good morning I will call the Cook County Board of Commissioners regular meeting to order on this day of uh Tuesday March 11th at 8:30 a.m. to start our meeting we do the pledge please rise as you are
able I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all are there any adjustments to the
agenda commissioner gamble yeah thank you madam chair I I would just like to uh note something that appeared in the uh n Nas National Association of counties newsletter uh County news and it might be best if it followed public
comment period if that makes any sense that would pardon that would how would you make some comments on that I was going to make comments on no myself too well that's that's fine I just I just felt that the nature of the comments
probably be would be best following public comment but you may put it where you'd like but um we can put it after public comments so yeah it just it's related to public comment so thank you okay any other adjustments
I'll hear a motion to approve so moved support I'll in favor I motion carries unanimously at this time we do have public comment period is there anyone in the audience who would
like to come forth please um sign in and state your name address and um I will give you five minutes for your presentation uh Madam chair Madam chair uh council
members thank you uh for having me uh today I'm I'm sitting here uh representing the Great Expectations Foundation uh we're the owners of the Great Expectations school um we have been talking with the county officials
and Commissioners and department heads uh for some time we uh as you may recall recently added on to the school we have a very nice addition and and it's been a fantastic uh space for for our kids over there um
the decision was made early on to to allow for future expansion in one build and we built an upper story um that's not needed at this time and of course with construction and we hit the market right when things are sailing upward so
we're we got some debt that uh we we need to somehow figure out how to cover one of the ways is to lease that space uh which we have it's about 3600 Square ft of leasable space not including bathrooms and hallways and things like
that so it's a it's a very nice space for those that have seen it uh I'm sure you agree we have an elevator uh it's Airy it's a light um pretty private uh You' think being in a school would be noisy but uh you know it it's very well
insulated above and below and in walls and and we think it would be a great space for anybody leasing so uh you know our Hope was that we would have continuing conversations with the county as you look at your needs um I
I understand late here in the game that you've already moved along pretty far on on remodeling the basement here uh here and but I just wanted to make one final pitch and plea that uh you know instead of uh spending Capital you could you
could lease that space uh it's a Community Asset you know it's a we we serve the whole Community it's a it's a draw you know good schools are a draw for for any employers and any people
that work here you know um good people need good schools and I think GES really adds to that so uh I know it's late in the game uh there's an elevator I know if I mentioned that so we're we and we could
build that out about the same time frame as you're looking at um for the work in this building so uh very late in the game but you know if you had another month to deliberate I'd be very happy to sit down with the building facility
these committees and and negotiate whatever uh lease would would work for either party but failing that uh you know hope this being out in the public forum there might be somebody else out there looking
for space but uh anyway appreciate uh a few minutes your time thank you thank you good anyone else to come forward with public comment then I'll ask the board members have any of you received any communication that you would like to
have Comm mad I have some comments um that come from Don Davidson of 583 Southshore Drive you authorize policies that made our homes unaffordable you think that vacation rentals don't affect home prices I recently asked asked an outof
County Appraiser to evaluate our home value both as a residence and a vacation rental the result as a homestead the value is 529,000 as a vacation rental about 680,000 but Cook County values our house
as if it were a vacation rental you need to stop this overvaluation of property in your District friends of ours have moved because they couldn't afford County taxes and you don't seem to care you're making it impossible for people to live
here and I have another comment uh we are La the laughing stock in Minnesota a county our size with three full-time attorneys you need to do an actual study we don't need three full-time attorneys on staff as I said
before you are the suckers there's no way our small County needs three time full-time attorneys you've been taken a ride by lazy employees an actual study will show that there is not any need for so many but I guess you don't care you
just cave to demands and let's see this last one you and I disagree about taxes you seem to think that everyone living here wants their taxes raised guess what we don't you seem bent
on bankrupting your constituency I hope you will discuss this at an open meeting soon we can't afford your vision of having people taxed out of their homes thank you anyone else
with something to be read no okay then um commissioner gamble you'd like to have some comments on N yeah thank you madam chair appreciate that yeah this came in the March 3rd issue uh for the public it's uh the association of
Minnesota counties or Association of counties which is a National Association there's also the State Association and uh these are resources for us as Commissioners and they put out this publication which is County news and fellow Commissioners might have read
some of these articles I noted one on the back in a column that's called now I know it is the title of it is to remember why I'm there and it's written by um uh David Copeland who is a
County Commissioner in Tipton County in Tennessee and he says what I think is relevant it says when I took office I started focusing on citizen engagement it wasn't about me it was about helping people find a voice to express their opinions and needs and ideas about how
government County government could best work for them I thought that was the kind of change I could bring after taking a look at what others did and what I felt like our residents need and want so whenever we take on County Business I want to make sure our
residents can understand it and find out more it's that's if that's the difference I can make while I'm in office I feel like I did what I set out to accomplish thank you thank you moving on to the uh consent agenda
items we have claims and we have minutes board meeting minutes from February 25th uh grandm maray Art Festival special Road permit Fox bike pathing race special Road use permit Grant in Aid ski
per Trail permit renewal resignation of Scott benon and retirement of nanet um silence does anybody need to pull anything chair I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda
support all in favor I oppose same sign motion passes unanimously I would just like to comment about um Nanette the work that she's done over the last 14 years really I really appreciate your work Nanette and good luck in your um
next phase of your future here in Cook County that is as a retire retirement person um so we're going to kind of go around um with different things that are meeting because we have a 10:00 a.m. public
hearing so let's um move on to probably the next item we could talk about would be the maintenance for the uh Courthouse basement thank you mhm good morning so today i' just like to uh we brought
the the uh bids and all the items for the basement remodels so we could move forward with moving some Public Health and Human Services and HR and freeing up some space upstairs we've looked them over over the period
of time and um seems to me that I think as long as we can use the space that we already have here in the courthouse we can um move forward with discussing that any comments or questions that
you'd like to give to Brooke or commissioner Brook could you for the listening public explain what the total project is not to Ed in just some of the big items that will be addressed a lot of them were in the capital Improvement plan I understand that
um just for those that are listening and make certain you speak into the microphone I'm still getting complaints I'm still getting complaints that they can't hear us in the outer world yeah so I I'll just go down through the spreadsheet so the gardener
Builder bid for 96,000 that's for demo sheetrock paint um we're going to just peel up the VCT Tile and they'll polish the floors so it'll handle pretty much start to finish with with that aspect of the
construction um the kettle for the EVR for 56 that will address that's basically a commercial model of a of a residential style air exchanger so we sized it to do the entire basement
so we'll be bringing fresh air and then exhaust out of all the spaces and storage spaces in the basement so just it's kind of musty and stale down there right now and it's a little it's it's expensive because it will have electric reheats for in the in the winter time when we're bringing 20 below air in
we'll need to reheat that before we start pumping it into spaces then the other Kettle bid is the plumbing so with putting the lactation room and the storage room across the hall we will be sawing in through theor
floor and bringing Plumbing in underground and then attach to the main that runs down that Center hallway and it'll also address heat in the offices with additional fin tube heating source as well also the demo and and getting
rid of the old water in the old break room Nordic electric that's pretty self-explanatory they'll wire the the new air exchanger all the lighting Outlets they're going to pull some cat 6 some low voltage for or mis and set up a
switch so we'll we'll get everything set up so everybody will have internet down there and phone lines and everything um Braun Intertech that was we needed to test the the VCT Tile to make sure there wasn't any asbestos in it so that was just a a testing cost
Network equipment again that just kind of goes along with mis for uh switches and and things like that to get everything up and running and then the office furn cubicles and and desks and and things like that I did put in the 7%
contingency which is a little higher than normal and I did that just because we're when we're sawing into the base into the concrete digging in the floor you never know what we're going to run into hopefully we don't have any issues but I just wanted to make sure we were covered in case we did run into
anything so that brings us to a grand total of 295,000 33537 let's continue um so will there be a reconfiguration of the spaces like a Remodeling and U adding walls in the break room or and where does all of this
um material that's been in storage I mean is is there a lot of reconstruction in or just a few walls here and there well there's a few walls here and there so we'll we'll be basically one storage room will be
completely eliminated and then the the new doors will go into the where the cubicles are the existing break room so there'll be a wall dividing that and then across the hall we will be adding two walls in there so the a very
small storage room will get enlarged and that's the one that's backs up to the bathroom so we can have our our water and our plumbing issues and then behind that another another wall will be built to build the ation room which will enter you'll enter the lactation room off of
the uh new break room one more question continue and so will this information will there be like a sketch a blueprint for the public to see at some point along the way not like necessarily now but just there are many
people some people even say there's a basement yep then other people will say what's down there yep so so I think that would be beneficial attached to this agenda online is all the blueprints and all the bids are located right there so they're they're all out
there yeah commissioner gamble thank you madam chair thank you for your work on this and of course as part of the building of facilities board I've had an opportunity to sort of catch up to speed on what's going on it might be helpful it's it's a good point that
understanding you know the costs involved and the nature of the configuration it might be best to step back and take a a broader look at it from the standpoint of what our identified needs were and what we looked at and what we ended up concluding as to the best approach both
from the standpoint of meeting the need and addressing the financial aspects of it how we could manage it more fiscally responsible yeah well we started off uh there was an ask for me with a need for space um so we started off looking there
was some vacant office space in the West End and there was some vacant office space at the Hub and then we did look at GES GES the the West End and the Hub they were nice spaces but just wouldn't have worked for us with the privacy
issues and and the size of them um GES was a very nice space and would have worked for us but I think it's a wise a wiser use of our funds to put it into our basement where we'll use this infrastructure forever instead of
instead of renting a space thank you we did start this back in 2023 when James was helping us decide how we can use um outer spa space in other areas not outer space in other
maybe someday um how we can use other spaces and so I think this is the conclusion that we've come to and maybe ministrator Roman would have some ideas on that sure yeah I I think kind of just put a little more detail into it um when
we really started looking at this project and other options in full it was within the context of this year's budget being approved which put us in a position where there were four positions in phhs that didn't have dedicated office space and two positions in HR
that didn't have dedicated office space so it was within that context we started to look at how can we address those immediate space needs it's it's not to replace or supplant our larger master plan that address all of the the larger space needs where we have you know three
