some numbers that uh I
looked at how many people have been termed uh so far just this year. We've we've termed uh and when I say termed, we're not like dismissing them. They're leaving employment. That's that's just a term that we use. Um 129 people have left employment since the beginning of
the year. 62 of those were variable hour, seasonal, or temporary. And out of those 129 people that have left, only four of them have been on step 12. Um, if you took that down to step 10, there was only nine of the 129
that have left employment that have been uh on step uh 10 or above. So, we're not talking a ton of people here. >> So, one question. So, out of the four that left at step 12, how many of those retired? >> Um, can you remember?
I can get that information for you. >> You don't. >> Yeah. Um and the other thing is um so so part of this program would be uh if it's
implemented would a person would have to notify human resources that they want to take advantage of this program and they would have to be basically off the roles and what we used is June 30th of next year. Um the board can make that change
or different. We can also um the board can institute uh when they want to start this program if that is what they want to do. The other thing that I want to point out on this early retirement calculations is that you see on the sick leave you'll see people that have a red
block and um those people currently would not be entitled to a sick leave severance because they don't have a minimum of 300 hours of sick leave. So, if you go over to the column uh where it says payout dollars, you'll see zeros
there because we wouldn't pay them out. They the the only thing that they would get would be the $9,600 if they don't have if they don't meet the current sick leave severance um policy. They wouldn't get the sick leave severance payment.
Um, Darren, can I um I'd like to jump talk a little bit about each of you as you talked about them. And so you talked about that June 30th date. Another um another good reason for that is, you know, we also talked about could there
be some concern on the part of somebody in management where they might have two or three people wanting to do this at one time. This this would allow a little bit of staggering to go on, you know. So if somebody somebody came in there on
January 1st because part of the criteria here also it goes through HR but then it also has to have supervisor. >> Correct. It it has to be a benefit to Klay County, a savings to Klay County and has to be approved by the department head.
>> And one of the things that you know if we had if we had two or three people that might want to do it at the exact same time that could that could have an a hiring impact. So the so the ability would from a supervisor standpoint would be well you know the first one that gets
this can probably do it first and then but then the next person might have to wait but you'd still get get within that window of June 30th >> right and and maybe as as the the first person leaves we advertise like we normally would >> uh once we get somebody on board then
maybe the second person could take advantage of the program >> try to avoid everything happening at once >> right Um, and I think uh the the June 30th or whatever date is uh deemed by the board
is is there's the intent is not to let us know on June 25th that you intend to retire in 6 months. No, >> the the June 30th date means that they have to be gone. So they could they can notify us tomorrow, >> but they have to be gone by June 30th.
And I think that's what that's what we talked about in pick is that they would they in order to qualify for this they would have to be off the payroll by June 30th. >> Correct. >> With that being said, uh did you have
anything to add? >> Okay, perfect. >> Well, I have one question. We implemented this in 2010. Do we know how many people took advantage of it in 2010? >> It was about five employees. >> Five? >> Yeah. We've not got what an additional
200 employees over and above what it was in 2000. So if we gained a lot of employ so when we when we talk about this and again I >> you know first off I want to talk about these people that have 20ome plus years they're you know they have some
institutional knowledge that's that's important to us. Um I think this thing is probably more designed for maybe the people who might pl be planning on retiring and maybe between now and the next three years. This might be an incentive for them to to do it a little
bit early. Uh the institutional knowledge uh that they have it certainly is very important and it serves a purpose but ultimately they those people with that institutional knowledge leave and and they somebody new does have to
come in. But I so I I just wanted to I did a little bit of work on this in terms of the uh if you guys have the columns open up there, the blue column that um actually
it's the green column, the net savings >> for the county. Um, I I happen to total those numbers up and if all of these people were qualified to do it, there would have been a saving there'd be a savings of 703,000.
