Everyone, I will call the committee of the whole work session to order >> where we are supporting community through quality public service on Tuesday, August 19th at 10:30. We have on our agenda the minutes from the
previous month. And the agenda today includes uh SGSD moratorum removal uh community center budget request and then for information in our packet we always have the minutes of the standing committees from the airport advisory
commission budget and facilities advisory committee um highway advisory committee although they did not meet in July. So, we will um open the meeting our meeting up as we shuffle papers here. The first one on their agenda is
from the highway department. Welcome and good morning. >> Good morning. Thank you. Um as you can see, we have kind of a I don't want to say a show of force here, but you can see just how many departments uh subordinate districts actually uh touch. um you know typically with subordinate
districts it's something that folks think is just associated with the highway department because we handle kind of the end result of that but there is quite a bit of work that the auditor's office does and that MIS does um upfront and and even ongoing I would
say um to support these uh and if I back up a little bit more just so everybody's aware of what our subordinate districts are the SGSDs um those are districts that are set up for um road maintenance basically on
non-county roads. So the the brunt of this conversation is going to around revolve around us expending county resources um from three different departments um regularly on non-county roads. Um that is something that uh I
think is um we shouldn't do. Uh that's my opinion on it. Um, you know, it's kind of the death by a thousand cuts, if you will. Uh, where sure we could, uh, we could plow every road in the county.
Um, but we know that we don't because, um, resources, staffing, that type of stuff. And so that's kind of where I think this conversation can can start. I I don't know if it would make sense if maybe at a high level if if Ray or if
Rowan and Kyle want to touch on kind of how these things get developed and the effort that goes in on that side and then I think if we're able to I know you brought a hard copy of a flowchart Kyle did u but we might be able to put it up on the big screen too but you can just
kind of see the effort that actually goes into these where like I said the the work that we do the tail end of it um is is a very small piece of this whole thing. So I don't know Brady or if you guys want to >> Well, they Yeah, I don't even remember
when the first one started. It was uh I wasn't involved when they >> 1992. >> Yeah. When they first start I was here but not involved in them. And uh so usually we hear from interested parties
that that live on a road and uh in in some cases they've been managing snow plowing or something like that on their own. a group of them or one person's been doing it and trying to collect funds and then as they get older and uh
their equipment wears out um new people move in they struggle with getting enough funding and it's uh the fairness of it who pays and etc. and they find out about this uh potential program, these supported service districts, and
they start asking questions. And I think the from my standpoint, the more the most difficult part is defining uh what is the district and who is included and that's where most of them
have really had the biggest struggle and I think we have too. And that's where uh the GIS department gets involved and they've create typically they try to create a map of where people think they
want a district to go. But um and then highway gets involved at times because uh even in the early stages as to you know what's what makes sense because typically they're nowadays the ones that
come up there are multiple potential roads involved. Um, some of the early ones I think were probably easier where it was a stretch of road, a frontage road along a lake and a section pretty well defined. But
as it's gone on, there's been some that have been several roads in a very unorganized area. Um, and who do you include? Who do you leave out? and they a lot of them have spent a lot of time
with us uh researching that and then dropped the idea and then someone else picks it up later. So, it's kind of an it's an ongoing uh conversation because it's out there. It's a possibility and the county has approved these in the
past. So, um, yeah. So, without a a change in the in the county's policy towards it, um, it is an ongoing, uh, effort, new people come in, they're going to, someone else dropped it, they're going to try it
again, see if they can, uh, get some help with summer, winter maintenance on these roads. That's kind of a start. >> Real quick before or go ahead. I can just add to that briefly and and just
say that from our role on MIS and GIS is you know support technology. What stands out to me is um a lack of process in the business owner you know internally and that that creates confusion you know for the customer for the public as well as all
of us in different departments that are trying to work together kind of in silos and and so that's where I just saw an opportunity to ing us together to find a process of business owner roles and responsibilities and um including
mapping and some other GIS tools to to help the public and um relate all that back to both the local policy and the statute that drive this. So should should we move forward some way for you?
Can I just add, you know, kind of to tie those two things together what Brady and Kyle said that the way that it's been done is they get built, but there's no ongoing process to support the fairness and as new people move in. And so what we see then is we build them and then we
kind of wash our hands with it and we haven't built a process to have that ongoing maintenance until it becomes an issue with fairness and people are upset and they're coming back to wanting us to correct it and then it becomes you know additional project or operational work
that had we built a process around it to just maintain it which you could do would alleviate that. It would alleviate the big lift and time crunch and it would also alleviate, you know, the hurricanes and upsetness about
unfairness and other things. >> And you may alleviate it. I mean, uh, part of the issue, too, is um, there's an elected representative and the election of said representative is, you know, loosely defined in here.
Basically, it's defined in so much as we're at least able to say, "Okay, this is the person we talked to." But, um, it's not like any vote has to be like shown, you know, they don't have to show us the results of votes. And then that
person then controls the resources of a lot of people essentially. And so you can have sort of a strong man or whatever uh really uh deciding how the resources of this whole community uh is
is uh decided. Um so it's a lot of it's a lot of power for this little community. So um yeah, and then you and then I don't I don't I personally don't believe that actually the people in the district always know what's going on. Um
and so they don't Yeah. they don't even recognize that it's it's a line on their taxes that um that is yeah and how it's being spent. So I think there is information that the public isn't isn't necessarily receiving either. Um and
then there's I think there's an inflexibility too about about actually growing these as as different properties get developed as these guys pointed out. Um there may be properties who are benefiting from the SGSD without paying
in at a certain point. Um >> yeah or there are properties that are cut out who would want to contribute aren't contributing but then the the existing SGSD won't won't let them or won't expand to
include them. So there's actually uh an example of a roadway and I I hate to name it uh but they don't want to expand to include other parts of the roadway and instead they want to blockade the road. Uh so and and exclude those new
properties from gaining services. So I mean it just it gets very messy very quickly and we kind of get as as the county we get caught in between with our sort of uh loose guidance. Mhm. Kristen, you had a >> Yeah. So,
>> go >> I I know >> you mentioned >> microphone. Sorry. So, what I think I'm I'm hearing you say is we've got two things we need to discuss is really should we do this as a county? And then secondly, you know, what is the process and how do we need to supplement the
policy with some process based on the gaps and the issues that you're seeing. Is that accurate? And I would say if if the county wants to continue doing this, then I think there's quite a bit of work to making it um work more smoothly both from the uh county side, but then also
from the public side. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And the one thing I'll add, and I know we've touched on it too, is we're the only county in the state that does this. >> I like being unique, don't get me wrong. this doesn't seem like why why are we
there are plenty of other rural counties with just as much gravel or even more um than than we have and so we're the only one that does this and so to me that kind of sticks out too like a sore thumb if I could I would add you know I think Matt did a really good job of explaining
some of the inherent risks and complications that come along with this process and just from the MIS side we're not coming to say you know we're in favor of this it's it's exactly that and the way that Kristen framed up the conversation is should we or shouldn't we do this and if the decision is that
we should hopefully we're explaining all the additional work that's going to be required to have a functional process and that's a large part of our role in being here is that if you want this to run smoothly um there's a lot of additional process
work that needs to be put into it but that does not mean that we should be doing it it's just that's part of conversation. >> And another question that's come up since I've been involved uh periodically is in the statute that allows us, it
talks about uh different ways to create a district that literally uh property owners could um by referendum. They could vote to have it heard by the county board. they could
