##VIDEO ID:o3ptbp8w0XA## i' like to welcome you to the Cook County Board of Commissioners regular meeting today Tuesday August 27th and if we'd all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with libery and justice for all as we begin today are there any items that one would like to add to the agenda Madam chair just like to make one change okay the uh 7 C and 7D we've put those two together back together this morning so it's they're both IB Revenue Bond uh grants and uh we had separated them on the agenda and I Tri RB is is going to approve them together as one so there's just a little misunderstanding how to present it here so we put it back into one item that's all all right same information all right any other clarifications or adjustments to the agenda I would like to add one item uh recognition of Staff um and maybe to do that prior to to public comment any other adjustments or changes all right is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended I'll make a motion to approve thank you commissioner white is there support support thank you commissioner Starley we have a motion and support anything further all in favor I opposed motion carries well one of the items that we have uh added to our agenda is a recognition of Staff a recognition of Brian's silence and for nearly a quarter of a century Brian silence our dedicated maintenance director has worked tirelessly to provide a safe and clean environment where County departments could conduct their vital public business his meticulous attention to detail and approaching our workplaces that are not only functioning but welcoming is greatly appreciated by this board many of us have taken comfort in knowing that our facilities are cared for thanks to Brian's leadership and dedication Beyond maintaining our buildings Brian has also managed the complex task of purchasing and maintaining our County Fleet all those Vehicles his oversight has ensured our departments have reliable efficient Transportation enabling us to meet the needs of our community in an effective fashion Brian's prudent management has not only kept our Fleet in top condition but it's been a model of fiscal responsibility which is important to all of us moreover Brian has been an integral part of our team in providing security and safety for our buildings our staff and the public who use our facilities and his commitment to creating this secure environment has allowed all of us to work and serve with a peace of mind knowing that the well-being and staff and the well-being of the public public is always Brian's top priority Brian your professionalism your dedication and hard work have left an indelible mark on Cook County you've been a mentor a leader and a friend to so many of us and always ready with a solution to any challenge or any repair for equipment whether it's in the middle of the night or on a weekend and you've served with a smile that brightens often times the toughest of days you're Legacy will continue to inspire all of us and we'll miss your presence and expertise but we're excited for a very Welles deserved retirement filled with relaxation joy and some new adventures on behalf of the board thank you thank you we won't make you do a speech Madam chair no he doesn't talk if I could just add we had a reception yesterday afternoon for Brian and it was heavily attended um there are a lot of people both in our organization and in the community who know Brian who have relied on him for for not only know taking care of County buildings but he snowplows driveways he's always there to help people when they need a hand and Brian I just think the world of you I I'm so so glad that you're reaching this point where you can uh take a a well-deserved break and uh hope that your retirement is a very happy one thanks for your service thank you all right well we'll move on from our recognition to public comment and this is an opportunity for citizens to appear before the County Board on any matter of concern and when invited to speak please speak into the microphone for clarity and sign in and for the record state your name address and the topic your address dring are there any members of the public that wish to speak this morning all right my name is Ron wakoski I live in hovland I don't know if you need my street address but it's 54 stonate Road um oh sir please sign in too am I not yes okay um I noticed that cannabis was on the agenda today and that's why I wanted to stop in because I have a brief question um uh the 10 years before I retired I was working for the federal government uh and and as such we were subjected to random uh surprise drug tests and I'm just wondering if that will uh will be something that the state local and uh elected officials will be subject too and I don't know if Molly has that uh answer but uh uh the reason I asked that is because if you if you go to the National Institute on drug abuse um it tells you all the effects uh one of them being um difficulty with thinking and problem solving and uh I'm just wondering I would like everybody to be alert when they're on the job uh what they're driving a truck or making decisions about tax peray money money uh so I was just wondering if that's a thought it's is that a consideration for doing random drug tests or not all right well thank you for your comments and make sure you sign in so we have it there yeah it's I have it there so and uh if I can I'll seed my minutes to Carolyn all right very good thank you [Music] good morning morning my name is Carol dry and I'm uh my address is 4062 Avenue East and I'm talking about cannabis and also about theou cannabis very briefly I'm a univers was a university Professor for I don't know almost 30 years and I could if somebody asked me the same question over and over or if they uh forgot and didn't come to class or whatever I'd ask the kids and they'd say oh yeah too much pot send them to the dean they'd come back and be a new person and I could see the effects and they drank a lot too but the drinking was not nearly as damaging to their performance as the Cannabis was so I you know I'm not a prude but I did see the effects they're very remarkable so anything we can do to cut down on that I I think is a good idea about the mou um you've heard me before you're probably tired of me but anyhow it's a contract anytime you give money for performance is a contract and I would like to have an analogy for this situation that we're in this contract was put together um I don't know anyhow I'd like to use an analogy which is if I hire a roofer so I pay the roofer I uh like in this contract I don't have a penalty for non-performance he uh is supposed to finish it in three uh months and um he has no penalty for if he doesn't do it or if he doesn't actually roof my roof my roof uh he immediately and these are analogies to what I think has happened with our contract he immediately takes one of the months off for personal leave he um asks for an assistant which he gets he says it's too hard to do the work um he's not accountable for any kind of action because I didn't put it in the contract um he spends his time contract contacting his boss asking him what to do um looking up the rules and everything and in the end after 3 months we have no new roof and um he has to be paid again and I should hire him for again for three months I'm not going to do it I recommend that you don't um endorse this contract with the University of Minnesota the analogy is apt um it's been uh we've had this contract in place for 3 years an agreement to pay um with no accountability um there's been no new initiatives there was an agreement in the contract and still is in there to start FAA that has not happened there's no penalty for not performing that um there are lots of rules and Reporting back to the University of Minnesota not to us but to outside entities not to the citizens here um um and um there's been um some insensitivity to people that are volunteering at the Garden and the um Orchard and the um Farmers Market there questions have been referred back to the boss the University of Minnesota and um the needs of locals that usually get answered by an extension person if gone un unattended so now we're asking for another three-year contract which I don't think um should be signed everybody says yes the person in the job is a nice person it's a new job uh she's learning but I look at performance this is a contract with our money as Citizens and um I think that this should this position should be accountable to the people in Cook County not to the University of Minnesota who decides if it's done well or not um so it's back to you to own this contract or not I'm not sure this came before the board and then in the first case but now it's yours if you vote for it I recommend that you do not thank you are there other members of the public that wish to speak this morning Chris good morning good morning my name is Christy Kane I am the interm director for the Arrowhead Regional development Commission and um commissioner storle is our chair she's doing a great job but um I'm here today to talk just a little bit about uh ardc we're comprised of three divisions uh my prior experience I've been with ardc for8 years was as the director for the Aging Division and um we also have the Metropolitan Interstate Council and the planning division So currently we're um making making some informed decisions and about the direction of ardc and the leadership and we're doing some internal polling and consideration with our staff and then also with external stakeholders the board will take that information and make some informed decisions about our future leadership and the future Direction and um some very thoughtful uh some very thoughtful uh time effort is going into this to make sure ardc is serving the full region well and under good capacity uh today though I just other than introducing myself uh I wanted to bring a couple opportunities forward I've uh given some uh handouts to the commission members one is ardc has just launched in a partnership with St Louis County St Louis County has received uh they've been funded for a 4 year $1.85 million Grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric um Administration around advancing Regional climate resiliency um for Minnesota's Lake Superior coastal region so as a key partner one of the things that we are doing is hiring a climate resiliency planner that uh position was just launched yesterday and we're hoping for some really good feedback on that we're hoping that we will have somebody in place by the end of October um there's the Partnerships in this uh work that St Louis county is launching include Carlton County Lake and Cook County uh as well as boy for Fondulac and Grand Portage communities and um there's five main strategies which would include establishing a regional resilience and collaborative um incorporating indigenous knowledge building Community capacity creating a regional resiliency plan and providing resources and Technical Support to the communities so I just wanted to let you know that that work will be launching this fall um we're really committed to ensuring that all Community uh members are uh actively involved and benefit from this initiative so we'll be soliciting Community uh feedback throughout the process and you'll see some more of us up in this region the other thing um that I wanted to just note there is kind of a green sheet in there it's a separate program energizing our communities program it's uh braided funding with three different grants that uh funding will be available while the work will be available throughout the entire region but the funding will be available to communities with populations of 15,000 or less that um can can apply I expect rfps and grants will open up again this fall communities can apply and it can be a number of things you could have energy audits done on your public buildings um it could be changing out infrastructure light bulbs those types of things for Energy Efficiency could be writing uh energy plans for your community so there will be opportunities I just want you to be aware Josh burad will be our primary cont as well as the energy planner that will be coming on board and I wanted uh this commission to be aware that those funds are out there communities can also be defined different ways so not just the city could be Township could be the county all of those things so I just wanted to uh put that out there introduce myself I am available anytime for uh questions and I want to thank you very much thank you thank you are there other members of the public that wish to speak this morning any other members of the public that wish to speak are there any written comments that have been received by Commissioners commissioner white yes I just have to find it I just had it honest hold on yes this came in uh late yesterday or last night I'm not not certain this is from um Teresa Donovan I don't have her mail her address however she writes Dear Mr Yorkie was since I am unable to attend the regular commissioner's meeting because of my work schedule I would like you to be the writing's too small hold on commissioner I'd be happy to to read it you have it I do read it with good emphasis and everything don't make it be dry wow the pressure is on that's right like emphatically okay okay um so as commissioner white said the letter is addressed from Teresa Donovan and hovland Minnesota she writes Dear Mr Yorkie since I am unable to attend the regular commissioners meeting because of my work schedule I would like you to share this public comment related to the Cannabis ordinance on the agenda I strongly object to the local government allowing recreational marijuana stores in our County just because the state has allowed the legalization of marijuana does not mean we will have to participate in the sale of marijuana in our County I ask that the Commissioners put our locals before profits we are already an area that depends greatly on tourist dollars what will happen when we make Cook County a marijuana destination we can follow Main's example after marijuana was legalized only 47 of Maine's 500 towns allowed for retail pardon me retail marijuana stores uh many towns left this to the people to vote on I think Cook County should allow the question of bringing recreational shops to the voters through a ballot referendum on top of this we can discuss the unforeseen issues with allowing recreational marijuana and licensed stores we only have to look to other states who are well into the legalization road to understand that there's a correlation between legalization and a rise in quote cannabis use disorder unquote uh a study published in 2023 by the American Medical Association highlights the need to screen for cannabis use disorder pardon me again in states where recreational marijuana use has passed the public needs to be aware of such risks such as impaired driving mental health problems brain development and cardiovascular issues in a county that deals with chronic understaffing at the hospital and the sheriff's department is the county prepared to deal with a Fallout from recreational marijuana stores and should residents have to pay the price for this by way of increased taxes finally as the spouse of a federal agent I wonder if the county has considered the ramifications of allowing recreational marijuana stores in a county that shares an international border and has border and Customs agents working there uh marijuana is still not legal under federal law if a resident or tourist is stopped by a federal agent and marijuana is encountered in the stop regardless of the amount they will enforce federal law the County Commissioners owe it to their constituents to pause and reflect a bit more on this very complex issue let me end by repeating I strongly object to the local government allowing recreational marijuana stores in our County are there any other um Commissioners who have receiv written comments commissioner Starling thank you madam chair I have a few here so bear with me the first letter is from uh don Petri and it's in regards to um the uh CJ ramstead Trail opening uh to ATVs ohvs economic impact and quietude I would like to clarify at the top that the proposal states it is for off-highway vehicles ohvs consist of ATVs off-road vehicles such as jeeps and off Highway motorcycles because of this incompatibility with quieter forms of tourist Recreation ATVs ohvs on the CJ ramstead Trail will degrade the Cook County tourist economy a survey by The Nature Conservancy indicated that about 72% of Americans consider the opportunity of peace and quiet in natural settings as a significant reason for visiting parks and other protected areas according to the outdoor industry Association a majority of outdoor recreation participants about 80% are mentioned that the ability to enjoy natural sounds and Solitude was an essential part of their Outdoor Experience this data suggests that the great majority of tourists come to cook County to experience the peace and quiet of nature motorized Recreation is noisy and spoils the experience of those who want a quiet nature experience a study by the