Obviously, that's not going to happen. >> Mhm. >> And I don't think we want that. >> I hope not. >> Be a lot of hiring. But so but if you and the and the average and I have I according to this I have 58 people
>> because there because for some reason there was a line missing in or a row number missing. >> Yeah. Uh there's two in there that are duplicated. I tried to get them out of there, but I mean this this sheet that you have um just has the 60 people, >> but um yeah, between
>> Well, anyway, I so I took an I took so I I just took an average per person savings per year uh you know because each one obviously each one is different, but if you if you just assumed an average that's $12,134
of the first year savings. Um, and you know, so if we had if we had 10 people retire, that could be 121,000 in that first year. >> Mhm. Um, then I then I expanded your
numbers there to this to 2027, which really is of concern for us. Uh, we've all been told to expect much worse things coming out of the state in 2027.
And so where this where this really seems to really then have an impact instead of that total for the 58 being $73,000 savings in 2026 or the first year, the second year would
be $1.8 million. And then you but then you also have to take away from that the fact that those people would move up two steps. And so I put in I put an average of
$5,000 a year for that. That's $290,000 in step increases. So you'd still have a 1.5 million. And the average of those 58 then becomes $26,900 per person that would retire on an
average. So if we had 10 people in 2026 for 2027, that savings would be $270,000. That's, you know, that's a that right there is what probably a little over a half% of a levy, you know. So I when we're when we're
talking about things to do for savings, those are I mean those are those are significant dollars. Just uh one more thing to point out on the back there, you'll see uh on the second column uh in age you see I
highlighted some orange. Um, so they may not necessarily be retiring. Yeah. As we in in the general sense, they could be just leaving and going and getting another job. So, just want to point that out as well.
>> Do anybody else have questions of >> I I don't have a question, but I think this this is a great idea. I think this if if this works, I think this it can save us some money long run and yeah and then it helps people, you know, if they if they're already looking at retirement, helps them, you know, maybe
make that decision. >> Well, you know, another, you know, there's I I happen to know some people have been talking about retiring, but then I also know some people who have second thoughts about retiring because of right now what's going on with the um
current insurance that that's out there. uh with you know with the Affordable Care Act you're talking about some people let's face it when you retire and all of a lot of us are well aware of that with their other jobs when you one of the biggest concerns you have is your health
insurance and making sure that that's going to be affordable to you and you know if there right now right now there's all these subsidies are gone that were part of the health and care and so that makes some
people having second thoughts on whether they should or not. Um that $9,600 might be able to help them in that in that regard. So um and yes, Commissioner Klo
>> Well, for guidance, um kind of the P discussion, um I mean, are you pushing for this or is there pros and cons we should be aware of? I mean, I'm hearing pluses right now
and and kind of want to know where did it come from >> the idea and the term. >> Um, I think that the idea came from when we did it last time in 2010. Um, we didn't, it was before I got here. Um,
but I know that there was a couple years where we had 0% colas. I think in 2009, 2010. Um, and they were looking for ways to save money just like we are today. Um, so I think the idea was we've never,
as far as I know, we've never floated this idea prior to this year, uh, since 2011 when I got here. Um, so I think with the the budget concerns of next year in 2027,
um, I think we're open to anything that might save some money. I think some of the cons of this is that you're losing a lot of talent, senior talent. Um, and that all depends on how many people take
it, which is an unknown right now. you know, if we have 30 people take it, that might be a pretty big hit to the to the county of losing that much uh in experience walking out the door and then hiring back. Um, I think the other thing
you got to realize is that we don't hire everybody at step one. So, there's going to be some, you know, people that we hire at step two or step three. Your savings are still going to be there, but it might not be quite as as much. Um, so
those are the couple things I could come up with, >> pros and cons. Part of the >> part of, you know, in our first pick committee when we were ALS, we were also talking about where
we're at right now. And we talked about there was actually some discussion about hiring freezes. And so one of the one of our strips set first steps on that was rather than do a hiring freeze
all of these um when somebody does leave needs to go to pick. They don't come directly to this board. Part of that part of that is this process that we're dealing with with how can we save money during this critical time.
