Good evening everyone. It is five o'clock. I'll call today's meeting of the Klay County Board of Commissioners to order. Our first item on the agenda today as an approval of the agenda. We do have an agenda addition request. >> Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the agenda with the agenda
addition. >> Okay. We have a motion offered from Commissioner Bear. >> Second. >> Second from Commissioner Ebinger. The agenda addition is an approval of a letter of support to the Minnesota federal senator delegation requesting a delay in the SNAP assistance
uh SNAP administrative and benefit cost shifts. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Same sign. The motion carries. Citizens to be heard this evening. Are there any citizens in the audience
wishing to address the county board on any item that is not on the agenda? Any citizens wishing to be heard? >> Steve, have you had any online requests? >> I have not, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Moving into the approval of the payment
of bills and vouchers. >> Madam Chair, I move that we approve the payment the bills and v vouchers. We have a motion offered from Commissioner Ebinger and a second from Commissioner Kraov to approve the payment of bills and vouchers. Discussion. >> Discussion.
>> All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. That motion also carries. Presented in the packet is the June 2nd, 2026 meeting minutes. >> Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. >> We have a motion offered from
Commissioner Bayer to approve the minutes as presented. Second. >> Second from Commissioner Kravangh. Discussion discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same. Sign.
>> Motion carries. Item two is a request approval of the advanced correctional healthc care contract renewal. Sheriff Chief Deputy Martin. Good evening. >> Good evening, Madam Chair, Commissioners. Thanks for having us this evening. We are here to get the uh
approval to renew and sign a contract with uh AC who is our correctional care folks over at our correctional center. Um it is a 5.66% increase compared to uh last year and that's been fairly consistent uh with
their previous contracts as well. Last year they sent us an email saying they're roughly going to be a 7% increase but they're going to try and keep it under which they did do that. Um, it is it is budgeted because we knew this was going to be coming. So, it is
budgeted, but um I want to have the chief deputy kind of give you a little bit of a spoiler into what our uh budget for medical care is going to look like for 2027. Um, it's going to be a little rough, I think.
>> Questions for anything? >> Just briefly here. Um, as you know, when we have inmates, we're responsible for their their care while they're over at our facility. And that includes not just from a providing care within the
facility, but also anytime that we have to transport them to Sanford or any other medical provider. If they don't have insurance, um, we are we are picking up the tab for for those services along with any medications that that they may have. Um, we are also um,
taking care of those those costs. Over the last three years, we've seen we've seen those rates increase substantially. AC was a known. It was a given. We signed a contract with them in 2022. Um in 23, 24, and 25, their rates rose by
5% and they had estimated a 7% raise each of those years. So, that was a known. What was an unknown and still is an unknown is the amount that we're spending on Sanford and Diamond Medications, which is our medication provider for for the inmates. Um this
year we had budgeted for 930,000. I ran the numbers today. We've already spent 590,000. Uh the majority or the biggest difference why we're off a budget is the substantial fees that we've paid to our
medical providers and the medication providers. At this point, I'm projecting that we're going to be over 1.2 million for 2026 after budgeting 930,000 for this year. >> So you you believe it will be 1.2
million total, not 1.2 million over the 930. >> Correct. I I think it'll be about 30% over what we had budgeted for and not this is not because of a it's because of just increased fees and usage of of the providers.
questions from the board. >> I have one question, Madam Chair. Is there another option other than AC? >> There are other options to go out and get bids for them, but again, I don't I don't see this as an AC issue. They provide um above average care for our
inmates. Um the the nursing staff that we have is very good staff and they have good connections with not just our staff, but with the inmates as well. And th those numbers are a known number. Um, this year we're paying out 66,000 a month to have almost full-time coverage
over there and they're very needed and used often. >> How many nurses are over there or how how many people are part of a that are over there? >> I'd have to check with Carrie to find out for sure how many, but I believe they have
>> got the main nurse nurse uh Sam and then I think they've got another full-time along with a couple part-time over there as well. I want to say there's four or five. And then it also includes having a an on call full-time on call doctor as well. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Campbell.
>> Yeah, if my memory is if I recall correctly, we did have um another provider of this service not too long ago and and it was um a lot of trouble. >> Correct. Yep. >> And you know, so we made the switch. I think it was right before you came on
board, Commissioner Bear, but but yeah, so we did have and and um since we've had them, I haven't seen any issues like we had seen before anyway, in terms of, >> you know, one of the things that uh Chris hit on was the medication side of
it. And I know that we just uh we lobbyed um our legislature to change that law that was written last year, which we could not use generic medications. it had to be the same exact medication as somebody was um brought in with. Um so that law will go into effect
here on August 1 and we'll be reviewing that to see if we're able to have a cost savings there from going from the actual med to a generic med. That should hopefully help. >> Thanks for your work on that. That's very important. You have a followup? >> Yeah. Um just a separate question. So,
um, when we have inmates in in their and if they are if they were on, um, Mure or any any of those other things, that falls off, doesn't it?
>> That is correct. Yep. We end up taking care of that. >> Well, it sure be nice to see that changed. >> I know. I I think for a while I I thought that was an AMC issue that they were going to try to work on that. you know, because whether it's um Mure
Mure or um the other ones that the state provides, >> we could definitely look at that through our our MSA lobbyist and see if we can make that one of our legislative priorities. >> That's significant. I mean,
>> I I don't know how many of your inmates are on some coverage. I would say there's some of them that are. >> Yeah, I can't give you that number. I don't know off the top of my head either, but I'm sure there are some >> from the just for the public. So once somebody is incarcerated, none of their
insurance applies >> and it goes it goes to a county responsibility. I think that's just >> something should be changed in that regard. >> Commissioner Evinger. >> Yeah, sure. Are these folks that are committed? Are these folks that just
can't make bond? Is there is there some way we can phase them out of the out of the the system? >> Any alternatives on it? >> This is anybody that is booked into Darklay County jail and that we're housing. Um whether they're committed
whether uh you know whether they're committed to a prison, state hospital, or county facility, it's anybody that we're housing, we have to pick that up. I think maybe it's worth saying that the county attorney's office works with the sheriff and and and Carrie very often. I
mean there are I mean it's all about public safety ultimately but sometimes we look at and and let's just say somebody who's a lower level offender but is in there. Let's say they need dialysis or they need we've had people who have a come in with a major heart problem. They're going to need heart
surgery. Well, if if it's a DWI person that needs heart surgery, that's a pretty easy decision that we don't need to incur a million-doll cost for the county on that. But let's say it's a person with murder charges. Well, we can't furlow that person. And that's
where the bigger issue becomes. The more serious people need to remain within the jail confines and they have to provide somebody watching over them while they're in the hospital. And so we look at those all some of those more serious cases, you know, I think dialysis is
probably some of the ones have come up with the biggest ones and we've allowed furlow because they're less likely to be a public safety risk. They can't get out. They can't move very much, but they've done something that, you know, garers charges. So, I mean, we we do monitor those. I remember the the the
video issue we had that was going to be a huge expense to the county and Drew Wrigley was the US attorney then and he was good enough to file some charges on them since it was an interstate issue
and but um I had no idea that we were we were holding getting caught up on tabs like this. Well, I to what your Commissioner Campbell has a question, but to what you uh identified with your state priorities and with uh Commissioner Ebinger on the public
safety piece, that has been a continued AMC dialogue about what those costs continue to be. I do think it's important to revisit it given the fact that um we're seeing such an escalation and what that is, keep it top of mind, particularly with 50% of the legislature
being new next year. I'm not sure everyone is quite aware at how expensive this care ends up being for counties. Commissioner Camp. >> Well, I question I don't know if I can go to um our county attorney or the sheriff, but it seems to me that if we're going to if
we're going to try to maybe talk to the legislature about allowing these people should be able to keep the insurance that they have while they're in there if they have it. But but in terms of not knowing which ones do and which ones don't, it
it might be good for us to do some research on that. I don't know what questions we can ask and what questions we can ask, but I it seems to me that one of the things we should be able to do is to inquire whether they currently have health insurance. if um because if
we're gonna I mean I I guess if we're going to in the in the future if we're going to look at trying to get the state to look at allowing those on state covered health insurance to stay on it, we should have some sort of information
on what percentage of our population that would be. And if we're able to ask that question right now, I'm sure our jail administrator would have that as she's very detail orientated and she's very responsive if we if we were to ask her that. She'll tell us if somebody has it, if somebody doesn't have it type
thing. She's very uh very on top of that stuff. >> Well, I think it would be good to good to have if we're going to be asking or moving forward with AMC to maybe even look at a policy. That's okay. That's Thank you. >> She's good. >> Yes, Commissioner Kavanagh.