vote to create a a district, but it's it's something called a qualified voter, which has no uh link to our voting statutes. We have registered voters and eligible voters, but there's no
definition of qualified voter. And I have vexed county attorneys for years since um I'm asking this question. Um I think Gan has heard it. She wasn't county attorney then, but it's the definition of that uh I don't think is
known uh statutoily. Um does it mean like a registered voter within Cook County? Well, there's very few of those in most of these districts. Does it mean a registered voter? Does it mean an eligible voter? Does it mean a
registered voter in Minnesota or an eligible voter that lives in Minnesota or in the United States or where I mean what there's no definition that we can find and they've spent predecessors have spent hours and I've had different
answers from different assistant county attorneys and from the secretary of state's office. So many answers to that question variations. I think when we look at all of these suggested um trails here um you know we've gone through
listening to people who have associations >> and they designate somebody to be in charge and it works. Sometimes it doesn't work. So you've got the small little 9/10en of a mile. Evergreen does not have an association as far as I know. So that's why they're out of the loop. They don't understand because
there's no communication until oops we need to have help and then they come to the county. So, you know, and looking at all this, there's variance of miles, 9/10 of a mile up to, you know, um, feet, >> right? >> And so forth. So, I think that's
something that we need to kind of, and I'm appreciative of you coming here to help us dig through all this and to support your end of it and the folks who live on these roads also >> because we've also heard from other folks who basically said, "Okay, I guess
we can't do it at this time." >> Right. there's more people out there that want >> right done with the county. >> To elaborate on that and I guess I should have gone over the handouts too. So there there's I think three or four we handed out. One is our policy. Um we've talked about that a lot. We just
revised it you know in the last few months I think um the map that you see that's got the circles on it. And so that highlights each of the districts um each of the subordinate districts in the county where they are. Um, what all the dots on there though are all of the
properties in Cook County that are on non-serviceed roads. So when I say non-serviced, I mean it's not a county road, it's not trunk highway 61, it's not a city street. Um, it's roads where they're forest service, they're DNR, they're private, where I'm assuming
there's no dedicated plowing, graveling, grading, that type of stuff happening. So there's about 2,700 of those in the county. um our subordinate districts, the total number of properties you can see is like 237. So that's less than about 9%. Um representation of
subordinate districts to to the rest basically that that aren't receiving services. So that's what that map is. Um Commissioner Sturley already touched on kind of the list that shows each of the subordinate districts we have currently. Um you know, some of them are new, some of them are old. I think there's been a
little maybe ramp up in recent years in kind of the history maybe. I know there's a lot and Brady could touch on too that get presented where auditor's office and MIS do a lot of work and then nothing comes of it. And so now again,
county resources expended on things that aren't I don't want to say aren't our business, but may or may not be our business depending how this conversation goes. Um, and then what's the other? Oh, and then I just printed off the statutes as well. So, that's what that says. >> And Robbie, how many of these have
associations? Do you know? >> I'm not. So, or maybe not. >> And I I don't know who does and does not have an association. Like that's not actually information that you have >> that I have access to. I do know um so we have six full year. One is winter
only. Uh one is summer only. Mhm. >> One is uh has both DNR and Forest Service jurisdiction. So like depending on what part of the road you're you're on, you're either on the DNR or on US Forest Service land. And then another
one is just DNR jurisdiction. So meaning there are other entities that uh have little little or no contact with the residents on them. um and the SGSD is uh just to maintain the roadway whether or
not that entity does any of their own maintenance apart from the SGSD. So it's becomes a hot potato of whose problem is it? Is it the SGSD paying for the maintenance of the roadway or is it the DNR or forest service? Uh, and that came up a lot in
the last wash out events because uh, who pays? Um, so I have emails uh, between myself, the DNR and the rep that says u, are we expecting you to pay for this or should I is this a problem? Is this my
problem? And there's to to to this day there's no resolution necessarily. >> Right. >> Thank you. Yeah. >> With other counties taking on the responsibility, do you know what what do they do? Like you have wash outs or you have major stuff, >> right? >> It's up to
>> it'd be up to so no other county does this. And so when you know just like you know if Trout Lake Road for example washes out as a forest service road, we don't go there and fix it no matter how bad it is. The grade being completely impassable at Cascade River, that's a forest well for now. Forest service
road. Um, but you know, so it's that type of thing where you, like I said before, we could we can do a lot. We have the equipment, we have the staff, we can do it. Uh, but you can watch all the level of service. And that's something we touch on a lot in our department as you watch that go down.
The more we do without more resources is that death by a thousand cuts. It's it's little things here and there that just start adding up. It's not, oh, we only do subordinate districts and we don't do any other work anywhere. No, we plow out 50 plus trail heads. We do, you know,
that aren't ours. We do a lot of other things. So, again, it's this kind of ticky tack of a whole bunch of little things that are starting to add up and take up our time. >> So, another like an anecdotal example of that, um, uh, there is an SGSD called Little Ali, which includes Lima Grade
Forest Service, Little Ali, DNR. uh in the last wash out event um believe it was in June when they had issues uh uh lag grade washes out that's a call to me when really it's a forest service
road I get um some emergency uh call out for a contractor to come fix it which gets you to Little Oi little Ali has a wash out which is a DNR road that is a conversation with the DNR are you guys
fixing it or are we fixing it? Uh they uh don't have the resources to fix it. So I contract with a contractor to then fix it. So this is me, the county, uh talking to two different entities as
plus the representative to try to fix the road for like one person. So, it's I mean it's it's just that's just an example of how this works >> or doesn't. >> Yeah. Thank you. Um
I think you know for the for the public and as well as for commissioners that uh the fact that we are the only county that does this. That's one thing to note that makes it peculiar. Um the other thing is to clarify is that all costs
associated with maintaining subordinate districts those costs are then divided and put on the tax statement. So it it's not supported in any way by levy. It is supported by the people with those
districts exist. The question based upon the conversation we're hearing is are we including all costs and and so coming to the table if I look at this as an agenda item it's a recommendation
from the highway department to terminate this program and if the if the recommendation is coming to terminate it that's different than coming to the table and saying we have this policy and it really needs to be looked at and revised. ized so that it's inclusive of
costs that affect departments and it also should be defined in the context of whose responsibility is it why are we doing what federal or DNR or any other agencies should be doing if we're coming
to it and saying we've had it because it's taking too much of our time we won't want to terminate it it should be understood in in the public context that that this recommendation is coming out of our experience and out of the
challenges that come with responsibility that exists in jurisdiction and the fact that we're not all inclusive because we're not counting the real cost. And and if we're going to move forward, we need to be sure that it the service we're providing for those who are
affected is reflected into what appears on their tax dollar. So, we have two choices. We either say nobody else does this and so the other we'll come alongside and help you to understand if you have an association or whatever this
is how you can do that divide that cost up amongst like Rose Bush Lane where we were at one point and then we contract we handle it. So we're not trying to leave you without an option. We will help you and as other counties do we'll
recommend these things. So either we terminate this program and come alongside to help people in doing what they want to do or we need to look at this and count the true cost and make sure our alliances with federal, state,
whoever it might be are clear so that the burden doesn't fall on us. So it's your recommendation is basically coming to say we want to terminate with the understanding the experience we have and
we'll we'll try to help in any way with these organizations in providing information and direction but either we terminate it. We got 86 other counties that don't have this program. So it's not like we're doing something that's
out of the ordinary. we are doing something out of the ordinary in another context. But um so the discussion to me is that as commissioners and decision makers, we need to understand what led you to the point of recommending the
termination because it sounds like what we're talking about is how are we going to improve our policy. >> I think it and I know did you want to touch on anything? >> I was just going to talk about some of the costs. >> Go for it. Yeah, please. You are correct, Commissioner Gamble, in that we are not accurately capturing the cost.
