Good morning everyone. Welcome to our committee of the whole work session where we are supporting community through quality public service on this day, Tuesday, February 17th at 10:35. We got a little technology going here in a few minutes. So we should be set, right?
>> Yes. So, I just want to reiterate the fact that when folks come before the um committee the whole to do a presentation, it's just that there's been no decisions made. We sit here, we listen to folks present things that they want us to know about for future action
with our um total board discussion. So today we're going to have uh on our agenda we have the minutes from the previous work session of January 20th. And then on the agenda today we have our lobbying update
Gunplint Trail Project Cook County 2026 legislative priorities and um this uh sub SGSD follow-up discussion. And also in our packet, we have the minutes from the standing committees for information
only, the airport advisory commission, the budget and facilities advisory uh committee, and the highway um advisory committee. So, we'll start off with our first item on the agenda with a presentation by our county engineer,
Robbie Hos. >> Thank you. Um we're actually going to take a short pivot if you don't mind. There is something that did come up recently. Um I think I had emailed everybody about that county road safety plan, safe streets for all initiative.
Um I didn't get a chance to to put it on the agenda while that that got out. Is that okay if we start there? Okay. >> Um so a little bit of background. Um, every county in the state, uh, with the assistance of of MindDOT and generally a consultant they bring on to help
facilitate, um, develops a CRSP, county road safety plan. And what that does is it looks at a variety of different things on our county road system and helps come up with potential countermeasures to deploy uh, if safety issues come up.
So, an example would be problematic intersections with high crash rates. Hey, what can we do here to reduce the crash rates? because at the end of the day, we don't want anybody getting in accidents. And so that's the type of thing we're looking at. If there's a lot of S-curves on a road and a lot of accidents, what can we do there to try
and mitigate that? Once you develop that plan, that plan can then be used to pursue funding, which is great because then it gives you this really big tool to hold and say, "Hi everybody, we've done a ton of work. I'm not making this up. We do need funds." And that helps
you with that. Uh and so part of the county road safety plan process is you can opt in to another acronym. Uh the safe streets for all initiative, SS48. Now government it gets dense. Um but the
safe streets for all initiative is some of the things we kind of already do up here. We consider pedestrians, we consider cyclists. Um and kind of how everybody interacts on our infrastructure on our roads. I think a great example of that is, you know, if you remember years ago, uh, the city of
Grand Marray created a pedestrian plan that the county then adopted and that is that is integral in our, um, 10-year transportation plan. That's that's part of that. Um, a very specific example is uh, the multi-use trail that we are going to build this summer directly
comes from all of that. And so, yes, >> no, I'm sorry. My arm just can't sit still. >> That's okay. Uh so yeah, so I mean that's that's one example. So what this what the the point of this is then to uh for the safe streets for all initiative and also for the county road safety plan
is to put together a task force of folks uh to get together and meet um and help you know kind of look at the plan look at areas that they are more intimate with maybe than other places. So, you know, the people that I emailed, for example, you know, all the townships are
invited. Um, the, you know, obviously we want commissioner representation. Um, I mean, you name a person or you name an interested entity, the school buses, the hospital, um, everybody's a part of that conversation. That and that's what we want. And so, um, I think what I was was
hoping was to get some, um, input from from you all, uh, on what type of representation we could bring from the county side of things, uh, for that. So, I know I've been rambling a lot, but is there any questions or comments about
it, what the purpose is, who's already said yes. >> Okay. Well, we probably don't want all commissioners on it. >> No more than two. >> Yeah. A question, Robbie, on >> Yes. when when it comes to highways,
roads, things like that. Um it seems that those commissioners that are on those committees that the their awareness because of their exposure to this subject makes
those commissioners the ones that should participate in these things. So the question is is a it's a question >> is that does that reasoning make sense? Is there is there something that given their involvement and their awareness that they're more equipped to be
beneficial in participating in this or not? >> That's a good point. Um I guess I would we don't really touch on too like so I think what you're getting at is like um Commissioner White Commissioner Sullivan said on highway advisory committee. >> Yeah. >> Um so there there are some you know
sometimes we'll talk this is a very specific group for a specific task. Um I don't know that that would make too much of a difference. >> Okay. >> One way one way or another. Um with that I mean the only things like so that you
know a lot of times too with these committees what what is difficult and what they've already told us is difficult is just where we live. We don't have any accidents. There's not you have you have two over 10 years and you go well that's not an issue. So, um,
and so that's that's kind of the hard thing with this group sometimes. Uh, the only thing I could think of we talked directly about maybe from highway advisory would be like our sign policy and how we intend that, you know, the intention behind chevrons or curve ahead
or, you know, that type of stuff and handling the gunflint a little bit differently. That's honestly all I can think of off the top of my head. Is there a requirement for participation or just more from the standpoint of not wanting to be left out
so that we have a voice at the table? >> Yeah, it's it's well it's it's representation. I'll give you an example of of the people. So like um so like obviously Jared Sweder from Grand Portage, Mike Roth uh from the city, uh you know, Sheriff Elias, uh we have a
trooper on here, uh our sign guy, all three reps from the um or all three townships, sorry, were emailed Mike Keeport, ask Kristen if she wanted to. Uh we talked to Tom Nelson with the buses. Um we'll engage with the um the
ambulance um what's her Carla with the ambulance. And so just to give you an idea, Christina Matson with the active living steering committee. And so I think you know kind of those individual groups and and entities within themselves. So yeah, I think some some county representation would be would be
nice. >> Um >> given the the workload of committees that I sit on, I'm I'm certainly willing to participate. I just wanted to get your perspective on >> what makes sense. But >> Sure. And I think it would be beneficial
to have another commissioner just at least in this instance learn more about these different roads and things about how there is a real undercurrent of not wanting any roundabouts in this county. >> However, there are are some people that
think they would be great. >> They are great. >> Not they are great. It it's not >> there's plenty of roundabouts in when you're in Cook County trying to find your way. So, >> well, I know you you get to, you know, >> Yeah, I know what you're talking about longer.
>> Um, the information is interesting and it's not that technical. >> Would you say that's true? >> I would. I would. >> And I think it's in it's it's good for all commissioners to know more about our roads.
