We have to up, >> you know, they don't have any. >> Sorry, Sheriff. >> Sheriff, you may you may you may be excused. >> You may be excused. Why is that carrot sitting there? Why is that carrot?
>> Good morning. Welcome to the county board meeting. Would you please join me for a moment of silence in the pledge of allegiance? >> I aliance 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. Open forum. I haven't gotten any. Okay. Uh, review and approve the minutes of April 14th and the amended minutes of March 24th.
Madam Chair, I make a motion to approve the minutes of the 14th and the amended minutes of the 24th. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second that. >> Motion by Commissioner Lubkkey, second by Commissioner Barrows. Is there any
discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Motion carries. Review and approval of the agenda. >> Madam Chair, I do have a couple of changes this morning. First, we would like to remove item 6.1,
the resolution declaring a public health nuisance at 100042 Gilbert Trail. We'll remove that one. And then under additional business, I would like to add an amendment to the landfill construction project.
If we could add that as 11.1. Do I have a motion? >> Madam Chair, if there's no other changes, I would make the motion to approve the agenda. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Barrow, second by Commissioner Coring.
Is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion carries. Consent agenda. >> I'll make a motion to approve. Second >> motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Coring. Is there any
discussion? >> Um, I have one thing on the outdoor uh warning sign sirens maintenance. It was just a question that's under 5.8. Do you want to? >> No, just ask your question. >> Okay. Um, Clayton, you know, we did this
uh this is in regards to us doing a overall looking at all the sirens, no matter what jurisdiction they're in. Um, and I brought it up. I'm bringing up in the fact I know that in the jurisdiction I serve, they're looking at another siren. Okay. But I but it brought up a
question to me. There is uh in unorganized territory, which falls under the county board, there is no sirens. Is there any look I I don't know if we've talked about it as a county board yet. Could you maybe get an idea of what that would take to put some sirens in that
area? at least give a proposal to us because right now it is our third largest population group in Crowing County and there is no sirens in that whole area. So I was just going to bring that up and and make a mention of it and I thought here would be the place to do it. >> Madam Chair, members of the board again
uh thank you for the opportunity to again talk about our emergency outdoor warning sirens. the uh initiative again we started kind of back in April 29th when I came from the committee of the whole and we kind of talked about that moving forward and reaching out to the townships and working out to the cities
on what that would look like for a kind of a unified emergency warning kind of a preventive maintenance uh schedule for those and then back in uh on May 13 we uh or um we also did the on March 30th I'm sorry we did that uh kind of an overall reached out to the townships and
the cities and had a kind of a working group and we had a good good showing there. Had about 20 members from the uh different stakeholders that came and we talked about the emergency warning sirens that we had and uh uh you know going forward as you mentioned uh commissioner the you know unorganized
territory is a huge area particularly it's one of our largest outdoor essentially uh you know when it comes to vacationing area and tourist outdoor venues for uh events and and then additional to our large population in there. So, that is one of the areas that
we're looking at potentially again providing the board with a proposal on what that would look like to and the best locations for that as well to make sure that uh not only are they, you know, in the in those areas, but also the uh the optimum location as well to
hit the most amount of people uh that'll be able to hear those those sirens. I know I had received one uh call from a resident as well on Galdam Road that had talked about sirens about not hearing them and the the interest of having a siren in that area. So we are getting again calls or I am feeling calls from
the community uh as we you know kind of push forward with this and uh you know I did a uh news conference with Lakeland News as well recently. I don't know if you had an opportunity to see that talking about emergency warning sirens. So I have had several members of the community call in and again kind of show
their support in as far as us moving forward. But as you mentioned commissioner that unorganized territory large populated area uh large venue area particularly during the summer months as far as tourism uh and we want to make sure that those residents are again and those visitors are being covered should
inclement weather come into our area. So I'll move pushing forward. I'll again look at what those locations look like costs associated with that as well and bring that back in front of the board. Thank you. Appreciate that. >> Um Clayton, when John Bowen was here, he did a study on that. So maybe you could
find that and look at that before you put a lot of time into it. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. >> I Madam Chair, I do have a question. So Clayton, this would this would really wouldn't fall under the county board of commissioners. This would actually be
the township board for unorganized territory, I would assume. And then those taxpayers would be having to fit the bill for that. Correct. >> And I'm would be attending tomorrow's evening uh meeting as well with the uh what is it? The >> township association of township officers. So I'll be at that meeting
tomorrow night as well. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> Nope. That's all I had. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Anyone else? >> Okay. We have a a motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Coring. All those in favor? >> I >> I
>> opposed. Motion carries. Community services. >> Morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. I brought this property to you last year in 2025. Uh we've received approval to utilize solid waste funds and working with the owner to abate
multiple identified public health nuisances on the property. This property is located on the 13,000 block of County Road 25 in Brainer. Uh, I have been working with this property owner throughout 2025 and now into 2026 to mitigate these ongoing concerns. We have
provided three dumpsters in 2025 and the owner has been responsive to our request and guidance. They're continuing to show efforts in their progress towards completing this cleanup and I'm asking the board to approve renewal of the 2025 resolution to utilize solid waste funds
into 2026 uh in order to abate the remaining public health nuisances. The expenses are to be assessed to their taxes, their property taxes. >> Any questions? >> Can I have a motion?