We have a uh policy that says for a one season uh SGSD, we will collect an administrative fee equal to 10% of that year's levy. If it's a year round, it's 15%. Uh we've recently increased the setup
fee, which still is not enough when you count the hours that uh Brady's staff and Rowan and Kyle's are expending on helping them understand. But the costs don't stop there. We have annual we have
monthly billings. We have contracts that have to be let and followed. And we have to then invoice our SGSDs every month for any of the payments that we have made to the contractors. But more importantly, you have the auditor's staff. They have to manually uh get all
of the assessments in via each SGSD's uh estimate that we prepare. Matt and I spend a fair amount of time doing that every year. And then they have to look at the assessment method that each SGSD has chosen. use their spreadsheets,
their formulas, whatever, and then input those, track those. We have to know who's delinquent. We have the changes in the GIS world that need to be tracked. And frankly, if we were going to accurately capture all of that, we are the ones invoicing the SGSDs monthly.
To try and capture all of that from multiple departments is going to become quite daunting. And then from a practical standpoint, a real challenge that we're looking at moving forward is that we are losing contractors who are willing to bid.
>> Can you see it? We're down to it's one. >> We get basically one bid per SGSD contract summer and winter because they they have been doing them. They know what the costs are. Um, on one of them, for example, it's someone who happens to be on the road who's been doing it for
years and will do it as long as that person's health and age allow. When that person goes away, their costs are going to skyrocket if a contractor is even willing to bid. >> And that that's when we have to call them to remind them to put in a bid on
it. So, I mean, it is and we've talked about that a lot where it's one we are one p one contractor away from these services not being funded. Um >> and if that service is not funded, we we then have to face the like moral
decision. Do we go provide the service ourselves? Which >> nope. >> And we have actually in the last 5 years had to rebid on more than one SGSD because no
bid was received. That increases their cost. We're redoing the whole process again and now all of the cost is going to one SGSD rather than six or seven and it it's just this trickle effect of it getting more and more complicated and furthermore the bids are increasing. As
we all know, inflation in the last few years has really brought those costs up. And so now the SGSD members, some of them are expressing their frustration at the fact that their assessments are going up. And more than one individual and some of the newer ones has thought
that we could just say no, we don't like the bid and we have to go through then the extra explanations of once we take it over, we are bound by state contract laws and a low bid is a low bid. I'm sorry if you don't like it, but we you lose any of that flexibility when you
ask the county to become the fiscal administrator. >> Right. >> Administrator. >> So with that, we are prepaying or we're paying all of those costs and then invoicing the >> SG. You got it. Subordinate. And so
>> except we're not tracking it. >> No, we're tracking it. I have spreadsheets that go back to 1992. >> We track everything. And the first year we are basically financing them when it's a new SGSD. We try to establish them so that every
SGSD barring extraordinary circumstances has money in the bank at year end because we can't tell you how many times it's actually going to snow. I run a five-year average for each SGSD and that's how I estimate. So that's I guess
that's my question is if we are if we're paying for the service upfront and then invoicing them when there is a significant issue to the road um have we run into any issues in terms of
invoicing and receiving payment? So, we receive the money via the auditor's office when receipts, tax receipts come in from real estate taxes in May, October, and December. Okay? And so then that money I track in a spreadsheet and
in QuickBooks and New Roads, um what they have in the bank and what we're paying. And historically, we've done very well except for the large SGSD. When they first started, their costs were so much more than anybody could have anticipated because no one wanted to bid. And when they did, they had to
recoup their cost. You're plowing 10 miles. But in 22 and 23, we had two back-to-back difficult winters as well as some major storm events. And at the end of 23, every SGSD was in the red for the first time since we've we've run
them. And so we do have an option per the policy that we can ask the board to basically formally finance and then they will pay a small amount of interest because it was such an unusual 2 years and every SGSD was in a similar
position. We just understood that we were going to drastically increase their levies for one to two years and get them back in the black and get them with a savings again. And we were just willing to do that because it was not a one-off
for one district as we had had once and someone or twice in my time here and they did finance formally through the board and that's established in the policy which Brady can speak to about how that's done. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And there are costs that we don't you
know if if I get phone calls um and we had to deal with a difficult subordinate district a couple of years ago. none of those costs were passed on. Um time spent in board meetings talking about sub, you know, this type of stuff when Matt and Jesse go out to a road um to
inspect it maybe before it's formed or even to get recommendations. Correct me if I'm wrong, but none of those costs are passed on. Um so it's just it's time and effort on our end. Um doing doing that type of stuff. I know. I think we I think we try and track your
time a little bit with them, Matt, but it's not >> Yeah, we have we have it set up in in our time sheet system that I can track per each SGSD up to a 15-minute phone call even, >> but we don't Does that get passed to them? >> Doesn't get passed on, >> right? So, now that's just again cost.
