You're fine. Yeah, that's fine. >> Lady in black time. Good morning. I will call the Cook County Board of Commissioners regular meeting to order on this day, Tuesday, January 27th at 8:31. We begin our meeting with the pledge. Please rise.
I pledge algiance 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. >> Are there any adjustments to the agenda?
>> Hearing none, I'll have a motion. I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. support. >> All in favor? >> I I oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. >> At this time, we do have a public comment period. It's an opportunity for
citizens to come up and and um talk with us uh different topics they might have. It looks like out in the audience there would be nobody unless those that are there would like to comment on anything. Okay. And then I'll ask if anybody's
received any comments here on the board. >> I have, Madam Chair. Go ahead. Right. I have received public comments from Arvis Thompson and she states regarding the request for abatement on the Superior National Golf Course. Please define what
the term county public service enterprise means. And under the term applicants statement of request on page 78, the sales price of 1.85 85 million seems to be driving the value of the land. I wonder if the sales price were
2.6 million, would the value of the land then have to be valued at less than 2.6? This document appears to be written first with the sales price as the guide to what the value of the land has to be. Who valued the land at 1.85 million? Was that independently of the sales price or
as a result of the sales price? And again, who valued the property at 9.7 million? Is the total acreage of 213.16 acres all a golf course? Can you explain why a property valued at 9.7 million should be sold for 1.8 million? Aren't
you selling a golf course or is there no market for golf courses anymore? If this won't be a golf course in the future, what will it be? And then she goes on to have additional comments regarding the Harborview LLC. Starting on page 32,
where does the 550 um,000 come from? Does the HA have a resource other than the county that it will draw its 300,000 from? And would it be safe to assume the 250,000, the county's portion, would come from county levy? Will the nine units that are not
section 8 voucher be rented at market rate? And thank you for reading this and providing any clarifications that can be addressed whether in the conversations today as you get these um get to these agenda items or at another opportunity. Sincerely, Arvis Thompson, Coleville
resident. Thank you. Anyone else? Usually at this point we don't have any comment but um the assessor will address this at um point number nine. Is that okay?
>> Okay. Thank you. Moving on to the consent agenda items. We have claims and we have minutes from the January 13th meeting. We also have the public applica the permit application for a raffle for Cook County
Hockey Association. A permit application for a raffle for Trail Center Lodge uh One Spirit Nonprofit. Approve the hire of Nicholas Sheen as custodian. Approve the retirement of Lisa Sorley.
And I would just like to say a comment there that we certainly regret the fact that she's retiring. We've enjoyed her um reports, her financials, and of course her um humor at the end of her report. So she did uh send a letter to
um Engineer Hos in her retirement. Um so that is the uh um consent agenda. Does anyone want to pull anything? >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I would pull item B which is the minutes from the January meeting. Just a a correction
at spelling. >> The minutes. >> Yeah. >> Okay. We can put that later on. Is that okay? >> Sure. >> Whenever it works. >> Okay. All right. So, we'll put be uh uh around
item uh 10. Anything else? Uh the item six, Lake Superior North, one watershed, one plan work plan. I just think it would be an opportunity for a little bit of uh uh explanation to the public as to what
what this plan is. And since we have someone here who's like an encyclopedia, we have a couple of people who really know it. I think at some point >> we will be discussing it at item six. Oh, that wasn't part of our other thing yet. >> Yep. Okay.
I can't get this all on one screen. >> If there isn't anything else, Commissioner Gamble. >> And thank you, Madam Chair. A motion to approve the consent agenda with the exception of item B. >> Support. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I
>> oppose. Same sign motion passes unanimously. At this time, we do have the reappointment and um administrative services uh by Karen Christensen in the veterans office and we are going to have her oath of office at this time. Welcome
Karen again. >> Thank you. afternoon. I do swear and affirm >> I do swear and affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of
Minnesota and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota and that I will be diligent, faithful, and impartial. that I will be diligent, faithful, and impartial in the performance of the duties and the performance of the duties as veteran service officer as veteran
service officer for the county of Cook for the county of Cook in the state of Minnesota in the state of Minnesota. To the best of my judgment and ability to the best of my judgment and ability and in accordance with the law and in accordance with the law. I make this
pledge freely and willingly. I make this pledge freely and willingly to the veterans of Cook County. To the veterans of Cook County for whom I serve. CONGRATULATIONS. TESTING. It's hot.
Just need to thank you. Need to talk louder. >> Cry. >> Okay. Thank you, Jana. >> I think we all appreciated Karen's presentation a few months ago, what she does in her office and all of the things that she's responsible for and all the
people that she serves. So, we um Thank you again. >> Moving on to item number five. I'll turn that over to administrator Treble. >> Thank you. Um, so we have Jeff Brand here to present on item number five. He
is going to present about uh regarding changes to the Harborview LLC grant agreement. So I will turn it over to him. Thank you for being here. >> Good morning everyone. Nice chilly day in Grammaray. Um before you uh today you have uh what we passed as a resolution
26-6 at last week's meeting on the 21st of January. um the Harborview um uh um Harborview Apartments in town here. We had entered into an agreement in 2024 for a number of different reasons to
kind of help um keep those folks um in subsidized housing through HUD. Um and so we we supported the $300,000 grant. There was a $250,000 grant through the ILR as well. And then the of course 300,000 was from ARPA funds. They're
starting to use that funding now. In July of 2025, last July was a much different weather day than it was today. Um um I was approached by uh somebody at the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. They were asking for some additional
information to be included in this grant uh agreement. And so you'll find on page I think it's page two of the um oh I'm sorry yeah page two I've got double-sided copies under compliance requirements in article one
definitions um uh semicolon exhibits compliance requirements means that during the compliance period pursuant to Minnesota statute section 273.178 subdivision 184 that information had to be included in this grant for Minnesota
housing finance agency and so we included it as well. And the only other change that you'll see in this entire document is um in exhibit B at the end of the document.
Um we just eliminated a little bit of language that was redundant. there were two drafters of this agreement and um sometimes when you have two people writing a document together um redundancies occur and so those are the only two changes. Um we want to keep
this grant intact. We want to make sure that that funds are being accessed and um they're going to continue to contribute to keeping um a subsidized housing in Grammar until 2037. >> Okay. Thank you on that.
>> Yeah. questions or comments? Commissioner Gamble? >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. G given my involvement with Arborview, I recuse myself from voting on this issue. >> Thank you on that, Commissioner Sullivan. >> Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion
to approve the recent changes to the Harborview LLC grant agreement so it can be signed and formalized with the Cook County Recorders Office. >> I'll support. Yes. >> Yeah. Jeeoff, do you
>> uh in section two uh letter E, I I just noticed when I read through it that the date um the developer expects unavoidable delays. The project will be completed by July 1st, 2025. It says
>> do it used to be 30. I think it's just a typo. >> I'm sorry. Um you said section two. >> Yeah, it's in article two. I'm sorry. >> Article two. >> Article two. Article two section 23 letter >> E >> E. Yeah.
>> So it's page page eight. What I'm looking at I think it's just a typo. >> So exhibit B you said. Sorry. >> Uh article two of >> article two. Oh >> here's article three. >> B. But article two.
>> Article two. Okay. Article two. >> E >> E. Yeah, developer expects that during unavoidable delays, the project will be substantially completed by July 1st of 2025.
Um, okay. >> Yeah, the the original we signed said 2030. >> 2030. >> So, I just wondered if that was >> the the original said what? original that we signed said 2030. >> 2030 >> July 1st, 2030. >> Yeah, that's I mean we should have kept
that. Um that wasn't something that I discussed with our lawyers at Fibberger >> uh to change that date and so that should still be the 2030 date >> um given especially the fact that we really didn't receive any bills um until fall of 2025 which is just you know last
3 4 months ago. >> Yeah, I'm sure it's just a typo. >> Yeah, that that absolutely has to be a typo. It's not something that we um we definitely want. >> Okay, good catch on that. I'll make sure that that's addressed. >> So, I'd like to amend, Madame Chair, my
motion to include the change on item uh C or excuse me, E >> 2030. >> I'll support that amendment. >> Any other comments or questions?
So, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> We have We have four A's and what abstain? >> Anything else? >> We'll just need to have a signature from the the county administrator and then
the president of the the chair of the the board as well. >> Madam Chair, I just wanted to point out that were it not for this, we would have lost 22 units of affordable housing. So, I really appreciate your work on this um and um doing every everything we can to
preserve our housing and in the community. Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. Thanks for pointing that out. >> Yep. >> And we've seen some of the bills come through already and the the photos of the, you know, the damage section 8 and the rebuild. I mean, I I I
didn't have a visualization of how this really worked and how important it was till I saw all that. So, Yep. And there'll be more more bills coming in for things like an upgrade and um maintenance to an elevator, provide better access to the people who live
there as well. So, that's important, too. >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Just a comment that the uh 22 that was agreed to in negotiating this contract that that there's actually 26 out of the 31 units that are occupied by subsidy.