>> Madame Chair, I would move the request for board action on the um property at 13734 County Road 25. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Motion by Commissioner Carring, second by Commissioner Barrows.
Any discussion hearing? None. All those in favor? >> I motion carries. Thank you. Land services. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. We have five items for your consideration this morning. The first
request is for the plenary plat of Clearwater Point, second edition for parcel number 500070563 located in section 7 of Bay Lake Township. The request is to approve a conventional design preliminary plat consisting of four lots. Um if we can go
to the map on page 106, we'll get an idea of where the property is located. So this is we have Clearwater we have Clear Water Lake here. This is Clear Waterpoint Road. Then over here, it comes off of uh off of Noki Lake Road off to the west. If we can go to page
108, that's this is the plat that's being requested. So, here you have Clear Water Point Road coming through and then you have four lots. You have two to the north and you have these two to the south. Um, when you look at the map, it's a little interesting because this
OW or the ordinary high water mark that defines where the lake is located comes into here, but it looks very um looks very wetlandish or very swampy. The actual water line is uh actually out into this area out here. Uh the planning commission held a public hearing on
April 16th of 2026 and made a recommendation to the board to approve the plunary plat of Clearwater Point second edition. And the board also developed the finding of facts that are found on page 214 and 215 for your consideration as well. This uh application had a few wrinkles in it as
we went through the process. So we originally had the application slated for the meeting in January and that included a request to allow a 33 foot road um to service the north two parcels. So originally the plan was for this the request was for this to be a 33
foot where the ordinance requires 66 and upon hearing feedback from the township and some community members the applicant decided to table the request um and um because it didn't sound like there was a lot of support for that request and so um they updated the information and came
back with a 66 foot now so there was no variance needed for that. The original plan for the plat was to access um lot two right here off an existing driveway and then for lot one to come around and use an existing driveway here. And uh
and so when the applicant made their in made the application to come to the March meeting, um there was conversation with the neighbor who owns this property. There's a a small parcel here that uh the driveway would cross that would require an easement and um they
have not been able to uh obtain that easement across that east side of the property. So what they requested was a variance to reconstruct the driveway to avoid driving over that neighboring property. Um if we can scroll down to
page 109 there the next one down we can keep right there. So um the this would be where clear water point comes around and then this would be that existing driveway and right in here this little sliver that is the actual amount that
where the easement would be um needed to be agreed upon to be able to cross over that to access this lot. And what they proposed to do was to was to move the driveway in this more of a hairpin type um turn. And that would have required a variance for Duke moving because this is a bluff. If you come if you if you see
out here, this is a very steep slope and actually meets the definition of a bluff. And so um they needed and they needed a um a variance to do that. And then there were there was another iteration of that that was provided that the township hadn't had a chance to review. And so at the March meeting, the
planning commission decided to table that and to come back to the April so that the township had a chance to review that because uh Bay Lake Township is a road authority for Clear Waterpoint Road. Uh and so when it came back to the meeting in April, the uh planning commission ultimately denied that
variance request stating that the applicant could access lot one via access through lot number two. Uh the township, they had concerns over the driveway being relocated into the bluff impact zone, the amount of dirt movement required and the potential instability
that that would um that would have. Uh so the Bay Lake Township who is a local road authority did recommend denial of the variance. And so we did have um some different comments from the township. the township did um provide initial comment um on uh from the January
meeting stating disapproval of the of the request and I think it was really based on that 33 versus 66 ft easement and then um then when we had the dirt moving request for the March and April they did um recommend denial of both
those variances as well. We did receive um a comment from the SWCD. We did receive three comments from the public. Um, and so I I think there's also we you also received information from um Steve Lindamman who is the owner of this
parcel here with his concerns over having access to lot one. And uh at the planning commission meeting, it was discussed that um there is access through lot two to the west to gain access to lot one using the existing driveway. And uh it would be the
recommendation of staff that based on the application submitted the staff packet public comments and the finding effect to recommend approval of the plat of Clearwater Point second edition. Um and with the condition that they have to record that easement across lot two to access lot one prior to recording the
plat. I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Okay. >> Madam chair if it's okay. I'd also like to point out that Tyler Progly is here with Woods. He was the authorized agent for the applicant as well. He's in the audience tonight or this or this morning, >> right?
