38. We start our meeting with the pledge. Please rise. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> There is an adjustment to the agenda that we received yesterday. And so we'll put that under F and that's to approve the hire of the deputy sheriff Tanner Cutsler.
Are there any other adjustments? >> It's actually republished as item C. >> Oh, well you can scoot that in there then. >> Everybody got that? Commissioner Gamble? Yeah. Thank you, madam chair. I'd make a
motion to approve the agenda presented. >> Support. >> All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. At this time, we uh give an opportunity for the public to come forward with any comments or concerns. Is there anyone in
the audience who would like to do that? Good morning, Arvis. >> Good morning. If you sign in, please. And you know, I'll give you about five minutes. >> I gotcha. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. Well, as often happens, I'm going to
speak to something which um isn't in your future discussion today. So, I'm ahead of the game. Um I have some thoughts about the sale of Superior National. I just wanted to share with you. Uh when you considered uh a sale, were
you commissioners looking to sell to get rid of so you could be done with this ongoing expense? In other words, see no return on the county's investment and also no further expense to the county
or did you think you would see a return and make some profit on the years of investments which the current scenario doesn't seem to support. The documents in the agenda packet today include one on page 27 called challenge
one cash flow shortfall. In it, it says um the high revenue summer months historically were used to repay loan lines of credit which were used to cover winter shortfalls. That summer information is missing from
your packet. Why wouldn't that be a consideration when looking at what is needed to cover the supposed irrigation and septic system repairs? All we are shown is February through May revenue and costs of sales followed by a
set of labor expenses for these same four months and further a set of expenses that appear to be for the year. Meaning you're using projected expense that the buyer should be responsible for
as well as potential income which is not shown. If you're going to show the projected expenses, shouldn't you show the projected income as well? A complete picture? And if I'm not understanding your
charts, then are they making sense to everyone else? And will someone please explain that during the presentation? Where is the detail on irrigation and septic repairs? Who provided this information?
Wasn't someone on top of these two systems before now? If this sale were not taking place, would these systems be suddenly revealed to you later this year and then be on your agenda to have to deal with in a
whole different scenario? Did they just happen yesterday on the market in March, potentially sold by September? Just because there are only three offers doesn't mean you must take one of those.
That's a relatively short period of time for a $2 million piece of property, even with the stipulations that are on it. What happens if you pause right now? When you think about it, to find the best person for a highly
responsible staff position, you exercised better judgment than to take from the first pool of applicants. You didn't find what you were looking for. So you tried again. You got better and you get got better results when you
decided you should start from scratch. Is there some timetable that the EDA has that makes this the offer that we have to take? On page 29, there are limited proposed
solutions to your problems. If the buyer needs to have these repairs, could he borrow the money from the county revolving loan fund at the 1% interest rate as opposed to the county jumping through hoops to fund the
$200,000 that the EDA is suggesting it needs. As you move forward with this and other decisions, it is your responsibility to review and research I'd like to remind us all that the
significance of credentials and past history were used when Luden Resort was sold enough said. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Have any of the commissioners received any responses?
>> Okay, thank you on that. So, we'll go ahead with the consent agenda items. Um on our um list today would be our claims, the minutes from our regular board meeting January 27th. Um, approval
for promotion of Neva Maxwell to land services director, approve hire of Deputy Sheriff Tanner Cutsler. Um, appoint David Satan to the Cook County Planning Commission and appoint Patrick Knight to the Cook County
Planning Commission. Would anyone like to pull anything? >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I' I'd like to pull uh the item relative to Neva's uh promotion. >> Okay. >> I'm not sure what that ended up being on
the rearrange here. It was C on the original. >> It's D. >> It's D. Thank you. >> Okay. Um we could put that maybe before the administrator report. >> Okay. And madam chair, then I I would make a
motion to approve the consent agenda as amended. >> I'll support. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I >> opposed. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. So, we're going to move into um some of
our areas of consideration. One is the update on the sale of the Superior National. and uh welcome both of you, Patrick and Mark, to give a presentation. We'll look forward to it. >> Great. Thank you. I believe I'm driving
the presentation. Is that right? Okay, good. Good morning, commissioners. Peter Clisshold. I'm the board chair on the EDA. Joining me is Mark Shackleton, EDA treasurer. So, good morning, commissioners. Kristen and and Brady. Uh so, thanks for making time for us.
I'll jump right in. This is, as I say, an update on the EDA sale. uh five areas to cover. We'll just do a quick review of of actions to date. Uh an overview of our buyer, uh a couple of challenges, significant ones that are
currently facing the sale, uh a proposed solution to those challenges and next steps. So, a high level overview of of the actions to date. We placed Superior National on the market back in March of 2025.
You know why? Many reasons. Uh retire the county bond. Uh convert this public asset into one that is private and with that treated as a taxable piece of property that currently is not collecting any taxes. This gets the EDA
and to a larger degree Cook County out of the golf course business, which we're not fully equipped to uh to tackle, uh, and puts this course in the hands of of a professional, someone who's got experience and is well capitalized in
managing golf courses and has proven such. So, we did receive three offers. uh we negotiated a deal and entered into a letter of intent with Brady Hatcher. That was back in September of 2025 which
kicked off a due diligence period. What was discovered during this period were significant uh deferred maintenance issues. One being the irrigation which we had an inkling of uh early in the summer that was not properly functioning but through bar engineering had a better
understanding of just the impact of that. and more recently uh the septic system. So both septic and irrigation and we'll touch on those in a in a few minutes and how they impact the sale. But uh deal negotiated Brady Hatcher. And what I'd like to do is spend just a
couple of minutes talking about the buyer uh and and the operator because as I mentioned, one of the key drivers for the for the sale of the golf course is to get it into the hands of someone well capitalized and importantly experienced so that this important asset to Cook
County, irrespective of of the ownership structure, can continue to serve both the county and and its visitors. So Brady Hatcher uh 25 years in in medical device uh development and manufacturing. He purchased Golden Eagle Golf Course
just outside of Brainard in 2023. They put a lot of money into this golf course. Some of our team has gone down and and met with Brady and importantly seen the golf course to get a feel for its upkeep and and the capital improvements that have been made. have
now had it for a little over two years and it is quite impressive and his plans for a superior national mirror what he's done what we can see that he's done with with Golden Eagle as is the case with Golden Eagle he intends to use SPN
Northco as uh the operator they've been in business for over 50 years Minneapolisbased uh they've been managing Golden Eagle since 2017 in fact so that's three or four years before Brady even became involved in it. Uh they've significantly
increased the profitability and the business model at Golden Eagle. Few photographs at the bottom there. It's very impressive place. It's open to the public. It's known for its excellent staff, course conditions, and frankly, it's actually recognized as one of the
best uh golf courses uh in the state and absolutely in the Brainard area. But as I say, we've got a couple of uh challenges as it relates to the successful completion of this deal. And the first is cash flow. So,
historically, uh expenses exceed revenues during these winter months, as I think it does for many businesses here on the Northshore. Uh, Superior National has a a history of taking a line of credit to help offset that uh, dry
period in in the winter, which then gets paid off uh, during the high revenue summer months. We've confirmed with with Red Path that that process really isn't available to us going forward. That is to say that our auditor has told us for
operational purposes such u bridge loans are just not any longer on the on the table. So, our 2026 cash position um and the expense projection between now and our expected closing, which would be the end of May, which is why we've bracketed
those particular months, sees us with with a shortfall of cash of about $163,000 between now and the and the end of May. Further details can be found uh in the appendix. The other challenge is as it relates to
the sail itself and as I mentioned uh the irrigation certainly the magnitude of it if not the understanding uh and the septic entirely were not fully known when we entered into um our negotiated
deal with with Brady. This sale proforma provides a toptobottom view of of the sale price plus the inventories that we expect to see at closing offset with the uh the bond retirement quoted from from
Brady agent fees other selling expenses. But as you can see the irrigation and and septic this is at 150% of current estimates uh estimates that have come in from bar engineering for the irrigation
um and um his name escapes me but the the septic uh >> thank you Isaac Hansen. So that's $500,000 that frankly we didn't have visibility to when we entered into this deal puts us upside down at closing to
the tune of about $90,000. So taking together a negative cash flow and a $90,000 deficit as you can appreciate presents some challenges. We could handle with one or the other but both coming together make it make it very difficult.
