the committee of the whole. >> Okay. Good morning. Welcome to committee of the whole. Um, we don't do the pledge to do this one, do we? Okay. Uh, number one on the agenda is Brainer orderly annexation.
>> Morning, James. >> Morning. >> Good morning. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and members of the board. Uh, so city council directed staff to work with Crowing County staff to direct. >> Could you just introduce yourself for those who might not know? >> I'm James Crown. I'm the community development director for the city of
Brainard. >> I'm Nick Broyals. I'm the city administrator. >> Yeah. So, city council directed staff to work with Crowing County staff to draft the orderly annexation that uh is in the packet uh for uh for Riverside Drive due
to the city's installation of municipal utilities along Riverside Drive in 2003. Uh this past spring there was a septic failure along Riverside Drive in which septic was leeching from the ground and was in need of immediate replacement. Uh this process was more difficult because the property was not within the city
limits of Brainard. Uh this is kind of what led to city council's action to direct staff to work with county staff on this area. Uh the orderly annexation agreement which is a joint resolution designates an area for for orderly annexation and the map is attached as exhibit A. Uh the agreement does not
immediately annex properties into the city of Brainard. Uh the agreement has been reviewed by both the city and county attorneys. If agreed upon, the city would annex by resolution uh subject to the agreement and based on the following criteria. Uh first one is
uh owner petition. Second one is city initiated uh an island annexation. So those are properties um or pockets surrounded by municipal boundaries or a body of water. Gilbert Lake or really the Mississippi River. And then um the third one would be city initiated
properties that are currently available to hook up to municipal utilities and those that the city will provide utilities to within 2 years of annexing. Uh so area one in the map that you can see up there which is the first picture on top. Uh these properties um are
already along Riverside Drive and have the ability to hook up to utilities or our island properties. Um, so this uh area would be subject to annexation by resolution if this joint resolution is passed. Uh, the bottom one, uh, area two there, there's one property that's just
passed or I guess just before Shady Hills Trail that's currently hooked up to municipal utilities. Uh, this one would also be available to um, annex by city council resolution immediately if that joint resolution is passed. Um, all of area number two, which is the bottom
picture, uh, would not be subject uh, based on the agreement. So municipal utilities again have to be provided within 2 years to it. Uh right now m municipal utilities run partially down Ashman Road in order to feed uh Old Stonebridge Trail. Uh in order to annex
most of this area, Shady Hills Trail along with Ashman Road. The city would have to plan for utilities down there. Um so again, uh city and county staff have worked together to create a proposed annexation area map based on the following reasons. So the first one is available utilities along Riverside
Drive as I mentioned just past Ashman Road and then partially down Ashman Road. Uh so this area is or already um set to become urban in nature. Also environmental considerations uh most of the properties in this OA is in the shoreland district if municipal
utilities are present. Uh hooking up to those is certainly better for the environment. uh property owners are currently required every three years to certify their septic, but many times that often lapses uh until a pull a permit's pulled um or they're selling their home. So certainly um I've been in
the industry before at times people don't reertify um for for many years unless one of those uh one of those parts trigger. Um properties would not be required to hook up as long as their uh septic is certified and inspected every 3 years. If a septic fails and
utilities are present, the property owner would be required to hook up to utilities. And then also with consideration is consolidation of maintenance. As the city already maintains Ashman Road doing the plowing and patching uh not the capital projects, High View Circle, Russell Road, Old Stonebridge, and
Island Drive are already city streets. Uh the county would be be responsible for capital projects along Ashman Road and Shady Hills Trail until annexed. If annex city would be responsible for car drive and river arches. Again, these would be um island areas the current the
county currently maintains, but if annex the city would take that over. Um and then again, sewer and water would be needed or would be needed to pro be provided for Ashman Road uh within two years in order to annex those areas. So with that, I can answer any questions that you may have. Thank you,
>> Madam Chair. >> Yes, >> ma'am. James, when you say the county, you don't mean the county mean unorganized territory as the county board, right? >> That is correct. >> Yeah. Okay. Okay.
That's the only question I have. I don't I don't see any issue with this. >> Um, >> any other questions? >> Yes, I have one. James, you mentioned that uh on your on sites that you have a do you have an an ordinance that says they have to be inspected every three
years? Is that in the jurisdiction of of city of Brainard then? >> So I believe that's also most likely a county requirement. Uh but it's also it's also a city of Brainer requirement in our code. >> I didn't know if that was a county. >> Madam Chair, Commissioner Lupkey, that's not a county requirement.
