Can we do a roll call? No. Great. Good morning everyone. At this time, I'll call the Crowing County Committee of the Hole to for May 20th, 2025 to order. First up is Tim Bray Reed TC. And is Brad here today? I don't see.
He was planning on being here. I don't see him yet. Okay, the floor is yours. Excellent. Well, I'll start off. Um, let's see. Amber, if you bring up the letter. So on April 1st of this year, the city of Baxter wrote me a letter and I believe
it was directed by the city council to to take a look at the the area. This is the letter. You go to the next the third one there talking about this area of Baxter which is Mapleton Road. It's to the west
or pardon me to the east of the two schools, the elementary and forest view. Um can I have that pointer please? Bet. Just to orientate you, this is the Isisle Drive in Cassafier roundabout. Here's a new elementary school. This is
Maple. Excuse me. If that's the new pointer, there's a button on there. It should be green instead of the new pointer is the one. Oh. Oh. Oh, yeah. Hold on to your eye. Hold on to your eyeballs. Okay. Whoa. Oh, yeah. Okay.
I'm sure there's a warning on here. This is Do not burning a hole in our screen. Don't sign up. Okay. So, is this more visible online? I'm I'm assuming it's not visible. No, it's visible here. I got you. Okay. So, this is the Isisle
Drive and uh 48 roundabout. This is Mapleton headed out towards the county line, Cass County. Um this is the elementary school and this is 371 here. So, on on April 1st, going back, uh the city of Baxter wrote a letter to me, uh
I believe directed by the city council to uh request uh a delay of one of our projects. And while we're here, and maybe um different from other uh uh requests for stuff, it was a request to kind
of do something different than the promise that we've made to the public in this area. And I thought it was important to maybe uh come before you, talk about that, give the opportunity to the city of Baxter and Sourceville to talk about the plan for this area. Almost since the first day I got to
Crowing County, we've been talking about this area with Baxter. And prior to my arriving here, this road, this is our GIS map, and this is a platted roadway that the city of Baxter and Crowing County officials back in 2004 uh uh
platted. And so we've been talking about it uh since then. And one of the challenges with the area is that this is the green outline is uh a contiguous piece of prop or a piece of property. And one of the
previous owners uh was pot latch. I believe they're the original owner. and and early on they were looking to um advance the construction of Mapleton Road along this curve here
to make the property one big uh parcel that was not split by uh County Road or Mapleton Road. And I've been talking with Vaxer and different owners throughout the years and Sourceville is now the owner of the property. And
um I think they just acquired it, you know. Yeah. In March. In March. And so they're doing some planning around that and that's what precipitated the um conversation with the city council in Baxter to formally the government agency
formally requesting us to delay our project as they kind of figure it out what what they're going to do with the property and um that's why they requested a delay because it could be and Reed will jump in in a little bit
talking about their plan for this area if we moved ahead with our 20-year near fix on this uh on pardon me on the yellow area only to have source come and request to to make this one big piece of property is as they build it out for what they plan for it'd be a waste of
taxpayers money so it's a logical request for a delay but we wanted to have an opportunity to talk about how long the delay was based on your planning source planning and so we can uh either have you accept accept that
request to delay it, do nothing until they're ready. Or we could uh put a shorter term fix on it knowing that maybe it's 5 to 8 years down the road that we put a thinner overlay, a different kind of treatment on it for a
project that's in 2026. That's why this is really kind of um important to talk about and a hot button item. we could put a a different type of fix on that that only is expected to last on the time horizon that they're having. And so
we wanted to get them here and be able to talk about that and maybe and also we had asked the city of Baxter to come here because they're they're also interested potentially in this area. They've talked uh about this area right here is which is owned by the city of
Baxter. This side is the city of Baxter. this side is now source well and what their plan is too. They've talked about a city center there. They've talked about other opportunities moving the city hall there. There's some things like that. So, it's their plan and
Sorcil's plan that kind of drives and their the timeline associated that drives kind of the decisions we need to make for the project in 2026. Have any questions? I hope I teed that up. Yep. Pretty good. Yeah. Mr.