But we do have a proposed solution and yes, it includes an ask of the county, an ask in the amount of $200,000 to bridge temporarily this this financial gap. This will enable us to maintain our planned activities for 2026 within the
EDA and successfully close on that sale by the uh by the end of May. But this ask isn't an end an an endless one. Uh we want to leverage an existing $200,000 loan that the EDA has made to Gunflint
View. So we consider that essentially an asset. That loan is to be repaid back to the EDA between September of 2026 and September of 2027, which of course at that point in turn we would hand that back over to the to the county as a
response to this uh to this bridge. And then just as a reminder, per red path, lines of credit as we've been able to use in the past are no longer available to us. Taking us then to the next steps before we take your questions. So finalize this
financial bridge with Cook County. Uh execute purchase agreement because right now we're just working under that letter of understanding. That'll get us into a period of public notice and meeting that the EDA will hold with with the public for the sale. That then enters into our
90-day right of first refusal period with the Nelson family who retain the right of first refusal on the golf course, taking us then to closing, as I say, by the end of May. And the irrigation and septic would be completed
after the closing when the weather uh improves enough. So that money would be put into escrow. >> Thank you for the time and questions or comments. >> Thank you. So, I'll open it up for discussion, questions or comments.
Commissioner White. Okay. So when the um purchase agreement was created and there was going to be discovery, was there any language that
would have uh somehow reduced the for the county for the taxpayers reduce the amount of of uh liability for the septic and the I mean for the septic and the irrigation. Was there any guesstimate in
the counties in the real estate person who sold this? Any estimates in their head as to what those two costs might be? I mean, if we're if it's 1.85 million and to uh settle the bond, it's
1.35, but but we have to throw in another 0.5. Is there any room for renegotiating or was there any discussion about what happens if this is what you know if this is what is found?
>> No, good question. The negotiation centered around us selling to the buyer a fully functioning golf course. Uh and included in that is irrigation, septic, all the elements required to to fully
function a golf course. Um we had an un an understanding by the summer, so this is after the the property was was on the market that there was a a fault that needed to be addressed with with the irrigation. But um you know a golf course that's fully functioning requires
irrigation and that is the expectation of the of the buyer which is understandable I think. So the septic system how often is a septic system on a a re or on a big
property like that inspected once a year twice a year? Why why was there no clue? I not that there was no clue. Did you have an inkling that that was going to be another system that was going to require and why not? >> Yeah, to your first question, I don't
know the frequency of of inspections for the septic system. To the second question, no, that wasn't on our radar at all that uh that we would be confronted with a septic issue between now and the close. >> So, does the county have an opportunity to just back out of this sale because
we're going to lose money on this? >> Yeah, the purchase agreement has not been signed yet. We're currently working under a letter of intent. Um it's our position that proceeding with the sale is the is the
best option because the irrigation and septic will need to be addressed regardless of whether we we have a buyer or not. If we don't have a buyer, the bond still exists um and be paid down each and every month. there'd be no tax
revenue from the property and we would still be looking at a significant uh expense for both septic and irrigation if the golf course were was to continue to operate >> and well there's a couple of questions. So while the that construction
renovation improvement on those two systems goes on will the golf course be operating to the public? I mean, when you do irrigation, I don't have enough of an understanding. I'm sure you don't
I don't know what parts are irrigated or how many miles of irrigation pipe there might be, but would that require a complete shutdown during that time or no? >> Yeah, my understanding is that the the time required to complete the irrigation
fix is is not great uh and can be done before the season starts. Now, I'm not a hydraulic engineer, so I'm probably over my skis here a little bit, but that's what I understand. Uh, and the septic system, although not compliant, is
working, but needs to be addressed in order for it to be compliant. So, to your question, I believe that the operation can kick off uh as scheduled this this late spring. >> Okay. And then yes, the county will the taxpayers
taxpayers will have to invest in those two systems which would then increase the value the selling value if it if we were to stop the whole stop the process right now. I mean, this
is actually something that is owned more or less by the county taxpayers and um so it's like I have a car was a really cool car at one time and
but now it's got some serious issues like I get a buyer who say, "Oh yes, I'll buy it for x amount, but I need to check it over." the mechanic finds that it needs a new transmission and that the uh you've got some serious uh problems
with your um combustion with your inside the engine. So that's going to eat up more than a a significant portion of what you would hope. Oh, you also have a a loan out on your vehicle. So the point
was to sell the vehicle, get rid of that loan, make your life easier. However, if you have to put in as a car owner the amount of money to fix those parts of your car, and once
they're fixed, you've got a new car essentially. So why would you sell it then? I mean, it's it just seems like we're giving more community property away. I mean, where
taxpayers are going to eat it again. So, I just um who it just seems like it's you can there's there's lies. There's damn lies. I'm not suggesting that but statistics can be
played with to present any to to present any scenario you would like black or white however it is and I don't think this is a good deal for the taxpayers administrator trouble >> thank you madam chair um in conversation
with with Peter and Peter please um please jump in here as well my concern is that in discussion with him, what we talked about is if if this sale doesn't go through, then a potential buyer will miss out on the
revenue over the summer months. And so our actual purchase agreement might be less as we move forward than the offer that we currently have right now. So I think there's risk in not moving forward with this financially for the county. And I understand that we do have to fix
the septic and the um and the water is the irrigation as well and that's a cost to the county. But um I just want to make sure that the board of commissioners is aware that there could be a reduced um amount of funds coming into the county if we do pause on this
as well. >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you Peter. the um I appreciate the discussion. Um there's been many discussions over Superior National over the years. Um at the point that uh uh
the golf course had hired a consultant to come in and make some recommendations that uh would encourage more participation so we would increase revenues. Um the drafting of that document um at that time Scott Harrison
and others who were asking for the support in that uh moved to go to tax abatement funds which bypassed a public referendum on whether or not to do the improvements back in 2013 the discussion
2014 the decision u and as happens very often within this county and it's not unique to our county. There are things that individuals bring forward before the board and champion as being good ideas and asurances that it will not
fall back on the taxpayer and in the discussions when asking for support for the tax abatement. Um I my position was to protect the taxpayer and um so there needed to be things in place
that would protect the taxpayer and I was told that there there was uh no risk and yet what I proposed in protecting the taxpayer the response was you want us to take all the risk and uh and my response was you told us there is no
risk. The reality is is that with those fundings that were going to be paid off similar to the business park by the sale of properties that uh the revenues we retire the debt but we are paying that off because of the document that was
drafted back in 2014 at $160,000 a year that are coming from our lodging tax. Had that not been in place, who knows where that money would have come from to retire that debt. Um, your statement
that uh get Cook County out of the golf business is probably the strongest thing that I could support. And so I respectfully I I I don't want to rehash a lot, but I think these are learning experiences that are important to the
people uh in this community. And um and so talking about it isn't isn't intended to be a scolding, but is it intended to bring accountability to our actions? And when we when we don't reach
uh our goals or intended purposes that we market and we communicate to the community, there doesn't seem to be accountability that accompanies that. And that that's frustrating and that's why the conversation needs to be had. Um I remember in my first term as
commissioner that because of the winter you know situation that we would provide the funds and then those funds would get dutifully paid back and that's how it happened. I don't know uh what the last year was that um uh
the EDA had requested funds from the county to cover winter operations. I do know that if Red Path um had informed the EDA that they could no longer establish a line of credit with the county, then we had to change our methodology, but the problem still
existed through the winter season. So, I I don't know when that was, but um um you know, we learn as we go. We find out some some methodology that we're using works and then we find out it can't under best practices or state statute,
whatever it might be. um in the uh next step. Well, it it would seem to me it would seem fair reasonable to conclude that in putting together the
2026 budget that came before this body that uh this we would have known and anticipated that these challenges would be before us. I would say that that um upon sale of real estate in the state of
Minnesota, if if there is a septic system that fails or issues that need to be brought up to compliance that you cannot sell property without having that inspection and finding out. So you might not know until the inspection takes place unless you're having significant
