Good morning everyone. At this time, I'll call the Crowing County regular board meeting for November 12th, 2025 to order. If you'll stand for the pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence, please. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. Number two is open forum. I don't >> Oh, we got to do >> uh I forgot. >> Weren't you just telling us not to
forget about 30 seconds ago? >> Yeah. All right. Roll call. Commissioner Coring >> here. >> Commissioner Lupkkey >> here. >> Commissioner Barrows >> here. >> Commissioner Franzine >> here. >> Commissioner Lee >> here.
All right. I don't believe we have anybody here for open forum. So we'll move on to number three, which is the review and approve of the minutes from October 28th, 2025. >> Motion to approve. >> Commissioner Franzene makes a motion to approve. Commissioner Lupkey seconds
that motion. Roll call, please. Commissioner Coring >> I. >> Commissioner Franine >> I. >> Commissioner Levkkey >> I. >> Commissioner Lee >> I. >> Commissioner Barrow >> I. That motion passes. Thank you. Number four on our agenda is the review and
approve the agenda for today. Any additions or corrections? >> Nothing to add or change. Mr. Chair. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Commissioner Franine. >> Second it. >> Second by Commissioner Lee. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Franine. >> I. Commissioner Lovekkey. >> I.
>> Commissioner Lee, >> I. >> Commissioner Coring, >> I. >> Commissioner Barros, >> I. That motion passes. We're on to number five, which is our consent agenda. Any concerns about items on that list.
>> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Commissioner Franine to approve the consent agenda. >> Second it. >> Second by Commissioner Lee. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Loveky. I. >> Commissioner Lee. I. >> Commissioner Quaring. I, >> Commissioner Franine. >> I,
>> Commissioner Barrows. >> I That motion passes. >> We will move on to number seven then. We're going to skip the can't do the public hearing until 9:05 or later. So, we'll move on to number seven, which is
the introduction of April Risto to the library. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair and commissioners. like to bring up Melissa Watley, the executive director for the Kitami Regional Library uh system to
introduce April Restell, the new Brainer uh branch manager. Very good. Welcome. >> Good morning, Crowing County Commissioners. Thank you so much for letting us have a piece of your time today. I just wanted to introduce you to the Brainer branch manager, April Estto.
She's been with us for just a little under a month now. Um, so doing a lot of getting introduced to the Briner Branch Library, the Kitagami region. Overall, she's a regional branch manager, so she also helps oversee other branches in the area. So, as far up as Longville, um,
and Pine River, so some of the ones that are local to this area. So, she will be coming around to speak with you about library issues. Um, and we would welcome you to contact her with any questions you might have about your local branch, as well as contact me for anything you might have questions about regionally.
So, April, if you'd like to just say hello. >> April, normally we get about a 20-minut speech out of new >> I can do that. >> Oh, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let me reconsider. >> Yeah, >> you're in trouble now, won't you? >> Librarians do like to talk. Yes.
>> All right. >> But I'm very excited to be here. Um, I've just come to the Brainer area and it's been very welcoming and Kitagami has been great um in this transition. So, thank you so much and I'm looking forward to meeting with each of you. >> Where do you come from? You know, I'm from the Twin Cities originally and so I
got my masters in library and information science around that area and then I went down to Florida and so I was down in Florida for a little bit. Yeah. But I'm back in Minnesota now and I'm very excited to be part of um the Minnesota area. >> It's always a challenge, isn't it, when you you are raised here and then you go
to Florida and you miss those nice cold temperatures being able to walk on water here. >> Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Well, I think it's the leaves, too. There's >> six layers of clothing. Yeah, especially right. >> All right. Well, welcome. Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much. And I want to also
personally thank the board for the 3% increase for Kitagami this year. Thank you so much for working with us this year for that preliminary levy increase and for working to uh increase our relationship together and make sure that we had full communications this year to get that developed. So, thank you so much. We do appreciate that.
>> Very good. One quick thing. Uh Commissioner Coring, did you have anything? I didn't see you on the We didn't look over your way on the screen. No, nothing. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I just want to say thanks for the good work that you guys do. I appreciate it. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes.