>> I do. I also um appreciate Commissioner Gamble um thinking about this because he is the one commissioner that is in within city limits and that's where most of our intersections are in the county. >> And so I think oftentimes we think about
roads, we think automatically about the Gunflint Trail, the Arrowhead Trail, but I think it's really important to also have that city perspective. >> Yeah. So, I think it would be great if we could have two commissioners on this particular committee. So, I'm hearing
Commissioner Gamble, you're you're willing. >> Sure. >> Is anyone else willing to serve? >> If real quick, just as a like time commitment. Um it is so we plan to meet on a quarterly basis and that will begin
sometime in March or April and so that's where I had asked kind of by the end of the month um for to hear back from folks um was was in that time frame. So quarterly not a huge time commitment. Um the meetings are not public so it'll
just be that group. >> Um >> and this is an ad hoc committee. It's not ongoing. >> Correct. Yeah. It's just for the development of this plan. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Or the the update of it. The last time we had one was 2012. >> So, it's a little
>> Well, I would be interested if it works into, you know, depends on what day, you know, >> right? And and we'll figure that out. Yeah. I think that's the point is just to get Okay, here we got, you know, the goal is if we can get about 10 people on this, something like that, that's a good
group to chat about this type of stuff. And Commissioner White, since you are um the primary on the highway advisory, I think it makes sense. If there is a conflict, let me know and then I'll be happy to help there. >> That will also help balance our
commissioner assignments. I'm also thinking of that >> and we can get we'll get this added to the commissioner assignments as well. >> So, Gamble and White. >> Yep. Sullivan as a backup. >> Y. >> Thank you. What's the official name of
it? >> How many acronyms do you want? Uh, it is the So, that's okay. It's the county road safety plan. >> Okay. >> Safe streets for all task force. >> Okay. Just quick before the hyphen >> that will take two lines on the website
should be noted 4A task force. There you go. Yeah, >> sounds like >> wonderful. Thank you. I appreciate that. Sorry for the minor detour from the agenda. Um, >> we're very flexible. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Um, so let's see. I did. Okay, so lobbying
things. Um, did that file hopefully download? >> Yeah, let's see if I can pull it up. >> Okay, that sounds good. So, what we wanted to do, um, Kristen and I have been working quite a bit uh with our lobbyist. Um, if you all remember, we brought on a lobbyist for the highway
department specifically targeting three projects. Main one in particular is this Gunflint Trail one. So, what you'll see in your handouts hopefully in a nice order is the first page is kind of it says legislator priorities and big letters. Um, we can start there. Um,
what that highlights is actually some of the things I think Kristen's going to touch on in a little bit and some legislative priorities. Um but uh I have a couple meetings on Thursday set up with um Senator Housechild and Representative Scraba just to chat not
only about broad prior transportation priorities but specifically our project. Um and so what we wanted to do is give you all an update uh kind of on what's been going on. Uh let's see. So, if I back up a little bit, at AMC, uh, we had a wonderful meeting, Commissioner
Storyley, uh, Commissioner Sullivan, Kristen, and myself, if I'm remembering correctly, with, I think, a couple people from the governor's staff, uh, and then another representative Senator >> Senator >> Senator. Yeah. Um, that sits on one of the transportation committees. So, it's
kind of just getting feelers out, getting the word out about the project, um, saying why it's important to Cook County, why we're prioritizing this. Um, and then what I wanted to include as well is so not only the priorities, there's the handout that we've been
working on and editing as we go along. Um, to give that to people, uh, to give that to our electeds to just inform them about the project's impact where we sit. Um, you know, I expect this to be around a $15 million project. We've secured three million so far, which is great. Um, so something will happen at the end
of the trail in 2028. uh whether it's 10 miles or five miles kind of depends on how much more money we keep getting. So there's the push uh for that. Um also attached in there you'll see some draft language uh for the bill that is that was put together um by Lark and Hoffman.
And so that gives you a sense of you know what is going to be the bill language, what the project's called, what we're asking for, what it's going to go towards. Um and then also Commissioner Sullivan and I had worked on putting together um a letter of support list, not just the list of
people to contact um but also then Larkin Hoffman provided us with a series of templates um that we can send out. Yes. And so what's kind of nice is depending the organization um you know might get a little different format uh and then also leaves them space to edit
accordingly. you know, um, you know, the resorts are going to probably take something different than emergency management, for example. Um, and so that just gives you a sense of kind of where we're at with that stuff. And then the last thing, yes, sorry. >> Yeah, Madam Chair,
>> the three million, where is that coming from? >> We have, if I I'm going to do it off the top of my head. So, if you look on the front page of the handout, uh, it's three different sources at the moment. Uh, it's three different federal grants. And so one of them was something I had lobbyed for in our district through the
protect program. I don't remember what that one stands for, but it's resiliency and infrastructure. >> Um the other one was flat funds. That's federal lands access program. That was competitive grant that I we applied for and got. That was great. >> And then what's the third one? Oh, thank
you. Uh surface transportation block grant program, STBG. um that is funds that come to the county every five to sevenish years that our district um kind of divvies out and so yes >> is that so the northeast regional
transportation >> yes >> um they had passed and this was amongst it support for >> yes >> this >> correct >> so that's why I was wondering if if some of those funds that they were talking about that they supported
>> were in that 3 million that you were referencing. >> Yeah, I know. Yeah. So, the the ATP, NEMNA ATP. Yeah. Northeast Minnesota Area Transportation Partnership. Um, yeah, that is a group that does get together and kind of talks about some of the funding we just touched on. Um, I think the
>> I'm trying to remember. >> Well, that one in particular would support those funds, but our district is separate. So, our district, when I say our district, I mean like my counterparts, just my counterparts in our district. Yeah. Um, and so St. Louis
County, you know, it's still northeast Minnesota, but that's our district. And then each district gets money, the state gets money from the feds, then the state divies it up to the districts, then the districts determine how they want to distribute, right, um, some federal funds. >> And so those projects, which this is one
that was included in that, and the other St. Louis and some of the other counties, and they passed a resolution to support. So, uh, understanding that that that if you if you look at the regional entities that coordinate these things that certainly a letter of support from them.