Um person that's online will have three minutes. >> Uh thank you. I think you're referring to me, Madam Chair and members of the board. My name is Steve Lindamman. uh for over 40 years. My family has owned
the property at 23011 Clearwater Point Road uh which is next door to the Cobble Crest property. Uh yesterday I submitted a letter for your consideration. In short, my family opposes this subdivision as proposed uh because it does not satisfy the
requirement of the county ordinance that each lot must have adequate legal access. Cabbell Crest is relentlessly pushing for a rapid approval of what we believe is an ill-advised plan. Was born in secrecy, has been riddled with flaws
that would harm the community and has repeatedly morphed when those flaws were exposed. The seeds of those flaws remain embedded in the proposed plat that is before you today. and those seeds will surely bear bad fruit in the months to come because the issue of adequate legal
access to the development has not been resolved. Uh I'd like to explain that by drawing your attention to two documents that are part of the record. Uh the first is at page 108 which we looked at moments ago and if that could be pulled up I can uh illustrate the point I'm
making. >> Pull that up. Now, this drawing shows a a hookshaped driveway that was rejected when the planning commission denied Cobble Crest request for a variance uh to ex excavate the sensitive bluff impact zone. As
things now stand, there is no other proposed plat drawing that shows access to block one, lot one after creation of the subdivision. As a result, there's nothing before you that we believe should be approved. Now, if you can pull
up u another document. This is at page 155 of the materials, please. This is essentially uh the same drawing, but it um has been highlighted in orange where the existing driveway is. And I
apologize, my highlighting is a little shaky there, but I think you can see the entrance to uh block one, lot two is on the west where the driveway exists uh existing driveway intersects Clearwater Point Road. That driveway continues all
the way across to the east where it then trespasses across our property to meet up with Clearwater Point Road on the other side. Um, as pointed out, if there were an easement uh for lot one to cross lot
two, um, there would be adequate access to lot one, but they do not want to uh have the driveway go across lot two to reach lot one. And so there is no easement currently. Now, if the board
board denies the application today, Cobble Crest will have to go back to the drawing board and ideally talk to their neighbors about what makes sense for the Clearwater Lake community. That's what they should have done in the first place and that's what they should do now. >> Your three minutes are up.
>> I I just want to finish with 30 more seconds if you will indulge me please. >> Okay. Um before anything is approved, the applicant should be required to show exactly what the PL they plan to do with the property, including how they will
provide adequate legal access to each lot. So today, we ask that you deny preliminary plat approval because there is no legal access to lot one. And as an alternative, as Mr. Pence pointed out, if you choose to pre approve the
preliminary plat, we ask that you impose an unambiguous and mandatory condition stating that final plat approval will not be given unless clear and adequate legal access to all of the lots is incorporated into the final plat drawing. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience who'd like to speak? and you can also have three and a half minutes. >> Okay. Thank you very much. My name is Tyler Pagribba. I'm the land surveyor uh that uh is platting this this property
um here to represent the clients. Uh just to just to respond to a few of those items. Um I don't think that this plaid is riddled with with errors. um myself and land services along with the clients. Um there was a bit of confusion
at first with the requirements on what we needed to show for easements. Um particularly with that north two with the north two parcels um we were very happy to change that to 66 ft. Um so
that that um satisfied those concerns. The bluff um variance with that driveway was denied and the clients were okay with that. We have proposed a ingress egress easement across lot two to
service lot one. Um myself I've done this many times. I've been in contact with land services and the county surveyor. Uh we typically will draft those easements, have them recorded, and then they'll be shown right on the final plat prior to recording. And those
updates have been made right here. I can certainly show you them. Um and then as far as the lot sizes, they're four times the minimum lot size. There's plenty of land area here. Impervious numbers are all okay. So the main concern was the
access to lot one which has been addressed and we show an ingress egress easement and we are proposing to record that prior to recording of the final plot. I I know that a lot of words have been said and this is kind of confusing.