>> That's that that was my question when you brought it up. I didn't know the county had that and it doesn't. >> I believe what Mr. Cranic is referring to is the fact that if municip and correct me if I'm wrong, but if municipal services are available and a person chooses not to hook up to those
municipal services, if because they have a compliant septic system, they have to reertify that with the city every 3 years. >> That's correct. Okay. Okay. So, it's not a county or a fad requirement. That is saying if they have a private system when c municipal services are available,
they're not required to hook up to those municipal services as long as they are reertifying that every 3 years and it's still compliant. >> Thank you. Thank you for clearing that up, >> chair. Couple questions. Um, so area one is this you guys already have some of
this annexed already, correct? >> That's correct. So everything that's in the red would be proposed for annexation and then all the area that is kind of pictured in that yellow color um really surrounding all of that uh area in red is currently part of the municipal
boundary for the city of Brainard. >> Okay. So this like uh 520 526 that are kind of um breaking up area one. Those are already part of the city of Briner.
>> That's correct. It kind of goes in and out of this area. >> Okay. Okay. So then I guess my last question would be for administrator Ericson. What what would be our role and our responsibility as far as the town board for this? Madam Chair, Commissioner Lee.
So from the county's perspective, or if we talk about it as the unorganized territory, town board, if you will, the county itself has no play in this. This is between the township of unorganized and the city of Brainard. A municipality has the authorization to annex as under
statute. There are several different ways that this can go about. One of them is an orderly annexation process, which is what the city is proposing at this time, where essentially the county board acting as the township board would adopt a resolution, this resolution that's been put before you agreeing with the
orderly annexation practice. If for whatever reason the county board chose not to move forward with the orderly annexation process, the city can still annex the property. it just becomes a basically I think they call it a contested annexation at that point in
time. There's a legal process that the city has to go through. It takes a little bit longer time. There's more uh municipal boundary office players that are at play. Uh the outcome honestly in this circumstance is probably going to be the same. It's just a depending on
what the process ends up being. The county really can't say we don't want it to be annexed because the municipality particularly in this in this situation where there are islands and there are municipal services that are already being provided here. The municipal
boundary adjustment office is going to say this is more urban in nature than rural which is what the determination factor is when they're looking at should it be annexed or not. So, the county's role is to agree to the orderly annexation or make the city go through
the other processes that are allowed. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> And I would just like the people in the audience to know that the city has not approached the county board until today. We haven't,
you know, we haven't been cooperating or having meetings about this. >> That is correct. The staff have had meetings. We've had meetings with staff to bring this forward at this point in time now that the city is approaching the county board to consider this.
>> Madam Chair, >> yes. >> Just another question I thought of is uh James, I I think I know the answer to this already, but if if some of this area is currently being served by Crowing Power, Crowing Power would be
turning that over to Brainer Public Utilities. Correct. I would have to do some research on that. I know a lot of this property is served by Brainer Public Utilities, River Arches, um Car Drive. So, I can certainly do some research into that. Uh today is certainly a time to ask
questions and I can bring back any questions that I cannot answer. Um city council uh will be um reviewing this tonight and voting on the joint resolution and this would be potentially then back before the county board on the 24th for a final vote and I I can
certainly get that answer for you. I know that in the past you you have uh oh for example up by Menards there you have annexed some property there and then uh Commissioner Lubkkey and I are both on Crowing Powers board of
directors and and I believe we turned it the Brainer Public Utilities had to pay Crowing Power but all that area was turned over to Brainer Public Utilities. So I I'm pretty sure that's what's going to happen if there's any area that's being served by Crowing Power. This was
it was kind of a curiosity question. >> Yeah. And I believe that was the case in that Menard's area. >> Yeah. >> Madam Chair, and just so that it's clear and maybe just for clarification for all of you, the the process if this were to move forward, as Mr. Cranic stated, the
city council would take the first action to approve the joint resolution. If they approve it, then it's going to come to the county asking for you all to consider approving that. If it is approved, there's a a multi-step process that's still happening here. And that
kind of is looking at these different phases. It basically says that these parcels that are identified would be eligible then to be annexed by the city. And again, please correct me if I'm not stating facts correctly. >> That's correct. It wouldn't
automatically mean everything in red would automatically be annexed into the city. You're still planning to do that in a phased approach as well. >> That's correct. >> So either a property owner that is currently listed in red on the map could petition to the city to say, I want to be part of the city. I want to be
annexed. They could be annexed. There may be pieces that the city does take action to annex those areas that we talked about that are surrounded by the island side of things or if those services if those parcels need to be annexed to extend services of what is
there. That's some of what you're seeing in that first phase. That first map would be that first area that would potentially be annexed. Even if they're enexed, they don't automatically have to hook up to municipal services if they are offered. >> That's correct. So, as long as they
reertify their septic and inspect it every 3 years, they would not have to connect to municipal services until that septic fails. >> The second phase of this map, the the Ashman Road area, if the city annex annexes that portion, they would have to
agree to extend services within two years to that area, but that same process would still be in play. >> That's correct. >> Dang, I'm on a roll today. Okay, I feel good. making sure I'm tracking with it so I can help you all make sure you're tracking with it.