problems. So it it's part and parcel of sale of property within the state that that inspection takes place and um so I understand that but but the cash flow issue and the asking price and the offer
with the three parties uh that would been something you'd be mindful of so that coming into the 2026 budget request there would be something built into that at least I would assume um and there would be discussion so that we would be
aware of that when we're setting our levy. If you look at this year and part of the discussion I had relative to budget was that the $200,000 uh to come alongside business and help businesses in our community
that had largely been funded through uh COVID revitalization monies and um and this year it was entirely levy dependent. If you take that $200,000 coupled with the $200,000 that you're
asking right now, that that amounts to 3.125% levy. And uh um I I say when we're looking at alternatives and this is a discussion
um in this process that $200,000 that that we that was built into your levy. If you haven't distributed anything at this point early in the 2026 season, I would say take that money and and use that money. Uh that money doesn't it's
it's money that is just granted. there's no interest fee associated with it and um so and it it from my understanding and I can stand corrected that is u that's the intent of that money is to come alongside business within the
community and if this can facilitate a process without an additional burden um I that would be a recommendation the other thing is the revolving loan fund is is a mechanism that can be used there and talking with Brady we do not have
this is something sort of new to us in this this regard and maybe somebody can find something similar but it's new to us. So we don't have a policy that defines us. We can in fact charge interest but we'd have to determine a policy and uh in order to be able to do
that we do have the revolving loan fund which was established the legislature that does have an interest that is set based upon what the market is and 1%. Um I think that responsibility and accountability should be there. I think it sends a message to the taxpayers that
we do expect accountability and even though it's uh the relationship between the EDA and the county is it's it's an ingrown situation. It it doesn't mean that that county doesn't need to exist. And we have many examples within the county
where we do have that accounting accountability. Um, I um I I certainly don't want to encumber the process because it's back to your statement. We need to get out of the business of the golf course. I think
an honest discussion is important. I think that there's been other opportunities for straightforward conversations, but they've been ignored. And so, we find ourselves in this position. to Commissioner's White Point um and to the public comment point this
morning. Um we don't want to dump this property. It it it does become an albatross that that uh is a burden and every year having to deal with that burden and uh the realities of that
financially get frustrating. Um, I remember when I was in the executive director for an organization and another organization was going to sell their property and I went to the auction when they were going to unload everything and it it what was difficult
for me and the lesson I learned from that is that people that had contributed to that organization for years, people that probably had little money that contributed that when they got so frustrated and wanted to be done with it, they just sold everything. They could have had an auction and generated
several dollars in revenue which was head by the buyer once the buyer bought it. And so the lesson to me is don't get so weary that you walk away from that fiscal responsibility to a community that sunk its tax dollars into an
enterprise. That that's one point and I'm not going to judge where we're at on that relative to the decision be made. I do believe that that the u the buyer and the credibility that he's brought to the
brought to that uh to Golden Eagle is is substantive. And so when we're looking at our long-term best interest as a county, I do believe you want a credible buyer. And uh we don't we don't want a lot of platitude and talking points.
what we want is substantive that is demonstrated so that that the decision that gets made made is reflective of of the scrutiny that is needed in making a decision like this. Um I think that um
again and the balance in our revolving loan fund as of December 31st is $78,000. Uh there's money in that fund. We have no commitments on that. Um and um
uh the other question I would have is um that in your presentation on your sale performer, I don't know what I'm missing here, but if you can inform me on this, you have the sale price of 1.85 million.
We have inventories of 60,000 which gives us a a net of I mean not a net but the combined total of that is 1.910 million. Then you look at the bond retirement of 1250 that leaves you with 600,000.
Then you have agent fees at 200 that leaves you with 400,000. Then you have irrigation projected at 150%. Did you get a quote on that then? And then you just increase it 50% for the unknown. Correct. >> Okay. That leaves you with 170,000. And
then you take the septic out at 270. That leaves you with $100,000. And then minus 100,000. And then you have other selling expenses projected to be 50,000. That leaves you at $150,000
under 90,000. So, unless there's something I'm missing there, when I tabulate those figures, it comes out to $150,000 negative figure. So, I I would I would just, you know,
raise that as as a question. Um so I guess to summarize um anything we can do to come alongside and support the sale of this while being fiscally responsible mindful all the points that have been brought you know forward this morning. Um uh this is a discussion
we're we're having we're beginning in a process that's going to require public input and everything else. It's an opportunity from today given this discussion to take a look at this and come back with substantive information that answers the questions that are are being raised. As to the options on
funding this, I would like to see either use the $200,000 that was included in the 26 budget or seek uh funds from the revolving loan, which we do have that money. Um I don't know Brady the timeline on that, what
your thought is. Well, I would want the county attorney to weigh in on that. >> Okay. >> Um it's those laws are not real clear, but and that's why you need to look at it. This is unusual.
Um the more direct loan would be to the buyer who's creating or retaining jobs, and this is just to enable a sale, which is a little different. Is it going to fit the statute? So, a we'd want to know that. Um, but the other thing is if the
county were to make the loan, we don't have a policy on a situation like this. We have one for fire departments. We charge them 1% and so forth. I've I've put out proposed policies, but we've never approved one. Um, and this is kind
of unusual. So, I mean, the rate is whatever you set. um you know it could be market rate, it could be mirroring the uh revolving loan where it's you know a a slight decrease. It could be
something else. So it's something you'd have to discuss on that but but I'd want Gene to weigh in on that revolving loans. >> Yeah, thank you Brady. Um, as far as Minnesota legal requirements for inter fund loans, a county agency such as an economic development authority, the EDA
may be charged interest on monies it borrows from a county, the reserve or general fund, provided specific conditions are met and the loan terms are properly documented in writing. Um, so in in my research on it, it it under
the state of Minnesota, it's certainly allowable and it it's referencing directly the EDA in in borrowing those funds because this is a beginning discussion. It is something that we explore but we're trying to look at this from the standpoint of you know when we
look at our fund again back to the issue anticipating this with a sale at where we were before the end of the year that this I would have liked to have seen this addressed in the budget as opposed to an add-on after the budget. Um
the um the other the other component is uh the right for first refusal that um um if there hasn't been any discussions or any indications that have
been given in that regard um it's uh as I understand it What we are doing is we're looking for the the the bid and and moving forward with the intention that it's going to take place and at that point then we put out to the Nelson family and we have so many days
in which to get a response from them. >> That's right. In some cases, it seems like it would be reasonable that once we know that we've got we're we're thinking of selling it that we would have said, uh, we're thinking of putting this up for sale because of the agreement that we have upon getting the the properties
that we just want to make you do does the family have any interest in retaining this? and the family might have said, "Well, I'd like to see what the offer is to know what it is we'd have to match so that you do it more proactive as opposed to at the end and and putting it out there given all the
energy that's put into it because they might have said, "Well, we're definitely interested. Let's let's see what the the price would be." It just talking out loud. So, um I I would like to I'd like to make sure
the other issue that I'm interrupting my comment there to say that when this was discussed before the conflict of interest between the seller and the potential manager a bit uncomfortable. It was something that had been discussed
um previously when it was brought before the board. Um if the agent that is representing the individual themselves is not benefiting but it is the company that is managing it which is also the company that is
managing golden eagle it doesn't look quite as bad but it is an agency that is selling and that conflict does exist to commissioner white point that we get as much money as we possibly can from this
if we look at the offers and we've done our due diligence in that and we pursue just as Commissioner White recommended that if you don't feel that it's a fair price based upon its appraisal you can start again with it time is ticking
money's you know are adding up but it is the stewardship of this process and not being weary in that process and just wanting to get rid of it so we can get rid of it. We want to try to recoup as much as we possibly can. Again, as a
just a summary, the potential buyer has a reputation has demonstrated that since they purchased Golden Eagles, that is a plus. And when we have these conversations with the public and decision makers to inform better inform our decision, then it it's a healthy
process. So, I again I appreciate the discussion. I would encourage we'd look at ways to try to lessen um the the burden to taxpayers. It is coming from a fund that is funded in large part by taxpayers.