>> Yeah. >> Uh, would be beneficial, I would think. So, >> absolutely. >> Yeah. Um, yes. And I think we have uh ARDC, if I remember right, is on the list of people to contact. They help coordinate uh ATP meetings. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Yes. Too many acronyms. And for I mean these are drafts that have not been sent yet. >> Yeah, these haven't been sent yet. I just wanted to bring them here first to see if anyone has comments, concerns about them. I mean, the intent is to
keep them pretty general just in case then if people want to add their own things and then the intent is to send them out, then they would send them back to us. Um, and then we would compile and go from there. >> There are a couple errors in the template, so that's why I'm will fix
them and get them back to you. And I like the idea of having the template and making it flexible so that people can personalize it. Um that makes a big difference to elected officials when they can read and see those nuances um provided by different businesses,
different organizations. So I really like it. >> Wonderful. >> The only feedback I have is we don't need the cents on this. It just >> 0. >> Yeah, it gets on very specific and it uh
it busies it more than >> Well, then maybe we could make it a little bit bigger in the future. >> Yeah, this picture is fantastic. >> Isn't it great? That's actually the end of the trail. >> That is ridiculous. >> Legitimately Yeah. >> And I love seeing how things have
evolved since the original. Right now, >> we have to remember when the highway department makes their budget presentation, it's always 10,000 and cents. >> She always likes to include >> very specific. Yes. Yes. >> Yes.
>> Okay. We'll look all this over and >> wonderful. >> Back to you. And >> and there is the last thing I'll say is we did um put together a short video. Sure. Um, so that that was a comment we had seen and and work very well with the uh theoreast transfer station. Um, and
so we don't want you know my goal keep it tight, keep it short and so we're hovering right around I think it's 2 minutes or so right now and I'd love your feedback on it. There's this still a draft mind you so everybody watching listening and everyone here this is a draft. Um but yeah, go ahead.
>> Let me restart that. So my audio >> is there is I was like well we need at least a little bit of a voice over um to touch on something cold wind. >> It's just like and and we will select a different voice over. This is just a
>> Yeah, this just a draft or it could be a place or a pack of coyotes. >> Right. Right. >> All the desolation links. >> That's really freaking hot. >> Tip it. I don't know. Janets.
>> Oh, yeah. >> Let's see that better. >> Oh, >> that's perfect. >> It's good that we have I know you >> our guy here, but it's not unmuting it. >> That right there is muting.
>> Yeah, >> I think it's just the TV itself, right? >> That might get some feedback. >> Oh, yeah. I know it's needed to push. This is like a bully. This is how you just bully to make it work. Okay. Are
you at zero? >> At zero. Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. >> Do a countdown. >> Stop it. >> Like NASA. >> Okay. >> So, hold on. So, 3 2 1 go. Ready? Okay. 3 2 1 go.
>> Welcome to the Gumland Trail located in far northeastern Minnesota just south of the Canadian border and on the edge of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Providing critical access for emergency recreation and tourism is
essential to not only the local community but to everyone that visits near and far. The proposed project would improve emergency access to the Boundary Waters and create a more resilient wildfire evacuation route. This route is
the only means of aggress and Boundary Waters community. So, it is vital that it remains a robust and reliable route. The project would strengthen our community's resilience to natural disasters by providing a stronger road for daily and emergency
use and optimizing the drainage along the corridor. The project would improve safety and accessibility to over 200,000 acres of the Boundary Waters and miles of hiking, biking, skiing, and snowmobile trails. Not to mention improving access to
worldclass fishing and pristine untouched wilderness. Over 90% of Cook Countyy's economy is dependent on tourism. This project positively impacts hundreds of jobs, dozens of small businesses, and would contribute to the
economic stability of the region. Cook County small tax base cannot sustain our infrastructure demands. This project would resurface 10 miles of roadway, replace over a dozen deficient and undersized culverts, and strengthen areas of the road where too much
deterioration has occurred. With over 1.2 million visitors annually, there is not enough consistent infrastructure funding. There is strong local, state, tribal, and federal support for this project. And with almost 3 million in
secured funding, the project will be shovel ready for the 2028 construction season. Thank you for your time and consideration into improving infrastructure in Cook County, Minnesota. >> I think you should have >> AI crows in the trees talking amongst
themselves about these issues. >> That's what it is. I like that. Yeah. You know, to lighten it up a little bit and just It's crows personalities are so >> All right. >> A little bit of humor in there. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It be these crows. >> Ravens.
>> Well, it can be crows or ravens. >> The ravens. >> Yeah. >> Just at sunset when they start start to >> Okay. AI crows. >> Yeah. >> What else do you got? I think one of the the key features I
love the message, but I think we need some faces in here. >> Um, and I'm saying this based on what we did with the Northshore Waste video and the comments that we got from the bonding committee. >> So, I would recommend that we consider
um some males and females for short little snippets. Um, thinking about Pat Elias, um, a a strong need for somebody in um, from the Gunflint Trail Volunteer Fire Department, maybe a clip about from Jim
Morrison's perspective about bringing an ambulance down the Gunflint Trail and the bumpiness and somebody who's really injured. maybe tying that in with um search and rescue Sheriff Elias or with
Mike Keeper from emergency management. And then I think also a representative um from the Gunflint Trail from one of the outfitters and maybe um Nancy Satan with the Gunflint Trail Scenic Byway or um somebody from one of the other
outfitters. But I think that would be um something to consider. And it can just be a couple of sentences that are plugged in that break up the video again with people. >> And I think if you if you do that um
that with their name and underneath, you know, the by line as to who they are, what they represent. So, with the short snippet, but you've got the the image and then the the name that appears with who they are, that that then I agree that that that would reinforce the
element. The other thing is I I think in trying to sell things that we we tend to position things with the emotional first >> and then get to some of the practical. I think in in how you position your
messaging and what takes priority, the priority is this is this is a a single access road to a primary area that comes on after you've been into it for a while and I think you start with that and all
these other things are things that are components of that but primarily this is a single access road and these are all the things that are impacted should that road you know not be there
but I agree the the human element um but it has to be succinct because it shouldn't be oversell it should just be >> right >> put in sequence the other thing I think that people that are decision makers that emotional peel tends to come to the
front forefront of things I think it I think you you talk about the main artery and then all these components so that we aren't saying well we see it with the subordinate government service districts what's the number one thing that gets talked about it's the
emergency aspect of it and I think I just think how we position that so that they don't feel that they're being put on you know what I'm saying >> totally >> yeah and that's you know a big reason for uh the lobbying effort is
grants eliminate the emotional component, right? Like we don't score well because we're tiny, because we're, you know, we're a small community. We don't service that. I mean, it's the reality of where we live. Um, we're never going to compete with
Duth or St. Louis County or, you know, as I've said, you know, the national parks sometimes with these grants. And so that's where it is. I think it's going to be a balance between those two things where we say this is a huge project. This would be the biggest thinking project we've ever done.
