--------- Good morning everyone. It's 8:30. I'll call today's meeting of the uh Klay County Board of Commissioners to order. The first item on the agenda today is an approval of the agenda. We do have an amended agenda that has been provided. Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the agenda with the amendment.
>> We have a motion offered to approve the amended agenda from Bear, a second from Commissioner Ebinger. Any further discussion? >> Discussion. Discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Same sign.
Carried. Citizens to be heard today. Are there any citizens in the audience wishing to address the county board? Steve, if we had any online correspondence. >> Madam Chair, we did receive uh three additional requests to have comments on the public hearing on the shotgun rifle
zone and speaking with Mr. Melton. Unfortunately, those were not able to be brought forward because the time for uh bringing forward information is closed. >> Thank you. Follow up to that, uh, many residents did reach out to the commissioners individually after the hearing which is allowed, but again, no
further public testimony would be offered. Any other folks wishing to be heard? Moving into the approval of the payment of bills and vouchers. >> Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to pay the bills and vouchers. >> Motion offered from Commissioner Bear to
pay the bills and vouchers. >> Second. >> A second from Commissioner Kavanagh. Further discussion. Further discussion. Further discussion. All in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. It carries. Minutes
from April 7th, 2026 were included in the packet. >> Madam chair. I move to approve the minutes from April 7th uh 2026. >> A motion offered from Commissioner Evinger. >> Second. >> Second from Commissioner Bear. Any further discussion?
Further discussion? Further discussion. All in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppos. Same sign. The offer carries or the motion carries. I'd like to go back quick to a moment um an item that we just approved in the amended agenda. Uh
really grateful during um the last week we were able to receive a donation check from the Sabin Elmwood Fire Department in the amount of $750 to our Klay County Sheriff's Office for some work detail. grateful for grateful for those um
options not only for the work detail crew but also organizations and entities throughout Klay County. Thank you to the Sabin Fire Department for that donation. Item two, request approval for out of state travel. Good morning, Kimberly. >> Good morning, Madam Chair.
Commissioners, I'm here today to request approval for out ofstate travel in May. I would be attending an educational symposium in Rock Island, Illinois that's hosted by my land records software vendor. Um they would be helping fund some of the transportation and the rest of the um expenses would
come out of my travel budget for the recorders office. >> Questions from the board? >> One question. >> Yes, Commissioner Bear. >> You had this budgeted in your budget for last year? >> Yes. >> Then with that, I'll make a motion to approve this out of state travel for Kimberly.
>> Motion offered from Commissioner Bear. Second from Commissioner Campbell to approve the request as presented. Further discussion. Further discussion. Further discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I.
>> Oppos. Same sign. The request is granted. Item three, Kimberly, is a request approval of expenses for the lands records department. >> Yes. So the recorders compliance committee met a few weeks ago and we have recommended action for the board.
The recorder's office was 100% compliance in 2025. So that means we're able to share um expenses with some of the other land record departments per the statute. So we are proposing for the 2027 budget that we would use $105,000
from our compliance fund. $15,000 of that would go towards the maintenance for our tax system. $40,000 would go towards our corner remonumentation program. 37,350 would go towards information services for their online mapping and things that
all of our land record departments uses and then 12,650 towards the um software maintenance for the assessor's office. So that brings a grand total of 105,000. So I would just be looking for a motion to approve these expenses and that would go in the 2027 budget.
>> Thank you Kimberly. This is another great uh um example of your good oversight and controls that you have in place making sure that we're in compliance 100% to benefit uh other areas of the county. Thanks, >> Madam Chair. >> Commissioner Abinger. >> Yeah, I was part of the committee that
met on this. It uh is a great source of funding for us and it's a responsible use those funds that comply with state law. So, in light of that, I would like to make a motion to approve 105,000 in expenses from the records compliance
fund for the land record department for 2027. >> A second. >> Thank you, Commissioner Ebinger. A second from Commissioner Kavanagh. Discussion. Commissioner Campbell. >> Thank you, Kimberly. How does this change from last year? >> It is the same from last year. It's been
that same 105,000 for for a few years. And it it was the same for areas that we're spending it on as well. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Additional questions? >> Additional questions. >> All in favor of the motion signify by
saying I. >> I. >> I. Same sign. The request is approved. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Item five today is our social services department. I guess four. Sorry, didn't mean to skip. So, we have the opportunity to
approve a proclamation that is recognizing April 22nd as administrative professionals day in Klay County. >> Thank you, Madam Chair and commissioners. Uh yes, I am requesting uh that we approve uh tomorrow actually
is administrative professionals day in Klay County. Um, our administrative professionals at social services are the steady force that helps keep our county government running each day. In social services, they coordinate communication, they manage records, they organize schedules, they assist citizens, and they handle the tiny little daily tasks
uh that allow all of our other social workers and all of our other staff to serve and function effectively. Uh, within social services, our administrative professionals play an especially critical role in supporting the work of our department. Our department is now at 152 FTEES and we have 11 full-time office support
specialists, one being a variable hour. So together, those staff support our entire department in our day-to-day operations and help ensure that uh we have smooth uh continuation of services across multiple floors of the building. Now, um our administrative professionals
frequently serve as the first point of contact for residents seeking services. uh they greet individuals who are navigating complex or pretty stressful situations most often and they're helping connect those folks with the right staff and the right services. Uh they also ensure that information is
shared accurately and efficiently. So recognizing administrative professionals day provides an opportunity for the board to acknowledge the professionalism, dedication and essential contributions of our staff uh that support the rest of our staff, strengthen operations and help ensure that our citizens receive the services
they need. So, with that, I have attached proclamation, but I'm open to any questions. >> Any questions for Quinn? Questions? Thank you for bringing this forward. Um, I agree wholeheartedly with everything that you said. Uh, the board, if we can rotate through and uh read
through the proclamation, the proclamation for administrative professionals day, April 22nd, 2026. Whereas administrative professionals day is observed each year to honor the individuals whose administrative expertise supports the work of
organizations and public institutions throughout the nation. And whereas Klay County administrative professionals provide essential support that enables county departments to function efficiently, ensuring that information flows accurately, operations remain
organized, and services are delivered to residents in a timely and professional manner. And whereas these dedicated employees contribute daily through their knowledge, attention to detail, and commitment to public service, helping maintain the structure, and coordination necessary for local government to serve
the community. And whereas administrative professionals demonstrate professionalism, reliability, and adaptability while supporting co-workers and assisting citizens. And >> whereas the Klay County Board of Commissioners values the contributions
of these employees and recognizes the important role they play in supporting the mission of county government. Now therefore, be it proclaimed that the Klay County Board of Commissioners hereby recognizes April 22nd, 2026 as
Administrative Professionals Day in Klay County and expresses its appreciation for the administrative professionals whose dedication and service strengthen the operations of county government and the well-being of our community. Madam Chair,
>> Commissioner Abinger, >> just uh one one notice on this. Uh in addition to the great people we have working for Quinn, we've got a number of them throughout the entire uh county staff, including Sarah, who keeps the wheels on around here for us and for
Steve. And I don't want we'd be remiss not to mention her. >> Madam Chair, I move the proclamation. A motion offered from Commissioner Campbell to approve the proclamation. A second from sorry, Commissioner Bear did say it right after, but uh certainly of note is
Commissioner Ebinger's comments. Uh Sarah keeps the wheels on definitely for all of us. So we are grateful. Any further discussion? Further discussion. All those in favor of the proclamation signify by saying I.
>> I oppose. Same sign carried. Now we'll move into the annual department update that you have for the financial services division. Quinn, we have uh Miss Amenson and Miss Fuerk. >> Thank you, Madam Chair and commissioners. Yes. Uh this is another
agenda item where I will just do introductions and then keep my mouth shut for the rest of the time. So we've got Michaela Wooder and Karen Amenson here to speak to our financial services division. Karen, I'll kick it over to you. Um Michaela and I decided to change
things up a little bit this year and instead of just data, we um decided to give you a day in the life. So um I want to walk you through a normal day. Uh not a bad day, not a crisis, just a normal day in the life of an eligibility
worker. So the first task of the day, successfully logging into everything. If all systems load on the first try, it's already a good day. If we don't log into the systems periodically, we get kicked out and then
we'll need to contact our security liaison to request access. Again, this can take anywhere from a few minutes to a few days depending on the system. This is what's waiting before they've had a chance to even settle in for the day. Each item up
there represents a client seeking support. often with time-sensitive needs. Once they get logged into the systems, they'll organize their day by prioritizing the tasks listed. While they're doing this, they may have clients in the lobby waiting to be seen.
And this is even before they've opened a case. Their first application immediately having questions. Applications reflect real life situations that don't always fit neatly into policy categories.
Eligibility workers scan 15 to 20 pages of the application checking for completeness already making eligibility decisions in their head. They will often go into Maxis, MMIS, prison, maybe MEC squared and Smi. And remember, none of
these talk to each other. They review the verifications received and realize that for instance the payubs don't match what's reported. Now they're calculating manually to determine if the client could be expedi expedited or even eligible.
And this is where the day becomes unplanned and reactive to real life needs. Getting phone calls, front desk questions, emails marked urgent. We request meetings and they're always
willing to help their co-workers. And as I stated, we like to say our systems don't talk to each other. They don't even acknowledge each other. We are asking staff to be accurate in systems that are not designed for accuracy or integrated with one another.
>> Can I go back really quick? >> Yep. One. >> Yep. uh this is the screen in which we are trying to tell your story. So I just want to give huge gratitude for providing this but for the public watching you're a financial services
division but if you look in the systems reality not addressing the fact that these systems don't talk to each other is contributing to high error risks in which counties are then on the hook for huge pieces. So, as we continue, I
testified last week on this exactly and had a prism question that I couldn't answer, so I should have had you. Um, but this is what we're talking about. These we have to in order to implement the services that the state is having for us to do, we have to have systems
that talk to each other. It's like uh yesterday or last week at the Capitol, it was like going to an airport and being on the Delta terminal and needing to get it to American Airlines and they there literally is no way to do that. So, thank you for dealing with this
craziness. Um I'm hopeful we can address this for you, but I just want the public to see the reality is if this doesn't get addressed, it will continue to see high air risk. Can I just uh Thank you. Um,
every taxpayer in Klay County should be watching this or if that are watching this and should understand this because every taxpayer in Klay County should be advocating for the corrections that we want done here because this is a clear case of us being able to eliminate a lot
of duplication and time spent doubling up on areas we don't need to be doubling up on. So this is one area whether you're right, left, indep, I don't care. You should be advocating in favor of this this legislation being done.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. I again didn't want to disrupt your presentation, but you are speaking the language that we all need to hear. So thank you. >> No, I appreciate it. Thank you guys. Um lunch often becomes a time to catch up rather than fully step away. Breaks
are encouraged, but our staff are dedicated, so lunch is often not when they disconnect. And the interviews, this is where policy meets real life, and real life does not follow policy. Clients are navigating complex and
stressful situations, and we can conduct interviews, which can take anywhere from a half an hour to an hour and a half, depending on the programs applied for and the complexity of the household. Conversations often involve helping people understand
programs during times of uncertainty and case processing. This is the part everyone thinks is data entry and it's actually the most complex part of the job. Before anything is entered, decisions are already being made. What income counts? Which program
rules apply? Is this verified or questionable? Does this trigger expedited? They're not even entering data yet. They're making eligibility decisions. Now, let's talk real life, which is messy, and try to make it fit into very
rigid systems. For instance, payubs that don't line up, verifications that conflict, household situations that don't fit clean categories. The system doesn't adjust to reality. The worker has to.
Now comes data entry. But it's not one system. And again, none of these systems carry information forward and a lot of what we do is not automated. We manually average income, calculate anticipated future income, and
determine eligibility periods. Two workers can look at the same case and have to justify how they got the same result. Then we document everything. We explain why decisions were made, what was verified, and what is still pending,
if anything. These case notes have to stand up in court months and maybe even years later by someone who maybe wasn't part of the case and maybe they're not even working for the county anymore.
So in reality, case processing is actually decision-m, interpretation, translation, data entry, and legal documentation. This is where accuracy is won or lost. and our average processing time.
This slide demonstrates the average processing time required for each step of just one application. When these steps are combined, each application can take several hours of staff time depending on complexity. Our eligibility workers typically
receive between two to eight applications per day on any given day. Even at that range, the workload can quickly exceed the hours available in a standard workday. For example, on higher volume days, the total processing time can add up to 20
to 30 hours of work in a single day. And that's simply not achievable within an 8 hour workday. Our staff work efficiently and are committed to keeping up, but when incoming work exceeds capacity, a backlog is unavoidable.
This slide highlights that the challenge is not effort, it's capacity. Each step reflects careful work to ensure accuracy that for the people we serve and the taxpayers. And our work never stops layering.
This is a part of the day where new work doesn't replace old work. It stacks on top of it. Dales are tasks that require action. They're not optional. There are alerts for verifications, deadlines that impact eligibility, things that must be worked on or we risk
errors. These don't wait until you're done with your current cases. Tickles are tasks we set to come back to, and they always come back. There are follow-ups on pending verifications and time-sensitive actions. Yesterday's work
becomes today's interruption. While we're working applications, existing cases are changing, such as income changes, household changes. It's all information that affects eligibility. Every change has to be reviewed, verified, and often rebudgeted at the
same time. Clients needs pop up throughout the day and require timely response. So, while one case is being processed, there are multiple other cases demanding detention. This is a part of the day where staff are doing complex, ever evolving work,
applying policy, analyzing information, and making informed decisions that require time, focus, and sustained attention. >> If I might go back to that one as well. >> Yep. These uh well, one, I am overwhelmed
with what staff is dealing with. So, um, just know that I really appreciate that they're continuing to push forward and addressing the needs of the people that they're working with while they're they're working with this. But this is the part that um I think is really important. Our board understands it, but
I want folks watching to maybe understand a little further. these systemdriven deadlines. When we're talking about mandates in terms of when folks, you know, the deadlines in which you have to process through all of these counties are talking about how do we
triage um maybe weight lists or how do we figure out different ways to address what the workload is because of the significant cost for administration with new programs that are coming on. That's the part in which counties can't
I mean we can't do those dead or uh weight lists. We can't get to it as we get to it. We can't staff to a different level because then that not meeting those deadlines contributes to error rates even further. So it's you're kind
of in this um wheel of purgatory really and how do you best address the needs of the people by dealing with these systems that are really um hindering the work to actually deal with people. So it it has um nothing to do I don't really think
with the financial piece as much as it does the systems that that are not enabling us to do the work to the highest efficiency. Is that a fair Okay. Thank you. Yes. Sorry. So now let's talk about what happens over time working in this kind of
environment. When every task requires decision- making all day across multiple systems that creates a high level of mental load at any given moment they are deciding who needs help right now, what's expedited. >> Yeah.
>> What will cause an error? What can wait? And they're expected to get that right every time. There isn't a lot of built-in space to pause and reset. That kind of cognitive fatigue doesn't show up all at once. It builds over time.
Accuracy is still expected, and it should be, but we're asking for that accuracy in environment that systemically makes the work more complex. So, when challenges show up, it's often less about individual performance and more about the conditions the work is happening in.
Over time, that can look a few different ways. Sometimes it means work slows down because staff are being careful and double-checking to get it right. Sometimes it means hesitation or second guessing which leads to delays. And sometimes when volume is extra high,
it can lead to rushing just to keep pace which is where errors are more likely to happen. The opportunity at hand isn't about changing the people doing the work. It's about improving the conditions around them so they can do it at their best. This is where your advoc advocacy has
really mattered. We know there has been tremendous amount of effort put forth around system modernization. That work directly connects to what you've heard here today. Modernized integrated systems are one of the clearest ways to reduce complexity,
improve accuracy, and allow staff to focus more on their time on serving our residents instead of navigating systems and sitting behind a computer screen. Because this isn't about lowering expectations. It's about building an environment where these expectations are
realistic, sustainable, and consistently achievable. I want to briefly touch on our role in supporting program integrity, knowing that Sandy will walk you through the fraud investigation side in more detail next week. Our eligibility workers are
often the first point of contact as they review applications and verifications. They're also watching for inconsistencies or information that doesn't pass the smell test. In 2025, our staff submitted 711 referrals to the fraud and collections
unit. This is where our role ends and theirs begins. They take those referrals and conduct the full investigation and any necessary recovery actions. This partnership ensures that program integrity starts at the front end while
allowing specialized staff to handle the investigative process. Every referral represents careful review and accountability at the eligibility level. >> Can we go back to that one really quickly? >> Yep. In regards to those 711 referrals
submitted, uh, one, kudos to staff for identifying those pieces and referring. Is there any circle back to our staff? Um, once it's out of our hands and it goes to the state, are we able to identify what was followed up on, what
may be filtered out? >> So, so those fraud referrals actually go to our two fraud investigators in Klay County. >> Got it. >> Yep. Two investigators in Sandy's unit. Um, a lot of what they do is fraud prevention. Um, so if uh information is submitted on the application before
someone receives benefits, our fraud staff will look into that before a single dollar would go out in a program benefit and verify that information to ensure doesn't necessarily mean 711 cases of fraud occurred, but just where maybe it doesn't match up or it doesn't pass the smell test or we have concerns
that it doesn't match up. We will have the fraud investigators go verify before any benefits are essentially. >> And I may be misunderstood. I thought I heard when you said that's beyond us. I was thinking us as county, not us as department. And we've certainly heard from Sandy and her department on all of
the great work they've they've had there. Sorry. And >> I did have to throw some statistics in and give our staff kudos because they do an amazing job. Uh in 2025, the adult and family teams consisting of two leads
and 16 eligibility workers processed 7,250 applications, 5,134 renewals, 928 change report forms, 49,530 verifications for public assistance
forms totaling 62,842 total forms. And you've likely seen and heard about SNAP error rates in the news recently. These rates measure payment accuracy, not fraud, but how complex eligibility
rules are applied in real situations. Nationally, the error rate is about 6%. In Minnesota, it's closer to 9%, which is why there's increased detention right now. Our team's error rate is 1.64%. 64%.