to four people in offices that were designed for one or two it was we have staff that positions that have been approved that actually don't have a place to work here at the county and how do we address that in the in the short term and so that's why you know in that context of sort of a a short-term
solution renting seemed like a good option to really explore and consider and so we started looking at uh the places Brooke mentioned there was commercial property available on the West End uh phhs director Allison McIntyre and and Brooke went out and
looked at that uh we met with then chair Sullivan and the same group of us met at the Hub and talked about reconfiguring their space and and what that would work as well as touring GES with members from our building committee uh commissioner
Mills was representing the board there in that that meeting and we took all of that information as well as the proposal that we have now for the remodel of the basement and we brought that to the budget and Facilities advisory committee as well
citizen representation there as well as our internal building committee with stakeholders for County facilities and very much like Brooks said because of the existing deferred maintenance that we need to get done within the
basement area uh the mold remediation that needs to still needs to take place within that same area as well as uh the ability that this project gives us to get a lactation room which is another requirement we need to have within this building and just the the benefit of
addressing all of those and in a long-term solution a reinvestment in existing County infrastructure for all of those reasons that both committees and and the staff's recommendation is that we instead of renting move forward with reinvesting in our existing
building to both address the issues that I mentioned as well as provide that that short-term space need I think we've been lucky that we've been able to have a strategic plan that started way back uh three years ago
about and um this is a result of strategic planning and um so I guess um at this point it seems that that is the best solution we've just about used up all the space available in the courthouse unless there's a niche
somewhere else that we might be able to use but um I think it's um it's a wise move for um for for the staff and they will be close to each other in case they need to go back and forth rather than go out of the courthouse over to another
building and and use that facility but for now um this has been a long process of decision making so commissioner and um administrator Watkins um could you explain because people have continued to ask well what
about the Stan bous building that just seems like a really good space we could buy it for a million something and then we could just we could just uh um renovate it why didn't we do
that and you can best explain this part well I yeah I I was in a in a different role when we looked at that building and made that decision so my my view into it was uh somewhat limited but I would say part of it was you know the similar to
this and that the county has a a pretty extensive list of deferred maintenance that we need to take on for ourselves and there was uh some conversation about you know the remodeling and and just wanting not wanting to add to that list of deferred maintenance that would need
to be addressed um you know one in particular when we were talking about moving phhs over to that location we talked about um whether or not we would then extend the County's Network to them and having that redundant fiber Network
that they that they benefit from having here in this building and that's obviously a consideration here as well and so you know a couple years ago you you might remember the the county had a large fiber cut and you know we had staff from you know Northshore Credit Union and
other places coming to our buildings to to do their endof the day processing because we were the only facilities that had connectivity and so you know retaining that that type of redundancy and and so many other systems that we have within this building um duress
systems and and access control and all the other systems that we've invested in this building um provide a lot of value that if you were going to push to a new building there'd be a a significant amount of cost associated with that there was other considerations there parking was another one that I remember
being brought up um so there was a a pretty long list of of considerations continue and might ey for the listening public it was the um it part was a huge thing and so
if you weren't listening and somebody asks you tell them to tune in or to call Rowan so that's why commissioner G thank you madam chair um I I appreciate uh and I've always
held and not that uh it doesn't exist throughout the county in positions of making decisions decision makers but informed decisions and um uh we understand that uh public in in their
lives and their responsibilities things that go on that we don't we don't always we're not always aware of everything that goes into making a decision and uh this is why we want to create a culture in which you ask your questions and and
hopefully we can give you a forthright response and walk you through the process and I've always believ in leadership positions that you involve people because they refine your processes they help us to see things we don't see but when we have an answer
that shows that we've done our due diligence we've looked at these things another example I I think that speaks speaks to to leadership president leadership in the county is that when uh we had the proposal coming relative to the transfer station that there was a
building that maybe we wanted to look at and again we were far along in the process but because we're trying to cultivate healthy relationships within the county and demonstrate that we do listen actively listen that uh staff went out and and took a look at that
building and when I heard that uh I said there's things that you look at the short term but there's things in the long term you need to constantly be aware is and that's cultivating relationships where the community believes that they can trust you that they are heard and that we're
forthcoming and addressing things and and so i' I've appreciated that and and I appreciate all of the the effort that was invested in this decision in using a facility and looking at all the aspects that are affected in making a decision
and when the public comes alongside and can see that demonstrated then we are making informed decisions that weigh all of these issues so I think that's a good thing it's a good thing for the president and it's a good thing long term in cultivating good
relationships so we've been asked to approve the courthouse basement remodel are there any other questions or comments thank thank you madam chair I just wanted to share my um perspective and and experience and um remembering
The Bouch building conversations before that and then following along with Brooke and and Rowan and commissioner Sullivan um just through all the different options and then also having a chance to tour the GES building and not previously um seeing the expansion really I guess the downstairs but not
the upstairs I was very very impressed in Blown Away about the size of it and just the potential there and uh and I was pretty excited especially with proximity to law enforcement and just some of the displacement that'll be happening um there while we do um our
project um but really the devil or not devil really the the factor for me is what the cost of this basement remodel is going to be and so weighing that next to rent um was was kind of the deciding factor and if
if the remodel would have been a whole lot more well it might be a different conversations but where where it landed I feel like it's a good investment just like Brooke and and Rowan said um with our resources and considering all the options it makes a lot of sense so um and and just to speak to some public
comments there with Howard we it's not necessarily that we're so far along it's just that we had to find that number out in order for us to move in any direction and so um it just it just so happened that that the costs that will be uh incurred for us and and that investment
is is a better use of funds so um that's it's not so much timing as just is just the the nuts and bolts I'd say right commissioner G thank you madam chair Brady can you speak to the funding well this funding will come out
of our uh bonds that we issued last year for the uh CIP okay that uh we named the courthouse the uh law enforcement center and the uh
highway department for those funds we'll have to change some of that the allocation amounts and we'll do that um when we get closer and know the exact amounts um to match what our CIP plan said for those bonds but it's all
allowable and it's in there so we have plenty of funds for that so Mr well I just wanted to thank Brooke for all his work on this um it's been quite a journey over the last couple of years looking at our needs and trying to
figure out how to best meet those needs in a fiscal responsible fashion and I think this is a great piece of work for our County over the Long Haul we're putting money into a facility that we're going to use for many many years to come it's a A very
wise investment and with that I'd like to make a motion to approve the courthouse basement remodel uh support think we have a motion a second any other comments or questions uh yes could you explain for the listening public
what the amount is well I'll tell them $295,500 17 CS what part of that would have been spent anyway an estimate for just the Deferred maintenance that we would have to do anyway would it
be do you have a guess on that Brooke I would guess I mean it's much much less I mean the Deferred I mean the Deferred maintenance down there would just be the mold remediation so it would have been a demo and a remodel of of one storage room probably looking at $15 to $20,000
oh well yeah it's something we would have done anyway yep we would have done that anyway I mean another nice thing is we're addressing storage down there and it's kind of motivated departments to get down and clean out and we're finding out that storage may not be as big of an issue as
we thought it was as things are getting cleaned out and we're we're going to bring some stuff down to the historical society that they will store for us and things are getting shredded that are past time that we need to save them so it's it's working out
well thanks any other comments or questions we have a motion in a second all in favor I same sign motion passes unanimously thank you for all your work thank you thank you everybody
thank moving on to item s 7 Mis approval of selling equipment through Minnesota bid yeah thank you madam chair uh so Mis has a fair amount of equipment uh
through just regular replacement schedule and and less operational use some large format printers as well as the security cameras the CCTV cameras that we uh replaced uh
the last go around when we replace them and they're all functional and with the combined value um it makes sense for us to uh try to recover some costs by selling them on the MN bid site uh
putting the time in to go through that process with this this amount of equipment and this value um makes sense for us to spend the time and in checking with auditor Powers uh a requirement is is that that uh the approval makes it
into the board minutes and so with that um the equipment's listed but I would I would stand for any questions and we're as stated seeking approval to sell this equipment that's been taken out of service through the MN bid site and try to recover some
cost commissioner gamble yeah thank you madam chair your chance we could sell it for 295,000 see how everybody's feeling when they bid I guess do you put pictures of all the cameras and are there pictures of all this yeah so there there'll be I think what we'll
look to do is individual pictures of individual models so you'll see there's uh there's 57 total Dome cameras we probably won't have 57 pictures for but you know one of each trying to accurately show and describe what they are and and uh as you would with
anything selling address any any use or wear tear condition that they're in sure well any questions or comments commissioner Sullivan I'd like to make a motion to approve the selling of the listed items from Mis through the
Min bid site support any further comments or questions we have a motion in a second all in favor opposed same sign motion passes unanimously thank you good luck with all
that thank you moving on to Human Resources Allison will give us some more updating good morning good morning I've got a few items listed they're all very similar um but the first one is separated out as I'm going to actually
hand this over to administrator Watkins to I um to address and bring forth given the conflict of interest yeah Madam chair uh members of the board thank you the first item uh under Human Resources
is the Human Resources Director job so the the conflict of interests there I've worked with uh Tessa from DDA our consultant to follow the the process that Allison typically does for all staff the reviewing and updating of job
descriptions um just taking her out of the loop for obvious conflict of interest purposes and uh following the recommendation from Tessa and DDA based on the job description their recommendation is to
move from a grade 220 to a grade 240 and then we would of course follow the normal process where when changing grades uh you move back in step to be closest with your current
hourly R um and so that's that's the first item and the one that that uh I have some insight into and so if there's any questions on that I'd I'd be happy to do my best to answer them questions or
comments Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to uh approve the job description updated job description and change in job grade for HR director from 220 to 240 support questions or
comments commissioner gamble yes thank you madam chair um you will find that uh on these upgrades and things it has nothing to do with the individuals it has everything to do with the premis or the basis under which these motions are being made these
recommendations and U in my experience in working with Keystone study and uh doing comp studies and looking and being on the Personnel committee looking at Job evaluations and things and how we score all of these things again it has nothing to do with the individuals and