So if we can build accountability into this process, I'd like to see that. So thank you. >> Thank you. >> So he makes um quite a few points. Is there any of those that you'd like to address? >> Uh a few. Uh we did receive as I
mentioned three offers and the offer that we landed on was not only the highest but was substantiated with a operator who would prove himself to be terrific in this in this space. Frankly
we would be prepared to not uh accept the highest offer although we did if the operator uh was uh was clearly the best. So the good news is we didn't have to make that decision. We were able to go with the highest offer uh and what we
think is is the best operator. Regarding the car analogy, uh which I which I love, um you know, the reality is that uh this car needs to have a transmission and a carburetor and an engine because that's how we marketed it. And through
the due diligence period, we discovered that it didn't have all of those things. So, so the buyer um wrote the paper, made the offer with the expectation that this be a complete car. And so that's if we're to proceed with
this, that's what we would need to need to do. >> Can I respond to that? >> Yes, of course. >> So, if I have this vehicle I want to sell and I invest all that money to upgrade, you know, we got a new transmission. We got Well, we've got years of life before we have to invest
that kind of money again. So, you're not going to sell it. I mean, maybe you're not going to sell it, but if you sell it, you're going to tack on some extra dollars or add extra because of the value of a vehicle that now has a new transmission and a new engine. You've
increased the life of that vehicle. Well, I mean, until you throw a rod or something. But, you know, it the chances are as a buy if I was looking for a used car, I would certainly want to buy a car that had a new transmission or
warranties or something. So, that's that's as far as I'm taking this whole thing. But, it's just it just doesn't seem right. I mean, it just doesn't seem right that the taxpayers
Was there anything in the wording of the intent to sell or intent to buy whichever way that if there were significant um problems found that there might be a
need to renegotiate the selling price? And I'm not talking about recouping the entire if it were $500,000 for those two systems, but something so the taxpayers don't have to so they
can walk away thinking we had a really good thing for our community for a while. We got it started. County does not want to have to run. We don't have the expertise at all to run to run a
golf course, but uh and and I believe it's the right thing to do. I mean, I thought that before it was even promoted that it's too much of an investment in an undertaking for the county, for the EDA to have to deal with because that's
just not our forte really. So, um, so I'm absolutely in favor of selling it. That will put it on the tax roles. It will still be available for people to to gulf at to enter to entertain friends that come to town. So, we don't lose
anything this that way, but we do lose out if we have to bear the entire um cost of upgrading those two systems, which one way or the other have to be upgraded. I get that. So, and and I
just question I just question why we we have this and why we could not and I don't know. So, I'm just it's a question. I really don't know to go back to the to the person and say we've discovered that it might cost this much
extra and I know you added 50%. But when you go into the years, they could be more than that. It doesn't, you know, I get that. But would they be willing to bear half the expense or pay for one or the other or something? And I think it
wouldn't feel so bad. So that's it. >> Okay. Thank you. A couple of points regarding the revolving loan fund, if I might. Um I firmly believe that the revolving loan fund in conjunction with
small grants uh can play an important role both of them uh under the the wing of the of the EDA. Currently the the two volunteers that sit in front of you don't really have the capacity for that yet. My promise to Scott Harrison has been after
the golf course is sold that it makes a lot of sense for the revolving loan fund to come under the office of the EDA. So for the right applicant, some of them might go into a a grant track and some should, especially for large capital
purchases, go into a revolving loan fund track. They're not, in my view, one or the other. They they complement each other. Um, we hadn't considered the possibility of using that same fund to offset this deficit, and that's something that we ought to study further
with Brady because that that can make a lot of sense. uh as well. >> I'd just like to say that um several years ago sitting on the EDA, we had very similar conversations about the golf course. It is critical to get it on
the tax roles and I appreciate the fact that you're thinking like I am, Commissioner, um that the revolving loan fund is an option, but I think we need to look at that and see statutoily if everything lines up. If not, I would be very
supportive of using that 200,000 from the Gunflint view, but I would like to explore the revolving loan fund first. But we have a buyer. Minnesota way overbuilt golf courses in the 80s and the '9s. Um, we have a very
highly qualified buyer and I think it's important that we move quickly on this. >> My question to you is just the time frame. So this is the first part of February and it looks like um several
things will happen between February and March. Um what is your time frame or you beyond this or are you pretty much needing to stick to the time frame you have here? >> We have public uh notice and meeting and
a lot of things going onde month. Mhm. >> The one piece of the longest piece of time here is also the most fungeable and that is the the 90-day right of first refusal. The Nelson family may come back in a week and say we're not interested and all indications thus far have been
that they're probably not, but they've got a right to their 90 days. And uh if all of that is is absorbed, then that would take us to to the end of May for a for a closing. >> Commissioner Mills. >> Yeah. If we use the revolving loan fund,
wouldn't the taxpayers just be paying the interest? >> It it it's it's an internal thing. So >> So the the EDA the public EDA would be paying the interest. So the taxpayers would be paying interest on the loan from themselves. Yeah, >> that's true.
>> So, that is accountable, but I don't know if it's the best use of dollars. Um, when the EDA has outstanding asset, the Gunant View loan to be able to borrow against, I think that's a better use of funds. Um, still there's
accountability in that because >> there's an agreement there. >> Mr. Gamble. >> Yeah. Thank you. Uh well, your key word there is agreement. Um and this is why looking at all options from the
standpoint of of um getting it done and accountability to taxpayers and putting some teeth into things so that I mean how many times have taxpayers come and ask for some relief and it hasn't been
there. And yet, how many times have we had business, tourism, and whatever come and ask and it's been there and and it's funded by taxpayers. So, I'm just saying that's why I think it's important that there's accountability in if in fact
that the direction to go is to use the monies on the loan payback from the gunflint view. That document needs to be very clear in its how it is written so that that in fact that's what happens
and uh that might seem very simplistic but we when we go back to the tax abatement it took three times reviewing the legal document the first time it came to me I said this doesn't say what we agreed to and they said well it's implied it can't be implied it it has to
be clear to if we both die anybody can pick this up and understand it. So, one of my points was that uh a legally binding document needs to be drafted regarding the polls leveraging the 2,00 you know 100,000 receivable front
confident view and like I say it's a fundamental you would assume but that document needs to be scrutinized so the commissioners in approving anything like that are comfortable that we've covered our bases in that regard and the other thing I would say is that what happens
if the funds requested Should estimates for irrigation septic come in under the projected 150%. If if we put those monies out there and we find out it didn't cost us that much, where do those dollars go and we say, well, it just
goes to the EDA or it comes back into our reserve fund. That's another element that has to be clearly defined. Again, I appreciate the conversation. this is a a beginning. Uh and those are just things that we need to consider.
>> Administrator Treble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Commissioners, for all of your comments. Um, just hearing the discussion, um, I wonder if we could, um, move this to the next board meeting on the 24th
and, um, do a little more exploration around, uh, several things that we heard, which are the 200,000 that's already in the budget. Is that an option? Researching the res um, resol resolving loan fund, revolving loan fund, sorry.
um potential negotiation with the buyer to cover the costs and then um what Commissioner uh Gamble just mentioned around the view and the loan payment and possibly anou or some sort of document regarding how we're going to move forward. So those are kind of the key
areas that I heard and so I'm just wondering if um if I could work with the EDA and Brady as well over the next week and a half to explore those and bring more information back to the board on the 24th. That'd be appreciated. >> That would be great. >> Terrific.