And that's while processing nearly 65,000 documents this year. Each one requiring careful review, verification, and decision-making. So this isn't just strong performance. It's except exceptional accuracy in high
pressure, high volume environment. This reflects the consistency, coaching, and attention to detail our staff bring every day. It's not about perfection. It's about doing the work thoughtfully and getting it right for the people we serve. Thank you for taking the time to listen
today and for your ongoing support. We truly appreciate the opportunity to share the realities of this work and the impact it has on both our staff and the county we serve. >> Thank you for uh the presentation. Commissioner Campbell does have a question before we turn.
>> Yeah, that that last little chart that you show there says a lot. Mhm. >> Um, you know, for the amount of documents that you process and your people go through, to have an error rate of 1.64% is really quite remarkable.
>> Uh, you didn't say in here, but the it's it's shaded, but in Minnesota, it averages 9%. >> Yes. >> And in nationwide, it's 6%. >> Correct. >> And Klay County is at 1.64.
>> Correct. So that's um hats off to your whole department for the work that they do. >> Excellent. >> Thank you. I might really quickly and then we'll go to two other commissioners. Um I testified on that exactly the data that you provided. So
thanks for getting that. the one one can you really quickly talk about how counties that have error rates as low as we might are actually getting penalized in a way that counties with 10 to 15 times the error rate are. >> Yeah, absolutely. Thank you, Madam
Chair. Um this is the frustrating part about uh the HR1, the big beautiful bill and the impacts of how how it's going to impact Minnesota counties. Uh right now the the fiscal penalty for error rate is just applied to the state. Um if the
state doesn't otherwise define it, uh it's going to be broken out as a total dollar amount and it's based on a percentage of the amount of SNAP benefit that is given to the residents in the community. So for example, I believe in 2025 we provided about $15 million um in
SNAP benefits to our citizens. Um the error rate will be a percentage based on the state's overall error rate of what that is. So for example, where the state currently sits in terms of their statewide error rate, uh the state of Minnesota would owe 10% of the SNAP
payments to the federal government. And that 10% would just apply to your county's payments that went out. Uh that's a scary scary number to me. Uh that's $1.5 million that Klay County would be responsible for in regards to the fiscal penalty under the big
beautiful bill just for the 10% of the benefit that we provided to the citizens. However, if you have an error rate that's below I think it's 5% there would be no fiscal penalty to the federal government. So in my opinion we're at 1.64%.
our performance at the county level would justify zero dollars in fiscal penalty because we're not making those payment errors. However, the way that it's currently set in the state is they're not taking into account individual county performance. They're just saying that error rate percentage
applies to all counties and you pay your fair share. So, because we're doing a good job, we would actually have $1.5 million worth of fiscal penalty when another county might have a 14% error rate, which is driving up the state average. It's very it's very frustrating
to not take individual county performance into account with that calculation. >> And to unpack that a little bit more, that 1.64% 64% error rate equivalates equival equivalency is $59 in benefit
erroneously identified that's not necessarily that doesn't mean that $59 extra that could be an underpayment of benefit to >> correct >> correct >> correct yes >> so >> and that even if it's a $59 overpayment that doesn't mean that at the end of the day we didn't also recapture
>> recapture and when overpayments go out we identify them we find them and then we fix them so if we mistakenly gave you $59 last month, we would either take $59 out next month or if that's not feasible given your situation, we might take $10
out until we've recouped the total $59. >> Commissioner Ebinger and then Kraov. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh I want to amplify something Commissioner Campbell said. This is not a right, left or center issue.
This is simply good governance. And I think we have it here. We're aware of and and I think you and your staff, Quinn, are are aware that this commission is very cognizant of the shortcomings that we've got with the
system we've that's been inflicted on us up to this point. I've seen something that you seldom see in in local government. It happened with the floods. It happened with some other crises. We got two commissioners that
have gone up to the state capital and really applied themselves on on a lot of issues, this being one of them. I think the expertise our chair speaks of with this is simply because she's become extremely familiar with what's going on. She's working with people on both sides
of the aisle to try and address it, as is the AMC, the Association of Minnesota Counties. This is a one of the prime issues we've got for this legislative agenda. None of us up here are able to to to
deal with the issues that we have to deal with without getting good information from competent staff. And that's what you've got. I'm married to a social worker. The people that are working these want to manage cases and they want to help people. They don't want to sit there and
be a data entry clerk for twothirds of their shift. We hear you. If we could change it right now, we would. We've got people that are making a real effort to work across the the political turmoil you have in the Capitol right now to try
to get this addressed as an issue that's affecting the entire state. I just want you to know the information you've provided them and us is being well used. >> Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Yeah. Uh thank you. Um so, uh two
things. Uh back to the airs. uh the 1.64 in the reforms that DHS is trying to do. Are they u are they even interested in um in their work to
uh decrease air? Give you any any uh how do I say it? focused areas that with higher rates, say up at eight or nine and and allow the people at 1.64 that uh
keep doing negative work. I guess I don't I don't know specifically uh Commissioner Krabanhoff. Uh you know that said I think a lot of the times I have to be really honest prior to this role I was completely ignorant in the financial services world and these two have completely brought me on board and given me accurate information as well to
fully understand and I think a lot of the issues actually come from the complexity of the policy decisions that are made. So, I think the state actually needs to look at their policies and make some decisions about how you can't have this and this count because they're
creating errors. So, I think a lot of it um again, just like you said, the staff that we have, they don't want to sit behind a computer screen all day. They want to help people. So, the more they're sitting behind a computer screen trying to figure out is it this or is it that, they're being less fulfilled in their daily job and we're risking more
errors. So, I I don't know if DHS is working on fixing that, but I >> just curious if it was in the conversation. Okay. And then the other thing back to the uh um beautiful bill that requires two times a year now for
checking eligibility. Is that the correct word? >> Yeah, that will be for um healthc care uh MA expansion population. >> Okay. Which you're going to get into. Okay. I want to hear more about that, too. >> You bet. Uh, Commissioner Campbell had asked me a
question in regards to specifically what bills we're tracking for the modernization pieces. There are a couple different ones, uh, which is why I was gone last week, Tuesday morning, I testified on the Frederick bill that is on the House side, 4840.
And then the Senate companion bill for that is Senate File 4982. that is to allow a lease purchase agreement for the sale and issuance um of that to replace the bond or the um Maxis system. And then Senate file 4612
is the vehicle bill uh the Wickland bill that we testified also on that has the Maxis component in it, but it also has the um Medicaid pieces that is different from this conversation, but that's where we're tracking. Okay. All right. Any
questions otherwise? Michaela, >> good morning. I'm excited to share about our healthcare programs today. Our current team structure, we have uh 15 individuals on the health care team including myself. We have a lead worker
and then our teams are split into the programs that they work. So we have six eligibility workers working in the Mets system on th those healthcare programs. We have three eligibility workers doing the Maxis health care system and three eligibility workers doing the programs
for individuals over 65. And then we have a case aid that helps us by supporting the entire team. So medical assistance is commonly misunderstood in how intertwined it is to our communities and our individuals.
Um it is more than just health insurance, right? It is um the entry point to many services that allow people to remain safe in their homes, uh cared for, and in their communities. It connects residents to health coverage,
long-term care, mental health treatment, substance use services, wavered supports, home services, and care coordination. It's especially crucial for our vulnerable residents, including older individuals, people with
disabilities, children. When MA works well, it uh helps people avoid unnecessarily unnecessary hospitalization or placement in institutions. It matters economically because these
services support providers, jobs, and our community. Ultimately, MA is about the human impact and the system impact. And at its core, medical assistance helps people receive the right care in the right setting at the right time
while also strengthening systems and communities that surround them. Here you can see a snapshot of our current case loads in Klay County and the relevance to our community. Here, our teams manage uh approximately 9,361
cases uh across three medical assistance areas. Uh the broader county impact is even larger. So right now approximately 16,000 individuals uh in Klay County are on some type of a healthcare program with us. So that's nearly one in four
residents, about 23.7%. So very relevant here with our community and has a big impact in Klay County. Next, I'd like to talk about how Klay County compares to some peer counties. Specifically today, I'll be including uh
Klay County, Ottertale County, Crowing County, and Candy, Ohio County. uh we found that they are really fair and accurate comparables to Klay County in uh case load sizes and and relevance. So what you'll see here is that our total
case load sizes specifically for the Mets programs um are the highest amongst our peers. And what also stands out however is that our individual case loads per worker are extremely high. Um,
so Clay is at 1,300 1,037, sorry, uh, cases per worker, while other counties are ranging, uh, in the 500s. So, you can see that Klay County is operating in a much leaner staffing model than others. And it helps really
just illustrate the pressure that our that our staff are under, right, especially tying in the system issues that Karen was highlighting in her presentation. Um, so these comparisons are really helpful to think about as we picture long-term sustainability for our staff
and our programs, uh, our service expectations that we like to continue offering and, uh, future staffing needs to maintain our level of timeliness and quality of work. So also same comparisons here in our long-term care or our over 65 population
which is where you'll see a lot of individuals that are in the uh facilities care facilities or needing very complex those cases are much more complex because they are on multiple programs at the same time. So they will be on you know cash SNAP and you know
healthc care benefits and others. Um so what you'll see here is Klay County may not have the highest overall number of long-term cases. We are um in the high among the highest in the comparison groups for cases per worker. Uh 356 is
incredibly high as a case load for a long-term care worker and they do very very strong work and we would like to maintain that that quality and the great service that our clients are getting from our staff. So, we really are
keeping a finger on the pulse with this demographic and making sure to keep in mind our staffing needs um to keep the workload sustainable. Another program I'd like to highlight today is our county burial assistance
program. So, this is one of the final safety net programs that we offer to families. When a resident passes away without resources or without another responsible source of payment, the county may provide assistance in paying for a cremation or a burial. Uh this
work is complex as it's tied to, you know, policy and procedure and state statute, but it's also deeply human. Uh we want our individuals to have that dignity, and we're dealing with families at a very, very difficult time.
And while it may not be one of our largest programs by volume, it carries a lot of sensitivity and a lot of importance, um it ensures that individuals are treated with dignity at the end of their life while also supporting, you know, these families during this time of loss. And at the
same time, as county burial assistance is directly paid by our taxpayers, um we have to be very very mindful of our fiscal responsibility here and the costs associated with these county burials. And so because of that, we work very
closely and frequently consistently reviewing state statutes um and adi, you know, getting advice from county attorney's office and just making sure that we are following state statute while also being as mindful as we
possibly can with the dollars that are being spent. And so because of that, it feels like we're constantly evaluating, tracking numbers, and just kind of seeing how we can make it the most efficient,
but also keep it human. >> Question from Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Quick, um, how many burials did Clay County have last year? >> Yeah, last year 2025, we had 56 burials. Uh, 2024, we had 59. So, it seems to be
kind of around that number. >> Thank you. >> So, glad that you brought that up because we do see, as you all know, Klay County is one of the fastest growing counties in population right in the state. And so, along with that, our 65
plus population is rapidly growing as well and is projected to continue growing. And so what this is going to mean for us specifically is more need for medical assistance programs and long-term care services um because of this demographic change.
So specifically the 75 and older and the 85 and older populations which is where you'll see more increased services needed um more admittance into care facilities and more just high support services will be needed. And then on top of that,
as time goes on, we are seeing more and more adults entering retirement with limited resources. People uh do not have assets like they used to. They do not have that financial means. Um 40% of individuals do not have enough in
retirement to sustain their current lifestyle. So that is very alarming and is a good number to show the need for these programs moving forward, right? And it's just going to continue growing. And so it's going to give us pressure in
the county burial aspect, but also on the medical assistance programs. Next, I'd like to share with you about an organization called MAFES. Uh MAFES is the Minnesota Association of Financial Assistant Supervisors. Uh we
have 120 members as a part of that association and actually as of yesterday 74 county agencies. We had Ramsay join us yesterday. Um so we are only missing five uh county agencies uh in our organization which we hope to gain their
membership soon. Um but what we do is every month we will meet with uh members from DCYF or DHS uh state staff and we will have many many conversations revolving around you know advocacy for our
programs and our clients and our counties or getting that first look into upcoming changes good discussion with state staff. It's just a great opportunity to be in the know of what's coming our way so we can prepare and
then it's also a fantastic space for networking and professional development for our members. >> Before we move to the next slide, uh Michaela was nominated as president of MAFT. So, it's it's great to see that uh Klay County is represented uh as really
seen as a leadership uh role uh across the state in financial services. So, I didn't know she was going to say it, so I'm going to say it for her. Congratulations. Thanks for putting your name out there. That's really an asset for Klay County. >> Thank you. It was it was an honor to be nominated and elected and I'm just so
thrilled to be in the position and drive the organization forward for all of us. >> Fantastic. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Want to go back to my question. >> Yes. about two eligibilities or >> a year
>> and from you now that just started in 26. >> Is that correct? >> Not yet. >> Oh, it's 27. >> Mhm. >> How do you expect that? Um to put pressure on what you're doing now and kind of initially as you plan for
that um where do you see it going? >> Yeah, absolutely. Could you go to the next slide? So, um, absolutely. HR1, we have two big things on the horizon. Um, HR1 changes, big beautiful bill changes, and then we also have a system
change coming that I will speak to as well, but HR1 first. So, that will be our expansion population that's impacted by that. They'll be impacted by both the six-month reviews now instead of an annual review. And they will have those work requirements or community engagement requirements. So that
population um for Klay County right now is approximately 2551 individuals. And rough calculations that we've been doing um for the renewal piece of it is we're looking that it's going to add around 40 45 hours per
month uh in doing those additional renewals. So definitely we're going to see a big workload increase there. >> And and along the way they're being every month they're checking in with their income verifications, are they not?
>> We have um periodic data matches that run in the background um with their social security number. So if they're if they apply, you know, start working at a job, then it will flag in our system and it will send out a they call it a discrepancy notice where the client will then need to resolve that with us or
then they could >> I see >> their case could close. So definitely it's not just, you know, once you're on you're right, >> you're good. There's that frequent checking. >> Yeah. So that's definitely >> two times a year help over one.
>> It would be an overall help to see the overall household composition and changes, right? So we'd be checking in more frequently on more than just income, you know, assets. Um did you get married? You know, did your
children move out? Are you no longer claiming someone as a tax dependent, which would change your household size and your income level or limit. So it it would definitely get us checking in on the households more frequently. >> Okay. Thank you for that. >> Absolutely.
>> So for the HR1 changes, we're looking for an increase in workload and administrative work. Absolutely. And timesensitive, right? Because renewals have to be processed by a certain date uh in the month. So some more pressure on our staff there. And then
additionally is the quest project. Now, the Quest project is something that uh some money was given from the federal government to the state of Minnesota specifically to fund a program for private health plans. So, not something
that the public does, but right now it's all in one system. And so, when there is an overlap of public and private, we do assist in that work sometimes. So, this Quest system or it's not the system name, the project will be creating a
system for only those private plans to migrate off of our MET system. Now, that's coming up here in June. So, we've been preparing for that. We've been going through our trainings for that because there is going to be an impact to our staff with this as well of course um because we will be seeing an increase
in tasks and applications coming in because if they are if whatever this system that Quest will deem you know if they determine that they may be eligible for public programs will be sent the application. So it will be an increase
there or if they have changes that would somehow interface with our individuals, we'll have an increase there. And what we've been told from the state is that those tasks that will be coming over from this new system must be worked immediately as soon as we can. So we're
we're already making changes in the way that we do our workflow to try to have a higher priority for those tasks. But unfortunately that means then that applications and renewals will have to kind of balance that, right? So those where we would maybe spending the time
focusing solely on the applications and renewals, well now we have another thing that we were told is top priority sneaking in. So we're making a couple changes with our workflow now to solidify before this new system rolls out. All right. Thank you for the
presentation. I feel like a lot of the questions and comments we had in the first part of the um presentation certainly applies to some of the issues and components you're working with as well. Additional questions from the board. >> Yes, Commissioner Campbell.
>> I pulled this one out because I'm going to keep this one. I when I talked to this board somewhere about our budget and what it means to seniors, um there's also another story here. And >> that's the affordability of people being
able to stay in their homes. >> Thank you. >> Absolutely. And the without medical assistance, there would be a lot more pressure on our first responders and our emergency personnel as well, which puts more pressure on our entire community, right? So, thank you.