So, kind of to Commissioner Gamble's point where we tried roughly a while ago when we updated our policy to reflect general setup fees, >> but again, it's general. It's not It took us exactly this amount of time. It took us, you know, two hours here and
three hours here, and now I'm talking to you every half an hour, five times a week, you know, whatever. Um, so >> I would say that there's a couple significant um things I'm hearing. I I hear from homeowners assa ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass ass associations,
property owners association and lake associations that they're managing and doing these things on their own and they have trouble understanding why there are subordinate service districts. So there is some friction within the community about the fact that we do this. Um there
are also very unclear uh there's unclear communication to property owners when they purchase property in Cook County that they are even on a DNR road or US Forest Service road. Uh, Commissioner White is aware that recently I had one
of her constituents contact me because of a culvert situation and they thought it was an unsafe situation. And it number one, it wasn't our road. It was US Forest Service. And I explained that those roads aren't created, they were
not created decades ago for anything other than timber management, but there's an expectation that those roads will be maintained like our city streets. And so, you know, it's it's a very difficult deal and I am glad we're having this conversation because I think
it's only going to get larger and we need to put our arms around it and figure out what we're going to do. >> And Commissioner Sullivan, if I may, to your point about people not knowing what kind of road they are uh purchasing a parcel or a a home on, we have dealt with that for years at the highway
department. And it got so bad with the phone calls that we were receiving from very iate new homeowners once they talked with us and realized it wasn't the county road that we actually worked with the realtors association and they now have and hopefully they distribute
to all of the realtors because our calls have gone down. they have a list of county roads and so they can look at that list if there's a question about whether or not it's going to have full county services because we said you have to be sharing that and when we do
receive an iate call from a a new homeowner I will I will talk through it all with them and go over it but then I suggest they give the feedback to the realtor about the lack of information conveyed so that we can minimize this moving forward we're trying to be as proactive as we
I think that the the homeowners that I've gotten contacts from don't know and whether they've forgotten or didn't receive the information. They don't know what kind of road they lived on and they also don't know the zone district that they live in. That's another thing. And
so I would love to go to one of those meetings with the real estate agents and talk about we really need to help our community. You know, they're they're wanting to do the right thing, but they don't know any better. >> Mr. I hope that's true because I just
accosted a longtime real estate person in the grocery store and said, "You've got to you've got to let potential property owners know that they are not going to be building on a county road." The response was, "Oh, well, I I think
we all tried to do that." And this is someone well established and but the idea of actually letting potential buyers know that they're now going to have to be in the road business and they might have to talk to and
coordinate with their neighbors even though they just want a piece of paradise in the woods and not talk to anybody. You share a road and it goes out. How much do you want to spend fixing it and what does it cost? So, uh,
when when we first moved up here, I believe it there were no service zones where there's no road maintenance, there's no school bus. I mean, that's it. And I don't know wherever that terminology went. Maybe in ' 92, the
county had a soft spot and said, "Oh, we could maybe fix this." So, I don't know. But I think it's uh we can't again I believe as a county board we need to have a conversation about what our values are and do we want our employees
fixing roads or do we want to sit spend levy dollars helping individual community members with their needs. I mean is it about the people or about the roads? I get roads are important. That's how you get places. But a road
is kind of an inanimate object except when it washes away. So, and we my own driveway, it's like erosion. Bring it out here. And we've got Grand Canyon developing right down the middle on the one hill. So, uh I'm all in favor of let
it go. It's We'll see what happens. Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah. Thank you. I guess if I think of it in the context of um when we have this disc this conversation
relative to jurisdiction uh I I think we would always agree that it it's best if we have local jurisdiction meaning if I have the state or the federal making decisions for us I would rather have that control myself. So I'm
saying as an association if I think that I can get things at a better cost that if I think I can control it and manage it better if we're resourceful and this if we work as an association we can do this ourselves.
Otherwise, if you look at it and you say, "Well, the countyy's going to be the one that has to do it." Then we have requirements that have to be complied with if we're going to be the pass through on this. And are we then
counting our true cost being with integrity in the process? This is what it is. if you want us to do it. I'll give an example uh where I was director of an organization and the road washed out in a heavy rain and they had to replace the culvert. Well, the local
county could replace that culvert. Our local jurisdiction, which was our little community board, they could buy a culvert from the county thinking we get it cheaper. That culvert, the price of that culvert was unbelievable.
So, the recommendation is just go out and buy your own culvert and replace it and you're going to save a lot of money because the county says we'll we'll sell it to you, but this is what you're going to have to pay because of all the whatevers that we have to go through.
Well, the intent is fix it for as little money as possible. And I can do that better on my own than I can do it through the county. And so I think uh depending upon the decision that is made, if we provide a resource and some recommendations, some things that inform
and help people understand and this is what you want to look at. We're here not because we want to take the service away from you. We just want to look at the positives that you have if you do this on your own and take that
responsibility. And to the point of are people aware when you come in and you live in this area, this is not a service that's provided. So being clear on expectation and then providing a means
for them to facilitate this on their own so they can do the negotiating as opposed accusing us of not getting the best price and not putting ourselves into it. Well, if you want to see the cost of what it is for us to do that and manage that, I think you can do it
better on your own. >> So, you've given us a lot of information here. Do you have a time frame by which you're going to operate? >> I I think you know kind of based on what you know I'm hearing here. There seems to be and that's why we kind of had this as either a more like a pause or a
removal. Um, you know, our recommendation, I think, at the end of the day from at least the highway department, uh, is is to remove them, is to no longer provide this, uh, service. Um, for for everything that we've talked about here. Um, based on what I'm hearing, I'm kind of getting that sense
as well. Um, and so, as far as a time frame, I think what we would do is is get through the winter. Um, I know those bids are coming up or I think something like they're already out or coming >> advertised by the end of the month, >> right? And so I think, you know, just just to get through that, I don't want to say we're done. Uh and you know,
you're on your own and you know, it's going to snow in three months. Um, but I think getting through the winter and then I think something like that where we can say we'll go through the winter, we'll bring this back to the board before we have to go out well in advance of summer bids. Um, and put this out because there is if you look in the
statutes there is, you know, um, I think termination by county board and there's some rules to follow there as far as advertising and saying we're not going to do this anymore. And then I think maybe we talk about, you know, we do have a policy. What does that look like to say, okay, this is now rescended or
no longer a thing we do? You know, I I want to make sure we check all the boxes with that. So, yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Commissioner, I would add that I think um bringing it back fairly soon would be helpful because if the decision is to not resend it,
>> um then I think there's that second part of the discussion about what procedures do we need to put into place and I think that would be helpful to have in place going into the winter. >> Got it. Okay. So, maybe what we can do is follow up on some of this maybe in the next month. Um, as far as getting
our ducks in a row on maybe some time time frames. Um, you know, like I said, we'll get through the winter bids. You know, everyone can get plowing if they need plowing and then we'll come up maybe with a process of, you know, effective this date, you know, the county, we will no longer supply
subordinate districts, and we can bring that to the board for everybody's decision at that point. and then whether it passes or fails maybe that is what determines our next you know okay now let's let's look at the flowchart then and see >> with timing I think it would be really
important to consider taxes >> what information is needed and when that is absolutely critical so okay >> part of that could be included in discussion and >> how many of those accounts have monies in them >> if if we terminate based upon what the
policy says about Well, they all have a a positive balance at the moment. Uh if we were say to go through the winter, it's going to be a little bit tricky because we are would normally be giving the
auditor's office the 2026 assessment information in January. And part of that 26 assessment may help them pay the last of the winter expenses, which sometimes we're paying in May and June, and we're getting tax receipts in May. Now that
said, um what we did with the recent uh dissolution of one is uh we waited till all of the bills were paid. We took the balance that was left in the account, gave that information to Brady's staff person who works with the uh tax
assessments and then based on the uh formula for assessment that was refunded as a tax credit then to them uh by that same formula distribution formula. I would recommend that that uh you put
together a bulletedformational piece that would show some of the challenges encountered. And so it would it'd be like the pluses and minuses basically. And part of the the pluses is is having control of, you
know, what we as an association or whatever determine relative to uh to costs and and ser level of service and everything else. Um so by putting that together, I think that's that's the
positioning statement for us going to a motion. >> Okay. And that would be included I would think in the resolution because there there has to be a resolution and that's the there's a 3 to six month period. >> Mhm.