>> There was a question from Commissioner Gamble about a discrepancy on the money here. The sale per formula. >> Did you find that there was a discrepancy in the tabulation of that? >> I I saw Mark doing some >> additions over here.
>> That's accurate. Um in the number that we needed, the minimum was about a 130. We're asking for 200 just for contingencies. And again, it was a best case scenario projection of cash flow. Um, I'm more comfortable with a with a
higher number. So, it there is cushion. So, we we were asking for 200. The minimum according to the numbers was 1275. So, it allows for that $50,000 difference. So, >> I think there was a question too on the
the 90,000. >> Um, and that that was accurate. It's this it's the 60,000 inventories is more is revenue. >> Okay. >> They have to pay for those inventories. So that's >> if I look at it just from a a standpoint
of you know >> plus minus plus minus that's >> that's >> yeah it's just the 60,000 inventories. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So then you get 90. >> So >> it's in there. >> Okay. It's in there >> as as revenue >> and I do end up with
>> so it's posting revenue posting expense and it comes out with 150. That's why I'm saying I don't understand how you got to arrive at the 90. >> Yeah, I don't know what the 600 is here. >> Those are the balance running after you subtract out the projected expenses in
the proarm. >> So um but that that can be looked at. I mean just look at it. I just found there was a discrepancy. I still think 200,000 is appropriate. >> I would agree. Yeah.
>> Thank you. I'll do a spreadsheet. >> Any other comments or questions at this time, Mr. White? >> I don't think it was a $200,000. It was just the math, >> right? >> Adding and subtracting and it's like, oh, we had two negative numbers. I mean,
so I agree. I come up with minus 110,000 >> round two 140,000. Well, whatever it is, it's not 90 and it's a math problem. >> I had 170.
>> Just kidding. Just kidding. >> Brady's figuring it out. >> Yeah. The the point is is that just take a look take a look at that. The other thing I I want to underscore is I appreciate the conversation and uh it's a beginning. I appreciate the administrator is going to and Brady will
get us more information before we make a decision on this. And it it is a journey. Uh I always try to encourage people don't be weary and welloing, but it is easy to get weary when you when you've been with this so long. So anyway, >> yeah, the math comes out as as the minus
90. >> It does. >> Yeah. Well, you can show me afterwards a little tutorial. >> We'll all have a math lesson. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I just wanted to thank you guys for your for your work on this and yeah, not an ideal situation to learn about
these uh bumps, but I really appreciate you diving in and and taking it on. Uh the community really owes you there. So, thank you. >> Well, if I told you it was a labor of love, I would be lying. But but we are we're happy of the support of the commission. So, thank you so much.
>> Thank you. The other thing I think to note is is Scott Harrison's work through all the years. I mean, if we were to put that down, I know when he stepped into the EDA, he did a lot of things to bring credibility, you know, at that point.
So, he's done an awful lot and unfortunately with the situation at Lootson, he's lost a lot too in in memory. So, I think it it would be a miss if we did not recognize his contribution to the county. So, thank you. Thank you.
So we'll look forward then you working with administer treble. Thank you for doing that too and we'll um hear from you the end of the month. Great. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Excellent. >> Thank you. >> Okay.
So we're going to move on to item number five which is um the uh Ccliff dissolution and dispersal of assets. Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I gave the board an inkling that this would be coming um a couple
months ago and um in fact on the the evening of our town hall uh CCIP did um vote to dissolve. And so I wanted today just to recognize Ccl and the impact that they've had on Cook County. They
were founded back in 2008. And the Cook County Local Energy Project began as a citizen-led volunteer-driven organization responding to community concerns about climate change, rising energy costs, and the need for improved
energy efficiency. And from its inception, CCIP focused on education, local action, and practical solutions that helped our residences, businesses, and local governments better understand and adopt energy practices. And over its
18 years of operation, CClip played a really central role in advancing energy efficiency and clean energy awareness in Cook County. and its core contributions include the development and administration of energy audits for
homeowners, helping residents identify opportunities to reduce their energy use, lower costs, and also improve building performance. And these efforts provided really practical household level benefits while supporting broader
community energy goals. They also provided a lot of homeowner and professional education. Ccl supported youth engagement, civic action, and the organization um also assisted a local group of youth
advocates to um help the city of Grand Marray established their climate action plan and actually hire Shane Steel for the city of Grand Marray. So, it really demonstrated their commitment to empowering our community members and fostering local leadership on
sustainability issues. While CCIP is concluding its operations as a nonprofit, its work will continue. They are going to turn over their assets to the Cook County Higher Education Group and they will be continuing to provide
different kinds of continuing education and action. Um, ensuring that elements of CCIP, both their mission and legacy, will continue to serve the community. And just so the public is aware, as of all of us, um, CC Club's history and
accomplishments will be celebrated on February 25th from 5 to 7 p.m. at Cook County Higher Ed. But we thank them for all that they've done for our community and um, wish Cook County Higher Education well
in moving forward with some of the initiatives they'll take on. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any questions or comments? >> Then we will move on to other items on the agenda. >> Okay.
>> Does that require a motion at all? >> It does not require >> for acceptance. Okay. So, we had a request from our consent agenda by Commissioner Gamble to um pull the approve promotion of Neva Maxwell to
land services directors. So, um Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate it. Uh my my question pertain to um with any time we have a transition especially a leadership position within a department is the difference between uh
the pay grade and the rate per hour as it affects budget. So when we were doing our 2026 budget we sort of anticipated because there were rumblings coming from Tim uh that he was anticipating his retirement. And so when your budget is
presented um if it anticipated that and I and I realize we don't know who the candidate might be so we don't know where they will come in at but based upon where Tim is at and where NEA would come in at that uh that's about $48,000
difference um reduced cost in that department because of TIN's longevity. So my question basically from an understanding of when we do our budgets and we see transition whether or not there was any uh mindfulness in how we
projected those numbers relative to personnel and um if if not if that $48,000 what happens to that if that goes into the reserve fund for that department?
That's my question. Tim's shaking his head. So, >> yes. >> Good morning, man. Chair, commissioners. Um, the answer is yes. Um, and especially we paid uh attention to that.
Um, when further instruction or inquiry came out to the department heads to take a look for an additional 5% or how can we if we need to cut, where are we going to cut? and I uh spoke with with Brady to make sure that okay yeah because of the longevity and such uh the new hire
would have that lesser amount and so said that's that's where we would plug in that lesser amount we would account for that at that point. So yeah that was taken into consideration in the budget. I don't think it goes into we don't have a reserve uh in for the department that
we >> some departments do and some don't but >> yeah well we we do for equipment for the recycling center and such like that but >> okay and so my question was it was taken into consideration but when you alluded to it you alluded to it in the 5% reduction ask and so my question because
we really didn't follow through on those departmentally and in your response to us in that regard I appreciated you know the scrutiny that you applied, you rolled up your sleeves and and you did your homework in that. So, I had no further recommendation relative to your
department. My question is is that you considered that did it come out in the actual dollars that was represented and approved in the budget for 2026. Um yeah, Commissioner Gamble, Madam Chair, I actually did not um Madam Chair, I did
not uh alter the numbers at that point because we didn't know exactly where uh who was going to be hired and at what rate that was going to be in. So it is a bit of a a windfall for the for the county that that is that was budgeted extra. It is going to be less uh for the course of this year. >> Yeah. So the 2026 budget as approved did
not reflect that. >> That is correct. >> All right. it was considered and we we kind of identified that as an area in which we would um see most likely a windfall on that. But we we didn't alter that. >> And the reason for the question is just from an understanding both for
commissioners and for the community in the budget process, you know, how much scrutiny we're applying to what we do know. And I can appreciate that we wouldn't necessarily know the person coming in as to the step in the hourly wage, but still it is a consideration
when you're looking at dollars mattering in a in significant, you know, budget year every year is. So, thank you. Appreciate the explanation. Um, go ahead, >> Commissioner Sullivan. Madam Chair, um with that I'd like to request the approval of the promotion of Neva
Maxwell as land services director with a pay grade of 240 and the rate of 5327 per hour. >> I support. >> Any further questions or comments? All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign.