>> So, it's it's been good. As I mentioned in the HA meeting, uh the one thing in in transitioning ownership from section 8 to subsidy through the enhanced voucher program is that those that go on the
waiting list now have to go through the HR out of DUTH, which is a significant two-year waiting list, whereas previously we could, you know, move people in if we had an opening. Um but um the fact that we have 26 of those
available 30 units is is accomplishing what set out to do. So >> thank you. >> As as we all think about housing in Grand Marray, >> uh that's probably on the list for future housing, >> senior housing, all of that. You know the list.
>> Absolutely. I do. Yep. I I definitely live that the to Commissioner Gamble's point um the Duth HR who we have agreed to work with in order to kind of produce those folks to live that those units have have been under some um challenges
financially because of HUD's changes um with the July big bill that they passed. Unfortunately, they've they've they're now facing a budget shortfall. And there will be a presentation at next month's um HA board meeting to kind of give us uh an idea of what's really going on
with HUD and how it's really affecting us in our county and us in our region as well. So stay tuned and >> stay tuned. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Mhm. >> Thanks, Jeff. >> Moving on to item uh number six, the
Lake Superior North one, one watershed, one work plan going to be presented to us. >> Good morning. >> Good morning. >> Good morning. >> Um I'll wait a minute. I'm going to do a presentation to give you a little bit of background information and um get bring
you up to speed then to fiscal year 2026 so that a lot of you I know is new. It's okay. >> Oh yeah, sure. Thank you. All right. Um, so the Lakespare North One Wershed One Plan, uh, if you
remember from the past when I've spoken, the county has two comprehensive watershed plans. One is the Renew River overhead and the other one is the Lakes Pier North one wershed one plan. Cook County was part of the pilot program back in 2014 for this plan. And so that
you know where the region is, this is the area. It was adopted by Cook County, Lake County, Cook SWCD, and Lake SWCD in 2017 uh to replace the local county water plan. And so we have partners now with this larger plan that we share
responsibility for this watershed. The focus is voluntary. It's not a regulatory document. So just to make that clear, it's a voluntary document that we all use as folks uh responsible for helping to manage the natural resources. And it was amended last year
in 2024 which this board adopted the amendments and all of the changes for that. it just again for that visual so those who aren't super familiar we it covers a lot of Cook County and just a tiny bit is in the rain for headarters for Cook
County but the lakes pure north covers a lot of Cook County uh area and so the implementation funding it was allocated to partners who have adopted the plan others who don't adopt the plan can also use the resources uh the
funding but it was used or it was allocated through the clean water land and legacy to be able to implement the projects in the plan. Now, these plans are huge. It's not going to cover most of the plan. And when we did our um assessment, when we started to do the amendment, we did realize that like
we've accomplished a lot just through other funding. This just really kind of hit the the tip of the iceberg. And so, this funding has been allocated so that we can implement the plan and do the projects. Cook County, we are the fiscal agent, the conservation district. So, each bienium, we're responsible to the
state to make sure all the partners are doing their part. We have joint powers agreements even with folks within the county and we're responsible to make sure that everything gets taken care of legally. There is a 10% match required with the funding. So all the partners who are bringing projects forward are
required to say I have match or I don't have match. And then if you don't have match then hopefully somebody else has a lot of match that they can provide so that we're able to hit our goal. So going to start at the very beginning in FY18. We had not as much money there. We only
had $387,59. It it was a lot then, but it doesn't feel as much now. Um what we did with those projects is we were able to bring forward some projects with the city of Grammaray. So over by the behind Aspen Lodge by the sewer, there was just a
pipe going straight into Lake Superior with all the storm water, no treatment. And so they put in this uh system where it takes out the sediment and the nutrients and they're responsible for cleaning it. And they put a little bit of match in. And so that basin went in. And then this village ditch or Nature
Boy Creek, whatever you want to call it. Uh there was an erosion and a sediment loading assessment because that also drains directly into Lake Superior. It is heavily influenced by development and all of that hillside going into it. And so looking at it and seeing where can we help ensure that we're reducing those
nutrients and really keeping it as stable as possible so we're not putting sediment into the lake. We also started what is known as the coastal zone erosion hazard map and then um there is always funding taken out each time for grant administration and management
because it's a lot of work in the background to keep track of all of this and work with all of our partners. So that was 2018. If you have questions anytime, please let me know. The next one is FY20. And the reason I don't have the full amount is because my computer
got updated and I couldn't access everything um late yesterday. And also the other reason is this one got a little um fuzzy because we, as I mentioned, we we split the money with the counties and with any other partners. Well, this time Lake County
came forward and said, "We want to do a lot with septic systems." Well, conservation districts, we don't do much with septic systems. Whenever we do some of this, we have to increase our insurance also to make sure, you know, if some of this goes out of our our um wheelhouse. And so, we said, we're not
going to take on the fiscal responsibility of the counties doing all the septic work. So, Cook and Lake County both did work on septic systems. Cook County did a ton of work with inspections and did a phenomenal job. Lake County did a good job. They weren't able to finish all their work. I'm not
sure what happened with their funding, but um if they ended up or not because again that was not my responsibility to track their stuff. Um but the conservation districts then we were they accomplished a two harbor storm water management plan. Again that administration and management the
coastal zone erosion map kept getting work done on it. A lot of education outreach um we did a numerous storm water practices were installed. Rustic Creek, which is down in the Lake County area, had some sediment reduction done. And then we started working on private
forest stewardship, seeing starting to dive into that forestry up here, which is something that we hadn't been able to do before, but with staffing and funding, this is able to start to to grow and help land owners. FY2022, which we're just closing up right now, again, um, and I have the
numbers if you need numbers for breakdown of what all of these are. We did administration again for the grant. Um, city of Silver Bay did a stormwater management plan. We did a lot of coastal and uh erosion and um both inland and on
the big lake for education outreach. For example, we we did a outreach that was hands-on where we planted 500 plugs with a landowner on Devil's Track and we had a lot of people show up and and then it's been mimicked and now we keep getting asked, can you do it again to Can you do it again? So, we know that these efforts are working and that
people are excited and hearing about it and wanting to do that. Um, Lake County did a GIS inventory of delineated wetlands. Um, so they updated their their database to be able to help service that better. Um, we updated the entire Lakespare North Wershed One plan.
With this funding, we continue to work on that erosion mapping project. We did a reduction in sediment, nutrient, and urban nodes. So, some of these grants um or projects have other grants that are matching them, but part of our funding went to Little Devil's Track River.
There was Skunk Creek, Agot Bay, and Baptism River all had different projects um installed on them. So, you can see we're stretching those dollars as far as we can. We're up to six 600,000 almost and we're we're getting a lot more projects in and stretching it. And then we had storm water projects. So, we had a Fifth Avenue storm water project,
village ditch village ditch sediment reduction that took place behind the highway department. Um it was eroding due to the business park had um a lot of water coming through underneath the Gunflint Trail and that culvert was kind of small. Can't upsize
the culvert because it doesn't need it needs it but it's not going to happen. And so what we tried to do is reinforce that the ditch going in there so it's not blowing out sediment everywhere. And then Knife River had several projects for sediment reduction. So,
and then in FY24, which we're currently working on, and so those projects are some are done and some are still getting finished. Again, that not as many projects, but because the price tags are going up, uh, and the projects sometimes are getting a lot larger. And so, we
have administration and coordination, watershed conservation practices. So, these are cost share projects. So each county or SWCD is allowed a certain amount. For our S SWCD, it's $12,000 a year to help people put projects in the ground and that's what all we get. That
doesn't really go very far. And so this opportunity allows us to do a lot more projects and a lot larger projects. Um for example, we were able to help someone with a trout stream put a new culvert in because it really needed it and they couldn't afford it. And so that was an opportunity to do that. We've got
we actually our office has spent all of our FY24 and allocated FY26 as of this year almost for Kashir projects. We have a long list of people waiting. So we're excited to have this extra funding. Um again uh Little Devil's Track was very
expensive so we pulled money from this to be able to cover that funding. Knife River has a large amount of sediment reduction projects going in and then the septic system improvement program. So that is with the county. Um Lake County was doing some projects with that and so
I feel like that might have gotten cut off but we're missing a project. Let me double check. Yes. And then um there's also the gravel pit map going in for this did not didn't make it on there so I apologize. So you know the county is working with the
doing the gravel pit inventory that is coming from this watershed based implementation funding and then there's also also forestry and so the forestry is part of that again and that's to help get forward stewardship plans on the ground and implementation on the ground. So
and then we come to FY26 and part of the reason also I have to bring this forward as part of the policy committee members each uh agency needs to approve the work plan plan. The policy committee has already discussed it at length which commissioner white can talk about if you
would have more questions and then we have to have each board come back and approve this so before we can fully go forward with the state. So for FY26 funding, um we I apologize I didn't write the number down, but it's also close to the same as uh 2024. So it's
around a million dollars, just over. Um it was a lot of discussions, a lot of meetings to try to figure out what we're going to do and how we're going to prioritize. As I had told Commissioner, another commissioner, we um our office alone has well over a million dollars worth of projects ready to go on the
ground. We're just waiting for funding. And we know that other the other groups do, too. So, it is a lot of back and forth. Who's going to give what? How are we going to do this? How do we prioritize um and it's it's hard, but we work through it and get through it. So, we have a lot of funding for plan coordination and management. Again, the
price tag is higher, which means we have a lot more responsibility to the state. Uh we're doing prioritized for forestry practices still because there's just a large benefit, especially with the spruce budworm. So, trying to get stewardship plans and implementation for those plans. Public engagement. So
that's our education and outreach which we're we do collaboratively a lot with Lake SWCD sediment and reduction and nutrient program um or practices. So that's Linston Creek that's in Lake County. They're going to be doing a culvert replacement. Skunk Creek,
they've got a lot of projects lined up there. They have a total maximum daily load. So that means they have too much sediment going into that that creek. The Little Knife River has a turbidity issue also and so they're going to be working on some restoration there. And the Papa