>> You know, not less than not more than >> Yeah. not less than three not more than six months of the notice before you pass the resolution. And part of the discussion that we've had is is is the challenges that that we have and and it it's if it's something that's mandated
then we would want to evaluate in the context of how do we mitigate the challenges but what we're coming with is we're saying in the overall scheme of things this is how we see it and so this is why our recommendation but for the person that's affected by this I want to
see what your rationale is so that I can I can either agree or not agree. So, we're not trying to stretch and look for things to justify this. We're representing what in fact our experience has taught us. >> Right. Yeah.
>> Okay. Anything else from your group? >> Yes. Sure. >> Commissioner Mills has a question as well, but I'm I'm reviewing the statute and I want to make sure that I'm reviewing this correctly because it it states the county board shall cause notice of its intention to withdraw the
service district to be published at least once in the official newspaper, not more than 6 months or less than 3 months before the resolution is adopted. So my question is um we need to make I'm assuming the process would be for this
to come before the board for a decision and then we would still need to publish and bring it back to the board again >> for adoption. Is that accurate? >> Yeah, because Yeah. When I when we when the the one was dissolved Yeah. we were here twice. That's right.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Commissioner Mills. >> Yeah. And I was just thinking um uh just a little bit beyond um our decision or maybe within our decision too just about communication. Um I think it's really
important that um we have too much communication with uh the heads of of or the representatives of of the SGSDs as well as I think it could be really helpful having some reps or examples of successful board associations and making
those connections just to show a good off-ramp and what what the potential is and and just try to lay that out for them too and make it as easy as possible. um so we get as few um high rate people as possible. Also, it sounds like um if I really am trying to quench
my thirst for power, I should probably be an SGSD >> 100% >> representative. And also, if I'm looking for money, I should probably be a contractor. So, >> yes, >> I got my >> contractor. Got my angle here. >> Yes, we could use more contractors.
>> Yes. with all of these um with all of these different roads >> um we could have several people coming over a period of time. Would it be appropriate to have a public hearing for them to come then and >> we just am mass them in the room
>> or public comment send something out to each of the subordinating service districts letting them know letting them >> I think if we're going to do that the information should preede that >> because we can >> mitigate a lot of issues if we have that
information prior to that. So here's the information. Anything else that we can help inform we'll do but otherwise it's going to be a free flow >> and we you know we get calls frequently you know when there are people you know building summer hey do you know you know who are some contractors to call for
whether it's building or for plowing or stuff like that. So I don't want to make it sound like you know just because you're not on a county road we're going to hang up the phone on you. Um, you know, we we spend I don't know if it's a considerable amount of time, but enough time where if people have generic questions about who to call for X, Y,
and Z, happy to help. Or, you know, hey, how much does a culvert cost? Um, how much should I expect to pay for gravel? And we can provide that information. That's fine. You know, we know that off the top of our heads. I think it's all the things we've talked about today is what's the kind of leading to this. I think most companies what they do when
they've got an issue that is a thorn in the flesh is that they have when you call you get your call thing and you press one if you want this you press two you make that press the last press on your 10 litany of things to do. Yeah, that's a good point.
>> Well, thank you for bringing this to our attention. I appreciate it. Thank you. >> Appreciate it and u we look forward to your next steps. >> Absolutely. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. So, next on our agenda, we're going to have a presentation by Sarah Waddle on
the community center budget request. >> Good morning. >> Good morning. >> Good morning. Good morning. >> Oh, great. I was wondering how >> work put it up. >> Thanks.
>> All right, >> that's it. >> Good morning everyone. >> We have some powerpoints, too. >> Yes. >> Okay, >> perfect. >> Test it out. Great. Well, thanks for having us here this
morning. A few weeks ago, we presented with the budget and facility advisory committee on this topic about the uh future capital needs for outdoor facilities at the community center. This has been a topic under discussion for a
while now. >> You want me to talk? >> Your voice is soft. I don't think quiet voice, don't I? >> This will make me louder. Perfect. Thanks. So, um I'll give a little bit of context and backstory and then I'll talk about
what we are um proposing and then my goal today is to understand your questions and your ideas and do some thinking together about what the best way forward might be for this topic. So, um,
just as a reminder, the community center, uh, has its own mission and vision. I'll just read off the mission for you. To offer social, recreational, and community focused programming and partnership that creates a culture of belonging, active living, and lifelong
learning for all. We accomplish our mission by ding ding ding, providing high quality facilities for recreational and social activities, supporting community groups and delivering their activities and events, and being responsive to evolving community desires. The next slide is just a
picture of everything that's part of the community center campus. So, in addition to the main community center building that has uh meeting and event space and the curling club space in it, there's also uh the skate park, the playground that's for older youth and early
childhood playground, a picnic shelter and picnic area, the tennis and pickle ball courts, the hockey rink and now bike skills park as well. um the ice rink, the smaller one that's next to the hockey rink, a warming house, a large community garden, a ball field, and then
up and off to the side, the Gunflint Horse Park as well are all uh facilities that are part of the community center campus. And when I first started in this role, um I learned that there uh was a
mechanism that the county was using to save money over time for eventual replacement of some of these outdoor facilities and that those um savings, we'll talk about a little bit more, are on the next slide as well, are held within the building fund that the county
has. However, um those savings accounts are only for some of these outdoor facilities and not for all of them. And when the conversation first started several years back about the capital improvement plan, these outdoor facilities, I believe, were initially
intended to be part of that plan as well. However, as the plan was formulated and played out, there were many twists and turns along the way, and these outdoor facilities were not included in the county's capital improvement plan. So the the buildings
that we have, the warming house, the log cabin, the community center building are all included in that capital improvement plan and money is being saved for replacement of deferred maintenance, that sort of thing. However, all of the outdoor facilities are not part of that plan.
So I'll just review kind of where things stand right now and then we'll talk about what future needs might be. On this small chart, you can see the areas that the county has historically saved money to um to do eventual repairs and
replacements for outdoor facilities. We have the skateboard park, the horse park, the tennis courts, the little league field, and the skating rink. I'm not sure why it says warming house/skating rink. Probably that got changed when the new warming house was built in 2019.
Um the next column you can see um the typical practice of saving for each of those areas. Some of them have a a year listed of when they started being saved for. Some don't. Um one of them, the skateboard park, had an end date
attached to it. So savings stopped getting added to that account in 2022. Um, and then on the far right side, you can see the total funds that are saved for each of these areas. Right now, in the last four years, we've used some money for some of these facilities. So,
some of the numbers, if they look small, for example, um, the tennis courts, we wiped out that account a couple years ago with the tennis court replacement that was done. So, that $15,000 is just the last two years of starting to build that account back up for future needs.