>> Yeah. And just one question question back to the prescriptions that you were talking about. Do uh with the doctors that uh put out those uh uh scripts um do they have the choice of generics
first or you know how that is? Do I have any do I have any say in that at all? >> Do the doctors have any say or >> No. Well, is it offered? I'm just saying are we you know are generics being looked at? So right now, no, we don't have any say in that with the the way
that Minnesota state law is set up. We do not. Come August 1st, then yes, we would have the ability to look at generics at that point. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any further questions on the request? >> Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the contract renewal with
Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc. effective July 1st of 2026. >> Second. We have a motion offered from Commissioner Bear and a second from Commissioner Ebinger to approve the contract renewal with the implementation of July 1st, 2026. Any further discussion?
Any further discussion? Discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. Same sign. Carried. >> Thank you. >> Item three is a request approval of step placement for a healthcare unit eligibility worker.
Social Service Director Quinn is with us this evening. >> Morning, Madam Chair and Commissioners. Or good evening, Madam Chair and Commissioner. Sorry, Habit. Um, yes. I am here requesting a motion to approve an appointment of our internal candidate in our elig eligibility worker position
in our healthcare team uh at grade 14 step 9. Uh, I got to be honest, I brought this to PIC and then I went on vacation. So, it's a little bit uh more delayed than I like to typically bring things from pick to board. Uh, I just want to be transparent about that out of the gate. So, it's been uh a few weeks
since I brought this to PIC. Um, but earlier this year, the county board approved uh the replacement of our vacant eligibility worker position within the healthcare unit. That was the end of March, beginning of April. Uh, again, PIC reviewed the request for this advanced step placement, recommended bringing it forward for all of your
consideration. Um, I am requesting approval to appoint this person at grade 14 step nine. um the candidate was in this role, this exact role for about 10 years um prior to switching to a different role within social services.
So they bring very extensive work with the MA and Minnesota care programs um prior to transferring to the new division where she's now leaving. Um the employee had this same classification and was at that exact step in grade when
when she left. Um, as you know, the healthcare team continues to manage high case loads and increasing program complexity. Because of this previous exper experience, there's going to be a lot less onboarding that's going to be needed. Um, they'll be able to be at full capacity much more quickly than a
standard hire. I'm going to say just off the street. Um, kind of restoring our our capacity on the healthcare team a lot more quickly than we otherwise would. Um, I do know step nine is way uh way advanced compared to where we normally start, but again, this employee
holding that position for as long of a time as she did. Um, and kind of still having that knowledge, kind of being a go-to person on that team, um, is a factor in why I'm requesting that. Um, even since pick, we've had some, uh, updates to this as with a lot of
internal movements is social services. We have now had a series of three additional internal moves as a result of this one eligibility worker swing. So the numbers in terms of the dollars and cents have adjusted a little bit. Um so
the eligibility worker would be filled at grade 14 step 9. The selected candidate is moving from grade 16 step 10 down to this. Um they are aware of that and and have accepted it under that that condition. that
vacancy will be filled by another existing internal employee that's serving at grade 16 step five. So there'll be a small amount of cost savings there and the resulting vacancy will then be filled through it says an external hire but that has changed even since this board agenda item is on that
will be filled by an internal hire at grade 16 step three but that position is coming from child protection. child protection is coming down into this new role. So, we will see savings. Uh that person is a grade 18 step five. We absolutely anticipate no internal
movement to fill that one. So, it'll be a grade 18 step one. All that said and done, with the exception of factoring in the grade 18 development because that was offered on Friday, I am still expecting a net overall savings of $6,234. I would actually anticipate that that
would go up a little bit because grade 18 is obviously higher than grade 16. A little complicated in terms of the dollars and cents, but all of that said, it's still going to result in a net savings. >> So then the motion to potentially be adopted or voted on would be the same as
you have listed on the memo even though there are some other internal changes. >> That is correct. Yeah. the back fill request >> the the it's my understanding the backfill request you all gave that when I refilled the initial eligibility worker position. So I don't believe I would need that with this request. >> So Commissioner Campbell and I were part
of the pick discussion where we um we talked about this and the road map and how that all plays in. I do want to say I I am really appreciative Quinn on how you're analyzing where we have staff and what makes the
most sense and where areas in which they can have reimbursement rates to uh offset savings. And really at the end of it uh when it came down to it for pick there was an overall savings to the budget that we felt was a positive move
by recommending this uh forward today. But any further questions on request wishes. >> Well, I'll make a motion. Motion to approve the appointment of eligibility worker position at grade 14, step nine.
>> We have a motion offered to approve the request from Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Second. >> Second from Commissioner Evinger. Discussion. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. Carried. Thank you.
>> Item four this evening is a request approval to apply for the crisis intervention and behavioral health grant for the West Central Regional Juvenile Center. Good evening, James. >> Good evening, Madam Chair, commissioners. Yeah, I'm here today to request permission to apply for the
crisis intervention and behavioral health grants. Um it's it's federal money, but it's coming from the um Minnesota Department of Public Safety. Um there's a million dollars available to local governments. Um and I plan on
putting together a proposal um that wouldn't require us to hire any staff, but um that to to try to get um up to 250,000 of it um over a two-year period. That'd be for a non-secure program.
questions for James. We've had good luck applying for grants in the past, so we're hopeful. >> Can always try. >> Madam Chair, >> Commissioner Abinger, >> I move a motion to approve the West Central Regional Juvenile Center to
apply for a crisis intervention and behavioral health grant. >> A motion offered from Commissioner Ebinger to approve. >> Second. >> Second from Commissioner Bear. Discussion. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I.