I mean there there's there's c there are certain times when you know if we're sitting there with a two or 3% levy that's that's one thing but um that's not the case right now and I'm I'm really concerned 2026 is going to be
tough and 2027's going to be worse and when I when I see the numbers here that you know if we have 10 people >> and again this is voluntary on their part we're not forcing anybody out >> correct you Correct. My my my assumption on this
thing on on this incentive plan, people who were probably intending on doing it in the next one to three years will take a serious look at it. >> Commissioner Aier. Yeah, this we we brought it back and discussed this twice
and and were provided with updates on on this the uh data that you've got in front of you now. Uh I think we sent it forward because we wanted to see how the the full commission feels about it. Uh
but I think this is has been assessed and talked through at the pick level to where we can bring it up here. And I think this is as good as this particular plan can be. And again, as as as the
chair pointed out, we're not pressuring anybody to leave, but this gives some people a little bit of a break in worrying about where their insurance is going to come from uh if they do leave and they they are either coming up to where they're they're Medicare
uh eligible or they are uh just needing a a a year of breathing space to figure out how they're going to address their insurance needs. Thank you. Um, >> yes. >> Yeah. Um, well, I'll just say it. I I
have really concerns about this. I um I know it's about Levy and and um maybe it's my way of thinking, but I just feel again, I said this a few weeks ago, you know, we're trying to find a spot to hit
a number. It almost feels like without allowing a natural management to figure out our ways through these uh challenges and and
I'm really concerned about that experience. Uh my involvement and other boards has been you lose someone with all that knowledge. How do you replace that? and how many people or a person and a half
does it take to get back to that spot. Um I'm really concerned about um you know the people that understand now I'm speaking to social services that understand the technology and its
inefficiencies that we talked about earlier today >> and and I I'm guessing they're probably the most efficient people that can work that technology until the new stuff comes. Um I'm concerned about pay family
medical leave. Now we're taking people away and if someone takes that program, we got to be able to cover that spot. So um to start shorting ourselves without
managing it, I think there are some serious risks. Um um I don't know. I I just I guess I'm more organic than that. I I just feel that our management should be able to
guide us uh through these times and we we need the best and I think a lot of the people with the most experience are the best. They are committed. There's a low turnover and we just have a more solid workforce. And last, I'll just
say, you know, we we tout proudly, as we should, you know, uh, Klay County is the fastest growing county outside of the metro. And if that's what we are, how short staff, how
how long staff are we really in keeping up as I see it with more and more mental health needs, more and more people living at the poverty level. Um I I would be concerned about about our
support systems. So all right, any other comments? No other comments. Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the creation of the early retirement incentive program for Klay County employees. >> We have a motion. Do we have a second?
>> Second. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Bear, second by Commissioner Ebinger. Any further discussion on the motion? >> I just want to say it's voluntary. Nobody's forcing anybody to retire. >> Correct. >> It is voluntary. And I also believe we
do listen to our staff, but when hard decisions have to be made, it's the five of us that are elected officials that have to make those decisions. >> And can I get some clarification? Would this go into effect right away or would you start it when January or >> we'll go December 1st?
>> December 1st. >> That okay with your second. >> Yeah, that's good. Um, and I want to point something out. This did originate with staff. Um, I think there's been a lot of brainstorming uh on where we could try and identify
efficiencies and try and keep costs down. I think I'm going to assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that uh this came out of those discussions as an option that they wanted to go forward and present to us to see if it
could help us keep the levy down. Uh, so you know, it originated it didn't originate from from commissioners here. It originated with with our staff. >> Can I get a clarification? So So you're that that that would include the June 30th date as well?
>> Yes. >> All right. Any further discussion? Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Oppose the same sign.