I imagine that the idea of starting these accounts was to anticipate future needs and to hopefully save for them over time. I'm not aware of how the amount for each uh facility was decided. Um who decided that we were going to save, you know, a th000 for the horse
park each year versus 15,000 for the other one. Um and what sort of goal was in mind when these first were set up as far as how much people thought we would need and at what point. So, I think it's time to review the way that we're doing this and think through what our future
needs might truly be at this point and um maybe course correct or um think through what our best practice might be moving forward. Now, this is really tiny. I apologize for that. Do you have it in your packets
as well? Good. So, um, we've discussed the outdoor amenities and what their future needs might be, uh, in the community center board meetings, as well as I meet each year with each user group that is associated with any of the outdoor
facilities at the community center campus. We've also walked through with Brooke and myself and discussed um, from our perspective as staff what future needs there might be for these different facilities. So, I'll talk you through some of this is just laying out our
thinking as of right now. On the far left column, it shows you whether that uh facility is something current as in we've already been saving for it or new as in there hasn't been saving for it happening. It doesn't mean whether it's newly built, uh just whether or not it
had already been saved for. And then it lists each of those outdoor amenities as a fund area. The third column just is a really brief uh sentiment of what future uh capital needs there there will be for that amenity.
If you jump far over to the right side, there are some additional notes about um how we came up with or what we're thinking as far as what needs to be replaced for each of those areas. So going back to we've got the future capital needs for each area and then the
next column tells you our best guess of when we think those needs are going to come to fruition based on what state the amenity is in right now. So uh let's just take the skate park for example. We have listed out there uh that we think the whole park is probably going to need
to be replaced by 2035. So in 10 years from now. Last year we replaced some of the surfaces of the ramps. Um but the whole park is seeing some deterioration over time. Um it's over 15 years old now and it's lifespan I think is expected to
be in the 15 to 20 year mark. So by waiting an additional 10 years we're going to be really pushing to the end of the expected lifespan when it was initially put in. So that's some of the thinking an example of the kind of thinking that got us to those guesses of replacement years. Question. Yeah, Madam
Chair. >> So, and Brooke, um I mean, if this was the for-profit business normally and you have depreciation as part of your financial plan and and for tax purposes,
you would take the entity skate park, you would look at its projected lifespan and then you would build the depreciation schedule based upon replacement. And so this question is pertaining to what informs
that life cycle. And so your best practice is going to say this is what it costs. This is what projected life cycle should be. And so how much per year would we have to set aside in order to be able to replace it at the time that the depreciation schedule works itself
out. If we find that usage in something affects that whether whatever it is >> then then we look at that and we inform that decision based upon what our experience is teaching us. But my question basically is that
>> uh for the board is that what informs our decision as to how much we set aside and how many years that that funding is in place at the time that expended life cycle will be in place. Mhm. Yeah. And I think had these things been in the
capital improvement plan, they might have had their fancy software be able to like pull, you know, they had all those like the expected years of life of the furnace and the years of life of that. So, I don't have all that fancy like nationwide knowledge, but we have our best guesses right now.
>> Talking to um companies that build the equipment and what they're used to seeing. And of course, you know, in California, a skate park lasts a long time, >> but here in our climate, we >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> We're not we we don't get that life expectancy out of it. It's kind of a best guess in a lot of those.
>> Yeah. >> But it's an informed decision based on >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. >> And they were taken apart last year with a volunteer columns first. So, uh, so we've got the replacement year that we're expecting to need to do these things, and then we
have the estimated cost of what it would cost to do this replacement in today's dollars, and those cost estimates are made from um, gathering information from, for example, skateboard park companies or what it costs to do the last time or looking on the internet, those sorts of things.
Next column um is assuming 3% inflation every year between now and the year we're thinking it will need to happen. What it would cost in the year to to do the replacement. The next column is a best guess of what we think the county
would potentially cover versus what say there's a user group associated with the facility. Could they do some fundraising? Could we go out and seek some grants? this column. Maybe there are some changes that need to be made to those percents, but this is our initial first guess of um what percent of the
total cost the county might um be on the hook for. The next column is simply that percent multiplied by the total cost in the replacement year, which shows you the projected cost to the county. The next column tells you how much we have saved
right now. So, the current amount um set aside for each of these. The ones on the bottom that are new obviously have nothing set aside for them currently. The next column just then parcels out how much we would need to save between now and the replacement year for each um
facility in order to have enough saved to meet that cost to the county column. And if you look down at the bottom, the total amount we would need to start saving in 2026 and each year after to be able to meet these projected costs would
be $73,355. And right now we're only saving $12,500 per year total. that does um that 12,500, you know, does not include what we had previously been saving per year towards the skate park because that one ended in
2022 because it was set to expire when it was first set up. So the final column just shows you the change from the current year savings p or the change from what we have been doing till now. So, it's um a large increase, $60,000
more per year than what we had been saving in the past. Um and so, yeah, we can talk through questions that you might have about this and then think through what our options might be. >> Administrator Drogo, >> when you you say we're saving um
currently saving the 12,500 annually, where does that money come from? Where are we saving it from? >> Saving as in it's part of the levy. It's in the levy and it's being um put into the building fund and then being
accounted for as saving towards these particular things. Yeah. >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah. Um the doest edition my knowledge is is the bike element that's in the
hockey arena. >> Bike skills park. Correct. >> How was that paid for? that was purchased with grant funds through the >> and that's my point that many of the things that we get that they're attractive and so we get grant monies
which is not affecting our levy >> but once we buy them >> that it's hard to get grant monies for something that isn't new and sparkly. So then the maintenance of it and that's any decision that we make relative to
grant monies. We need to see what the carrot is tied to on the one hand and then the ongoing costs which usually is going to be a levy item. Mhm. >> And so um in in evidence-based
budgeting, we would look at something and saying this is the just the prospectus that goes into getting the grant monies in order to put it in place is predicated upon it's going to be used, it's going to be appreciated and this could be valued to us. When we
measure that, then we find out if our expectation and assumptions are true. and then that that evaluation justifies levy dollars. If we find that usage is
not what expectation was or whatever, then we have to determine just like we did now with the subordinate districts, it's relative to cost versus value. And so that's my my point is when we get
many things that that uh are grantbased that the ongoing cost has to be a part of that decision initially and then we have to measure to see how our expectations are being met in order to
justify the ongoing costs. Mhm. >> And I'd like to speak up for that uh bike skills thing. Uh being around some uh juveniles in my life like a 10year-old and a 13year-old and their
friends highly highly appreciated. >> Uh have a lot of fun on it and uh there's been no broken bones yet. But I think it was and I pointed out in the number I think I told them was that it's like you know how much this costs so you
guys could do this and I said it was $222,000 so you take care of it >> and they were most impressed but it is a wellused >> area and I don't see that h going away with the amount of biking that we have
in this county >> but you're absolutely >> basically you're looking at 60,8 855 to be set aside for the next few years. The project that's the closest to any kind of repair is the uh tennis court 2028.