>> So, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. >> All right. We're now at 9:05. I would look for a motion to open a public hearing. >> Mr. before you open the public hearing, perhaps you'd like to hear from uh land
services staff on what the what the petition is and then open the public hearing. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair, commissioners. Uh we are host we're holding a public hearing today for the Kimble Lake Improvement District. Uh they were created in 2018 with an assessment
amount of $200 per eligible property owner. Um and just as we've seen the prices for doing services have increased. So they uh submitted a petition with 70 verified signatures which it was 67.9% support of the petition to change the annual assessment
calculation. And what this means is um they are only allowed to go up to that original set amount of $200 and they would like to be able to go higher than that if need be. So, what this means is they would set their budget for the year, which I'll be bringing to you at the next board meeting, and then they
would divide that by the eligible property owners of what they need for the next year. And if that comes in higher than that $200, this petition would allow them to assess the property owners higher than that $200, they would still need to vote on it and get it approved at their annual meeting, but this would allow them to go higher than
$200. >> So, currently, they're at $200, correct? Yep. >> Okay. Any questions or concerns, Commissioner Coring? >> Nothing from me, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Could you repeat what would the increase
be? Sorry. What would Could you repeat what the increase would be? >> Uh, I do not know that yet. It'll be $200 for 2026, but then come for the 2027 uh year, they would be able to increase it. I don't know that yet until they submit their annual report for 2026, and then they would submit their
budget and needs for the next year. So if their expenditures are 100,000, divide that by the number of eligible property owners, that's what they're they would propose their assessment to be. >> Okay. So at this point, they're only asking for authorization for 2027 >> and forward up to use this new
calculation, >> not for 26. >> Correct. >> So all right, any other clarification needed, concerns? Um, Mr. Chair, just >> one second, Commissioner Cory. Um, Commissioner, so if if for some reason
that board that board that sits there and and decides they need $400 from each property owner or whatever more they need, >> is that done by a majority of those lake owners or only who shows up at that meeting? Then >> that is vote voted on at the meeting and
they also are required to send out uh I don't know if it's a card or a piece of paper where uh the homeowners can vote as well. >> And there after they do that, there's nothing that comes back to the county in regards to overseeing that at all. Uh, not approving that. Nope. We see it in their annual report and then I bring that to you guys each year, but we don't
approve or deny. We approve their budget, not the assessment. >> Okay. Commissioner Coring, >> I guess, Mr. Chairman, my question was the same thing. Can can you just explain to me how the assessment works? I I
after we approve a lake lake improvement district, the the lake improvement board and the membership, then they're the ones that can raise up whatever the uh assessment is. Is that correct?
>> Yes. Correct. It's voted on every year by the board of the lid. Um and then they certify that to us like every other special assessment that we have and then that is like assessed to the property owner property owners. Uh but yes, it is voted on and like I said, if their
original um founding documents state $100 as their assessment, they cannot go above that. Um so this is the third uh lake improvement district that has petitioned to change how they do their calculation for the assessment each year to this new calculation so that they are
able to go above it. They can still stay below it. Um but then they're able to change that and be able to grow their fund balance to do the treatments and services that they need on their lake. So, Mr. chairman. So if they what what's
is is there any limits on what if they started out at $100 and let's say some get some board members that are out of control and they want to go to $900 and it gets passed and then all of a
sudden some lake associ then then what happens? I haven't been through that yet. Um I am not certain, but you guys I do bring it to you guys each year at county board all of the lake improvement district reports and what their budgets are. So that is something we review at that
time. Um and then the uh assessments aren't certified until end of November. Um so we have a chance to I guess look at that, but I'm not certain on if we have the ability to say no, you can't do $900. >> Mr. Chair, >> Mr. Chairman, >> no.
>> Commissioner >> Co. So just just one more question. So uh can you just explain this new thing that that they can go to can they go to anything they want to or or is there a limit?