>> Uh but that it's >> nothing compared to right. But I mean this could be anybody others >> yearly project and we're like holy crap here we go. >> Yeah. And I think another way lens to look through it is it's not a
selfserving no >> you know project and that's where you have to see it if if you know with the the nature of the boundary waters and the accessibility to all of these things that get you out of doors into you know healthy environment everything that we
talk about here's the substance of where that actually happens and so this is what I mean by not be self-s serving in what we're doing we're trying to couch it in the context of what we're stewards for all of these interests and agencies. >> Commissioner Sullivan,
>> thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I also think that we need to think about our audience, many of whom are from the metro area, and tying in the fact that we have well over a million visitors. Maybe uh, Linda Jurich with some
statistics for 30 seconds or 20 seconds. Um, >> and we did have that. >> You did have that in there. Yeah, >> but I mean have have actually Linda talk about the number of people that are coming from the metro area into Cook County or from outstate Minnesota to
Cook County. >> And along that line, I was kind of wondering if there is a summer photo of the campground at the end of the trail. >> I'm sure someone has one. >> Yeah, I bet Josh Dicks could >> Oh, yeah. >> come up with some pictures
>> or a picture of some of the potholes. and the flooding uh you know and I know we have have some but um if we can find some of those um to include >> start with the wildfire video. >> Yeah, I did look I think it just in the last
20 years we've had half a dozen that this project would directly affect >> like that. >> Yeah, which isn't nothing. I think it's more than I think it was like eight if I if I counted right. um just in the last 20 years >> maybe a a quote from I'm just thinking Sue prom outfitters at the end of the
gunflint trail and and she can talk about driving through the fire down the trail >> but something like that >> sounds great >> this feedback is very helpful >> I don't know if you want outsider perspective but you could also refer how
many businesses residences and that it's one of the nation's largest school impact. >> Yeah. Tom Nelson can give you the picture and some of the data from >> I have that magazine. >> Yep. There you go. >> Front cover and shiny
glossy magazine. Yeah. >> Awesome. All right. >> Good suggestions. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Anything else? >> Not yet. You want me to move on? >> Sure. >> Is that all right?
>> Okay. >> Sorry. Um I'm just going through the the the the graphic again, right? >> And to Commissioner Gamble's point, big, you know, on the second page, big impact, it's in blue. Maybe if we put emergency access first.
>> Oh, >> just really focusing on that. >> Well, I think you I think from the messaging standpoint, one is what we know because of our our reality. The other is positioning. This is why you hire somebody like Larkin, you know, to
to help you in in synchronizing your messaging. And so I think understanding that we we want to put it in in a sequence that that makes sense so that that when we do our
presentation that the listener isn't making assumptions that assign weight to things incorrectly. if that makes any sense. >> Right. >> And that's why I'm saying that the emotional appeal creates a sense of obligation and we
aren't trying to we're just going to put it out there. >> Mhm. >> And and it's it's not a methodology that is trying to create this emotional sense of of need. If you don't do this, you're jeopardizing all these people's lives. So, I'm not sure if we were >> Maybe it's opposite the opposite of
Commissioner Gamble's point. >> Yeah, it it is. Yeah. Because when you said that, that's not what I was saying. I say don't start with the emergency because that's the emotional that's trying to back you in a corner and say if you don't do it's a moral decision. I'm saying just >> it's a practical thing. If you got the
Boundy Waters and the Feds and everybody's gone through all of this, you better give them access because they can't get there. And that's because it's a single artery, I think, is the primarily. We have no other option. >> And it all of these things are impacted
by that single artery. That's my point. >> So don't start with the wildfire. >> Yeah. Yeah. But you can put it in there, but then they don't feel like you're getting, you know, badgered with it's a moral thing if you don't do this. >> Guilt them.
>> Yeah. Well, guilt. The feedback that we actually received, if you look at, I know Commissioner Sullivan, I think, has the original one. Our focus was initially solely recreation. Some mention of, you know, it's the only access and whatever and it has since
morphed into based on feedback from >> um Lark and Hoffman of emergency access of you need this because it's the only one. So, they're tied and maybe it's just how we message it. >> Yeah, I would agree. the world's not going to burn down. But
>> was that >> was that input that came from Larkin on the the I back away from the recreational >> did they >> uh was to have that almost as a a balance or kind of se one a oneb >> I would I would too because if you if
you take all the components of it and you ask the focus group what do you think is the most important aspect of that >> then you're going to find out where that is and I I would say this is when we prioritize izing our dollars here. This is this is recreational. That is not a
that's not a need. and and yet you know access because of emergencies that is that is something that is in need >> but >> it just identifying all the things and then assigning weight and say what's the most important and understand the nature
the psychology of the people that tend to make the decisions >> right >> okay hand those out >> sure >> all right so we're going to have to share we don't have one for everyone um but I am aware that over the last few
years when we have spent time at the legislature, we've had um a folder like this that we have brought with us. And so I wanted to make sure um that we're prepared. So on the right side is where we would put um our priorities that Robbie just walked through from the
highway department. On the left side is a one-pager that Janna kindly put together for us uh in Canva um with our 2026 legislative priorities for the county. Um
in discussions with our lobbyists, he had recommend that we move away from having all of all of the one-page handouts for each one of the departments that we've had in the past. He said that he really recommends that we have a one-pager that we provide and then for
the staff that we meet with we would provide them with more of the detail. >> So we have that available but this would essentially be what we bring to meet with folks at the capital and then with the staff provide additional information as requested. Is this also uh Lark and
Hoffman or is this um what's the >> the recommendation that came to combine into one sheet? >> So this was the recommendation from the John Burns. >> Okay.