Wisconsin DNR found When comparing the compat compatibility of all other landbase activities with hiking and ATV riding it is evident that ATV writing is incompatible with every other landbased activity but snowmobiling hiking on the other hand is supplementary to and then he gives um a document that a person can look up the economic implications of this finding are that tourist revenue from ATVs ohvs on the CJ ramstead Trail would be substantially offset by a significant loss of revenue from people who chose to go elsewhere to seek the quietude and spend their tourist dollars maybe Wisconsin since this study suggests the state is already addressing this issue and then he refers to Minnesota statue 116b a comment in The Proposal suggests the Trail Road would be inclusive in reality given the incompatibility with other forms of recreation it would become exclusive to other activities the noise of at V's or RVs will extend well beyond the CJ ramstead Trail Road in all directions my home and neighbors are approximately one mile from the CJ ramstead Trail in winter when outside I can easily hear the snowmobiles on the trails the ATV noise would be comparable but more disturbing to people because it would occur when more time is spent Outdoors during the warmer weather months and also when more people are visiting Cook County noise also has an adverse effect on animals and human health which would become yearr round with ATV o traffic there are numerous studies documenting this impact not sustainable environment impact this proposal says the Trail Road would be sustainable inclusive it would be neither the correct me meaning of sustainability is meeting the needs of the present without compromising the future fossil fuel emissions from building maintaining a trail or road trailering ATVs to the trail riding the trail will all compromise the future given climate change crisis The Proposal itself states that the ATVs OHS leak fuel transmission fluids and Poland will also enter wetlands and any other water via runoff from rain events with all due respect calling the project sustainable is like putting lipstick on a pig turning the trail into a yearr round use also compromises the future by increased habitat fragmentation sediment erosion and chemicals into trout streams and negative Wetland impacts currently compared to an ATV trail or a road much of the CJ ramstead Trail is minimally Disturbed with natural vegetation growing on it it is protected from damage in the winter due to snow cover and The Frozen Ground as it exists it probably presents less of a habit fragmentation barrier to animals but the mitigate damage that OTV oh rutting and sediment erosion to that trail would need to be reconstructed more like a road which along with the increased year- round traffic would add to the habitat fragmentation problem may have suggest the Cook County Market itself as the last quiet place what people come for my sincere thanks to the board and staff for your considerations to these concerns which I share with fellow County residents and he's at 132 Willard Lane the next comment is from Heather and Jake M from 1245 Pike Lake Road dear County Board Commissioners please do not request that the Minnesota DNR amend the master plan for the CJ Ram State Northshore T State trail to include the use of ATVs this would be detrimental to the wetlands and the valuable habitat they provide in addition this would increase both the noise pollution and actual pollution to the surrounding areas please consider Consulting with the stakeholders including residents and providing thoughtful research prior to moving forward with this request thank you for this consideration in this manner um the next um letter is from Caitlyn Kimel hos 1400 Pike Lake Road Ro Grand maray dear County Board Commissioners I am writing to you today in regards to the agenda item 4A on Tuesday August 27th 2024 board agenda recommendation for ATV use for the CJ ramstead Northshore State trail I am writing to you today not only as a resident of Cook County but also as an expert in biodiversity science and ecology I received my PhD in e ology from the University of Minnesota in 2020 and have been working in the ecology and data science Fields the past four years I am the author of 13 scientific articles focusing on Vio biodiversity changes and statistical methodology that have been published in journals like nature conservation biology and proceedings from the National Academy of Science while the report report from Mitch Travis details the implications to Wetlands from the trail improvements it neglects to mention any of the other potential environmental degreg that would occur from increased traffic and use of relatively quiet Trail in the summer I am no stranger to mitigating the impacts of construction on Wetlands I worked at an environmental Consulting agency that did stage one and two wetlands delineation for natural gas drilling in Northern Pennsylvania and am married to the Cook County engineer I understand that folks go into projects with the best of intentions to minimize construction impacts on the natural environment however these construction impacts may be longlasting as ecosystems need to come back to the equ equilibrium or shift into alternate State further I'm concerned with other impacts that this Trail Improvement may have to the ecosystem outside the Wetland degreg several studies referring to a Zeller study in 2024 a St stic study in 2022 and a sensy study in 2020 which were attached have shown that human Recreation and even just noise from Human Recreation can significantly author uh animal behavior and ultimately biodiversity as residents of this County we need to ask ourselves where are the tradeoffs between human use of Trail and preservation of our natural ecosystems there are no numbers or data provided in the Travis report referring to Wildlife impacts how can the board make an informed decision without data backing up this request sensy and col and colleagues from 2020 show that sensory pollution like light and sound can impact bird mating success I live on the southern half of Pike Lake along which the CJ ramstead passes to the north we pride ourselves in the fact that our Lake offers a habitat to at least two Lon families a manzer family a Mard family and has resident ball Eagles nesting in the white pines that border the trail I firmly believe that human use and benefit should not outweigh the potential impacts to preserving our ecosystems and biodiversity further I'm concerned with the ability to maintain this Trail the report notes that grants will be used to get funds for upkeep but without coordinated efforts my family has seen many ATV trails fall into disarray they become mud pits with deep ruts making the modes of recreation at this Trail currently more difficult I would like to see a detailed financial plan from the groups proposing to maintain the trail along with details on how the upkeep will be done consistently and who would be responsible for failures to maintain promises alternately a 60 to 70 M stretch of Trail deserves more than a brief discussion of potential implications and benefits before being unanimously passed I have not been convinced that this Trail Improvement would provide so much benefit that it outweighs its potential to impact local ecology and the current use of the trail show me your impact analysis so we can make an informed decision and my last one comment is from uh Robert F Kimmel 1400 Pike Lake Road dear board Commissioners I'm writing to you as a resident of this County a professional engineer and an advid snowmobiler and ATV writer this is not an official statement from the highway department I am writing an opposition to the proposed expanded use of the CJ ramstead Trail for several reasons first why is this needed there are already several different routes that ATVs can take on roads that already exist and are wide enough to handle 2-way ATV traffic the maps are provided in the agenda even show these roads from the County border there's Kramer Road 600 Road and the grade each of those connect to the sail Trail which brings you up to Rice Lake Road this connection brings you East to the Caribou Trail which LS with several roads including murmur Creek Road Mark Lake Road and United Forest Service 331 all of these East West Roads connect you toward Grand marray adding ATV traffic to the CJ ramstead Trail appears redundant and unnecessary you you'll probably remember concerns that were raised the border to border route and this was on an already existing Road in the county why is this all of a sudden a better option creating a new road for ATVs doesn't make sense second The Proposal is to widen the trail as a snowmobiler who frequents this Trail one of my favorite parts of it is how tight it feels it also keeps my speed down any snowmobiler that likes riding the Express on the west side of the gunland versus the trail on the east side I bet I can tell you which side goes faster widening the trail just like a roadway would increase speeds for of snowmobilers in the winter this can present a significantly safe issue for already stress emergency response system in our community wiing the trail can ruin the winter wonderland feel you get on a sled when the trees are tight and the branches are overhanging from all the snow if you haven't experienced this feeling it is truly magical and something that needs to be protected thirdly maintenance existing trails and roads are already in need of Maintenance why would adding more Trails ensure that it actually got maintained it's easy to build new things with grant money but it is far more difficult to ensure its long-term success with sustained funds is there a budget and proposed funds already existing to maintain the train additionally there is history and grandf funded projects beginning and ending in fits Parts get done and then left alone until the money is available again is there even any Assurance of the proposed Trail getting completed fourthly environmental impacts there appears to be no consideration for the environmental impact of this project Beyond stating that'll get handled in the permitting process this lead leaves a lot of room for things to go sideways the gig gami Trail in Grand marray is a great example of this the invasive species and erosion that introduced into the area because of that project will have a negative impact for years to come that project among others inspires little to no confidence that the proposed project in front of you wouldn't have the same impacts on our environment these would be introduced into areas where there are currently no issues like this and for what there is also no mention of the degradation of at ATVs would have on a trail system when someone goes to a mudding off Trail is that going to be enforced or are we allowing another Avenue for people to interfere with our pristine Wilderness as we encroach into our Wilderness more and more we eventually will lose the things that we all love about being in Cook County and lastly tourism how much more do we need to cater to C tourist as previously mentioned there are already ATV trails to get you from the County border to Grand marray these are already roads where they are Forest Service Roads or County owned these roads are already robust they're built they've been handling ATV traffic why does there near why is it a need to be another route when the impacts of creating that route far outweigh the benefit would creating this new Trail actually bring in more TV ATV users as the proposal suggests and how many more tourists can our County handle if we're promising more people visiting during times when there's typically quote a break for businesses to catch their breath I live on the east side of Pike Lake very close to where this expansion is prop osed as someone who rides around that area quite a bit I've never thought that another route was needed has the public been involved in any way to see if this is a desired um event by the community nobody has asked anyone at Pike Lake about it and I assume it's the same for the rest I hope you'll take these points to Heart the funding for this project would be better spent improving what already exists instead of creating another trade that cannot be sustained long term a decision like this requires more than a brief discussion at a committee meeting that favors Trail expansion thank you thank you commissioner Sterling um I to have received um several comments regarding this um first one is from Mike Hofer on County Road 60 opening up the CJ ramstead Trail to motorized travel during the hiking biking and horseback riding season would be in my opinion effectively ending the non-motorized means of exploring enjoying that trail how's that for inclusive inclusivity people hike and bike and ride horseback because it's quieter less intrusive less destructive safer and considers the environment around them motorized travel is anything but considerate and inclusive it's apparent no amount of writing or speaking that I or others might do might wake up people to what they're proposing with this type of project or in the case of politicians what they're approving as we already know too well there will be wetlands and wild areas the trail expansion travels through which can't tolerate the kind of motorized use that some feel is necessary for experiencing nature and unfortunately nowadays when people out throw out the word inclusive politicians take notice and are not able to exercise sound judgment and Analysis of what that actually means this results in what I call reverse exclusivity the trail is already inclusive everyone can use the trail in a manner that's respectful and inclusive to Nature and other humans which currently is defined as non-motorized during the non-winter season there is no mindful reason to change that the next comment is from Kate kellenberger on bekin Lake Road I'm dism made to learn that the Commissioners are considering opening the ramstead trail to ATVs the trail was designed for bikers hikers and horseback riding ATVs are incompatible with any other Recreation imagine being on a horseback ride and a single or more likely a group of ATVs approach or on a bike imagine RS caused by driving in any weather especially rainy weather the trail will be impassible to all but ATVs and there are so many bridges how will they endure the heavy machines pounding at the wood and the beams and invasives the trail will be lined with tanies spotted nap weed and other invasives snowmobiles when there is snow do not cause havoc on the environment that ATVs will snowmobiles while nosy noisy drive on frozen ground and do not usually stray off roads for the respect of their machines opening the trail to ATVs will be the end of the multi on the descriptor ATVs will allow for no other enjoyment except the ATV and the last remark I have is from Bob Shannon he indicates that the CJ ramstead and um use of ATVs and ohvs during the non-winter season especially the wet winter seasons is concerning allowing motor traffic in the warm months may increase the risk of harm to our watersheds it will require significant and costly measures not only in the planning and construction but also for ongoing maintenance oversight and law enforcement although the proposal mentions impact to some resources which presumably include Wetlands it's short end details for example how much Wetland acreage will be affected other resources will be impacted but which ones and what will be the immediate and ongoing impacts to the wetlands and other resources to address pollution degradation from Vehicles which may leak fuel transmission fluid and coolants onto the trail which could leech into surrounding Wetlands via runoff from rain events the most important thing I see here is whether resources will be available to adequately fund long-term maintenance and law enforcement made necessary from expanded Trail use will impacts be compatible with extensive Wetland mitigation efforts already underway by the Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District or will they just increase the number of issues that s swcd needs to address the governor's climate action framework calls for preservation and restoration of wetlands it would be irresponsible for Cook County to place Wetlands at risk for purely recreational use the trend in Cook County and in Minnesota should be to protect one of our most valuable resources our Wetlands streams rivers and lakes but to do this responsibly will require significant funding both today and in the future please act accordingly and responsibly to restore and protect cook County's future Financial commitments and the Minnesota Wetlands for now and for generations to come respectfully Bob Shannon cougar Trail are there other Commissioners that have comments to read all right if not we'll close the public comment will um will we have a chance to speak when this is an agenda item as Co County ATV club members or is this the only chance this would be your opportunity okay then may I comment certainly R good morning morning good morning the ikona is beautiful I just learned that yesterday that's what it was