>> I don't know of a limit, but what it would be is if they when they submit their annual budget to us, we're reviewing that, making sure they're spending their money on the allowed expenses, looking at what revenues they have coming in, looking at their fund balances to make sure they're not growing too high. Um, so what this would do is we would look at their budget and
then say they had $100,000 in expenditures next year. They have very little fund balance. So they would take that $100,000 that they need to do their treatments or whatever services they're planning for the following year and they would divide that by the eligible proper um property owners and then that would
be their assessment. they would certify for the following year and then they would like I said they'd have to send that out to all eligible property owners and then it would be voted on at their annual meeting. >> So commissioner co commission administrator Ericson please >> Mr. Chair commissioners when you
establish an a lid there are two different ways that they can be est actually there are three ways they can be established under statute. One is with a fixed assessment amount which is what the vast majority of the lids that we have in the county have done. They approach you, they have gone through their membership, they've received a
petition that says, "We want to establish this district. We believe it's going to cost us $10,000 a year for treatment and um services that we need for this particular district. We're going to divide that by the number of parcels. We're going to charge $150 a
year per owner, per property owner, whatever it might be, whatever their plan is in that way." That's the fix fixed assessment route that Kimble was originally established under. Another way that they can do it is to do that
same exact process but have this flexible assessment which is what they're asking for now which gives them the ability to adjust that amount every year based on a number of factors. Whether it be that they're seeing improvement and they can reduce the amount of treatment that is needed.
whether they are seeing that there is a higher area of spot treatment that needs to happen. Costs continue to go up. Rather than having to come before the county board to change that fixed assessment every year, they have the ability to make this adjustment as Jessica has laid out from the standpoint
of saying here's what our budget is going to be for the next year. This is the amount we're going to charge. Your piece of this is giving them the authority to do that fix or the uh flexible assessment amount. Their lid board, their membership is required to
determine what's the appropriate dollar amount for what that would be. Their total membership have to vote. A majority of the membership have to agree for whatever that increased price is going to be at that point in time. The third way that a lid can be
established is basically with taxing authority on a levy. They could petition you to give them the authority to tax an actual levy amount versus a special assessment amount. I don't believe we have any created under that role in our county. But that is another option that
is in statute. You have three things that come before you when you're establishing a lid. One is is there enough support to be able to do so based on the number of people, number of signatures on a petition, so on and so forth. Um number two, are you agreeable
that they can adopt a lid? And number three is what model are they adopting this this lid under the fixed assessment, the flexible assessment or the levy authority? the lid board and the lid membership then has the control
as to kind of determine what that dollar amount is if it's under the flexible amount or the levy amount. In this case, Kimble Lake is asking to go from the fixed assessment to the flexible assessment, but it would be up to their membership to determine what is the
appropriate amount every year based on that flexible membership piece. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, Mr. Loveky. Um, so this happened last year, I think, with Ruth or the year before with Ruth, Ruth was on the fixed amount. And in order for them to be able to go to the
flexible amount, they had to go back to every one of the lake owners and and get that majority again, 50 plus one almost to like recreate the whole lid over again, but to create it with the flexible amount versus the fixed amount. And that's what Kimmel is doing here. Correct. >> Correct. Yep.
>> Yep. That's pretty much Yeah. So, everybody still voted to go ahead with the lid and go ahead with it. as far as those people on the lake, the majority of them. And do we know how many of that was of the how many property owners are on Kimble and what that amount was? Did you just say that earlier? >> Yep. Um it's 103 eligible properties and
then there was 70 verified signatures. >> So they had about a 70 70% of the people on that lake said, "Please allow them to raise that rate and to tax us and have it put on the on our we we collect it for them, right? And then they collected.
>> Do they get the check then right away or do we hold the money? >> It is sent as a check as a transfer to the lake association. We no longer hold funds for any of those lids. They're responsible to have their own banking accounts and do their own financials >> and they come back. Do they come back then with that annual report and we look
it over and do we do anything with it? We just look it over and says that looks correct. >> We review the annual report but you have no authority to say you did a good job. you didn't do a good job. You shouldn't still have a lid. You can't have a lid. You don't have the authority to do that.