Um but the clients and myself have been very um willing to adapt this plat. That's why there's been a few iterations of it to satisfy what the county will require as far as minimums and they're far exceeding those. Do you guys wish to
to view the prelim and final plat showing the showing the easement? >> I'd like to see them. >> Yeah. >> And final >> Chris Madame Chair, Madam Chair, may I ask a
quick question? Uh Chris, did the um planning commission see this this what we're looking at now? Has the planning commission seen what's being proposed right now? >> They they have uh they have not seen what you see today, but the discussion was the understanding that there would
be an easement through lot two to access lot one. So >> they were aware of the easement, but they haven't seen the specific drawing, >> but they they knew it was exactly as it's been discussed. is going to be using that existing approach coming off of Clear Waterpoint Road and the existing driveway to get over to lot one. So, Yep. Yep. They they understood
that when they made that recommendation that there would be an easement um needing to access lot one through lot. Yep. The planning commission was aware of that >> and they and they weighed in that they would approve it. >> That was that they Yes, absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Y
ma madam chair. So, it is a little confusing for me. So the easement across lot two, isn't lot two owned by Mr. Lindamman? >> No. I mean,
>> can you point that out? >> Yeah, absolutely. So, Mr. Lindamman owns this >> because they were they were first talking about going across his property, right? >> Yep. So, Mr. Lindamman owns this parcel right here, this part of government lot, too. And that parcel comes up like this over at an angle and it kind of
terminates right in this area here. Right. So that's where they had to cross this northerly sliver of his property to gain access to this lot. So the Cobble Crest properties owns lot one, lot two, three, and four. So they own all of
this. Currently, they've been using this historically over the years to get access to this lot using this, but there was never an approved easement to go across the Lindaman property to to get access to this part of the property. So, >> what they're proposing to do is to grant
an easement across lot two to get over to lot one. So, that'll the access will be through lot two to get over to lot one. >> So, they'll be going Madam Chair. So, they'll be going through maybe that whoever is going to buy that lot will have an easement through there
to get to the other lot. >> Correct. and there'll be a recorded easement so they would be aware of knowing that they're purchasing a property but with an easement where folks will be driving through to get to that to get over to lot one >> and just madam chair so and Mr. Lindamman's argument where what would
his argument be then? I don't see where the argument is. >> His argument would be that the easement isn't there right now. >> So, and the ordinance the ordinance talks about there having to be um legal access for parcels we created to a public road. And that's he's he's just
saying that the easement isn't there now and it should be. You can you could deny it on that basis. But the planning commission made the recommendation with the understanding that there's going to be easement through a lot to to gain access. >> This is the And madam chair, this is the preliminary plat, >> correct? So they still have to come back
to you for >> the final plat will come back to us, >> correct? >> With that and if that easement is not in there, >> it wouldn't it won't come back until we have that part figured out. >> Okay. So then I don't know what the issue is. >> Madam Chair, I've got a couple
questions. >> Has the the township seen this yet then or is this brand new? Uh the what what you see up here now is what the town the township has seen this. They haven't seen the the specifics of what Tyler
provided today. But they were they they understood at the meeting that there would be an ease. They were they had they didn't have any concerns as long as the they were using that same approach to gain access into lot one. So they understood that there would be an easement through lot two to get to lot one.
>> Okay. Does lot one or lot two currently have a house on it? >> Both both have structures on it. Yep. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> So then the township would then be uh would approve of the driveway instead
of a 66T easement >> or go through that. >> They wouldn't require a 66T easement to get it be more of a driveway style easement to get through there. Yep. Okay. And then one of the concerns that I saw
was with regard to dirt removal, moving moving stuff around on the bluff. Correct. >> That would not be necessary anymore. >> That would have been in this area here to relocate that driveway >> and that was denied by the planning commission. So there will be no um dirt
moving in that area to recreate the bluff for there'll be no work in that bluff area to relocate the driveway. That was denied by the planning commission. Yep. >> So that's that that decision is what forced the easement to come through here to gain access to lot one. >> Yeah.