>> I. >> I. >> Oppos. Same sign. Carried. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Item five is a request approval to refill a vacant care coordinator position in the adult health unit along with corresponding status change. Good evening, Jessica. Good evening, Madam
Chair and commissioners. Uh I am here to request consideration uh to refill an open position we have due to a resignation notice we received we received last month. Uh the primary reason this was not on consent today is
we are also requesting a status change to move the position from a.8 FTE uh so 4 days a week to a 1.05 days uh a week FTE. So I am going to focus my presentation on the status change today
since the rest of the position uh typically would have just been approved through the pick process. Um so the employee uh that resigned was originally hired as a 1.0 FTE back in October of
2021 following a leave of absence. she returned to work uh with the status change of going down to a 0.8. Uh that was part of a retention strategy that public health used uh during an ongoing
nursing uh workforce shortage. Um however due to continued program growth uh we don't feel that we can continue to accommodate this specific position at that lower status and are requesting uh that it be refilled uh during this
opportunity now that it's open back to the 1.0. Um the adult health unit continues to experience um sustained growth in both volume for case loads and service complexity while staffing resources have
declined. Uh so this specific position works with our blue health blue plus health plan. Um and it was previously staffed with four full-time employees and two part-time employees. uh one of those part-time positions was
eliminated due to a vacancy during the 2026 budget planning process. Uh so also offsetting this would help us restore it just slightly um back to uh what it had previously been. So um under our current
um setup with um FTEES compared to uh client ratio um our average case load size is 79 clients which is quite a bit higher than where we would ideally want it to be. So adding this point 2 back into the position um would allow us to
reduce that even just slightly. So, um, let's see. Um, as this is a backfill request, uh, the majority of the wages and benefits for the position were included in our 2026 budget. Um, the departing employee is classified at
grade 18 step five with our intent to hire grade 18 step one. However, there is potential that this could be filled with a BSN nurse rather than an associate degree nurse. Um, so that could bring that classification up to a grade 19. Uh, if the position is filled
by August 1st, the estimated budget impact would be um, $323 if it's approved today to increase the status. Um, that's at grade 18. If um a grade 19 BSN nurse is hired for the position, we
would see a budget impact of $1,958 to the 2026 public health budget. Uh and then looking at 2027 at grade 18, we would see a impact to our budget of $12,44
at grade 18 and then $16,536 at grade 19. However, uh care coordinators working with our Blue Plus Health Plan do receive reimbursement for direct and indirect client related activities of $101.84
per hour. Uh restoring this position would give us eight extra hours of work per week where we would estimate five to six hours of that time would be billable. Uh so we would see additional revenue in the amount of anywhere from
26,000 to 31,000 as a general estimate. So I truly feel restoring this position back to a 1.0 um and allowing for that additional billable time every week would offset any um additional expense
to the county. So um and then I I am also requesting backfill. Uh before questions, I I think part of uh understanding that budgets are going to be really challenging for us this year, part of the uh dialogue that happened at the pick committee and the
reason that I believe Commissioner Campbell and I supported moving this forward really did have to do with that final paragraph that you talked about the additional revenue that can be captured by adding just that additional um workday a week. Uh really could
equate to a substantial savings for the county. would certainly want to hear dialogue too on this questions from the board. >> Well, just in that summation, yeah, thank you. Um, as you were talking about, not only not only do the
reimbursements help the the budget and the fiscal responsibility actually does more work for you. So I mean we have to the effectiveness of having that point too of something that uh has a large uh demand on it.
>> Yeah, we'd really simplify things with case assignments, overall case load. I think it would help program morale um evening out the distribution of cases and then obviously the increased opportunity for revenue as well. >> What what might backfield look like? Uh
well, if we had an internal candidate uh within public health who was either a um associate degree level nurse or a bachelor's. Okay, I'll leave it at that. Right. >> Additional questions from the board.
>> Did I cover all the things? >> You did. >> Any further disc or discussion an action request? Madam chair, I move to approve the um care coordinator position restored to a one full-time position with Beckville. >> Okay, we have a motion offered to
approve the CL clarification uh change to a 1.0 with Beckville. >> Second. >> Second from Commissioner Ebinger. Further discussion? Same comments from your department or to your department. Thank you for analyzing where makes the most sense for staffing
placements so that we are able to um simplify but also make sure that we're supporting staff in a way that's important. >> Additional comments. >> Commissioner Campbell. >> I I want to follow up with that too. I I think that, you know, you being new in this position, you've you've really done
a nice job of of really trying to look at ways to uh modify or or what have you the way services provided and and how you work with your staff. So, I just I think you're doing a really nice job
with that. So, >> any further discussion? >> All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Same sign. carried. Thank you. >> Item six is a request approval for solid waste to apply for the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency Recycling Grant. >> Good evening, Corey. >> Good evening, Madam Chair and Commissioners. Um, as you know, this the MPCA is requesting that we try to shoot for a goal of 35% recycling by the year 2030. um they came out with this grant and
we've recently started a wood recycling program at the at the transfer station and we'd like to expand that to the landfill. Um with this grant we would be able to purchase three pieces of equipment. One would be a basically a mini waste handler like we have at the transfer station, a skid steer on tracks
and a trailer to haul them to the demo landfill. Um we would use the equipment to pull out any lumber that we deemed usable. we could reach right in, pull it out rather than having to send somebody in there by hand. Um, this would also replace an aging skid steer that we have
at the landfill and put it on track so we can use it for mowing and that kind of stuff as well. So, uh, we felt it was a good op opportunity for us and it would come at a cost of $25,000 to the county with 149,000 149,961
and60 uh total ask. So, that would be my request this evening. Corey, can you uh just identify where that $25,000 would come from? I mean, I know you have the account, but >> it would come out of our internal service fund for uh replacing of the skid steer and that kind of stuff.
>> Question, Commissioner Campbell. >> Yeah, Corey, can you uh when you talk about that MPCA's wanting us to reach to 35% by 2030, is is that both the landfill and the demolition landfill?