>> The the members do though, if the members aren't happy with how that lid is done, correct? >> They can come back. And I don't know what that number is. Is it 50 plus one to go away from the lid or is that number different than that? >> It is the same number. >> It's the same number. So, so if they weren't happy with their board, they could come back to their board. They
could apply and then then the lid would be dissolved. >> Dissolved. >> Okay. >> Have we dissolved any? >> We have not. >> I didn't think so. >> I didn't think so. the the as you mentioned commissioner the taxes or the assessment is collected as part of their taxes. They get that settled out during
the regular property tax settlement process. So they get a payment in July, they get a payment in December. They get their payments that occur at that same time that our cities and townships. Essentially lids are a taxing authority just like a city, a township, a school district would be.
>> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? All right. Thank you very much, Jessica. I would look for a motion then to open up the public hearing regarding the Kimble Lake Improvement District Assessment Calculation Change. >> So moved. >> Motion by Commissioner Franzine.
>> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Lubkkey. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Lee, >> I. >> Commissioner Coring, >> I. >> Commissioner Franzine, >> I. >> Commissioner Lubkkey, >> I. >> Commissioner Barrows, >> I. That motion passes. The
public hearing is now open. Would anyone like to speak regarding it? Yes, sir. Um, you both are in the same line of a my finger here. So, >> I'll need your name and address, please.
>> My name is Dan or Daniel Yavner. I live at 34840 County Road 39. Uh mailing address is Peekquat. It's Ideal Township. Uh thank you for the opportunity to
speak on this matter and I do support the efforts of the board to protect the lake. I have two concerns. The matter before this board uh does not
state how the board will use the additional funds. There is a statement of this infection that is uh prevalent in some other lakes and they wish to build a a defense fund
uh adequate to fight this infection should it occur in the lake. My concern on that is what if the lake is not infected? They are building this war chest so to speak. What happens with
those funds and they're not describing that? So does it just sit there? Do they decide to spend it on other matters? So, I would like to see some regulation
that says this extra war chest is for this particular infection and not for general matters or that they state this is for general matters.
uh if the funds exceed what is necessary to fight this infection, what happens? Or let's say they are assessing this extra assessment for 10 years,
the lake is never infected. What happens to those funds? So I I would like clarity on that. If this is not the council, the uh county board uh matter, then I'll have
to take it up with the um uh lid board. The um my other uh concern is the uh rather unequal assessment
per lot. My taxes are $1,100 a year. On top of that, there is a $200 a year uh assessment for the uh LI.
That's nearly a 20% search charge. They're proposing another 40,000. And currently their allocation is just simply there are 100 lots divide by 100. That adds $400 to my
taxes. Add to the 200 that I'm already paying. That is a 50% search charge over my county taxes just for the lake. The county has social
services as number one and public uh the sheriff's office and what have you is number two and roads and what have you. And uh I'm glad to spend for all of that.
To have me pay a 50% search charge to protect the lake just in case it's infected, I think is unreasonable. It may be a bookkeeping challenge to
allocate the expense based on the assessed value of each property. But I think that's a lot better than just okay 100 lots. Boom. I don't even have a house on the lake. My house is on
the east side of 39. I have a steep bluff. I can't even get down to the lake shore without a switch back. And and you folks rightly will not permit me to build on the lake. I don't
have setbacks and that it would destroy this bluff and what have you. So to me, it's great that people want to protect the lake. I don't feel that a 60 50%
uh search charge on my taxes is valid and appropriate. Thank you for this opportunity. >> Very good. administrator when we get a petition. >> Any questions or >> I'm going to try to get some
clarification here on what our authority is as a board. So I my assumption is and correct me if I'm wrong is that when we receive a petition, the questions that are being asked here are more for the LI board than they are for us. We're here
simply to approve or deny the request on the petition. Correct. That >> is correct, Mr. Chair. Yes. Okay. So, >> you do not have as the county if if the establishment of the LI or a change of the LI is coming as a petition from the
ownership, you don't have the authority to tell them how to set up their lid. Right? >> There is a provision in statute that lets the county board establish a lid based on your determination. You have not taken that action in the past and none of our lids are set up that way.
you have taken the action that if they want a lid, they have to come to you. In that case, your responsibility is limited to saying yes or no and setting if they're asking for that fixed rate, what should that fixed rate be? You set that as part of that. Um, but you do not
have the authority to say it should be done as a levy situation versus as a special assessment. That's based on the purveyance that they've put before you with that petition. So the questions that are being asked, we would redirect him to the >> to the lid board.