okay um first thing I I want to really clarify two Mitch's Mitch Travis's um thing said that Rhonda silence brought this forward it's not me it's I'm representing the hundreds of ATV club members in the community and visitors to the community so and requesting this amendment doesn't mean it's going to happen the people every concern just about that people raised will be it will never be addressed unless this amend we request the DNR to amend the um master plan for the NorthShore State trail so um the comment of ATVs will disturb loons ducks and Eagles um I don't know how my ATV disturbs Birds on a lake a mile away I you know there's a lot of hyper Bowl about all this um ATV trails have fallen into turned into mud pits because of no maintenance but if anyone if I'd love to take you all on a ride we could go see hoveland Woods topy Timber Freer and the rice like pancor Loops that we've ridden on for that we've been responsible for decades Brady are you guys are our fiscal agents for that and so those trails have been very wellmaintained we take excellent care of those and the grants that are available we would seek larger grants from like Polaris Industries and articad and different and I RB in fact we're in the process of receiving working on getting um uh $25,000 for equipment for mowing possibly we don't know yet we're still working that out but we're getting we're getting in the ITR system to for funding there's Mega way to get funding for Trails but the Minnesota DNR has Grant in Aid and that is like allocated every that's solid we that isn't a we might get a grant we we get as long as the state well I guess I shouldn't say that the state could do it someday but I mean Grant andate is a very established system and we've been averaging about $10,000 a year to maintain the timber faere the holand woods and the rice like pancor Loops so um the person who mentioned we can ride roads that we can get across the county on roads absolutely we can it's a hodg Podge as ATV Club secretary I get calls from people saying how can I get to Trestle in from Grand marray I don't know I'm going to have to get that letter because that I apparently spelled it out but the point is it's roads it's Dusty Dusty roads and it's um you're with logging tricks and other vehicles you don't get you're not in the trees a trail is very different from a road we have wonderful Forest roads that we can ride we probably have I don't know a thousand miles of Forest roads that we can ride on but people can take their cars and trucks on those roads the if we can use the North Shore State trail it's a Scenic grassy trees it's a beautiful beautiful Trail and it was built with the idea that it was when as a snowball Trail it was built high and dry as much as possible away from houses I don't I'm surprised there's anyone a mile away because it was built very purposefully back in the snowle days um the bridges are enforced to hold up the groomer which is way heavier than any ATV um horses we have ridden with horses we've you know we've done a lot of Education if you're riding an ATV and you see horses you pull over and just sit quietly and let the horses go by and it it's just common sense people do do that and um one year in the parade we had a horse a person from the local Saddle Club ride with us with a sign saying the original fourwh um for ATV anyway we had horses ride in the parade with us one year so the local horse group is not opposed to this they've never spoken out opposed to it and in fact it seems like they're leaning toward being in favor of it as and also the mountain bikers um one of the parks and trails members actually two of the parks and trails members said they would like this because then the trail would be mowed the grass would be down because they said right now they can't use the nor State trail in the summer because the grass gums up their their bikes and stuff so um there was a mention of the law enforcement concerns about how this would be impact law enforcement and you if you I think MIT Shar M Travis shared the uh letter from Sheriff Eliason and Sheriff Eliason supports this because they've gone to rescue people on Trails but that they can hardly walk through so they endorse you know keeping this Trail nice and safe um I think that's all my comments that I wanted to answer to but I really wanted to stress that this is if you pass this today it doesn't mean it's going to happen it's going to go to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for their review and that's when all they'll look at the wetlands and see what needs to be done and that's when they will allocate money to take care of those so um but if you don't do this we've been trying to do this in 1990 from 1998 to like 2000 I have that in here somewhere the Nora State trail was identified by an uh DNR Planning Group as being a nice backbone to get from here to Silver Bay and that that's how long ATVs have been asking for this and asking for the reviews asking the DNR to review the trail and a lot of the work has been done the trail is basically high and dry there are places where maybe we um we acknowledge that you can't ride down into gramar from County Road 6 down into grar is very that's where the patterned Fen is where um the the hiking trail goes through there and it's a kind of a Mucky mess so we know we we said no we're not going to ask for that so the ATV are realistic that you know we may not be able to use every inch of the State trail but unless the state Trail is the the plan is amended the DNR won't look at the State trail to see you know maybe it won't be the whole 50 70 miles it might only be a segment here and there but if we can get off roads and Dusty roads shared with cars it would be nice so I think there's a lot more there's almost every argument that comes up the ATVs have proved ourselves responsible the people that visit Cook County and live in cook County are generally responsible folks and please pass let this move on thank you are there any other members of the public that wish to speak good morning morning uh my name is Josh Engelman I live at 2226 countyold 7 gr marray um I am the treasur of the ATV Club we also enjoy just Rider ATVs around the county and a couple things I wanted to just reinforce is one it yes it's this doesn't say we're going to do this right away it just gives the DNR saying you want you would like the DNR to take this up and look at it and give a their opinion on would this work secondly when you talk about riding on roads if the county and people want us to ride on the roads more it increases the interaction between ATVs and vehicles and increases the risk of something happening there the more we can get off the roads the gravel roads the highways anywhere the safer it is for everybody involved and we try to be respectful we try to be considerate when we come across other people using the trails and we just like the opportunity to prove that we can uh be you know keep keep this going in the right direction thank you thanks are there any other members of the public that wish to speak this this morning if not we'll close our public comment period and move on to the consent agenda are there any items the commissioner wishes to pull if not I'd entertain a motion so move Madam chair commissioner Starley said all right we have a motion by commissioner Starley and support from um commissioner Mills any further disc discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries we'll move on now to item four Land Services and we have Mitch Travis coming forward good morning Mitch Commissioners morning thank you very much what's this item about exactly I think we've heard a robust discussion uh thus far already um yeah so I mean I guess would you like me to kind of run through the entire project of like summary and things like that orbe a summary would be nice I think it's important for the public if they haven't um been diving into this particular topic to at least have a general feel for it sure sure yeah so um I am the uh parks and trails coordinator for the uh Cook County parks and trails commission uh so that's a halftime position that that I do uh in addition to my other work um with Cook County Land Services I do Planning and Zoning storm water as well as Wetland excuse me conservation act Administration for the county uh countywide so um yes the Cook County ATV Club approached us uh earlier this summer kind of regarding this potential project of you know amending the master plan for the CJ ramstead Northshore State trail um shortly after that we I coordinated a meeting with uh Kevin Johnson who is our Region's uh parks and trails coordinator for the state essentially I I don't know if that's exactly his title but uh Recreation related so um and you know after you know talking with the ATV Club and with the state we kind of felt it would be wise to coordinate a scoping meeting just to kind of discuss the implications of this project um you know what what would be the route for kind of identifying whether or not Cook County wanted this you know so this is kind of why we're here today um just talking you know seeing if the county would be amable to such an idea of okay this use that is currently a multi-use trail mostly for snowmobile use but also includes the use of um you know equestrian travel which gets very little use for my understanding uh mountain biking and Hiking you know so kind of horse travel Mountain M biking and Hiking kind of more summer use and snowmobiles in the winter so um you know this has kind of been a discussion actually you know as we talked about this they the state did provide a feasibility study back in 2006 for this very project I neglected to include it on the agenda just because it's a 76-page document that I didn't feel you'd have the opportunity to consume before we have we had this discussion but I have it available for your consumption um yeah and so just kind of you know before we get down to like what are the implications in terms of environmental stuff and you know uh wetlands and and all those things you know is the county open to this idea is kind of why we're here so um yeah we had that meeting of the uh Cook County parks and trails commission uh in July uh kind of unanimously you know we agreed that we should forward this recommendation to the commissioners and you know have your consideration as to how you feel about the trail get some public input about it and see where we stand so are there any questions for Mitch yeah so I have questions thank you Mitch um so the trail how much of the trail is currently opened ATV use in Cook County none of it by the trail does have ATV use on it outside the county yes in Lake County it does there are sections of the trail where they do allow ATV use yes but not the whole Trail and do you know why um I couldn't speak to that very well I think Kevin Johnson with the state likely could um I mean basically Lake County approved the use of that you know so it was Lake County's decision that they felt it was a useful you idea to include ATV use on portions of the CJ ramstead and so when we say we're supporting the scoping of this at the DNR it doesn't mean we are saying the whole Trail will automatically be open to ATV trail because it has to go through a DNR process do they have public comment during that process I believe they would I mean I'm not super familiar with all the ins and outs of like because there would be a two phase cuz there it's through a lot of federal land so there would be the federal NEPA process as well as it's a state Trail so there would be kind of the state regulatory process as well and involved in that yes there is always kind of portions for public comment whether it's regarding a wetland impact or you know a potential Crossing of a stream or something like that all those are up for public comment as they kind of work through the regulatory process yeah and as somebody who's been on that trail on both of snowmobile and a bike I know there's differences and there's areas that might be appropriate and probably areas that's probably not appropriate for ATV use right um so I'm assuming we are just if we say we're open to the idea it's not our last shot at saying no we don't want it there right we want actually are just asking the state to spend the money to do the work to see are there any sections that might work for us yeah I mean in some regards yes um so I think kind of the you know the way that the use of the trail is described to the state is it's for you know these specific uses snowmobile mountain bike hiking and bike or I think I missed one in there but anyway for those particular uses uh equestrian was the other one um so it's kind of just saying you know we want you to amend this to include this particular use and in order to do that you know the state's going to have to likely kind of look at the sections that need to be brought up to a better standard you know like where there's muddy spots we're going to have to build up the trail and you know make culs and you know storm water plans to deal with these issues you know so it's not saying yes you know break ribbon get started break ground it it's just saying yes we are open to this idea for this particular use and so you know all of the you know all of the kind of questions regarding possible environmental impacts and how those are going to be dealt with we haven't even scratched the surface on that yet you know and and so I mean as Ronda mentioned you know there are sections of the trail like just above Sawtooth uh just above kind of the the radio tower that we have that pattern Fen which is a super high value natural resource to the state and I mean even in that kind of scoping meeting that we had back in June the the ATV Club was very understanding and saying no we don't want to cross this particular area we understand the value of it it would be regulatorily nearly impossible to even engage in that process anyway so you know where can we bring the trail up to a standard you know to to vary access through these kind of areas that on this trail that already exists where there's already motorized use you know so thank you mhm other questions commissioner white to commissioner Johnson's use first stand knowledge you you identified that there were parts of the trail where wouldn't work in your well I don't I'm not a scientist I know I mean it's like the parts where obviously it it seems to be a compatible but other parts it wouldn't so what do you do you're driving along on your ATV and stop can't go any further this part is incompatible where you have to build another Trail what what happens uh well I would suggest we look to what Lake County does and how they've connected that that's why they chose that 6.6 miles of the trail that does connect there's areas where it might work and there's other areas where it's probably not appropriate um and that's what makes it a multi a use Trail mhm and I'm all about making sure all user groups are represented nobody gets everything except if you're in the bwca I guess but um so I'm open to the idea of what can we do to look at the next step I certainly don't think the whole Trail should be open to ATVs I'll say that right here but I I'm open to the idea that there may be sections that users and as a I don't own an ATV but I've been on an ATV and we're we're pretty respectful of where we live we don't want to degrade our environment and we'd like to have a place where um we are protecting our trails and I also think as far as bikes if you could put a a bridge across across some of those muddy sections what happened at the Lutsen 99er might not have happened as badly as it did so we have to look at all of this Madam chair administrator thank you madam chair uh Mitch a couple of questions so the state and the FEDS both would be involved in this review process and and that makes me think okay this is going to take a while right corre um do you have any sense of like what that timeline might be I do not um no I mean so we currently I mean the state and the feds have you know an agreement regarding the use of that trail and so I mean there would be like I said that two-pronged approach and and this is kind of the way that we kick that off is you know is if we agree to this that kind of you know alerts the state that yes Cook County is open to this idea you know where do we begin you know and so I mean I think we're talking about you know think very similar to the gig gamy Trail where you're talking sections that are going to need to be updated you know built to a certain standard and it's going to be kind of done piece by piece and so I don't think we're going to be looking at a a whole scale project where they're going to do 60 to 70 miles a trail it's probably going to be a couple miles at a time for you know likely decades very similar to the gig gamy so and then my other question is following that review um does it come back to the board for approval I mean is this like this is not the last bite at the Apple for the County Board to make a decision about yes or no we should have ATVs on this Trail um that's an interesting question I I don't I don't believe no I mean in the kind