So, it's taking total tons and reducing it by 35%. >> Right. Pretty much >> increasing our recycling rate. It's any recycling or reusing that we do throughout the whole county. >> And I'm sure there's score funding to come with that, right? >> Yep. Yep. The the better the better we do recycling, the more score funds we
get supposedly. >> Commissioner Bear. >> So, that that was what I was going to ask. What if we don't hit that 35%. But it comes down to score funding and that's where the dollars come from. They haven't given us any negative consequences at this point. It's just a goal. Um, as long as I think as long as
we're increasing and showing that we're trying, they're they're going to work with us. >> Well, the state is already taking a good percentage of the score funding anyways. Yeah, I digress. Did you have something else, Commissioner? I was kind of being kind of tongue and cheek when I said that we more score funding, but
you know, so another thing that would also uh help us reach that goal is the organic stuff that we're talking about, right? >> Yes. And we should hear on that. They said six to eight weeks. I believe it was eight weeks today. So, we should hear real soon on that. So, that would
help us immensely as well. >> That'd be that be really good. Yeah. Thank you. or direction. >> No, I make a motion then to approve the application for the MPCA environmental assistance grant in the
amount of $149,96160 for the $25,000 local match. >> Okay, we have a motion offered from Commissioner Kavanagh. >> I'll second >> and a second from Commissioner Campbell. And >> I do have a question. >> Yes, Commissioner Campbell. Thank you. So, is this um this grant that we're
applying for, does the MPC MPCA have a certain dollar amount that they have? What's the how competitive is this grant? >> I don't know the exact dollar amount. Um I do know that Nathan, uh the new MPCA, he moved from Pope Douglas County. He
sent it down to us and told us we'd have a pretty good okay pretty good chance at it. Um the only stipulation is there's some also some stuff in there for recycling of hair products and we don't do that. So um >> not yet. >> Not well maybe
>> see how we do on this one. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Any >> and I I I can say the same thing about what how you've been doing with solid waste that we've talked about with Quinn and Jessica today. you're what what you're
doing is really really beneficial to all of our uh taxpayers in Klay County. You really are watching out for um the best ways and the best ways to um approach things and it's again it's great greatly appreciate. I happen to, Commissioner
Mojo and I happen to serve with you in that capacity and we really we see it firsthand and I know all of your SWAK committee group think highly of the work that you're doing as well. So >> we try to get all the funds we can and and not spend any more than we have to
>> just one one comment. >> Yes, Commissioner Bear. >> Just keep us up to date on if we receive that grant funds or not. >> Absolutely we will because we'll have to find 25 grand. come out of the internal >> if we find the organic have to find both of I mean both of them. Yeah. All of
them. I mean we we we approve them to ask not just him but all our departments. We ask them to go after these grants but sometimes we don't get informed if we've received them or not. I'd like to start knowing if we start receiving them or not so we know. >> Good. Any further discussion? Madam
chair, commissioners would just note that uh when it comes to the grant writing that Commissioner Bear mentioned, uh Corey has staff uh actually James, we have a number of staff that uh are participating in grant writing opportunity through AMC here in the coming weeks. And so we're hoping as
a as a collective group of leadership that uh that that's an avenue that we can look to offset the taxpayer dollars. >> Okay, any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I >> oppose. Same sign carried.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, Corey. >> Item seven is a request approval of the bridge maintenance agreement. >> Good evening, Justin. >> Good evening. Yes. So, the first item I have is this is really similar to the bridge MLOU that I brought a couple
months back with Cass County. So, this is just updating a bridge maintenance agreement with the city of Fargo. Also included in the maintenance agreement is the city of Morehead, Cass County, and the city of Fargo. Um, this doesn't change anything how we're doing things
today, and it covers two bridges, the Wall Street Bridge and Cassat 12 bridge, 60th Avenue South. So, the federal highway is basically requiring more specific language in these agreements than was included in the past. And since North Dakota DOT is starting to take
more of a inspection role, they asked that we updated this agreement. So it's not going to change anything currently how we've been operating. >> Questions for Justin on the request? >> Madam Chair, I'll make >> Commissioner Bear.
>> Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the bridge maintenance agreement. >> We have a motion offered from Commissioner Bear to approve, a second from Commissioner Campbell. Any further discussion? discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I >> I same sign
carried. Item eight, the request approval of the comment letter to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. >> Yeah. So recently the Minnesota the MPCA is updating their MS4 permit requirements. So MS4 is municipal separate storm sewer systems. So, the
city of Dworth, Minnesota State University, Morehead, City of Morehead, Klay County, and the Buffalo Red River Wershed Districts all participate in the MS4. We actually recently went through an audit, and it is a ton of work. Um, so
anyway, with the new permit requirements, one of the main things that the MPCA is trying to implement is requirements for total maximum daily load. basically what goes into the river and city of Morehead contracted with Houston engineering to look at this and
there were some major major concerns that would be an extreme cost to every entity. So what I'm asking for is approval of the comment letter basically stating our concerns and some data behind it that we would send to the MPCA
on behalf of all the entities. >> Well, we talked about this at highway. >> Yes, we did. I give a >> synopsis or do you want me to? >> Why don't you start? >> Can I ask one question prior to that? >> Commissioner Bear, >> why is this on transportation? Why is this with if we're talking load in the
rivers and streams and >> uh well, you can answer because it >> the engineering which >> Yeah. So, the highway falls on your plate. >> The highway department is the permit holder for the MS4 permit and being that we have outlets into the river, it's the highway department's jurisdiction.
>> Okay. And then we haveous with the city of Dworth, Buffalo Red, and the city of Morehead. Basically, anything in the city of Morehead, the city of Morehead handles. Anything in the city of Dworth, they handle. And then we have a few outfalls, but it's it's really not a lot
compared to like for the city of Morehead and city of Dworth. This is major and it would have a budget impact on us too if this was implemented. I just wanted to >> Well, you know, we talked about this and there are some concerns uh with comment
phasings, not just with this, but statewide there's concerns with rules and how the state goes through rules and how they might deviate from a rule in one thing and not deviate in another. So, I think the the process is cloudy and what we're identifying and what we
talked about is that it seems to be a a tricky process and that um there can be a better way to do this. Um but uh really felt that having this technical memo was really the first step, if you will, to address the concerns there.
>> Yeah, I um I would agree. I know we we've had a lot of discussions over many years about the TMDLs and >> how the MPCA is changing that. I think you're especially when it gets into the major tributaries like the Red River
>> um because it, you know, there gets to be issues that go and wide all the way up to Lake Winnipeg. And so it can be some of those factors that go into the river. But I I do think that um I'm really I'm really
thankful that um you and the other engineers with the city of Morhead uh have really pinpointed some areas of concern >> that maybe u you know they need to hear a viewpoint and I think this request
does that. I mean certainly it asks to let us be heard. >> That's that's really important. I I get what they're trying to do, >> right? >> Yep. >> You know, but at the same point in time, it's
it's important to hear from us. And I'm I'm glad you're you and these city engineers and the Red River or the Buffalo Red are all interested in >> sharing those concerns. Thank you for doing that.
>> I think it's important. Um, Minnesota State Morehead is also in this um and it's in the the cover letter. But part of the the challenge is that when you're commu communicating with so many different people, there are 13 people from FPCA copied on
>> I mean it's challenging technical stuff and to have solid comments from all of us united is really helpful in our our case as well. >> Yeah. And I just I just again I'm going to say and I I've said it the last I think the last couple meetings we've had in terms of when these agencies when
they get into their rule making they're these rulemakings are being done without uh without legislative support and sometimes u you know that overview >> you know isn't there but I I'm hopeful
that that this will help and that we can at least have our I'm repeating myself I guess and I I can say after going through an audit in 2025, we there's some very minor things that we had to address, but if this was implemented the
way it is and nothing changes, we'd probably have to look at hiring a one staff member just to make sure that we're adequately covering all of the bases that the MS4 permit requires. And that's just a staff member, not some
of the BMPs that we might need to put on some storm structures. Madam Chair, I would I would move that we approve the comment letter to the MPCA. >> Okay, we have a motion offered from Commissioner Campbell. Do a second from Commissioner Bear. >> Further discussion.