>> Lid board. So all right. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. I just have one other thing. If in talking I think at one time to Chris Pence and stuff uh that there was also another way of doing it where you would prorrate it over the valuations of the property. >> That's if they are doing a levy based
adorum tax that's not as a special assessment like I mentioned a lid basically as taxing authority. if they would approach you with that funding mechanism as part of that petition that says we want to levy x number of dollars per year and then that gets applied like
the county's levy gets applied it's based on the valuation of the properties >> and they're they're not doing that they're doing a fixed >> they're not doing that and I don't believe we have any that are doing a levy situation they're all done as a special assessment >> I think most of the lids we have right now are in the district I serve so I'm
fairly familiar well no except for south along lake Right. South Long Lake has Or is there another one down there? >> There are a couple down there. >> There. Yeah. So, >> the other gentlemen, if you would like to come up and give us your name and address, please. >> Sure. >> Uh, commissioners, uh, my name's Thomas
Hansen, and I have a home at 10,0001 Kimble Creek Road in Pekquat Lakes, which is on Kimble Lake, and I am the vice president of Kimble Lake Improvement District and was part of the the board when we put the resolution together. So, I'm here to speak to that.
Um, I've been on the board for 15 years, almost since it was created. And, um, we've lived within our $200 assessment for 17 years. And other than the first year, this is
the first year that we've ever assessed $200. So this year we increased our assessment to the full $200 because when our costs are gone up quite a bit on chemicals to treat.
It's costing more to get our lake surveyed and uh you know just like everything else just costing more and for some reason we're seeing more and more outbreaks of mil foil and on our lake and so we've had to spend more on treatment. In the past, as we've
increased and decreased our assessments, we've had a a number as for a reserve account and we've tried to raise and lower assessments based on how much money we have on hand. So, we've never like, okay, let's build a great big war
chest. It's like, okay, we're looking out two years, three years. We have to look that far out because what we assess at our meeting in uh vote on and our meeting in 2026, we don't get that money until
2027. So, we got to look out a long ways. We're just sitting there today looking out saying, "Okay, in the interest of everybody on our lake, are we going to have enough money in the future to fight the star stone wart to
keep fighting the mill foil and to do this?" We're like, "We're going to need more money than our $20,000 assessment or limit of $200 per home." And we don't know what the number is going to be. It
And that's why we we're asking you to go to this. >> Okay. Questions or concerns? >> Um yeah, Mr. Chair. Um Tom, so when you when you go out there and and because I think your lake was infected at one time and you did use some monies to to help
that, correct? Did you was it curly leaf pond or was it >> Oh, we have we have uh mil foil. >> Mil foil. And and you you did have quite a bit of it and you've been able to keep it kind of in check. >> We we had a lot of it at the beginning. 17 years ago. >> Mhm.