the good work they do it has everything to do with the premise upon which we make these decisions and that is linked to the Keystone study and so uh you will have noted that in previous recommendations this regard I I mean no
due disrespect towards IND individuals but until um uh I I've tried to work to make a comparable study similar to the structure that was in our first comp study done uh relative to comparable
counties and uh so I will not be supporting these motions until I can look at things that are based upon a premise that is more in keeping and fitting with who we are as a County the upgrades are they done every two to
three years when you're all finished with this then when would be the next look at everything so most of the jobs that I'm still bringing forth are our initial 2-year cycle where we're reviewing all of the job descriptions um so hopefully that uh we were hoping to
wrap that up at the end of 2024 so this is just a little kind of rolling over into the next year then um on an ongoing maintenance basis every uh it'll be a three-year cycle every year we will review onethird of the positions just to
make sure that they still remain update and be be proactive and Progressive in that okay just wanted the time frame on all that because you've been working really hard for the last couple years for sure at least a year and a half year and a half almost yeah any other
comments or questions commissioner white so then when the department heads do their evaluation are those assessments excuse me of their employees um I'm assuming that um should an
employee not be meeting the standards or or they're doing they're identified as as uh needing to do X Y and Z this is in your job description but if their performance is not um what it should be
and there's been intervention to help an an intervention to help the employees better perform their job is what's the next step I mean if we're doing if say
we're if we're in the cycle of reviewing the job description and now this position should be uh receiving a higher grade a different level is this particular employee benefits from
everything I mean how what is does it really work that way here that if a an employee is not meeting the mark on job performance what happens well would just say that you
know the there's the steps within a grade and then there's the grade and so when we're looking at the grade that has to do with the job description and and the comparables that are have been referenced and where that fits within
the market and then the the steps I think is maybe in what you're you're asking about in reference and when there's typically you get an annual review and within that annual review form there's a a checkbox for a supervisor to fill out whether or not
the increase step is recommended or not um and so I think you know when we're talking about where a position gets graded that has to do with the level of responsibilities and the other the other Keystone factors that grade it um but then the
progression of steps is something that happens typically on an annual basis and there's there's room for that conversation to happen within uh the annual review process right our our handbook does uh include language that
we don't necessarily have a merit-based system um in terms of if like Rowan said we follow steps based on their yearly anniversary uh but the handbook language does allow those steps to be withheld if
the employee is not meeting the performance standards that would be expected and outside of that um there is um there are processes to identify um subpar performance
um and that would be kind of a completely different process in working with the employee to identify what is needed of them and the ways to support them to Meeting those goals and usually that would involve a performance Improvement plan
okay continue and then so um the uh Keystone is this is comparative is this comparative just within our County or comparative with Lake County I mean is a
job that that say our um eligibility specialist does in Cook County is it compared to what they do in Lake County are you referring to the actual position or the like the grade and the
associated the position so um these positions the grading is first using the grading structure of the Keystone m mat but then the kind of comparable rates um that we
use to do our compensation study what we're paying people at these grades and steps is utilizing the benchmarks that The Benchmark committee went through and identifying and using those as the comparables to help determine where
these rates should fall um in relation to the market so we can recruit and retain staff um in terms of the actual position the functions of the position um that's going to be very unique to the
counties and may not be comparable to the same position like an eligibility specialist say in St Louis County um just given the nature of County structures can be different workloads are different Staffing levels are different um having been an eligibility
specialist for example for this one um I know that this role this job description would be very different than say an eligibility specialist in Lake County St Louis County Carlton County um because they have again kind of veered their roles to whatever is required for them
um in those particular counties our eligibility specialist for example and we'll talk about these descriptions next um they do a lot they work in all program areas where in a lot of counties they have multiple eligibility Specialists that actually just focus on
one specific singular program so there's multiple factors that go in but in terms of the grading and the associated rates those are really driven by the comparables that were selected for the compensation study okay so for each County the comparables I
mean the the we we set the market value here I mean this so ours are not necessarily this the standard that every County goes by for the so so if you're um whatever your job
description is I can't it's dry in here whatever uh your job description is the rate of pay that you get is not necessarily the same as what you would get even if all of the pieces of your
job were the same it's not necessarily what you would get in a county of a similar size like down the shore someplace correct correct yep so when the um benchmarks were selected was this back
in 2022 um committee that worked several months to compile those benchmarks um then that information was um is now handled by DDA and out of all of the benchmarks and all of the different varying positions that all of the
counties have and the similar positions to what we're reviewing there's an average there's a Min and a Max and an average of taking all of that data um so for example like the HR director position eligibility specialist there's going to be an average of all those benchmarks of those positions again
there's going to be some differences and similarities with like say eligibility Specialists um and then when the board approved the compensation study the pay philosophy approved at that time was that the county was going to strive to
be within 95% of that average market rate driven by those Mark counties okay that was another opportunity for people to try to understand this thank you thank you for asking those questions so we have a motion in a
second any other comments or questions so I have a motion to respectfully recommend the approval of the job description and updates for the human resource director all in favor I I oppose same sign uh passes um 421
being um against okay moving on okay uh so then back to me to present the next two job descriptions that have gone through the review process with DDA uh as we were just talking about I have the
eligibility specialist job description um so the updates to the job description and a recommended change in job grade from a 150 to a a 160 there are four individuals that this will impact we have four eligibility special in public health human services and then the other
one is our Behavioral Health Services clinical manager this also includes an updated job description and a recommendation of a change in job grade currently from a 200 to a 210 questions or comments uh Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to uh approve the job
description updates for eligibility specialist as well as the Behavioral Health Services slcl clinical manager and I'd also like to um include the change and job grade for eligibility
specialist from 150 to 160 is and then for the Behavioral Health Services clinical manager from 200 to 210 support question questions or comments all in favor I
I opposed four to one I and one opposed thank you so much you're welcome um and then I have one more uh job description update I separated this out because this was not part of the DDA
review process um so in your packet is the job description for the highway Clerk in the consent agenda we brought forth the retirement notice of nette Silence um it is good practice um when there is transition in a position such
as a retirement to review the job description again to ensure that it is accurate um and reflects the current duties those that that is up to date the highway clerk position the job description did go through the DDA
review process um I believe that that position was in really the first round of reviews so back in the summer of 2023 um and in reviewing the job description in preparing to post it and recruit for for that next individual um
it was discovered that there was a missing required certification license um from the job description and looking back at my records it appears that that lure has always been reflected or always um has in the most most recent
iterations of job descriptions has been included in that um and that is because the role of the highway clerk um includes managing the fueling facility that we have so that license is required in order to complete that that job
function um but for some reason somehow it got excluded and left off when it was actually brought to the board for final approval so I want to bring that back um and reapproved job description adding back in that previous lure so it's the
mpca class B operators's license and someone can either have that coming into the position otherwise most often they would be obtaining that within the first six months questions or comments commissioner gamble thank you madam chair can you tell me with that uh
changing the job description to note that and make that a part of the requirement how that affects uh grade and and uh level of pay it won't affect it at all yeah yeah so when I went through the DDA process my records show
that this was included previously in that review process um and given that this license is as typically required most people probably won't have this going into the actual recruiting process and they would obtain this afterwards there's no impact um in terms of minimum
requirements that that would increase the grade or pay for this position right and Madam chair as a follow so it's it's a requirement and now that we've noted it that whoever comes in should they have that otherwise we will equip them in other words provide it so that they
will meet that qualification is that correct yes so this would be considered training for purposes of of fulfilling the required job functions and and requirements um so this would go into the training budget of the highway
yep commissioner salivan Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to approve the updated job description for the highway clerk I'd support that any further questions or comments all in favor I oppose same sign motion
passes unanimously thank you so much thank you okay we're moving along here wow so we'll go to item number nine um auditor Brady thank you madam chair so this is a
request to authorize sending a notice of withdrawal from msis payroll uh the background on this is the County's been looking at moving away from msus payroll for about seven years uh we actually attempted it once in uh
2018 2019 um that did not go successfully but the the plan remained and the reason is that uh we're not integrated with our HR System and our
payroll system msus has an HR System but it's not a welldeveloped one they would acknowledge that so we're trying to have a well integrated system that uh removes all the double entry there's a lot of Double Entry within the HR
System for all employees so this is double entering on 130 some employees in both systems that's probably the single biggest reason other reasons there better uh reporting systems in other payroll systems so we've come a long way
since that first try many years ago and there's been a team of uh mishr and the auditor's office payroll looking at this and we think ukg is probably our best solution uh we're not ready to bring that with you with a contract yet we're
still working with them um in fact we're working with them later today but we've looked at it uh with other counties uh a real similar County as Cass who uses it and still has uh e time because we need e time we're not ready to move away from
it primarily because Highway they cost accounting system works closely with e time and it's complicated and uh and Cass works the same way and uh so it works very well with them we've been to their facility so we're still working on
that but the reason I'm coming today is that uh msus because of their uh um budgeting function they need uh to know this uh by April 1st that's in the uh our uh joint
Powers agreement with them we have to notify so that they can make plans with staff Etc on where they're going to work etc so we notify them now that we'd want to end Services by the end of the year so unless we want to keep being charged next year so we need to do this now in
preparation and uh as a backup uh the last time we did this we gave them notice uh the trans transfer to a new system wasn't working well we stopped and we went back to empis and said uh
please uh ignore our request we want to stay with you and we've stayed with them for many years and they would do that again if something w r i let's say so but this is a necessary step at this point
so gam thank you madam chair uh Brady uh you identified that there's some redundancy the way it's set up right now using their you know Serv services and I guess what I would say is when you evaluate it why we're going to change part of that is because we're seeing