Cory. So, question. I guess I I have no I know you're you the county engineer have been kind of a stickler on promises made with the five-year plan. I mean, but if you feel like delaying this, I guess I have no problem with it. I guess
what I'd like and I've mentioned this multiple times. I guess when you take County Road 48 or this one here that are actually inside of a city, I guess it to me it reminds me of Peekquat Lakes. If
we still had that where the 371 that went through um Peekquat Lakes, we turned that over to them. We made a deal with them. Mhm. As you talk about the future infrastructure, are you having the
conversations about, you know, what can we do to turn this over because it makes probably makes sense for them to be plowing the snow there. And um anyway, that's my question. We we have uh Commissioner Coring, thank you for the
for the question. Um we have been talking almost since that day one, you know, 16 years ago about the potential of turnbacks for um in different scenarios. We thought about making
County Road 170 Kasaw 48 and and swapping uh those, but we've never really come to an agreement on that. Um what we did in Pqua Lakes, we turned over $4 million to them, too. So it comes at a cost and we just have not
advanced those to real serious conversations. Almost every time we get together kind of joke about that that we need to get that going but it's never come to fruition. If that's something that the county board wants to advance, we can continue to to have those conversations with
Baxter. Um so that's really currently that's not on on the table and part of this necessarily. How long is this? I mean, milewise, this what you're talking about here? Oh, I'm I'm not certain. Four miles. Four miles. I wouldn't I don't even know that it's that long to
be to the county line. No, this here. Very short. It ends at the county line. Yes. Uh, County Route 170 goes to the county road. What did you say? 170. County Road 170 is four miles or whatever it is. Yeah, I can get the I get the exact length, but it it's a
substantial length. And does the city of Baxter end at the county line or it does? So county road 17 I don't think it goes all the way. I think it ends by forest view, doesn't it? On the the mountain ash there's much more to the
west. I can I can get goes all the way. It does. Yeah. So there's here's a that's a perfect example. Well, if we got County Road 70 or 170 is four miles in the city of Baxter, I don't know. Doesn't make sense
for us to even have that be a county road. You know, that's an initiative. We've talked about it uh just kind of at the city and county engineer level and really is not advanced into a a long-term goal or anything, but we do have a long range transportation plan
that we are working on and that's certainly something that can be addressed in there um in advance with the city of Baxter if they wish just what the intentions are of the two entities. So, a question for Reed. So, um, some, you know, obviously I don't,
you know, I I'm sure Sourcewell does all kinds of good things and I and I know they do and and I'm kind of I guess I'm kind of snotty towards them because they've taken away a lot of good employees here and they they can pay more than we can pay and so that kind of
pisses me off. But I guess is it a big secret of why now that you're buying land source wells buying land. What I mean I know you're taking over the world but what what is what's up with this? Uh happy to explain. Uh commissioners good
morning. I'm Reed TC director of facilities for Sourcewell. I know a lot of you from working here in the past but to Commissioner Lee and and Lubkey. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you both. Um Commissioner Coring to your to your question. Um Sourcewell recently procured the properties as as Tim had
mentioned. Um, we bought those in March, uh, in conjunction with an initiative that we have at Sourcewell, uh, the Wonder Trek Children's Museum. Uh, you may have heard about this uh, from years ago, I believe. Look, I've looked at Mike and asked Mike a little bit about this. Um, but it's been we've been working on Wonder Trek as an
organization and partnering with them for five or six years or or even more. The idea of it has probably been growing since longer than that. So um but recently uh through partnerships with uh the previous owner uh Consolidated Telephone um they had previously owned
those properties uh Wonder Trek had an initiative to try and get up and moving by the end of this calendar year. So uh Sourcewell had the uh capacity right now to support um the Wonder Trek project. So, the three parcels that
um the three parcels that Tim had mentioned are are the parcel in the northeast, parcel on the southeast, and then this westerly parcel here that it does cross Mapleton Road as Tim had mentioned and follows that plat where the the curved roadway would go right
here. Um we have no other plans at this no other plans at this point uh for any development in that area. Um it was just one uh one grouping of parcels that we uh decided to move forward with and to support the children's museum. You may have seen that they broke ground on that
earlier this year. They did some tree clearing and we're are starting to work on their outdoor uh trails and outdoor uh outfitter studio for uh their project on property that Sourcewell owns. Yes. So we have we're have we have an agreement with them or working on an agreement with them for a long-term
lease of this property. Um, as a nonprofit, uh, it partnering with a unit of government does open up funding for them. So, we're we're we're getting into some strategic relationships with with Wonder Trek. I thought somebody's mentioned something about the city of
Baxter moving there or possibly a new city hall. Correct. Yeah. Correct. So, something partnering with. Yeah. I'm not speaking on behalf of of the city of Baxter. I I thought I had thought Brad was going to be here to speak to that. I'll let him uh speak to those terms,