>> Motion passes unanimously. >> Madam Chair, >> I do have a statement. It's like we really need to fix the uh video in this room so the the public out there can see what what Anva Maxwell
looks like and that's all. I mean we over the years they get glimpses of Tim Nelson but I just it's another instance where the public would like to know who's or even when people speak. So, I'm not going to
like I'll say it, but I'm not going to expect that you'll walk up here and turn and face the cameras. But, um, anyway, that's my plug for getting better communications in this room. >> We'll see what we can do with it.
>> Yeah. >> Or rearrange the room. I don't know. We can't rearrange this, that's for sure. Okay. Thanks so much for coming. All righty. We're going to move on to administrator updates. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, and we, like you
said, we will see what we can do about the cameras. So, I actually have a list of updates today. Uh, quite a few things um, uh, that I've added because I assumed we would have some time since we had a shorter agenda today. So, the first
thing that I would like to talk about is the board work session that we had on January 30th and um all of the commissioners should have a one-page handout. Um we've also provided it um I believe with the agenda so if the
community members are interested in in seeing it as well. Um and Jana, if you wouldn't mind pulling it up on the screen for the community as well. Um I just wanted to provide an overview of what we discussed on the 30th and the work that occurred with the the board
work session. Um so you'll see on the screen we have the meeting summary. Um it was an all day event where the commissioners, myself and Brady worked collectively um on a variety of different things. We started off by talking about leadership
and you'll see on this page some of the things that came up from the commissioners um and Brady and myself that respect and valuing community members and people are essential, openness and integrity um serviceoriented leadership, professionalism and perspective and
positive engagement. Um we talked about commissioners roles and responsibilities um and some of the differences between administration and commissioners roles. Um we provided some data from our Matt team and others about some of the
priorities what how they view priorities for the county and then in the afternoon engaged in discussion around um what are some of the things that the board wants to work on over the next year. And so Jan, if you'll go to the second page, um
the areas that we discussed were SGSDs, a town hall policy, communication with the community and with um with county staff, and then budgeting. And so there are some next steps that we've identified and things that we'll continue to work on. Um and for SGSG,
SGSDs, I wanted to mention that that will be on the committee of the whole agenda next week. and staff will be bringing bringing forward a proposal to talk about a work establishing a work group and that came out of the town hall that we had a few weeks ago. And so just
so that the community is aware um that that's what we propose as the next steps and the board had some discussion around that as well. Um and so we'll hopefully finalize that at the committee of the whole next week. Um, and some of the next steps are things that I need to
work on and bring forward at future meetings and I'll be doing that and hope to have more information to the board soon. We also talked about having an additional work session to really dig into the budget and so I wanted to propose a date for that today
which I'm looking at April 3rd. I'm glad it's not the first. >> Not April 1st. >> Yes. >> Nope. I'm I'm hoping for another Friday
and that will give us a little bit of time to continue, like I said, to work on some of the takeaways from the work session. >> Um, and then start planning for that. So, just wanted to check in and see if that looks good. >> Okay.
Okay, perfect. Thank you, Jana. You can take that down. All right. Um, I also wanted to check in on another date, which is a really short turnaround of um a potential meeting with BKV this Thursday. they are
available from 11 to 3 to do a kickoff meeting with us um regarding the next steps with um updating the capital plan. So, I wanted to check and see if there were a couple representatives from the board that might be available on
Thursday. If they're not, we can certainly move move that meeting to a a future date, but it sounded like it was that date um or they would have to schedule it out several weeks. I'm available and I would be interested
in attending. >> The timing was again the time >> 11 to 3. >> Okay. >> I'm not available. >> And I have another meeting with Senator Hchild and Representative Scram. >> Okay, perfect.
>> So, Commissioner Sullivan and Commissioner White? >> No, I'm not available. >> I'm not available. So, Commissioner White is available. Is anyone else available? >> No. >> Okay. Is there interest in in moving that to a future date or keeping that? >> I would appreciate, you know, be part of
the discussion, a future date, but >> I could do that date if it was just a little bit later, like an hour later starting at noon. >> Yeah. >> Janna, can you help me remember if that
was a possibility? I believe it was. Okay. >> Make sure it works for them. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Perfect. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate the flexibility. >> Yeah. >> 12 and thank you. >> 12 to two on the 12th is the aim.
>> 12 to 12. It would be 12. >> 12 to 4. I'm sorry. Okay. Yep. >> Okay, perfect. >> Um I also wanted to mention that I attended a training and um quite a few of our
case managers within PHS attended as well. Um two it was the same training but two different audiences. So what we had a tribal training and certificate partnership training related to the Indian um child welfare act and MIFPA
the Minnesota I'm going to forget the what the acronym >> Indian family >> African-American disproportionality act. Thank you. And um so we held a training here a couple weeks ago for our case managers um to work with the tribal training and
certificate partnership on really understanding and learning more about IQUA and MIFPA. They also held a training specific for county administrators. So I attended that um on Monday and then the prior Monday as well. It was a two-day training. So, I
wanted to let all of you know that that has happened because I know that's something that we've been talking about at the PHS board. We have a second training that's happening um here as well on the 17th and 18th for the staff that were not able to make the first training. So, we're trying to get all of
our case managers through that training program. I also wanted to um make sure the board is aware that we have our first Grand Portage leadership meeting next week and so I will be working with Anna Desamp this hopefully this week um on
finalizing an agenda for that and we'll be moving forward. So we're excited that will be our first leadership meeting that we've had with them recently >> and that's on Wednesday the 18th. >> Correct. All right. Uh the last thing I wanted to mention or last update I wanted to
mention is that we had a labor management committee uh training last week through the Bureau of Mediation Services. Uh we had two of our commissioners, Commissioner White and Commissioner Mills attend as well and the focus was on a couple different
areas. um active listening, building consensus, perceptions, conflict management, problem solving, effective facilitation, and governance documents. It was a great training opportunity for the group. Um and I look forward to continuing to work with the labor
management committee. >> So, wanted to make sure you were all aware that that happened. And then the last thing that I have is um something that a change I would like to make to our agenda process which is to change the way that we add our new hires and
staffing changes and transitions to the um consent agenda. Um what I would like to do is to provide a once a month report that provides a summary of all of the changes that have happened within HR. So, all of our new hires um if there
are any terminations or resignations and provided in a one-page summary to provide to the board. Um I have consulted other county administrators to look at how how do they manage this process and what does it look like? And it's it's there's a lot of different
processes that are used by county administrators. Ultimately, it is a role and responsibility for the county administrator to be responsible for all personnel outside of myself. it is the board's role and responsibility to hire
and supervise me. Um, and so I'm hoping to make that change starting next month. Um, like I mentioned, I talked to a lot of county administrators. There isn't one way of of doing this. Um, but I think that it would streamline some things to put it together in in one
document and provide to the board. Um, what I'm also considering is doing it the opposite month of the rec or the opposite time of month of the recognition of staff. So, one board meeting we're talking about and recognizing staff's anniversaries and
then at the other meeting looking at the the changes within our personnel for the county. >> Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um the uh one page I think is good. I think it some things I feel a little uncomfortable
given the significant changes and when it's on a consent agenda, it it sends a different message. Um, and so I I think the one page, the other thing like the discussion this morning that I think is beneficial is is knowing how it affects
budget if that can be put in there to the extent that we're comfortable with that. But a lot of times when it comes to changes in in personnel and significant positions, it's a it's an issue why I tend to pull it because I want the
public to know how that's going to affect our our budget up or down relative to some of those changes. But >> okay, >> it just let me think about that. >> Give that some thought. >> And I think that's important. I just don't know that it needs to be a
playbyplay. You know, when we talk about budgeting, right? it'd be good to focus on that rather than just here and that does that to the budget, you know, like bring it all together. And so I think that can be a lot more cohesive and comprehensive. Well, >> it's important that we're they're aware of it, but
>> um >> it just when it's like the cumulative uh nature of acquiring knowledge as we go through the year that informs our budget process because if we get to the budget process, we got a lot of things being thrown at us. I'm I'm open to the
discussion, but as a commissioner, I I would like to know when there's a change how it affects budget. That's just because it it's it's it's a numbers thing that lets me know, but >> there's a lot of things that affect the budget and I don't know that we're
briefed on them every time. And so that's why I'm like, if we can do it all together, I think it would be more of a cohesive discussion and streamlining to your point, but but I don't want to not know things either. So, I hear what you're saying. It's just I'm trying to figure out >> when you're when you're providing
information. It's like, you know, we had a presentation this morning and there were details that weren't in that presentation that informs us our responsibility is is due diligence and whatever, but I'm just putting it out there certainly can be a discussion. >> Yeah. And >> I don't want to labor you with you know
additional work. I think this move to the one page and giving it more significance so that we are aware but that is a component part of it. >> Yeah. And I think that I can um have some conversations with Brady about um is there a report that we could provide
>> quarterly or something that provides where we're at with personnel compar in comparison to where we were when we budgeted. So I think there's >> um let let me explore this a little bit and see what options >> happen is that we um
>> we we'll have a discussion whether it's you know the sheriff's department or whether it's in public health human services and we can look at the chart but and we get a higher we don't know how that's affecting you know the monetary side of things and I think that's what we're primarily responsible
for is following the dollar. So, however, >> so one thing I want to add about my in addition to what I've shared about my why in terms of making this change is >> um I I think there when staff are hired,
when they're um offered a position, we have to wait until after it's on the consent agenda for approval to move forward with >> them with their starting date. because we've historically always had the board of commissioners approve their hire.