>> We got it down to where just for a few years we could only find a plant or two. So very minimal. But in the last four years, five years we've had numerous outbreaks all around the lake. And so maybe one year we spent $1,000 on treatment. In the last couple years we
maybe spent $12,000 on treatment. So, we've actually gone back into our reserves the last couple years um because we're finding more and more mil foil. >> You know, as somebody who sits on some watershed boards and stuff, I just I applaud some of the lake associations
and the lids for um you know, yes, it does it is your it is the property that you have that's on the lake that has some value, but it's also the water out there is actually public water, you know, and you're using your tax dollars. you're deciding to tax yourself to protect public waters. And I kind of
commend you on that. I think the state probably could step up their game a little bit on it instead of next that we got one more year yet. I think our as money is going to be the same, but the next year they're cutting it in half and and I don't know what that's going to mean to to the lakes, especially when
we're in a county like Crowing, which is a lake centric county. You know, we kind of run on water up here. So, uh I applaud for what you're doing. I understand the concern of the gentleman that spoke before where he has a piece of property on the lake that really is not usable that I know of and and he I I
haven't gone through and looked at it and see what he could he do on that property, but he's still being assessed that same amount of money that everybody else is. >> Yeah. And I can't speak to that. So, >> well, that's that's kind of a we can't speak to it here at the board. I would
encourage all members, everybody who's a property owner on our lake, if they're interested, if they're concerned, they really really should go to the annual meetings where we have robust discussion on these matters >> and um people get to vote. And if you think that the board's going wacko and
raising the fees too much, you vote in other board members. And um so that's what I would encourage Dan to do and others to do is just go to your it's one hour once a year go to the meeting and get your input in there and one person
talking that's a little bit different than what we're used to hearing has an impact on it. So it's not like it's you're speaking to a sea that no one can hear. And again, I think uh uh county administrator uh framed it right where
that's really not part of our review. Our review is to say yes or no. >> Yep. >> Okay. Any other questions or concerns? >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner. >> Yeah. So, I've got a Is there anybody
else that's there in the audience that's going to speak? >> I don't believe so. >> I don't want to step. >> Okay. So, I want to just tell you a story. you know, uh, when I was in the Senate, uh, there was a small lake and I I I'm trying to think of what what it was, but the the lake did not have a
public access on it and it was a small lake and, uh, the DNR was in the process of buying somebody's property and they were going to tear down the house and they were going to make a public access on this lake where the people on that
lake were opposed to that. So, I called in the DNR to my office and I talked to them and they emphatically said, "The people on the lake don't own that lake. That's a public lake. That's for the public."
Well, it goes to this to me that why are the people that are living on this lake having to Yes, God bless them for protecting their the lake that they live on, but why are they responsible to take
care of all of this stuff on their taxes on on their backs when this is all public water? Why shouldn't the DNR be doing that? This is this is where government is is this it's baloney because
government should be taking care of this. The DNR should be taking care of this. But no, they're not. So now the public has to take their take this responsibility on this lid to try to
protect their lake. Otherwise, government's not going to take care of it. So, it it just doesn't seem right to me. And uh you know h how much how much of a burden can these people stand to
pay for to protect the lake that they live on? And it it really isn't their responsibility. I don't think so. You know, uh so anyway, that's just an editorial comment. Mr. Chairman, I'm I'm really kind of frustrated with all this lake improvement district where these
people are almost in essence being double taxed because they're paying taxes. They're paying taxes so that the DNR takes care of these public waters, but yet they are not taking care of them. Just a bunch of BS. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Commissioner. Any other questions, concerns, >> comments, Mr. Chair? scenarios that we can think of. >> Mr. Chair, Paul and I agree on that. >> All right. If there is nothing else, I would look for a motion to close the
public hearing at >> second. That motion >> at 9:25. Commissioner Franzine makes the motion to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> Second by >> Coring. >> Commissioner Coring. I had somebody
talking in my ear. Paul, I >> didn't forget your name. >> Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Coring, >> I. >> Commissioner Franine, >> I. >> Commissioner Lupkkey, >> I. >> Commissioner Lee, >> I.
>> Commissioner Bar >> I. That motion passes. We'll move on to number 6.2, which is the Kimble Lake improvement district assessment calculation change. So, we've heard the discussion. They're asking to change to a flexible approach
to the uh taxing authority that they would have. Uh any questions? >> Mr. Chair, I'll make that motion. >> Commissioner Lubkkey makes a motion to approve. >> Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> Second by Commissioner Franzine. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Franine. I. >> Commissioner Levkkey. >> I. >> Commissioner Lee. I. >> Commissioner Coring. >> No. Commissioner Baros. >> I that motion passes.
Thank you. We'll now move on to number eight, which is the county sheriff and the medical examiner transport services request for an RFP. >> Morning, gentlemen. >> Excuse myself. Mr. Chair, commissioners.