River, we're our office will be working with Loots and Mountains. Um there's one area where it's really blown out from the 2022 floods. There's also a lot of overland flow and so we're going to work with them um and see what we can do to mitigate some of that and to reinforce some of those banks so it doesn't keep
eroding quite so bad. Storm water mitigation progs. The Knife River Township will be working on updating their plan um to incorporate better storm water practices and then the development of some other storm water
work is uh working with our district has been asked by some housing folks from Hamilton um to hopefully help them with some projects outside of their permit. So we don't fund projects that are with permits, we don't fund permit projects. This is them being able to go above and
beyond to really put in um additional things. And then again that cost share projects which I had mentioned earlier for our office is pretty well spent already. So so what I'm here today is to ask for you to approve this is the allocation funding um this work plan and
you have it before you. I tried to simplify it but if you want more details I I can provide that um today. >> Thank you Elena. It's amazing, isn't it? All the different things that have happened since 2017, what's going on now,
>> right? >> I was part of that group working with Luden Ski Mountain >> and also the Popular River projects and that was quite a long >> thing that we got through it though, you know. So, comments or questions? Well,
one comment having attended meeting two is how cooperative and selfless these different counties and agencies are is like we've got we've got this much money, but we need this much
money. So, we're going to have to share. And then to have counties say, "Well, let's give it to someone else because we'll just we can just wait." I find that to be >> I mean, it's absolutely amazing because
they're giving up actually giving up projects they really want for the good of the water, for the good of of the lake shore. So, it's uh >> it's a process. Yeah. And we've started our FY28 already. We're ready for the next bienium between the partners. We just when we meet in 2026, we know that
we can't all work, you know, get our work done. So, okay. So, maybe you got a lot more done this benium. That means this agency gets to have more funding. >> And the other part was that when one one entity didn't get to spend all their money, I mean, for whatever reason, then
they say, "Well, give it to >> so and so until we're prepared again." So, >> people don't share like that. I think it's very nice. It is Commissioner Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for presentation
um and conversations uh just the work that you described but also all the work that you pour in generating revenue to be able to do things that that's uh that is hugely significant and I think uh to the community uh when you have departments
that work as hard as you demonstrate to generate funds to be able to do these things and it isn't levy dependent that uh that's that's tremendous resourc and stewardship. So it's it's appreciated. Uh question relative to uh
what is before us here on the million43 uh that is uh funding that is shared with Lake County and yeah and u you mentioned earlier in the presentation about the requirement of a 10% match. So
of that 1,ion43 then uh the county would contribute however that is >> not necessarily the county. So the the 1 million is between all four partners and sometimes we have outside agencies that will come in and say I really have this
big project you know can I work with you but it has to be vetted >> through the SWCDs or the county first and then that much the match we have is on top of that million. So, it could be, for example, Lake SWCD is a good example. Um, one of their projects is
actually a which one is it? An $800,000 project. >> I believe it's the Knife River. And so, they have, you know, a lot of extra match that 400 plus,000 of match. And so, they could cover everybody's match. So, we could come in like for our
project, you know, we'll ask Luden for some match. And so everybody comes in trying you trying to bring forward what match they can provide but being that um >> the grant world has changed drastically within the last year it's where everybody just supports each other with
the match that we can provide. >> Yeah. in that partnership which Commissioner White referred to. We see that with airports, we see that with the highway department and uh uh it's good to see that uh there are some institutions that don't think others
exist and uh that makes it very challenging, but it it's uh it's neat to see. So, thank you for your presentation. >> You're welcome. >> Any other comments or questions? >> Commissioner Sullivan. Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the
work plan and budget for fiscal year 26 watershedbased implementation funding as approved by the Lake Superior North WHED Plan Policy Committee at their November 14th, 2025 meeting. >> You're on that committee, aren't you?
>> Oh, I am. I was just letting somebody else support. >> Oh, I I figured if you were on it, you would. No, I mean it's >> okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further questions or comments? All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimous. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you, Elena. >> Moving on to item number seven. Matt is going to come before us to talk about a motor graater. >> Good morning. >> With the assistance of engineer Hos. >> That's Yeah, I'm just here assistance.
>> That's right. I'm here for moral support. Yes. So, this item um is the authorization to purchase a motor graater. And you might be having a little deja vu because I just becaa came before the board in 2025 for the
purchase of a very similar item. However, this one is planned. Um this is not due to a breakdown. Uh we have a planned purchase in 2026 of another motor to replace one of our units which is 11 years old. Um, and so yeah, um, if
anybody has any questions, it's a >> question, Commissioner White. >> Motor grader as opposed to >> a pedal grader. >> A pedal. >> No. >> Okay. >> It's just the more formal name for greater
grades, roads, plows, snow. >> So it has tires. >> Yep. >> Tires, not >> tires. tracks. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, my question is, um, so we have this on a schedule and when it comes up and we're looking at it, we're leasing it. So, we we let
it out for bids. >> Do we do that on a lease? We don't do it on a lease. We do it on a purchase, aren't we required to? >> No. So, uh, we buy off a state contract. So, those contracts are managed by the state. Uh and so then essentially the
the the vendor has to prove that it was let out for bid. Uh and then that contract was approved by the state and so we can buy directly from that vendor knowing that we're getting the best price. >> Okay. Thank you for that explanation.
The other question I had is that um uh in the documentation that you provided to us, it shows that this is over a term of six year with that last year just being a dollar means nothing. Uh just a transactional issue, but uh we're
looking at allocating uh roughly $80,000 u on this agreement. And our previous pedal grader that was uh on how many years? >> The same. It's a fiveyear. >> And what's the difference between this
contract and that contract annually? >> Uh about $1,000. I believe the other one's like $79,000. >> It was so that's very similar. >> That's good to hear. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And that's that will vary year to year based on what our tradein value is. Um
because that all gets factored in. And would you say that the transaction that happened in the previous contract compared to this one that the trade-in value was higher in this one which makes the two more comparable? Uh no. So actually there was a significant jump in the price of the unit um because as
those contracts get relet at the state level obviously the price goes up. So the price of this greater is significantly higher but we did not trade in a grater on that last purchase because we fixed it in house. >> Okay. Um, and that one is currently what
I what I'll call our spare grader until we can get through this whole cycle of four replacements. >> Okay. >> Once we're through that, then we'll be able to sell that one. >> All right, Madam Chair, make a motion to authorize the purchase of the motor greater
>> support. And we have a motion in a second. Any further questions or comments? All in favor? >> I oppose. same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, Matt. Appreciate all your digging around into all of the trading
and who's on first. Moving on. Engineer Hos. >> Yes. Uh so, a couple of projects in front of you. Uh the first one is Pine River Bridge Replacement. And so, if you're familiar with where that is, that is the air end of the Arrowhead Trail. Literally the very end of our county
road way out there on the east end. Uh we own the bridge that is there. It is ours to replace. Uh, as you are aware, we inspect our bridges on different cycles depending the age of the bridge. That one is very much due for replacement. Contrary to what I have heard from some people, we have a score
on it. I can't remember what it is, but it's an F. And so that means time for replacement. Um, so what's nice is I'll keep bringing it up. Uh, is you remember a few years ago we put up all those UT signs, town road things, town bridge things. I've talked about that at
nauseium and I'll do it until I retire. Uh because that's where all this funding comes from is that if we didn't do that, this is 1.8 out of the levy as opposed to 1.8 from state bridge bonds. Um or in this special town bridge, yeah, the
legislature. So, uh anyways, we ended up with only two biders on the project. One complete bid, uh which was Redstone Construction. Um you can see it's just under 1.8 8 million about 12% over what our estimate was. Um you know every year we always learn something with our
estimates which is something we'll talk about again in the next project. Uh being that we were quite a bit off in that one. Um at this point I'm just convinced I'm going to look at the state average and triple it and say good uh because we've been going 30 to 40% over
state average and that generally serves us well. Uh but you can see we're even starting to lag behind that. So, um, not to say that pricing is a joke, but I'm running out of ideas on how to get these right. So, and when I talk to my counterparts, uh, too across the state,
you know, it is kind of a thing where we're the exception. Uh, when you get really rural like that, other rural communities deal with those higher prices as well. Um, I I'm I'm comfortable with this bid, even though it's technically only one complete bid. Um, we we let it on time. There's
nothing I'll say weird or unique with this project. Um I just think it's in the middle of nowhere and there's not a lot of people that come up to do that that type of work uh up here. So any questions? >> Uh could you just inform the public why
do we have to pay extra? >> I mean what are some of the fact consider factors considered besides lodging and >> the socioeconomic realities of living in Cook County, Minnesota? Um, I mean you a myriad of things. It
depends where they're hauling materials from. It depends where they're based out of. I mean, just trucking, you're at the end of the arrowhead. You're not just Grand Marray. It's what is that two more hours beyond. And then on top of being, you know, a lot of times these companies
are working out of Duth Redstone in particular. You know, I know a lot of times they'll partner um with uh KGM for example. And so KGM will do the dirt work. They at least have a pit here, but their pit is off the ball club road. So, you're almost going from like north
central county to the tail end of the county on the east end. So, that's my best guess for stuff. Um, timing wise, like I said, I'm very happy with, you know, we we bid this at an appropriate time. This is normally when we get stuff out for bid. Um, I just think a myriad
of things, tariffs, inflation, name it. Um, it's all kind of goes against us up here. So yeah, 12% I'll take honestly I'll take that. >> So then there's that question is this is there might be change orders so it might be go higher. >> It could. Yeah, there's always
unforeseen things on projects and so it depends. Um sometimes you know we actually underrun things uh that happened on our Ty Park Road project a little bit. So we have an initial bid based on what we think um you know based on survey info and what we can collect. But, you know, when you're out in the
field, sometimes you don't see a rock and so that could raise the price or actually it's less material or we could reuse something so there's a savings here and there. So, we'll see. Um, like I said, I think with this there's nothing unique about it. We've done several of these projects just in my
time here. Um, but yeah, >> thanks, >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So you you state in the documentation in our packet that u this comes from u county state aid funds.