That ties our hand in our ability of when we can bring staff on board and it's ultimately not the role of the the board to approve those positions. So, we want to make sure that the board has access to the information, but ultimately the hiring of staff is is an
administrative responsibility of myself and of the directors. And so we want to make sure that we're not tying our hands in terms of when staff can start positions. It also sends a misconception to staff about when we offer them a job
that it's not final until when it's approved by the board. And so there's sometimes some fear around that and it's misplaced because it's ultimately my role and responsibility. So, we want to make sure that we're clear with staff when we provide them an offer for
employment on what that process is going to look like. Um, and and truly that's the biggest why behind this is to make sure that um we can streamline that process for hiring and onboarding, make sure that we get the information to all of you, but it's done according to roles
and responsibilities as well. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. U thank you for that, you know, perspective. What I what I would say in in our role I understand the hiring there are two components as a steward of you know
entrusted uh in this position is uh that that we're hiring good people >> and when we set our processes and whatever that then ensure that happens uh when we don't it is not saying we're going to get it right every time but if we if we have processes in place so the
two things I want to know is are we hiring good people is the process have integrity and the other is the financial component. Those two things that's >> I realize the decision isn't isn't ours to make but it is to see how leadership manages it. >> Yeah. >> Absolutely. Right.
>> And I have a question. Um what is the uh assessment or evaluation of a new hire? Is it in three months or >> six months? >> Six months. Okay. >> They're on probation for the first six months of employment. >> That can be extended as well if if necessary. Um, and that's always done in
consultation with human resources, but it's typically six months. >> Okay, thanks. Yeah, >> I think that's it. Let me just double check my list. I believe that's it,
>> Madam Chair. Thank you. >> Thank you for that update. Then we'll move on to um commissioner reports, meeting updates with anyone. Commissioner Sullivan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. um had an opportunity to go to Cook County Higher Education and um participate in a
presentation put on by Jeff Brand about the HR and a housing update for Cook County and that was really valuable um and had an opportunity to share the slides with our county administrator and um just really appreciate the work that
Jeff Brandt is doing to update our community. uh had an opportunity to attend a Firewise meeting and we welcomed Delori Hansen who lives on Anagon Lake. Uh she's an EMT from the Gunflint Trail VI volunteer fire department and she will
be serving in John Botker's uh capacity since he has moved out of the county. So we're happy to have a member of the Gunflint Trail Volunteer Fire Department uh continuing in that role. We recently had an S SWCD meeting and um
one of the things that was um really gave me a smile was that we got an additional $30,000 because Lake County did not use again all of the funding that they had available. So we will be benefiting from that as uh part of the Lake Superior North one wershed one
plan. And um they also announced the date um Amanda Weeberg, June 20th will be their annual Voyager Brewing event and they will be serving mystery snail ale this year. So um be watching for
posters and more information on that. And then uh lastly, I mentioned that I would be um having an opportunity this Thursday to uh listen to Representative Scraba and Senator Hoschild. They will be meeting with the Cook County
Coalition of Lake Associations providing um responses to some questions they shared regarding copper sulfide mining. So um that will be an hour and a half and I will be able to get to that noon um meeting as a result. But thank you very much for the opportunity to update
you all. >> Commissioner Gamble, do you have something? >> Yes, thank you. Um, yesterday the uh University of Minnesota Extension uh committee met and uh we had a full house
and um Commissioner Stley is also on that committee. it's required that we have two and um we talked about uh local food sourcing and the importance of um of trying to encourage that and the resource that the University of
Minnesota Extension provides in that regard. We had a um uh a good discussion about the the benefits. We've seen the increased uh the farmers market and um also the educational component uh that
is involved in local food sourcing and the health benefits and a program that is considered a um a food RX which speaks to the issue of uh how local
grown food and ve fruits and vegetables uh benefit a person's health. And so there's an allocation uh based upon need of uh local food that can be put together and uh and uh working with the clinic and other um
collaborative agencies to make sure that uh people recognize the importance of of healthy local grown food. Uh there was a a presentation um also from a gentleman and I
Commissioner Sterling if you want to take that. >> Oh the climate change >> Seth Spencer from um >> ARDC supportive of monies that's come in for meetings on climate change. She's
hoping to have a a date set for the Cook County to kind of have an open house and and know what's going on with that. um I do attend when I can, but um he had a great PowerPoint and so I asked him to send it to me because I'll be going to
the townships because he mentioned about you know including them in um the information that we all need to uh >> realize that uh climate is changing and how can we work together here in the north part of um Lake Superior. So, I'll
be doing that over the next week, presenting that at townships. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> Oh, yeah. Um, pretty busy week. We had first round interviews for the EDA director. Um, we moved two candidates on
to second round. That'll be on the 17th. Um, Northwood's Food Project met, Cook County Food Access Council met. Um and there's a lot of I'd say uh synergy and potential synergy going on much to um
the extension report too uh around food and food access. Um so and and just to you know make sure everyone's aware and clear that the Northwood's food project is more aimed at um supporting and
sustaining and um developing local local farmers and local food sources versus the Cook County Food Access Council is mainly getting the food to the people that need it. So um but a lot of overlap there I think or just a lot of potential
overlap. I'm really hoping that there can be more. Um but just a lot going on there. So that's that's pretty great. And yesterday um was the uh community health board. Um pretty fast meeting elected same slate
of officers um as last year. Uh the doctor's presentation was on vaccines um and the state of uh uh you know is where where we are as a state with vaccines where we are as a region as a country
and um there's a lot of talk about measles in particular and um and it's it's coming home. Um there there were a couple people in the meeting who had
family that were in quarantine because of exposure to measles and so it's just uh doctor was pretty uh he wasn't very pleased with the state of affairs and so um it was he's a real friendly guy but
it's probably the least friendly I've seen him just talking about talking about that. So, um had some um harsh is too strong a word, but uh yeah, >> he had some Thank you. Thank you. That's
exactly the right word. Some stern messaging there just about um what models we're following or not and the data versus not supporting the data. And so it was just it was good to learn about that. So on the flip side of
that, because of the attention and the exposure, people are seeing it, people are feeling it, and now there's a surge in measel vaccines. So there's it kind of >> nice, >> you know, swings back and forth, but uh
yeah. Um that's probably all I have to share today. >> Commissioner White, anything interesting? Oh. Yes, the prevention coalition. It's u a group that is trying to get the word out
about uh prevention of drug and alcohol usage by uh younger community members. uh working with the school. It seems to be going really well. Getting school students, older
students to be uh take a lead on promoting sounds a lot like DARE kind of, but it's a little bit more than that. Giving them the skills to be able to talk intelligently with their peers and with younger kids about the dangers of consuming those substances.