>> Thank you, Quinn. Any closing comments? Uh really the only thing I'd like to say is when when you uh heard some of the data behind how we're measured and the performance that exists, you heard uh I don't know what your takeaways are. My takeaways are we ask our eligibility workers to do a lot with what they're
given. Their case loads are high. They've always been high. Um and yet they do a phenomenal job. I couldn't be more proud of our eligibility worker staff downstairs, nor with these two right here. Um, one of the things I took away from this is the leadership that we have in these two is phenomenal and they
really help guide really difficult and complex and sometimes bash my head against the wall silliness when it comes to the systems that they that they have to operate in. So, I couldn't be more proud of them as well. Thank you so much today. >> Thank you you guys.
>> Item six today, we will move into the request approval of the rate increases to the school nurse contracts. We have our public health director, Jessica Mickelson. Uh, Miss Beer is also here. >> Good morning, Madam Chair and commissioners. Uh, yes, we have two
agenda items uh for you today. We'll start with um our school nurse contract. So, uh this is a regular visit to this commission to get these contracts updated. So currently Klay County Public Health provides school nursing at two
school dress school districts. Uh we are out at DGF. Uh we have two full-time nurses there and then we're also at Yulan Hitterdoll two times a month. So uh this is just the regular review of getting these contracts updated. Um as
you can see we are proposing a 3% annual increase for each of the upcoming um school years. Miss Mickelson, I think it's important also to highlight the fact that the county is subsidizing some of the cost
to that. Um, going back to Commissioner Campbell's um, comments on on budgets and how it's affecting our residents, making sure that the school district didn't have the full shift of what the cost is. Correct. >> That is absolutely correct. So, um, the cost per hour for us to have these
nurses out at the schools is $66.75 an hour. What we are proposing in our 3% increase is to uh increase from the $50 per hour that we were at for this current school year and move that to
5150 for the 2627 school year. and then an additional 3% increase for the 2728 school year to so uh to increase that to 5305. >> Madam chair, I have a question. Not we're not even going to keep up with
cola on that. That's way too low. I believe I think I don't think the whole county should be subsidizing the school districts. I think we should be at the 6675 >> to address 3% on top of that every year. >> Do you want to talk about the negotiation with that? How
>> um well, if I I included in my presentation here the agenda item the historical rights. Um so just historically we have not been keeping up with the actual con cost to have the these staff and these nurses out there.
Uh we feel it's a vital community service that the county is providing. We would be willing to really work with any of the school districts and we have had more school districts contracted with Klay County Public Health previously. Uh but for one reason or another, those
school districts have chosen to uh go a different route. Essentially, primarily they've hired their own nursing staff. >> Um but we feel that it's a really important service. It keeps um the county really engaged and involved with these smaller school districts. Um and
it allows us to provide quite a bit of support. Um and we we don't really know what those nursing services would look like if there wasn't somewhat of a subsidy provided by the county to them. And and partially too, you know, it's
the historical rates. if we came in and said, "Okay, we're going to start charging you the 6675." I don't believe that either school district would renew the contract with us. But, uh, maybe to shed a little light to that too, and I really appreciate Commissioner Bear's comments,
it's similar to though how we deal with the, uh, school resource officers that are in um, you know, the sheriff's office has in those schools. I'm I'm fairly certain there is a a subsidy component to that as well because there
are off calendar days of school that there's still county responsibilities. Correct. I mean there's still county employees when school's not in session. >> Yes. >> That's the piece. But, you know, I think it's important as we
continue to discuss there are increases that we are seeing and what the contract rate historically is has not kept up with what the cost is. >> Yeah. And you can see historically we've not done an annual increase. And so
we're hoping by now kind of having this initial conversation with the school districts kind of preparing them um that they may be seeing a more frequent increase. And I mean we're certainly willing to have that discussion with the superintendent.
>> I certainly don't think Madam Chair that 3% is enough. >> Well, you are Well, I just want to say you're six months in. Um, I think it's certainly you're hearing the feedback and the comments. Uh, yeah, I appreciate
that there haven't been increases and you're proposing an increase trying to figure out where to be. Um, but I I think you've also heard from the board that there are concerns on how what what is the appropriate threshold.
>> Commissioner G. Yeah, I you know I again it's it's still a total cost that's going to go on to the taxpayers whether whe whether some of it's county and one of its school district. Um I you know it goes to what we'll even talk about later on some of these um other
public health fees that we charge. Um, you know, I I I think the overall percentage that the school district is paying to the total value, you know, what they're paying what, maybe 80%. I I haven't done the math, but I'm guessing
that's probably 80% >> that they're paying of that service. And we're subsidizing the 20. But part of that um portion that we're subsidizing is the public expects that from the public health department, not from the
school district. So there's that there's that component of it as well that you know um you know if we're if we're going to just say uh let the school districts do it on their own, why have a public health department? I mean essentially it would eliminate
the school nursing portion of our >> Yeah. I mean so so I you know I think you know and sometimes maybe some some of the things that a school nurse might find within a school district might be something that's caught early that's
preventing from getting worse throughout the entire community. >> Right. >> Yes. and provides a lot of oversight um and support to the nurses and we also have a medical director that we're
contracted with that we can reach out to. Um so it's it's a lot more than just the dayto-day supports that are provided within the school. Um there's kind of a community of support that these nurses provide in in those buildings.
>> And keep in mind whatever whatever a a school district has for an expense, it goes to all taxpayers within that school district boundary. Whether you have kids in school or you don't have kids in school, it's all
still the same. So, I I you know, I think, you know, we brought we were talking about this in pick and um you know, we weren't having these 3% every year, >> right, >> for probably 10 years.
And so at least it's pro, you know, by having this 3% we're probably keeping it close to always being at that maybe 8020 cost school district versus county. And I say 8020 because I I'm just throwing that number out, but it shouldn't change
a lot. >> Bar. >> I don't, Madam Chair, I don't think anybody's talking about not having this program in the schools. I'm just saying we need to bring that price closer to what reality is on what
it actually costs us and what we're subsidizing the school districts. Holly Holly School has a nurse in it. Barnesville, I'm pretty sure, has a nurse in it. Morehead has nurses in them. We're not subsidizing those school districts with their nursing system.
This we are. We're subsidizing Ulin Hitol and we're sub subsidizing DGF. And when you subsidize it, the whole county pays for it. Morehead residents are paying for DGF. Barnesville residents are paying for DGF. Holly residents are paying for DGF.
I just I would like to see it. 3% is not enough. >> I think those uh comments are certainly well um intended and they certainly make sense. the the challenging part is that as we're trying to figure out how to be the best partners um this you've had the
opportunity to discuss with the school districts I think we're asking for maybe more information on how if it is to that full number and then how does that affect what services are able to be provided I mean it it does go into um
we're seeing massive cuts to some of our school districts because of their ability to pay for pieces So I think it is a a definitely a delic delicate balance in in how we move forward. I think that with new leadership we are seeing the uh intent to address what
that full need is and I would like to also uh lean into how our agreements with our school resources resource officers work as well because Morehead is paying for Morehead school resource officers. Is it 100%? That's not to you,
but you know, a conversation that over the next budget cycle bringing in the sheriff to discuss that component. Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Yeah. Um like to hear a little uh background. So the three districts that are not part of this, what's the history
there? When did they pull out? Why did they pull out? Does anybody know? Um, so speaking to Holly, we did hire um a public health nurse as a school nurse and at I don't know what year it was,
but Holly did choose to hire that nurse um at the school. >> Um and prior to that, um the same thing happened in Barnesville. So this would have been in the last, you know, 101 15 years that that this would have happened. Um and Morehead has
always had their own nurses. We have never um hired nurses for Morehead. Um I don't know the history on that. >> Do we know the is there is there a reason why do you think
>> um I wasn't in a supervisor role at that time so I I am unsure um what the what the reason was for them to do that. We could certainly reach out and >> Well, I think it'd be important to our conversation.
>> I agree. I as we move into budget discussions, as the school districts move into budgets discussions, I know you weren't prepared to have the historical on all of it and giving you the opportunity to provide that information so that we can further d um
dissect it is important. Commissioner Camp. Madam Chair, one thing we need to keep in mind when we're doing these things is this the school district district set their budgets. >> They have a different calendar. They're on a they're on a fiscal year that I believe is July 1 >> and you know and we're on a calendar
year. So, uh we need to let them know >> because because they're they're about to set their budget for the 2027th year. Uh we don't have till December to make this to make this change because they it wouldn't fit in their budget then. So,
um, you know, I I this is a good conversation. I think maybe maybe, you know, part of the discussion that should be had with with these school districts that do contract with us is to, you know, and I think we talked about that in pick to let them know that we are
subsidizing them, you know, and and and then maybe we can find what would happen if if we were to go to the full rate. What would you do? I think, you know, I think those those that those are important conversations to have. Uh but in the meantime, I think
there's these school districts in particular want to know about signing a contract now. >> Yes. >> Right. >> Thank you. I I think we have enough information to act on what's before us today. I appreciate all of the feedback.
We do have to be um really cognizant and aware of the conversation about subsidizing others. The argument of of someone who lives and praise pays property tax but only takes a trans the bus system for instance could argue that they're subsidizing the payments in
their property taxes for a transportation system and roads that they don't utilize at all. So that's part of uh the conversation on what the benefit of the public health uh department is to the county as a whole, how we're able to help mitigate and identify some issues early on. Uh but
certainly all of the comments were welcomed today and I think we can make decisions moving forward. >> Madam Madam Chair were you guys um you know as I mentioned this was brought up to pick and the recommendation was to
go with these rates for 2027 2028 >> 2026 school year >> 26 2 Yeah 26 27 >> and 28. Um, so I would I would move the approved 3% rate that was or move a 3%
in rate increase for school years um as uh recommended by >> we have a motion offered that def um represents the memo provided to the board. >> I'll second >> and a second from Kim Kraban. Further
questions, comments? >> Just one further comment. Bear, >> that's not even meeting COLA for the next two years with the contracts we signed. I mean, it should be at least four or 5%. If we want to keep up with cola at least
point other discussion again, this is not a 100% this employee doesn't 100% of a calendar year work for the school districts. Correct. >> That is correct. Any other discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I.
>> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. >> I >> carried. Item seven is the request approval to increase the non-legated environmental health fees. We have Jessica with us again on this one. And then our public
um health uh Mr. Severson. >> Yes. Hi. All right. Thank you, Kent. Uh so before you uh is a proposal to increase the environmental health non-deligated fees imposed by um the
environmental health department. Um as you can see from the proposal before you, these fees have not been addressed in over 30 years. The last these have been pretty much set as is since the 1990s. Uh so we determined it was probably time to take a look at them.
So, um there is a graph before you with um each of the services, what the current fee is and what the proposed fee is. Um as we looked at these, we did a regional comparison um we were well before or well below our
region in all of the areas. Um but as we determined where we wanted the fees to be, we obviously wanted to ensure fairness uh throughout um the county and we didn't want to go well above or well
remain well below. So, um, we looked at the amount of work that goes into each of the services and kind of factored in kind of a an hourly rate and included mileage and that is how we determined most of the fees. Um, with some of those
that would have set us kind of above where the region is. And so then we did kind of a match with what um, Becker County um, charges um, as part of our community health board. So, um I can list them off. I don't know if you need
me to go through each line item of what they um what they are. Um let's just highlight the propos or the ones that are changing. >> Um okay. So, the ones that are changing would be um our septic contractor permits. So, our current fee is 150 and
we're proposing uh to increase that to $225 to match what Becker County is charging. Our homeowner Oh, sorry. Um, our homeowner insult inspection, we currently charge $300 and we're
proposing to increase that to $460. Uh, and that would just be to cover the cost of our labor and mileage. Um, compliance inspections, we're currently charging 150. We're proposing to
increase that to $225 to match Becker County. Uh, water testing sample collection. This is a service that we're not currently providing, but we would like to start doing it. Uh the current market rate that other entities are charging is $175. And so we're just
proposing to match what they're charging. We didn't want to go over or under. We didn't want to get flooded with all of those referrals, but it's a service that we're capable of providing. And so we thought it would make sense for us to to offer that to the community. uh regarding uh demolitions.
Um so for small residential demolitions, so this would be like a shed uh maybe a one stall garage type size. Um we're currently charging $50 for all of our demolition fees. Uh for small demolitions, we'd like to keep that at
$50. Uh for a large residential demolition, so for example, a house, um we're currently charging $50. we'd like to increase that to hundred. Uh and then for a commercial demolition, that fee is currently set at $50 and we'd like to
increase that to $310. And again, we factored in the average number of hours staff spend doing um that service and then added a little for mileage as well. >> Questions from the board? Commissioner Campbell? >> Thank you.
Uh on the on these fees, are are we talking mostly uh residential and areas that are fall outside of our incorporated cities? >> For the uh septic fees, yes, for
demolition, obviously that is across the board, rural and urban. >> So So those demolition fees, for example, Morehead has depends on you to be involved with that. >> Yes. Okay. So they go through you and not they don't have their own internal
agency that does that. >> No, typically uh I will do the inspection and asbestous analysis. Uh a lot of the commercial uh projects will require them to um have a consultant do the asbestous analysis and then I'll
analyze that and uh oversee the abatement, make sure that's done. Um I'm not sure. Am I answering your >> Yeah, I think so. Yeah. And then and then um I just want to point out the water testing. I think that's great. I as we're working on this uh regional
water project right now and we have a report on that in our committee reports. But um there's an awful lot of people who are being more and more interested now in having their water tested when they're learning about the arsenic and all those other things that are there.
So when you do that, are you going to have the ability to do the complete testing within your within or do you have will you receive the samples and send them out and then get the information back? >> Yeah, that's a great question, Commissioner Campbell. Um what that
water testing fee entails is what we're seeing with lenders on real estate transactions is there's a uh a very large uptick in requiring a third party to sample the water for real estate transactions. Um, back in the day when
we did have our county water lab, that was something that we did regularly as part of our septic inspections was if we were going to be on the property for a septic inspection, we'd collect the water samples and we'd actually analyze the water ourselves in our own lab. Uh, currently, as you know, we don't have
our lab, but we have a a an agreement with R&B Laboratories in Detroit Lakes where residents can come in and get sample kits from us and then bring them back and there's a courier service that will bring them. So what our plan would be is when someone is interested in us
collecting these samples for them, we will bring them back to our own building here and then that will be taken care of by the courier service for bringing them to the lab. >> And so the proposed fee that you're establishing will cover all of those costs. >> Yes. Uh I should back up, not the costs
for R&B. They they would still be paying for the testing through R&B. we would be taking care of collecting the sample and that's and the sample getting to um the lab by the courier and then they would still be responsible for the testing.
>> Okay. >> Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Yeah, just uh follow up on that. Um so for all the um I guess for all the tests I did I always did them but I understand third party because I know uh
for sure there was always suspicion of well the water was coming out of you know so I think you're doing that's good that you're doing that as safeguard. So, in the past, there had never uh been a charge to go out and and grab
the water to get it to deal. >> In the past, we had an $8 pickup fee. >> Okay. >> And and I should add to this, this is not intended to be a regular practice that we're performing. this the thought
with this fee is the demand maybe demand isn't the right word but the uh the uh the need from lenders needing a third party to be sampling and what we did with that fee was to look
and see what other uh private sector um places are charging for that because we didn't want to be well below and then get flooded with additional things that we're doing with that. Well, the one reason I did the collection, number one, I trust myself that I do it correctly.
Number two, timeliness. And, you know, that there's that risk. You know, when things are happening, you got to be moving on a pretty quick pace. You know, does 30 third party meet that obligation? Yes. You know what I mean?