>> As well as Grady who's Lark and Hoffman. Okay. Yeah. So both I had conversations with both just about you know um essentially this is my first time working with the legislature from the county perspective and what do they recommend in terms of our strategy and
both had said um the one page approach is what they would recommend. So um so we can make changes to this as necessary. I know Commissioner Mills had requested that we add the child care support program so we've added that. Um,
I don't think we've received feedback from anyone else, but take a look at it and let Jan and I know if there's anything that um, you think that we should be adding. And again, we do have the detail that we provided in October at the legislative lunchon. So, we have that available if any of you are meeting
with any legislators that you want to, you know, focus on one particular area, we can have that available for you. >> That would be really helpful. Um I know that you know we'll be down there and we'll be visiting. Um there's also different kinds of events outside of our
day at the capitol that we attend in evenings and so having those one pagers for I think commissioners would be helpful. >> Okay. >> Um and then maybe the one pagers for um both Senator Hoschild and Representative
Scraba's administrative assistance would be a good idea. And um I apologize. I'm not as familiar with what the state is providing for child care support right
now, but the county picked that up >> from what the state was doing. So rather than continued funding, I would ask for funding. >> Okay. Got it. >> Because I don't I'm not aware. And there might be some kind of you you would hope
there's something. I just it's not as big as what the county is pointing out. So, >> we had that discussion and we weren't sure if that was continued or if that was funding. So, thank you for that. >> I think it's on the radar state and nationally,
>> but specific to how it benefits us. It's a topic, but it's direct connection to us from what we're doing is something that we're trying to >> put some substance to the discussion. >> Yeah. and Senator Housechild is aware, but it's just
>> and and very engaged. >> Yeah. Right. >> So, what we'll do is once we finalize um the one pager that Rabbi has, we'll make the change to this um we'll resend all of the the legislative resources so all of you have them. We'll make a handout
of or a couple of these as well for everybody so you have them for handouts when you're down in St. Paul. Um, the other thing I would ask is let me know if you're going to be in the Twin Cities because our lobbyist has recommended that Robbie and I let him know and then he'll try to schedule appointments at
the cap around everyone's calendars. So, just keep us in the loop if you're headed down there for anything >> ever. >> Yeah. In general, honestly during during session >> pretty random. >> Well, and there are a lot of evening gatherings um for legislators that that
we may become aware of. You have a question? >> I just had a question. Yeah. Um, so I sit on the chamber board and I know chamber and PCC go down quite a bit as well. Do you guys ever Oh, yeah. With Okay, >> absolutely. >> The fiscal disparities.
>> I don't know that that's something that we've necessarily had on on there, but >> we have always had that on there. >> So, Assessor Thompson of the list doesn't mean we haven't. >> Okay. Yeah. I just wonder about that. I did have a conversation with uh uh Lake
County Commissioner >> uh and um >> I think we'll be forming a group to try to be more proactive in that. That should just plain go away is what it should >> Bob can I'm sure provide you with. >> Yeah, we've got a lot of information on
that. >> Would you like these folders back so that we can recite? >> Yes, if that's okay then we'll add to them. >> We'll update and add. Thank you. Perfect. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um there the commissioner Sullivan had
asked a question about um meeting for dinner during the conference. Often >> times um there's an event um it's previously been at Mancini's. I've seen nothing about it. I will state >> Well, it is happening but they're only
allowing one person from each county. >> Okay. All right. >> And that be me. >> Okay. That's from the headies. Yeah. Yeah. >> Is that the Arrowhead counties >> because in northern Northern counties >> Yeah. No, no, not northern. We're Arrowhead. >> We're Yeah. No, they're meeting. So, a lot of people must be meeting there,
whatever. But >> just because it's a small place to meet and they just decided they couldn't handle two or three from each county. >> Yeah. >> So, that's why. >> All right. And what night is that meeting? >> Maybe Tuesday night. >> Tuesday. >> Yeah. Okay. because we we have a meeting
which is within club and that's at >> Nancy. Yeah, >> there's so much going on. >> Well, and also many of the the evening gatherings that have happened >> repeatedly on the same date at the same
location >> are not following that procedure because of security issues. >> They are not sending out emails notifying where people are meeting. Mhm. >> Um, you have to inquire, you have to ask,
>> and they're different locations than previously or historically, I should say. >> Yeah, >> they change daily. >> Yeah, I was teasing >> honestly. Um, but yeah, some some big big changes because of security issues. >> Be aware of that.
>> This March 4th is at 7 o'clock is in club. >> Okay. >> Okay. Okay. And just to share, I shared this with Commissioner Stley and Administrator Treble. I will not be attending the conference this year. So, I just want to make aware of that. >> All right. Did not know that. >> You won't be walking over there then or
walking back, I guess. >> Unfortunately, >> I walked over, but then I rode back. >> Well, then from the capital, too. That was a beautiful walk. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Anyway, >> thank you um on the update. Anything
else? Okay, we'll wait for future input there. So, we'll just go right on to subordinate district and um see what we need to know about that. >> So, I think we landed on dissolving. There seemed to be a lot of support for
that. >> Information only. >> Don't listen to that man behind the >> Sorry. No, I I uh I I think general consensus and I'd be curious obviously with everybody's feedback seem to be a ton of
support for a working group um to come together is that everybody's kind of going uhhuh. Um so the last couple of weeks I guess now at this point um Kristen and I and Rowan and Brady have talked a bit about what potentially that
would look like. What's a format? How are we doing this? Is it public? that type of stuff. Um, and what should I propose? >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah, go ahead. We'll do that. Um, so I think what I would propose is to try and keep it around 10
people. So, an idea off the top would be myself, u someone from MIS, somebody from the auditor's office, um one or two commissioners, uh and then we would have two maybe three subordinate district
representatives, whether it's the actual liaison or just somebody that represents subordinate districts. So, what's that get us to? Eight. Um, I think it would be good to have a homeowners association and or a property owners association
person or somebody that's on a private road that does this type of stuff. One or two of them. That gets us to 10. Um, and then maybe a contractor. >> That gets us at 11. >> What do you guys think? Yeah, I I would say that um forming the
the work group is an advisory group coming back, you know, on this issue is is a good response to the public hearing and and uh you know, the discussion that we've had to this this point. I think
that um somebody that has done it well for multiple years as you suggest definitely a contractor definitely and I think that we had um um the gentleman that uh
>> we've had Chris Yep. We've had a couple Chris Yeah, he he was there and so he's demon that that'd be excellent. we need a contractor >> and u then also um uh Gina had had you
know expressed some interest um but if I think we look at it in the context as you suggested of those different disciplines >> and um somebody that's done it well is is hugely important >> uh because some of the uncertainty when
you've had something provided to you and now it's going to potentially go way there's a lot of angst but if somebody says well this is how we dealt with it so I it's an issue that should be addressed when we're addressing all the multiple issues so I think >> I think you you've covered it well I
think that the the subordinate districts that whoever is is a representative voice not just somebody that is a participant in that >> is important >> so we have had a number of people reach out and offer to volunteer be part of
this. And so when Robbie and I discussed this, which is great. Um when Robbie and I discussed this, we thought about um uh contacting the liaison to let them know that the next steps like we had said during the town hall that we would be setting up a working group and then
have them identify who their representatives are because I think from the number of folks that we've reached out to, we would have I believe we have more than three that have volunteered. So, I'd like to give them the ownership and the ability to select who they think
should participate, but wanted to run that by all of you as well. >> I think that's good. >> I think that's appropriate. >> In my area, I have one Evergreen Road has been there at least 10 years, >> very active, very cooperating with each
other. Potential Murmur Creek potential, but >> yeah. >> So, somebody I don't know if anyone's called in from Evergreen. I could certainly contact a couple people that are >> well. Yeah. So, kind of what um Kristen had said is we're going to reach out to those liaison and then kind of let that
>> Yeah. >> process and then and then we'll see, you know, the intent and I was talking to Gina ahead of this was, you know, to get a good spread of it. You know, I don't want just Gunflint people or I don't want just five people from Irish Creek. You know, a nice spread would be good.