but I know that uh through their through their studies that the city of Baxter does own right here, they do own this parcel here. I think it is one of their potential future city hall considerations. I don't think they've are ready to make a decision at this point and I would defer that to the city of Baxter on where they're going with
it. Our goal really in this um Commissioner Coring was just one these properties open up some future considerations for Sourcewell and any of the other regional partnerships that we may endeavor into in the future. We have nothing teed up for any of the other
parcels at this time other than Wonder Trek and again that we've been working on that initiative for five or six years. Okay. And then I I would just say Mr. Chairman that um obviously you know we got a letter from the city of Baxter. I think it's important for us to work with our
partners, whether it be federal, state, city, whatever, you know. So, if the city um wants to do something and the county engineer concurs with that, I guess I'm okay with delaying that. If you think it's a good idea, I guess I'll defer
I'll defer to you, Tim Bray. Well, the it's in really tough shape and anybody that drives it knows that it's it's it's used up and it's at its end of its service life, the current um surfacing. So, something needs to be done and I think uh it it's important what Reed
just stated is that there there is no plan beyond Wonder Trek right now. They're looking at all options. they're they're a brand new um owner and are getting in their planning uh process and um you know the
the request that came from the city of Baxter first came from Sourceville to Baxter to do some to do this. So they're they uh responded to Sorwell's request to delay it. Yeah. And and Tim, if I may, just out of out of clarification,
um the request would be not to delay the County Road 170 project in its whole, it's only to delay or or or to reconsider the solution being proposed for the section. And if Amber, if you could back up to the overall uh map um
the previous one there that Tim had with the green box. Maybe one more. Yeah. So the um the request would be for uh the city of Baxter and the highway department to consider from the Jasperwood intersection here on the
north because this is all fairly new. Uh Tim, I believe this was done with the school uh or maybe even before that. This is new fairly new pavement right here. The old pavement starts here and goes down and ends right here. So the
request would be to consider an alternative solution if if the timing makes sense for just this small L L section right here and then uh for us to work on that over the next 12 months or so and come back for have any in your deep pockets
have any money to help us with a a band-aid fixed so that we can maybe put a band-aid on it for a while and before we do a whole fix I don't know how the funding mechanism works between the city the financial guy got him money
I you know we answer it it's our it's our roadway and uh it's our roadway and I think the decision today is do we move forward with the do nothing put something on that is long less longerl lasting like a 5 to 8year fix think
about inches you have three inches of pavement or do you put on one inch to last you eight years which might within the next 5 to 8 years m meet up with their planning horizon. So we're they're it's coming of age about the time that they're ready to build some of this
other stuff. Um like this road is also platted in there. So that's the logical extension of that uh through that area and u that that's really the decision. Is this close by where the Amazon facility is going to be or is it Amazon
is to the west much further west. Pardon me. Amazon is uh currently operating to the west quite a ways down uh counter one. Well, it's off of 210, but this is adjacent to the 371. Like the 371 is what you see in the bottom right hand
corner there, Commissioner Corning. Oh, and then just just up to the north of 371 is the 48 stop lightss. So, this is right along the 371 roadway. Mhm. Only right after the river. Pardon? Right after the river. Correct. in between the
river and the 48 stop lights. Amazon's like way over here. Yeah. Okay. Way over. Yeah. It's way over there. Um Mr. Chair. Yes. Tim, in your 2026 plan, you have already identified funding sources for this
piece with the full reconstruction. Correct. Uh not full reconstruction on on this part. That would be just a surface treatment and overlay. The reconstruction of 170 is past mountain Ash which is
over there um is going to be a reconstruct and I just if I take take a second there when the um request was before the city council the brand dispatch reported a delay of 170 and I had several people call me and say hey
um not the reconstruct right just to clarify for those that might be watching and all the commissioners that were only talking about this the 170 reconstruction this was from the round up all the way out to the county line is still a go. We're going to do that. We're moving forward with that. That is we're not talking about delaying that.
It's just the yellow area and the mill and overlay here. That's it. That's all we're talking about. So, the project is already in the plan and is already has a funding mechanism that's already assigned with that aspect of it. So the the idea before you or the conversation
before you is are you okay with Tim having the authority to maybe delay a little bit on the promise or revise the promise that was made for just this portion of that road at that point. My question
Tim and to Reed is we haven't talked about the timeline correct? Yep. you know, so I I don't know that source and the city really have a timeline that would apply. So when you say a thin layer that'll go five to eight years, we
don't know that that would be adequate or it might be done in a year and then we wasted money on that thin layer. So can you kind of clarify that timeline for us? Sure. Yes. Uh Commissioner Barrows, thanks for that.