>> Yep. When you're dealing with a 30hour uh >> Yeah. >> old time for the bacteria. Yeah. >> Samples. Yes. It gets interesting to time when you're taking that sample and when to get it. Yes. >> Right. Okay. And then on the other one, I just want to ask I as I view these
increases uh with my experience, I I think they're um in line. I I guess I want to Yeah, I know you gave it great thought, but there was certainly a great amount of work to these some of these systems. And I knew and I know even your
new designs maybe even a little more at times with soil types. So very good. >> Appreciate that. >> Commissioner Abinger. >> Yeah. Uh Commissioner Bear and I serve on the the uh partnership for health. We
reviewed the delegated environmental issues for increases last Friday. >> Yep. >> Yep. And it passed uh from the partnership. Uh I think staff has done a good job of looking what's reasonable. One of the considerations on the
delegated issues were inspections of restaurants. Uh and staff took into effect what Fargo is charging and a competitive market. We wanted to make sure that we stayed competitive. A lot of thoughts been put into this. So I
that being said, I'd like to approve the proposed increases to the non-legated environmental health issues and that would be effective June 1st. >> Motion offered from Commissioner Evinger to approve as presented in the packet, a second from Commissioner Kavanagh. Any
further discussion? >> Just just one question, Madam Chair. >> Home homeowner install inspection. Is that me personally putting in the tank or hiring a third party to put in a tank? That would be a homeowner personally. So, what we see with those
by code, by the state code and our county ordinance, if we have a septic system that needs to be installed and it's a pressurized system, anything at the surface or a mound system, a homeowner is not able to install those. Uh, if it's a gravity system or a
holding tank, a homeowner is able to install those with a uh design from a licensed designer. What we wanted to do there is we are seeing such an uptick in shops that are going up that have a bathroom and so forth. Um we've kind of
drawn a line in the sand where uh due to th those numbers being increasing the way that they are um if it was if it's planned on the building permit for only a bathroom, we will allow for a holding tank being that if we put in a full system and it's not getting enough use,
those are going to freeze up during the winter. So, we're trying to recognize what's happening here and adjust with what's happening in the market with these shops. Um, if it's if there's living space involved, then we're looking at a two-bedroom minimum size,
but we did not want the uh holding tank charge for a homeowner to uh follow the other homeowner install charge. Um, try again trying to uh remain fair and uh so Any other questions? All those in favor
of the motion signify by saying I >> I >> opposed. Same sign. Carried. Thank you both. >> Madam chair. >> Good. Madam chair or >> Steve? >> Uh just want to thank Jessica and uh transitioning into her role. Uh there's been many different things that we've
asked her to look at uh as a commission. Uh I know that uh balancing balancing fees is something that this board takes very seriously in in one providing uh the context of of paying for the services in some cases provided versus the impact it has on the citizens. Uh
but we do want to thank you for for bringing these forward. >> You thank you both. The next item eight is the request approval to authorize the relocation of the social services healthcare financial team to suite 200
of the family service center and discuss the corresponding fitup charge. >> Okay. Good morning, Madam Chair, board members. Yes. Uh today we're talking about suite 200 up there on the second floor family service center. Um just to do a little recap on the history of this
past year uh we had a current plan to um move some of public health's employees into there and I think um um between um Jessica Mickelson and Quinn had gotten together and did some internal um moves that would uh free up some of that space
for public health. And so sweet 200 did become vacant. And um what we did is we got together between Quinn and Jessica and I and started discussing what really is um would be an appropriate use and and some future planning for for their
departments and their space needs. So I think um what we're proposing is to move a division of um Quinn's financial team up there and he'll he'll go explain that a little bit more. But I um if you were to ask us now uh his financial team's
not completely out of space. they everybody has a space. It is full. Um but this would be a demand that would pop up within the next year or two. Uh anyway, so we're proposing to move them up there and this would be um eligible for some reimbursement costs from the
state. Um and that would also include the fitup cost as well. So um I can let Quinn kind of explain that a little bit more. And >> well, Joe did a good job with the history there. Um again, just to be crystal clear, we don't absolutely have to do this today. Um however, this would
be a huge space needs uh fix for I would say all of social services. Um this board was very gracious in allowing us to take over the public health uh defender space uh last year which kind of solved our fifth and fourth floor problems. This plan would solve our first floor first floor pro problems as
well. Um, if you remember Michaela's PowerPoint from earlier when she showed the graph of people, we would be moving the Mets healthcare team from downstairs up to second floor. Um, what's what's nice about this, as Joe said, is we would this is eligible for
uh FFP from the federal government. So, we would would receive 50% reimbursement for not only the building rent, but for the fit up costs as well. Um, it is important to note that because the health care team is, I'm gonna say, the right fit, we looked at a lot of different options as to who should move
and and what combination of staff would move if needed to cause as little disruption as possible that it ended up being the healthcare side of things. Um, if it was the uh SNAP and cash team, we would be looking at only 25% FFP based on the big beautiful bill. So, it is fortunate that it's the 50% because it's
the healthcare side of it. Um to clarify the reimbursement as well, kind of how the federal financial participation works is it's not like we submit an invoice and then get 50% of the invoice back. What ends up happening is those expenses are reported as a part of our overall operational cost and then we get
a proportion of that back. So this is a very large revenue line in our budget, but it's never broken out by 50% for this staff or 50% for this invoice. It's just all thrown into what's called the cost pool. That makes sense. Okay, questions from the board.
>> Commissioner Bear, >> one comment, Madam Chair. This went through the building committee and it was approved. >> Additional comments. >> Hearing none, I'll make a motion to authorize re relocation of the healthcare finance team to sweet 200 in the family service center. Second.
>> We have a motion offered from Commissioner Bayer, a second from Commissioner Ebinger. What's that? >> Okay. Additional discussion. Further discussion. >> All those >> that motion also has uh the associated fitup costs and project.
>> Okay. Does that reflect the second? Okay. >> All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I >> I >> oppose. Same sign carried. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Item nine today. Thanks, Quinn. Item nine today is a request approval to pro
uh seed with the power plant roof replacement project. Joe. >> Yes. >> I assume this went to building committee as well. >> Yep. We brought this to building committee and and um it's it's the original roof from 1972. Uh just to give props to my maintenance staff that we've
been patching this for 20 years. It's been uh uh it's been a it's Yeah, it's outlived its life. So, what we did is we got three different quotes and um we're proposing to move ahead with a replacement um this summer and um so and
this is actually on our capital plan as well. and we're going to be using fund 19 which has uh sufficient funds in there to do that. And so um I'm asking to move forward with the low quote of ANR roofing at 88,860. >> Thank you for the presentation. I also
want to say that the work of your staff has allowed us to push this to a point and where we didn't incur that enormous cost at the at a time in which we're doing some other significant input into cost of buildings. >> Uh they do a great job of saving us money and figuring it out. So I know
once it comes to us that it's likely you've reached the point of no return. Maybe fair to say. >> You're right, Madam Chair. >> Questions from the board. >> Just one comment again. >> Commissioner Bear. >> This this went through the building committee with approval.
>> And with that, I'll make a motion to proceed with a power plant roof replacement project by accepting the low code from ANR roofing in the total amount to $88,860. >> Okay. We have a motion offered to replace and proceed the project and also
to approve the uh bid from ANR roofing in the amount of 88860. A second offered from Commissioner Evinger. Additional discussion. Additional discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify
by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. Carried. Thank you. We are >> Thanks, Joe. We are a little behind but I am going to go ahead and call for a 5m minute break briefly. Thank you. TV's on.
Okay, we are back to address item 11 on the board agenda today is the Klay County Board of Commissioners consideration of a draft ordinance language for the 2026 deer hunting season. >> Good morning. >> Can I clarify something?
>> Yes. Um, obviously it came up during the public hearing of when the board can readress something. Is that why it's titled the 2026 instead of leaving the date off of it? uh during
our during our April 7th meeting of the public hearing uh after at the end of that meeting, this board uh requested to have an ongoing discussion based on the information that was provided both in written form and oral form uh to move uh move the decision or the discussion and
decision until April 21st and that's why that it's stated that way. >> Got it. >> All right. >> All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. As this board, as I just stated, this board had a public hearing on April 7th. Uh we
had the opportunity to have many of our citizens uh here to provide uh their insight. We appreciate their willingness to to take part in active government. Uh we highlighted the state statute changes uh the repeal of 97b.318
and and subsequently uh the new state statute 97b.031 031. Uh that made the state of Minnesota a rifle zone. Uh subdivision number seven provided each county board the opportunity uh the and
the authority to limit firearms and hunting. Uh this board had a work session this past year. Uh and at that that point requested that we get county input on this topic. And so again, subsequently we had the public hearing on the 7th. During that meeting uh we
talked about options for this commission to consider. uh we we uh listed here. We'll go into a little bit more detail uh on the future slides. Our commission had a discussion uh and we had uh citizen input that was provided. Uh again, the public hearing
was closed uh and uh and it was the decision to move any further discussion uh to to today to allow for additional time to reflect on the testimony and the both oral and written. Uh again, this is just a statute that we
talked about that allows this board uh to adopt an ordinance that that would adjust it just based on the rifle rifle statute portion uh in limiting uh the number of type of firearms that may be utilized. Again, the goal that this
board had is to meet the deadline of May 5th, uh to ensure that with the adoption of any ordinance, if there were to be one, uh that the DNR could be notified so it could go into the hunting booklets. Uh again, option number one that we discussed, again, as a reminder, was
just to take no action. Uh the statute that is in place that came in place January 1st of this year, uh stated that the entirety of Klay County would allow for the use of rifles. Uh and if that were the decision this board would uh take, there would be no ordinance required.
Uh ordinance two that we discussed very briefly was a shotgun only uh making the entire county shotgun uh only. Uh again, there wasn't a lot of traction uh that came with that discussion, but did want to include that uh in because it was part of the initial packet. Option
three, uh, one of the things that this board talked about during our work session and subsequent public hearing was to make sure that we had, uh, we had verification from the Minnesota DNR on any enforcement questions. Uh, we received a letter we received a letter
from the division of enforcement at DNR that stated that they would be uh, any ordinance that this county would provide that was different uh, than the state statute. Uh, they would enforce any ordinance. uh and encouraged us to put
that verbiage uh in in our ordinance if uh if that would be helpful. So the carveout areas that uh we initially spoke about here uh where where state highway nine would separate our county on the right side uh right
side or the east side of the county would be a rifle zone. uh and uh on the west side rifles would not be uh would not be a west side of count state highway 9 would not be allowed to be utilized in addition and this is what
the map of that would look like again the option three ordinance again we highlighted the yellow area uh talked about the enforcement piece from from the DNR uh that was included uh to
ensure ensure I guess an extra layer of asking for enforcement help from the Minnesota DNR. Uh option 3B kind of came uh as part of our discussion I think uh with the public hearing. Uh we had uh that Klay
County would essentially be split at state highway uh 32 and I 94 uh against which was in basically the same enforcement areas that we had uh in the 2025 uh 2025 deer hunting season. rifles could be utilized east of Highway
32 and south uh south south of state highway uh 34 to Barnesville and rifles would not be able to be utilized uh through the remaining part of the county. Uh and again this is the
map that we had at the public hearing uh and it highlighted where deer hunting rifle hunting was allowed last year. Yes. >> I think it's important to note too, you know, we presented this during the
hearing, but um this might get referenced today as part of the discussion. These are the the zones in which DNR has. Uh so the hunting zones 262 269 that 666 is that uh chronic wasting disease uh zone up in the
northeast corner. And then obviously you have the corner of of 239 uh in the southeast portion of Klay County. So just so folks are aware, if we reference those four numbers, that's what that means. Okay.
>> Uh and again, this this gives you the the comparison of of the two carveouts that were discussed at the public hearing just for for comparison. Uh and then I think in in talking uh with Mr. Melton after the public hearing
again as a board you have a decision these are these are the things that we spoke about in our work sessions and the public hearing. Uh but ultimately you could carve out a a completely different um enforcement area if those were your wishes.
Uh so again we are fortunate to have many citizens that came uh to to listen and also provide testimony. Uh we had a total of 59 uh comments received. 26 were in person during the public hearing. Uh we also allowed several
weeks for our citizens to provide online submissions if they weren't able to make it or were not big fans of public speaking. Uh and we received 33 of those uh online submissions. We cut that off right as the meeting started. Uh we had
of those of those 59 uh testimonies, we had 20 that requested a move to all rifle. We had 30 that said continue with what's in place during the 2025 uh season at at highway state highway 32. Uh we had six that said split it at at
state highway 9. And we had three that were indifferent. They provided facts, no opinions or um or just asked questions. Uh and again, as we touched on earlier, uh this board requested that a decision be delayed uh for you guys to
to uh review all the testimony submitted uh till today. Uh and so that brings us to to our discussion this morning. With that, I'd yield for any questions. >> Thank you. Any questions for Steve? >> Comments? Madam >> Sure.
>> Yes. So the the page that you showed the rifle where the hunting zones the the hunting zones don't change do they from according to the DNR. >> That is that's correct. The hunting zones are the same.
I think it's important to note too that the zones may not change, but uh as you look in past maps, there have been times in which 265 for instance north um uh north um of us had had two different uh
qualifications for what was allowed. And so making sure um they are able to accurately articulate that. Maybe 666 is a better 666 is a better example. So that one goes into Becker P
or Norman and Clay and at the Clay Norman line north of uh north of 200 uh rifles were allowed in that and then east. So I mean we are able to carve out but I think in terms of communication for residents how DNR produces the maps
just making sure that we're able to utilize that explanation as well as help. Mad Madam Chair, I do have another to to Commissioner Campbell's question. I do have another slide here that uh that we created we received kind of an overlay from uh the Minnesota DNR website. Uh it one kind of expands not
the full full zones, but it talks about it shows all of Klay County and then our our neighbors uh neighbors to the north, east, and south. Uh it also the orange area the orange the orange lines are the break the
breakouts of each of the deer uh different deer sections for hunting. Uh the black of course are the counties. Uh and then it is broken down you see in in dots versus diagonal. I know it's kind of hard to see in this map. Uh but also kind of shows uh what our neighbors what
our neighbor what decision our our neighbors have made uh in uh in the counties around us. So the solid orange lines are the zone boundaries. >> That's correct. >> So that if you look at above Ottertale in the the bottom right corner, 239,
that goes up just east of follows the interstate and then goes east of Barnesville there and then up 32 to where that 241 line is. So it's important to see that. >> Ryan, I do have a handout if it's help more helpful for the board to see it.
>> Yes, Commissioner Campbell has a question. So, so on this map right here, I we see the um zones 666, but you said that orange line. So, what's what's in that yellow below that
orange line? What zone is that? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. And do we know um we so everything um east of the county line on Becker side is rifle. Is that correct? >> Correct.
>> That is correct. >> And how about Norman County? >> Norman County is also rifle >> in that area. So that area of 666 that goes in Norman County is all rifle. >> That's correct.
>> I'm sorry. And that was the cutout on the northernmost uh boundary uh for the entire state really. It's basically the Clay Norman line which was the shotgun zone to 32. Then once it cuts over at 34 to Barnesville, it basically headed uh
the interstate uh all the way down to Alex and then there was some cutouts >> and then back in >> Thank you, Madam Chair. in ' 07 and 08 262 and 666 were also rifle for those two years
just so everybody's aware of that. >> Okay, >> additional questions, discussion. I mean, what what I would like to see, Madam Chair, is to carve out the whole 666 into rifle, give it a year, and see
how it goes and take input from our sheriff after next hunting season because to have three different counties provide in the same hunting zone, it' make it a lot more simpler if the whole zone would be rifle, especially if
we're moving it from 32 to number nine on that map. So that's I would I would like to see that at least go into into rifle if not the whole county. >> Commissioner Krabanoft >> I mean just doing discussion of all
views. >> I think that's fair. We did not have discussion after the public hearing. This board has not had an opportunity to provide discussion. >> Okay. for discussion here. I guess um um I'm very strongly in favor of leaving
the line at 32. Um we heard overwhelming testimony in people uh um in that Felton area. Um
I've had count countless phone calls um that nine is just too far west. We had testimony about the state land that's through the area please from people um
you know stories people around the Felton area and um that were opposed to it. I think our numbers show that keeping it abs is in other words which is number 3B
option 3B is what the public has told us um they want uh I want to say from my point of view as a person who's hunted probably 50 seasons
hunted in other counties other states Um, I'm just This is about Some are saying it's not safety, but I believe it is safety.
Um, I've heard bullets over my head. I've I've grown up hunting with a a bolt action, so one shot. Of course, I have a magazine in there. I can shoot more. So, that's uh what I have. But I have a lot
of friends that shoot automatics, semi-automatics. And I see a lot of I don't know if I call it beginner, but people that don't aim very well with automatics.
>> They Nobody's using a madam chair. Nobody's using an automatic. >> Semi-automatic. There you go. >> Excuse me. >> Thank you. He did say semi-automatic in the first part of his >> Yeah. Sorry about that. And when uh I just think there's a safety element
there. I know what some of the testimony was, but when you start taking long range rifles and blurting off five bullets because the thing's out 200 and some yards and you're just giving hail Marys. I just don't think it's safe. My
last point will be it's about this area has been established long enough to give com people a comfort of kind of what's around them, how it's around them. And uh I I just think there will be a lot
lot more comfort in knowing that there aren't new changes going on that may affect their comfort and safety while they hunt in these areas. That's what I have.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Kavanagh. Additional comments, >> Commissioner Campbell. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I I mentioned after the hearing that I a part of my decision was going to be uh
significantly important regarding safety. Um, last week our county board had a small cities meeting in Barnesville and I took I I 94
uh on my way there um from from here to Barnesville and unlike any time before, I paid attention to tree lines where potential hunting could be happening along that area. And this I'm
talking about mostly talking about 269 >> and the number of eligible areas for rifle hunting in that area and tree lines even close to the interstate. We do, you know, we talk about safety in terms of of, you know, we heard an awful
lot from people who concerned about their homes and stray bullets maybe in their homes. And I started thinking, what about a stray bullet just on traffic that could be flowing on I94? Uh
now I again I know there's the personal responsibility thing that's there but people do miss and when you miss that bullet still goes somewhere. Um and the further it goes the more unsafe it is as far as I'm concerned.