of the overall scope of the process no it's not our last bite at the Apple um but it does kind of set things in motion in a way that I'm not sure how much input we're going to have during the trail building process or things like that it might you know the when you get down to kind of the brass tax of wetland regulation for instance um as I'm noticing projects it is going out for you know and notifying people that this project is going out it's fairly rare that you know a county entity or even an individual is weighing in on some of these issues um but that's very different you know that's a state process very different to um you know the NEPA process which is very open to public comment you know through the federal government so this who this guy now oh you got a haircut thank you director Nelson Nelson um thank you madam chair uh just real quick to uh address some of these concerns and such as as it was identified that Lake County has segments and that are used and not segments that are not used clearly uh through that process they worked with the DNR and the FEDS to identify those and had those I do not believe that the DNR would allow for a 20 M segment to just stub out at the end and not have some sort of egress thing that we would anticipate through because these both the entities the federal the the feds and um the Kevin Johnson from the state the DNR who would be working through this um are participants on the County's parks and trails commission and so we would anticipate that it would be uh they would be updating and working through and with the county uh on each of these phases through each of these reviews that would take place as was indicated this kind of kicks off this review it starts a process and because we are dealing with the state and the FEDS we can anticipate that it would take quite some time to go through and during that time we would get updates from the uh from the danr from the feds and we would have the ability to uh kind of guide in chime in on the impacts and where we would see alternate routes uh that would be possible it was already mentioned about the the pattern fin nobody wants uh anything going through that um and such and so those would be identified and avoided and Al alternative uh routes would be in place but this just as was indicated before just kicks off that that study and review from those through which we would uh anticipate a a pretty connected um dialogue between us and the DNR and the FEDS through the entire process any other comments Commissioners have commissioner Miller yeah so I sit on the Cook County parks and trails commission and there was unanimous support there was also good discussion uh I would say well I shouldn't say all prop it seemed like all uh of the concerns that are brought up from U public comment um were also brought up at the parks and trails commission and it was talked through about the process and how this works and um and as was stated earlier if we do not approve this then it will not be looked at if we do approve this request then it can be looked at and so it's the only um real viable way to look at it is to get this to go through I do want to bring up the idea that maybe the importance of a full-time parks and trails director is rising to the top because outdoor recreation in county is Paramount that is what our county is known for for the visitors is our artor rck we want to preserve that we want to manage it as well as we can and doing it with a halftime position is doing it with one hand tight behind our back um I think we should be looking at this um all of the user groups on the parks and trails commission saw this as a really great springboard on other user groups as well um trying to collaborate and work together uh to get things done and to support each other um I thought that was really powerful and not something you always see in our rec groups um so that really impressed me and um again they're pushing for a full-time position recognizing all the intricacies all the ins and outs of these processes and we have an exceptional individual in the part-time position um it's um it's just getting more and more complicated as time goes on and just the expertise with Wetlands as well um it's it's um it's something we shouldn't um take for granted I'd say um I am not a motorized I don't recre I don't do motorized Recreation but I I respect people who who who do I see the value in that and I don't want to exclude people I don't want to be exclusive with other user groups I recognize that there's a lot of Education that needs to happen I have seen Damage Done to Trails it's almost always kids you know just kids not being responsible and so some people's kids you know um but it's by and large our community and all the visitors we that's what we value and that's what we want to preserve and protect and so um it's really important that um if we're going to be making these decisions or making these improvements that we do look at it but we need to be able to allow ourselves and allow the state to look at it otherwise we just won't um and um that's I don't think where we want our County to be going I think we want to try to be working together collaboratively to make improvements uh for everybody so thank you one of the things um that I appreciate in Sheriff Elias's letter was that he talked about um helping to improve our wildli firefighter and Public Safety infrastructure um I see that as a huge piece but it's also evident to me by the number of comments we received just in the last 2 or 3 days that the public at large um needs perhaps to be more involved in this um one question I have and maybe Mitch you can um respond to this there's an inconsistency in the cover page and in the resolution the cover page talks about ATVs and ohvs ohvs include if I'm correct Jeeps motorcycles and dirt bikes but the resolution only says ATVs and um that I think may have created a lot of concern and and is a concern that I I have um I also um note that there is um it seemingly support by um other user groups like The Superior hiking trail and Superior cycling associations um I think it would help our public if we had letters of support from those groups sure and then um just to clarify people are talking a lot about Wetlands I um checked both Minnesota rule and NEPA and Minnesota rule 4410 43000 does say that there is a mandatory eaw with this process and that because of um Federal lands NEPA which is the National Environmental Policy um act um gets involved and I did confirm that EA yes yes which is environmental assessment worksheet thank you um I did have comment from Ellen bardes shanc who is out of the tofy ranger station she reiterated we have time so we can take some time to talk about this she said it'll be 10 to 15 years before this would be um potentially completed um so I guess I would like to see maybe a committee of the whole down the line or some opportunity to dig into this to look at that 2006 feasibility study um letters of support um public involvement so that we're doing for our community really due diligence before we as a board make a decision um what do other Commissioners think commissioner St thank you yes I agree that commissioner Johnson is open to the process and I agree with that and I think our conversation is leaning toward that rather than to right away say to allow construction of a robust yearound multiuse Trail the way it's written here to be open to a committee the whole to have more more presentation and more letters of support and just another discussion rather than do a vote today okay other Commissioners other questions iion yeah I don't think there's a huge rush but I do want to make sure that we're we're moving forward with this and I don't know the best way to do that I iterated my concerns just about staff and um uh but but yeah clearly there's a lot of interest here I think there's going to be a lot of interest throughout um and I'm I'm comfortable with doing a community whole and talking more about this I think it's also worthwhile and important to talk about the O and ATV uh um discussion too um so unless there's a deadline that the state Master planning is about to yeah no right so it's it's on us just we want this to to get going is kind of how it how it sits but well I'd like to make a motion to recommend this for a committee of the whole discussion um where we can incorporate some of this information and it will help us as a board and also the public to really understand the issue at hand M chair is there a support oh I'm sorry support thank you all right we have a motion and support discussion administrator y yeah so um thank you madam chair so just uh thinking about how this would work and using the gami trail as an example so there would be funding opportunities to kind of piece meal this together and I assume that I mean would would the county be acting as a Fiscal Agent for some or all of that funding I'm I'm guessing so there there would be I'm I'm just trying to get to what the board's role is going to be in the future with actually implement ing any any Trail sections that come out of this and I'm just trying to you know understand what what the board's role is going to be I think that's important to know commissioner well I'm under the impression we're just saying look at this idea there is no funding available yet that's another process and we already facilitate um the grant and aid Trail monies that come in we do that Brady's office does that um you handle that that's a different step that and we approve that understood so that's what why I'm like I don't know I'm agreeing that we just need to say yes let's look at the idea let's let's say State yeah go ahead figure out what may work what might not work and then we say no we don't don't want that state and Aid traal money we don't want to build that section I don't know I'm just I I don't see a problem with the way this resolution's written I did notice the difference between ATV and oh and I was okay with that right I just think for for the public it's really important that we're clear what we're doing and that inconsistency just jumped out at me right away and that may have been what caused a lot of consternation so I just think it would be valuable for our public to understand the issues commissioner M you think it's worthwhile having committee the whole discussion I mean I don't see it being like we got to do this now I want to try to I it's this has been in the works for years putting it off another for another meeting I I don't think it's going to be a big deal um I don't think we're going to get we're going to get the same thing we got today 50 here 50 here um that just my opinion but but if it makes you feel more comfortable it's fine with me I guess do us uh Commissioners have uh further concerns that we want to explore through committee the whole or is this um more for the Public's benefit or What's um the intention with Community the whole like for me I would like to see the letters of support from the other Association that share the trail um the feasibility study that Mitch um referred to I think would be valuable for us and for the public and um I just think you know public engagement because this happened even though it's been talked about for many years I think it came up quickly and that's why we have such reaction from the community so I think it it helps for us to study it thoroughly and make sure our public is educated as we are commissioner so what we're going to talk about and study is information that's been out there and we're going and ultimately we want the state's input we want them to spend state tax dollars to Let's do an environmental impact statements or whatever they will do to actually do a thorough review of this section to see about the viability of it becoming an off-road Trail also is that correct am I I I could maybe speak to that uh commissioner white um I I think there's maybe a couple of routes depending on how they classify the trail I mean if it if it does become a grant and aid trail that is a different set of State funds um versus like say the ATB Club did an application for a grant to update a section of the trail that's slightly different you know so I mean it's likely going to go through the same review process either way but you know there might be a little less State input on the route where the ATV Club is getting funds for instance versus like a grant and aid grant or something like that so it's dependent on exactly how this goes and we don't know that for certain yet so another question so essentially we're asking for State input so we have more information to share with the public so we have more more information about this is and there'll be no decisions you said 10 years something like that a lot can happen in that time frame but I agree with commissioner Johnson let's and not to dismiss the citizens concerns at all but as much information as we can get I think is important and we're not making a decision none of us might be here in 10 years by the time this decision is made I could probably say I'm not going to be here in 10 years so um safely say that however um I believe that going passing this and saying okay State give us some more input on this what what will this do and what are the impacts and yes we all are quite aware of wetlands of the run ruts what ruts can do noise pollution all of we've all experienced it lived it however and I agree with commissioner Johnson well we all agree that we we who live here want to take care of and do take care of our resources that's why we live here so other comments commissioner Ms yeah just another thought I had and regarding the letters of support I I feel like the C County parks and trails commission does a a pretty good job of representing the different user groups and to have that robust conversation there I think was was enough for me to to be able to support um looking at this further so I don't feel the need for uh further discussion with committee the whole I am very open to it I I don't see any harm in that I can um I can see benefit by just getting people more comfortable and familiar with the idea of uh amending a master plan and looking at what our vision is um one thing I did take away from that discussion though is just how valuable the trail is to other user groups and how underutilized it is to other user groups because of the lack of Maintenance or mowing even it's just it's not worth it for a lot of them even equestrians or or bikers it's just I mean hikers I hike on it um it's valuable that way but um you know a heavy du makes that a bit of a challenge at times walking walking pets certainly it's very valuable especially close to town here um and so um I'd be um very comfortable if a committee the whole discussion is not deemed necessary making a motion then and this is of course not a motion but that we do it B contingent on user groups letters of supports or something like that um but I I feel comfortable with with the parks and trails recommendation as well so there's nothing definitive there for anyone but throwing lots of ideas out any other discussion all right we have a motion oh director Nelson Madam chair just want to interject just a little bit here um if it is uh you know the desire of the board to have as much information as possible a lot of concerns were thrown out with regards two impacts on the environment and everything that's exactly what an environmental assessment worksheet is and so so yes having a a committee of the whole to talk about the existing documents that have been prepared in a feasibility study from 2006 we know in terms of changing environmental conditions and everything else like that that that may not necessarily be as reflective from 2006 to 2024 um that having a current or the most current environmental assessment worksheet uh study or review done would provide the the best uh most updated amount of information and perhaps really address a lot of more directly the concerns that were expressed in those um in the comments that were made so I just kind of throw that out there you could do a a committee of the whole meeting you know before and then during or after or whatever but I'm just saying out there that uh if if it is that kind of information that is uh is valuable and would be valuable that that would be the they would be the ones to do that and that would be uh providing Us in this board here with the most amount of pertinent environmental in information thank you other remarks or questions all right we have a motion and um a second to you repeat the motion sure the motion was to um further study this at a committee of the whole meeting all right looking at the feasibility study gaining letters of support and uh encouraging public involvement all right all in favor I opposed motion fails three to two you said you were going to make a motion I saidd be comfortable that's not saying anything I'm usually comfortable uh I'd like to make a motion to um let's see here oops uh approve a resolution to request that the state uh DNR amend the master plan for the CJ ramstead Northshore State trail to allow uh the construction of a more robust yearr round multi-use