>> Any other discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. Carried. >> Thank you. >> You. >> Thanks, Justin. >> Item nine is a request approval of the Axon Justice software purchase
application. We have county attorney Melton with us. Good evening. >> Good evening, madam chair. Good evening, commissioners. I am coming here uh to request uh purchase of a software program, Axon Justice. Um, I did go to pick and and talk through a lot of this,
but Axon uh is a primary uh body cam uh maker and and uh that does body cam for police departments and and nowadays body cam uh is a constant for us. So, every department that we work with uh between
Morhead PD, all the other towns uh throughout Klay County, and then sheriff's department, uh all have body cam now. So, we're always getting uh video and processing that. And so, uh currently we have what's called just a
created Z drive through the IT department. It's about a 13 terabyte drive. It costs about $31,000 uh to maintain yearly. uh this program, which would be about at least for the next year uh budget year would be about
36,000 about $5,000 more would allow uh a great deal more as far as being able to store that video. Um currently that 13 terabyte is is limiting and so we're constantly having to uh get rid of uh
video and and monitor that. the acts on justice would be unlimited. So we wouldn't have to be constantly kind of fighting against that uh storage uh piece and then there's extra features within the the software program itself which would help with timelines and
getting stuff done currently. Sometimes, depending on the amount of video, as you might imagine, sometimes you might have an event that happens and you have five or six officers that go there, interview several people, a lot of different video. Um, and it can take up to 8 to 10 to 12 hours to get all that video
downloaded, and then we have to disclose it. And we'll go from 12-hour time frames down to minutes. And so, that timing alone will really help pay for itself, you know. So, there is a there is a cost factor. It's about a $5,000 increase uh to the budget. Um but I
think that time savings is going to be well uh worth it. So, I I know I put a feature sheet in there just some of the different things that it does and allows for, but I know that uh my folks as we've been looking at that and getting some updates or or uh briefings from
Axon of of how we would use this um you know, they're really I I won't say it's a gamecher, but it could be a very impactful thing to help limit having to add staff uh in the future for legal assistance. I mean, I think it's going to give a savings to all of them which
could be extremely helpful for us. >> Well, I think we also talked at pick that uh the time piece uh people's time costs lots of money uh particularly within your department and uh in times when you need to access the information
as quickly as possible as you're working through cases. We felt that the cost which you compared to what the just the data storage is would justify the payment and and you would see a substantial cost savings uh every year
going forward as well. >> Commissioner Ebinger. >> Yeah, Brian, I I read this through and I'm a little unclear on one part of it. They can take what you've got on the current system and put it within the
framework of you. You only have to access one data. Correct. Everything that we'll have this will this will change over. We will no longer have that Z drive and that 13 terabyte piece and that cost. everything will get transferred over and and really all the
so again everybody uses Axon except for the sheriff's department and I uh I want to say Greyhawk but that's not quite right I can't think they use a different one but that too can get stored in there they just have to go through a different cycle to to get it stored into so all of
that program that program will store all video for us >> and it's on the cloud >> on the cloud correct >> well the redaction And I'm doing this from a position of somebody that was looking at this stuff what, eight, nine
years ago. But what they've got right now uh addresses a lot of the fears we had on not being able to keep up with redaction and getting things out for for uh information requests and and the whole bit. So, >> right,
>> I think I see where the savings is going to be. >> Correct, Commissioner. Beyond just that download piece, again, I didn't get too into the other features, but there's a lot of other features for able to to do our own redacting. It has a a I guess, if you will, an AI feature that produces
an instant uh transcript, which is very helpful. It's not a 100% transcript. You still have to go through it. And when people are talking over each other, you got to you'll get about a 70% transcript, but that's better than what we have currently where we have to go back to law enforcement, ask them to
create one. So there's definitely some features that are going to be other time savings that we haven't even really explored yet. But uh yeah, redaction is a big piece too. Yeah, I know it during our big meeting when we talked about this, we did spend
time talking about the redaction piece and how important that is and and I this whole thing I think from the reason PIC was recommending this of course was um for one thing it seems to me it's just an upgrade to something better. Um, and
it really is in my mind it it's going to pay for itself in the time savings um that that we're dealing with. And didn't you mention something too that there's a potential for some you have like forfeite dollars or something that could go towards this?
>> Right. If if you look the I I gave obviously one of the primary things is it's a five-year contract. Um we do contract with them for a period of time. currently uh Morehead, which would be the biggest customer, they're on a five-year contract, staying with Axon. So, I expect all those will be going,
but we do expect to um implement immediately after approval here in July. Uh and that July through the end of the year, I would pay for through forfeite money. I have for that 13,000 would would uh come from me in
forfeite and then after that be budgeted into the 27 and then future budgets after that >> just like it is now. >> Just like it is now. >> Additional questions? >> Any question? >> Yes, Commissioner Bear. >> And then coming 2027 budget, we'd be not paying for what we currently have.
Correct. That would come off the books. >> Correct. I would expect Rory would I >> I haven't told him or well we've talked specifically about it but I'd be telling him that if this is approved then I would expect his would come off of that budget currently that's in his >> that's in his budget >> correct >> madam chair
>> yes commissioner >> make a motion to approve the purchase and application of the Axon justice software system for the attorney's office >> motion offered from commissioner Ebinger >> second >> second from commissioner Campbell uh
Steve did Do we need a dollar amount included in the >> um I think I think for this first year the first years or six months we would the rest of them would be captured in uh in the upcoming budgets
>> was that that number specifically identified the six months >> that the 13 madam chair that was that um scrolling down >> sorry >> 129960 Okay. Does your motion reflect the the 1299? >> Yes.
>> 960 and second. >> Yeah. And that would come out of because >> the forfeite >> forfeite. >> Further discussion. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Oppos. Same sign carried. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks Brian. Item 10, the request approval of resolution 2026-12 for continuation of the performance measurement program. We have our assistant county administrator, Darren Brookke. Good evening.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair, commissioners. Good evening. Um, this is the uh resolution for continuing the performance measurement program for 2026. Um, a little bit of history on this. This started that I tracked back in
2011. Um it is a state auditor's program and what it does is it uh we we identify different categories from our departments and that we have been tracking data since 2011 and uh each
year we get a little bit more data. Um it doesn't take a lot of time to put together because a lot of the departments track this already. So when this comes up, it's due on July 1st of 2026. The data will be from 2025.
And so when I when this comes up, the departments are able to give me that um that information very quickly. Um the other nice thing about it is that last year we received $9,359 from the state auditor's department
because we did participate in this program. And that's about the same that we normally get every December. Um in 2025 there was 39 cities that um participated in this program and 28 counties. So not all of the counties or
cities participate but um we have since uh 2011. Um this uh information will be posted on our website for 90 days so the um citizens can review that if they want
to. Um and with that being said, I am open to any questions that you may have. >> Why did Thank you. Any questions? >> So we It's the same every year, Darren.
It's it's something that you can provide them the information that they need and and the you can do that for probably less than the 9,359 that we get, right? Isn't that >> a lot less? >> Yes. >> So, it's a revenue producer. >> It's a revenue producing.
>> Okay. >> Yes. >> I don't know where that money goes. I think a general fund, but uh it doesn't come to the administrator's budget, I don't think. No. Well, to follow up, I do think this data is really helpful as you walk through some of this. It shows
some needs areas and interesting just in interesting data for us as we make decisions on programs. >> Additional questions. >> Madam Chair, I move to approve the resolution 2026-12 to proceed in the state performance measurement program
for 2026. It's 27. >> It It'll be for 2026. So, >> Oh, it's okay. >> This This year we'll report next year. >> We have a motion offered to approve the request resolution 2026-12. >> Second.