>> So um it doesn't impact levy >> correct >> uh directly because it's coming from state aid funds. Does the state have a um a limit or an oversight at which they think that these bids are not
acceptable? >> It's Yeah. So, a flag goes up when it's 10% off and that is over or under. >> Okay. >> And so then what that requires is a justification letter from myself on why. Um and so there's been instances in the past where we have awarded when it has
been it's never under so higher. Um but a lot of times, you know, in my opinion, there's always a if we're going to award it, there's a good reason. So, like timing to me is a great example where and I'll skip ahead to the multi-use trail for a second just because I think
that's a great example of this. We let that project last year very very late in the season thinking that well we already have people working on the gunflint. It's right next door. We should still get a good price and be okay. So, when we got those bids back and we went oo
that is hilariously high. No. And that was where I said, "Okay, I think timing played a factor in that one. Let's rebid it next year, this year, and do it in our normal schedule and then hopefully get more biders." And then say, "Okay, I
think the price is right now." And then that, as we'll talk about shortly, is one of those things where when I have several biders, then saying, "Here's the price, and I bid it on time. That's just the price." Now, what we have here is an instance where I, like I said, have one
complete bid. We had two biders total. They just didn't finish. And it's 12% off. So, I'm sitting there kind of going, am I comfortable being a Scotch over? What, you know, kind of the cut off, the threshold is for a justification letter. I did talk to
state aid already and they are comfortable with that given the location of the project, not just in the county itself, but just being in Cook County period. So, >> so that and when you're talking about the next item, >> that one was significantly over, >> right?
>> So, that flagged it then that the state had to look you had to write a >> right >> justification. So, when you said that uh in your logic that you applied in having it bid >> thinking that it's going to be better, how did that play out?
>> Uh in in the case of the multi-use trail, we actually shaved off about $110,000. All right. >> So, to me, that logic was sound. It's just like I was saying before of going, I thought putting 40% on state average was already good. I'm almost not lying
when I say I need to start tripling it. >> Yeah. >> Um it's, you know, it's the reality of that. There's there's instances where we do get savings up here, as you know, like we've started to partner with St. Louis County and Lake County on striping projects. We get below state average then, which is wonderful. It's a one of
the rare instances I can think of where we get a deal. >> Um, but you end up with stuff like this where you're just you're hauling materials to the end of the world and that costs a lot of money. Um, but I guess that's the it's the price we pay for it. We could abandon the road, but
that's a different conversation. So, we're not doing that. >> Thanks for the explanation. >> Yeah, you're welcome. >> Thank you. pretty soon. >> Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion to award the contract to Redstone
Construction LLC for 1,779,11430 >> support. >> Okay, we have a Oh, >> yeah. >> We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Mills. >> Um, we've used Redstone before. Oh, yeah. Right. Yeah. And was that >> with the Timber Bridge in Portage? >> Correct.
>> Okay. And um and so this is a little it's a tight area. I don't know how many >> year round. Well, summer residents, I'm sure there's many up there, but >> how does the logistics go with that bridge replacement? Same as the other. >> So there's Yeah, same thing like anytime we do a bridge replacement. So what
we'll look at is is there a detour route and that will dictate whether we have a bypass. Um in this case there's no detour, so we're going to have a bypass. So the traffic will be able to flow um just like you know any of our other projects. Um, I think it's I I I can't
remember if the if the stop lights will be there or if it's kind of stop and take turns. It depends on sight distance and what you can see. Um, we can also always pivot depending on conditions where say it does start as a stop and take turns and if we're running into issues, we can pivot to the the timed
lights >> and then you you know it's that that thing like we did on the gunflint. >> Yeah. I can't imagine there's enough traffic, but >> Well, and and it's more it's not necessarily quantity of traffic. It's can I see can I see you coming at me, me coming at you, you know, that type of
thing. And so more often than not, that's what dictates it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Just trying to think about our boundary permits, >> right? And that's just south of where we'll be. That parking lot's there, so we shouldn't >> be in the way.
>> Shouldn't we bet that lot might get some use? >> That's Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, no, I mean, it's busy. It's construction. It's obviously going to interrupt, you know, some things. Um but you know our job and I think too um and I've talked with Commissioner White about this in the past is you know we're going to go
through this award process. We're going to have our contractor once we have our pre-construction meeting and so that'll be a little bit you know early spring late winter. Um, what we'll do is it probably be a good idea host a town hall up there for folks and just say, "Hey,
also because we have our Arrowhead Trail project going on, Chicago Bay Road project going on, redoing North Road project or that little chunk, a lot of work happening in the east end." And so I think it's going to behoove us to make a public appearance and say, "Here's your project inspectors. Here's all of
our cards. Here's what to expect." Um, and just a long summer of of construction. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Are you thinking about your permit this summer? >> Rethinking now. >> Okay, we have a motion in a second. Any
further questions or comments, Commissioner Gamble? >> Yeah, thank you. relative to the timing, the project that was done on on the the bridge, the culvert that uh Devil Track that that seemed to take a long time.
>> That was a big bridge. >> Mhm. and and so anticipating although the traffic isn't going to be as significant obviously but anything that can be done to try to alleviate that
inconvenience because of timeline >> sure >> and how everything gets lined up and whatever and then try to do it so that you're not inconveniencing >> right what's difficult is our construction season falls across the 4th of July falls across everybody's planned
vacations in Minnesota. We all come up north to our cabins. There's no good time. Ex, you know what I mean? It's that type of And so what we do is just try and make it, you know, have a timeline that's appropriate. So structures like this, for example, uh when we did the one on the North Road in
Hovindland a few years ago, about 3 months and that's kind of what it is for these smaller things like that. Um, and there's, you know, a lot of it depends too on the crews they send up. Um, you know, the company that gets it. Redstone
is familiar with this area. Um, Aaron, who I work with from Redstone, is wonderful to work with, understands the limitations and I mean, understands construction in general. So, um, you know, I I think having a meeting out there on the east end to inform people and what to expect and not to sugarcoat
it, um, and just say, "Yeah, it's going to be annoying, but there'll be a bypass. people will still be able to get to their cabins um and that type of thing. It's, you know, very similar as well to the project we did up on Cross River um up there. That was four years ago at this point in time, I think. Um
but similar thing where you have access to a lodge, access to cabins, where you know, we just do our best to communicate with the public and say, "Here's what to expect, you know, on on these days." Our inspectors do a great job on the dayto-day being out there, you know, meeting people, meeting the people
impacted by this. um and you know just to get information out. So, you know, I wish I could do it now um but unfortunately we can't. We're we're hitting it in the busy season. >> Yeah. Madam Chair, as a followup, um does the state allow financial
incentive? >> In other words, >> incentives and disincentives and it's kind of >> like if if you can do it within this time that that uh >> that yeah, that exists and it's up to us whether we want to include them in the specs or not. Um sometimes we do um on
on larger projects, especially if you a great example is the Gunflint project we just finished. Um if the pavement meets certain criteria, smoothness, rideability, quality, um there's incentives for that to say, "Hey, you did it great. Here's an extra $5,000 or
something like that." Um and those are measurable outcomes. And so on the Gunflint, for example, we did get that report and say, "Yep, you know, it met smoothness criteria. It met quality criteria." And so there was an incentive there for the contractor. Um you know that you can do it as far as the time is
concerned as well. But I don't want to underscore pro projects take time. Um it doesn't matter if you have 50 people on site doing stuff or you know a proper crew. You know I'll just make up a number 12. Um at the end of the day there's a series there's a sequence of events that has to happen. It takes so
long to drive a pile. It takes so long for concrete to cure. um it takes so long to drive to the end of the Arrowhead Trail. And so some of that stuff, you know, is going to play in this where your your crew doesn't matter so much as it's just a project and they
take about 90 days, you know. Um yeah, >> thank you. >> Mhm. >> Any further comments or questions? I'll call for a vote. All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. >> Wonderful.