some redundancy there might be other efficiency issues uh in our change over how does it affect then our our ongoing costs when we compare on all these if we gain efficiency and it's more stream line and how does it affect costs going
to a new provider yeah what what we've seen in the in the costs with uh Cass County and some other counties is that our base charge would be less than we're paying now and
the it's possible that there are other things that you might want to Implement and of course they're going to charge you know uh for those things I can't anticipate what those would be but the base charge looks to be less than we're
paying now and the reality is that msus is down to just a few counties now if we go what what we talked about on strategic planning was if one more County went then they will plan to end
payroll so we're going to be in this people have been moving away from msus for years I mean it used to be maybe 10 12 counties at one point and they've all slowly been moving off to other systems
because they're integrated better better reporting less manual um if you talk to Nick he keeps he has to keep track of things he has little spreadsheets and things that he has to keep track of when he's entering things into payroll more of this will be automated in the system
too so it'll be a shorter process also and we're going to face this reality if we don't do it we're going to face it in a year or two or three when it gets down to the last one anyway so seems like a good time Madam chair as the follow up
the and thank you Brady so it it it appears that on the basis of gain deficiency and and potential savings based upon other counties experience and depending upon an unknown that we don't know whether we use additional features
that they could provide for us but uh at this point looking at the comparables it would be more cost effective and if in fact on the horizon it looks like they aren't going to exist that we be putting in our POS oursel in a position where we
sort of control the transition as opposed to being forced to do it so yeah some of that what M sis would you please explain what that acronym means Minnesota County's Information Systems it's a
joint Powers it's it's really um owned by several counties so it's a staff that works over in Grand Rapids Minnesota in a building like this um and they do this for their main function is tax they were
created to do to manage the tax system in Minnesota um everybody has a company like this because our tax system is so complicated and and that is what they really excel at but they expanded over the years into things that counties
asked them to do like they were doing manual payroll or they had some system that didn't work and so msus said okay they dug in and created a payroll system but they don't have enough enough staff enough um counties
whatever to to to make the the kind of functional changes the big companies that have lots of experience and lots of staff can make they just can't do it but they're willing to continue with it as long as there are enough counties that want it so um so I would you don't feel
like we're hurting the our joint Powers they'll they'll just reallocate staff towards their main functions and uh I think that's the ruin yeah just add for the context of of the group makeup of the joint Powers agreement there's 12 counties and
12 of 12 use them for uh property tax as Brady mentioned they're they're primary the cam uh they're down to five including us for yeah for payroll and so as that dwindles it's a service that they would look at ceasing to provide
yeah they'd be down to four without us and we decided during strategic planning if it went to three it just isn't functional for them to to provide the resource for that thank you madam chair the other thing to be mindful in that is that that
if they have a primary fun function which they feel that they're very good at and they have a reputation for being good at that if that other side thing that they do they aren't going to necessarily Focus their energies on that they're doing it more as a courtesy it
seems as as the participants dwindle yeah they yeah they they've tried and provide other types of services too um but but that they are really good at tax and uh so we want to keep them for that
and we want them to focus on that too so that make it who knows that may get tougher them for them in the future but they are really good at that so yeah thank you any other comments or questions I'll make a motion to
authorize the county auditor to send a notice of withdrawal to mcis payroll before April 1st of 2025 I support the motion I have a Motion in a second all in favor I oppos same sign motion passes
unanimously item 10 administrator updates all right thank you madam chair um we'll start with the law enforcement center uh expansion yesterday uh boring was done for uh core
sampling to help inform uh foundations to to move forward uh we meet this Thursday to do a phasing implementation uh and that's where we'll we'll just talk about what areas of the building
will be under construction for how many different periods of time and and what is our operational plan behind that to ensure that Services continue obviously so uh dispatch is a a key factor there as well as um transporting for for
deputies and and others as we move through this uh larger project just making a a good phasing plan and making sure that um staff from the Sheriff's Office are are informing that and and that we have a a good functional plan to move forward um the next couple
Milestone dates that we have on our plan would be March 25th and that's when our construction manager uh Johnson Wilson will come back with updated pricing based on the presentation that we had with them with bkv
and and the inclusion of the recommended deferred maintenance that are associated with the law enforcement center and then there's there's several meetings in between here but the next one uh tentatively would be May 27th uh where
they would come back and look for board approval to move to bidding and then from from there the next timeline would be June 24th uh again tentatively uh would be looking at a board meeting to approve
bids and begin construction following that so that's the update I have on the law enforcement center project I'd pause there if there's questions on that one is that following our original
timeline pretty close it is yeah yep we're still we're still on track I I think you know originally when we first started looking at this we were we're hoping to start construction a little bit sooner but um as we got kind of into more of the the nuts and bolts meetings
of the design schematic that that shifted a little but still looking to start in June and with a a pre-cast building looking to have it uh enclosed before winter and allowing construction to
continue to move forward uh the next item if there's no other questions on that I would talk about would be the the transfer station um we continue to make progress on the ground lease and the facility use lease we've had good good conversations with Northshore waste and
attorney Peterson uh and um being well informed with our our bond attorney to make sure that the language is correct so that we can secure tax exempt bonds and that's um the the most time that I personally have have spent in
conversation with it but but I know permitting is going on in the on the background as well so we're doing a lot of local County permitting and in fact this week I believe will'll be coming before uh the board of adjustment and Planning Commission to move forward with
the necessary permits there and then after that's complete uh we move forward to the state permitting and um still still moving along on a good timeline there as well yeah please yeah Madam chair Rowan
and maybe do Dustin could speak to this as well as that the the permitting thing which we've talked about is you know at the local level and and the commitment you know to fulfill that requirement but the state level just any sense of how things are going or if they're all
looking forward to us coming and kind of walk things through sure so um I've been in communication with the pollution control agency um that's really the the longest permit um you know originally when we
had the conversations they say that the permit can take as long as a year um I think some of that information was coming from if you're trying to start a landfill um when I was talking to the local permitting guy down in in St Paul he thought that a transfer station
permit would take about 6 months to get um he suggested that I send him a copy of the permit application at the same time that I send it through cuz sometime it could take as much as a month to get to him and he he didn't have any problem with us starting with construction while
it's going through the permitting process as well um so he said that's a pretty common thing um just knowing that um a lot of the things that might need to change would all be above ground where we'll be working on the stuff
underground while the permitting is going through so so what your com level it's good yeah yeah I feel I feel pretty good about it um the design team has reviewed all the the regulations by the pollution control agency we were
really fortunate that the the gentleman that we've been working with is super helpful and um you know you don't always get that on a state level but we call him and he's excited about the project and knows what we're talking about and you know calls you by your first name you
know he he's he's seems like a a pretty good pretty good guy those are all good indicators so yeah right I was it was a breath of relief for me when I when I found out it was him so thank you yeah the other one I typically update on
would be the uh the basement remodel but we we covered that so I'll move to administrator hiring uh tomorrow Wednesday March 12th at 8:30 a.m. the board and DDA will be begin interviews and those will be live streamed and
we've shared a press release but i' I'd mention it here as well that there is a public feedback form on our website that will a link to it that will go live uh starting at 8:30 tomorrow we don't want anyone to fill it out until the
interviews have started um so if you've tried it and it doesn't work that's why I took a peek did you okay yep and so it it it'll it'll be live 8 :30 um when the interviews actually start and then following that the next day uh 8:30 the
next morning the board will reconvene and and discuss further um those are the updates that I have any commissioner M would you tell the audience how many people we're
interviewing we have two finalists any other questions or comments I'm going to backtrack just a minute because we approved the consent agenda but I fail to mention one important one at the end and I just want to publicly um that we approve the
appointment of Ben hellberg representative and Lindsay milky who's the alternate for the Northeast Minnesota 911 Public Safety answering point I wanted to make sure that I got that publicly out there
okay so yes commissioner and we uh um pulled out nette silence and thanked her but there was another uh resignation by Scott Scott I did mention that oh did we thank him thank you Scott we did another
thank you is always appreciated I'm sure okay so I know we have a lot to talk about with our um visit to the capital and all our reports so I think right now let's just take a break and be ready for the
um um next um auditor event which is the um public uh hearing at 10:00 because we have some of these to look at and we'll clear our mind for um the public hearing so we have these we'll resume at right at 10
o00 think okay this is another set I'll back up e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e e e we are now back at our board meeting and
it is 10:00 a.m. and um we're now going to uh go into our uh public Hearing in regards to establishing rates and charges for solid waste management and services provided by County so I will open the public meeting and turn it over
to Brady thank you madam chair so this is you're looking at an ordinance to establish rates and charges for Solid Waste Management Services um following today's meeting this public
hearing portion the board could approve an ordinance to establish those charges for solid waste uh the rates and charges would go into effect in tax year 2026 and would be used for financing the main transfer station facility to be
constructed in Grand morray and the auxiliary facilities to be built and improved in holand and tofy so some background purposed Counties have responsibility for solid
waste as Tim Nelson can tell us so in Minnesota statute 4001 it stat states that there it's in the public interest that counties conduct Solid Waste Management Programs to protect the states water air and land
resources so as to promote Public Safety Health and Welfare and that's what there's a department we have that does that um it goes further in 400.4 saying the giving the county the
authority to construct and improve Solid Waste facilities and to enter into contracts for maintenance and operation of properties and facilities and that's what we've talked about over the last many months for the county to build a
facility and through contracts leases to have the private entity uh maintain and operate that facility so the purpose of the fees proposed fees is to fund the creation of the fa
facilities uh through bonds and these would make the bond payments through the fees and the reason that the fees are structured as we've talked about uh fees on
Parcels um is to spread it you know as widely kind of a compromise between spreading it as widely and evenly as possible but keeping it as simple and reduce the complexity of the management
of the fees so that's kind of a compromise make it wide keep the fees as low as possible we've got two rates tier one and tier two as you see um residential type properties
paying the lower $50 tier fee and then the uh commercial type properties paying the higher fee of $100 um but across all the taxable Parcels um and lands on Parcels rather
than trying to identify individual units within Parcels so it's a compromise but um that's what we have before us today and that's what we've talked about at previous meetings so I would ask if there's any