>> I >> All right. Motion carries 3 to two. >> Thank you. All right. Committee reports. Who did I start with last? >> Started with me last. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Uh, Thursday the 6th, uh, I attended an emergency communication board's legislative committee meeting remotely. uh a lot of discussions about um
strategic planning and among which was uh reddraft of the 911 statutes. We've been trying this since 2012. Um they've efforts in this have failed
because the telecommunication industry does not want to move forward into uh the world we're in today where most of the calls are coming in from cell phones. They still want to be able to get get their funding augmented by the
state as if 80% of the calls were on landlines and maintain a system designed for landlines. Um we adjourned discussions on that two years ago with the idea that we're going to get a moderator to try and bring this
straighten this out. Uh that has for one reason or another not explained has not occurred right now. Uh we're going to request a legislative board to work on this a work
group. uh sorry not not a board but a legisl legislative uh commission workg group to try and form a new statute and get it up to date and that is going to I don't know how many more
years it'll be but it's an ongoing work. uh Friday november 7th uh met with uh blue sky remotely blue sky I'm sorry dancing skies uh agent agency on aging
uh to discuss an upcoming exchange panel that uh we were putting up for age friendly regional meetings uh Wednesday November 12th attended the pick meeting on the incentives that we had Today
on Thursday the 13th, I went to um Park Rapids and attended the uh agenda for or attended the the committee meeting for the on behalf of
the Dancing Skies for the Northwest Minnesota Age Friendly Exchange. Uh this consisted of a panel and several other activities. Uh we are the last of six exchanges that have been held in the state and it's to develop a blueprint for age friendly the
age friendly community initiatives. It was well put together. Um the panel was good. We answered a number of questions concerning where the priorities need to be in addressing needs of not just city uh and urban
aging populations, but particularly uh the focus in this district was on rural needs. Um, Monday the 11th, I attended the Klay County Township Officers meeting,
uh, which I myself and, uh, Commissioner Bear, uh, were there, staff was there, and did some great presentations. As always, it's good to talk to our township officers, hear the needs. I think we can be particularly
appreciative of our county engineer and the sheriff uh bringing some really good information to that group. And I know Commissioner Mojo and Commissioner or Sheriff Campbell were in the Twin Cities. >> I wasn't >> doing Huh?
>> I wasn't in Twin Cities, but I had a >> Oh, okay. >> another commitment. >> Just uh one one particularly with Commissioner Mojo. I know she loves to get out the township meetings. They missed you, but you were you were doing work for us on that, so I appreciate it. >> Thanks. >> And that completes.
>> All right, Commissioner Krabnoff. >> Uh, on the 5th, the on Wednesday, we had our um briefly uh nonsecure facility uh PRTF strategy meeting with our lobbyists. Um main thing of that meeting
was preparation for the Senate bonding through which was to come in the next week. Al also we were working on uh with the great help of Steve and Lori uh our final numbers for the um 20 roughly the
$28 million ask to our um honor uh 20 to get that uh in the bonding and then also um starting to add figures when we asked for the 28 what's our investment today in this project and Steve did a great
job and coming up with about 15 million that we've uh got in in the space of what it took to build the current juvenile facility, its operations, updates, additions, and uh so uh we're
able to show legislature that uh we do have an investment in this project. Uh on Monday the 9th, uh um Commissioner Mojo and I were at the Buffalo Red WHED district meeting. Uh there was a land owner in down in Holy Cross count uh
township wanting to put some additional acreage into a existing drainage uh system district and that was approved and then along with that that uh landowner uh got a drain tile permit for
that use to put in that drain system. Um, also another discussion was down in our uh part on ditch 11 in southern Elwood I believe it is um township. There is an area in there where there's
been excessive erosion in on the river on the creek going through that area and uh they're going to look at a reshaping of that area. uh the discussion on that. It sounds like they'll reach out landowners and then become uh we'll find
out more in the future. Also other various small dig repairs. Uh then I'm back to Wednesday on November 12th. Again, one more meeting with our lobbyists and that was the final prep for the Senate U bonding tour
that we had. I'll let Commissioner Mojo speak much deeper about that. um think we made great inroads. I thought it was wellreceived and we'll also start making inroads now with our lobbyists toward the governor
and more to DHS for additional funding. Uh also, uh I had a kind of the next emergency me meeting is what we're calling it as far as the food commission. Again, once again, lost uh we've lost a lot of our funding and