>> So yeah, I'm good. Go ahead, >> Madam Chair. So another question is okay. So we're right now we're looking at the preliminary plat. Obviously at the preliminary plat we make recommendations on changes. Land services makes recommendations and
that's what's happening right now. And then the final plat will come before the planning commission. It will not >> it comes directly to you. Planning commission doesn't review the final plat. Final plat's reviewed by the
county board only. And so what if the final plat if if let's just say we wanted the uh hear what Bay Lake Township has to say then when when would they have the chance to weigh in on that?
>> We we could definitely um if you approved the plenary plat today we could forward to them and with the information that Tyler provided today to to get you know to get their feedback. But if that's something that you'd like, we could definitely have that in place prior to prior to coming back with final
plat. >> I I just, Madam Chair, I just don't want to have somebody say, "I didn't get a chance to weigh in on that." I mean, >> I would argue that >> there's been a lot of opportunities to weigh in on this one. So, there's been a lot of lot of everybody understands I
think the input and the questions and concerns have been brought up, but I I don't see any issue with forwarding this on to the township and asking them to take a look at this new plan that Tyler provided before he comes back for final plaid >> being that they are the road authority. >> Absolutely. Y that would be very easy for us to take
care of. >> Any other questions? >> Oh, I have a motion. I will make a motion to move forward with a preliminary plat um with it being approved by the or
being sent to the Bay Lake Township as well. >> Okay. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Madam Chair, could I just and and to require the easement as part of the >> Yes. Sorry. Yes. >> Correct. Yes. Just want to make sure. >> The most important part. Thank you. >> Y Thank you.
>> Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Coring. All those in favor? >> I I >> opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> The next request we have is for the
preliminary plat of Ruter's First Hole Golf Cottages for parcel number 500330614 located in section 4 of Bay Lake Township. The request is to approve a conservation size preliminary plat consisting of 12 lots, 11 for cabins and
one for an outlot. Um if you go to the map on page 202, well actually that'll work right there. We can stay there. That'll work. This is uh located um north of Rucker Resort. Um this would be Tame Fish here and you've got Highway 6 here. There was a plat that was done in
a conditional use permit that I'll get into in a minute, but this is where they're proposing to replplat um this location. Uh so the plan commission, just to give you some background, the plan commission approved a conditional use permit on July 15th of 2021 to allow
an expansion to the resort. And the conditional use permit at that time allowed 14 um 14 lots. The county board approved the plat of records for soul cottages on August 24th of 2021. Um and this included two outlots. So it says when this says there's 14 total lots,
there were two outlots for a total of 12 cabin lots and then two outlots. The request that you have today is replat of it. It was approved in 2020 with a reduction of one cabin and a reduction of one outlot. Uh so the planning commission they held a a public hearing on April 16th of 2026 and made a
recommendation to the board to approve the plary plat of Rucker's first hole cottages. The planning commission held developed the finding of fact that's found on page 214 and 215 of your packet as well. If we go to page 206, we can look at the plaque quickly. Um,
so this would be this this is tame fish here. You've got state highway 6. And the changes are up here. The previous lots were held over in here. There were four in here. And what they're wanting to do is readjust them over these three off more to the east and reduce one of the lots and then keep everything pretty
much the same coming down with this being the access going up. Uh so based on the application submitted staff packet public comments and the finding of fact is recommended to approve the plenary plat of directors first golf cottages staff have reviewed the file and concur with the recommendation from
the planning commission. I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Madam Madam chair so Chris the where it says block one and there's three below and then there's one two three four five above. There's nothing there now. Those
are >> correct. There's nothing there now. These are just >> Yep. Cottages >> proposed to build. >> So then just a curiosity question. So would each lot or each little cabin have their own septic system? Where do they
get their water from? >> Madam Chair, Commissioner Cory, that's a great question. So they are on a state permit. So they generate more than 10,000 gallons of water per day. So they're on a state pollution control agency permit. And so they have all the waste water ran through the state of Minnesota. And we have we have
confirmation from the state that everything they've got out there for capacity covers that. There also is right in this area right in there is a wellhouse. So they've got a well there that provides all the water for um that side of the resort and the golf course. So they have adequate waste water and um
and drinking water for the proposal. >> Very good. >> Other questions? >> Have a motion. I'll make the motion. >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Barrows. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion carries. >> Thank you. The next request is for the final plat of Ruckers First Golf Cottages for parcel number 5003
0614 located in section 4 of Bay Lake Township. All requirements have been met for the final plat application and we recommend approval as submitted. >> Madame chair, I would so move the adoption of the Ruters first hole golf
cottages and second edition final plat. >> I'll second it. >> Any questions? Hearing none. We have a motion by Commissioner Barrow, second by Commissioner Lee. All those in favor >> or not, by Commissioner Coring. Mr.