comments from the General Public good morning Mike name Mike harson 1655 Eastway 61 I appreciate this ordinance for the most part and its Simplicity yes but it may have gone a little too far in Simplicity
it seems wrong that an apartment building of five units would pay the same as an apartment building a 50 likewise for Resorts so maybe not in this version but maybe next year you might consider something that's going to be a little
bit more flexible for for the charges $50 a year doesn't seem outrageous even though I know I only pay about $50 a year for garbage service right now because I deliver my bags directly but
nevertheless I think the ordinance is reasonable just think that it may be too simple so thank you thank you thank you yeah and that distinction probably
should be made again that this is for the facility and people pay for disposal of their waste now that won't change and whatever fee large commercial operations are paying they'll continue to pay
whatever the market requires them to pay and the same for individuals and uh this is outside of all of that is considered a general County responsibility um so good comment we've
looked at a very simple structure you can change the structure you have to go through public process whenever you do that notices public hearings but you can change it isn't necessarily forever what
you do approve any other comments from the public hearing no other public comments um I will close the public hearing and uh we can discuss it among ourselves
about the fee and how we eventually came to this and we've all been a part of that process so any comments or questions on this commissioner gamble thank you madam chair um yeah I think it it's it's important
and we've stated it but you can't state it enough and to Commissioners white Point making the public aware of of actions we take and things that we're considering that uh this this basically is a partnership between noar waste and
the county with the county owning the building and norshore waste facilitating uh the collection of what would be Refuge as well as uh potentially uh recyclables which now the county is responsible for and taxpayers
are paying a significant portion of that in the levy uh so this would be a good thing to merge the two and eliminate that cost that taxpayers are paying right now and in the in the state statute that defines the County's
ability to fund this through an assessment which is basically what we're doing and I think the confusion is is that when we talk about this and using the statute the statute L language says service charges and um it can be confusing because when you go in now
you're charge a service charge for depositing your Refuge this is this is what we're talking about has nothing to do with the cost of of dropping off waste it has to do with funding the facility which the county will own and
so in in essence it's it's an assessment the way that we can do that is we can do that by adding it through Levy or we can do it by having an assessment that is added to uh your annual tax and um the
board then was tasked with trying to determine how we are going to make that fair and Equitable in its distribution so initially when we had to T Bob in the assessor's office to look at this we came up with a parcel
um and we had tier one and tier two tier one was vacant land residential seasonal recreational and personal property which amounted to 8,145 Parcels or at least taxable entities and then tier two included
apartments Resorts commercial beer land commercial property and utility those amounted to 4177 so when we looked at the initial assess ment we looked at $50 for the
residential which was 8,45 which amounted to $47,000 for the 107 250 a year the $100 for the 47 tier 2 amounted to
41,700 that combined then is an annual assessment of $448,500 which if you took that over a period of 13 years with the estimated cost of the facility the unfunded portion that has not come through grants and other means
of securing funds to build the facility that's about 5.8 million is what we've estimated it would take 13 years to retire that cost for the bonding and so part of the question uh or what we're
looking at as Commissioners is what do we want that annual assessment to be for the those two different tier groups and how long do we want the term of this to be recognizing that if it's the board's responsibility to maintain that facility
to contribute to Capital Improvements and maintenance which needs to be defined clearly in the contract so that Northshore waste knows what maintenance they will conduct and what maintenance we will conduct as owners of the building so that should be done and then
um uh uh what we will do after that 13-year period as to keeping money that we can have for that ongoing Capital Improvement and maintenance but would not necessarily certainly have to be at the rate established to fund the project
to begin with so um I had attempted to call Brady yesterday and um uh had some understandable commitments so I I just briefly talked to him to this morning to
him this morning and I I handed out a document that u i felt in looking at what we had set that 50 and 100 at and then we had a public comment period previous and I think the understanding this is what we're paying to drop off our garbage and certainly commercial
would have more garbage than I would but again this is an assessment it has nothing to do with a charges relative to the disposal of waste um and so uh what Commissioners had before them is is a handout that
just says if we did the $50 as proposed and as in the the proposed document that we have before us today in the 100 for the tier two or if we were to look at a different distribution that more fairly represents what we're talking about as
use of of the facility that U if we were to change those uh there's different calculations here that that shows what that distributive uh share would be amongst the tier one and tier two so I just I
present it for the board's uh consideration the other thing in looking at the document that was before us U is that I think the confusion that there is and I can understand it in looking at the Statue is that uh this really is is
not a fee for garbage this is a an assessment to build a facil that the county will own and and continue to up update and maintain so in my estimation what we're doing is we're not
establishing rates and charges which gives the illusion of what it cost to to dump Refuge we are um establishing an annual assessment fee in connection with financing the construction of future and future improvements and maintenance
costs for three solid waste Transfer facilities to be owned by the county and to be located in gram hoveland and tofy within Cook County Minnesota if that language were consistently in there it would represent intent and uh in
discussion with breedy um because this uh document that's in the packet and available to the public online uh has the language rates and charges I think that's where part of the confusion is so if in legal compliance and when I look at the state's statute I
think we would be consistent with requirement if the language are to represent in fact what we are doing is financing the construction and so that's a discussion to be had comments or questions now thank you madam chair um uh Jean and
Brady if we change the language um per commissioner Gamble's um recommendation would that require any um second hearing or um yeah further hearing or how that affect I'll defer to
Gan but the if we change the language anything we'll have to republish and have another hearing at this time yeah I would also respond that the language in the statute 400.0 subdiv
three the County May establish by ordinance revise when deemed advisable and collect just and reasonable rates and charges for solid based management excuse me Services provided by the county or by others so that's the language pull straight from the
statute yeah there may be other ways that we can clarify the use of it uh without changing it in this ordinance but I'd want to i' certainly want to bring it back to our bond attorney
before making that change here and we couldn't do it here we'd have to propose it here and then have a public hearing again right commission yeah and and just considering um we have had a hearing schedule for this and it's
been in conver conversation and um considering the public comments we had today I think it's um it makes sense to revisit this I just don't I I just don't want to delay this project um at this point and so uh
I think that to commissioner Gamble's point this this clarification would be very valuable um but it's it's kind of on us to communicate what's going on if there is confusion at this point and then we can set it in a a more clear ordinance um in a month if we wanted to
um it's just that right now to keep things um going that we need to we need to act okay commission way but did not Dustin just say that they can proceed
without the uh permits so would that give us time would that fall in with the right time frame like if we were to redo this ordinance and get it right the first time
and I don't know if he has the answer to that maybe it's jeene the attorney I don't know that I do have the answers for that I mean we have a a lot of balls rolling right now I mean this afternoon we have a a meeting
to to finalize the plan so that we can put bids out in the next 10 days or so um so that construction can start in April um dollar-wise I don't know you know I don't know how changing this
affects the availability of money as the project starts moving forward is it just two more weeks and you change some wording um permit wise I don't I don't know that this would affect it at all as long as the intention is to move forward
um on the permit um we have to provide the conditional use permit um we have to have the signature of the board the signature of of Tim Nelson um we have a land use permit and and things like that I'm not exactly
sure what what you're talking about now affects that M gble thank you madam chair I I think the questions to be answered relative to what we're considering is is how it affects you I do not believe it affects you other than the fact that we
need to get final costs so our projected number that we're basing this assessment on needs to be realistic number one and if we change let's just say if we change the language to be consistent with what we draft in the lease which I think is
advisable then we need to ask the those that drafted this document uh and as I look at the statute yes the languag is in the statute States what it states but B based upon what our Our intention is and when it talks about financing
facility there there is a reference to assessment so I think that's a question that just needs to be asked so that we make sure that the document is consistent with a provision of Statute and as to having to repost should we make a determination to revisit the
proposed language should we make a decision to revisit the proposed assessment that would necessitate the public hearing which Brady can say posting requires this much time and we could have that and if it doesn't delay
you but it's more in keeping with what we've heard from the public and what Our intention is then then I would my recommendation is that we would choose to try to visit that I would agree we don't want to hold things up to be
nitpicky but on in my experience when it's drafting language that we're accountable to I think it's best to have things consistent and in order with what Our intention is commissioner Sullivan yes um attorney Peterson I
understand that this language is parallel to what we have in State Statute when I read it it makes sense to me given this is a a facility for Solid Waste Management Services um can you address what the difference would be in
the proposed elimination of some of that language versus using the statute not accurately without a new proposed language um I can say that this language in the ordinance is pulled from
appears I didn't draft it appears to be pulled from and is definitely authorized under the statute as written so without a proposal on specific language I have a hard time saying whether that would be advisable appropriate or otherwise okay
it seems to me that um Madame chair and board that um using this language that already exists in Minnesota statute would be wise and that our task is to communicate clearly to the public what this means um that's the view that I look at
it but any other comments on this your gamble thank you madam chair Brady correct me the drafting of the document that's in our packet was drafted by uh by fryberger attorney yeah Bob
tofy and right and so my recommendation would be to to get their opinion relative to that the other thing is is that in documents that we have drafted in relationship with entities within the county in my previous service on the
board that three or four times I would go through documentation to make the language was consistent with intent so that if none of us existed and somebody picked it up it was clarity as to what intent was and so I I think in weighing all the difference things we need an
opinion from the people that drafted the documentation to say whether or not this language is consistent because it is consisted with intent and then if in fact we choose to take a look at a more equitable distrib distribution of the
assessment that would necessitate a public hearing as well so I in in response to looking at an equitable configuration as to what the assessment is I think there's options that would be more Equitable when you look at and some
of the you know correspondence I've got from individuals that have commented to me about it as to how we might distribute that that money so when you have such a bulk of like 8,000 compared to 400 obviously every dollar there's a
significant change because you're drawing from a bigger pool but I don't think that should drive the decision I think the decision should be based upon Ane equitable distribution based upon overall use right well and it's very clear
um C 2.01 C we're we're stating it's for the solid waste facilities annual assessment it's for the solid waste facilities annual assessment
fee it's there's the Management Services all of that is deleted so this clearly says that we're talking about the facility not the trash or dealing with the trash so where does it say that oh
this is this is the document that commissioner gamble handed out right so in what he gave us yeah it's very clear it's very clear MH and indeed still it's it's incumbent on on us or to uh educate or to get the