trying to figure out where we can go with leadership to get these um integrate these things in other food systems and other strategies working with food supply. And uh so it was some outside members with the food bank uh
having to do with uh our cast public health and then also other um people involved from the hunger coalition and in issue. Uh so there more stakeholders. So, there's going to be one more meeting uh that's coming up in auh on the 24th,
and that one is bringing in uh potential uh investors into the program uh to keep it going to find the uh ways for financing. So, more to come on that one. Um last thing I will say, we didn't get
a report on SNAP today. Uh but uh from what I see and what I heard, the amount of food and the amount amount of don donations that were brought into the community over the last couple weeks, amazing. Just absolutely amazing. Uh
food bank had over two and a half times the supplies of food that they've had in distribution. Uh my wife is very active with a a place for hope and and those freezers are full and there's people
coming twice as much just trying to you know make sure they have their supplies and their needs and I know uh legislative shutdowns coming are done these benefits are going to start up again but there's going to be a trickle
effect uh going for a while for need. So anyway, thank you to community and and uh the people who are in charge of these places and pantries. And then uh let's see, then we had the Senate bonding tour. I already mentioned that. And uh
the last part of that um just a real thank you to uh again our juvenile staff uh for them helping us out. I mean again they're just that day was just awesome and and the reception I believe
that came back feedback I think from the uh senators that were there was good and I mean kind of gave us ideas uh areas to pursue and so with that I'll leave the rest on commissioner Mojo on that.
That's my report. >> Thank you Commissioner Mojo. >> Thank you Mr. chair. On Tuesday, November 4th, I attended the highway tracking committee meeting. We talked about project wrapups, the county road two piece and um future planning
discussion for the transportation school district meeting that happened the next day. We also had the county owned property meeting that day. We discussed county owned parcels, what's allowed, what's not allowed, how we communicate to the public during deer season and uh
direction moving forward there. The next day, I attended Metrocog HR coordinating meeting for some uh office reviews that were happening. The following day, I attended the highway department transportation dialogue with the
sheriff's office and our school districts. I just think that is such a critical meeting that happens every year and how we triage weather related events or announcements or response and I appreciate the highway department and all of those school districts for
attending that and obviously Sheriff Empended the Klay County legislative strategy meeting uh with our lobbyists that day and the next day had um annual performance reviews at Metrocog.
Friday, I attended the non-secured detention PRTF legislative strategy meeting and then a flood mitigation strategy meeting with the chamber uh diversion authority staff, city of Morhead staff, Buffalo Red, and Klay
County. On November 11th, I was able to attend the Barnesville's Veterans Day program. I appreciate all of the schools in Klay County that do that. Was that the day we also had or I on the 10th I attended the
Buffalo Red watershed district meeting with Commissioner Krabanoff. Further dialogue on um with them on what they allow on on their properties. Wanted to make sure that it's aligned with Klay County properties as well. There was a
dialogue on um removal of logs that have built up in rivers. I think that Commissioner Kabnoff has worked with them on that. And then on, sorry,
November 12th, I attended um the Casclay Food Partners meeting only as a a discussion for historical context on where we've been as that was the first committee that I was assigned to as part of this board. also had the Klay County
legislative strategy meeting that uh was final prep for the bonding tour on November 13th. Happy to host the Senate bonding tour. Uh so important for them to stop in Klay County. We did have a discussion on the Red River diversion
flood mitigation ask that was a presentation at the Yum Compst and then also able to host them at our West Central Regional Juvenile Facility. Our staff is amazing. uh they just did such a great job in making sure that that
presentation was up to snuff and uh explaining to them all of the components that our staff do to the um work with the kiddos there. One question that came up from a senator was why do uh
jurisdictions choose this facility? Why is this working? why, you know, why do they um look at a a list of available PRTFs and non-secured components throughout the entire United States and pick us and it's because of the program
that has been implemented, the um conversations that happened with Morhead public schools to make sure that the schooling component in there and the uh the therapy component is there. So, a huge gratitude to them for that.