trail that is available to ATV use uh contingent on um the uh letters of support from the three user groups that are currently um allowed in the summer season is there support support we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I I I opposed motion carries all right thank you very much all right we'll move on right now to item number five live let's take a short break good idea all right e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e thanks everyone we're returning now to our Board of Commissioners meeting and we're returning to item five Human Resources Alison plumber welcome hey good morning good morning all right I have one item to bring forth this morning um it is uh a job description uh job description update for the County Recorder position so I do want to provide some background on this as well uh so the County Recorder position um has gone through some transition we've brought a resolution to transition that from an elected to an appointed position so in preparation for that transition um and knowing that we would have to eventually recruit for this position uh looking at our records we did not previously have a job description on file for the counter recorder position and actually we don't have any job description for any of the uh elected positions and this is common I checked with my regional counterparts most counties do not have it's very unlikely um more so unlikely that Counties have job descriptions for elected positions so then that put us in a position of well we have to have a job description if we're going to recruit and hire for this position so after obtaining some examples of other County job job descriptions for the County Recorder position for those counties that have transitioned as well to an appointed position we drafted a County Recorder job description went through the review process just like with any of the other job descriptions that we do had Dusty look at the job description had James and then once that was reviewed and given a thumbs up going to um DDA to review it and provide their input and therefore we have now arrived at a a draft job description um and the grade also was subsequently reviewed after that job description was reviewed and um given the go ahead to to review the grading and that would remain at a 210 it is currently at a 2 10 so bringing forth really a new job description for a current position um and then reaffirming the grade at a two10 are there any questions for Allison commissioner Johnson I have one as far as the education and experiences it says Bachelor bachelor's degree in real estate or similar Fields I just curious what that means because I've never heard of a real estate degree so can you explain to me what that I'm just not experienced on that yeah I would imagine I I I would imagine that there's going to be some degree that focuses on real estate real estate transactions what Deeds are um I mean nowadays there's degrees in multiple fields and those have even changed since I was in college so or the pertinent thing too is says or a similar field so someone that give would a a field of education that would provide some background information for someone going into this position so but again flexibility yeah I that's a great observation I think we probably need to to amend that to indicate a business degree with experience in real estate or something I think that's probably the the likelier um likelier background that makes more sense to me business degree somebody who no I or Comm I mean you know if somebody I mean there are lots of Realtors who don't necessarily have uh degrees but having that background is vitally important for that kind of position so we can we can amend the uh the language to say something to the effect of U either Bachelors of business um Administration or a background in real estate with X number years of experience I I think with a background in real estate experience some way is pretty important yeah but I just was curious because I've never seen that and I was thinking the same thing um people with a real estate license or people who have done title work things of that nature would have that background that's appropriate commissioner Mills yeah the the degree exists you can get from University of St Thomas and I I think the language is fine because it covers like Allison said related fields but it does make more sense as well like you're saying commissioner Johnson and administ ychy about just that business degree and related and then that experience so I can I can agree I can support either way whichever makes the most sense for getting the candidates that we want yeah I just that's all I just clarification of what we're looking for absolutely commissioner white and as attorneys there are attorneys that focus on real estate law and I don't some of it's kind of like it's continuing education and you mhm learn on the job and so but they don't have a degree a lot agree you know they yeah they just they're just a lawyer I can say that I have one in my had one in my family didn't mean to derail I just was not clarification so Allison do you have some revised language you could share well I was actually just going to bring up I had to connect to the network um another thing to switch from our s drive to SharePoint um so I have to connect to the network CU I actually just wanted to double check the educational experiences for the chief Deputy recorder because I believe that we had some similar experiences listed commissioner M yeah again I don't I don't think it's problematic I just think it makes more sense sure absolutely yeah I don't have a I don't have a problem with that at all sorry searching for it oh boy okay I thought it was an easy question we just want to make sure we get the language right and I think it's important that we hear that language before we vot on anything well I'm trying to find the recorder okay so the chief Deputy recorder position which we reviewed not that long ago and approved uh so we kept these actually in line the education and experience so the approved Chief Deputy recorder position um also references a bachelor's degree in real estate or similar field plus four years of relevant experience or a combination thereof okay I think we're all comfortable so would we want to change this um that's what I'm education experience or leave it with the approved language from the chief Deputy position that we did in December I'm comfortable with a chief Deputy position language okay commissioner Mills uh what I think this does is uh emphasizes uh the the experience in real estate versus if we say a a business degree that emphasizes business right and they can have the real estate on the side but we really I think want to emphasize the real estate so upon further thinking I'm liking it but um which way is the wind blowing can you say that these are in line currently the chief Deputy recorder as well as this draft yes okay yes have the same language when it comes to that minimum education experience again and there's built-in flexibility because it says or similar Fields uh plus experience and then such or an equivalent combination of education and experience commissioner what and the only certificate or license we require is a driver's license and there might be more trainings after more certifications that they would go through upon being hired um because I think there's certain trainings that they have to do for providing like vital Health Statistics and Records um but at least for being hired or at least meeting the minimum qualifications to apply and potentially be hired the only one that they would initially have preemployment would be the driver's license and that's standard amongst all of our positions I mean just like the assessor's office we don't require them to have um CMA AMA all of the different lure levels because they do that upon employment afterwards thank you for clarifying that I'm sure I'd like to make make a motion to uh approve the job description for the county quter uh uh job grade at 210 thank you commissioner Mills is there support support thank you commissioner Johnson we have a motion in support any further discussion all in favor I opposed motion carries thank you very much attorney hickin thank you chair salivan okay okay so as the board agenda item says the Cook County cannabis regulation ordinance is back before the board today uh with the benefit of the full board um Commissioners wanted to make sure that commissioner Johnson had an opportunity to join in the discussion and have a vote on um and to vote on the ordinance if that's the stage where we're at um so as you know the proposed osed ordinance which has been published for public hearing uh includes a limit of 14 registrations for cannabis retail businesses uh Commissioners at our last meeting discussed whether that's an appropriate limit or might might we wish to cut it in half or might we wish to limit it to one um if Commissioners decide today to change that limit any for to anything other than 14 we would need to republish the ordinance and hold another public hearing before voting which is fine we need to to include enough opportunity for the decision and and the discussion um so one thing I I need to um clarify or correct from my comments at our last meeting is I had misremembered um the County's authority to limit registrations or to even set up a registration ordinance for retailers of the low potency hemp Edibles and beverages I told you that that is not a power that the county has but the county does have the power to include in this ordinance if you so desire uh a registration requirement for any retailer of the low potency cannabis uh low potency hemp derived Beverages and Edibles um I pointed out in the cover that um you would be doing so without we we as a committee did not thoroughly discuss that we kind of didn't have it on the table from the beginning um so you might wish for the committee's input on that um if you were planning to do that you'd also be impacting potentially impacting um 13 businesses that are already selling those products um so uh if you're going to do that you might wish to create a different different category for registrations so registrations of low potency hemp edible Beverages and Ed and um and Edibles or um expand the registration from 14 but all of that is your choice I don't mean to confuse the discussion I just had to make sure I corrected what I told the board last time looks like commissioner Mills has a questions thank you um so you said we have the authority for the registration do we also have the authority to limit the registration yes ah I also made a few changes which I wouldn't call substantive um in the draft proposed ordinance uh this is now I think the third draft um these changes are to make sure that the ordinance is align with the 20 24 changes in the Cannabis ordinance um so when the office of cannabis management issued their model ordinance um I hadn't noticed that they didn't update for example the definition of cannabis retailer uh to the 2020 20 2024 version or definition so now that definition is corrected and there are some formatting changes um um the discussion um amongst either the board or the committee or both related to whether each location requires its own registration under this ordinance or whether it's just each license holder requires a registration I made it clear in this ordinance that uh we're talking about every location needs its own separate regist so if you have a license holder who's for example um a a micro business which can have three locations under its license we require a registration for each location um making it clear that the intent of the ordinance and I think this is implied in the rest of the ordinance language the intent of the ordinance is to limit the Lo the number of locations by limiting the registrations um so that's in section 2.1 where I made that language change the other piece that is updated to reflect the 2024 changes in chapter 342 is in the annual compliance checks language that's in 2.3.4 uh because the statute took away the requirement that um counties if they're going to register businesses or require registration for businesses must do not just age compliance verification but also operational requirements um compliance checks so I took that out Commissioners can put it back in if they wish um essentially what I'm aiming to do here is limit the compliance check obligation to the county um to strictly what's required under statute and no more um knowing that there has been some discussion of the resource allocation for compliance checks and our concern that we don't necessarily know how many businesses are going to establish themselves and how much time uh and energy it will take of the public health department to do those compliance checks um in the discuss session so um in some research and also uh with the OC's webinar that several of us attended um the understanding that I have is that the state is also not going to do regular compliance checks for those operational requirements what they'll rely on is a comp it's going to be a complaint based system so if um for for example our public health staff goes in to do an age verification compliance check and they notice oh these aren't properly labeled products or this security system isn't in compliance with the statute we can make a complaint to ocm and then ocm may investigate uh the statute specifically says ocm can choose not to investigate though so it's a balancing act do we want to um dedicate resources here at the beginning of the process to the county doing operational compliance checks or do we want to rely on the state and have faith that they will respond with an investigation when appropriate so again that's in section 2.3.4 just see if there's any other changes to point out not really other than formatting I do want address some of the um public comments or questions that came up um our hoveland residents who had a comment um related to State and local employees whether the county is going to subject um or does subject our County Employees to testing or random testing such as the federal or tribal employees do um I would draw your attention to two different Human Resources policies that Cook County has in place these policies were specifically so um recreational adult cannabis use was legalized last year in August and anticipating that change or maybe shortly thereafter um I did review with human resources are two drug testing policies for County um employees and we tweaked them both to um make sure that they were up to date with the law so there are two separate policies one of them applies to all County employees and the other applies to only commercial drivers who have a CDL as part of their and and use it as part of their um employment and the reason there's that distinction of course is because the CDL Drivers have federal regulations that they they have to abide by um they are subject to random testing um and so our our policy is consistent with the Omnibus Transportation employee testing act for commercial drivers and it says circumstances under which drug or alcohol tests shall be required or requested include during the application process for reasonable suspicion post accident random testing and return to duty and follow-up testing and this policy prohibits commercial drivers from using possessing selling transferring or being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while working or performing job duties so they're prohibited from being under the influence uh if there's reasonable suspicion that they are under the influence they may be tested and they may also be randomly tested those are all um you know part of the burden that goes with the responsibility of being a commercial driver and the privilege of being a commercial driver so our other policy that applies to all County Employees um says that circum well first of all it prohibits um employees from using possessing selling transferring or being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while working or performing job duties or while on the County's premises or well operating County vehicles Machinery or equipment so it's prohibited to be under the influence possessing or using on the job circumstances under which drug Endor alcohol test shall be required or requested include application process for reasonable suspicion nope I'm reading the wrong I went back to the commercial driver policy sorry but any uh All County employees are prohibited from using possessing selling or transferring alcohol cannabis and other Controlled Substances while on County owned property wherever work for the county is being performed and there's an exception for law enforcement officials who are in possession of those items because of their um investigation duties um the policy says no County employee shall report to the workplace well impaired or influenced by alcohol cannabis Controlled Substances or other mood altering drugs nor shall they consume during work or on breaks um there is not a random testing policy for for um for County employees in general and that's consistent with the law and protections for employees and