Um, >> you know, >> and I think if you identify your criteria >> that that that will be available to anybody that wonders why >> the selection was the selection, >> right? We need >> Yeah. >> Because to me, if we had a nice, you
know, kind of to your point, if there was, you know, like the West End, so if we had an Irish trail, >> right? Or, you know, Yeah. If we had evergreen or or um >> murmur >> murmur or rose, you know what, you know, there if we had an Irish creek, that's a big one. That's a good one. And then one
of them up the trail, you know, whether it's mileine, forgers point, something like that. >> Off the top of my head, that's a nice spread. It feels like um but I think the other thing too is you want people that want to do this. So I'm not, >> you know, if there's nobody from Irish
Creek that wants to do it, I'm not going to force them. um it'd be nice, but you know, so that type of thing. So, so we'll just put out the feelers and see see what the response is. >> But I think it's good that you're you're reaching out with that criteria and letting them make the decision and if they come up, nobody wants to
participate. I I doubt that'll happen, >> right? Not worried about that. >> Yeah. And then as far as commissioners, I I think we've talked about it before that those that tend to field a lot of the questions on it because it's in their areas that that makes sense too because they're going to
>> Do you have an idea about the starting date? >> Yeah, I was going to say um two things and now I'm slipping away. Uh one was um to your point about Gary, I think I think you're talking about have someone represent who is is doing well like
>> Yes. >> doing what? you guys would expect of an SGSD. >> You may also want one of the problem child roads represented, right? To figure out like what's not working and why and like what >> what about what's doing well over here isn't doing well over there. I don't
know. >> Yeah, that that would be the groups. That would be the groups. >> Yeah. And we'll let them >> figure figure that out because I think you know that that's we want the subordinate districts to have a voice in who >> who is chosen. So I think you know so okay so it seems like quantity of people
feels like what we just talked about feels I I disagree >> too many or more >> not enough I think every SGSD should have the opportunity to be represented so >> otherwise it's going to be a friction if they're not included they're excluded
>> and that's we're just going to run into another town hall >> um we really need this I mean it it's one I mean large work groups can be unwieldy but to be able to have that buy in, that participation, that understanding or you're going to do it
the workg group and then have to include everyone at that point and they're going to say well what about this and like well the work group talked about and what about the you know so it's just a back and forth and and I think part or go ahead >> well our intent was our hope was that whoever was selected as the
representatives would be working with the liaison from all of the groups to make sure that their voice is heard and those issues are addressed Um, I worry a little bit that the larger the group, the less we'll be able to move
things forward. Um, because in my experience working with larger work groups, they're just not as agile. And I know that this is something that we want to continue working on and having, you know, great discussions about and trying to problem solve. And so I do worry a
little bit that if we include a liaison from every district or every yeah every district it's it's going to slow down the process. >> I I would say if that if that were to happen I think the when you step back and look at it what we're saying is we
want every voice to be heard. I think your inclusivity and and how you format it allows that to happen without making it become unwieldly. In other words, whoever the leazison is, it's going to be inclusive so that all voices are
represented. But, uh, if we allow them to do that, we just need to clearly define what our what our objective is in response to what we've heard and where we're at right now. We want everybody to feel
that their voice is part of decisionm, but we have to do it in a way that's going to be efficient. If not and it's unwieldly then how you orchestrate this is going to have to be very defined in order to control it. >> Can I respond to that quickly? So I do
think um to the point about criteria, if we made that part of the criteria when we communicated out to the liaison that we truly want these three representatives to be able to speak to all of the issues that were addressed at the town hall and what they're hearing
from the other SGSDs that might get to your concern, but >> right to have them a criteria for being part of this is that you would commit to communicating >> the communicating with the other the other people you don't know with the
other roads and and sharing that information. This is something you have to do besides come to a meeting. You have to reach out and share information. I think that there's a there's a risk in getting so big that the issue being such
an emotional issue for so many people if you want to put in that is that you you would have more people that have the concern than than those that are representing other components of it. And when it feels like >> you're trying to control it because you
need need to because it's unwieldly then they feel you're controlling outcomes if you understand what I'm saying. And and and if you don't control it then the loud voice will just override the process.
>> The other thing that Robbie and I discussed and Brady and Rowan as well was um that we might need some subject matter experts to attend some of the meetings. And so as we're having this discussion, that might mean that
might in need to include the SGSDs. So if you have one um SGSD that has a particular issue that's that they need to speak to or it would be best to hear it directly from them, I think they could be invited to the meeting when there's discussion around that particular issue.
>> Um we also talked about there were some legal issues that that came up during the town hall. So making sure that when we have that discussion that we have someone from the legal community attend. So I do think that you know if we have a core work group we still would have the
space in the room to include others as needed to further the discussion. I think moving forward it it'd be helpful at least certainly from my standpoint that that uh that that criteria in other words in response to the the public
meeting and the and the feedback that we've got the town hall we're moving forward with this workg group and in the discussion that we're having now uh the board is is suggesting in our discussion that we do this and here's the criteria
and here's the you know what we're thinking and if we look at that then we can say we we believe we've we put together something that addresses the identified you know issues and is formatted in such a way that it'll be a
productive group. >> Do you feel that addresses your concern? >> No. Um, >> okay. >> I I think to put the burden on say one SGSD to communicate to another SGSD, I
think there's room for the non-participating SGSD to feel like they were well represented because it wasn't their SGSD. And so I think it's really and it's not just about them being heard, it's also them being educated,
right? And so you kind of need everyone to be on that or else you're just going to do it again. >> Can I ask then as we're trying to balance perspectives, if we're going to add six more people to this just from the subordinate district side, does that
mean then we need seven more people on top of that from the homeowners association side and now you're talking no >> 20? >> Just to stop right there. No, it doesn't mean that. It's just about getting that information in and out. And so if we have successful HOAs that can share
information >> and we have >> I mean because each SGSD is different. They all have different unique challenges I feel like or at least makeups certainly geographies. Um and so all of I mean there's a lot of nuance there that I just don't think will be
captured by a different SGSD. But I I think I think you could still accomplish both by having you know the the discussion as to who the representative is. But any ES SG that wants to
participate is welcome to be there to from the informative standpoint so that they can see how the sausage is being made but they should communicate with that leaison who represents those interests. In other words, I think we're not shutting the door. They can be
there, but they channel those concerns through the representative that is put in the position. I think you could do that. >> It's certainly possible. I am skeptical success. >> Um, also that would infer a public meeting which was another discussion
point, right? >> I would so I guess I think at this point um format is some ideas we have, you know, kind of talked about. Um, in a broad sense, this would not be a public meeting. We would treat it very much
like any other advisory committee, highway advisory for example. You can have some pretty candid conversations there, which are nice. Um, there's minutes, so if someone's curious, they can always review the minutes. That's fine. But I think it does give a space to talk about, you know, some of the
maybe more sensitive things that can be difficult um to talk about. But if we can create a space to have that genuine conversation to address those concerns that have been brought up, um I think I that's what my recommendation would be.