>> Okay, continue on. >> Here we go. So, back to the project I just kind of mentioned. And this one's Yeah, this one was alarming. Um, this was we So, this is a design we did in house, um, which was wonderful to do. We like to keep our staff busy in the winter doing projects like this. And so,
we had let this one out for bid last year, like I had mentioned. Um, and I believe we got two bids. And if I remember, the low bid was like $960,000, but we bid it very, very late. And so, we knew that. Um, I thought it would not
be like that. You know, that's almost double what our estimate was. And our estimates already, again, 30 to 40% overstate average on top of looking at previous bid prices. I know it made me cough, too. Um, looking at Sorry.
Um, looking at old bid prices and trying to, you know, do our best to put an estimate together. So, this one was really awesome, though. Uh, we got nine biders on this. That never happens. uh three at most, you know, four I think when I've seen bigger projects, but to
have nine like this was wonderful. Uh and so yeah, so the price still came in $840,000. Um which is way over what our estimate was, but I look at this and I look at things that we've already talked about timing. Um I'm come that timing is not
going to get any better. And then I just look at the quantity of biders and go that's a lot of people and everybody's saying it costs this much. And these companies also vary in size. Uh the the apparent low bidder right now is a very small company. Um and then you also have
your your KGMs, your vites. Those are big companies. And so everybody is sitting there saying we think it costs this much. And so I think it's again one of those things where we just have to go back to our estimates and the way we put them together and change it um going
forward. So, all of the funding though for this is going to come from we have uh $560,000 secured in a combination of state and federal grants. And so, but and then to make up the difference, we get municipal state aid money every year. And so, we've been accumulating that for the
last few years. So, that difference is very easily made up here. Um shouldn't be any there. I don't think there's any impact to the levy on this one. So, any questions? >> Why do you think there were so many biders? I don't know. Um,
>> is it that that counties are some counties don't have the funding to do it anymore that that you know they're going or everyone wants to be up here in the summertime? >> When I when I kind of look at some of the people that that submitted bids, the
contractors, some of them are smaller. And so this is a trail, you know, this isn't a box culvert or a bridge or even a road project, you know, 10 foot wide batuminous >> trail. Um, and so I think some of these smaller companies are able to handle that.
>> You know, they have the equipment where where you know, if you're already doing patching work or you're doing driveway work, um, if you're you're a utility relocation company, um, you're going to have all this equipment already to do this work. And so I think that's my best
guess. >> Any other questions or comments? >> Yeah. >> Continue on. So, have we worked with this company before? >> No. >> They're out of They're out of duth. >> Okay. >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, make a
motion to award SP016-612-081 and SP016-615-004 multi-use trail construction to the low bidder MJ Companies LLC for 841, $2025. It's a board.
>> Um, we have a motion and a second by Commissioner White. >> Oh, >> any further comments or questions? >> All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you on that.
>> Thank you. Last thing um related to our entire 2026 and even 2027 a little bit construction schedule. So what we are allowed to do with our state aid funding is if needed we can borrow ahead. So we get money
from the state every year to perform work on our county state aid system. Um this is any of the roads numbered 1 through 23. Uh we can expend that money on that. So given the slate of projects that we have next year and as a reminder you know I mentioned all the ones on the
east end and of the Arrowhead trails a bridge we're re you know resurfacing the Arrowhead Trail itself upsizing a box at Otis Creek repaving Chicago Bay Road chunk on the north road gunflint 92s uh what am I missing and then the multi-use
trail a lot of projects and we're running right at the line and so what we when I talked with uh Lisa earlier uh about whether we should borrow ahead just in case to the point Commissioner White brought up about change orders or just just to have it just in case. Uh we
thought it would be a good idea to borrow ahead our 2027 aotment. Looking ahead at our 2020 or looking ahead at our 10-year transportation plan um and looking ahead to 2027, we don't have any state aid projects that year scheduled.
Um that's not to say we're not doing anything. We're doing four bridge replacements. uh they just aren't on the state aid system and so those funds won't be needed. Uh if for some reason something is needed, we'll at least already have that money in our in our possession. So 2027 would be like a
catchup year. We'll already have the funds and then everything is back on schedule in 2028. Any questions with this? >> Yes, >> is there any penalty for uh receiving the funds early? No. Okay. Commissioner Sullivan.
>> Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the resolution for county state aid construction advance >> support. >> Yes, commission. >> Uh I don't think we haven't done this in my memory. Okay. >> I don't think so. Um yeah, it's
something I think what's nice is it's >> it allows us to you know again we do our best and the other thing too is we do our best with our estimates. And so now if those estimates are really really wrong, well at least now where we thought we were kind of running out of line with things, well now we have
insurance and we're good. You know what I mean? Um obviously if things come in >> over what we can afford, then projects are going to have to shift and that's fine, too. Uh and then we'll really have to fine-tune how those estimates get put together. Um but uh yeah, I don't I
don't think we've ever done this before. Um, and yeah, I was uh a little little hesitant to do it, but hearing your explanation, laying it out, especially 2027, it makes a whole lot of sense to have that security and to keep things moving and and to get her done.
>> And the Yes. And the other thing I'll add is it is nice too when we can when when we can do this. So, a great example is like a project we're pushing for in 2028 to get the end of the Gunflint Trail paved. Mhm. >> That could be a scenario where I come back here and we talk about the same
thing depending on funding that's secured and whatever. We can actually borrow ahead I think two years worth. And so then what I would look at and say it's an opportunity to do a lot of work in a big project and then we just need to look at our construction schedule and
say well that's okay to do that. We can catch up over the next one or two years and still do other you know bridge work, culvert replacements, county road work, you name it. Mhm. >> Um but I like I like that it's an option that we can if we need to.
>> Commissioner Gav. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So what is the given we haven't done this before, so we don't have the experience. Um if you talk to your peers about it and say if they've did it, you know, any repercussions, whatever. But
the question would be what what is the risk? >> How? So >> I guess if we kept borrowing ahead then we're always behind. >> That's right. And and so in some cases and that's where the discipline and the informed decision tempers that and
that's an important element. So as as a commissioner I I would say that that uh the way you approach projects, the way you look at funding, the way you evaluate that builds confidence in supporting your recommendation.
um asking the questions as to what's the worst case scenario and um you responded and saying we'd have to realign some of our projects. If our projects based upon our assessments we need to do this and it's going to really cost us significant
more if we delay it then that would that would potentially be a risk. Correct. But back to my statement about not just saying, "Oh, there's some money here and we could take that and play with it as opposed to this is an informed decision that supports this recommendation." That
I'm I'm comfortable on that that basis and um understanding what the risk is and we'll see how it plays out and it might be a f future tool in in the future. Thank you. >> Anything else?
We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I >> oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you all very much. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Oh, we won't see you for a few months. Thank you. >> Moving on to item number eight. MIS
going to have a presentation on professional service agreement. Good morning. >> Good morning. Morning. So, >> today, pardon me, I'm fighting a little bit of a cold here. Today, we have a request to approve a service agreement
with Guy Carlson, registered land surveyor, for the completion of the spring 2024 public land survey system monument grant program. for the PLSS monument grant project. I won't read the whole summary for you,
but this is the grant uh that was written by Wayne Henchi for us with the support from reporters office and our GIS uh and unfortunately wasn't be able to be completed. And so this contract is with as I mentioned Guy Carlson to
complete that grant. Uh there's remaining work and remaining funds uh available and um the contract here is is just very similar under the same terms to meet the grant. The grant's been extended to allow for this and we're
looking to utilize these funds and get the remonumentation done with this project and and close it out. Kyle, you have anything to add? >> I think that kind of sums it up. We're just Yeah, there there's remaining
money. We we're after the deliverable uh for the benefit of the the county, the community. Um yeah, these these corner monuments are the foundation, the framework for our public land survey system, which you know connects all our
legal land descriptions. It's important >> just felt like we were fortunate to have somebody who wanted to do this. >> Absolutely. Yeah. And as stated in the the document, there's just under 58,000
left available. 59,000. Um, so it's a good chunk of money that will allow us to complete this project. And it's 60 >> four total corners is the the scope of the project. And it's roughly from um
kind of County Road 60 and Caspers Hill. Yeah. um east 14 uh and back down uh Lindscoot Road. So from kind of east to west, north to south, Lake Superior to County Road 16, up Casper Hill area, Link Scoot
Road all the way over to East 14, those corners and that's included in the the attachments of the board. So with that, we'd stand for any questions. >> So where are we with um having a land surveyor with the passing of Mr. Henshi?