The next day was the uh legislative uh strategy groups and then yesterday I apologize for missing the township meeting township officers meeting. I did have a invitation to meet with the uh
Governor Walls's staff at the capital. Uh we also met with the office of management and budget and DNR on the remaining components of the Minnesota um flood mitigation needs. Uh really fortunate for the opportunity to attend
that in public uh or in in in person. It was public but also in person about 15 to 17 people there around that table making sure we're revisiting what the agreement was with the task force and what those needs are for our residents moving forward. And I think that
concludes my reports. Mr. Chair, >> you Commissioner Bear. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. On November 4th, I was also at the county own lands committee. We Mrs. Mojo did a very good job going over that. We also we also had a pictometry overview. We spent some
money, if you don't remember, back in I want to say it was early spring, late late winter on designating some money for that system for taking pictures of the county for our staff to use. It's very the Yeah, the overview was very
nice. They did a very good job. I think that'll help staff tremendously. Then also on November 5th, I was at the Wild Rice Wershed District meeting where they passed three permits and tabled three and denied one. It was a very
informational meeting. It was very quick. There wasn't too many permits on the agenda. After that meeting, I went to uh the highway school district meeting and it's the first time I've sat through that and I thought it was a very good meeting, very informational for the
school districts and the highway department and everybody getting to know what's going to what we expect during the winter with snow plows and how they run. Then on November 11th, I went to the Glendon Township
meeting. They had some questions about the federal trust land that might be going in on the west side of their county. I informed them, they invited me there, so I gave them an update on the tribal trust land over there. Then November
12th, I was up in H Hallstead for the Senate bonding tour for the West Central Regional Water District where we gave an update there. And our ask in that group is a $10 million to help us run a pipeline from Holstead down to Felton.
That was very wellreceived as well. I want to give credit to staff for putting that together and the Senate bonding tour for making a stop there. Then on November 13th, where are my notes at?
I was at the Klay County SWCD board meeting where we had an audit report and uh it all looks good just like ours was. We also discussed they also wanted to discuss a county county budget proposal
update for what we proposed to them. So I gave them an update on that on where their ask is. We we decided as a board as of right now not to just to hold their ask at the same ask they had last year. We had discussion on that.
Um that's pretty much what happened there. Oh, they're they also made a decision on their paid family medical leave update. They decided to go with an outside agency with a 0.59% there and the S SWCD is going to pay
that entire portion. Most SWCDs in the state are paying it because they're getting it at that lower rate. So, they are paying that for their employees. And I left that meeting to go to the Senate bonding tour in Morehead here
with a PRTF and a non-secure unit. And that's my first time sitting through that whole thing. And I thought the staff and you guys did a very wonderful job there. I was very impressed by staff and you too both and Steve as well that how you presented that. I I think we've
we've got a very good chance there. So then after that on November 17th I was also at Catco meeting up in Morin Town Hall, their new town hall. Very appreciative for them opening that up to all of us. There was 16 36 members there
from 18 different townships. So, it was very wellreceived and I want to give credit for staff for showing up there and getting Dave out of the city of Morehead and seeing God's country. So, with that, that is all I have to say. Okay. All right.
>> Wait, you stopped in my district. >> Well, north of Highway 10, Jenny. >> All right. >> You referenced the good country, you know. >> On um November 4th, I also had the highway tracking committee meeting which Commissioner Mo report on. I don't have any additional things to add to that. On
Thursday, the November 6th, we had the intergovernmental committee and we spent an awful a lot of time talking about the school bond issues that had that both Morehead and and Dworth one was successful and one not so much. And so
we talked about that and there was um a lot of discussion about planning for the intergovernmental retreat. Um, I think we've got some ideas in mind there for that. Um, more to come on that. November 7th, we
had the flood mitigation check-in with the chamber and uh, Commissioner Mojo reported on that one as well. And on Wednesday the 12th, we had the Red River Dispatch Budget and Finance Committee meeting.