And then so not public. Um >> it would be >> Can I can I touch on that real quickly? For me, um when we were discussing that, I didn't see any reason to treat this differently than any of our other committees. We have a process in place.
This is how we conduct business. And so I didn't see the need to treat this differently. So >> is there could you um following this meeting I mean how this shakes out send out to every subordinate district and
say we've had further discussion and this is what we're thinking and we just want to run it by you and then get that feedback to see if there's huge red flags or not to the >> well and and they have commissioners >> absolutely
>> Lord knows they know how to reach out to me on the east end so I mean, if they have if they want input, if they want >> Yeah. >> whatever, I'm I answer the phone. I mean, I'll >> Yeah. >> talk to them because we do need their input. >> Yeah.
>> It this is their lives. >> Yeah. >> I mean, change always happens everywhere every day. But no, and they have commissioners to talk to. We are their mouthpiece to send information along. I think >> I would say probably Commissioner White
and I are, you know, um, heavily contacted by our SGSDs. Um, you know, on a regular basis. >> I attend meetings. Um, I hear from people. I and I have no problem representing those people. >> Right. But that that's a point that
would be put in the overview that this is input if you have any input or whatever your commissioner and that certainly will become part of what you know is contributed to this. I I think in in addressing what we're doing is
your discussion, you know, with Robbie and and you you see what you see and you see what you see and you see what you see that to try to address these issues and find that common ground that gets us where we need to be is important. So,
um, if there's other ways that we can do that without compromising what you see is is best formatting, I think that's what we're look we're trying to figure out. >> Well, and we'll move forward with whatever >> Yeah. >> working group that that you all believe
is best. We wanted to share our thoughts on it, but ultimately this is your your decision. And I believe having the commissioners be their conduit like I would hope they would trust I'll only speak for me that I they can ask me
anything and I will as best I can relay that message that information to the group and then I will get back to them and I will be able to you know we'll have a discussion about that and and I won't you know we can talk as long as
they want and as many times But genuinely we need the public to be part of this. Not just the roads but everything. And so this is building trust and transparency and
call me. This discussion leads me to think they need to have a heads up. So maybe a letter to say this has been a discussion. These are your commissioners. then they can proceed to call whoever they need to. >> Yeah.
>> Well, and just to review because of the discussion is that >> that the recommendation that there's representation >> and that the representation that comes from those districts that we give them the right to make that decision as to
who they'd like to have represented. I think that's that's good. I think the things that we'll be addressing, what works, what are the concerns, what are the legal ramifications, uh, you know, from the perspective of the of the highway department. Uh, we
identify those things. So, coming out of what we've heard and we synthesize it, we're putting an outline together the things that we'll be looking at and here's how we'll address that with this committee. But you certainly can contribute. anybody certainly your
commissioners that will be funneled and u >> and that to the format point just to kind of finish that is yeah that was the idea is anything you know commissioner Sullivan put together a wonderful list of things that were already heard at town hall we have a list as well to go
that and the intent is literally whiteboard list >> ideas and then solutions to bring them forward and it's just go >> we have a comment back there >> I Just wondering if you know how many SGSDs were represented at the town hall that night.
>> No, nope. >> It probably have to look at the sign in because to your point, it probably is more than three SGSDs and >> Oh, yeah. >> There could be hard feelings if it's not at least one >> at least. I I like your idea of emailing the liaison and saying here's where
we're at. We're looking forward working group and then perhaps you outline I don't know if you thought I don't know how your committees um work but is it a once a month meeting on this day and time and we need a commitment to that. So if you're
>> I had a chance to touch on format in this entirely. Um so we're talking maybe six months at a minimum um 12 months at a max. Um, I don't want this to dotle on as just this neverending indecision thing. Um, I think the program as it
stands is broken. Um, that has not changed in my opinion. Um, and so changes do need to happen. And so the intent with this is to get people in a room, make decisions based on everything that gets laid out in front of us. um not necessarily only one dissolve or
keep at the end of it, but it's here's all the problems, here's every idea that we were able to come up with and then the purpose of this workg group is to come up with solutions to those problems and then bring those solutions to you all. And then we can sit there and say,
okay, here we go on what that solution could be. A solution could be hire three people. Do you want to do that? That is your decision at the end of the day. Um and so that is how I envisioned it was that um monthly one to two hours we can figure out a time once we know a group.