>> A second from Commissioner Bear. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying >> I same sign. Carried. >> Thank you. Can we do the agenda addition now? >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioners,
before you uh this evening is a proposed letter to Senator Amy Clolobashar and Tina Smith regarding the implementation uh of a recent changes to the SNAP program enacted through HR1. The letter uh requests support for extending
implementation relief to all states as the state senate develops the 2026 farm bill. As outlined in the letter, uh SNAP serves more than 7,700 Klay County residents and the new federal requirements will create significant administrative staffing, training, and
technology demands for county human service agencies that this board has uh spoke off and on. While Klay County has maintained a strong SNAP payment accuracy rate less than 2%, the legislature reduces federal administrative funds and introduces new cost sharing requirements tied to state
payment error rates, creating substantial financial exposure for both the county and the state. The proposed correspondence asked Minnesota senators to support a delay in these cost shifts provisions for all states, providing counties the time uh necessary to implement program changes, maintaining
maintaining service levels, and continuing to improve payment accuracy without disrupting assistance to vulnerable residents. Uh the recommendation would be for the board to consider signing uh the attached letter. And that I yield for any questions. >> Thank you, Steve. The other reason this
came as agenda addition is Niko sent out a urgent request for folks uh counties to contact their senators on this questions. >> I'd move approval of the letter. >> Uh Commissioner Campbell offers a motion to
approve. >> Second. >> Second from Commissioner Ebinger. Discussion. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Same sign. Carried. We'll
email that to the offices as well as a hard copy. >> Item number uh 11 is the request approval of the recommendation for the H Heartland Trail state or regional trail designation. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. As you recall on June 9th, uh this board held a work
session. We had a presentation from Dan Farnsworth from Metro Cog. uh he shared the findings and recommendations of the H Heartland Trail study uh that the counties participated in going back to 24 2024 and 25. The presentation reviewed the proposed alignment extending the Hartman Trail throughout
Klay County, the work completed to date and the considerations associated with uh pursuing the project as either a state, a regional or a combination of both types of trails. Since the completion of the study, the H Heartland Trail Task Force has continued evaluating rightway opportunities,
coordinating with partners throughout the Minnesota with including the Minnesota DNR and the Buffalo uh River State Park, and exploring long-term implications of trail designation, funding, construction, and maintenance responsibilities. Uh the key policy question before you
you this this evening is determining uh which is your preferred direction of advancing the project. Uh the board had a robust conversation after the presentation evaluating both the pros and cons of uh of each option. At the end of the discussion, uh this board asked county staff to bring this item
forward for discussion and consideration. Uh and with that, I would yield for comments from the board. >> Thank you, Steve. Commissioner Campbell. >> Madam Chair, thank you. I um when we had that uh workg groupoup session last week, uh it's too bad that
we didn't have that agenda in reverse order. Um because when it got down to when we started talking about our Klay County 2027 budget target discussion, uh we we all realized the
significance of of the impacts that are going on right now with our budget. And you know, and I I said it during that time with um Metrocog here that I I really believe that um if we were to go
this regional approach, it it could really cause some problems, financial problems for our county uh that we just are in no shape uh to handle right now. And I I guess I'm speaking up just like I did at at the
workg groupoup session and advocating strongly that we adopt the state uh type of a plan that would go forward with the with the trails. I know there's there's some things and that doesn't say that maybe there could be a small stretch
down during this planning process that maybe we could alter that down the road to um maybe get something where it's of significant use uh to more more people. Uh that would be good. But at this point
in time, I I think our budget's going to be stretched so so thin. And I I'm even looking beyond 2027. You know, you look at the next even three years, the demands on our budget are going to be just incredible. So, I'm advocating for the state option.
>> Commissioner Abinger. >> Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with Commissioner Campbell. We are not in a position right now to take on u although a desirable resource resource that is going to take a lot of money to develop
and to maintain. So, um, although it may be a quicker route to put it on on the the county and locals to to pay for it, I think state has got this program and we need to let them run with it and support them however we can,
but we don't have the money to take it a re make it a regional rail. >> Commissioner Kavanagh. >> Yeah, I I would agree with that. um it's too much risk and um I think we have the
patience um to know that if we work it through a regional approach someday it'll be done and um we'll be able to work along with the state in doing that. So would would approve uh move along
with the approval of the regional. Madam Chair, I sit on the Heartland Trail Committee with about six other township officials and state officials and all that. And I appreciate your insight, all your insights on that. And sitting on that,
Ive I've I've always wanted to have the board make that decision on which way we lean on that so we can work forward on that committee because right now we're in a stalemate on which way we should go. So, I appreciate you all chiming in on that. I'd like to make a motion to have it go into a Heartland trail follow
the state trail designation. >> Second. >> We have a motion offered from Commissioner Bear, a second from Commissioner Ebinger to follow the state designation. >> Commissioner Kavanagh, >> I want clarity. I don't have the
paperwork in front of me. >> Apologize. >> That's okay. So with that uh the this so I'm straight the state one is the private uh >> that is a state funding it
>> bonding you follow the bonding >> right >> okay just making sure >> yeah okay >> well I think the great part about having this as the work session is it did give us an opportunity commissioner bear is on that committee he's had those
dialogues metricog has done an enormous amount of work, but they too are seeking guidance in which avenue to go. I grew up spending a lot of time on the H Heartland Trail. I think it's a great asset. It's a great uh uh system that can be an economic driver, but
unfortunately for Klay County, the counties that have these trail systems also have um parks and trails departments. >> We do not have that at all. Uh so what would end up happening likely if we chose the regional component is it would
be an extra burden on what our highway department is is feeling there's some substantial work requirements that come out of that maintenance requirements and we're in a time when we're trying to find ways that we can do more with less
on our road systems and uh I am in full support that I think uh following the state system is the best option for Clay county. It is disappointing because I know that comes with some um long-term um it it's a challenge to secure
long-term funding. I do think the avenue for state funding opportunities are a little more promising there than having it uh solely on the county levy. So, I agree with the my colleagues here on this one. Any further discussion? Commissioner Campbell. Madam Chair, I
want to go back a little bit and Commissioner Wayland when he was when he was on this board uh and he served on the H Heartland Trail Committee and um he he said a long time ago years ago he said he said that the diversion project
would be done before Hartland Trail and and he's been absolutely correct uh on on that. Um the diversion is set to be done in October. Um I I the the frustrating part about this is that it
um and I I drive from here to PUM where my lake place is at and I see the trails that are completed and they're used a lot and it you know but it it's a um this is for me this is like triage
uh with what with what we can afford to pay for and what we can't. And it's it's it's like what we need versus what what we want. And this is something that everybody would like to see happen. Uh
unfortunately, there are other things that have greater needs. And I think we're making the right choice based on that. I do believe that moving forward I you know going back to the statewide vote that put x amount of dollars I can't remember what it was in little
sams and those types of things that that maybe they could expand the ability to use those dollars in some of these ways would be beneficial. I I'm I don't know all the ins and outs of that but I would think that that might be a source any I support the motion. >> So we have a motion and a second. Any
further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I >> post same sign. Carried. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Moving into our committee reports. Commissioner Abinger.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um last Tuesday on the 9th, I was with the rest of the board on the workg group that we covered uh or that we has been covered in tonight's meeting. a lot of uh good groundwork for us and and I think it
helped helped is helping us make some good decisions. Uh the next day, Wednesday the 10th, I met with Mike Arnston, who's the chairman of the greater Fargo Morehead EDC. We reviewed the uh 360 evaluation
of Joe Raso, the uh CEO of the EDC and general and had a general discussion on it. It's an issue that will be brought before the board, the EDC board in the coming months. And on Thursday the 11th,
I uh got to get my notes. Remotely attended the treatment court initiative advisory committee meeting. I represent the AMC on that. Uh had a great deal. It was a two and a
half hour long meeting. We discussed some of the u development of formulas to uh review these courts as are coming up. Talked about confidential confidentiality policy uh issues
involving staffing who can be present while the staffing discussions are going on. Um then we discussed future meetings and scheduling on it. Uh best practices and some of the treatment court evaluations
that we're doing and um I'm not going to go too far in the weeds on some of this stuff. It's not relevant, but it was a very productive meeting. And that's completes my report. Thank you, Commissioner Ebinger, Commissioner C.