>> Yeah. And that is showing courts four and five which weren't redone in the most recent debacle of tennis court redoing. >> Yeah. So yeah, and then the much larger amount underneath that, which would be
redoing all five courts in a further future year, would be redoing all five courts in a different type of construction called post tension concrete, which is expected to last much longer in between resurfacing
um time periods. >> Yeah. And I I believe what they did in the the last surfacing was just to buy us a few years before we went to the post tension concrete, >> which didn't turn out exactly how it was planned. So, we're not sure exactly how
that's going to end up. >> So, just a question, are the dead spots taken care of? >> No. >> Huh. >> Nope, they are not. We added a couple dead spots to it actually with some repairs there. came up and did.
>> Yeah. >> Not a not a not a very good experience with it. >> And so I would assume that particular company is on the no call list >> for the future. >> Oh, definitely. Yes. >> Yes.
>> Well, right now speed dial, right? Or >> unhappy update. >> Oh, >> we called Jean. It's It's through the lawyers now. handling it. >> And I thought the cycle superior cycling
associated owned the >> they do the the the bike course thing. >> I don't believe so. I believe the county owns it because >> fiscal agent the grant money came to the county for it. >> It was owned by them. It was my
understanding was it they own it and that's why they needed storage for it and they they used the grant money to purchase the conx with the future might have a new a new park up on the
hill where they could permanently install this terrain park because it is meant to be permanently installed. And >> we just kind of gave them hopefully a temporary space inside >> the ice rink and then hopefully eventually it will go somewhere else to be permanently disco.
>> Okay. >> Brady, do you know how that works though? If with being the fiscal agent of the grant or the things purchased through the grant money belong to them or to the county, >> there's there's an MOA draft.
>> Well, yeah. No. Yeah, there's definitely an agreement between I I'm pretty sure the county owns the bike skills park. >> It was my understanding we didn't, but >> yeah, we can clarify. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, the question would be liability. >> Do you pay the liility premiums
>> or does the county? >> Well, I think it's inclusive in our overall liability for everything that's under the community center. >> I think so, too. I mean, if it if if you introduce a new element, usually you talk with your insurance, you'll say, "Is this going to affect our premium?"
So, you understand that, but if you look at your what your premium does cover, it'll list all of these kinds of things and it's there, but you check usually to verify to make sure that there's coverage on that. Like if you got a trampoline and they say, >> you know, no, we're going to put a
search charge on your premium. Yeah. >> I would thought about getting the trampolines. Yeah. >> No, we haven't. >> There might be dead spots. The other thing that we've learned through experience with our hockey arena, its initial installation and
multiple things is that at the point that we initiate that contract and that agreement that we have to scrutinize that because so often we're enamored by the newness of something that we we miss the things that hold whoever the
provider is accountable. and we shouldn't have to fight to get the guarantees supposedly that are provided by the purchase or the contract. So, it just again it's something that we learn from saying we've got to do a better job of reviewing agreements
>> in reference to the tennis courts. Is that what you're talking about right now? >> I'm I'm just saying we hit that with a hockey >> anything with the concrete. Yes. >> But then when you get him to come back Yeah. with the why with that that contract agreement everything sure we'll
fix it but everything they did it was a charge >> it was a charge and it should be in our contract you need to get it right >> and it and and I would say it's respectful to negotiate that contract at the front end because if you get a
surprise now it can get sticky >> sorry I was looking up the uh memorandum of agreement and it does state that the county will act as grantee for the legacy grant and will purchase and take ownership of the components of the skills park and pump track with legacy
grant funds. So, I believe the county owns the Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But back to the the big spreadsheet of numbers. Um yeah, I guess
I'm curious about your all thoughts. I know that every everyone continues to say, "Wow, this is uh going to be an unpredictable budget year, and you shouldn't ask for anything new." But I also feel like the longer we don't talk about this, the worse it's going to be when these things come time to be
replaced. And we're sort of building ourselves a pickle. So, yeah, >> I do have a question for Brooke, which is um it's my understanding at least that if you defer maintenance on items like this that the cost is substantially
more as the years go on. So, I guess from a a fiscal standpoint, it I'm assuming it's in the county's best interest to follow a schedule like this. >> Oh, most definitely. >> There's no question. I mean, that's kind of the with the CIP and everything. That's the that's kind of the situation
we're in right now. And and again, I'm working on one of these for the entire county for for all the the facilities, which is going to be a scary number. >> So that's another question I have, which is, is there any benefit in adding this into the total CIP instead of having
this as a standalone item? >> Well, I mean, we can add it. These are these are things that just don't fall under >> I guess they didn't fall under mine, but it was always >> they do >> the community center. >> Well, and I think there's two things
when we talk about the capital improvement plan. There's both the plan itself and then the funding for doing the things in the plan and the the plan that was written 2 three years ago. Funding has already been bonded for those items if I understand right. So,
these items can't be added to what has already been bonded for, >> but perhaps this gets folded into a future iteration of the plan. >> Um, >> they did plan on a I believe larger bond at some point in the next few years,
which could change. I mean, there's a lot of different ideas I think going around on how it's could be funded, but we could add it to the CIP. >> Yeah. And that's something you all know more about than I do of what funding mechanisms exist for the county, whether
it makes the most sense to add $60,000 a year to the community center budget or whether there's some other way that you think this should play out. >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you. Um
I would say that um when we look at governance overall that uh we ask our departments to build integrity into their processes into their budget process into you know uh the the measuring effectiveness of what
we do with taxpayer dollars all those kinds of things. So when we come to you and say put together a replacement plan and and capital improvement and and maintenance all those things that if you do that and you build integrity into that and then you come to us and then we
don't fund it it gets it's frustrating. Um however from our standpoint and from the public standpoint what we fund is is challenging. So I think it's incumbent on us to be sure that that we encourage
departments to follow best practices when it comes to looking at the true costs which our previous conversation this morning identified and once we identify it then we have to determine how we're going to meet that need and if it's better aligned and it's inclusive
when we're looking at CIPs then and that that's probably where it should align then we will look at that I think what we have done by practice is that when we have these things that we haven't been aware of and haven't accounted for,
we've dipped into our reserve fund to try to make it up and it'd be better to have a plan in place rightly aligned where those dollars are best set aside so it's not a burden to the public, but it does provide the services that we
show by experience people appreciate and that's Our responsibility is to try to do that, but it's got to be prioritized first. We need to know and that's why these discussions are beneficial. >> That's where it's it's nice to have it
all in one plan so that >> Yeah, >> you're weighing it all at the same time, not like finishing this priority for main buildings that we have this. >> Yeah, >> there's a lot missed with the CIP pretty much stopped that building. So when I'm
going through it, we have a lot of sidewalks. We have a lot of pavement parking lots and curb and gutter and all of that was missed. So there will be a lot of exterior items that will be added to the CIP if we wanted to add this to the CIP as well. It just would kind of
cover our exterior stuff. >> It was a start but not a >> comprehensive not. >> Yeah. The other component of that is that in similar sized counties that we find out how do you treat this? Now there's how do you do that? Oh, we
always just set aside and we put it as part of the levy or we we usually just say okay let us know what do we have to do because we got a bonding bill coming up. It's like with the state, we just have to have that awareness being ensure it's inclusive. And then if they say the way we do it is this and you can say
just like we did in the previous conversation, 86 counties don't do subordinates. We do. And when we survey, we found out that the majority of counties, they put that into their CIP. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I think it's important to look at this
in terms of what's coming up in 2028. If you're going to bond, if you're going to have 60,855, this already costs 125,000. So, you know, do you want to parse this out? This is an important thing to set aside money for that and contribute a
smaller amount. I mean, I'm just throwing this out because that's within two years. The rest is within um seven years altogether, 2030. But um you know, maybe the tennis courts is the most important right now at 125,000.