But um I I just wanted to point that out. Um, I I you know, it seems to me I heard more I certainly heard more testimony about keeping it the same, especially in
that southern area. I I don't remember, and maybe Commissioner Kramers remember, but I I do know there was some concern up in that Felton area, too. But, um, I do not support going rifle uh within the entire county. I I just I can't support
that. Um, and I just want to point out that until the state made this change in my time as commissioner, I had never had one call suggesting to me that we
should change the boundaries of hunting. Not one in my entire time on this board until this issue came up. Um, so in a way I'm kind of if if it's not broke, why fix it?
you know, but again, I I'm I still want to hear from my fellow commissioners on their thoughts on it. >> Thank you, Commissioner Campbell, Commissioner Evinger. >> Yes. In the in the five years that I've been on on the commission.
I have never had the kind of feedback that I've gotten on this issue. Not just people showed up here, but emails, even a text asking me to call and talk to them. Four of the people I responded to live
east of of of nine and all of them were unanimous in telling me that they did not want to have rifles. Three of them were hunters. One is a farmer who or rancher is cattle who has
state land abudding his property that he incur he allows people into part of his property to hunt with shotguns. None of them wanted a rifle. I've had an opportunity in my career to build
well to repair the the current Morehead uh police range where we put the wall up and then I commanded a a police academy in Little Rock where we had three ranges and we built them. And I'm familiar with ballistics and I'm familiar with where
the rounds go. Um, I'm also aware that once we went to semi-automatic pistols, there was always there were always people that did the spray and prey approach to hitting the target where we'd have to talk to them about you're
responsible for where your rounds go. That's going to happen no matter how hard you try to have pe when people are out with a weapon that they can rapid fire and they want to hit a target. Um, what compels me to be supportive of
the 3B proposal is simply have talked to people that are living and farming out there. And even if you even if the ballistics and the the the data doesn't support it, their comfort on their own property needs to be taken into account.
And as Commissioner Campbell just put it, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. We've not had a big problem with uh hunters or or or bystanders being hit with with loose rounds. And
you know, let's give it a shot in 666 and see how it goes in a year. I don't know if it would make any difference or not, but the people that are living there would feel unheard and they would feel uh uncomfortable
when they hear the a rifle is posted with shotgun. And I think what's predominant in my decision making is the people that live and work out there, what they're telling me. And I think I think they need to be heard. So, I'm
going to be supportive of the 3B on this. Thank you, Commissioner Ebinger. Commissioner Bear, >> I'm one that lives and works in 666. Those are my constituents up there. I've heard two to one in that zone specifically that they want to go to
rifle being out and about in the community two to one that they want that zone at least to go to rifle. And we had 26 people if you figure the 20 that said all rifle and six if you lump them into the east side of nine. So there was 26 people
here that talked about wanting rifle. So it wasn't overwhelming support to stay shotgun. There was 30 30 people that said shotgun, 26 that said rifle. I would not say that's overwhelming support.
I'd say that's pretty close to 50/50. >> Additional questions, discussion. I mean we can always madam chair yes we can always look at this again after a year or two and see how it goes. >> So my understanding commissioner bearer is based on how it is advertised and my
question earlier is because this is a draft ordinance for the 2026 deer season it will have to be redised moving forward. Is that >> fair? >> That was my understand you would Yes.
>> Yes. And part of the discussion from citizens were uh how what would trigger the board to readress this? What does it look like going forward? Is it every three years? Is it every four years? Is it annually? I think because of the way
this has been drafted, it has to be next year. But >> but also I I would uh Madam Chair, the the statute itself required or discussed the idea of of an annual um review. So the statute stated if something new is put into place, meaning if if you left
it rifle, I don't know you would I don't think you'd have to review it every year. Correct. >> But if you >> nor do we need to act, >> right? You wouldn't even need to act. But if you're acting and making something, then the statute has a review in there. That's a annual review. So >> Okay. >> I I believe you have. >> Okay. Commissioner Campbell.
>> And And does that annual review require public hearing? >> I'm not sure. I didn't look at that exact thought it did, but I Right. I I think >> I believe it does, but I just I'm okay. >> And and again, might be advisable after one year to have a public hearing again
anyway, just to hear how it's gone. And I think that'd be advisable anyway. >> Thank you. One of the things this board talked about at our work session and discussion with the attorney's office and the sheriff's department was that we really wanted to hear from residents on how
this would affect them. That was something that counties weren't necessarily part of the dialogue at the capital when these hearings happened. No counties testified on any part of this and we wanted to hear from residents on how uh one what their situation and
perspective is but how this would affect them. Um I have u hunted in all of these zones so I'm very familiar with all of the different topography and concerns of residents. I did hear
uh fairly significant lines in different uh perspectives on where people um felt like uh a change would be most appropriate. And I think it is uh our um job I I certainly feel like it's my job
any decision I make must be in alignment with what our chief public safety officer's recommendation is. there are significant uh concerns for safety that have been um raised from the sheriff's department. So I want the action of this board to uh take into account that
perspective as well. It was clear that um yes there was comments six specifically on the Highway 9 split. I also had comments that uh because people weren't aware of what the Highway 9 split was had uh personal comments to me
that were different. it is um fairly even with what residents are wanting and I uh will say I didn't hear overwhelming support for 262 to be rifle or 269 to be rifle. If you look at the comments uh
the public hearing sign in we were afforded um to see where uh folks live. we um the responses that people reached out to me um they it's pretty clear that if there was perspective on all rifle
the majority of those folks came from north of Highway 10 uh and on the eastern side of the county. I think that a there was maybe concerns from some of those comments that the county board would talk about making 32 and east all
shotgun. I did not hear that from or all rifle or no all shotgun. I didn't hear that from anyone. So I think there are different ways to interpret what the inperson testimony was with the online testimony. Uh and based on the averages,
I my my stance of the where I would support it uh certainly would allow um east of nine in the 239 zone to continue to be uh rifle uh 269 and 262 certainly
to be uh shotgun only. Um, and then I, you know, I could probably, uh, because there is a, a, a 2026 date on this, review what 666 looks like, but I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I don't want to minimize that. Uh, even though there
were comments for rifle, there were also residents that uh, were active hunters that also did not want rifle in that zone, too. So, I think um, approaching this from a staggered position is is taking into all of the voices and saying, "Listen, we heard you. We were
glad to provide the opportunity. Here's where the majority of the comments lied. Um certainly this discussion uh or action is not going to make everybody happy, but what I am really proud of is that we allowed residents the time and
space to provide their perspectives. And then certainly it is the onus on us to take into account the variety of uh viewpoints and uh perspectives and figure out what makes the most sense for Klay County. Additional comments.
>> Madame Chair, >> Commissioner Bear, >> I'll make a motion to have zone 666 to go all rifle and 239 to stay rifle and zone 262 and 269 to go shotgun.
>> So, for clarification, my understanding is uh 666 has been 266 in the past as well. So, I just want to make sure because of the CWD, we're want to make sure everyone understands what that 666 would would be. >> Highway highway 9 down to Highway 10 on
the norththeast corner of the county. >> And then the cutout for 239. >> And the cutout for 239. >> We have a motion to that effect. >> I I will second it for sake of conversation. >> We have a second from Commissioner Campbell.
And again, you know, when we I think of it from the standpoint of the number of uh conversations I've had with people similar to what Commissioner Ebinger was talking about, certainly south of Highway 10, there there was a I
think a strong strong sentiment towards uh needing to keep that shotgun, you know, other other 10 uh east of 32. >> Mhm. >> You know, I I think it I think the people even south of Highway 10 in that
area east of 32 were I didn't hear anybody saying, "Well, you should just eliminate rifle there." Um, you know, I I could support this motion just from the standpoint that uh, you know, as if we're including in there or
if we're under the understanding that this requires a one-year review. Let's let's, you know, we could see what happens there. Um because if anything, the majority of the people who did prefer, and this goes to
what Commissioner Bearer did say, is I think the people who wanted all rifle, most of them were from that 666 area. Madame Chair, >> Bear, >> I'd like to amend my motion to have it
expire January 1st. >> Can we do that? So then we have to deal with it. >> Well, well, we have to no matter what. I think the statute requires it. I think you have to withdraw that amendment. >> I don't even know if you have to do that. >> The amendment is withdrawn. >> Yeah. Okay. I wouldn't support that
either because if if if it just goes away, then we go then it goes back to the state, which would be all rightful. >> So I don't >> Yeah, I wouldn't support that as my motion. >> Additional discussion. >> I mean, we So what
>> Commissioner Bear? 666 was rifle in 2007 and 2008. So that area has used rifles in the past. So it's not something that's going to be brand new for that zone. Just to clarify that.
>> Thank you. Any additional questions? >> Commission. I'll add um I'll be honest, as much as I don't like it knowing it's one year, maybe I can live with that. Um and hearing just what
you said, if there's been two years there already. Um, I hope that would when we have a next public hearing hear a better voice for or not to that specific area even
though I still bothered by it, but I I agree with it for one year. >> Commissioner Campbell. And I I do I do like the idea that we're um making this decision also incorporating
current zones that are established by the DNR. >> I agree. >> DNR. >> Yeah. >> You know, so we're not we're not trying to split one zone. Um >> Yeah. >> You know, so I think I think it's it's worth a try. Um,
is it any less safe in in 666 than the others? I don't know. Um, Commissioner Bear will find that out, I guess. >> Y, >> Commissioner Abinger, >> in uh in light of the fact that
generally if everybody leaves a little bit unhappy, it's good legislation. Um, I'm willing to look at that, but the people that I've spoken to who have concerns about this, I want them to know it's just going to be one year.
And you certainly hope that we don't find out that it's a problem the hard way. But if this is something that impacts on their quality of life and impacts on
their concerns for the safety of themselves and their family and their their their their homes, uh we will look at this in a year and we will have the public coming in and we will listen. We've listened this time. I'm going to yield to the fact that it's
Commissioner Bear's district and he's is we know he's well in touch with the people there and I take him at his word. But if there are problems, they'll be addressed in a year. We'll see how this works. >> Yeah. >> So, I'll join the consensus on that.
>> You know, I I think it's important that we look at where the feedback is coming from. There were uh questions in regards to the Felton area. My my hope is that we are addressing what those concerns are. Hopeful that uh some sort of
compromise um pro makes the most sense to uh move forward. This isn't something that is going to be uh thrilling to every party involved. But what I'm hopeful is that our community hears that
this board really wanted to take into account all of the different perspectives and um weigh what that is. I don't think uh sweeping uh decisions from St. Paul uh always u make local
folks happy either and this is the product of a lot of conversation with a lot of people. Any other comments? >> I I think Madam Chair, maybe I I'll make a comment too and just uh you know, with
the Steve and I or the help of staff, you know, we're we're putting together proposed uh wording uh within an ordinance just based on um uh the the work uh workg group side of things, the public
comment, uh just some of those discussions. And so I think as Steve stated um uh earlier, this is exactly what the board can do. The board can make their ordinance and and so I expect or I I think everybody knows what they're voting on, but the wording
itself is not currently captured in any written document. Correct. So we would you can adopt that and vote that today. we'll work on and make a document that that def defines those lines, you know, so that I think it's all explained and understood, but we'll just need to do
that at a later >> to update the resolution language. >> Correct. And if I'll go to Commissioner Campbell in a moment, but I think what is uh the most important out of that is we were able to capture and then articulate the concerns from residents
and and it um it we heard from folks at the public hearing differently than we thought we might hear from folks. And so making sure today that we're addressing that as as noted, adding the zones as they were uh during the hunting season last year is helpful
to identifying what the ordinance language would be. Correct. Commissioner Campbell, did you have a >> Yeah, I just wanted to point out u going to Attorney Milton's um comments, I think the the area that we don't have the language in is pertains to um
section 11 1.1. That would have to be that would have to be redefined according to the motion, right? Is that what we're talking about? I think if you looked um three, option 3B had language in it that
was capturing the the uh highway 32. Uh, and that language is actually what came from originally the the statute from before and and define that down and but now we'll be able to to change
language to capture using nine down to highway 10 down to 32. I mean, we can change that language. So, I think there's probably two paragraphs. I >> the 34 to 94 would be I mean that zigzag. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Correct. Yes, madam chair. Okay. And so
I I just was looking and I had it up on my computer and now it went black. But I think as as Steve outlined, I think it's that yellow one has some language in it. And then also that 1 would probably need some language
change. So we again we can work on that in wordsmith. Those are words that I mean once you vote and you're capturing what you've said here, I think everybody understands that. We just don't have a written out document yet for actual words. I just want to make sure that was clear to the board. >> And does that second the whereas after
the highlighted does that need to be as part of the factf finding components or can our discussion be >> right no none none of that I mean again all of this is words they're really ultimately your words they're
draft words that >> that Mr. Larsson and I worked on just to have capturing what's on there so they can they can be whatever they are. I just wanted to make sure you're aware that as you vote, you're not actually >> a lot of times in planning commission,
it's very easy to >> change that on the fly. That's really not here. We'll need to capture this after the fact in a written document that you can then again look at make sure that >> so clarification. Um we don't identify
the ordinance as part of the motion, the the ordinance number rather since it hasn't been captured. I feel like generally, not generally, all of us understand exactly what the motion and second and mapping means, but it does
need to be reviewed from our attorney. And I think that's part of the the point. >> Does that make sense? >> Yep. >> Does that make sense? >> And then and then the one point. The enforcement that's the same language no matter what we choose, right? So yeah,
>> that because that was also a topic of concern early on in our discussions is how is this enforced and and I so I think that what it that doesn't need to be changed. >> All right. Very good.
>> Further questions. Last call. Any other discussion on the motion before us? >> Madam Chair, I'm going to ask for a roll call vote. I >> thank you. I have already asked for one. Thank you, Sarah. Commissioner Krabanha, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bear, >> yes. >> Commissioner Mojo,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Campbell, >> yes. >> Commissioner Ebinger, >> I thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Huge gratitude to folks for participating in that process, especially uh our
administration and attorney's office and sheriff's department. It was really a triage with all of those entities to make sure that we had the most um um most pressing information. I appreciate it. >> Okay, that passed unanimously. Item 12
then would be the committee reports. Commissioner Ebinger. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Last week on Wednesday the 15th, I attended the Cass Clay Inter Agency Council on Homelessness meeting. Um
it's a quarterly meeting we have uh basically it was some exercises among the the entire group uh looking at mapping out and prioritizing some of the specific activities that are going to
take place once the commission is up um and functioning. Um, and we'll meet again in 3 months. They will have the results of that and we'll begin putting together a work plan. On Thursday the 16th,
uh I attended the West Central Regional Juvenile Center meeting in a general business uh reviewing um our data on uh the usage of the facility looking at uh
uh had a budget presentation. Uh discussed the licensing inspection which went very well for the for the uh center. Uh, Commissioner Campbell may have additional information. He chairs that group, and I'll leave him to get
into some of the specifics. Later that day, I attended the Spring Rural Cities and County meeting. Uh, had to leave early because I had another meeting back in town I had to get to, but I uh it was a good good
turnout. was good to uh see our staff presenting to the the leaders of of our rural uh city communities. As I said, I had to leave early. We had a Lake Agassy Regional Library Board
Executive Finance Committee meeting. Uh basically the the topic that we were covering was uh we had a the normal financial report but then we discussed the uh um signitories
what's build to the signitories every year. what formula we're going to use there. When there's been one for about 30 years there that's based on everything from property co property values to uh numbers of people who hold a library
card to numbers of books that are checked out. It was done way before we had the automated systems we have now where we can track a lot of those things closer. But the the discussion has has taken us to where we feel like it should
be based on operating costs. When we look at the operating costs of the signitories of the library, uh there is some disparity. Becker County, Klay County, Detroit Lakes are all paying in
in excess, not huge amount, but single digit to 10 or 12% more than their operating costs where some other signitories are much lower in looking at and they're usually the smaller
communities. been looking at what uh what we can do on that. Right now the discussion among this committee is we'll bring before the board some proposals again based on operating costs
and shifting to a new formula on a one to fouryear basis so the smaller signitories aren't hit with the entire increase all in one year and that is a work in progress but I think we made some good headway on it.
Uh, let's see. Friday the 17th, myself and Commissioner Bear attended the public health partner partnership for health meeting. Um, had our usual financial review and
grants review. I do want to just give a shout out to our staff. Brandon Nelson has done a very good job and Jessica is the new uh director over at public health. They've done a really good job of keeping us informed, bringing the data on these grants, what's going on,
what the transition has been since we've gone to two counties versus four. Just a good presentation on that. Uh we also had a legislative update from uh Jessica Mickelson um shack update and we uh got into the
environmental health issues and as discussed earlier today in the meeting we discussed the uh delegated programs we vote or agreements which was voted on and passed by the public health board and the pro proposed
um non-delegated activities we voted on today. See, uh Saturday the 18th, as part of the Lake Agassy Regional Library Board, uh I was at the ribbon cutting for the new Morehead Library. If you haven't been
there, you need to go look. That is an amazing facility. There's great opportunity for for small to fairly goodsiz meeting rooms there for people who want to have meetings and of the you know for the public. Uh just a real good
day. Uh it was just the the culmination of a good program. So that was something that we can look forward to as being part of the downtown Morehead uh rebirth. And that completes my reports.