There's there's been a series of emails to schedule a meeting with the land records committee to to talk more on that and how we might best approach that. Um, you know, that could be um possibly a shared position with um highway and their survey needs. Um,
yeah, there's there's a lot to be revisited there. >> A lot a lot to discuss still. >> Takes time. >> Yeah. >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh just a question. Uh the project wasn't completed initially. Is there a
duplication of funding as a result of that? How did it affect funding or was funding not like we're not starting over and having to pay? >> No. No, we're we're not starting over. Um the grant and the professional service
agreement that was in place before and the one that we're proposing now allows for billing as work is completed. And so a certain amount of work had been done. There's a certain amount of funds and work remaining and um Kyle's been in contact with Guy Carlson the who will be
doing the contract work and feels confident that you know the amount of remaining funds are appropriate for the amount of work that's remaining and the contract reads as a not to exceed. So, we're looking to finish all the work and just spend the rest of the grant money that's there and as I mentioned, just
close this project out within the extension that we've received from the state for the grant. >> Okay. So, it's just a continuation of the project with the funds that >> had been anticipated. >> Just a passing of the torch with this project. >> Yeah. Thank you.
>> Keep it moving. >> And I really appreciate the the attachment at the end. And that's the those are the corners that need to be okay. Um I I enjoy the lost corner versus obliterated.
>> Yeah. And Wayne was able to I believe set all all the corners. um is and so kind of what remains is probably a little bit of field work and establishing coordinates for those corners as well as detailing the whole
history that documents the evidence of those corners back from the original land surveys and that gets recorded in the reporter's office here as a corner certificate. That's >> kind of what we're looking for is the ultimate deliverable >> to formalize the work that's been done
and >> secure it. Yeah. Thank you, >> Mr. Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I make a motion to approve the professional service agreement with Guy Carlson, registered land surveyor, for the completion of the spring 2024 public land survey system.
>> Support. Have a motion and a second. Any further questions or comments? >> I think Wayne would be really happy we're doing this. >> He would be. Yeah. >> Me, too. >> All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion passes
unanimously. Thank you for bringing that up. >> All righty. Item number nine, assessor golf course value abatement. The only reason I was going like this to you is that when we have um um public
comment, we don't comment on the public comments. So >> yeah, I I kind of figured that. I wasn't sure if we were going to address the questions right up front or during the item. So >> Yep. So you're back and good. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. So, item number
nine is a request from the EDA to do a a value abatement of the golf course. So, um you know, I can try and address some of the questions that were raised during the public comment about um you know, the the document on page 78 that is um
the request for abatement or the application for a reduction in value. That's an abatement application. Uh effectively this came to my attention, you know, somewhere along the discussion of the the golf course sale and what I saw come back as the the highest best
offer on the golf course being 1.85 million. Um I looked at the valuation. In fact, it was brought up by one of the board members of of the golf course and you know he said, "Well, what what's the taxes going to be on this property?" I'm
sure it was part of the discussions and negotiations on landing on a contract price and you know back then the value I think was somewhere in the $5 million range and last year there was a significant increase on the Superior National land values
the the golf course homes that are that are adjacent to the golf course. We we carve that out as one of our neighborhoods. Um I'm not sure if if the commissioners some of the most of the commissioners were here um when I gave the presentation about how we are getting away from our old land tables
which basically was one value from Lake Superior all the way up to the you know say the organized township of Luton. We had a what was timberwood um land valuation and there wasn't any neighborhoods. So, you know, you got 5
acres down by Highway 61 or 5 acres up by the the grade. It was valued at the same rate. We went through and broke out all the different zoning districts. So, R1 is different than commercial, is different than all the F1, 2, and three. We have multiple different rates in the
land table systems. And the golf course falls into one of those really high high dollar rates. It's a residential, resort, commercial, RCR. So that in 2021 was applied. And then also the neighborhood of what we call Superior National. Now we've carved it
out to be the heritage, which is the homes along Superior National and Superior National Golf Courses, two different neighborhoods. Um, under that old, you know, strategy or application of the assessment, it was never reviewed. There's not a property owner that's paying a tax bill on it. It's
exempt from taxes. Uh, I don't think anybody who's in the management of the golf course or anybody who's been in the position of the EDA director has ever really contemplated what that value is and what it means. But that value that's established back in 2025 would become
taxable in 2026 if the golf course closes prior to the end of June. So that would put us in a situation where the new buyer, the owner would look at that tax bill if nothing was done and they would say, "Well, you know, clearly the
the golf course isn't worth $9 million. There was and no offers to support that." um and likely would file a tax court petition which you know then we would have to try and defend the $9 million valuation which was based off of
the Superior National Homes, the homes along Superior National and how they're being valued effectively highest and best use if you think of it that way. Um the value on the golf course currently for 2025 is, you know, roughly $41,650
an acre. Uh, I know the last couple of lots that sold on the golf course were about $200,000. So, you know, and that's half acre, three/4er acre lots. Um, so that's just trying to get down to where that 9.7 million number came from. It
was it was never really analyzed on a close examination. And that value doesn't take into account the deed restriction, which um that deed restriction does affect the market value to anybody who owns that property other than the Nelson sisters because that
deed restriction doesn't affect them. Um so effectively what we what we're looking at here is, you know, there were multiple offers on the golf course. Uh the best offer, the one that they are currently working towards um a contract is the 1.85 million. that does include
all of the blue sky value. So, you know, you think of like all of your employee manuals, that intangible stuff, your um website, your internet, all those things. And then you have the personal property, which includes, you know, anything that's owned by the golf course, equipment that is not considered
real property. Uh that's also included in that 1.85 million value. So, now we have to look at what are the land and building worth. And I went through and made some adjustments, created a new neighborhood for the golf course, and this is similar to what the value will
be in my 26 assessment, but I cannot change the 25 assessment without either an abatement or a tax court stipulated order or a tax court order by a judge. So, that's where um the EDA came in and and filled out the application for
abatement request. Uh this money was not levied in the 2026 levy. The the property was exempt and it was never contemplated to pay any taxes this year. So uh the third page that I've attached in my item shows the difference between
what the taxes would be if unabated, which is 85,647, and what the taxes would be if abated, which is 17,843. Now, that's based off of the market value with the deed restriction and the income potential of the golf course.
That income potential really limits what the golf course is worth. Um, you know, investors obviously want an expected return and that's where they they put the number is based off of what that potential return is. If you know it was a if there was no deed restriction and
there was a developer that really wanted to carve up that golf course, they might pay a lot more for it. But at the same time, you know, without the golf course there, is that land as valuable? I mean, certainly it's valuable. It's on the ski hill. It's it's close to the ski hill and it's in loots and it's it's valuable
land regardless of the golf course being there, but uh that that would change certainly change things um for the properties that are currently adjacent to the golf course. So, I think I just want to go back and double check that we addressed most of
those concerns that were brought up in the public comment. Um, you know, the county public service enterprise that is that my understanding is it is something where a fee is charged and it is not it is not funded through taxation. It's a fee a user fee to provide a public
service to the to the public. Um the 9.7 million valuation again that was that's kind of looking at it from a highest and best use perspective and valuing it equalized with adjacent land. Uh there's a lot of land here with 213
acres. Um so when you put it at that 47,000 an acre rate or 41,000 an acre rate comes out to that $9 million value. But that's that's not what it is worth on the open market given the deed restriction.
Um, I think that pretty much addresses all the the questions from the public comment. Do do any of the commissioners have any questions about this? >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the explanation and following up on the
public comment. Um, one question is what is it best practice or normal to evaluate a taxexempt entity that the county owns and controls at the highest and best value? I mean why why would we
do that as opposed to you know in the context in which it is owned and operated making that the incumbrances that come along with that status reflect in the valuation.