>> Madam Chair, one more question. Are you providing any services now to anybody in that area that is not uh City of Briner? Is there any unorganized properties that you're providing a a a sewer service or water service to that isn't?
>> No, there's a property on High View Circle that is a city street. Um so certainly that uh road is being improved and maintained by the city. Um and then there's joint maintenance agreements that we have with uh the county um to maintain certain roads. So Ashman right now um to my understanding we're doing
the plowing and the patching on that road. Um and the county is still or the first assessment district still responsible for road improvements. >> But but you don't have any properties that you're providing a sewer water to that are in unorganized territory. They're all if they get your enterprise
zone or your sewer and water zone, they actually are part of Brainer. >> Yeah. except for there was a property that was allowed to pay 200% um until they annex. That is there's a property that I mentioned that is on that bottom map there along um Riverside Drive that is currently connected to municipal
utilities. Um so that property would be subject to potential immediate annexation is they are already hooked up. >> Okay. Okay. That was the only question I had >> but that was the only property to my understanding that's currently connected that's still within the county. >> Madame Chair. >> Yes. Paul.
>> Madam Chair. So, so James, just a kind of a curiosity question. So, what does the process look like? I mean, you know, in serving on the county board, the county board, I'm assuming the city council is the same way. You always want to hear from the public. Is there going
to be a a public hearing that shows this map so that the people that are in this area can come and weigh in to the city council? I would assume so. Correct. >> Yeah. So, that'll be tonight. is not statutoily required as part of um the orderly annexation process, but city
council did elect to hold a public hearing. Um as recommended by staff as well as the the county staff to hear from the public on it. Um so the county board um can certainly review that. Um you guys can provide a link for them to to listen in on testimony from um
residents in this area. So again, we were statutoily required um to post this in the paper designating a potential orderly annexation area. Um however, city council elected to hold the public hearing and then we did also mail out um to every property owner so they're aware
as well. >> What happens if the county contests this? >> Um city council would have to direct staff whether or not we want to continue to pursue it or pursue another route for this area. So, K City Council has not spoken on what would happen in the event
that the county um or first assessment district contests it. >> Madam Chair, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Commissioner. >> So, are we looking for consensus today? >> Madam Chair, there is nothing that is needed from the county board today. This is simplyformational. This is letting you know that the city council will be
having a public hearing this evening, as Mr. Cranic mentioned that they will be taking public testimony and they will be making a decision tonight whether to move forward with that joint resolution. If the city council approves the joint resolution this evening, it will then come back to you at your table for
consideration to approve that that resolution. If they don't approve it tonight, it's not coming before you again until after the city council has taken some action to move it forward. Well, this is is just a comment. I would have appreciated a copy of the letter
that you sent out to everybody. The minute that letter hit their doorsteps, I started getting calls and I didn't know what was going on. >> Yep. And I I can provide that if it's not in the packet here. >> It is in the packet now. She just would
have liked a little bit of advanced notice as to when this morning. Okay. >> Yeah. Madam Chair, and if I may ask one more question to the city folks, is there a do you have if if a property is annexed but services are not yet provided? Is
there a subordinate service district type of tax district for that area different from what the city's taxing regular tax district is? >> There is not. Um, city council did elect to remove the rural service district this past spring here. >> Okay. Does anybody in the audience have any
questions? >> Okay. Would you come up to the mic and state your name? My name is Tom Carson and I live on uh River Arches Road. Uh my question is is who does the certifying of the of the sewer the septic systems? Is that the
responsibility of the city, the county, or or private contractors? Thank you. Go ahead. >> Would you answer? >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, my understanding is the county um provides a list of certified inspectors and then
it's up to the property owner to essentially hire somebody to do that and then they send in their their paperwork that they've done with that inspection process to say that that septic system certified. >> Anyone else? Please come up to the microphone. >> Uh my name is Richard Schmidt and uh I'm
a resident of uh the River Arches uh car drive area, the little island there. Um, and I'm here uh to oppose the proposed annexation of our properties into the city. Uh,
just due to some unique characteristics of that area. Uh, annexation is not just a boundary change. It is a permanent shift in governance, taxation, infrastructure, and community identity.