Thank you, Commissioner Ebinger. Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Thank you, Madame Chair. Uh going back to the Wednesday the 15th, uh I had a historical and cultural society um finance committee. Um we've been doing
kind of a deep dive as a group on our revenue sources and main things that are talked about is um uh areas and effectiveness uh toward working toward um donations uh membership and
admissions. All three of those uh lay apart um es and flows um over the years. But how can we do something in uh in focusing on marketing in different ways to make those uh um
more sustainable and growing. So that was the main focus of that. The following day, well then later that day, I um drove to St. Paul where Thursday I was at the Capitol all day. Um along
with u um uh the diversion um Jason Benson with the diversion um some staff from Morehead, Lisa Bod um and also um mainly led by chamber policy um um Kale
with the chamber and then our lobbyist Haley was along with us who had set up some meetings. main things there with the DA was trying to advocate for a match uh they could have with the uh of some funds, federal funds that they
could get to try to have a match with the state uh to in the way of leveraging uh turning $32 million and hopefully with a match 64 help take care of some of their needs uh with us um on the PRTF
nonsecure um two two conversations uh furthered on that regard and Jenny uh Commissioner Mojo will give a little more on that I think as she was there two days prior to me coming and so a lot of good
groundwork has really been uh executed and coming to fruition. Um hopefully we have a bonding bill and hopefully we do well with it. So, we'll just it's a wait and see. But, um some of the things are moving forward that we didn't in our
favor that we didn't see even the week before. Um let's see. Oh, and that day while I was gone, just a heads up. Um so, part I'm I'm part of on the uh West Central Initiative Economic Development Board.
And while I was away that day and not making the meeting, they uh elected me chairman. lucky what you get >> and I I'd been to my v my chair but I had to laugh. So anyway, I look forward
to that opportunity to work with him. That's it. >> Thank you. Uh Commissioner Crowoft, you also attended the watershed. Did you highlight? >> Oh, I did, didn't I? Thank you. Um I think >> I can read. >> You have your notes? Okay. Thank you for that. >> Appreciate it.
>> Yep. Commissioner Campbell. >> Thank you. On Tuesday, April 14th, we had our personal issues committee meeting. We originally had 10 items on that one was removed. Eight of those uh move forward with most of them on
consent this morning, which we all acted on. Uh the there's um there was one item, a Clay County compensation system discussion. um that was delayed for um so we could get the full pick committee
there to discuss that. And then we um we asked for more information on today we approved the uh non-delegated environmental fees. We also have the MDH delegated environmental health fees that
we asked for more information on at PIC. So there was no recommendation on that and we've asked for more information regarding that and I understand that maybe you guys in in your public health meeting did act on that. >> Yeah.
>> But that's something that we'll have discussion on here I'm assuming coming forward. Um then I had um that same day then we did have a a teams meeting regard with our west region water group and that was
in preparation for the uh hearing that was to take place on the 17th which I'll comment on in a few minutes. Um then on the April 16th we had our West Central Regional Juvenile Center meeting. Uh we
went through our uh current um statistics for through 2026. Uh and then we also looked at our um 2025 actual numbers, budget numbers and our
2026 budget to date. And we got a report on a l the licensing inspection which uh you said is always interesting, but it's I think we it went well for us here. Um,
and in July we will be working on our 2027 budget. The that afternoon we had our rural cities and counties meeting. Um, you know, I think it's I think that's it's something that's always worthwhile
meeting with these with these groups. not only is it good for us to know uh what things they're working on um but in ways that maybe some of our policies might impact uh what they do.
>> Uh I think is important to um be able to have that understanding of what they want. Uh it also allows us to and our staff to um talk to them about important issues that it impacts them. I think
about Mark Sloan and he talked about you know something coming forward about census information and how uh those cities get letters but how the county can be there to assist. I think that was that was good. Um Jill gave some
important information about the new ways of assessing that are done. And so these things I think it's important for our our small community leaders to hear and understand some of those things that are going on that maybe they might not be privy to outside of uh having that that
meeting. So and I do want to um thank all of those uh community leaders for joining us in that in that discussion. Then Friday the 17th in the morning, we
uh Commissioner Bear and I met with our um West Central Regional Group again uh getting our final preparations for uh what was the um second public hearing with the district court in the
establishment of our West Central Regional Water District. And so we had that meeting. There was a full courtroom and an additional court courtroom that had some overflow. There was also a courtroom in Pulk County that had some
attendance. There was a lot of I mean the president I I I just want to give a hats off to >> the council and to um our A2N and engineer. Um they did Stephen Slick.
They did a they did a tremendous job in answering a lot of questions that the citizens had and uh they were well informed and I just thought it was great. Um we I guess we went in there
maybe not expecting an immediate decision from the judge. We were thinking that maybe it would take a couple weeks. uh that presentation was so good and I think the impact that the citizens themselves um showed uh through that public hearing
process that our project was ordered um that day and that I think that's a testament to the good work and the fine detail that over these years
have been that have allowed this to go forward. And it might not it certainly won't be in my lifetime, but there there's going to come a point in time when there's going to be a lot of rural citizens. We're going to be very thankful for
what's been done to date to prepare them to be able to have um clean drinking water uh throughout Klay County. And that's that's the goal. So that was an excellent day.
And I just want to make sure I do believe that's that's concludes my report. >> Thank you, Commissioner Campbell. Commissioner Bear. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. On Tuesday afternoon last week, we had a West Central Regional Water District planning meeting to discuss the plan for Friday.
Commissioner Campbell was also there. I don't know if he reported on that, but he was also there. We went through the the whole slideshow that Tuesday to make sure we were all ready for Friday. And then that evening I went up to Craigness Township and gave them an
update update on the water district and shotgun rifle zone which both have been already been determined. And then on Thursday morning I headed down to St. Paul to testify again in
front of the capital investments in for Senate file 4457. We were down there, testified on that in the afternoon. And then we also met with uh Senator Coopek and Representatives Joy and Gander as well as Senator
Johnson. So that went very well. That and then Friday morning I was up back up in Morehead for Partnership for Health where Commissioner Ebinger gave a great
update there. And just one thing on the delegated and non-legated agreements. So we agreed at this board today for the non-elegated agreements with public health. The delegated agreements are specifically for partnership the health to decide on. And
what we decided there on so that won't come to the full board. What we decided there on was to move our base our base fees up to MDH levels and then keep all our other fees to where we've had them. currently. So, those are not being raised. Our base fees are being raised,
but our current all the other fe fees underneath the base rates are staying the same. And then on that late morning, early afternoon, I was also at the West Central Regional Water District's public hearing. And yeah, I I couldn't say
there's great turnout there. And yeah, our our staff with AE2s and council did a tremendous job. I don't think the engineer Steven Slick missed one question. I think he answered every question that was asked of him and it we lasted about 3 hours in that public
hearing and then at the end of it yeah the judge signed off on the project. So it was a great great turnout and a great uh we exactly what we wanted to happen. So that is all my reports. Madam Chair, >> thank you Commissioner Bear.
I have two weeks of reporting. I apologize for missing last week. Thank you, Commissioner Kavanagh, for taking over as I was testifying at the same time as the board meeting. I Let's see. Going back two weeks, I attended the chamber leadership discussion strategy
as a region. I would like to schedule coming out of that before we get into our um budget cycle. I think in talking with Commissioner Ebinger and Deb White who serves on the Greater Fargo Morehead EDC with uh Commissioner Ebinger, I'd like to schedule a meeting between um
those of us that sit on the the chambered discussion and ED EDC discussion with the city of Morehead. I think we need to strategize how we are discussing uh resources and where we're allocating resources. So, do you want to reach out to Dan Molly and see if he
can't I think Deb White and um not sure who the economic de other one is. I don't it might be more but particularly as we talk about how Klay Countyy's um shifted some fundings between the chamber and the EDC wanting to make sure all of our Minnesota um entities are on
board there. The next day I attended a public pol or that day still uh attended the public policy discussion with the chambers chair Rich Slaggel. a really helpful discussion as we move forward. And then the Winthrop Weinstein strategy meeting um I'm just going to say in the
last two weeks the amount of meetings that we have got because of their uh work um is unbelievable. I would never have been able to be part of some of these uh dialogues without the leadership of Haley and Tom. Uh that day the April public policy discussion
really an update more on what is happening at the federal piece and how we continue to advocate for changes there. attended the non-secure detention working group. Huge thank uh thinking um of James and Quinn who attend those every single week and really are the data getters for us as we tell the story
at the cap. I traveled to St. Paul that day and had the opportunity to meet with Representative Allen Duran Hinselman Gilman Backer Murphy and Perryman. Those are all individual meetings in a time when it's a little crazy to meet with
folks. And out of that, I'm happy to report that we now have new co-authors in Representative Ber, Representative Burkel, Representative Gilman, and Representative Walgamott. That are those are bipartisan co-authors in um folks
representing all the way uh northern uh Minnesota to the metro to southern Minnesota. Great job to all of you for your help. and then had an opportunity to meet with representative uh Joy and Keeler and how we strategized that lift. That afternoon I attended the Niko
public policy lands discussion meeting. The next day I attended the big four meeting that's um is serving on AMC executive committee that's the association of townships the league of Minnesota cities and the schoolboard association. Uh we are really bolstering
our message. So many of us have the same concerns at the capital. Happy to be part of that dialogue. I attended the AMC executive committee meeting afterwards and then Monday attended the Barnesville City Council meeting. Good feedback from folks on what the item 11
was on our agenda today. Uh but the main reason I went there is many of you know Jerry Reap. Jerry's worked for the city for a long long time and now is retiring after 46 years with the city. Uh gratitude to her for all of her work. She has a retirement party. They'll make
sure and forward that to Steve to send out. After that, I attended the Buffalo Red River Wershed District meeting with Commissioner Kravangh. We had a great update from Riverkeepers on all of the work that they are doing. Great to see how they are utilizing resources, but
really sharing uh to do the school district day um work camps. That's great. and then talked about the receding the red and a uh one of the board members from the CW co-op came forward. A new uh concern has come
forward with the ability to license or uh ensure their fertilizer facility north of Wolverton. So we did uh request that they work with the wershed to come forward to the MCCJPA meeting this week um just to kind of talk about what if
there's new information how can we provide data to help it um to where they will get insured or what the proper mechanism of addressing their concern is. Uh Tuesday morning I traveled to St. hall again to provide testimony at the
capital investment side of the house uh committee on the maxis funding component that we talked about a few times today. We um was asked by representative Frederick who's the vice chair of the capital investment committee to provide insight. He's also been a big champion of our non-secured attention project.
Appreciate that opportunity. I did attend uh the pick committee. I did uh need to sign off. So um we'll have some continued dialogue. I appreciate this board supporting the issues that came before pick. I was asked to attend or um testify in front of the children, youth,
and families committee on uh the challenges that counties are facing in implementing the act. There are, I think, some some agreements. The bill that I testified on was in full alignment with what the Senate passed unanimously. Uh uh the discussion at the
House side did have some challenges, but really appreciate Representative Keeler for uh working with her caucus to try to see our our side of perspective and and try to implement some types of pieces to delay to align to have systems that uh
communicate to each other. That afternoon I had uh meetings with Senator Utki, Senator Rasmmanson, Senator Jazinski, Senator Lang, Senator Johnson, and Senator Coop on our project. Uh Senator Coop is working hard
to get um Senator Hoffman's signing of our facility. He's been such a champion for that work. And then the next day, I testified in front of the Senate Health and Human Services Finance Committee that specifically is on the U. Wickland
vehicle bill um omnimous bill in regards to the modernization SNAP and Medicaid components that they're addressing for us that that administratively we heard today on what administration is costing um some of these programs what they're costing us locally just making sure that we have the systems to be able to do the
work. I mean it's really kind of simple. Uh but then ear later in the day I did have the great opportunity I've never met with her in St. Paul to meet um with speaker Lisa Damouth and talk about our projects, talk about the needs. Also given the fact that we are seeing some
significant challenges in our business community was able to raise some of the realities that we are seeing in our business community locally. Um it is really concerning to see as many businesses as uh we're seeing closing um just in a matter of months. hopeful that
there can be some some um thoughtfulness that goes into that challenge at the capital. That afternoon I attended the NATO rural action committee meeting that really takes the um we're you know classified as a rural county. I'm grateful to have the representation at
the in Washington DC on that piece and then Friday was able to um nope then I also Thursday attended the rural cities meeting. One, huge gratitude to Barnesville for hosting that. Two, uh, thank you to all of the departments from
the county that were there. I think it's really important that we show up in our cities um to answer questions if cities have uh confusion or questions on implementation or collaboration and communication. Uh, we had Hitall and Glendon and Dworth and Holly and
Barnesville and Sabin represented. Um really hopeful that that uh folks still see the value in that. Uh there are so many issues that we have. Um things come up. Did I say some did I miss somebody? Um so many issues come up. We need to uh leverage shared resources and
collaborate together. Um thankful for um folks that uh continue to see value in that. Friday I attended the West Central Regional Water District re uh final hearing. I did provide testimony on that. Thank you to the both of you for all the work that you've done to get us
to this point. I know there's been lots of strategy and discussions uh and really uh answering questions is the most important piece. Uh thank you for that. Sunday I attended a press conference on the invitation of Senator Coop to discuss the need for uh bonding
and how kicking the can down the road continues to cost all of us substantial amounts money. Dworth Fire Department was there, the city of Dworth, the city of Detroit Lakes, the city of Morehead, and then Klay County. And then my uh last piece is uh more of
excitement last week as one. Thank you to um Commissioner Bear and Commissioner Kavanagh for also driving down to the cap. We are hearing um from representatives and senators. Whoa. Klay County is really invested in a lot of
these issues. Thank you for providing your testimony. we don't always hear um from folks. So, I know it's a challenge for you guys for all of us to get down there. Um thanks for making it important. But two, we uh had some outreach from Jenny Nash, who's the
committee administrator for the capital investment committee on some refined numbers on our project, and our uh lobbyists say that is a very great sign. So, we'll continue to uh uh beat down the doors to talk about how this is something um that comm counties are all
dealing with and it's a way to actually save us money um shockingly. So, uh thanks for all of you uh for all of your help um with the work we're doing. That concludes my reports. >> Uh thank you, Madam Chair. I two weeks I'll only touch on the things that
haven't been covered either today or last week. Um on the the 8th we had management uh meeting. We talked about the upcoming retreat on uh that'll be this Friday. Uh we talked about legislative priorities and the impacts that uh they're hearing on their own
departments. We had updates from IT and also human resources. Um on the nth met with Brandon Lunick and Dan Molly on some shared areas of interest. on the 16th uh had a premcca
meeting. Our meeting for that will be this week. Uh uh and that day, as Commissioner Mojo highlighted, worked on getting additional information uh to Miss Nash on our nonsecured detention. Uh uh the 16th participated in the in
the Spring County rural city meeting. Again, thanks for Barnesville for hosting. Again, we're looking for a host for uh for fall. So, uh, if anyone's interested in those communities, let us know. Uh, participated in non-secured detention meeting on the 17th and also
attended the West Central Regional Water District hearing. Uh, again, just want to reiterate the great work that uh that was done. Hardly any questions uh after uh after the presentation. Uh, and Mr. Slick and and uh and council did a great
job answering any additional questions. uh participated yesterday at the AMC legislative zoom. Heard updates from all of uh the different AMC staff members. Uh just a reminder, this week uh we have our Klay County Commission HA Commission
meeting this afternoon. Uh Earth Day press conference tomorrow at the resource recovery center at 10:00 a.m. Uh and again our intergovernmental retreat uh this Friday at 8:30. And that concludes my report. >> Thank you. And to clarify that press conference was advertised so all members
of this board can attend. Correct. >> Okay. Brian, do you have anything to add? >> Sarah, did you raise your hand? >> Yeah. Just one thing. I I know that Commissioner Bear uh talked about the um
about the delegated agreements u and that was done through the joint with Becker. Um, I just want to say that I have I have some concerns with with those numbers
and I I expressed them in pick um you know going to the MDH um Minnesota Department of Health's numbers they they established numbers and I don't know if they're always taking into consideration
border cities issues uh when we have 50 and 100% % They're small. They're they're small, but they're still impactful. I just read again last night that we have another restaurant closing in Morehead.