Yeah. So the department of revenue is always you know reminding us that we need to pay attention to exempt properties on the chance the off chance that they do become taxable. Your value has to align with what market is and you also have to determine you know if this
property was taxable what would the classification be? They want you to track that even though it is exempt from property taxes. In the case of the golf course, we I I I'll be honest with you, I was unaware of the deed restriction until the property was being marketed
and and the discussion was being had that, you know, I actually live on the golf course. And there was a lot of discussion of, oh, well, what happens to the golf course? Is it going to close? Well, no, there's a deed restriction. It c it cannot be closed under the the the deed restrictions that are in place. So
once that came to my attention, it was clear that you know highest and best use is not is not applicable to this property. There is an actual legal deed restriction binding the use of that property. Um so you know it is something that this this is an experience that you
know now I am looking at the the Gunflint Hills Golf Course. I'm looking at some of these other exempt entities. And you know, if you're using, say, like the North House Folk School as an example, that's an exempt entity. Every time they add new construction or update a building, we update our record. We we
feel like those values are are where they're supposed to be. But if there is some hidden deed restriction and there's not a property owner bringing it to my attention, that that's where we got to this situation is that, you know, if that if that golf course was privately
owned and run, they would have brought the value up before it ever got to $9 million because there's a financial impact. >> I'll continue. >> Thank you. Yeah, just to follow up. So, so the state made the requirement that
for not for-profit properties like that that it should be valued at the best use, which it'd be nice if Pilt would think about that. Um the uh and so in
looking at this, golf courses generally generate significantly less property tax revenue for local governments than if the same land were converted to residential or commercial development. And so because the state is required that we look at the at the best use
scenario that's why the residential is used and that's where that is at given the realities is that um with the encumbrances that are part and parcel with golf courses that um this highest
and best use uh won't apply. The one thing that I would question is that at the price that the golf course sells at, if that price were higher, like the initial asking price and it
came in at the lower price, if that price ended up being a higher price, that tax revenue would be higher based upon the market price. Is that correct? Yes, Commissioner. So, the the market value is is what we're shooting for. Um,
so if if the income potential determined that yes, the the golf course could have sold for $2.5 or $3 million, you know, that would be reflected in the in the assessment. Um, again, you know, we're looking we're typically always looking for highest and best use. That's just
statutory market value language is highest and best use. And in this case with the deed restriction, we have to deviate from highest and best use and value it as its as its legal use, what it can legally be used for. >> Yeah. And I think that the important
thing to the public is we've had this golf course, this golf course and um at the point that we're seeing that it it's potential will be sold. is that uh is is everything on the up and up and um uh
are we being good stewards of something that we've sunk considerable monies into now that we walk away from it? uh are we again being good stewards and given what we are required to do by the state when
it comes to assessing that even though it's been in the county's ownership through the EDA uh we are doing what we're required to do and so there's no shenanigans or anything that are going on here relative to why the request that
comes before us this isn't something that is an advantage that is being manipulated this is something that is responding to compliance in normal and best practices relative to a sale of a property like this. >> Correct.
>> Thank you. >> Commissioner Mills, did you have a comment? >> Oh, yeah. I was going to say basically the EDA should have complained about our valuation long ago because of the deed restrictions. >> Yeah, that's right. Yes. If if the EDA had reviewed the value every year, you know, like every property tax owner has
that statement that comes out, you know, if they had come along and said, "Hey, we don't think this number is right." Even though it's exempt and it doesn't matter, at the end of the day, there's no money being exchanged, it would have been reviewed, um the deed restriction, if that had been brought to my attention. So, it's interesting because
there is a program in Minnesota called open spaces. And so let's say you have a a golf course that does not have that deed restriction and it could be developed by a developer. It's happening all the time down in the metro. Their golf courses are being absorbed by developers and turned into subdivisions.
Those golf courses are are they can apply for a special program called open spaces. And that effectively values it at its current use and income potential. So, the open spaces is effectively the same thing as what that deed restriction
actually does to this property legally and allows assessors to tax a golf course at a lower rate. So, in that case, you do keep track of the highest and best use value and you also keep track of the current asuse value. And if that golf course sells, they have to pay
back seven years of difference from highest and best use to to present use unless the new owner qualifies and it continues to operate as a golf course. Same thing for the ski hill. They have that same program. >> Any further comments or questions? >> Ju just really appreciate the
explanation of all this. Mr. Gavl. >> Yeah, I just make a comment to the open spaces that the valuation disparities in in my research on this as golf courses are often taxed based on their current limited use which is current use
or open space classification which undervalues the land compared to its highest and best use such as residential subdivisions. So >> I'll I'll make a motion to approve the request abatement. uh for the 2025
assessed value of the golf course. >> Mr. Sullivan >> support. Any further comments or questions? All in favor? >> I >> oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you for bringing all us up to date on that.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair and commissioners. I will be putting on a AMC lunch and learn for the county board of appeal and equalization. So, that should be coming up in the next couple of months here. >> Nice. keep that on your radar. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Bob, and
just comment relative to support that um understanding this, we are we are responding to a compliance requirement that is normal and and required by the state. And so again, I think it's just
important given the discussions relative to the golf course that the support for it is support for the rule of law and the context in which this applies. So the request is a legitimate request and it applies to the application as we understand it relative to this call golf
course and its potential sale. So I support the foundation and the parameters in which this is allowable. >> Mhm. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Moving on to item number 10, land
services. We have a presentation by Mitch >> with help. >> So, we have uh Chris O'Brien here. He's the president of the Pin Cushion Ski and Run Club. Um I'll just try to keep it brief. I don't have much of a presentation. Um, as you guys may be
aware, um, Chris is intending to apply for an FRTP grant, uh, to acquire a new tractor to maintain the trails up there at the ski and run club. Um, and FRTP requires that a local governing body essentially oversee the kind of
acquisition and dispersement of those funds. Um, so Chris is just kind of coming to us today seeking um, fiscal sponsorship for that grant application. doesn't uh really entail any sort of commitment from us other than maybe a little staff time. Um there's there's a
match that is required. They will be responsible for for acquiring and you know using that match as part of their application. Um yeah so just in the interest of being brief I'll leave it there if you guys have any questions.
>> Okay. >> Questions for pen cushion request. Commissioner Gamble. Yeah, I don't have a question. I would just support make a motion to support the fiscal sponsorship for the Pin Cushion Ski and Run Club uh
to apply for uh the grant to acquire a new tractor >> support. Any questions or comments? All in favor? >> I >> oppose. Same sign. Motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Before we move on to administrator updates, we need to go back to our consent agenda which um Commissioner Gamble asked um item B to be pulled. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. just in reviewing the minutes from the January
13th board meeting. Um the on page 16 in our packet um my comments relative to the uh northern county's land use coordinating board that the administrator's
name John Anger is spelled O N G A O N G A R O and uh I guess in further competent things if a name sounds a little fe unfamiliar I should probably spell that out for you. So, just wanted to note that.
>> Got it. >> Thank you on that. >> And then I would make a motion to approve the minutes from the January 13th board meeting as amended. >> I support. >> All in favor? >> I oppose. Same sign. Okay. Moving on to
item 11, administrator updates. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple very brief updates. Um the first one is I've been updating on our construction projects at the LEC and the transfer station and um just a heads up not much has happened over the last week and a
half because of the weather. Um but they're hoping that with the warmup next week that we're anticipating that they'll be able to move forward with both of those projects. So or continue to move forward with those projects. Um, I also wanted to mention that we do have a town hall tomorrow uh regarding SGSDs
and that's from 4 to 5 in this room. So, just a reminder to the community that that will be occurring tomorrow. And then we have our uh board work session on Friday for the commissioner. So, just a reminder to all of you that we'll have that in the ITV room on Friday. And
that's it for today. >> Okay. Thank you on that. Commissioner updates, reports, meetings. Commissioner Sullivan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um had an opportunity to attend the Cook County Historical Society meeting recently and
uh they are very much in the same throws as we are. They're updating their employee handbook, working on strategic planning, and uh they did want to indicate that they will be providing minutes for us um for their meetings. um
they will be attached to our committee of the whole. So once they are approved then we will be receiving those. Um we had an opportunity to meet for the airport advisory commission and um are in the process of talking to all those
individuals that are on a waiting list for a hanger. Um we have a list of nine people and so um we have heard back from three of them that they still are um wanting to have a hanger. So, we need to hear from the other six before any
decisions are made. And then we've >> is that how um I thought it wasn't too long ago where we had open hangers. Is that remind us Mr. >> It's been it's been about six years. >> Okay. Okay. And the list has been
>> And the list has been growing. >> Wow. Wow. >> Yeah. So, um there is an opportunity to um build a new hanger, but we want to make sure that we have all the the slots or the vast majority of them filled before considering that. >> Yeah. Well,
>> but it would be good timing given the airport master plan and we do have an opportunity to build a new hanger built into that plan. Um we've been working um with Rowan Watkins and also with the FAA to talk a little bit about the remote control um
outlet. If you recall, if you've been up to the airport, there's a little tiny building at the base of the airport property right where Double Track Road intersects with Airport Road and that is a communication system from airplanes to
the airport. the FAA um is considering closing those down nationwide and that does not work for us here because the option is to use cell service which is very unreliable in Cook County. Um so I
got some good information back from Rowan and it's really up to providers to get on our towers and for that communication to improve. But the other fact is a lot of older airplanes do not have the equipment required to use cell
phones. It's not built into their airplanes. And so we also have older planes coming into our airport that don't have that equipment. I do not believe for a minute we are the only airport in the United States that has that issue. So we are talking to other airports right now, just those in
northern Minnesota to find out their response and why no one has reached out to us about this decision. um that has apparently been made. >> Are we talking about pedal planes? >> I'll tell you something else. Um then we
had an H meeting and um Commissioner Gamble and I both attended and we had a great presentation from DED that was provided to us and of course discussion about the Harborview which was on our agenda earlier. Um, one thing related to
the HA, they are getting ready to launch a new website. So, we will let you know when that occurs, but everything will be updated and available for the public in the very near future. >> Okay, Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, yeah,
with the HR and the and the deed presentation, very informative. The presenter, a gentleman that was very uh enjoys what he's doing. He's been there six years and I think it'd be a good presentation for us at some point to give us some context relative to our our
community and the northeast region as well. Um and uh he was going to follow up on some of the questions that we had presented. Um and then uh following up on uh LEO jet which is the job core out
of Virginia. I uh is one of the committees that I have sat on in my previous tenure and sit on as well now and determined that um I don't see the the real connection and benefit to Cook County other than the camaraderie with
fellow commissioners uh from the region and um uh being able to lend voice to the conversation. But, uh, a lot of theirs is job training and things that are dealing with the mining and, um, uh,
areas that that we're not really, uh, participating in. I spoke to uh the administrator this morning and expressed that uh uh the decision was that we would no longer participate which did not indicate that we don't value the
work that they do and that if there's anything that that uh can be communicated to us to be aware of what's going on or if they would like to uh bring to attention a time that maybe we they would like to have us attend something that we're certainly willing to do that. I told her I'd follow up
with a formal letter thanking them for um the opportunity to be able to be part of that board and explaining why the decision. So >> um so is there as far as the joint powers agreement is
there anything we should know like deed funding or any you know I don't know what's mandated you know. >> Yeah. Um what I would say in that regard is that uh we we could look at the joint powers agreement and our attorney could make a combination if there's or a
recommendation based upon an assessment of that. Um I don't believe that uh I mean some of the committees that we sit on we we pay a fee to be part of and I don't in this situation I don't believe that that's the case but if there's
language in there that would restrict or that requires you know mandatory participation then we would address that. It was not addressed by the administrator when I spoke with her this morning. But >> yeah, I'm just thinking like the CHB, right? We're required to have a CHB. So,
it's like are we are we required to participate in that or >> or you know, that type of thing. And then, you know, we've had presentations there from DED and there's a pretty strong relationship with DED and so >> certainly our EDA can have that
connection and you know, focus. Yeah. But I was just just looking >> and I did express if if there's something that that I'm not seeing or that we should be aware of to see the tangible evidence of benefit when we're trying to prioritize and be good
stewards of time and resource and so that was how it was represented. >> But I appreciate the point. >> Yeah. And I don't know um it's Marie, right? She's the director. >> It's different now. >> It's not Marie. Uh well who I spoke with
this morning uh is the ad may be the administrator. It says administrator so it's for a director but >> Okay. >> I had sat Renee um was the director in the four years that I served on it previously. >> Oh okay. No. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So Marie is the I think the new >> Yeah. >> But um what I was going to say is I don't know how into the weeds she's gone into with the joint powers agreement. I don't know how much perspective she'd be able to share about the ins and outs there, but we'll work through it. Okay.