Under Minnesota law, annexation must serve the best interest of the affected area and demonstrate that municipal governments governance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
That burden has not been met. First, this proposal would increase property taxes without clear justification. Annexation typically results in higher municipal tax rates.
Yet, no comprehensive fiscal impact study has been shared publicly showing how increased taxes would provide proportional benefit to our residents. Transparency is essential when asking
property owners to assume long-term financial obligations. Second, the justification of improved services does not hold up under scrutiny. Our current township level services are adequate. In fact, the city has
previously declined snow removal services for car drive and river arches uh due to the incline of the road to access that area. residents have adopted adapted
responsibly by funding private snow removal services. Services that not only clear roads but also help seniors and disabled residents with driveways and walkway clearing. Under city control, those additional
services would disappear and require further out-ofpocket expenses for the residents. There's been no demonstration that annexation would meaningfully improve service quality.
Third, annexation would alter the character of our neighborhood. River Arches is known for its dense vegetation, tree canopy, and wildlife habitat. Residents choose this area for its
natural environment and privacy. Road expansion and infrastructure upgrades could require clear cutting of trees, increasing exposure to Riverside Drive to traffic noise.
That would permanently change our quality of life and potentially decrease property values. The statue requires consideration of the area's character. Our neighborhood remains rural and wooded,
not urban in character, nor in need of city level intervention for safety or welfare. Finally, major governance changes should not proceed without clear public support.
To date, residents have not been presented with comprehensive financial modeling, infrastructure plans, or long-term tax projections. Annexation should not move forward without transparency and meaningful
resident consent. Annexation under statute 414.0325 is not automatic. It must serve the best interest of the affected area.
At this time, that has not been demonstrated. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that this annexation proposal be denied or at a minimum delayed until full fiscal analysis and documentation and
documented majority support are provided. Thank you for your time. >> Well, thank you. But I I would hope you're going to the meeting tonight at 7:30 at the Briner City Hall and presenting that because that's where the
decision will be made. >> Yes, we will be there. Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. >> Yes. >> Deb, can you just explain this a little more? or maybe James Ken that
we could the county board or the town board of the unorganized territory. We could object to this. All five of us could object to it, but there's no other way that we can stop it if if a whole bunch of people said,
"Hey, we want you to try to stop this." Is that correct? >> Madam Chair, Commissioner Coring, that's basically correct. It would just change the type of process the city would have to go through for annexation. There are three ways under statute property can be annexed. One is through this orderly annexation. One is through petition by
the property owners directly. So if if the property owners wanted to be annexed but the city wasn't planning to annex, the property owners could petition to the municipal boundary adjustment board to be to be annexed. The third is the
contested case process which the city would initiate. The county doesn't really have a say so in that regard. The court, if you will, at that point would make the determination. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am.
>> My name's Rachel Khan and I live on Riverside Drive. Um just I wanted to thank Richard for um giving giving his um talk, but I guess the question that needed to be asked which he pointed out
um that we didn't really get an answer to that I'd like to get an answer to since we're offered questions. Um so thank you for that. Can the city explain how this benefits property owners?
That's my question. Please answer. >> Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so certainly um being that this area is probably about 90% uh Shorland district. Uh there certainly uh is a a higher standard then for the environment being
hooked up to municipal utilities rather than septic systems. Um oftent times um aren't inspected every 3 years. So we do run into those issues like we did this past spring. Um and then uh while this is a an area that's kind of on the outside of the city um in that first
area map, it does kind of jut in in and out of municipal boundaries um between city of Brainard and Crowing County. Um there is a benefit being next to the city. Um certainly the city pays for emergency services that we have joint agreements with. Um you're you're near parks and then other city u bike trails
and such that that are able to be utilized. So, you know, a little bit different in this area than if somebody were to live 10 or 15 minutes north in First Assessment. Um, there certainly is a benefit to to living next to the city here. >> Thank you.
Anyone else? >> Please come up to the microphone. My name is Rockford Devil. I live on River Arches. Um, in the beginning I keep hearing this theme about septic that this whole this whole course of
action is about on-site sewer systems. Is that true? Is that what's leading this >> would be my question? >> Yes, please. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so that that's part of it. Um, and then certainly these island areas um that for
Ash for Ashman per se, we're already maintaining these areas. Um there's other roads in this area that are um city roads that we're maintaining. Um so again, kind of municipal boundary consistency as well. Um it seems to me that this is somewhat o
an an overlaid protection for the city because the EPA protects you. If someone doesn't do their septic duty and they fail, they automatically end up in this position automatically.