information very clearly stated that this is for the building this is not for getting your trash picked up on a weekly basis commission so practically what
CH how would this affect um our timeline Brady as far as uh is there is there any disadvantage I mean it's it's more rigoll but to commissioner Gamble's point it is it is valuable to have this intent clearly stated yeah well I gan I
think we would need to agree on this but uh I'd want to bring the language back we'd have to have a meeting with Ellers and fryberger M come to and I don't know if they would what their advice would be
but then would you set a public hearing now to reconsider it to go in the paper today for another date certain um which would be you know it could be the March
25th um I believe or April 8th or we do have time on April 8th but they're actually on their schedule they're putting together the preliminary official statement this
is part of it m so it may put them back on some of these official MH documents I'd want to speak with them I'd love to have them here to say yeah you know they may have other things on
their schedule they may not be able to drop everything for what we need also I I expect they would but I wouldn't be certain of that so I guess I'm just wonder without speaking to them yeah yeah I'm just wondering what consequence I mean it might push things back and and
I guess what I'm wondering is what does that mean for us well on the schedule that we're on right now uh we'd be scheduling sale of bonds and closing by May
13th and then we'd actually have the proceeds in our hands by June 4th um as we're doing right currently but the other the other thing is we're also
trying um if we use another issue jail bond versus CIP um if we agree on Jail bonding then uh that will be this schedule but if we change for some reason and issue
the LEC bonds under we're trying to coincide the two bondings so that's another complication in all this then that would push the dates off another month if we didn't use Jail bonding we use CIP because of publication es
Etc um and I'm and why why I'm bringing that up is if if you had if this would cause because of discussion decisions coming back uh if it did the same as the using
a CIP and having P another public notice Etc that pushes um the bonds out approval to June 10th and the money in our accounts on July 2
so it moves it out a month um what does that mean does how does that affect contractors or bids or the whole process I'm just trying to get down to the r meets the road yeah I I don't know specifically how that affects
them but it sounds like um Dustin doesn't have any issue with moving ahead um we do have uh grant money for that project that we need to spend first number one um infrastructure with the
one Grant the 425 but still my point is I'd like to have one of them at this meeting today to make that decision can't call um can't call we could
try and Madam chair just a state yeah Attorney Peter um thank you I just would respond that the the board can make a business decision today on which way they want to go but I would caution against doing an endr run around language that's been set
out specifically in the statute because when you have terms of art that are defined in the statute subdivision 3 addresses service charges however subdivision 2 is what authorizes those service charges so you have a statute that says if a service area is establish
ablished the County Board May impose service charges for Solid Waste Management Services in the area the next subdivision lays out those service charges so if you start to move language around for word preferences it could have effects on the
legality of of what the board is doing commissioner gambl thank you madam chair and and I and I certainly understand that but the the the the company that drafts the the language I mean their opinion you know will say
that and usually that's based upon Court precedent when things are challenged whether the language is K consistent or not so the decision as simple as I could make it before the board is that do we go with something that continues to
confuse with the onus on us to clarify and then in the lease agreement try to be more specific where we're not necessarily having to use the exact language that's coming from State Statute so it is it is not trying to
circumvent the statute it's trying to be in keeping with with the intent of the rule of the law but having the drafter determine whether or not and and Court president would say that's certainly acceptable or not acceptable the other
issue relative to decision today is whether we want the document as drafted to b as stated which is the 5100 or that we want to look at a more equitable distribution based upon the feedback we've gotten from public and the other
thing to note is that if the funds that we have that need to be spent do not preclude beginning our work and if um if we make a decision to change the the
assessment uh that would necessitate a a um another public hearing as it is and I I I just put it out there it should be understood that we did not see this this is the first we've had an opportunity to look at it and so this is the nature of
the discussion that should come in result of just having our first exposure to something that we're making decisions on and so that's just my my my input and and I certainly will go with the will of board so are we looking at then the
possibility of tbling this until attorney Peterson and Brady and the law compy Brady is comfortable seeing if you can catch him but you know what your experience is in that regard so I would
say do what you would recommend yeah the the person in charge of drafting it I believe is his date of return from a vacation is March 13th okay
commission I I think um these these details are important um but I am very comfortable leaning on State Statute to to proceed with our ordinance and it's it's on us to communicate what our intentions are and to have that language in the lease I
think is is very helpful and important but um it's it's not often that I have um community members reading the ordinance um and and then being confused if if they are if they are such
that they'll read an ordinance they have probably been following along with meetings and discussion in process and so if they're that involved then they have that perspective if they're not um it's more of just like what's going on and then I can explain it um at least
that's how it's been you know this last this last process so um I also would like to revisit how we distribute this but not today and not right now um I think we can give it a year and then um
see how things are um because I think there is value in seeing the equity aspect of it right now this is um trying to balance the the effectiveness and the Simplicity and leaning on the expertise
of our assessor and an auditor and um and just all of our professionals this is this is what we have right now and if if we decide that we want to change this this balance um in into a different way which I'm very open to um I think we
should do it um next go around um better to have some some good progress then what's that saying good progress than no Perfection or you know getting something perfect and not getting it done or having having something good but but not perfect and
getting it done um I think that's it's important to move forward commission white we don't need to strive for mediocrity well said so commissioner Gamblin so thank you
madam chair the question is is that if we if we say let's not get it right right now and and then we say we can always change it the question is can we change it because if we're making a resolution uh to prove something we're
saying this is the framework in which we move forward which if we're going to change it what are the Hoops we have to change it to do that so we're trying to weigh the issues which we've identified with Dustin as how would this delay you
how does it delay the financing which we said we have money that we need to spend or we lose it and if the question is can this language which is more in keeping with intent can that be and we haven't answered that question from the
individual that drafted the document and we have a document that if we approve it is going to lock us into the 5100 and if that's what we're comfortable and we' have you know we've had people say could you make this more Equitable even though we realize it is funding the facility I
I think those are issues that we just need to need to address so we've got a lot of unknowns and we're going to make an assumption to move forward and then we'll address it which if we choose to address it in the future and be more precise at that point
in time what's involved in that changing something that we we made a commitment to and we haven't addressed what happens after 13 years we've got a YMCA right now with monies that that end you know on that as to how long do we continue to
fund something I think in the state statute with the provision with the 1% monies that are coming from tax doll that it would go so long but this we as a board should say what our intent is and granted if boards change that intent
can change too in the language but if we see this moving out the public have a right to be informed as to expectation will this continue beyond 13 years or is it there to fund the facility and then a revisit in order to have the pool of
money that we've learned through live experience that we need to move forward that's just seems reasonable um I can answer the question what I believe was the part of the question anyway that the County May establish by ordinance then revise when deemed advisable and collect in um just
and reasonable rates and charges for Solid Waste Management Services I don't really see where we're tied in for 13 years no we aren't it's open eded right and I'm saying to be reviewed as we always do we have
something we say this is what we're going to go with and then we review it at another year how is it working or somebody will come and say you know I've heard things aren't working out so well let's review what we've already established last year let's review it this year so I think we should be open
to reviewing obviously this and other things but I don't see where we're tied into anything specific commissioner gamble yeah thank you madam chair I I would just say given my experience and observation the government when they find a pool of money it's very hard to
let go of that pool of money and so uh I think that anything that identifies even in the language of the thing that this would be Revisited and you can if it doesn't happen in the 13 years because something is a variable in the bids then
the intent is stated that it it is to cover our costs once those costs have been you know those bonds have been paid off we will revisit this as a board to determine moving forward what portion we're going to need in order to continue
with capital Improvement and maintenance I think intent stated is being responsible to to our our uh our constituents otherwise you just leave it open say we can change it anytime that's too Loosey Goosey for me and I haven't
seen government have a reluctancy to say Well they're used to paying it well that just keep it going it just it's just the way it is I I think I think this this this Fund in particular that's one of the reasons we're doing it is restricted to its uses so we can't just keep doing
it because we feel like it we need to have this need you know defined and that's what we're doing to I understand but but while it's restricted in in its uses unlike what was with the YMCA it it it's still or the Broadband
right or the Broadband or the library yeah yeah and I could I could speak to the Broadband issue too you know with expectation and how things are sold and what we ended up with all I'm just saying is the more Integrity you can
build into what we do I think it cultivates and builds trust like we talked earlier and efforts that we make to do something even though we're in the midst of things and um and so I I that that's just my position but again
I I respect the will of the board so commiss Sal um I know we've talked about this um language paralleling or being statutory in nature I think this is a compromise it's
reasonable we obviously are going to go and look back at it one thing we haven't discussed is Bond rates and looking at the economy right now um Bond rates are a little volatile and from my opinion it
would be better to jump on this sooner rather than later that that may be a much better deal for our taxpayers in our County in the long run um so with that I would like to make a motion to approve the ordinance as written with
the rates and charges for Solid Waste Management Services provided by Cook County um support okay we have a motion and a second any further comments questions discussion yeah I very much uh
appreciate the the suggestions in language and and I'm very open to to revisiting in fact I think we need to um I just don't want to um do it uh you know on the day that we're making this decision um after um having State statue
standing and and having as I said our staff look at things as far as that balance is concerned as as well as um our attorney attorneys uh or specialist attorneys and um and such so um my the
communications I've had with with uh the public have have been uh pretty clear and without without question and um if there are further questions I'm happy happy to answer those in in discussions out there too but um pretty excited to
to get this going and um it's going to be a great a great project and um we can make uh language better and understanding better as as we go right um based on the fact that our
decision here right now will not impact the process going forward I want to confirm that I I don't know the answer to that um I mean if you can if we have monies that have to be spent we the project and and you have
been given a verbal you can go ahead and start was that this one yeah without the without the permit then the hand of the government will not come down and or something and really yeah pull the rug out you know I I honestly can't
sorry to interrupt I just I honestly can't understand you know the money question is more a question for Brady um I don't see a I didn't see a question on the permit asking about the funding um