Um, as you recall several weeks ago, we uh we had Steve in who is our current uh medical exam transport services uh contract. He's been with the county for 10 plus years. I I believe obviously he notified us that he's retiring and he
sold his business out and for that reason we're coming before you to offer up an RFP to have a new service start our transport uh program here in Crowing County and we're asking permission to send out that RFP. I believe the Mr's
office got a copy of the RFP in hand and we're looking to advertise for a replacement for Steve at this point in time. Do you have any questions in regards to that? I have no questions. Commissioner Lee, >> just uh one question. I just for clarification, I I remember that that
gentleman being in here and um speaking with us about his upcoming retirement, but I thought he had someone that was taking over his business for him. >> He did. He sold his business to another individual that had been working with him for some time to get the understanding of what it required to be
part of that transport. Uh but the contract that we have is currently with Steve and for that reason we whoever bought that contract out would have to uh put in for an opportunity to get that contract under his name through Crowing County.
>> Mr. Chair, we yes we transferred the existing contract that expired December 31st anyway. Oh. >> To the person who was taking over that business. And it's always a good idea to go out and and get proposals for these types of services on a somewhat regular basis as well. It's been 10 years, I
believe, since we have bid this out. So, it is a good idea to get some proposals and see what else the market has to offer. The new owner obviously is encouraged to bid on the services that are going to be provided, but also opens up to anybody else who might have some interest as well. >> Right. Commissioner Coring, do you have
anything? >> No. Mr. Chairman, the only thing is is uh if if Deb could expand on that a little bit. Now, this is not a a bid. This is a request for proposal. If they don't re meet the requirements of the
proposal, uh insurance-wise or uh or whatever requirements we have, even though somebody's lower, uh we can choose on who's going to provide the services that we're looking for. Am I saying that correctly? >> That's correct. This is a proposal
because it's a service being provided, not a good that we are purchasing. So rather than a request for bids, that's why it's a request for proposals. And when you consider proposals, you look at the pricing, you look at the insurance requirements, as Commissioner Coring
mentioned, you'll look at all of the different aspects as far as what's listed in them to compare the the uh responses that you receive. And you are not required to take the lowest dollar amount. you look at the total package of what that service is.
>> Any other questions, concerns? Does this require a motion to >> Mr. Chair, it does require a motion to authorize the sheriff's office to solicit RFPs? I believe you are looking um to be received until 400 p.m. on December 12th. Is that correct?
>> That is correct. So, anyone who is interested in providing a proposal would have to respond in writing with that proposal to the sheriff's office by that time. >> All right, >> I'll make that motion. >> Commissioner Franzine makes the motion to approve.
>> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Lee. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Lupkkey, >> I. >> Commissioner Lee, >> I. >> Commissioner Coring, >> I. >> Commissioner Franine, >> I. >> Commissioner Barers, >> I. Motion passes. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
>> And I have just one last thing I'd like to bring up to the attention of the board, Mr. Chair. And uh good news. Uh as you know, we actually put out a application for a vsent crime enforcement team opportunity with the state. Currently, there's 21 vs in the
state of Minnesota and we wanted to be 22nd with our latest team. Uh that application was submitted back in October or actually was submitted back in August and we were expecting a response in October. We just got our response last Friday. We've been approved and we are beunded now through
the Vet program which is uh the trigger that allows us to try to hire that individual that we needed for our record support. Uh and I just want to let you know that I was not going to move forward with that position until we got approval with the funding to do so and that has been approved as of last Friday. I just want to make you aware of that.