Coring motion. Okay. >> Opposed. Motion carries. I had to change my notes. Okay. >> All right. The next request is for the preliminary plat of Rucker's Lakeside Cottages, second edition for parcel
number 5000300598, also located in section four of Bay Lake Township. The request is to approve a um a a uh conservation design plenary plat consisting of 13 lots. The total size of the parcel before subdividing is about
11 acres. Um if we go to the map on page 285 of the packet again, we'll see the location. Um so just as a reminder, this would be tameish state highway 6. We just you just approved the plat on the north side here and now we're um
actually excuse me we're in this part of the resort now to look at that. So if we could go to page 287. So what you've got is these these uh lots here is what's being proposed to be platted with this request. The plan commission approved a conditional use
permit and a variance on February 15th of 2024 to allow an expansion to the resort. Um the the expansion that time allowed for 13 cabin lots. Uh the plat today monuments those 13 cabin lots uh so that they each will have their own legal description. Uh and that's what
you see up here on this today. Uh the planning commission held a public hearing on April 16th, 2026 and made a recommendation to the board to approve the plary plat of Rucker's Lakeside Cottages second edition. The planning commission developed the finding of fact found on pages 295 and 296 for your
consideration as well. And based on the application submitted, staff packet, public comments, and the finding of fact is recommended to approve the pre plat of Ruckers Lakeside Colleges second edition. Staff have also reviewed the file and concur with the recommendation. Be happy to answer any questions.
>> Madam chair, just the same question as I had last time, just out of curiosity. So is that is that the same well or is that a different well? Is that the same y >> treatment plant? >> It's the same wastewater treatment plant. Yeah. All the water gets gets there's there's they've got lift stations. They pump it up to the north.
They've got a big drain field up in there for that and and there's there's a different well for that that that uses water on the south side compared to the north side. So, they've got adequate water and wastewater treatment services at the resort for this. >> Okay. >> Madam Chair,
there's some existing structures on the east side of that. Are those in this uh >> up in here? >> Are they there some separation from those? I take it I can't I can't remember exactly. I thought there was some buildings maybe or something. >> These what you've got in this situation,
these were um replacements of some of the existing cabins that were there. And so when they went through that conditional use permit in 24, it was to get and because some there were some that were cabins that removed and there were some cabins that were allowed to stay and then that was part of the conditional use and the variance because they don't meet the they don't all meet
the 100 foot setback to Bay Lake as would be required. And so that's what the variance was for as part of that in 2024. >> Okay, that's all I got. >> Any other questions from anyone? Can I have a motion?
>> I will make the motion uh to approve the preliminary plot for Ruters's Lakeside Cottages, second edition. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Coring. All those in favor? >> I
>> I >> opposed. Motion carries. >> All right. The final request is for the final plat of Rucker's Lakeside Cottages, second edition for parcel number 500330598 located in section 4 of Bay Lake Township. All requirements have been met
for the final plat application recommend approval as submitted. >> I'll make the motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Coring. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion carries.
>> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thanks, Chris. >> Good morning, Madam Chair, members, commissioners. Good to be here. A lot of stuff going on. It's uh start of summer and we're uh gearing up for
all that, all the action that we're expected to have here in the uh Briner Lakes area. So, we're excited about that. We have our boat and water uh that's up a full staff and getting ready to start here uh in the next couple weeks. Uh attended a couple events. One
of them was the uh Lakes Area Heroes banquet that they had for us at the NP Center. Uh it was uh hopefully you guys can go next year. It was a great time. They had 427 folks that showed up at that and uh and
honored our first responders here in Crowing County. Um even Morrison and Cass County as well. So uh we're very blessed to have an organization like that that uh takes care of our first responders when when they're in need. So
uh it was uh it was a lot of fun. They gave away a ton of guns, very expensive guns. Um, and there there were a lot of prizes uh for folks to win. So, um, you guys would have had a good time there if you would have showed up. The food was awesome. They did a great job. The other
event I attended was uh last night attended the uh Minnesota adult and teen challenge banquet or gayla. Um, and it was just another uh f place place that we have here in Crowing County that does an outstanding job with our folks that are struggling or that have control
addiction issues or uh some type of thing that it controls them. And um it was a a really good event, fundraiser for them, but uh also a um a blessing to hear some of the stories that have that that have taken place or the transformations that have taken place in
people's lives. Uh so very pretty special. Um there uh also will be attending the annual township meeting. I'm sure I'll see some of you guys there uh tomorrow. We have uh one FTO that just got off of FTO field training. And
uh so he's working by himself now back on the road. We have two folks that are still in training. Uh hoping to get them on the road here in the next uh uh next month. Um let's see what else we got. Um got one interview coming up for uh one
more uh deputy. Um and hopefully we'll uh we've been receiving some really good candidates. So we're excited about that. I think the area um gives us an opportunity to draw good people here because everybody wants to come to Brainard and and uh make their uh
forever home. U the the question is whether or not they can afford it. Um the other let's see um uh and then I was just going to say that uh I've noticed as I've been looking through the calls and stuff there's been
uh quite a few uh suicides as well that have been happening in our area and I would again push out the number the 988. Um if anybody is struggling or needs mental health assistance please don't hesitate to call us. We have an embedded
social worker in our office as well and uh we use her quite heavily uh when when people are in in crisis. So uh I just wanted to give a plug again for 988. With that I'd take any questions uh if you have any or any concerns,
complaints, compliments. All right. Thank you very much. >> You >> Thank you, Sheriff. >> The attorney. Good morning, Madam Chair, commissioners. I don't have anything for you this morning, but I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
>> Any questions? >> Thank you. >> Any administrator? >> Madam Chair, commissioners, just an update today from our senior management team. Yesterday, we talked a little bit about our analytics, reviewed our recruitment analytics that we have been
looking at after our contract with Hubard Broadcasting. If you recall, we have a micro site, a micro website devoted to recruitment. And if you haven't had a chance to take a look at that, you will find a lot of great information about our organization as a
whole, which I think is probably helping what the sheriff was talking about and recruiting some of those great candidates to some of our open positions. We're also now looking at the the radio ads and the input that that has, the impact once those are broadcast. when we hear those radio ads
in the community, it does drive a little bit of a spike in the folks who are visiting that micro site. So, we know it's having some impact that way. And now we're adding some social media components to that effort as well. Really trying our best to reach the the folks who really want to come and be
part of this fantastic organization. We also had a discussion in preparation for an upcoming presentation next week that we will be making to one of the local high schools for their AP government class. This will be the second or third group that we've had the the chance to be in front of. And when
we talk about recruiting, not only are we looking for the folks who aren't currently part of our community, but we want to try to encourage those who are the best and the brightest of those folks who are already here to stay here and come and work here and make a great career here as well. We talked about the
fact that our supervisors are working through the first period employee check-ins for performance management. I can't believe we're already past the first quarter of 2026 already. The time is just flying by here, but we are getting through those check-ins as well. And then finally, we talked a little bit
about a revision process for our class and compensation review as we've discussed previously with all of you as well. That's all I have for you today, but if anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. >> Thank you.
Additional business. Uh good morning, Madam Chair and commissioners. Thank you for your time today. Um on your agenda for additional business is an amendment to the 2026 uh Crowing County Landfill Construction Contract. So, at your last meeting on April 14th, you approved um the uh
entering into a contract with Pratt's affordable excavation for about 4.4 million. Uh this is a budgeted item for land services. Uh we budgeted 5 million from our solid waste funds to complete the relining of our Lee ponds, final closure of the east uh slopes of cells
three and four, the addition of a raincoat, and then the uh construction of cell 6. Uh as some background, our engineers estimate for the project was about 4.6 million and we received one bid from Pratt's Affordable Excavation for that 4.4 million. Uh after the bids
were approved by the board, the contractor did reach out um and requested approximately 37,000 in an increase to their base bid um because of the volatility of materials to complete the project um and the price uh and the the time between when the bids were
opened and awarded by the board. Um, originally the contractor had reached out for about a $60,000 increase, but we worked with the contractor to um, source some different materials or the same materials but from a different vendor and were able to get that down to about 37,000. Um, the contractor stated that
uh, the increases are coming from the cost of resin to produce some of the specialized materials that we need out for the landfill construction project. Um, and specifically the liner and the geo composits. uh most likely seeing those because of the uh conflicts that
are happening in the Middle East. Um I'll pause there for any questions that you may have. Um there madam chair, one quick observation. This morning it was noted that gas prices went up six cents in some areas of the country. So we're seeing the volatility
of that supply line. Does Pratt understand that these costs are still going up? They're, you know, they're asking for this today, but today we already know the costs are going up. Are they going to be coming back for an additional amount of money?