so it's really an unknown for me right now yeah so did you have comments um going just that the I think the unknown for us too is is what would happen to our timing it's it's a
question that I think uh Ellers and fryberger would would be able to answer for us but but haven't at this point so in my mind there's a little bit of an unknown similar to what what Dustin's saying about what is what's the risk associated
with pushing it down the time the timeline um so there's an unknown there from my perspective as well if I can say one more thing my only concern is if it does get delayed um you
know we start running into timing issues for construction you know say we couldn't start until July for some reason after this decision today you know now we're trying to build this facility in the winter right which there's costs associated with that in
most cases um and then our project is also timing with the project for the law enforcement center so the same people the same contractors that are building the transfer station are also building the law enforcement center So the plan
that Brooke and the folks from Johnson Wilson have worked out is you know they're going to have one one construction manager one one team they're going to do concrete at our place they're going to go to the law enforcement center they're going to put the walls up at our place they're going to go put the walls up at the law
enforcement center so my my fear is if we do run into a situation in this process that slow things down not only are we affecting the transfer station facility we're also affecting the law enforcement um so to answer your
question I guess that that would be my my one fa and just similar to that along with the bonding we've we've talked about combin and Brady made reference to this but about combining the bonds and whether or not they're they're jail bonds or CIP bonds and if we can Bond
both of those projects at the same time there's there's benefits to be had there and I and kind of to better Define the uncertainty that I have about the impact of delaying is just not knowing how delay would impact that that component
commissioner gam thank you madam chair uh there there are a lot of wha ifs and they're valid wha ifs uh it's an unfortunate situation that that those that can answer those questions of what ifs and the assumptions we're making are
not here to do that and I think when it's significant uh in a project like this it would probably be better to have people like yourself to be able to answer our questions so that we aren't making assumptions um and because all of all of
the concerns are valid concerns but they could be simply answered if we had people that could answer those and we made a decision relative to our basement remodel and applauded the process because it's like we didn't leave any
stone unturned and that's what we want is that due diligence to be evident in our decision making as opposed to having to make decisions on what ifs so I I will support the motion because I'm not intending to uh slow the process
down but I am encouraging that if we are given something in a document like this that defines our fiscal responsibility on behalf of our constituents we need to be able to answer those questions and do what we think is best that's why we're
elected to do that and so I'm just trying to encourage that we build Integrity into all of our processes as we spoke to relative to the building expansion in the basement the remodel and um so I I feel we're moving forward
with a lot of what ifs that are valid it's just too bad we can't answer those questions so that we have all the pieces in making an in formed decision thank you would it be possible to postpone this or table this and have a special
meeting on this and have Ellers and fryberger on the line to answer the question questions uh we'd have to schedule a public hearing again which requires what's well first we have to decide what's going to be in
the ordinance so then you'd start discussions once you decided what's going to be in the ordinance now then you would say at at the following meeting after the decision was made what is the language what are the rates what
are the classifications once all that was done then you would have a meeting to say now we're going to set a public hearing to consider these on whatever the date that is to given how long discussions might take um getting people
together I mean I don't know what to guess it could delay it a month two months hard to know so we right now we have a motion in the second yeah are we ready to vote
okay um a motion a second to approve the ordinance establishing rates and charges for Solid Waste Management Services provided by Cook County all in favor I I oppos same sign motion passes
unanimously thank you so much thank you everybody Madam chair I just um make sure I understand the intent of the board that that we should reach out to fryberger and and and Ellers and talk
about understanding what it would imply what the implications of changing the language would be and bring that back to the board for future conversation about yes potentially amending and how yeah how and when and or or language within
the ordinance commissioner gamble yeah thank you madam chair the other thing is if you look at the motion that just passed the motion that just past is deceiving because we just made a motion to support Cook County supplying Solid
Waste Management that's not what we're doing in other words if you read back what the motion is the motion should at least we should be consistent we should clarify that what we're doing is we're supporting this you know proposed
documentation with the rate being what it is and the intent of building a fac facility but we're not providing Solid Waste Management that's not what we're doing rates and charges rates and charges if
it's for the county to provide Solid Waste Management if you read what the prop if you read it back I'm I'm just noting that that we're we're confusing it by if if somebody just wants to look at the minutes and read what it says we're saying cook count is going to survice out with Waste Management we're
not it's I think it's I think the language is confusing because you can read words like Management in different ways I think in the statute because of the language that comes after the word management that it
includes uh potentially the management you're talking about that norshore waste is going to do but largely it also includes just the management the overall management which means providing that someone else does it is considered
management also and I think that's our purpose here is the overall making sure it gets done and we're going to provide a facility to do that but the word can be read different ways yeah it' be good
to clarify yeah takes a lot of clarifying after the fact we ready to move on moving on then we're going to go to commissioner reports and meeting updates we've all been
down not all no we've been down to the capital we've had a wonderful experience down there and so I'm wondering if anyone would like to share anything from our meetings and um meeting with the legislators and all the folks who were important in our lives when we were down
there commissioner Sullivan thank you madam chair um one of the things I want to share um with the public is that when commissioner storle and I um got down there on Tuesday evening one of the first people we saw as our new HRA
director Jeff brand and um it was a pleasure to see him engaged right away um with the work that is done on behalf of the people of Cook County he was attending the I RB meeting which was held um at the Intercontinental Hotel
where we stayed and it was on that evening that Hamilton habitat received $14,000 for their hookup to City of Grand maray services and um so it was really great to have him there and so that is one
thing outside of speaking with our legislators that I wanted to share with the public one of the um meetings that I attend and represent us is uh public health and um we really
um did not pass any resolutions or um we agreed with several of the items that AMC is is promoting we heard a lot from different committees on public health and um so I came away from there though
with the last comment of the meeting when a commissioner stood up and said you know we come here AMC meetings we go to our Public Health meetings in our counties and we talk about public health for everybody else
public health for us is important too our mental health is important in how we deal with folks in our County because we're going to be facing some pretty um dire decisions based on what's happening
in our country and so this person said take care of yourselves because you are serving other people and that can be stress on us as a representatives from our counties so we all applauded and
thank that person for that perspective because it really is important that we take care of ourselves yeah maybe commissioner Mills has some comments about his experience at the legislature or anything else you want to fill in yeah the one of the big
takeaways was just um visiting with uh other administrators and other Commissioners and and other staff from around the state and and and region just about their processes with administrator search um and and selection as well um
really helps getting a lot of lot of different perspectives there and the different different experiences um and then also just um touching base with our representative uh representative scraba as well as Senator house child and where they're at what they're seeing the lay of the land and
and and they understand what we're saying and I really appreciate that connection and and understanding and reaffirming that and it's just always refreshing to visit with them um and uh as as uh frustrating as other news can
be from um the operations at the state um and then hearing uh hearing the the leaders speak um both the House and Senate majority and and minority leaders I thought that was really interesting and and insightful and I saw
um well I guess I saw the impact of a presidential run on our governor um he's always very well spoken and and off the cuff and uh and I just noticed uh I just noticed uh the the hardship that that
he's gone through um expressed in in his words and and um just line of thinking so um one of the things I didn't like about um the the House and Senate leaders
was the kind of uh we need to work together but it's their fault T type of language um I it's was talking out of both sides of their mouths and and I didn't appreciate that so I hope the work together side of the mouth comes through um more so than it's their fault
but we we will see um kind of off to a rocky start there but try to stay on the Sunny Side M gamble I I would just comment on the uh the session where we had the panel with the representatives that uh we intently
listened and uh to the different things that were said uh when they got to the last question that was posed the question was uh what have you done on the positive side something that effect
and uh two from different opposing parties said we take walks in the morning and and we talk we talk about our lives we talk about this or that and the response on each one of those that came across from each of those Representatives that each spoke to what's positive uh the response from all
of those that participated just there was a lot of clapping which is an indication that people want people to work together and have mutual respect in regard and I thought that was that's healthy to see because when we lose that we there's there's not a lot of Hope in
getting things done so that was that was that was something that that to me made a big impression anything else so we have upcoming meetings to note um there was just an addition here for the Board of Commissioners special
meeting which is tomorrow and then um also uh Thursday and I believe that was it for any additions and um then we also have the
uh Cook County lodging um tax comparison through December of 24 we have recognition of uh staff March staff anniversaries Neil Pon from the
attorney's office one year Connor Ingram from Highway Department two years Leanne averly from Public Health and Human Services three years Todd Ford public info officer three years Kim Shepard
from Court Administration 28 years Courtney berer from auditor's office 31 years thank you thank you for your continued work and support here and then we have a March Milestone at anniversary
Amanda weberg from Soil and Water 5 years and with yes I wasn't just twiddling my thumbs while you guys were wow down talking to the legislators your tulip come up for us no I was holding down the fort you
have no idea what's going to happen in this County just stay tuned so there was a healthy Housing Network meeting and um um I didn't go to that one but I do know that the um um the land service offices
um talking about um if you need help or you need anything um we are definitely putting formats in place to facilitate getting information out to needy needy constituents the NorthShore
management board that was um it's a the NorthShore management board is a state approved board that is to focus on the shoreline of Lake Superior three we got Lake County Cook County St
Louis County and the reservation and it has become quite apparent among all of the uh participating members that there needs to be a revisit of the purpose of this board is it management or is it a
Consulting board I mean what is the they've uh it is uh AR DC has a facilitator and then they also have that that uh pulls the meetings together and then they have a person on their staff
that when our Land Services Department offers V or um approves variances or conditional use permits that is goes to ardc to this particular person who then
reviews it and sends it on now to the board and uh the nor the NorthShore management board to their board chair and vice chair for approval and this is ju this is kind of a new thing that's
been happening and the question is and there's not agreement is this what the role of this board is to review every to review every uh variance and
every um conditional use permit in all these counties or do we rubber stamp it or what is the role so that is there's the emails are flooded coming in in the last couple of days like this we need to have a full conversation about