And the EPA makes you whole. The state makes you whole. So why is it that this is all underneath the cloak of of sewer? That this is all for to help everybody out. How does this help everybody? If
you're not doing the right thing, Yeah. then then go pay the the the tax for it. But those that are doing the right thing and maintaining and aren't getting services at all, not even snow removal, I mean, we should
be completely like overlooked in this situation in my opinion. I I I don't I don't see the justification using a septic as a scapegoat in my opinion. So, thank you.
Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? Okay. Any other questions from the board? >> Well, thank you for your presentation. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next on the agenda is um Crowing
County Emergency Sirens. >> Boy, you know how to clear a room. >> Madam Chair, Madam Chair, members of the board, >> good morning. >> Clayton Bar, Crowing County Emergency Management Director. wanted to say thank you for taking the opportunity to uh talk to me this morning count regarding
the county's emergency sirens uh this morning I'm looking at kind of giving you an update of uh what our emergency sirens currently consist of uh kind of seeking guidance from the board on what the next steps uh you'd like me to proceed with and then uh again wanting to inform the board so as I'm working
with the community you're kind of you have a heads up uh rather than your constituents calling you wondering what emergency management is doing out asking about sirens. So, this gives me an opportunity to brief everyone on kind of what our current situation is uh and status is with our sirens and as I work
with the community uh and those members of the community if they reach out to you, you're well informed as far as what what's going on. So, currently uh as Crowing County's emergency management director, I've been with uh the county now for going a little over two years. Uh part of that is the maintenance of
our siren system. The county is responsible for the infrastructure which sets the sirens off. So within our dispatch center and we have infrastructure at several tower sites located throughout the county. The individual municipalities or townships, they're responsible if they so choose
and again warning sirens are not a requirement uh but again based off the the needs of the community uh is uh to install the siren and then maintain those sirens. There has to be a good bond or communication and link between
both the sheriff's office and emergency uh our dispatch center and the individuals who are responsible for again installing and maintaining those sirens. The first Wednesday of the month we again test our emergency sirens. Uh some
cities will again like in uh the case of Baxter they have individuals with their public works who are assigned to each individual siren and say okay whether or not that siren is going off. Um a lot of times you know we'll have deputies will say hey or the city or police officer in
that city hey is your siren going off. What we don't know is if those cities have multiple sirens whether or not those uh all the sirens are going off or just one siren is going off. So the way our current system is is scaled is once that message or that uh radio
transmission is pushed out to the sirens, uh we here in dispatch, we don't know if they're going off or not. There are other options that are out there as far as a two-way cellular capabil uh capability. Uh there are federal grants that are out there that uh would
potentially pay for that upgrade. Initial cost estimates that I've looked at are close to around 750 to $800,000. It's a state uh it's a state grant. So the entire state has to put in for that grant in order to be able to put that
grant in. I've expressed the the need uh or the desire for again the state to do that expressed for it last year and it also expressed to uh to have the state do that again this year. Whether or not that occurs, we'll we'll wait to see. It may not again occur until uh next year.
um cycle as well. But at some point, we have to start someplace. Uh for me to really have an understanding as far as what currently is out there with our sirens is to have a good uh readout as far as what maintenance is being currently done and the infrastructure at
each of these siren sites. Currently, I have a a kind of a rough guide as far as working with the distributor siren distributors as far as what infrastructure was sold to those individual uh locations. Uh, and I do have some information as far as some of the maintenance that has been done on
some of those sirens. There are unfortunately a lot of sirens out there that aren't being maintained to the standard that they probably should. Some are installed and uh some are the batteries are replaced on uh periodically based off a maintenance schedule, but when it comes to the
rotary motors and some of the uh equipment that's up on top of the tower, a lot of times those uh aren't being maintained like they should. Case in point, we had a siren in Ideal Township that again was having troubles up there
and, you know, a fuse would get blown and they would, you know, fix the fuse or have somebody come out and fix the fuse, but then uh the next time we set the sirens off, it still doesn't work. So a different company came out and they looked at it and the rotary motor was
was uh severely beyond they repaired it or uh the state of it was basically essentially the cause of the uh the fuse being blown. So uh what I'm kind of what I'd like to do as far as uh going forward is to