>> So, on the uh Wednesday the 10th, started out the day with the CL County Extension Committee. Uh we had our new board member, Michael Butnoff, in attendance. So, it was nice to meet him and hear more about his background. We
also have um there's open position right now u and some of the work that's being filled in by we had a they have a intern through August she's a senior from Ohio
State um senior in degree in agriculture so she's helping out fill the gaps uh we're mainly went through program updates from 4 into the uh agriculture and natural resources
uh master gardener program and then uh other regional updates. Uh, a big t part of the discussion was from our uh, Northwest Minnesota uh, program leader uh, um, Karen Revenue and she
really went deep into the new initiative that they've been bringing about called Beyond Ready Initiative and it's purely a youth development program that starts pretty much uh, ages 10 years old up to
19 and the value to that um in nurturing these kids through youth development. Uh one fact that is coming out of it, these kids are three times more likely to be engaged in community activity than kids
that don't go through these programs. So that was the main gest of that meeting and uh so many good things are going on prepping for the Barnes or the I call it the Barnesfield fair county fair and uh getting ready for that and they have
high numbers of kids being involved uh kind of the highest level they've ever had. Um later in the day I had the um Clay County govern collaborative government governance meeting. Um we had um
presenters uh from their different um providers and their requests uh there was u for funding for 2027. There were 17 uh requests brought forward by different um some some of
them through the same entity but diff uh seven 17 different um grants if you will that we put out in the uh collaborative. 16 of the 17 were approved. The other
one wasn't. It was determined it wouldn't fit the criteria. And these total requests add up to $512,486. So, I mean, it's a lot of money going out there. I think if you added up all the kids involved is what, 300 kids. I
mean, it was uh an incredible amount of work that they do and u uh really appreciate what their collaborative is doing for our county. Um,
and I had the class WCD on Thursday here. Excuse me. Uh, mainly uh finish up some u there was uh one, two, three, five, nine CRP
contracts that were uh planted for reimbursements of cash share. um had u I haven't got the final three amount yet. We'll have that next month month in detail. Uh but we've done 10 miles of adding and many plant jobs.
Field one brakes were in the neighborhood of what was approved. Uh looks like there was right around a dozen of those. So, um, also a big part of what they talked
about, um, was they're working on their budget that we will be, uh, um, having on, uh, July 21st. And I think my big takeaway um been around this organization for many years
but and was me mentioned last week a little bit as we talked about our own budget and how we work with the class WCD but the uh number of things that we share in common with them and what they do that is passed through money from
that comes the county that they do for us. So anyway, all that is appreciated and we'll hear that much more in detail when they present on the 21st. So overall, um yeah, I I think that's what
I have takeaways from that meeting. Um uh it would have been on Friday. I had a um historical and culture society finance meeting. I will say that our budget's on track and again toward
budgeting and the uh the you know everybody's pitching in here u the efforts uh to increase their revenues and again we're working we've been strategizing this uh to increase those revenues continually and some of the
things are starting to happen in in a positive motion. So um that's more or less at the infancy stage. And then um Monday I had um two meetings that kind of revolve around CAP LP. Um one
was the fact they took on uh reach out and Holly. Uh they've now set up policies and procedures for them uh in their thrift store that's being set up there and it's kind of been refreshed. um they expect to have a right at
$80,000 role and um the efforts that they're doing there is to uh have that a forprofit center so that they can work in the community around Holly and in rural rural Clay County of services that
they can provide uh um um residents of that area. Um the other part is uh through the F FRC that's also housed with CAP um uh bringing a transportation
plan u that maybe we could work with. We're working along with Matt right now and several other entities to make that much more efficient to uh kind of see what we can do to improve the efficiency of our transportation needs in the city
of of Morehead and Dworth. And then this afternoon or two things uh happened law library uh we had a quarterly meeting. Um, this uh group is funded u by the number of court cases that go through
the district. We get $10 a court case and that balance is up to $124,000. It's amazing. These people are working over there. And uh anyway, uh what do we do with the money? And uh so we've been
doing improvements to the law library itself. We're making um um iPads available for people needing needing help in in their their work um whether it's they're in the courts courts are
doing something um uh typically on their own. Um, also, uh, two upcoming things that are just in development and probably be taken off, uh, over the next couple months will be a family mediation
program and also a chips mediation program. Uh, Clay County hasn't had these in the past and um, Ottertella's uh, the medi family mediation. I think Becker's got the chips. So anyway, kind
of following um and making these available in Klay County. And then this afternoon I had the uh Klay County adult mental health. Uh we did reports of our agencies again well attended. Then we
had a presentation from Jason McCoy of public health and there is a um a newer um u not it's not an app. It's it's online, but it's called uh um
crediblemind.com. And it's really um really harnesses for people a way to get into uh a website that really uh treats and gives good information um for people that with mental health
needs. uh helping people to let know something know where they have information and guidance like when they're one example just getting really anxious or uh to the point of anxiety I had to have. So um that's what came out
of that meeting. So that's it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Commissioner Kavanagh Commissioner Campbell. >> Thank you Madam Chair. And I want to start off just um the workg groupoup session that we had last week that and the agenda items that you had put on there was uh well timed and I want to
kind of incorporate a couple of my um committee meetings together because if we recall one of the items that we had I want to thank Haley and Thomas for being here and during that conversation I brought up to them you know the the success we had but I also talked about
that $9.5 million of additional dollars that are out there for state flood mitigation dollars. The reason I'm going to incorporate so we had a planning committee meeting of the diversion authority on the 11th and during that meeting we talked about one of the
things we talked about was Minnesota funding and one of the things I I brought up to them is if we were successful in getting uh any more allocation of that $9.5 million would the diversion authority match that because that was not clear before and
under based on what we learned from the diversion authority planning committee meeting. Yes, it would. So, so I think it's I think it would be good for us to let Haley and Thomas know that as well as let you know um I believe the Buffalo
Red has its own uh lobbyist as well >> and and then maybe even follow up with uh Dr. Zimmerman because he's going to be part of that plan in place with Steve and applying for some of these things that go on. But that could that might really be a carrot
to get us some additional funds knowing that that would be matched. I have have nothing else on the workg group. That was just all timely discussions. Uh the county personnel issues committee meeting was on the 9th.
Uh we acted on just about everything. We did have one uh conversation regarding the phone system cost comparison. And I've got a I've got a cousin who has a band and and their the band name is
Easily Amused. And at that meeting I was easily confused. I I was really confused over the presentation on that. And I think everybody felt the same way. So I think we're going to be getting some more information on on any of on that before we make any changes to to that
system. Everything else we talked we dealt with today. Then we had the uh dispatch um meeting of the June June 10th also and that was the budget and finance committee meeting
and uh we had learned that the executive committee had agreed to move forward with the um budget that included the technology specialist.