and um we just reviewed the current year-to- date budget was pretty much all all that was done at that particular meeting. Uh that afternoon we had the pick meeting which uh the primary purpose of that was the continued
discussion on the early retirement incentive program. Um, I do want to bring up uh another thing that came out of those discussions and something that I think Darren brought up
that we're going to probably have to be looking at in the future and that's the um the impacts to paid family leave act has on our sick policy. So, I you know, I think that's something that we're going to have to um be
looking at that going forward and how that all correlates together. Um and on Thursday the 13th, I had the Lakes Country Service Cooperative I uh
meeting and um they were talking about the different positions that are up. I think we there's four positions that are going to be up for that board this year and there's four candidates and there's an additional candidate from the Mor public schools that are going to be on there.
So, it's likely that Lakes Country Service will have two members of the Morhead school district on their board as well as myself from the county. And then on the 14th, we all yesterday or Friday morning, we also had the
flood mitigation update again with the chamber. And I said on that there was a lot of planning that was um involved with that one for the um trip that Commissioner Mojo and others took yesterday uh where they had a meeting with the Governor Walls. And
so we're thankful for all of you that participated and took that trip for that purpose. Uh I'm sorry that I wasn't not able to attend the township officers meeting
and that I believe concludes my report. Steve Eve, thank you Mr. Chair. Uh the fourth I participated in highway tracking which has been well covered. Uh also participated in the county owned lands meeting. Uh on the that afternoon
I met uh with Darren and Mr. Milton in regards to some union negotiations. Uh on the 5th participated at the United Way Taco Bar uh the juvenile center staff donate all of the food there and every year it's it's amazing. So uh appreciated
>> huh >> you eat or you participate? >> Oh I participated. All right. >> By eating. Um and uh on the on the uh fifth participated in a meeting with Dan Dan Molly, Derek Le Point Payton in
regards to the wired nation discussion. Uh on the sixth participated in the IGR meeting which has been well covered. Uh that afternoon had meetings with Darren, our labor labor attorney with union negotiations. Uh on the that afternoon
met with Lori on some ongoing budget discussions. Uh on the 7th, Lori and I met uh we had our closing wire confirmation call for the refinance of the of the law enforcement uh correctional facility bond. Uh that was
completed last week. Uh on the 7th also participated in our legislative lobby call that's been well covered. uh the flood mitigation uh check-in with uh we where we discussed the Senate bonding tour preps uh and uh that afternoon and also on Monday participated in the
public health screening director screening director uh interviews on the 12th they had Klay County management uh we had budget discussions we heard updates from Kimberly on the judicial security legislation and also she's been working uh on a credit card payment
system to collaborate with all of our departments uh to to uh be more consistent and then had some HR updates on the 12th. Matt Jacobson, Derek Le Point, and I met with Kyle Roman, a representative from Orion
Strategies. Uh I did provide you guys a handout uh in your in your boxes. a DG Midstream uh purchased purchased a pipeline uh from Oak One and they just wanted to make their um make an introduction and know that they're in
our in our county. Um again, uh the 12th we had our legislative meeting which has been well covered. I've been working with MMB uh to uh receive the $1.2 million uh that the legislaturator awarded for PRTF remodel. Uh and so we
got some information on that. Uh just a little bit more data and that should be coming soon. Uh we got some timelines of when we can utilize uh those funds. Uh and uh with good news of of uh a ability to go to legislature to ask for a no
cost extension. I participated in the bonding tour at the at the juvenile center. Uh I think as as was has been talked about that was an exciting day. uh there's a lot of positive feedback that we received which
was wonderful. I think that the other thing that to some of the comments that were made I think it's important uh why uh facilities use this is uh because of the programming but it's because of the investment that this board made uh and it's goes back 10 years ago uh when
other facilities were stepping back you guys were stepping into it and that's made all of the difference. Uh we found out this morning that we'd uh we are we are on the my MYAK agenda uh for their quarterly quarterly meeting uh next week
or two weeks I guess uh and uh they've supported our PRTF uh plan moving forward and and are looking forward to an update. So that was nice to see. On the 13th and 14th I participated in the AMC futures uh conference down in St.