have some type of proposal as far as a unified maintenance program throughout the county. uh the county um would essentially be the the holder of that contract and then bill out the individual uh municipalities based off
of what uh qu the quantity of sirens that they have. We have uh a large variance of sirens that are currently out there. We have some sirens that have been recently installed and some that are going to be going in. There's a new Baxter plans on putting another siren in
here, I believe, this year. And then we have sirens up in Cailluna and up in Trumald which are many many years old, decades old that have received very little or no maintenance at all. And so having a better understanding of what currently out there and some of these
older sirens there are grant opportunities available some through Sourcewell or other areas as well that'll pay for the entire replacement of the siren or there's cost share programs as well. So working with uh once identifying the current state of our current the sirens that are with
throughout the county then working with these individual municipalities or townships as far as okay what can we do to assist you in finding grants out there to upgrade those. So coming in front of the board today is I had some documentation that I had uh
provided on there. Again this is simply a draft proposal trying to get guidance from the board on how you'd like me to proceed. Um, what I'd like to do is again have a uh kind of a unified preventative maintenance program for all of our emergency sirens that having one
doing an RFP, so a request for proposal working with the cities that are currently out there that have individuals who maintain their sirens uh to provide them an opportunity for those contractors to be able to provide their uh their information as far as for the
request for proposal. uh outlining a list of our requirements through the county that need to be uh included in that maintenance schedule and then having a memorandum of understanding between the the county and those municipalities or township saying that
the the county is going to you know going to hold that that main contract and then based off of the amount of sirens uh that we have part of that contract we'll bring that that rate down. Currently, I know some uh cities have contracts that it's roughly $750
per siren uh as far as a maintenance. If we can get uh a larger quantity uh brought on board, we can maybe bring that that cost down to maybe mid mid uh mid to uh 550, $575 or $600. So, bringing that total cost down. The
benefits of that is from the emergency management and also from our dispatch center is now we know that there's a preventative maintenance schedule and that uh a better understanding of uh what has been maintained on those sirens. Undoubtedly when the sirens
don't go off they they call dispatch uh and wonder why they don't go off. So, we going to uh again once we send that page out, if we don't know that siren is being maintained, again, there's that there's going to be that disconnect between our uh our dispatch center and then with the actual
sirens that are out there being maintained. If we have somebody that actually is out there that the countyy's working with one point of contact, then we can work with that specific uh siren uh maintenance provider and say, "Okay, these are our challengers that we have out there and what do we need to get
them fixed?" Um the also on here the paper provided is a complete list of sirens that we have throughout the county. We have roughly 52 sirens. There's 53 on the list. The
siren that is in uh Trumald is more of a kind of a bullhorn on a building, not necessarily a uh a warning siren. So, I didn't list that in as far as our our as 53 on there. We have other ones that'll be will be going in as well. Uh,
again, some of the challenges that I've experienced in the past couple years is a lot of these sirens aren't being maintained. Um, and working with uh who's actually going to be the one responsible for it and then, you know, again, finding the money to uh to repair
or maintain those sirens. Uh looking from the board, it's kind of request uh authorization from the county board to move forward with establishing a request for proposal outlining the project scope, objectives, requirements, and expected deliveries as far as what
that maintenance schedule should look like. And I provided some of the information uh some of the the highlights as one of the attachments on here as well as far as the details of service. There's additional areas that I think that would be uh we'd want to add to that as well. And then once complete to report back to the county board with
those RFPs uh that meet those requirements and determine the next course of action in establishing a master contract which coordinates a preventive maintenance schedule for all the sirens located throughout the county. >> I'm open to any questions. >> Madam Chair, a couple questions.
>> Um first of all, you're alluding to the fact that a lot of this equipment is aged. >> Yes, sir. What's the life expectancy of one of these sirens in total? I mean, you talk about repairs and that, but what is the life expectancy of that
piece of equipment? >> I would have to uh talk to the with the actual manufacturer of those equipment, but I know some of the sirens are 25 to 30 years old. Again, a lot of it depends on the preventative maintenance.
Like say having a vehicle, if you never change the oil in it, then the the life expectancy of your motor is going to go really down. But if you change the oil regularly and you do those preventative maintenance, then you your vehicle is going to last a lot longer. And the sirens are essentially kind of that around that same same uh idea.