Um but then the I would like to keep this tight and I would like to keep this moving. Um Lord knows as you said before we sit on enough committees. So >> and and that's where I think that the having a specific >> outline of what we're going to address that that is going to be the framework
that keeps us from exploding. Well, yeah. And that like I had said, it's it's literally the whiteboard or in this case, it's in my, you know, I have a table on my computer. We plug it into the TV. It's up on the TV. Issue number one, >> this okay, let's come up with some ideas. Um, and then whether we in the
very first meeting start to outline all the issues or if we just have an initial list that we'll work through and as other issues come up, we can add them. Um, that type of thing. But I think keeping it tight, keeping it to things that we know for sure have been brought up. Um, and there's no bad ideas. It's
no bad solutions because at the end of the day, these are the problems, solutions that were come up with. >> There could be bad solutions, but there's no bad ideas. >> That's for you all to design. Yeah. >> But after each of these meetings, we need to share that information. Make certain that >> those that are not in attendance, they
can look at that and they can read something and say, "What?" >> Yeah. And just like every other committee we have, we'll have minutes, those get posted. Um, and whether it's three reps, nine reps, whatever you guys, a million reps. Um, I do think too
big can be a little much. Too many chefs in the kitchen, if you will. >> Um, >> I also really think it's important to balance >> the subordinate district perspective and the HOA perspective. There's clearly a model that exists in this county that works just fine without us being
involved. Um, and I think having that voice there is important. You can, you know, there's plenty of advocates online that you see locals that deal with this themselves. >> And I think the the uh the purpose of the committee, the advisory committee needs to be clear
>> stated. So both in expectation of what you bring at the time commitment but clear and the end result of this discussion and this process which involves all these people that we feel have ownership in this will be
recommendations coming before the board. >> Rowan, did you have anything to add? ask >> um something that I've been thinking about as as you all are talking and it a little bit to Commissioner Gamble's
point just now about the what is the goal of the work group and the scope and a little bit touched on by by Robbie just a minute ago about the makeup of it. um you know the existing SGSDs are obviously very key major impacted
stakeholders but I think what we've talked about internally is that they represent about 4% of county residents who live in these types of situations. So 96% of the county or residents that
are in these situations, depending on the decision of this work group and what the board decides to go forward, may or may not be eligible for these types of services and how those folks are represented in the work group.
and also how the decision and the goals that the work group is set out to decide should keep that in mind as well going forward. The the fairness, the equity portion, the people that receive this service from the county. Now, the county's ability to
provide that service to the other people who could stand to benefit from it. We've talked about how other HOAs do do this and and do it well and make it work and figure it out. Um, but there's also lots of other people that live on private roads that really
struggle and just grind it out and do the work themselves and figure it out. Um, and so I think whatever the county decides needs to have that in in mind as part of the context and potential growth, especially when we talk about
things like Roso and future higher density and, you know, really adding to different, >> you know, doubling or or more density in in certain areas that would apply to the types of properties and access issues that we're mostly talking about right
now. And so I think keeping that in mind within the context of both who's represented and what is the stated goal scope of the work group to come back with a recommendation for maybe it's not just to fix these nine SGSDs or address
this problem but to look at it from a much bigger future perspective. >> I think I think that's a component needs to be identified certainly. >> Yeah. So, so given that, um, thank you, Rowan. I wonder if it would be helpful
at the board meeting um next week um to have kind of a purpose statement and a draft charter to make sure that that we're as staff that we're clear on what are what's the goal and the
ultimate purpose of this workg group because I don't want to communicate this out to the SGSDs until I'm I'm certain that we have alignment on what that purpose and goal is from the board's perspective. >> I I agree. I I think that that has to
happen. It just >> when and how you're going to do that. >> If if you bring it before a board and and we review it and then we say there's other components here, so I'm not comfortable, you know, ratifying this and moving forward. We we have that
option. But um if yeah that needs to happen because we need to know what has the combination of discussion with stakeholders and and our discussion now what has that led to and if we can
repeat that back and say yeah that's what that's what we agree and this is how we agree to do it then I think that's a good thing. Are there parts of the group too thinking full-time and thinking of some concerns about having all the districts
represented where maybe we don't need you know either myself or someone from the auditor's office or some do all three of our departments need to be there the entire time or is it just because if if an aspect of this is we've
developed the list on our side we know we've listed that and that's not a part of this yet you know right now what commission Commissioner Sullivan, what I just copy and pasted in was 12 things, >> right? >> Um, you know, and some of it we'll have to contact some legal folks and just get an understanding, but you know, you
throw in the issues we brought up internally. Okay, maybe it gets to, I don't know, 30 um 30 things. And based on that, do you say, okay, this workg group now, let's come up with ideas. What do we think we can do to address this stuff? And then part of it could be
weeding that into the solutions component is filtering it then through that subject matter expert then from ideas to solutions. >> This would really this this is an actual thing that could work. We could spin up an entire mapping system that would
account for all the subdivided properties when it happens and as places are bought and sold and whatever the stuff populates and that is an actual solution we could do. Um, so that type of thing where we could say, well, let's whittle out a couple of our departments
from the main group. We could still add in then a couple more reps or if we want to do them all, fine. Um, and then but that could still keep it smaller. Just an idea. Or we just have a big person group.
>> I I have to I have to do interviews at noon and so I'm going to run away. I feel like my thoughts have been expressed and that's that's fine. My my biggest concern is just having all the information that full, you know, because
there's going to be a lot of what about this? Why didn't you think of this? Well, I and and I just want to tell you that to your point, it's very valid because if you are out here and you really want to be part of it, but you're being excluded,
not that you're really being excluded, but we don't want you. I mean, there are limitations. And so I could see where it could cause, this is all emotions, but somehow if you knew who the person was, we could reach out
to them and find out from them. But if people are grossing and feeling left out, they might not want to reach out. I think that's why we we want to address that point in making sure that you certainly, you know, are part of the
process, but this is the way we're doing it so it doesn't get so unwieldly and it isn't it isn't something that is, we'll call it a democratic process in which the number of votes >> and the number of people that speak up against it make the determination. It's
in the context of all the things we have to evaluate when it comes to making a decision because we're going to be setting a precedent that we we had no idea that's what it's going to be in the future for us. So, we have to look at it in the context of all of those elements.
But inclusivity is huge. People want to see their voice in governance. >> Okay. So, it sounds like you'll present something to us at the board meeting. That'll be our first step. >> Okay. Yeah, >> sounds good.
>> Do can I add one wrinkle into this? Are we Well, it's part of it including um the lake SGSD in this conversation or is this specific for roads? >> I would say specific to roads. That's
what this issue is about. >> Yeah. >> Just making sure. >> Okay. >> Still Yeah. Still a supportive district. Okay. >> All right. If anybody has anything else they want to add. >> No, I just encourage the crow thing. They don't they don't get paid. They
don't get Yeah. >> No, but I think ravens are better than crows. >> Well, ros they have a voice that's very similar to us. Yeah. >> And the ravens gather at the end of every day >> and they feed on the carryon. So
>> to ask when just for my own clarification I was going to ask um the board you're presenting something at the board meeting. When is that? Next, >> next Tuesday. >> Next Tuesday. Tuesday. >> Yeah. >> And is that public facing or >> Y?
>> Okay. With these final comments from everybody, we are adjourned. Thank you all. >> Thank you also for >> Yeah. >> Thanks, Gina. Thank you forward. I know
it's usually well received.