I uh I got to be honest there is a problem right now with testing for cannabis uh because cannabis stays in your system for up to 30 days after use and you can be positive you can have a positive test result for cannabis or THC whether or not you're imp pred and given that this is a substance it is legal for people to use on their off time um we would have a problem if we were requiring people to um test negative um if we didn't have a valid basis for that our valid basis is you shouldn't be under the influence or you can't be under the influence while you're working um so the state patrol has a pilot project right now for field testing of um people to try to determine the level of um THC in their system but right now we don't have anything you know even if we were um to suspect impairment it would be difficult to confirm that through testing um so what do we do we train our managers and supervisors and HR professionals to detect signs of impairment whether it be by cannabis or you know misused prescription drugs or by alcohol and we say you appear to be impaired and you you investigate the situation in other in other ways um but yes we do have a policy that prohibits cannabis use or influence under the influence of cannabis on the job any questions about that I got into the details where how does that relate to the ordinance um well I'm just addressing the public comment that's a that's a good question um I think in general we're talking about a potential um higher prevalence of use again potential if these retailers are in the county um so there was another public comment related to youth use of cannabis um I've already talked to you and put in my um materials uh that it's a priority of the it was a priority of the committee and drafting this to keep cannabis out of the schools and we're going to continue to try to do that so thank you questions or comments commissioner white um it was I was in a meeting last night so I didn't hear it firsthand but I was was told that on uh public TV out of duth there was um a discussion about cannabis and that the state has a lottery and nine well 900 or half of them are from out of state people like we have which really means we have absolutely no say into who might get permission to to sell cannabis here in Cook County I mean that's my takeaway from that like so we could have people from Chicago or from and I'm only saying people with a lot of money can be coming here seeing this as a great potential they have the money to invest and they don't I don't think that's a good excuse me I don't think that's a good idea when we were talking about this I'm thinking about our local businesses that might have a I mean might would probably do their due diligence because they live here and it would be an opportunity for our local businesses but as I understood what was being said it's a it's a lottery and our businesses there's a good chance they're not going to get it so and we have no idea who's going to get it and I don't know if they even discussed how the lottery how what we as a county has to say if there's any impact whatsoever so we say we only want one and they'll say well we've got 2,200 people that would like to be part of this Lottery and she has an answer uh I didn't mean to interrupt no that's okay um I do I do have a response to the piece about um the the number the the state will not issue more licenses in Cook County than our ordinance requires um or allows thank you um the also the state will not issue a license in a location that zoning in Cook County does not allow the initial Lottery yes I heard the same thing that you heard that um there were a lot of applicants that came from out of state um we don't have the ability to deny a registration based on who applied for it their residents uh what the law allows us to do is prohibit um the unlawful operation of of those businesses if they're operating outside of the um operational requirements that the statute has set up if they're selling to underage if they're allowing underage people into their store in violation of the ordinance or if they're trying to establish a location above the 14 or whatever number we set limit yep so that do you know that if we have say 20 people from Cook County who put in when they do the lottery for cook I mean they the lottery when your number gets PK picked or your name gets picked do you get to go anywhere you want to go in the state so as I understand and this is complicated and it's changed you know they keep adding information to how this process is happening but here's how I understand it um the current lottery is for a pre-approval um to allow the social Equity applicants um to know yes your application looks in order it looks like um you're a social Equity applicant um but those Li those licenses aren't going to be issued until the location is identified right now they can apply the social Equity applicants can apply for pre-approval without saying where their store is going to be but the licenses won't be issued until 2025 and they won't be issued until the location is identified and approved and the county where that location is identified has an opportunity to review the license application um you know match up that location to their zoning requirements um do an inspection we can can do a compliance check pre- approval and we can get back to the we must get back to the state within 30 days if we see this location is in violation of zoning this location is above the number of registrations that we've allowed or this location does not it doesn't appear that they can comply with the state requirements for operation um so we do have that ability and it's built into the rules which there are drafted rules now um the comment period for the Draft rules ends in 3 days um and I should mention that I am working with a team through AMC they invited me to help review those rules so I've reviewed the parts of it that are specifically pertinent to our discussion here um so anyway there is a response by the county that is built into to the licensing process administrator your I was going to add too I heard uh Sophie linger from the uh office of cannabis management present on this and applicants also have to have a viable business plan so if you're just some dude who's wanting to sell marijuana out of his trench coat or something in front of the tofy holiday you're not going to get a license so so there is a barrier to entry there's a review process for my understanding and in compliance with with those requirements is is part of that well be that as it may there's still no guarantee there's it's a lottery and there's they're not going to just pick from our local businesses might totally lose out I mean why why I don't see any well one I'm going back to maybe let's do what Two Harbors did and just have a moratorium because the state is making it it's not going to necessarily in any way shape or manner benefit Cook County businesses if they don't get to be someone who who actually invest all this money and time for security in the reg if they don't have a shot at doing it because it's a lottery like how lucky are they you know I I just think this is this is I I don't want to play this game with the state bo privacy contents have been up I just don't believe that till the state gets their act together like you know I feel like they are treading on our rights as a county to say you're we're going to draw have a lot lot we're going to have a lottery and we're going to pick X number of people and they if they meet all the criteria they're coming to the your county near you even though they haven't Liv there I I just find that wrong I don't find that that's the one thing and the other question that came up was the international border right somebody goes across that border and one way to say it is border patrol they don't have much of a sense of humor and just because they know you it doesn't mean anything this is the law and I want my border patrol to be like that and so I can just see all sorts of unintended problems where people don't get to come back from Canada or they're just stopped at the border forever they don't because of cannabis I find that's a that could really happen I I happen to know in their youth where high school kid forgets that he's got all of these hunting knives in the trunk of his car and he and his friends are just going up to the mall in Canada like they're idiots I mean they can't help it their hypothalamus are not developed but I could see this happening I could see this happening at this point he lost all of his hunting license his hunting knives and was told to go home but um I don't you know there are federal laws and state statutes that are beyond our control oh yeah and so what we need to do is look at this ordinance and determine what controls we can put in place to manage this best for our business Community but for the Youth and the families that are here as well because it's also about keeping our community safe um I have spent a lot of time listening to people I know all Commissioners have have done that over the last few weeks and one thing I feel very strongly about is limiting the number reducing the number from 14 to 7 so that we are parallel with our liquor establishments and that will also assist Public Health and Human Services as they begin the process of compliance checks let us start small and see how it goes and if we need need to adapt or we need to change fine but the thing I'm hearing from our community is to decrease the number of registrations that we have in the county commissioner Sullivan and well then to that end let's have one one let's really reduce it one because if it's going to be a lottery and somebody from who knows where comes there'll be one that'll be less work it'll be less work I'm just sharing what I've heard from constituents they feel being parallel to the the liquor situation is a good way to start M chair I would also just note that would be less opportunity for local businesses too and I'm painfully aware of that I mean I've talked to some business owners and I know that um but I'm I'm thinking um of the health and safety of our community developing a process by through Public Health to do the compliance checks and I think going slow and steady and getting data so that we all as we look at this again in the future have information on how has it changed um for example looking at the Sheriff's Office how many more tickets are being given how many were related to uh DUI or a a DWI um what's happening with our young people what are the schools seeing what is public health seeing what's Sawtooth Mountain Clinic seeing and I think collecting information is really important for us as we start and it's a lot of work so let us start small and then take a look at it in the future commissioner stle we still have control that's the thing we can say no depending upon who wants to come in where they want to be as attorney hi can said we still have the last control and then just a side comment I'm hearing from folks that why can't we opt out we can't right when this was first coming across the states maybe 15 years ago the state of Washington Colorado some of the individual counties could opt out no more I think we're the 24th state to enact a cannabis um regulation now and so we have no choice so in not having a choice let's move a forward and be as um aware of the future because as of today there's 2,000 applicants from other states so so let's just be aware that they're all going to be a lottery and that we have control who comes into our County and who is in our County that wants to have um dispensaries all of that so a question uh commissioner St so does that mean if somebody say from Tim buuk to just they get and they and they have all of the business plan they have everything in place and we say we would really prefer to have one of our local businesses we don't get to say that so we don't have control over that if they get win the lottery and they have the necessary documentation and money they can come we would review that and if we say we don't like this doesn't matter if they have the requirements our businesses do not get to have an opportunity I mean they can't say we can't say let's just okay here's one but let's give it to our local business and we can't and and I understand that and I'm going to look at the analogy of a teaching license we don't get to decide who gets licensed to teach in our schools here in our community they get a state license and I I don't like the fact that with cannabis that's out of our control and we aren't allowing local people but again that's not in our control commissioner Johnson you had a question yeah I understand that concern but I'd also like to point out that's how we get new business to Cook County and whatever business I agree I would hate to see all the licenses go to outstate people and all that money being left but they have to have a piece of property here that will be taxed so whether or not they rent a place and they're paying lease payments or they buy a place to operate their business it's no different than a plumber coming in from out of state and saying I want to sit up shoping Cook County maybe they'll want choose to live here yay hopefully you have kids that want to go to our school too that's what we want so I understand the concern of having nobody that's currently a resident maybe receiving that um license but let's encourage those lenses to make your home in Cook County and live here year round not half the year and commissioner Sullivan to your comparison to uh teaching licenses a teaching license anyone can come to the to to the school district because there's an open for what in whatever teaching position but they don't have to be hired you don't have to hire them you can say this person and I know it's happened like they might have all the requisite uh certifications and and license that they need or degrees that they need but in the interview process I recall one in situation where it was determined that this particular person's and her p and the personality was not a good fit for the existing culture in the school district and so in the teaching field you have unless you don't have you really need a teacher and there's nobody else that applies um you have options you don't have to hire a teacher simply because I mean you don't have to hire them so and good point commissioner Johnson and I just like to say I also um would lean to reducing the number of registrations at least for a year and I think this is something that's still evolving especially at the state they don't have their act together yet and they will be making changes and figuring things out so I would instead of a complete moratorium because we have to do something yeah I'm more inclined to say well okay let's start small see how it goes who applies how's the state regulating it don't overburden our Public Health and Human Services Department on that yet and maybe we'll find out that it's not a big deal and the next year we say we want to amend our ordinance because we've learned a and C whatever so commissioner W so what number are you suggesting for a reduction well commissioner Sullivan said seven and I guess I would be okay with seven I don't know what the the right number right it is well and there there's not a right number it's based on what we hear from the public and and how we imagine um our public health and human services staff can support this and input that we've had from the sheriff's office I mean there's a lot of pieces to that any other questions or comments commissioner so just a public clarification we have no say in whether or not there will be cannabis sold in this County correct has this gone to court we we need to allow at least one retailer that is a non government non-municipal retailer but that has is gone to court these other other um other cities that did not want to have it hasn't I don't think we're at that point yet because there haven't been licensed issu you know I would assume it's all yeah commissioner m i I appreciate the concerns it's just important to know where our Authority comes from it comes from the state every single bit of authority that County Board has is an arm of the state and so our Authority is granted to us it's not that we have it and we can you know defend our rights it's that it's granted to us and so um it's important to know the structure of the government and and just where we fit in what our role is uh we have had says throughout this process the thing is is there's 887 counties and there's other very large municipalities and they also have SS in this process and so um we've been a part of the conversation from whenever that was 2018 or something um and um and there's been a lot of compromises there's been a lot of strategies um it's we're just taking things step by step and doing what's best for our County as as we can I mean we could enact a moratorium and that would get us all the way to January 1st of 2025 you know that's all that would do couple months yeah so it's it's it's like I think it's very silly that other places are doing moratoriums cuz they're just burning time here it's if we've been kind of