>> So then to follow up on that, because your memorandum of understandings are about maintenance and repair, what about replacement if you had to replace one? >> Yes, sir. uh as I mentioned um is there are grants available out there. So there are some
of the sirens on the list here that will undoubtedly require replacement and working with source well and other grant options out there to and some of these grants options are a full replacement cost and others are a cost share so a 50
50% uh cost share. So, working with the individual cities and the townships to see what their budgets are and then working out what grant opportunities are out there to meet their uh their financial limitations. >> And my last question is
what if a municipality doesn't want to participate in anou? What's our leverage? Because you're talking about >> scale bring the cost down. >> Correct. That's the assumption is then that uh let's just say it's 100% of them
will sign off on this. What if several of them don't? What's our leverage? I think it's the real leverage is going to be from the community themselves to know that the sirens are being maintained uh and their constituents within their area uh providing that leverage or that that pressure to ensure
that their m they're again their siren systems are being maintained. talking with if you look at the uh the list of sirens our main locations that have essentially more than 50% of our sirens include Baxter uh Cross Lake and and Brainard and just my
initial conversations again nothing uh official but just initial conversations is that those would be uh likely on board with pursuing some type of of contract again there's going to be additional conversations that would need to be take place exactly what that would cost is it an annual uh maintenance or
is it we looking at doing it every two years and then all what that budget looks like. But I didn't want to get into too much of the conversations working with the different cities until I briefed the board as far as what kind of the direction I'd like to go with it um uh before reaching out to those individuals and then having that more of
a candid conversation with them. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Madam Chair. You you have a question first, Madam Chair? >> I do have a question. Um there's nothing listed for unorganized territory and I know we've have discussed this in past
more than one time. Are there any plans on ever putting any sirens in unorganized territory? again the so the requirement there is no requirement to have warning sirens so that the community that is deeming the that there is a need then
they can again work with myself crowing county emergency management to provide uh again to see what grant opportunities might be out there for them to be able to uh to put that that siren in so if there's uh a need identified by the community I am here to work with those
communities to try to find grant opportunities to be able to implement those uh that that siren for that for >> Well, I guess I' I'd let you decide if there's a need in an organized because people have asked for them.
>> Madam Chair, um one thing is is really under as a county we aren't responsible to have sirens out there. Correct. >> Correct. >> They didn't get out there because we said we wanted them as a county. >> It was because the jurisdictions actually asked for them or group of jurisdictions.
>> Yes, sir. And and I'll go to the one that that kind of precipitated my getting involved in it was the fact that there's one up there on 16 on county rightaway that was put in I think 2010 if I'm remembering right you know if it
goes back well there was no it wasn't working it hadn't worked and nobody really noticed it and all of a sudden we look around and say well who's is it who's responsible who pays for power who does this and we realize that it actually covered three communities it covered city of Jenkins it covered
Jenkins Township and we recovered the north side of Peekquat Lakes and so in working together with those jurisdictions and you were you were involved in that. I really appreciate it. Um it came up and the uh it needed to be worked on. The bill went to Peekquat because that's where it went and then the other two jurisdictions
picked up a third of each of that and and it got fixed and it works fine. I can hear it on Wednesdays if I'm outside. So I want to appreciate you overseeing it. But as far as it being a county, the county other than the overall management of it really doesn't
have anything involved in it except just making sure they're all working. >> Correct. >> Because you you are the ones that actually turn it on. Nobody in a city or anything else can turn it on. It's done at dispatch or whenever that need arises to turn them on except for the Wednesdays. >> Correct. The AR dispatch center again
has the ability to initiate all the sirens. Some of the newer sirens like they're being impeded up in Cross Lake. do have that capability where the the fire chief could activate those sirens. That is a a capability that some of the newer sirens do have, but as you mentioned, sir, it's again the the
responsibility of the sheriff's office to set those off uh countywide. >> And it'd be nice if they worked if you were pushing the button to set them off. >> Correct. And then knowing what is actually programmed into each of those sirens as well because that's another aspect of it is not just the functionality of it but what is the
whoever put those sirens in 10 years ago 15 years ago what uh frequency did they program to ensure that they gone off you know has it has it been tuned that they're you know receiving the the uh the frequency properly. So ensuring that all those areas are being covered and
again a piece of mind for the community that where those items are located that they are being maintained uh in an orderly fashion. >> Thank you >> Madame Chair. >> Yes sir. >> Yeah. Clayton, I just want to I want to
give you a huge pat on the back. Uh I think you're doing an excellent job and the sheriff's department for I believe being proactive. God forbid if we ever had uh I think I I just talked to a friend of mine a couple weeks ago and we were talking about when they had
the F5 tornado go through Wadina. You know, God forbid we ever had that happen. Uh I I think that you and the sheriff's department are trying to be proactive of making sure that all these sirens are working. They're when they
when you want them to go off, they go off. Because if something bad happens and and I hope it never does, but if something bad happens, there's going to be a lot of fingerpointing and people saying, "Well, well, why weren't you on top of this?" This goes to show that, you know, Commissioner Lubkkey said,
"This isn't our responsibility." Well, I think uh the emergency management director is responsible for the whole county. So, I I believe this is our responsibility to make sure that these sirens are going to go off, make sure they're running properly.
Uh I think that's why people have elected the sheriff, elected the county board to make sure that uh their safety is paramount on on our mind. So uh I just want to say thanks Clayton. You're you're doing an excellent job.