The other thing I'd say about the tennis association, they have been one group that has demonstrated that they've been very resourceful. >> They have definitely earned >> much of what we've done because they have been so resourceful. >> And that's with Sarah's list. That's
kind of where she spells it out is the big numbers, but only 50% is what >> we're trying to >> Yeah. >> think of as what we would account for >> because they're strong. >> So even though that 2028 cost is 120 in 2025.
If you look far over on the right, we would need to save $16,000 each year between now and 2028 to come up with our 50% portion. So, it's not that we need to come up with $120,000 by 2028. Yeah. >> Yeah.
One thing I just wanted to also bring up in relation to whether this fits with the rest of the CIP is that um I think these facilities are a little bit unique compared to other indoor or outdoor amenities of the county in that there are these external user groups who might
have capacity to fund raise or help seek grant dollars for some of um some of these items as opposed to like the courthouse parking lot. There's no user group who's going to write a grant for that. But um >> but the tennis association, yes. >> But some of them don't really have that.
And I don't think we should say that they're less important because they don't. For example, there's no user group association of the playground, but that doesn't mean the playground is less important to have. Um it just means that 5-year-olds don't know how to make an association, but they very much benefit
from having that amenity. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> You know, it'd be interesting. I mean if if you thought about it this way when it comes to tourism if the presentation of the discussion was that we need to fund tourism.
So what we're what we're saying is so how much do we want to take in levy dollars to fund tourism? >> Are you saying that they're the ones that use the tennis courts or >> No. What I'm saying is it just as an example. >> Oh yeah. This is to the point that that
when we find if there's a user group or an entity that generates revenues that contribute to it or you find a revenue stream that's going to be able to do this because of resourcefulness you find this revenue stream. I'm saying tourism if tourism came to us and said we need
this money for our budget but tourism is funded through the 1% tax. They don't come to us for my knowledge and and ask for money because they got a funding source and if we can be resourceful and find these funding sources to the extent
that we can that's beneficial. So my my point in the illustration is what if tourism, which is a huge part of this county, came to us and asked for money to fund them, but they found a funding source >> or or better yet,
tourism is a big part of this county and tourists use our resources here. And is there a way that we can tap into the >> 1% >> the one more of the 1% because >> besides sanitation
um garbage pickup streets um >> law enforcement >> law enforcement our search and rescue our playgrounds that's on our local people to take care of that. I mean, >> hasn't that conversation started kind of
been explored? >> It's it's been talked about, but it sort of simmers. >> Right. Right. I mean, that's my understanding was that's kind of been discussed about handling that second CIP instead of a a large second CIP bond.
Some way to tap into the 1% that we're using to pay off a different bond. >> I've kind of discussed it with Brady a little bit, but I think some some uh language needs to be changed on it, I believe. >> Yeah. And that a question that been
posed to Brady, but um oftent times when it comes to negotiating salaries that the argument is, well, yeah, we have a small population, but look at all the tourism. And because of that burden,
therefore, we need to treat it like we have a large population. And so I'm just saying there's an awful lot of things that are driving the financial burden on taxpayers, let alone the price of housing and available housing and everything else and the price of
groceries and da da da da that u anyway it's often a rabbit. >> Right. Right. >> Any other comments that you would like to hear from us or anybody else? Commissioner Mills? Yeah, I I really appreciate these numbers and I absolutely think we need to include it
in the capital improvement plan. Um I'm not entirely sure how we should best fund it as far as this year in particular. Um I am very leerary of bonding and you know if we could not
borrow all the better and so um I'm just uh I'm not certain on the mechanism but I I strongly believe it should be part of the plan so we can >> Yeah. >> And I appreciate the word too. >> Yeah. And I think you know there's a lot of time between now and when you figure
out exactly what the budget is for this year. So other things could change, but I think it would be unfortunate to save any less than we currently are. And anywhere between what we're currently saving and what we need to be saving
would be an improvement. So um I think we should see where we can get to knowing that if we don't and knowing that these are estimates that things could change, you know, but >> not 50%, maybe it's going to be 70%. >> Yes. So many things could be in flux,
but getting towards a larger lump is going to is we're never going to regret having a larger lump of savings when these things start to come up to need to be done. >> So, I wonder if it would be helpful for the staff that are here to meet and to
talk about um what would it take to move some of these items to the capital improvement plan? What is the timing for that? and then what's left um and figure out that dollar amount and come back to the board with some more information
about how to separate that out. >> Would that does that sound like an appropriate next step? >> Yeah, including like streets and gutters or or whatever. And then >> um and then of course we'll need an updated financial management plan as well.
And I think it's a if the policy issue that can be generic, you know, to the county overall is as to how we approach these things when it comes to how much is driven by, you know, levy and how much is driven by I mean it's it's all
driven by levy, but I mean where does it properly align that? I think we should look at that because I think that organizes us better when we come to these discussions. >> Okay. Any other comments or questions? Otherwise, thank you Sarah for bringing
that to our attention and commission >> last of course always coming at the end. Um I was I was really pleased to see that the pickle ball is included in the in the uh in the the scope there and just didn't know if um pickle ball nets have been budgeted for yet as far as
where where that would fit. >> Yeah, the pickle ball so tennis and pickle ball are officially one association. So, it's the Cook County Tennis and Pickle Ball Association now. And they did um reach out this year asking if there was funding in the community center budget to purchase two
additional pickle ball nets and two benches. We discussed at our last community center board meeting and um told them that we had within this year's budget enough wiggle room to fund about half of what they asked for. Um and then asked them if they could ask around for
some other players to fill in the gaps. And so there's some email conversation going on right now about where that's going to end up. Yeah. The total cost is not crazy high. It's like $4,000. >> So we said we have about 2,000 that we could um put towards that out of the
existing funds we have for this year. Yeah. >> And in the community center discussion, we also suggested that there could be a search charge on pickles sold at farmers markets. >> Such a good idea. Yeah,
>> that would be very successful. >> We actually don't have any pickle vendors. So, if you're looking to get in the business up the cucumbers appoint person contract and now pickle so many things to do and so
>> thanks for bringing that up. Any other questions or comments otherwise? Thank you both for coming. >> You're welcome. >> And we'll have further discussions, I'm sure. >> Yes. Thank you. And there being no other business, our meeting is adjourned. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> This is something you know. >> Yes. Where are we? I'm not trying to