>> Excellent. Thank you very much. >> And if you have any other questions for me, I'd be willing to answer. >> Mr. Chair, so what does that position do? Could you help me with >> the record specialist for our related team actually does all of our financial records and our statistics that we're required to provide to the state to be
part of a VSET program. So every activity any uh any monies that we bring in any monies that we spend uh the activity of the team in regards to arrests type of arrests types of drugs we're taking in types of crime we're uh we're dealing with some of the federal
information that we're being provided uh for those arrests through the DEA the FBI. Uh all that stuff has to be documented and sent into the state quarterly and then they do audits on us every month and she'll be in direct contact with auditors when they come in to verify that all of our documentation
regards to our financial records, our reporting, our reports and so forth or in line. She's also going to be in charge of the evidence collection for related teams. So any evidence that comes in that has to be controlled and has to be reported back to the VSET. Also uh this this job entails basically
our entire record department and one person just for our VSET program that's being headed by the ladated team. So it's uh it's a very important position and it was more it was too much for our laded uh lead to actually take on. It would have spent more time sitting in a
desk than doing the actual fieldwork and that's what this position is for. >> Okay. Thank you >> Mr. Chair and commissioners. That is part of our 2026 budget. the preliminary budget that you had approved, if you recall, that position was included within that budget with the expectation
that it was going to be funded through those VSET dollars. And as chief deputy mentioned, if it wasn't going to the if the grant wasn't going to be received, the position wasn't going to move forward. So, this is good news for that. >> Yes. Very good.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> County attorney, are they online? >> Kelsey is online. Yeah. Good morning. >> Good morning, Mr. Chair, commissioners. >> Good morning. >> I don't have anything for you this morning, but I could be I'd be happy to
answer any questions you may have. >> Any questions for the county attorney? >> Guess you're off the hook. >> Thank you. >> Have a good day, >> county administrator. >> Mr. Chair, commissioners, our senior management team met on Monday afternoon
and we had a couple of different agenda items that we discussed this week. First, we had a presentation from the Association of Miss Minnesota Counties grant support team from the standpoint of showing us some new tools that they have available with a listing of grant resources that might be something the
counties may want to take advantage of or at least have an opportunity to see what grants might be available. They also have developed some resources that assist with grant writing. often that is not a skill that we have on our staff.
So, it's always a nice thing to have some template material and to be able to make sure that we are approaching those resources and those opportunities as best as possible. Um, we also spent some time discussing our plan B, if you will,
if we were to have an IT disaster if for whatever reason, whether it be man-made or whether it be a natural disaster that took out our IT functionality, how would we continue to do business? We've talked before about what does that mitigation
plan look like? How do we prevent things from happening? But now we need to also focus on what's the recovery. How do we respond? One of the things we talked about was do departments have a list of contact information for all of their staff. And in some cases the answer was
yes. And when the question was asked, well where is that stored? Somebody said well on my computer. Well if we can't get to the network it doesn't do us a whole lot of good of having just that location having that piece of it. So what is the recovery or response aspects
that we need to be aware of? Like many of these things, this is one of those areas where we really don't know what the issue might be until you're in the midst of it. But what can we do to make sure that we are somewhat prepared to be able to cover any kind of contingency or
emergency that comes up. So some of the things we talked about was utilizing the Everbridge functionality. um some of the other areas and opportunities that we have with our emergency management department to help to provide that notice as need be. We also talked about
the fact that we've done a great job of outfitting our departments and our buildings to be keyless entry. Your key is now your card. Well, if your computer system is down, how are you getting in the building? Do we make sure that we can still access our facilities if that
is the case? So, a couple of good discussion points that came up for talking points and further review for us to consider as we move forward and continuing to strengthen our operations. That's all I have for you today, but if anyone has any questions of me, I'd be
happy to answer them. >> Questions for the administrator? >> Commissioner Coring? Anything? >> Nothing, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> You have a final story for us, Paul? >> No. I wish I did have a a final good
story, but uh uh I I the only final thing I would say is uh that Crowing County has lost somebody that documented uh our area, Steve Kohl's, has passed
away. and and uh I got to tell you from the time I started running uh for the state senate seat, I can remember back in 1996, I was in the St. Matias town hall. Uh, it was dark out and Steve took
a picture and it was uh it kind of it it just kind of told you what what the grassroots government is on caucus night with the picture that he took. And they always say that pictures say a thousand words. Well, I'll tell you,
Steve Kohl's said many, many words. And what a great man. And um I I considered him a friend and and I certainly will will miss him. and um I just want to honor him today. >> I would concur with that, Commissioner.
So, thank you very much for those >> wonderful words. He was a gentleman and a welcome at any event. Amazing. Anything else? If there's nothing else, I would look
for a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Motion by Commissioner Franine. >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Lubkey. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Lee, >> I. >> Commissioner Coring, >> I. >> Commissioner Franine, >> I.
>> Commissioner Lupkey, >> I. >> Commissioner Barros, >> I. That motion passes. We are adjourned. Thank you very much, everyone.