>> Thank you sir. >> One to go madam chair. Uh a couple questions for you. Um first of all you said we have 52 currently. Do we know how many are not working? >> We have one that's that I'm aware of
that is isn't currently working and that's the one off of Twin Lake Road uh that has been down for a while. We're working with one of the uh providers to get that fixed and it's on their maintenance schedule. So hopefully here within the next four weeks they'll be up
to to repair that. Uh some of the challenge that I run into uh as far as emergency management director is we'll have cities and townships asking me well who who should I use uh to get these fixed. Well, I'm not in a position to recommend any specific you know company.
And that's why if we can have one that's been vetted all everyone that uh is currently in the process of again providing some type of maintenance has the opportunity to buy in on an RFP and then one is selected then in the future when somebody says well who who should I
use I can say well this is the person that we recommend u based off of what the county has decided and not from you know me personally as far as emergency management director. >> Okay. So then it kind of leads into my next question is basically roughly right
now it's approximately 750 to have one of these inspected. Um depending on which contractor you go to the RFP if we put the RFP out um with 52 of these sirens annually inspected. Um the goal would be to bring that number down for
all those municipalities as well. Correct. So >> correct. >> Uh currently I know some of the smaller ones again this is just off of one provider. I won't say what provider this is, but it's roughly $750 uh for the the few that they have. If there's more than 45 sites, then that would bring, you
know, if there's 45 or more sites of the 52, then that would bring it down to under $600. If there's only maybe 25 sites, so then maybe that would be just over $600. Again, it would all depend on how many municipalities and townships opted in to have thisou with the county
to be be able to provide this. Uh again, my initial conversations with those that are out there, it's, you know, to taking basically taking that off their plate, they're very receptive of it. So, and again, I didn't want to get too far into the weeds as far as working with the different ones until getting approval
from the board to move forward. Uh I guess in the last thing, I'll just make a comment that uh I agree that this is of utmost importance for our our county. We we haven't had a a Wadina tornado yet, but it's it's a matter of
time for us because if you look at how many times our county has been hit by tornadoes in the last 10 years, um we we're kind of in a in a vortex, you know, um Bermuda
Triangle, whatever you want to say, but it's this is an important issue for us. So, >> no. Uh that was one of the things commissioner that I noticed uh working with the National Weather Service. Uh and again the Crowing County is probably one of the highest has one of the
highest tornadic activities uh in the state. >> Did not know that taking this position. >> We've talked about that, haven't we? >> Madam Chair, I do have one follow-up question. Is it I don't think it's fair or
equitable to have Emily pay the same price for that maintenance contract that Baxter does or Brainer does based on population. Are you looking at somehow scaling that so that the smaller communities for them
to, you know, if you take 550,000 and you got 52, it's $10,000 ahead or per siren. When you look at that, Emily would had a would have a harder time paying that than Brainard or Baxter, for example.
So, would you scale that cost somehow to to recognize that they don't have the same ability to pay that other municipalities do? >> Uh, I think commissioner looking at it as like Emily has one siren. Uh, and
then, you know, with Baxter having, you know, if they install the one this year, they'll have 11. So, I don't know if that would be considered as far as scaling just because they only have one siren. I have I can look into further um >> I guess what I would say is it's not
fair to say that Baxter pays $10,000 and Emily pays $10,000. Maybe it's on per siren. >> It's correct. Okay. Yep. It'll it's a perr rated per siren. Correct. Yep. It's not a it's not okay. We've got 10 municipalities and townships and the
total bill is this and then we divide it 10 ways. But since Emily only has one siren, they're only paying if it's $600, they're paying $600 versus if extra has 10, then they're paying close to $6,000. >> Okay. >> Because they have 10. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Okay. Yes, sir.
>> Clayton, there's one siren on here in Morrison County, >> correct? So, we have the ability to turn set up one siren that's close to the uh line. They're and they're responsible for that Morrison County >> and that >> their their cost would be 550,000.
>> Correct. >> Good to go. >> Right. >> Any other questions? So, does Clayton have the okay from all of you to continue moving forward with this and to approach the cities with
information once he's got that to work with? >> Yes, >> I think this is an excellent idea. I'm Yes, I'm on board. >> To Paul's remarks earlier, the safety of our residents is paramount. It's important. And yes, >> this is just one aspect of it. you know,
the sheriff's department does other pieces of it. So, I I think this is an important part of our public safety. >> I agree. >> Thank you, Clayton, for doing that. Bring it up. >> Thank you.
>> Is there any other business? >> Madam Chair, I have one thing. >> As we all know, this is Black History Month. Jesse Jackson passed away today at 84 years old. So, just wanted to recognize that he's been a a great proponent of civil rights and I think we
should all appreciate that. And I have nothing else. >> All right. Well, meeting is adjourned at 9:54. Death for