proactive on this and really trying to get ahead of it I think it's really wise to scale back and to do that slow thing and to amend later on as we see what's what and how the state plays out so but that parody with alcohol there's such a stigma and there's so much unknown as well about cannabis we're learning new things every day I don't I forget there's like hundreds of cannaboids in there you know THC is the big one you hear about cuz that has a big immediate effect or whatever in CBD too is another one which is a lower effect on the brain or whatever but there's other ones too and so because it's been illegal and it still is federally I think the DEA is looking at rescheduling but no that's not going to be until after the election um there's just so many things up in the air and we're learning so much that taking it slow I think is is wise um but also trying to be proactive at the same time it's it's very tricky situation so our um um ordinance committee I think has done a really thorough job at looking at the ins and outs trying to um protect our youth trying to respect um the law and trying to also enable business opportunities and Property Owners to to exercise their rights and so I'm not a fan of outside businesses coming in but I think the whole point about having property I mean imagine some big Russian uh dispensary comes in and uh and opens uh opens up who's going to work there you know there's no employees in Cook County like this is really going to be I think a locally driven industry there's potential for not um but you could say the same for McDonald's you know why isn't there McDonald's it's just there's lots of different ins and outs here so um and of course there's so many unknowns that makes it hard to make these decisions and a little frightening at times but I think we've done all we can to this point and um yeah there's there's just more to do as well but time will tell and our staff will tell uh the sheriff will tell our schools will tell um the clinic will tell the hospital what's and we'll hear plenty too from residents but I think it's also worth noting that there has been low potency Edibles in our community apparently sold at 13 different retailers since 2018 that's when the farm bill passed and it's been around and so um what I've heard from the sheriff's department is that has not resulted in more uh cannabis related problems if any reports at all um but that is a lower dose or whatever but you just eat more and it's the same thing so it's it's all very strange um and dynamic but um but I think we're doing a good job I really do and I feel confident that attorney hickin is is really looking at this carefully you've been on our AMC um groups and through mcit later this week There's a training that a number of us are going to so I think we need to stay on top of it um and collect that data once we have an approved order um but I'm going to make a motion to reduce the number of establishments from 14 to 7 I should say registrations um from 14 to 7 so by 50% and and that means we're going to have to have an additional public hearing just so everyone is clear on that I will second that thank you commissioner Johnson we have a motion and a second any further discussion all in favor I I opposed and I would like to add that I'm well aware and very appreciative of all the work that David and that whole group and that they've done going forward which was you know it's hard to second guess a group of people who have spent countless hours discussing it and coming in so I'm well aware of that but I still hearing that I'm just getting over the fact that our local people that just really irks me motion carries thank you all very much attorney hickin uh thank you um so now that the board has moved to change that number um I would ask that there be a motion for a um to set a public hearing um at the time of your it would be the second regular board meeting in September and then to direct the um publishing of the notice for that public hearing so would that be the 24th or yeah okay uh Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to set the public hearing for our cannabis regulation ordinance for September 24th at 9 a.m. thank you commissioner Mills is there support support thank you commissioner Johnson we have a motion in support any further discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries thank you so much all right we will move on to auditor powers who's been so quiet this morning now we're gonna give him an opportunity quiet sorry thank you madam chair so uh first item is a firewise brush disposal pit agreement this is a renewal it's a five-year renewal um this would expire on June 15 2029 it's between us and the United States Forest Service which owns the land on which these sites are so the the only change in the agreement is that Carlton uh there's a pit now for the Carlton uh Mountain area so other otherwise it's essentially the same so any questions for auditor PS so it's less less of a pit and more of a peak then so it's a pit within a peak yeah they all are quite peaked at this time yeah these are I mean I think these are key to the firewise effort because if if we didn't have these pits we'd have to create them or people would you know be disincentivized to do a lot of cutting and or they'd be piling it somewhere or burning it when sure all right oh I'd like to make a motion to approve the five year agreement uh fiveyear agreement with the forest service for the maintenance of the brush dis will listed thank you commissioner Mills is there support support thank you commissioner Johnson we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries uh next item is an airport Grant agreement Amendment so we approved this agreement for the airport for a $32,000 Grant through the American Rescue plan of 2021 we did that in 2022 uh the this is a Federal Grant and uh it allowed for four years to spend the money but when the state approved the agreement with us and and all others across the state uh they they shortened that timeline and it all had to was EXP expiring this year on September 30th they realized that I think a large number had not spent the money yet and so they've uh they decided to extend this uh on our behalf so this is just for an extension otherwise it all Remains the Same is what we originally approved any question for auditor powers if not I'd like to make a motion to approve amending by resolution the airport Grant agreement to extend the deadline to January 25th of 2026 is there support I'll support that thank you commissioner white we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I opposed motion carries and the next item is for a resolution to accept uh an ierb Revenue Bond Grant and this is the one uh we changed the agenda item which had separated two parts of this project but the IB is giving us money we call them two projects but they asked us to combine it into one for their purposes so we're combining it it's it's a combination of of the transfer station facility project and an affordable housing Apartment project and that's the uh Harbor View Apartments in town here so this is for the resolution is to accept the $2 million in Grant funds from it RB to construct the transfer station facility in Grand morray and 250,000 for an affordable housing Apartment project so the county you know we initially applied through the regular State bonding which of course didn't get approved this year that money comes to you pretty much without strings attached but since that didn't pass our legislators with our project and a bunch of other projects they said well we'll authorize that for IB bonding so there's total 49 million of these various projects of which we have two of them and uh the the let's say the complication with this is that it RB does have strings uh let's call them that there's an application process and then there's um the um what kind of wage prev prevailing wage that uh that has to attach to these projects and the funds must be spent within 30 months of when the their their state Bond sale occurs which they expect to happen in November uh which pushes up their timeline which means this uh application has to be in by uh the end of this week on the 30th so you're not given a lot of time to make a decision on this um and Brady if I could just add none of this was evident to us until we had a phone call with I less than two weeks ago yeah so we've been scrambling to get ready we have this uh you see this um project form that's not the actual application that'll be taken it RB will review that and then we'll be putting it into their application system um the portions of this to fit their application during the rest of the the week or however long it takes so to a little more detail the affordable housing project portion is supported by 1.65 million of private funds that would uh purchase the uh the Harbor View Apartments those 31 units and this will allow it to stay affordable for uh 12 years affordable units and plus the 250,000 of ITB Revenue bond funds and for the transfer station um it's supported by 450,000 of ITB infrastructure Grant this has already been secured an $800,000 deed energy transition grant for and 363,000 351 of private Equity that uh Northshore um has already put into the project preparation and the $2 million of ITB revenue bonds however that entire project is estimated to be around 6 million and it is short about 200 2.5 million they attempted to get Federal funding through federal legislative earmarks but that was not approved so at this point they are short that amount and in order to receive the ITB funds we have to in the application say that we have secured all of the funding for this project so um this is kind of a key decision today for this to go forward to get the $2 million uh for that project is that we have to say we have this funding and that we will spend it within 3 years for this project we've talked uh one one option is that the county could issue um uh Solid Waste revenue bonds they're designed for solid waste projects and we could we could issue those on behalf of this project and then we could then uh on property taxes that's one method is that uh we could then have this fee or charge on property taxes for residents here that would then pay uh the bill so the other the other is that Northshore uh raises fees and uses their um service in sufficient amount to pay the bonds but not everybody subscribes a lot of people bring their garbage there um and so forth so it's not as simple process as it may be in other places Tim Nelson dealt with this in Clearwater County where it it did it did work for how their service was used in Clear Water a little bit different in Cook County so um a lot of information um let's see for for thought but not a lot of time for thought so moved so moved um and just should point out that Jason is here to answer any questions about the affordable housing Apartment project I see that both Jason is here and Reena and Dustin are here as well you guys moved I thought I'm gled back I thought you guys had left sorry so what I'd um suggest is that maybe you come forward to a microphone and and maybe one of our microphones could be moved to appropriate seating just so if Commissioners have questions or you have information that you would like to share that the public can hear this as well um so again we're looking at combining these resolutions that were separated out initially on the agenda um and it would be an acceptance of um the ITR Revenue bond for affordable housing um which is Harborview and then the revenue Bond grant for the transfer station so that's the way the resolution would look out are there questions that individuals have for either the HRA or for Northshore waste are there any comments that you would wish to share chair or yes chair um sorry my brain is about 10 places right now um I'd just like to add uh to uh auditor powers and and administrator York's comments that this is a bit of a fast turnaround both for the county uh and for ITR I think that they weren't anticipating uh this in the same way either so uh both of these projects although very different uh have obviously been have plans that were outside of this particular the mechanics that they end up happening with regard to going through the ITR process the application process the subsequent requirements and so at this juncture we're trying to recognize and appreciate uh the funding that the state is providing and then also recognizing that there are complications that have come along with that so we're trying to make the best out of it and make sure we don't lose these funds uh and adapting on the fly so to speak and and I know for myself I can't speak for the Transportation uh project but I have a series of questions out to ITR about this particular application um and to make sure that we are you know this project is going to be able to adhere to all those things and and how can we get creative with how these funds are used because they it is creating some dissonance with the original intent of the HRA working on this project so all that's to say yeah you can't plan for these sorts of things uh but all we can do is try to um adapt quickly and still you the money is still worth using and worth putting into these projects so that's my comment and I would like to say from the HR meeting HRA meeting that we had last week that um it helps keep 31 units affordable it's so so so important for our community to do that and I so appreciate the new owner of that property hanging in there with all this new um language New Direction that we have to take um looking at prevailing wage um but I think that as a team we can save those housing units and that means a lot to those 31 individuals and and families that live in those units just a point of clarification chair it's uh 31 units total in the building 21 of which would be reserved for the Section 8 housing I just want to be clear for the public too thank you yeah you're welcome commissioner Johnson I guess my question is more for um Brady the administration um so we talked about this at our Comm of the whole about reaching out to Ellers so this says we have infrastructure bonds but really I RB just once you know that's what you're thinking and if we decide not maybe we use fund balance or whatever are we I just want to clarify I'm not voting for you guys to go out and get bonds without it coming back for to us and that discussion right come back so they're okay with us saying that's what we think we're going to do mhm yes okay I just want to make sure we're on the same page here that you're not signing something that says we have infrastructure bonds for this no no they understand this is a plan okay thank you for and we did talk with Bruce Kimmel at ERS yesterday we still have some questions about how this mechanism Works um but I mean he's confident he actually thinks that if we if we back it up you know we get the revenue bonds but we back it up with General obligation bonding that we could get like a AAA rating on on the bonds so um the the interest rate would be very favorable um but we're still exploring how those pieces fit together and we have started that conversation with others yeah and he's he's reaching out to bond attorneys too just to make sure exactly how it might work so that you would understand that clearly before you made that decision okay and so as far as a timeline here of when so this has to be in by Friday and then they you have to do another one and then there's something else I'm just wondering when can we as a County Board expect to vote on issuing those bonds do we have a time frame of when they need to know we did it we have a follow-up meeting with Bruce scheduled for next week um so we're right now we're in the information gathering phase um and I don't know we'll have more information on September 10th I doubt that we'll be ready to have a bond proposal ready for you on that date that I don't think it happen that quickly probably you know within a month or two I would think so other questions or comments so the the other thing that I want to that we talked about at the committee of the whole meeting last week was getting the um funding in place to do the engineering work for the transfer station and I I should mention too uh just for for folks who may be Tuning In For the First Time The Evolution of this whole process with the transfer station is that initially when the county was asked to sponsor a bonding application to the state um it was our expectation and the sponsor and Northshore waste's expectation that they would own the facility we would apply for the funding from the state we would pass it through to norshore way so that they could build this this transfer station as we started having conversations with Minnesota management budget um they were telling us you can't do that because these are public funds and so we can only we can only make those funds available to you if it is a publicly owned facility and that that made us pivot a little bit um and at that point then we started talking we asked MMB how how does this work and they gave us an example of how um mental health facilities in other parts