the history the reason behind it because there's not a consensus among the board members that this is what we do so that was fun and then uh David was so kind and well received I think well I thought
well received uh he came to the Council on eing down at the Hub and uh they talked about uh their financial woes and their successes and where they're going and that was uh yeah that's that's what I thought it
was doing one more thing but I guess that's oh no and the other one was I went to the quarterly uh attended the quarterly Shi Regional Community leadership meeting and that is a it's a collaboration of of different groups
that as I sat back and and participated some I don't think they understand really or appreciate the value of what they're doing as a collective individually I don't believe they really understand how important they are
in trying to help their communities and I thought about this long and hard after the meeting so now I have to wait two and a half months to tell them this but uh it it's uh it's really heartwarming that there are so many Community people across the
region that really care about the people that live here so that's what oh well then I also did attemp the firewise meeting and commissioner Sullivan wrote me up a little thing that I had to write that I
read and my Keyport was the leading Topic in four of your paragraphs however I found in reading your statement one page I've read so many element books to to preschoolers that I had a really hard
time not adding emphasis in places to make it a really exciting document so it was all about the airport and then we're going to I tried to read it as flat and un unexciting as I could so that's what
I did while you were all gone always a new experience commissioner Sullivan Madam chair I have a a few committees I'd like to just update the board um fellow Commissioners in our community about um one of the things for Commissioners in
particular is I would encourage you to look at the mcit website they have been offering a four-part series on open meeting law and they've talked about Personnel they've talked about um when
you're issuing contracts the next one is about remote participation but I would really encourage it's it's very thorough um each of the four uh sessions is about an hour in length but it would be well worth everyone's time to to revisit that
um I had an opport to attend um the open house at Gunflint view a couple weeks ago um and many people in our community did attend there were about 40 people all together and um it was just a real nice opportunity to look at one of the
units it was on the second floor uh unit with a view of the lake um but one thing is some community members did not go up the steps they went to other units that were not available for the open house and so there was some concern about
cords and the mess that was there and whatever and those were areas that were not open to the public so I just want to make certain that people understand the unit that was available to be viewed was up on the second floor commissioner I would like to add to that that I had a
constituent who said she would have really liked to have gone but she could not she didn't wasn't certain she could make the steps to get to the second floor so she didn't go at all right and there will be other open houses coming
up um as it gets closer to opening and units are finished um appliances aren't in cabinets are up there's um you know flooring that's been up that particular unit was sheetrocked and painted and all ready to go but they're making great progresses I'm sure many people are
seeing as they drive by uh Cook County highway department both commissioner white and I attended recently and um one of the concerns is that a project that was on the do for next year the end of the Gunflint Trail um that funding has
been frozen so that project is off the table for for now just so the community knows I know a lot of um people who live at the end of the trail contractors who work at the end of the trail are are really concerned about that section of
Road and so we'll just have to see what happens with the federal funding uh Cook County Historical Society the big news there is they've changed their time of their meeting it's on Thursdays at 1:00 now um so you'll be um getting minutes from them a little
bit different time of the day but the meetings will maintain the same format with a zoom option as well as in person at the Museum um airport commission met and last week the FAA was to look at our draft master plan we're hoping to get
feedback next week on how that meeting went there will be a public meeting that will be scheduled in in May for members of the public to come up to the airport and talk about the airport master plan and to see some big Boards of what it
looks like and how things are laid out so I'll make sure to um get that information out to the public as soon as that date is selected um Cook County local energy project met and one of the things for people that
are interested in uh solar is that there's going to be another group buy we've done this annually for about the last eight years and so um the group buy will be through solar United which operates out of duth and that bid um and
communication with the public and applications will be available March 12th we had a builder Workshop uh through cclp which was held in cooperation with Cook County higher education 14 people attended got recertified um and got some of their
needed uh continuing ed credits in the building area and then related to what commissioner white mentioned the healthy housing and envelope meeting um we have three individuals who are waiting for Windows to be installed we still need
someone to come forward and help us install Windows um they're all paid for the projects are approved but we just need someone to do that work so that's a pitch for people out in the public Brady if you're free and you have the skill you know oh I don't have
skill and um then the Gunflint Trail Scenic byway committee met talked a little bit about the impact of uh the federal freeze on the Gunflint Trail highway project and its funding um also to note that we usually have
several people from the US Forest Service in attendance at that meeting there were no people in attendance at that meeting and we don't know what that means we do know that um someone we retired we've heard different things I don't want to spread any rumors but just
that there were no members of the US forist service that were there and also noticed um and it was um noted at our Soil and Water Conservation District meeting that you know there's proposed state cuts to AIS at 50% Soil and Water
Conservation District changes in 2026 budget but um that the USDA has laid off some of their people which is going to impact um some of the work that's done and some of the Foresters are laid off
that um work with contractors that also work with our s swcd so um we're starting to feel the impacts but I will end on a positive note take a kid fishing is Saturday July 19th so put
that on your calendar and this evening all across Minnesota townships are meeting for their annual meeting where we discuss um budget and then the budgets are set in August so this is my Marathon night the meetings don't start till
8:05 so I look at everybody's agenda and then I have to kind of figure out who gets a little bit of my time otherwise commissioner gamble yeah yeah thank you I just was going to uh make a request that with our list of
assignments as Commissioners uh it's it's good to have that list the way it's been broken out one other additional thing that I think could be beneficial is that if if it's noted whether we are there to listen whether we there to advise or whether we are there with
voting uh Authority it should be noted so that we understand that that would be helpful and what Jenna has done in that regard is s making that a lot easier that's great but that's another element that would would be great to know going in so that we're aware that so are you
asking because you're not sure about the commissions and boards you're on whether you're a voting member or not that's right in other words when we have assignments or we get reassigned or whatever and we say when these meet and when need we should notify you know so that they know that we're now taking that place but we should also know the
capacity in which we are there whether you're there as a voting member we're there as an advisor and we're there as somebody to list you want that posted it should be on that list I think so you know so commission you worked on that so absolutely so many of the groups have
the bylaws yeah in there and if you click on that it will state that information so it's it's on the thing with the website yes it's on our website correct there are some that are missing and all of us as Commissioners need to go to those organizations and have them
forward their bylaws because that's the difficult thing to get yeah okay yeah whatever we do in that but I think it just makes it more complete it's better for the five of us to try to seek out that information than Jan to seek out all of that yeah I would agree but
we could forward it so that it could be keyed right any further business commissioner Mills yeah I just wanted to report on a meeting I had yesterday um I was invited uh to learn about the Noah which is you know the weather National Oceanic
Atmospheric Administration uh Northland resiliency resilience collabor collaborative so this is a new they're still forming I guess um but I can just read the little blurb here um it says the grant totaling 1.85 million over 4
years is awarded by Noah to St Louis County with ardc serving as sub awarde the project covers the counties of St Louis Carlton cook and Lake as well as the boy Fort Fondulac and Grand Portage reservations its primary purpose is
strengthen resilience against climate change and Coastal hazards in the region the project aims to strengthen Regional resilience by fostering collaboration among local communities and tribal nations in integrating indigenous knowledge Into Climate res resilience
planning it focuses on building Community capacity by equipping communities with the knowledge and tools necessary for climate adaptation a key component is the development of a comprehensive Regional resilience plan which prioritizes
climate adaptation strategies and outlines Pathways for implementation Additionally the project will offer ongoing technical support resources workshops and training to further Empower communities and so this is something that James was involved
with before um before he left and um and so they're asking us okay where's County but they understand James is gone and we have interim administrator um but just how how could we best be represented
there and so I thought i' would bring it to um the board here I said I'd be happy to fill in or do virtual meetings um they want to have meetings travel around but it's going to be a lot of travel and I said practically virtual is going to
be best for us probably no matter what um I know there are I mean it extension is involved in this so I know um commissioner story and commissioner gamble might have interest I know um commissioner suvin work in CCL you could have interest there um some of the
projects that uh I'm interested in involve composting and biochar and so that fits into there too so I think we all have elements in Northshore management we all have elements that could fit within that um the expectations for the group
is uh contribute to bonly meetings be in working groups to complete collaborative objectives attend desired trainings update collaborative of resilience progress for sharing and newsletter and Reporting share about this work use technical assistance offered and
integrate this work into your own so um that was the catch that I was asking them about to do we have a date for the meeting when it regularly occurs uh tomorrow as a matter of fact uh so I I informed them that we wouldn't we
wouldn't be there tomorrow I was going to try to find an employee that was not a department head that would not be tied up necessarily tomorrow and um I thought potentially Neva Maxwell I don't know if she'll be involved in um Del liberations
or not but um that was someone who came to mind so but I haven't spoken with her yet I don't know if you I would think anybody from Land Services or Soil and Water might be appro I think we could go reach out to Tim and Elena see what recommendation is yeah yeah that would be
awesome thank you for bringing that up we'll discuss that next week at ardc and this is a result of hiring a young lady to come to argc to work on climate and so this is a result of she's on it oh
and yeah and so there was a in this meeting uh I was a little I wouldn't say overwhelmed I was surprised uh at the number of participants just to kind of communicate with with me um but yeah Deanna was there from ardc um she's the climate
resilience planner um and then car carola um I forget her last name maybe it's here yeah d d d Dalin um from St Louis County that's the St Louis County
facilities and sustainability uh director um and then another gentleman that I think is out of the U extension but is half of the funding for his position is coming from this Noah Grant
um and uh Seth I don't recall his last name but it was it was just some some pretty big hitters that were kind of on their game and and looking to looking to make this work so felt great to have additional resources out there and
they're really kind of fishing for different issues that I saw um that in regard to sustainab and resiliency and climate change for Cook County that that would impact um community members and yeah I'm sure their ears are always open
if we have other ideas or issues that we want to share with them so it's the beginning right y yep they said it was the formation and yeah so B monthly wedes I don't know if it's always going to be Wednesdays uh you know middle of the month or or what what the deal is
discuss that at the meeting too probably you know yep pick a time it's going to be good for some not for others so yeah okay any other business otherwise there'll be a motion to adjourn all moved support all in
favor I I thank you for all the good discussions and wo topics and everything Adriana got it all thanks for letting us talk not able to go to okay would you be
interested in looking at the area that I started do any that's Transportation yeah I go to that Norther this is from