I and then the other part of it is uh and the big question is we have many people in this community who have uh gone through treatment and they have succeeded. I mean residential treatment and they are clean and sober for x
number of days or weeks or months or years. But the question is how does is there anything here to support uh their efforts to stay clean and sober are is there any way what could what is
needed and this is as I said um to the group I don't have a lot of experience in this field at all but there are people that have had suicides and alcoholism and and
efforts, efforts, excuse me, efforts by their loved ones to kick the habit and then just just couldn't. And so that's what this is going for. And then there was the active living steering committee. It did
not overly did not have a meeting. So I got to attend that. um this group that has been working on the Superior Hiking Trail forever. They just keep plugging along and it's
um the Gigi Trail. Financial um problems exist on all facets for everybody from the DNR to Mindot to the nonprofits. It's but they're not giving
up. It's pretty impressive. and but when I heard them talk about it, I thought this is going to be decades before they get it done. But they're not daunted by that. Um and then uh there was a Lake Superior North one watershed one one
plan meeting and it is interesting that the Cook and uh Lake Cook and Lake County it's how they share the money like there's all grant funded money and if they don't get a chance to use it they put it out there and say we've got
30,000 we can't use this or whatever so here you go. That's pretty interesting. And then there was the uh Council on Aging. Um determined group of people to uh
uh keep that place open. Um revenue isn't is a problem. Uh they're getting more they're getting more revenue, but the costs are still there and they need to they're going after grant funding for updating the kitchen for I mean the
place it's time. it's time to get all this done. So, they're working on that and they need board members. Um, if you become a board member, you will have the opportunity to work and uh have your
when you discuss and what and all of your ideas to be very seriously considered and um it's a good group of people. Also, I will throw in a plug for the Lions. The Lions need more members. This was just an aside and then the
discussion went to the decrease in volunteerism among younger community people everywhere. So uh if you're not a lion maybe you should be if you have extra time to work. So
>> is there a still group called the lioness? They didn't say it was just an off off >> okay >> side conversation that we had and I don't know because >> uh I was now if I'm remembering
correctly Kathy Everett is a lion >> still and she was years ago >> but maybe she was a lioness >> I don't recall >> I know there's the two groups so >> have been >> I thought they combined but I could be wrong
>> I don't I was thinking if I could say um what were you >> didn't the Grand Marray lionesses um sometime in the past become wise wis >> um >> this information is coming from our
administrative assistant >> I did not myself but I believe I believe that's what the lionesses turned into was wise >> became wise >> which I can't remember what that stands for >> women >> women something
>> okay Good. >> You remind Commissioner White, you reminded me. If you're done, are you done? >> I'm done. >> Oh, okay. you reminded me um of the parks and trails commission meeting and it's on me to bring this to the board and clearly we're not going to vote on it today but it's something that um we
need to discuss further and it's about the CJ Ramstead trail um allowing ATV use and um and just to go back a little bit um this board had voted to include
it in the m the CJ Ramid master plan include ATV use, not UTVs, just ATVs in the CJ Ramstead master plan. If there was letter supports from the Spear um hiking trail association, um the horse uh the saddle club as well
as um the the Spear Cycling Association. Um we did we did not get all three of those and so we were not put into the master plan. um I made the motion or amended it or
something. It's it was um I guess poorly worded or executed. It didn't make a whole lot of sense. Um and so there is now a request to be put in that. I expressed uh what I thought was
happening as we were waiting for uh $20,000 from the state to um study it uh or that section at least before we wanted to be in the master plan. Um considering all that's going on in the
state um that was probably over a year ago now that's not coming. It I guess doesn't exist any longer. Um uh so in order for us to look at it, we need to be part of the master plan. Um
there were I I would say um public comments uh in respect to the north side of Pike Lake. There was concerns about noise and traffic there. Um, and there
have been just kind of some, you know, napkin drawings and looking at maps about potential workarounds there. And there is potential. Um, but as of now, the CJ Ramstead uh board does not have Cook County included
>> in the master plan. And so I um told uh the president of the Cook County ATV Club that I would bring it to the board to talk about this more and what our next step should be. Um I understand the hesitancy to want to be included in the
master plan without knowing but uh being a part of that master plan allows for that exploration. Um, and I guess, you know, we can reach out to the state to see if once we're in that master plan, it's that's that or if we're going to
have some kind of say as far as what they discover and what our roles are through the process. So, just wanted to put this on our radars um and and ask how the board thought or wanted to
proceed. >> Commissioner Gav. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, when you said board, you're referring to this board and not the the parks and trails. >> Correct. The parks and trails has already given full support to that request. >> Yeah. Well, I I would say that you know
the opportunities that we have for discussion on this either come at the committee at the whole if it's something that has some indepth otherwise there'd have to be information that would be informative that come before us before >> we would make a decision. So as far as moving forward, I guess we'd need more
information and and if it rises to that level that it should be on the cow agenda, then that's what I would do. But if not, then something that's a presentation comes before the board. It's always good to have context and understanding the ripple effect of any decision. However,
>> yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. The other thing I I would mention uh madam chair is that at the extension committee the backpack program which has been a good program uh the funding for
that and continuation through the um uh extension it has been agreed that it would be taken over by Northshore Foundation and they felt that it would be a good fit and they would have the monies to do that. that's new newly informed not forprofit and so that
program will continue but under the opices of Northshore Foundation. >> Yes. Um so maybe we should ask um the state sorry to keep balancing uh about um giving a presentation on the
committee the whole if um you all would be agreeable to that just to get more information >> and has there been any followup commissioner Mills on why we have not received letters? Um I think uh the it was I think the holdup was spear hiking trail
>> and um I my I haven't heard directly. My impression is that >> there was concern of the politics and just they didn't see how it applied to them and so I think they were concerned about getting backed into a corner or
something. That's that's kind of my between the lines. >> It's always good. I mean, for those that are that are in the no, we'll call it, if we can see the the the pluses and minuses. >> Yeah. >> And and so if we can put something together that way and address that, then
then it'll address the things that we need to weigh in any decision. So, >> yeah. >> Pros, cons. Thank you. >> Um, well, let's see. My updating is we had a three-hour nl meeting finalizing all of our policies and everything. So,
I'll give you an update on that probably on Tuesday or for sure the end of the month. Um attended the um extension meeting yesterday. I was pleased to see we have new members. So, you know, it's always been kind of beating the bushes
to figure out, you know, come on board and and help um with the extensive programming that um has been presented to us. So, that was that part was good. I'll be attending um township meetings over the next week and a half. And um
that's about all I have right now. So, we can move on to um updating uh our meetings um for the coming week. Um the courthouse will be closed on Monday um President's Day the 16th.
And um that's all I have just for updating on that recognition of staff. So the February staff anniversaries are as follows. We have Paul or better known as Willie Olan Highway Department one
year. M Westerland, Attorney's Office, one year. Julie Berglin, Office Support Specialist, two years. Rico Rivas, public health and human services, two years. Jay Doot, radio communication
analyst, four years. Karen Christensen, veteran uh service officer, four years. Nick Honer, um, auditor's office, four years. Kathy Anne Robinson, Attorney's Office, 7 years. And Tim Nelson, Land
Services, 27 years. There being no other further business, we are ajourned. >> Thank you. >> Question. Will you send me an email with >> that? We have a real >> We're done way earlier than I thought I
would.