And I I guess I I at some point I I have I have to start asking, you know, we have to start asking what are what are we doing here? uh these fees. Now obviously they're they're they're important and a lot of times we want these fees to cover the cost
but in this particular instance what we're what we're also dealing it you know in the terms of restaurants when we have these inspection fees and all these other license fees that we do we do them on behalf of the public as
well to make sure that these businesses you know are compliant and are clean and safe. You ever wa if you ever watch the movie Bar Rescue and you see and you see some of the filthy pathetic things that go on
in restaurants. Well, we never want to get restaurants to be in that to that extent. And so, not all of what we should be charging should be the responsibility of the small business to pay because it's
for the benefit also of every citizen who goes into those establishments. I I'm just I'm concerned about about the fee increases and I just want to express that because we don't you know it's one of those things that we apparently don't talk about here at the board anymore. I
think we used to we used to at least talk about them and we don't anymore and I I find that troublesome. So, I just just want to raise that issue. And >> if I could just respond to that, Commissioner >> Commissioner Ebinger, >> the uh staff of public health made an
effort to find out what the costs were in Fargo and either match them go below them as far as restaurant inspection and the inspections. The uh the they they only did the the the uh
>> the base. They didn't get into the details of the small uh fees that we charge. The base is the only thing that was adjusted and that was to adjust it uh after many years and where we have been investing
uh taxpayers money out of the levy to pay for these instead of letting the people who are using these uh facilities, premises, whatever is being inspected uh carrying their own weight. So, I understand your concern on that
and I I indicated earlier that we are aware that we're border city and we've got to compete with people across the river. I think some of the issues we have are probably the family leave issues and the other things that we're dealing with. I don't think uh staff I
think staff came in aware of that and they don't want to add to the problems. >> there there's no >> I'll let you talk respond to that point and then Commissioner Bear did have his hand. There's no question that there's multitude of reasons why um you know
some of our small businesses are hurting and some of them and and and I I can only talk about in Morhead and Klay County when we see businesses closing there can be a multitude of reasons. Uh a lot of it can be you know what are the state stipulations and requirements and
that mandates that come down on businesses. What I'm talking about is what we can control to help reduce that burden so that these businesses can stay open. >> Okay. >> And that that's that's all I'm saying. So,
>> Commissioner Bear, >> with the bump in the base fees still does not cover the expense what we're putting into that employee to go around and check this. So, we're still under the cost of that employee and we are under North Fargo North. I mean, you
could just say Fargo. We're still cheaper than Fargo on those base fees. And we did not touch the smaller fees in there, right? >> We had we we did have a lot of dialogue there at that meeting on this. It wasn't just raise fees and just move on. There was a lot of dialogue and everybody was
understood that what we're doing here also dictates if someone does move to Fargo, if it is cheaper to on fees over there. So, it wasn't just raise fees and let's move on. There was a lot of dialogue at that meeting. >> I do appreciate that. That's um a
continued dialogue that we've con talked about when it comes to planning and zoning pieces. I know you've had that dialogue and even though the fees might be um comparable to what we're seeing uh across the river, there are so many other things that really um make that
that piece kind of a moot point in but I appreciate that we'll continue to work on it. Anything else? If not, we have our EDA discussion later, the press conference tomorrow, and then we are scheduled to meet next Tuesday. We are
adjourned. Part: 2
Good evening everyone. We have a quorum. I will call the meeting to order. Um before we begin, I would like to welcome our new member Jeff Winter.
And if we'll go around the circle and if you could tell us a little bit about yourself and we will all reciprocate. Well, my name is Jeff Winter. I was uh born in Klay County here. I grew up five miles northeast of town here. Uh
graduated Mort High in 1979 and then me and my wife bought a place on the Buffalo River like 10 miles northeast of here. Been there 40 years. I recently retired from American Crystal Sugar with 45 years of service there. Um
was on the uh Mullen Township Hall um board there for 18 years. Um just uh real interested in Klay County and the history and always been kind of passion of mine to stay involved with the
community and looking forward to it. >> Thank you. Welcome. >> Thank you, >> Kurt. just just a brief >> uh my name is uh Sebast McDougall Morhead City Council been lifelong Morehead resident as long
as I can remember Dave Stiken. Uh, live in Dworth, work at the post office in Fargo, was on the city planning. I'm on the city council now and, uh, about 30 years in Dworth.
>> Joe Hildebrandt. Um, I'm on the soil and water board, also Egglund Township resident, been here for 18 years. Laura Johnson representing uh the downer area and
Elton Township Clerk for the last 14 years. Keeping busy with that, otherwise retired. Jenny Mojo, I'm on the Klay County Commission. I've been uh serving in that capacity for 11 years. I represent uh
the southern half of Klay County. Uh really grateful for the opportunity for you to serve in this capacity. It's um certainly one of the most um varied but enjoyable committees I serve on. >> Joshua Shrader uh representing
Barnesville. I've lived there for 19 years now. I've been on the city planning and zoning for four or five years. Um just uh still in my first year on county planning and zoning. So, >> thank you. Uh moving on to business. Uh
hopefully everybody had a chance to peruse their packets. I received mine yesterday. So, I still didn't get the planning commission stuff from last month, but um if ever if everybody's had a chance to
go through them and read them and has no additions or corrections um or additions to the agenda, would look for a motion to approve the agenda as printed. >> Move for approval. >> Second. >> Motion by Sebastian, second by Kurt. All
those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. >> Minutes from March 17th. >> Same thing. Anybody have any additions or corrections? Seeing none, look for a motion to
approve the minutes as printed. So moved. Motion by Josh, seconded by Laura. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. >> Citizens to be heard. Is there anyone in
the audience or online that wishes to speak with something that is not on the agenda? Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak to something that is not on the agenda? Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak to something
that is not on the agenda or online? Thank you. Our first public hearing of the evening is R.J. Zavver and Suns request for a an interimm use permit. Applicant is requesting an interimm use permit for 38
acre gravel mine at 1100 290th Street South in Holly on parcel ID 24.03. 036.2500 the northwest quarter of the east half southwest quarter and the northwest
quarter of the southeast quarter section 36 township 138N range 44W Park Township. Look for a motion to open the public hearing. >> Second
>> by Laura, seconded by Kurt. All those in favor say I. I >> opposed. Motion is carried. Public hearing is open. Take it away, Matt. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, this is a request for an intermuse permit for mining. The applicant is R.J. Zaval and Suns and the owner of the property is
the um Bang RLT. So, this property is located in southeast the southeast corner of Klay County, just on the southeast edge of Park Township as well. Um it's a 280 acre parcel. It's about a half mile north of County State Highway 6. uh
right kind of at the close to the Becker line there. Uh the base zoning of this property is agricultural general. Then it does have some overlay zoning. So resource protection aggregate and then resource protection biological as well.
It does have a pretty extensive use history. Um so in 2009 there was a cup for a 35 acre mine and a temporary batch plant. Uh in 2012 there's a CUP for a underground uh high voltage electric transmission line uh that kind of runs
along the north end of the property. Uh in 2015 an interim use permit for a 39 acre gravel mine and a temporary asphalt badge plant. Then in 2021 a interim use permit for a temporary asphalt badge plant. And then also in 2021 an interim
use permit for a 25 acre pit expansion. and that was what expired um it or expires May 1st of of this year. So the request is just to open up a 38 acres um for mining and processing. Uh they would all these activities would
occur within the existing mining footprint. Um they're seeking at times from March to December, Monday through Saturday from 6 am to 8 pm. Um really looking to extract and process class material, hot mix asphalt aggregates, concrete aggregates, and rip wrap. Uh
there would be some washing that is on site. Uh it's not expected to exceed that 10,000galon per day limit. If they were to exceed that, that would require a DNR water appropriations permit. And so this orange area is kind of the
the where the remaining uh deposit is located. So this will be the main mining area. They have two sight accesses so they can do kind of a loop kind of ingress egress there. Uh they do have it phased out
into a stockpile area uh three mining phases and then a area for washing. And then the hall route would be um south and then either east or west on on CASA 6. There is one uh residence at the
corner. Um this resident also has a use permit for a um kennel like a dog dog kennels as well. Just some recent pictures of the the property. Um some considerations, dust control.
Um, I did think there's illegal dumping occurring on the site, but it's actually the owner, so it's not illegal. And they are going to clean that up. Um, consistent operating hours. You got to think about that. Um, from 7:00 a.m. to
7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. hauling only on Saturdays. That's kind of what you've put as conditions on every mining permit. We didn't receive any comments. I do want to touch base on their reclamation plan. and it was pretty detailed in the application. Uh but one thing I do want
to note is this area to the north um that will need need to be reclaimed by Knife River. Uh they're the current operators in the in this pit and they mined essentially this area here to the north. They also mined kind of all of
this as well. Um Zaval does not plan on going any further north than this blue line. So, we'll just need to make some do some coordination with with Zaval um to make sure we know where exactly this the north extent of their pit boundary
is. It might be just staking it out or something like that um on site. Um dust control again pretty important um on this road especially at the corner where this residence is is located.
As far as our comprehensive plan goals and objectives, um we have a goal to foster a balanced approach to aggregate resource extraction that is compatible with the natural resources and rural character of Klay County and to require adequate buffering and landscaping for new mining operations when adjacent to
existing residential areas as well as when an existing operation expands or substantially modified and would negatively impact existing land uses. Um there is about 2,000 ft between the operation and the nearest residence
existing burming in place. Um they're looking at modifying the burm just to eliminate or reduce any further impacts. Um the previous operator did go into this um RP biological go back to this
zoning. um they're not planning on expanding any further into this and so thought here is that that's fine as long as there's no further expansion. This whole area too um was also classified as
disturbed land. So it's not actually high value um e there's not any really high value ecological resources in this disturbed land classification anyway. Um, further to the south, that is a different story. Um, that is kind of a
dry gravel, dry sand prairie, which there's probably only 300 some acres of left in the entire county. So, it's a little more of a rare natural community. Um we also have a objective to avoid or
mitigate against impacts to groundwater, surface water, native prairie woodlands and wetlands. Uh there aren't any wetlands in the um um mining area. Uh depth of groundwater is about 50 feet on average. So you have to go pretty far
down to to hit the the groundwater. Um again, those encroachments into that um resource protection biological overlay zoning district were were already discussed um really doesn't have an intact native plant
community um in that in that area. As far as uh objective for reclamation, we do have a requirement for phased down reclamation plans and bonds to ensure mines are reclaimed as mining progresses. So, Knife River does have a
bond on the property that's active. Um, recommend working with them to keeping that open um until that's reclaimed. Um, R.J. Zavverall's estimates their rec reclamation cost to be $2,000 an acre. And then we have an objective
to consider the cumulative impacts of existing nearby mining operations for new or expanding operations on the environment, egglands, residential areas, and transportation infrastructure. Really, this area has a history of mining activity. Uh, and this mine is not anticipated to go outside
the existing um footprint of what's open. Any questions for me at all? >> Mr. Chair and Matt, um, looking at the history, 2009, there was a cup
gravel temporary batch plant. Was there a lapse in use or did the 35 acres of gravel mine get mined? >> Yeah, most of this north end of this property here has been mined and reclaimed already. So, it's kind of been a sequential kind of starting here and
moving or starting here and yeah, and it's been mined up here. It's been mined here. So, there's been several areas of the property that have been mined. And when you go to that uh screen with the blue line bordering the north edge of their
projected. >> Yeah, it's roughly >> now uh is that north of that south? So south of that's going to be mine. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> What's going on north of that blue line? Same thing.
>> North of the blue line right now. This would need to be reclaimed. >> It's just sitting there right now. >> It's just sitting there right now. Yep. And that's what the bond is still valid. >> Yes. Yep. For the just for this area. So I'll need to work with the um with R.J.'s Aval to determine where exactly
this line is so we can make sure that the responsible parties for our reclaiming and there aren't any gaps in reclamation. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. Okay. Uh, so is this
is the border states pit a different pit or is this on the east side of 290th? >> This is a the border states pit is to the on the west side. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> Where I thought it was >> challenging to get to to >> to look at. You can't get from the
north. You can see both gates but you can't get there. >> Yep. Yep. >> And that that dog kennel is right there. Um, so let's control that first or last 100 yards or whatever
you're going to call it. Um, so in your notes you had that Zabil is current on their gravel tax with the county. >> Correct. >> Is their pit in Hagen Township 100% compliant at this point? >> That's my understanding. Yes. From our
last inspection. Yeah. >> Okay. And is the pit that they're looking at, is that currently compliant? I know when Zavil took over the pit in Hagen Township, there was some issues even before they came in.
>> I don't foresee any issues with this pit just because it's been permitted to so many times. Yep. So, >> so the BMS are where they're supposed to be. >> Yep. >> Okay. That was
my notes. Anybody else have any questions for Matt? >> Thank you. Um um on the interimm use uh mining permit um number number 24 it talks about uh describe uh methods to be used for dust
control and just says um it would be applied as deemed necessary and just curious who who would deem that necessary. Is that like the resident that would live by there would request additional dust control or >> No, no, no, no, no. Matt, would you care
to answer that? >> Um, typically we will either if we're out inspecting, we'll and we see dust control, we'll um a need for dust control, we'll we'll call. Uh because we can't be at every pit all the time, we
typically get call we would get a call from um either nearby resident or someone who's traveling on the road um just to let us know. We'll go check it out and then make that determination. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> But that landowner, that dog kennel,
that landowner there certainly would be the first probably the first person to call if >> there was too much dust there. But there's I don't know if you're familiar with that part of >> Yeah. >> Clay County at all, but there's three pit. I mean, if if there's a lot of
dust, it's not just going to affect that house. It's going to affect all the formerly company formerly known as aggregate. I mean, there's other there's other companies hauling. I mean, Border States is currently hauling out of that pit down that road using that. Yeah. >> Yeah. And I will say to you, Mr. Chair,
and Mr. winter. Um, there are gravel companies and operators that are very proactive and they have good working relationships with the nearby residences to the point where they have each other's phone numbers and things like that. So, there's an issue. Um, the neighbor can always some often
times we won't even hear about it because it's been resolved between the neighbor and the operator >> which is the best way. Right. Absolutely. Thank you. Hearing no other questions or comments for Matt,
would the applicant care to step forward and come to the mic? Uh, make sure you got a green light and state your name for the record and my name is Tracer Bower. With me today, I have Dale Johnson.
Um, good evening commission. As I said, I'm Tracer. Uh, I'm a project manager with RJ Zeal and Suns. I also, um, handle most of our environmental compliance kind of in the offseason and throughout um, the construction season as well. Um,
Dale will be the on-site um, manager, I guess, of this facility. And, um, we're just here today, yeah, seeking your approval um, for this IEP for an aggregate production um, facility at this time. Um we seem to work well
together in in Hagen Township and uh we expect this this to be no different here. Um Matt talked about um communication with between operators and adjacent land owners. Um that's something that we're certainly familiar with. Um Jeff Brooks is another one of
our aggregate um managers. He sees more of the green pit up in Hagen Township. Yeah, we're here to to coexist um and and have a build and have a maintain a good um relationship with everybody involved. So, we can answer any
questions if you have any as well. >> Okay, >> thank you everyone. >> Is there any one else in the audience that wishes to speak for or against. Come to the podium and state your name for the record, please.
Chris Bang. I just wanted to let you know with the dust control situation, we have a working relationship with Mr. Riddle that lives there and tell him whenever he's got a problem, we tell him to call us and we'll get and zalls know about that. That's how it was with Knife River. So it gets taken care of before
anyone. That's the main a lot of dust on that road like you said when border states are hauling out there now. And they haven't been dust controlled. Well, they've been trying, but it should be dust controlled right now, but when they're working on our pit, it gets taken care of. Just wanted to let you guys know that. So,
>> thank you. >> Is there anyone else in the audience or online that wishes to speak for or against Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak for or against? Is there anyone else in the audience or online that wishes to speak
for or against? Hearing none. Look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Motion by Sebastian, seconded by Laura. All those in favor say I. I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Public
hearing is closed. have a different format in our packets tonight. Go through the I guess it is the same there. >> Okay. Well, you've got a review.
>> Yeah. Okay. Just use the simple one. Okay. The interimm use will not be injurous to the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the residents of Klay County. Is this a site that's
been mined for a long time? Do you feel the need to read all the paragraphs? >> Um, Mr. Chair, certainly up to you, but if I would say just to go through it and it look for a general agreement or if anyone has any comments, just give them
the opportunity to >> make those. >> Does anyone disagree? with that sentence. Seeing lots of no comments, but lots of
head shaking. No. So, thank you. The interimm use will not be injurous to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted. >> The site has already been used by multiple people and multiple
organizations. So, it'll be just a continuation of what's been going on >> and with the the land owner and the applicant stating for the record that they would be on top and you saying that
the kennel people have your number. Um, I agree. Okay. Thank you. The establishment of the interimm use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvements of
surrounding property for the uses predominant in the area. There is no development other than gravel mining or batch plants. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide utilities, access
roads, drainage and off- streetet parking and loading spaces as required by the ordinance. All of these have been done and it's going to continue in a little bit different location on the same pit.
Adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, water pollution, and soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and a control lighted signs or other lights in such a manner that no
disturbance to neighboring properties will result. That's been covered that that house is over 2,000 ft away. Just the interimm use will not create an excessive burden on current or
anticipated public infrastructure or services that serve or are proposed to serve the area including but not limited to parks, schools, public safety services, roads, water supply, sanitary sewers, storm sewers, unless the county
and the applicant establish a development agreement that determines how such impact will be resolved. Nothing but towers to the north and the east.