For those that don't know, the technology specialist is going to be um basically an assistant to Brian. That's and Brian has been involved with that for many many years. And and I would think it's just a matter of time before,
you know, he'll probably be pulling the plug too. He hasn't said that, but it you just time would just say that. So when we talk about um about um having plans for replacing um that that position was included none
of the other ones in the other options were and so the um budget that was approved originally would have been 8.28% increase. However, we did have a we did
have a look back um to the population and and Klay County's number did drop. Um >> yeah. So, so under the previous one,
Morhead was at 7 point 17.8% of the budget. Klay County was 8.3. Under the new numbers based on the census information provided, MORD dropped to 17.3 and Klay County dropped to 7.9
which is probably saves about $2,500 for Klay County. >> So what does where does that shift get made up? >> It goes to Cass County because it it's populationbased and >> yeah so and then we talked the draft budget. So anyway, so the 2026 budget
was approved with those numbers. It's it's unfortunate but uh most of it were software issues that are required to pay. And so and then um then on the 11th I was in um Grand Forks for the West
Central Water meeting along with Commissioner Bear. we had basically we're trying to plan out uh how we're going to deal with the moving forward with with financing and funding of different projects and I think we're really coming up with some good plan
options there. Uh more to come in that we're going to be meeting again as a full board up up in Grand Forks on the 29th. Um I think we're really setting this up to really see some pipe coming getting in the ground in 2027. Right. It's
Yeah. So, and I I think both Ezra and I kind of really pushed for a timeline to see some uh with our goal getting water to Felton uh as soon as possible. So, that would be good for northern Klay
County for the residents up there. Uh diversion authority planning committee meeting then was also that um on the 11th. Um I talked about we did talk about some governance issues in in reviewing the u
executive director position. Uh one of the things that uh we talked about where there is concern and now that uh I we noticed that um council member um Hendrickson from the city also has decided he's not going to be running.
So, it appears that we we have the potential for having uh eight uh diversion authority board members off the board come December. >> Well, it's going to be complete, but it's going that's I mean, that project's going to go on for 30 years with
maintenance that there's it's just a whole different amount of work. Um, so there's that's going to be interesting to see. And and of course there'll be changes to our MCC JPA board and and all those things that are going to be happening be some of our board
members will go off in June and some of us will go off in December. And that concludes my >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Campbell. Commissioner Bear. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. On Tuesday, I was also at the work group session which I thought was very good. And then on Wednesday, I was also at the Klay County
Collaborative Governments governance meeting where we went over the program funding and we approved those grants. And then we also approved the LL LCTS coordinator contract and the approval of the coordinator contract.
And then I also went up on June 11th up to Grand Forks for a workshop for the West Central Regional Water District on our next financing options and building options which we'll be reporting back to the full board on the 29th. And then on June 12th, I went to meet with Derek La
Point on the behalf of West Central Regional Water District to discuss funding options with Bill Bank on that project and getting him up to date on that project where that sits. Those are all my committee reports. Madam Chair,
>> thank you, Commissioner Bear. Last week, I also attended the PIT committee that was represented well from Commissioner Campbell's standpoint. The piece that needed some additional clarification had to do with our phone systems throughout the county. What made the most sense,
uh, we needed more data to better grapple with what we were discussing. Uh, thank you to all of you for your input on the work session. and it really felt like it was a valuable conversation so that we could take action on the items of importance today. And I also
think that the timeliness of wrapping up the legislative session and talking about the successes at the uh legislature, but then pivoting as we are under contract with uh Tom and Haley, where is uh areas that we can put them to work on in the off season that really
would help maximize uh issues for Klay County? and we've identified a couple of them today, but particularly that flood hazard mitigation pool of funding, having their expertise on those application proposals would be very important. I also attended the Klay
County Extension Committee meeting with Commissioner Kabanov. We did have a good discussion uh from all the presenters, particularly great to have new membership on there. And then we did talk about the budget and uh the constraints that we're looking forward.
We did float the idea on that open position to recommend uh changing it to a 0.8 position from a 1.0 position. That decision needs to likely happen soon as
the intern will cover the additional um workload during the off season and the fair season. But once we get into school-based programming, that position covers a lot of that school-based programming. and we've heard from our school districts the importance of having the representation in those
school districts. So, uh Steve will be working with Cecilia on what that looks like. Uh anticipate something coming to this board for approval or action going forward. And that al that concludes my reports. Steve, >> thank you, Madam Chair. I'll skip
everything that has been covered. We had management on uh June 10th. We talked about the legislative session 2025 budget. uh our upcoming uh appreciation picnic uh Klay County government days at the Klay County Fair on July 10th. Uh
and also Darren's been along with several department heads has been spearheading a data practice update for the county. Uh on the 11th I met with Darren, Anna, and Tessa Melvin from David Drsson and Associates. As this board's aware, we determined that we're
going to be looking at a market study uh next year with an adjustment uh implementation in 2028. So, we're having those discussions what that would look like. Again, any discussion will most likely come to pick and then before the board. Uh on the 11th, I also met with
Jessica and Joe on a series of county issues. I did uh have an opportunity to to go to open house for Payton Mastera, Dworth administrator. Wish him well as he moves on. I think he had his first board meeting in Nebraska that today. Uh
and so that was great to wish him well. appreciate the work that he did with the county. Um, I think that concludes my report. >> Thank you, Steve. Brian, >> thank you, Madam Chair. I think maybe just worth mentioning um as this board
may be aware, there's a a law change coming in effect August 1st that affects juvenile law and the fact that uh juveniles 10 years of age through 12 years of age will no longer be uh considered capable of committing a crime. Uh and so that has some impact
within the juvenile uh setting. Um and so uh instead of it being referred to uh through the juvenile criminal process and ultimately uh from law enforcement to our office, uh those issues now that
potentially arise will now be uh going to uh the social services department and looking at potential uh chips matters in those cases. And so the only reason I mentioned it's coming up August 1st, but I have uh meetings planned with law enforcement uh to
discuss that with uh sheriff's department and local smaller uh agencies this Thursday and then the week after with Morehead just because they'll be a larger uh scale operation. And ultimately some of the discussion is how to get them referred to social services
but also restorative justice still has a a role and a part in that that even if it's not a criminal matter getting referred specifically to court uh that it could still be and benefit from restorative justice. So how to make sure that still remains uh in play u is is
something that you're going to be discussing uh in the upcoming weeks. So, I just wanted to mention that to this board as you might be aware of it or see it in the news upcoming. I did also want to just mention that um we have our own internal uh wellness week within our office uh that we're doing. We have some
different things over noon hours, some mediation or uh meditation stuff uh mental health CLE, trauma and legal profession on Tuesday. But what I wanted to mention was that on Thursday, June 25th, so next week, Thursday, we do have
a potluck. Um, and I would invite anybody from the the board if you're welcome to come and now because we love our potluck and love eating down in the county attorney's office, but this is a salad potluck. So, which we did do two years ago and it was actually very successful. A lot of different variety
of different salads and different stuff and people are signing up to bring meats and nuts and all. So anyway, I would invite any and all of you to come on down for a salad potluck if you want to see how it goes. So it'll be next Thursday at noon on June 25th. >> Thank you, Brian. Darren,
>> we have a minute to go before >> I got one minute. I'm not sure I can top that salad potluck, though. Um everything is uh been covered already. The only thing I had uh that was summarized was uh I had a meeting with Rory to tighten up that phone system
presentation. Uh so that'll come back to the board here in the next couple weeks. Um also, uh had two evaluations that I did for the recorder and the planning and zoning. Had a watermill hearing on Thursday and everything else has been
covered. Thank you. >> Thank you. Sarah, do you have anything? Okay. If not, uh we have concluded all business for the day. We are set to have our board of appeal and equalization here in a couple minutes. Uh the county offices and um buildings will be closed
Friday in honor of the federal holiday and then we will meet here next Tuesday at 8:30. We are adjourned.