Paul. Uh we heard presentations on pack uh property tax reform ideas. Uh there's about 20 different states that are looking at uh different funding sources and so we heard from Julie Ring's counterparts in Texas and Florida. Uh we had an update from Matt Hillgard
and federal shutdown. Um again we are now we're now budgeted through the end of January. Uh the positive news is that both SNAP and WICK, which you heard presentations on last time we were here at board, are actually funded through September. And so if there are any
issues, we won't have that same same challenge moving forward. Uh we we heard from economic development uh programming ideas for Itasa County. Uh and uh uh that was a good a good conference. I appreciate the opportunity to be there.
Uh participated yesterday in the township officers meeting again. appreciate our staff for coming out and sharing uh sharing the different things happening at the county and yesterday afternoon met with Darren and Anna on a series of issues. Just of note, uh this
this week is Minnesota winter hazard awareness week. Everyone from in the county would have received an email from Gabe uh talking about some of the dangers that we're we'll be facing probably shortly. Um and uh just a couple of other things. Uh today's the
16th annual county campus craft and sales boutique over at the family service center and taco in a bag will be served over lunch. Uh we do have interviews uh for the public health director starting this afternoon at 1. And just wanted to provide an update
based on your action today on shifting $100,000 uh of uh of cost from Quinn's budget that uh brought our levy down to 4.64%. That concludes my report. >> Great.
>> All right. Thank you, Steve. Brian, anything for us? >> Darren, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, November 4th, county owned lands committee. I also attended that. Uh, also on the 4th had a discussion with Steve, Brian, and myself on attorney's uh negotiations. November
5th worked on a report for Mark Sloan legislative planning meeting with our lobbyists and I met with Corey and Ashley on some score funding trying to find the calculations for that. November 6th I had the highway third highways
third negotiations and also the attorney's negotiations. Um had a meeting with MC on improv project that we've been working on. November 7th worked on updating all the negotiation status sheets and PRTF
legislative meeting with the representative from Amy Clolobashar's office. November 10th I participated in the public health director interviews as well. 11th I was off for Veterans Day. Then November 12th uh I also attended the manager meeting and had the
corrections fourth negotiations and uh attended the pick meeting. November 13th, Senate bonding tour. I participated in that as well. November 14th, we had detox's fourth negotiations and social workers fourth negotiations.
Uh November 17th, I yesterday attended the township meeting as well and had a meeting with Kimberly and Lori uh on some um establishing how we can do some online payments. Um, so we are we are making progress with the union
negotiations, which is good. I sent an email to everybody, I think yesterday, uh, kind of an update on that. And last but not least, open enrollment closes tomorrow. So, if you haven't done your open enrollment
yet, please do it today or tomorrow, I guess. That's all I have. >> All right, Sarah, do you have anything for us? Um, Mr. Larson, from the uh calendar standpoint,
uh, what when are we when have we decided that we're going to be dealing with the setting the levy? >> Uh, we are we're having truth and taxation on December 16th at 6 p.m. and then we would be setting the preliminary levy on December 23rd.
>> Okay. >> All right. And we are planning on a meeting December 30th as well. >> That's correct. The board made uh made made that action so the under treasur's office could make their final payments. >> Okay. >> One one question. >> One question that can we make that final
levy on the 30th or I mean if we don't decide on the 23rd, is the 30th another day or are we going to decide on the 23rd? Yeah, my understanding is yeah, you can as long as you make it prior to the end of the year, >> right?
>> I would certainly hope that by the 23rd we're ready to deal with this. >> We'd hope so. >> One way or the other. Okay. All right. Hey, we were drinking