The interimm use is allowed by this ordinance and conforms with any specific use standards established in chapter 8 which is the user regulations as may be applicable. this use can conform to the use and overlay standards uh if approved
is limited to the area that's uh for the overlays >> that 35 >> right the interim use is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Klay
County comprehensive plan and transportation plan and any comprehensive plan of a township or city as may be applicable. Yes, it you know we need to mine aggregates in our area. We also need to take care of
homeowners that is being done. So we have all A's on the findings of fact and staff has so Mr. Chair these draft conditions
they're essentially taken from the previous interim use permit. they've been modified just a little bit to fit kind of the um current application and um project. Uh one thing I'd maybe recommend is
taking off this 14 about the the dumping um because the land owner is going to do that. So, and it's their their material. Um the only other thought I had was about
um this 14 just a reclamation plan map just so we could maybe see kind of where that northern um boundary might be and that would probably have to be followed up with like a site visit and have it have them
stake it out. So I don't know if you want to get more specific about that um or not. It's up It's up to you. I don't I don't foresee having an issue working with Zabrell on that if it's not a condition and I don't think it needs to be a
condition. >> Yeah, I don't think it does. >> So, we could maybe take that one off. >> Mr. Chair, I don't believe that needs to be there either. >> Okay. >> Do we need to adjust the hours to match what we've currently doing? Okay, that was >> that's 6 to9 number 12.
>> That was my other going to be my other question. Um is this is what it was on the previous permit? Do you want would you like this permit to match? >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. >> Like permit to match what we've been
doing. I'm not saying they can't ever go longer than four days. One of the good things about mining out there is that the infrastructure the road is there actually a squad parked in rollog again
yesterday making sure that we weren't going 60 through there. Mr. Chair and Matt, on the red line for number two, um the previous one is struck out as within 100 feet. Now it's
no mining to encroach any further. Is it already into that resource protection a little bit >> into that area that's marked disturbed disturbed land? Yeah. >> And they understand that they mean I guess they'll have to agree to that. >> Yeah. And we can Yeah. And based on their current mining plan,
there's no plan to encroach any further into it. That's something that was again done by a previous operator a while ago. >> Okay. Does the applicant see and understand and able to work with
the conditions as printed? I can see you. I can't. So, >> okay. >> Mr. Chair, I have been on this board for a while and and as we looked through those past actions in this particular area, have
had the opportunity to be part of most of those hearings after 2012. And um this is not a pit that has been problematic. The land owners have been really responsive if any issues come up. Um, so I have no uh concerns with that
moving forward. >> I agree with Commissioner Mojo. >> Hearing nothing further, look for a motion to approve or deny. >> Mr. Chair, I'll sorry I'll offer a motion to approve the interim use permit. Motion by Commissioner Mojo with
conditions one through >> as noted. Y >> I'll second >> and a seconded by Sebastian. >> All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. >> Motion is carried. >> Permit is approved.
Thank you everyone. I have one other question now that it's full. How long is the asphalt plant permit good for in Hagen Township at the existing? Do you know, Matt? >> Um, that's something I'd have to look at
and get back to you, but it sounds like someone in the audience might know. >> I have a sneaking suspicion. >> Okay. Because I thought we did it two years ago. >> Yeah, >> I think we did. I don't remember if we did I was asking is I don't remember if we did three years or five years. So,
okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, our second public hearing is something initiated by the Klay County Board of Commissions or
>> Well, I can get into I can explain it once we >> Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. look to uh open the second hearing regarding the Clay County Land Development and Subdivision ordinance amendment vacation home rental
change. Um look for a motion to open the public hearing. >> So offered, Mr. Chair. >> Motion by Jenny. >> Second. >> Seconded by Kurt. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Public hearing is open. Thank you, Matt.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, this is a I guess a county initiated amendment to the uh land development ordinance. So, it didn't come from an applicant at all. Uh the amendment is pretty simple. It's to advocation home rental as an administrative use uh in specified
districts where resident residential uses are allowed, adopt definitions and performance standards um and require a development permit with um in addition to a lodging licensing before any operation. So, I guess getting to why uh
this is coming up. Um we don't currently address vacation home rentals. We don't have a lot in Klay County. We're not like some other counties. Uh if you go further east into Lakes Country, um you know, uh we don't have as many as like an Ottertale County or a a Becker or
Hubard. Um there was some uh changes that took place um in 2026 regarding the administration of um lodging licensing with our um uh community health board. Uh used to be a partnership among four
counties. Now we're down to a partnership with um Becker County and so uh some of the licensing the way lodging licensing will will be a little bit different and so uh talking with environmental health staff uh thought this would be a good opportunity to
address both the um uh two sides of this coin. So the first is there's a zoning side uh and then the second uh side of the coin being the um lodging licensing side that's basically required through uh the department of health.
Um and really what we're looking to address on the since there's going to have to be an update on the the lot to the lodging licensing thought it was a good opportunity to do the the zoning side of it as well. um really looking to address just a lack of definitions, use
permissions, permit standards, um any way to handle or deal with potential complaints um for short-term rentals. We do have some we have permitted some short-term rentals in Klay County. Uh basically though, through the home
occupation permit route. So that would be where um the person who is doing the renting actually lives on site. this would address. We also have uh kind of a bed and breakfast um use which is maybe
a little more antiquated um and that's pretty specific. Uh this would address someone who is basically using the property as like a rental property um and not living on site at all kind of miss there. So there's a
little bit of a gap there. And so right now in our code we don't define vacation home rental. We're not we don't list it in our use table. We don't have any standards. We're basically looking to address that. Um just so we have a kind of a clear review
and enforcement framework for short-term rentals um and to give property owners some um regulatory certainty around this because we have had we have had some inquiries as well about this. Um I think
um folks that would like to do more of this in Klay County would like to see some sort of framework for for how that would operate. Uh so really just looking at adding three definitions um to the development code um owner, an agent, and a vacation
home rental. And then uh performance standards. And so first being that you'd require a lodging license. Um, second, just limiting it to one unit per parcel. Uh, noise, so quiet
hours, essentially following um the 10 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., which is the conforms to the m Minnesota noise pollution rules, parking, making sure that um a property has adequate parking, um knowledge of
where the property lines are. So all any activ so the rent so the person people who are renting know where the property begins and ends. Um just some general um standards about just outdoor areas mainly related to
noise and adjacent property. And then just some safety things like uh contact information, um sewage treatment, um solid waste collection, pets, uh and then access for inspection by mainly by
the county environmental health as needed. Could also add in an optional standard that would prohibit the use of recreational vehicles, tents, fish houses as vacation home rentals. um or using that to obtain an increase in
occupancy. Essentially, the issue with this could be um there are some short-term rentals or vacation rentals who would use like a camper as like a way to increase their occupancy, but
then they wouldn't have the appropriate septic um for that. Excuse me. Um some considerations I did check um and this would not even though this would uh be a new use in a in shoreland areas. It wouldn't be considered an amendment to our shoreland
ordinance. Um did check with the sheriff's office. We have they have not received any complaints or calls for service uh regarding vacation home rentals. Uh we don't exactly know um what the number of vacation home rentals in Klay County is. Um, some counties pay
for like a license to software that allows them to figure it out, but I don't think we're to the point where we want to be doing that. Um, um, but it is something that's that's come up. >> Let's get the ordinance first. >> Yeah,
we also have not received any comments at this time. Any questions for me at all? This is something too that um you know I'm just introducing it right now. Certainly don't have to take any action on it. Don't have to move it forward. If you
want me to you know bring back more information or more time we can certainly um continue it next month or we could keep going ahead with this. >> Well I will I'm going to make a comment. When I first started reading this, you
know, yesterday afternoon when I got the mail, it was why are we looking to make things another bit of regulation, making more things complicated? And the second and third reading, you know, it it changed things.
So, I'm assuming this would affect rentals that are that are currently in operation. They would need to if you know some are some we some are known. Um, so you're saying right now you're
not interested in digging for the ones that we don't know about, but I'm assuming that the ones we do know about would be suggested that they be in compliance. I would need to probably consult with
our county attorney on that. I think for licensing, yes, I think we they would they would likely need to be licensed on the environmental health side. Um, as far as needing a administrative permit for zoning or if they'd be considered
grandfathered in, um, I would say that they'd probably be they could potentially just be grandfathered in, but I don't think they'd be grandfathered into the licensing requirements. And that mainly deals with um you know
safety uh water making sure the water is um safe to drink um and then septic or sewage. >> The environmental >> Yep. >> portion of it is why I you know maybe
this isn't such a >> that's where I became >> sure >> changed my mind on it. You know, we make even the temporary campgrounds where they, you know, are setting up
batch plants. They have to have fire stuff and outouses and, you know, there's something written in the code even for temporary. So,
>> yeah. And I should add too that the the type of permit as well that's being suggested as part of this amendment would not be something that would come before the planning commission. It would just be an administrative permit. >> That was my comment.
>> Mr. Jar and and Matt, can you uh just walk us through if someone makes an inquiry, they apply for the permit, I suppose, or license, I guess, who would be showing up? Who would be what's the log? What's
the normal steps that would be before thing is before it is approved or granted? Public health is in there. Obviously, >> they would the first thing that they would need to have would be the licensing through environmental health.
So, they would need to have that. Um, they could apply for that concurrently or they could apply for that beforehand. Other than that, it's a we would treat it similar to we to any other type of administrative permit application
um that our office receives. Um, it's likely that environmental health would be doing just like an on-site visit. Uh, we wouldn't necessarily need to do that, but we would just need to make sure that um it would meet all of the or it could
meet all of the standards in the ordinance for zoning. >> Mr. chair. This is a conversation that's happening a lot uh kind of at the state level, but particularly with counties, wanting to make sure that not u one
thing that resonated with you, it's not necessarily that we don't want to find who is currently engaging in having a vacation home rental, but we do want to have some sort of framework um so that it is a cohesive plan for how we move forward with things. Um, you know, I
know Ottertale has been really part of the dialogue, um, as well. Um, I know that there's conversations at the state about if you have a hot tub, um, you know, in a short-term rental component, it used to be that it was a public pool. Well, now there's been some laws that
have changed, so it's not necessarily a public pool. It's it's allowable, but, you know, we do have to have some sort of framework to help with that. Um so again it's not us trying to add a whole another level of bureaucracy but what we
are trying to do is streamline the process so that it is um more um user friendly for folks that are looking at maybe creating a VBO out of a residence or something like that. comments or questions or
what this >> I think we should proceed forward with it. >> And that's what I was thinking too. Why why kick the can? This is I mean at the second and third reading it became
straightforward. Um to me it takes me a while and I agree with Sebastian. So >> hearing no other comments, I'm going to >> we close the motion.
>> I No, I think we're still in a public hearing. Correct. >> I think we need to close. >> And we do have findings as well. >> Okay. Be the same as We need to make a motion to close public hearing. I make that motion. >> Okay, we have a motion to close the
public hearing by Sebastian. >> Second. >> Seconded by Kurt. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> I don't see a findings of facts in mine. Pardon? >> You see a findings of facts? >> I just have zavals.
Um yeah, >> would you like me to read them, Mr. Chair? >> Absolutely. >> They're up on the screen. >> They're there. >> All right. So in granting a text amendment, the planning commission shall consider the
effect of the proposed amendment upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands and the effect of the existing and anticipated land uses and especially the effect on agricultural uses and the degree to which the text amendment will affect nonconformities or variance
requests. And I've kind of drafted to an approval and denial finding if you want to take a time to review that. Happy to read anything if you'd like me to can make the text bigger. Oh, I that
is very selfexplanatory and I would definitely approve that. >> I agree. I like the fact that it creates a framework so people can move forward in a logical way. >> Okay.
Burden on public utilities. The development authorized by the text amendment will will not create an excessive burden on any public facilities or utilities. Make this bigger, too. >> I agree. It's just basically someone else living there. Then it's already
probably been existing for who knows how long. All right. Uh, ready to move on to two, >> Mr. Chair? >> Yes. >> Okay. Consistency with the ordinance. The text amendment is consistent with the general purposes of this ordinance.
This figure too. >> Yes, absolutely. Especially protecting the public health standards. Okay. Number three, conflict with the comprehensive plan. The text amendment is consistent with the goals and
objectives of the Klay County comprehensive and transportation plan. >> Agree. and for a text amendment. Those are the four review standards. Now I will
After going through these fact and getting a positive comment on approval for all four points, I look for a motion to
send this recommendation to the county board of commissioners. We are not approving it per se, this text amendment. We are saying that we approve of this being passed on to the next level >> and oh sorry
I was just going to add Mr. Mr. Chair too, there is that option. I don't know if you want to discuss discuss about the type of if if you want to include the um performance standard about recreational vehicles, tents, fish houses
um or leave that out for now. I will say just after reading this a few more times, I can envision getting a call about someone asking if they could do like an igloo or a um sand castle or,
you know, something else that's not a recreational vehicle. >> Tenture fish house. Yeah. >> A cave, a hobbit house, you know. So, um >> I don't know. How about >> So, I don't know if I mean that'd be kind of cool, right? Um that would be
definitely be allowed. >> Um so, I don't know if that's uh >> something you want me to maybe workshop a little bit more before bringing it to the county board or leave it as is or just leave it out completely.
>> So, in approval I understand the value of identifying some of those things, but how far do you go on some of those things is the next question. Uh the more
details you put into it, the tougher it probably is to really get it all figured out. I mean, I'm just thinking out loud here. >> I guess Mr. Chair too. The other maybe point to make about for for leaving it out is there is a standard in
there that would only allow for one unit per parcel. Um so if someone had a house or a cabin and then tried to also use a fish house or something on that parcel, that would be two units and they
couldn't do that. So that would be maybe an argument for not including that. >> I'm thinking leaving it out for now. >> I would be in favor of moving for approval with leaving that out as well.
It being it's limits whatever you considered a living arrangement. It's only one allowed. So that's my position. see a bunch of nods. Okay. The consensus is to leave it out. It's
already at one. We have a motion do this tonight or kick it down the road. >> I make that motion do tonight. >> Okay. Sebastian makes a motion to approve it um with leaving out that paragraph. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Seconded by Kurt and Jeff. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I >> opposed. Motion is carried. We are sending it on to. The county commission for them to look
at. Thanks everyone. Matt, do you have any unfinished business? >> I do not, Mr. Chair. >> How about new business? >> Um, I do not. I don't know if Commissioner Mojo if you want to talk about the hunting at all or
>> Yes, I would love to talk about that again. >> Thanks. >> Sorry to put you on the spot. >> No, that's okay. Uh most of you know there was um a position that the state legislature put counties in uh to there was a change
that was made legislatively to make all counties uh some counties along I94 and south including us had shotgun zone specific but the legislative uh change was that as of January 1st all counties would
move to um allow rifles uh which is not a problem But um they also allowed counties the opportunity to make local changes if they so um so chose I guess. Uh we had work session. We worked with
the attorney's office, the sheriff's department. The sheriff had pretty strong feelings on um continuing to have some sort of carve out. If you recall, Klay County used to be shotgun zone basically west of um 32 and then kind of
down to 34 and then down to the interstate is where they cut in. Um so we had a public hearing. We had probably 60 folks in the boardroom two weeks ago. We received another 35 official on there
comments. Um and uh the best thing about it is uh everyone has very wide varying opinions and um so we were tasked with the um challenge of trying to figure out where we would land on something that
looked like what the people wanted but also um one we know we can revisit it in a year which we'll need to. So this morning the county board did make a change to align um and we had several different proposals. We did make a
change to align um with hunting zones in Klay County. Um, so basically the only change is we added 666, which is basically east of nine north of Highway
10 uh in that district to um to Rifle uh for the upcoming uh hunting season south of Highway 10. Actually, the rest of everything will then be shotgun zone only. Um although the 32 in east will
continue to stay. Um I don't have the numbers written down um for me, but there's basically four zones in Klay County. And so that was the major change. Um I know that people are very
upset. I've had lots of conversations of folks that are mad they got put in, people that are mad they didn't get put in. Um, I will say what I'm most proud of is that we had a full room of folks offering their perspective and they were very respectful and um understood the
process and the legislature did not afford local entities to testify on those bills. Uh, but we did have, I would say, uh, lots of local testimony. So, we'll see how it goes. And
I don't know, I shoot I hunt in uh zone 666 and I will say I will still likely use my Savage shotgun. So any perspectives? >> Well, I'm glad that I could hunt in
Hagen Township legally with a rifle. >> Yeah, there you go. anything. >> Thank you, Commissioner. >> Yeah, you bet. >> Chair and M Commissioner Mojo, does this need to be revisited at a later date?
>> Uh, it will need to be revisited uh in 2027 at the end of the hunting season. We did not put a a date on it like a January 1 expiration. um and looking into well legal is looking into
um you know what is that threshold um understanding we've had things come before us that it seems like it's continually brought up every year and so one we'll have the flexibility to bring this one up again I'm not sure what that threshold is I I don't think we need to
uh visit it every single year the sheriff is uh glad that we do have the ability um to revisit it. But I will say we are the only um county in the state that uh did have a special
carve out. So, um I would say that that tells me that we're really responsive to I mean we literally had it was like a 6535 comment spread in person then it was more 50/50 online and then um so this
there was a lot of wide ranging. >> Yeah, I was at I attended that initial hearing and it was everybody everybody said their piece and waited their turn was Okay,
I guess hearing nothing else, I will uh like to remind everyone that pollinator pint night is Thursday from 4:00 to 7:00 at Junkyard Brewing. It's put on by the Soil and Water. It's a yearly event. Um
it's a local grower from Glendon that donates the honey. Um there's workshops that go on family oriented so support local small businesses
hearing nothing further I'll look for a motion to adjurnn motion by Josh >> seconded by Laura >> all those in favor say I post motion is carried meeting is adjourned