>> Yes, Madam Chair, Commissioner Barrows. So, that's something we did. We're very clear with Pratt that this is this is a one and only type thing and that he needs to have his bid secured through today. So, uh, if this gets approved today, he can move forward, purchase those, and he won't have any other additional increases. He'll have secured
his materials for the project. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, also, you know, you just mentioned the fuel cost going up 6 cents. He must have known that already going into the project that his fuel cost, I mean, you know, he's talking about the resin here in in what
our liner takes to put it in. He has also the fuel cost of all his vehicles hauling that dirt out of there. Correct. He didn't ask for an increase in that. >> Yep. Madam Chair, Commissioner Lipkkey, he did not ask for any additional increases outside of the the cost for the some of the specialized materials that are coming from this resin.
>> When we've done these in the past, um has who have we had multiple bids? Cuz you said right now Pratt was the only one who actually bid on this project. >> Yes, I'll defer to Gary. I I I would have to say that we have, but I wasn't here um last time we did a construction
project. >> Yeah, we had two bids on our last our last >> Okay. But we only had one bid for this whole project. >> Correct. >> So it isn't there's a difference between somebody the pricing is really non not an issue because we only have one bidder.
>> Yeah. And and the the good thing here is that um he was you know the bid from Pratt was under budget and underneath our engineers estimate as well. And it still remains that even with the $37,000 increase that they're asking for.
>> Other questions? If not, can I have a motion? >> Madame Chair, I would I would I would move the request for board action. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Motion by Commissioner Coring, second by Commissioner Barrows. All those in favor?
>> I >> opposed. Motion carries. Thank you very much. >> Now we'll go into close session. Person Yes, Madam Chair. We would be looking for a motion to move into close session pursuant to 13 DO5 for pending
litigation for the Whitefish Jane LLC versus Crowing County. >> Madam Chair, before we go into close session, would it be in I guess I guess I'd like to hear from our great county engineer on how things are coming. Uh I
know that a lot of bids have been let and projects are moving forward. Just if there's any updates at all, Tim, at all or Madam Chair and Commissioners, uh, Commissioner Corning, thank you for the question. Uh, we're just getting started
our very busy construction season. As I stated at the last board meeting, we are on track to deliver just short of 40 miles of resurfacing around the county. >> Wow. >> Number of bridges and um some reconstruction. And one of our projects
has started the reconstruction of Mapleton or 170 and uh the rain we would have been a we would have got a good start yesterday if it hadn't rained so much over the last couple days. So look forward to keeping that one going and so we're just getting going. All everything has been bid for
the most part. We do have a partnership with the city of Baxter. We're trying to deliver or we will deliver a county road 48 pedestrian trail uh this year. We're working with them. We're expecting that to be bid later this year.
>> So, Madame Chair and Tim, so as Commissioner Barrow has pointed out, the price of fuel is going up. How did just kind of a majority of the contracts that came in? Were they were they near the uh engineers
um cost or or estimate or or where we at with that? Uh off the top of my head, I don't know all the percentages. Sometimes they're above and below, but we take pride in being really close to the engineers estimate. The thing that um the contracts that we use, they
incorporate a fuel escalation clause. This is something that MDOT, you know, it's a MDOT specification we use too for instances like uh the reasons why fuel is going up and down. >> Yeah. and uh it's it's based on
certain pieces of equipment is very specific and that's how we would handle those particular things. So I can't uh explain that totally right today right now I don't have the time but there are provisions that allow for contractors to
claim an increase in their bid price based on the cost of fuel and impact on their operation and the construction project. Okay, I I'm good. >> Else. Thanks, Tim.
>> Okay, >> I'll make a motion to move to close session. >> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Lee, second by Commissioner Barrows to go to close session pursuant to Minnesota statute uh
13D.05 pending litigation. All those in favor? >> I. >> Those motion carries. Oh, I wish I didn't. >> I would have just played that
>> move off my screen. >> My party. >> Okay. Okay. Motion. We need a motion to adjurnn. >> So move motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Motion by Commissioner Coring, second by
Commissioner Lubkkey. All those in favor? I >> motion carried.