of the state have been funded where basically we uh we would uh lease the land from Northshore waste they would give us a long-term lease we would then be responsible for financing the building which is what all the the bonding is for and the uh you know the congressionally directed spending requests that we made to our Senators um we would own the building but then we would have an operations agreement with Northshore ways they would operate and run the facility and so that's that's where we are now and that's why we are and that's how we're able to get the Public Funding for this project um but we have heard from ITR and others that they want to see the county have some skin in the game and so the bonding really helps us check that box um we we have to get that last piece in place and again the you know there are multiple benefits associated with construction of this transfer station um environmental benefits related to not processing waste Outdoors where you know we've got lead paint chips just falling to the ground um we are would be able to process uh trash picked up from residences indoors which would allow Northshore waste instead of driving pack trucks to Deluth every day they would be able to load the the um Municipal solid waste into a semi-trailer but significantly uh improve their their fuel costs uh reduce emissions Etc and so there there are lots of benefits that go along with with doing this and I think everybody in the county because Northshore waste is now the only uh Solid Waste hauler in the county all of us stand to benefit from this work and so that the County's investment here I I see is just kind of a no-brainer um we all have a stake in this we all want to have a better way of handling our waste and so um that that is why we're having this whole conversation um the other thing we talked about last week as I mentioned talked about the engineering for the project and we do have some County funds um in the amount of about $330,000 that are immediately available to get that work underway that's going to be really important because like Brady mentioned once the uh once I issues Bonds in November there's a 30-month clock that starts ticking and we have to have the funds fully expended by the end of that and so it's important that we start getting all the pieces in place so that we have plans so that when we get the money we can move full steam ahead with the construction of the station so that's the other part that I wanted to remind you all of and and what I've heard from the board I think we all you know support support the project um but that's another piece of the finan Cal commitment that we need to make and I think uh the conversation last week at the committee of the whole we were talking about possibly using $200,000 of that $330,000 for the engineering work and that would leave a sufficient amount for us to continue uh purchasing equipment for the recycling center Dustin and Reena anything you would like to add James did a great job I don't that there's much we can we can add BR I hear you have openings yeah if any of you are looking we'll we'll take you on full time full time do you have anything to say I think you did a really great job explaining all of it both of you I don't know that there's a lot we can add to it okay commissioner Mills I just want to point out that if it were not for Northshore waste we would be having to do this all on the counties uh it is ultimately our responsibility um and because we have such a great partner we're able to share the the burden and the responsibility and um hopefully um it's going to be a viable path for for your business and it certainly is a necessary um service in our community so um I think this is um uh money well spent and and well invested in our community and with such great partnership I think it's just the we have very few options and and we're lucky to have this one so the way the state has it set up you know it helps protect Solid Waste in Cook County for years to come you know the County's going to own this building if something were to happen to Barry and I you guys have a facility to process Solid Waste for the next 50 years yeah so absolutely any other discussion questions remarks if not I'd like to make a motion to apply for and accept the $2 million in grant grant funds um from I trip R um bonds to um construct the transfer station facility in in Grand marine and except well is that not in 2 million we combining the resolution as well as um the 250 for our um HRA project as well all right thank you commissioner mels is there support support thank you commissioner Starley we have a motion and support any further discussion commissioner just also want to share my gratitude for the H and H director for trying to facilitate this because if it were not for the HRA more than likely these would not be um affordable housing they would be market rate just like that and uh that'd be a lot worse for our community so appreciate the work and efforts there too all right we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries thank you so much all right administrator yorie all right thank you madam chair just a few things to report on this week not that there's not tons of stuff going on but a couple of key things I wanted to Loop you in on we have continued the master planning process for the courthouse and the community center and uh where we are now pardon me where we are now is um we had another round of meetings last week um we are kind of whittling away whittling down the the concepts that we've been talking about and trying to come up with kind of a final proposal that we will present to the board on September 24th um have had really great discussion and all of the Departments that would be impacted by this by this move by the change in in the configuration of this building and the potential construction of a building up the community center have been involved in providing input and talking about operational needs and so I feel like it's been a very thorough process and again tipping my hat to bkv group which has really listened closely and the design work that they're doing for us is just completely reflects everything that we've talked about and so they're doing a really great job uh we do have a follow-up meeting meeting is it next week or the week it's the week after I think I think it's the week after um to kind of Whittle down and and kind of tighten up the proposal that we will then bring to the board on September 24th um and again commissioner white has been participating in that process too and commissioner if you have any things that you'd like to add about what what you've heard to date and the process I'm very pleased with with the bkv group and their interactions with us they're listening their communication skills the information they know about um what the rules and regulations are not only for the courthouse but for social services and uh I think and again I think we're getting value for people that don't know they're still here they're still here but they're not just running up their bill they agreed to a set amount to do this work so if they come another four times or five times it doesn't matter they don't get any more money so that's been an issue that I've heard about and I would agree with that the value it's $25,000 contract plus incidental expenses travel and so on um the value that we're getting out of that money is pretty enormous and how many times have we met with them now this we've had we've had a series of three multi-day meetings yeah so yeah so yeah um so they're doing a great job and again uh we plan to come forward on the 24th of September with a proposal bkb will be here to present that um also wanted to let you know the board directed me to uh to ask bkv to put together a proposal for the law enforcement center Edition they are working on that and I had a chance to catch up with uh with Henry about that last week um and they're getting close to having that ready so I would expect possibly even by the next meeting we'll have something to share about that so um that is pretty exciting um third thing I was I received an email at the end of last week inquiring about uh County tax abatement for the heights project and so that is something I'm just mentioning this to put it on your radar I know that the uh the Real Estate Investment Group that is sponsored ing the the Heights Apartment project they are working with ERS to put together a proposal um they're going to be seeking abatements both from the city and the county and I have no more information for you than that um I just know that it's coming um and we'll have to look at the numbers when when they're available um and that might be as early as the next meeting as well so I didn't want you to to be caught off guard by that um and I was talking with with Gary Latz yesterday their hope is that they can actually start the site work this fall um once all the financial pieces are in place um and get that site work on the foundation in so that come spring they would it just be a pro uh process of bringing in the modular units and putting the whole thing together so in an ideal uh world that's how things will will transpire but obviously we don't live in an Ideal World so we'll see how that goes but um just want you guys guys to be aware of that um the last thing I'll mention is that we have uh we have made an offer for a facilities director um we're awaiting confirmation from our from our pick that um he will be able to accept that offer um so I expect to have more about that at the next meeting and hopefully even a a job offer for for you all to approve so thank you so much all right um so commissioner updates commissioner Johnson um I attended the arc meeting Arrowhead Regional Corrections meeting and they we approved the final budget for 2025 and I meant to bring it for Brady if he didn't have it and it's on my counter so I'll get that to you later um actually a little bit lower number than last year so okay right in the ballpark I got the packet didn't you got it so all right good thank you commissioner white well I think I reported where have I been the northern Count's land use we we met that was the last time I was here and talked about that last night was the NorthShore management board met and that's um it deals with the the Waters of Lake Superior along the shoreline so I learned a lot more about that and their new is she a director I don't know what her title is but lenel is she the director now of this no well she's the committee chair she's the committee chair for for this and uh she's new too in learning and she it was a very well-run meeting over at our much loved Community Center so um I think that's about the that was the most exciting one which was pretty lowkey but it was it was the most informational one okay thank you commissioner Mills I have nothing to report today okay Comm starle um yes um I had a town hall meeting last week in regards to the school bonding because I was hearing from people they were confused about the one two three and if the first one fails then the rest fails and if this one doesn't that one does so um superintendent linol came out and we had a small group but it was good um information and um I would just encourage all of us to you know be aware that um this is a big ask 36 million but um some of the areas are well needed in all three of the specifics on that um this coming Saturday I'll be attending the caribo Lake Association meeting they meet twice a year they meet on the weekends of holidays can you imagine a memorial and labor day but I'm I'm in the neighborhood so I'll be able to thank you very much I had a chance to um attend the K count Historical Society meeting where they recently adopted a new strategic plan it's really exciting and um so they will be putting that out with our minutes and it will be included for all our commissioners to look at they also hosted their plink trout dinner down at the community um Camp the community's campground and um liter sold every last piece of trout there were a few pieces left and that smell was spreading throughout the campground and all of a sudden people were there wanting to take tog go boxes back to their campsites so um it was well attended I saw commissioner storle there um but it was great to have that back that has been missing since Co hit and of course you're cramped in a small building particularly if it's rainy out and so it was really nice we had seating inside but it was a beautiful day and people could be outside and um so great event um the HRA met as a mentioned earlier last week um and I'm sure people have read in the paper seen on wtip if they didn't watch the city council meeting that the um borberg project um was voted down and the H is disappointed with that outcome of the city council vote but the city has been such a valued partner for the HRA have helped us with um you know the Gunflint view those 51 units of mixed income housing they help with Hamilton habitat and have supported that and so we are just um back to work on other projects and continuing to move forward and um thinking of weekend and Labor Day events I'll be at the lon Lake Bay Road Association on Saturday and um I'm looking forward to that commissioner Mills um there were two things I was hoping we could talk about um uh first uh it is the um Department of um children youth and families uh meetings that I've been attending um hoping to get that on my list of official UH responsibilities um there are um two different meetings one is just County people where we kind of huddle up and and you know Talk Amongst the county issues and then also there's one where we go to the state and and huddle with the state and and talk about how things are going there and it's it's been really great um learning about that and seeing the Dynamics the concerns uh whether it's from the Metro or outstate and some of those other um multicounty um organizations um the the transition thus far has been more or less uneventful which is a huge positive uh um commissioner Tiki Brown uh the the takeaway that I will never forget is just saying nothing drops we don't want anything to fall through the cracks here we want this to be a smooth transition so there's still concerns because it is a phased transition but it's going very well the the most recent concerns that are being brought up is there was a lot of um difficulties early on and um I was not a part of the group at that point and so I'm only picking up uh kind of that history and now things seem like extremely smooth however people are concerned that um State leadership uh particularly um commissioner Brown is not as directly available because the department is up and running now the the real job is happening versus just planning for it um and so we're really making efforts to make sure those direct lines of communication are open open and anyone uh that we're familiar with in the department is is en encouraged to um you know really double down on those relationships and and keep those lines of communication going so that's pretty good the other one though uh is regarding our AMC committee meetings and I didn't know um who of us um are able to attend the fall policy conference it's still not clear that I will be able to attend I recognize the uh lodging block is full and and lodging will have to be figured out um I'm still hoping to but um what I'm really hoping to do is get on the general government committee which commissioner Johnson currently holds um because there's been kind of this um call for um interested people regarding some of the tax issues and one of the tax issues that I am particularly interested and I hope we all are is a local option sales tax because of how that can Leverage visitor dollars for our community and so that's something I would like to pursue more but um technically it's not my purview at this point because it is commissioner Johnson's assignment so um wanted to talk about that again I brought it up earlier but we just haven't talked more about that so didn't know if you're were going to be able to attend that um I am willing to seed that committee to you for the policy for that weekend for them as long as you can send me updates yeah and I don't think I will be able to attend that's okay we're still and I'm not certain that I can either but um I I want to make efforts in that direction it's just still a juggling act and so um and yeah you yeah so okay that would be that would be wonderful we will make sure that opportunity um is there for you commissioner Mills and and um commissioner Johnson I'll send an email to AMC indicating that you have asked commissioner Mills to attend a fa thank you yeah and I'll just let the board know as I can if I'm going or not um but it'll probably come down to the last minute all right that's fine any other items for the good of the order we have some correspondents and um with that is there a motion to adjourn so moved thank you commissioner Johnson is there support support thank you commissioner stle we have a motion in support anything further all in favor I I oppos motion carries thank you all very much um a information children using fam