>> Yeah. But I I'll look at it. >> Yeah. >> Bringing our attentions there. >> Yeah. >> Anyone else? >> Meetings. White. >> Uh there was the emergency communications board meeting last week.
It was the annual meeting and it was uh essentially organizational and both of our staff people Rowan and uh Jay sit on a number of committees and they would be the ones to best explain
what those committees do but they are also again I mean they are highly regarded by the room full of people who are speaking in acronyms. So it's uh it's very comforting on so many levels. So
and and that was the the sum total of that meeting. >> Okay. Anyone else? >> Um yeah, I guess I just want to bring uh uh to the attention of the board that we um have our small business development
consultant now, Relle Christensen, >> um is um >> taking on that role. So that's very exciting. Um lot of lot of business experience, a lot of community experience. Um and uh and has used the services in the past. So
has has that perspective as well. um had a meeting regarding uh potential composting in in the county with Northshore Waste and Land Services and uh prompted from Northshore Waste just looking at opportunities with the
building of the transfer station and just the the money that's out there to help reduce um waste. Um and Grand Portage was a part of that too. they have they have a program and so just trying to brainstorm what could work in
the community. Um and then library board talked about capital planning and um a lot of concerns around immigration in libraries and the library culture um throughout the state. So just talking about that and having the plan in place with the
city and um library is a public place and so um all people are welcome in there um including um enforcement agencies and um so there's just questions about privacy and
and data and that sort of thing too. But um I think that's all I have to report at this point. >> Okay, Commissioner White. two little things. I remember when the Patriot Act after 911
came um was implemented and our then um librarian was asked for some information about patrons >> and she said no. >> I thought that was pretty heroic of her to do that because this is
>> private. >> Yeah, this is private information. and you don't need to know what books anybody is checking out. So, >> and I do have one thing though. Um, this is about the uh town hall meeting coming up. This is our opportunity community to
uh practice some democracy. Um, come and share and come and have a conversation, civil conversations. And uh this is not like community comment time. And this is where we will have
discussions. So, um, come get the facts and meet your neighbors and reach out and touch the county commissioners. >> See you tomorrow. >> And to that point, too, this is a town hall meeting is different than open house. >> Yes.
>> Yes. So, we're going to have a little presentation and then people can ask questions or give us their comments. So, yeah. And it starts right at four o'clock. So, within a five minutes or so, we'll start. Yeah. >> Presentation so they know what they're coming to, >> right?
>> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Commissioner Wait, for bringing that up. Um I I think this these opportunities for dialogue is is uh healthy and encouraged and a lot of the communications that we've been getting
as commissioners, we appreciate people taking the time to voice their opinions and ask their questions. uh this is an opportunity and some that have expressed that they can't be there, they still want to share their their views. Um this
will give context to understand the amount of time that has been invested in this and the questions that have been asked and the context in which this decision is being evaluated. So um it's an opportunity for us to hear from individuals and it's an opportunity for
individuals to hear from us relative to the work that we have done on this important issue. So >> yes, >> and I would like to say to the last three or four people that have emailed me that I'm not blowing you off. I just
haven't had a chance to reply since I don't send a a a form letter to anybody. So when I get home today, I will craft uh responses to the people with their concerns about the road issue. So
commission. >> Yeah, just I just wanted to talk generally that you know that I agree this is a wonderful opportunity for us to to have some discussion around the issue. maybe brainstorm some solutions, maybe look at restrictions that we have
legally and and areas where we can maybe um find more clarity uh and and maybe push the envelope too. But um I'm a little concerned about expectations because people are submitting letters as if it's um a public hearing, which is
not the case. And so they're like, let this be put in the official record of our unofficial town hall. It's I'm just worried about expectations and um I'll try to address that uh tomorrow. Um but
it's just there it appears there have there there appears to be a narrative outside of my circle at least about um the process and and where things are at or where we've been. And so I just have
concerns about that. It's always helpful to um share, you know, the process like Mr. Gamble was saying about what work has been done and and and where we're at and what has not been decided because nothing has
been decided. Um but you know I think there's just we all we all can see the uh the attention this is getting and um it's important and I I believe that uh
inviting people to come to a town hall there's a lot of uh as social media seems to do misinformation rapidly becomes more distorted as the message
goes along. So, there's information or concerns out there that no, I mean, this is something uh Commissioner Sullivan and I sit on the highway advisory board and uh even before
the new assignments, um this discussion has been talked about and it hasn't been it's been taken very seriously all the time. So anyway, oh and the one thing is that in a democracy, just because you
are allowed to share your opinions and and we welcome them legitimately, sincerely, it doesn't mean anybody anybody really gets their way. It's a compromise often. So that's how it is.
Now I'm done. Okay. Promise. >> Okay. Commissioner Gabble. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, thank you, Commissioner Mills, for bringing that point up. I think that it it speaks to the issue that that the more that we invite and are inclusive in
bringing the public in and uh there's been discussion about our public comment period and it's sort of like we bite our tongue and we sit here and we we listen, but we don't necessarily actively listen and we don't have dialogue. uh but I I think it's important setting that
expectation upfront and uh the distinguish you know between a public hearing that is required and a town hall and a focus group and you know whatever so that people upfront know what
expectations are and the more clear we are on that the less hopefully we mitigate some of the disappointment well I thought you know kind of thing this is an opportunity for discussion and and um in governance what it demonstrates is
that we are committed to see the evidence of the public voice in our proceedings. So I think that's important. >> Okay. So I have a little report here. Last week at our arrowhead county association meeting we had a request for
one of the counties to withdraw from the arrowhead. They said that they were more comfortable going with the Northern Alliance group and so that doesn't affect anybody's dues because our dues were due January anyway. So we were just disappointed. I noticed kind of a lack
of attendance over the last year and I did talk to a couple of them at AMC and they were kind of on the border of um not going to participate but the whole group had to decide that. So that's the first time that happened. So, we did ask
the secretary to look up, do we have any guidelines about withdrawing and so forth. Back in 1999 to 2008, it wasn't um really um much other than after withdrawal if they were
going to come back again um and ask for application to the to the association. That was kind of covered that by January 1, they'd have to make a reapplication if they were going to rejoin again. I don't think they are. I think they're pretty well set.
>> Which county is it? >> Pine. >> Pine. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um, ARDC, I think you all received an email about that. Of course, I get a color printed copy because I'm at the meeting. Um, nothing too new there.
Um, no, we're coming up with our 10 top um, things to talk about at their conference, which is later on in February. That's it. So, um, we have our correspondence
memos, the Cook County sales tax comparison through November. And there being no other new business, we are adjourned. Thanks everyone. >> Thank you, Campbell. I got distracted because I got
an email that I needed to attend to when you were talking. W.