Um correct. We don't know what timeline we may be talking about here. The request to um come up with an alternative solution is to buy us some time um so that before uh Tim, I believe you come back to the boards usually in April every year to approve your next
5-year highway improvement plan, right? And Tim, you were just here last month and approved your 25 through 29 plan. Um the goal that the city of Baxter and Source have talked about is that in the upcoming 11 months that we will work on a clearer picture for Tim so that he can
more accurately put a placeholder in a capital plan like his highway improvement plan for when some solution might be. I don't know if it's going to be a curve of a that that curved road in the future or some other solution in the future, but it's for us as units of government, Sourcewell and Baxter and
and Crowing County to work together to try and maximize and not not spend taxpayer dollars if we don't have to um on a solution that may get changed in a very short I say very short but in a short window like a maybe one to five year window.
Reed, if I may, just the challenge with that is we're designing the the plans now and we're making those decisions and by the time April comes around, the plan is likely for this project to be lit. And so, we need to know much sooner than that on what what that fix and that
yellow portion's going to be. So, it that decision timeline is much shorter than than you stated, right? I guess Tim, uh, my my question would be is you're already planning the in this on this easterly section here from you said Mount Nash where you're going to
reconstruct west, but this easterly half of County Road 170 will be a mill and overlay, right? That's a that's what you already have planned. Correct. That's correct. But it's in the same plan. We're doing the My I guess my ask would be is uh would would it be possible to
provide a um design alternative for just this section? So that obviously you need to have timing work out and we we'd be happy to be partners with you and try to get as much information in your hands as possible when it comes to having to make a decision on that future project, that next year's project. Um but to have a
design alternative there so that we can give you some more information on what the next one to three years might be so that that gives you um info you need to make that decision on on what solution you would put down. Yeah, we'd like to have the decision or what you're
planning for so they can make the decision whether to keep it in the plan or not or what it looks like. It is it three inches of overlay, is it one inch of overlay or is it nothing? And we that's really what we need to know. Yeah. And we like, you know, obviously as working here in the past, we know how much our capital plans mean to the county and so we completely respect that
and want to make sure we're helping as part of the capital planning activities of Crowing County. So providing the information as soon as we can possibly provide it. I think it's unfortunate, you know, we have a three-legged stool here and we only have two legs sitting in the room and that Baxter isn't here
to represent their portion of it because they will have some cost share that goes along with the this curve and so I think that that's important important an important piece that we're not hearing and I don't think I know I'll speak for
myself and I know that I'm on the source board so I'm a little careful on on what I say but I support this just from a a traffic control area. Having driven that and ridden my bike out there and I know what that road looks like, I think a
curve would be more appropriate. I think it certainly is advantageous to bring the piece of property into one ownership instead of splitting it that and then you have a piece of property that can't de be developed. That's counterproductive for city development.
So, I think it's unfortunate that the city of Baxter isn't sitting here and being able to kind of because they're the ones that are going to probably drive the project more than Sourcewell will. You're just asking for us to agree with this, but Baxter is going to have
some skin in the game in terms of finances. And and I think that it's important to remember that as a board that they aren't here talking about what they can commit to next year or the year after or when that would fall in within their financial plan. Yeah. Just to
address uh the future and cost share. So what you see here it's really faint but um we've been talking about potentially uh when the curve comes in there's a connection back to this um and what we our cost share policy is
that that would be development driven. So yes the curve would be beneficial but it does um there's no immediate need for that right now. the the introduction of the curve has always been because of the
development potential in this particular area. So in accordance with our kosher policy, anything that's development driven would start off at 75% uh the city uh because we work with government agencies not source well and
then they can work with source to figure out how to get the 75% and the counties is 25%. So when and if this does what you kind of see in this faint line, they extend this down. This road hooks up with an intersection here and then the
curve is built, that cost participation starting off would be 75% the city and the developer together and 25% the county. and we've been clear about that um in you know the meetings we've had um
that when that when eventually that gets done development driven and the county's portion is reduced because of that. So Tim what what would be the life expectancy of a 1 in application versus a 2-in application? Well probably that 1
in or 1 and 12 in is 5 to 8 years be because of the uh surface that's underneath. I would expect even after one year it's those cracks and all those uh deficiencies that are out there right now. You'll start to see them. They'll be tighter and they won't it'll be less bumpy, but you're going to see a lot of
crack sealer out there and that kind of stuff. Uh you know, we do 3 in to hopefully last 20 years. So, um you never know. Depends how people drive it, the types of uh vehicles that drive on it or winters and that kind of
stuff. So, I think we've seen an increase in traffic. I don't know what the counts are out there, but coming from southern Cass County using that back road to get into Brainer or head north on 37 or south on 371. So, um I
think that's the questions I had. Commissioner Coring, you had a So, question for you, Tim. So, let's say this wasn't source well. Let's say it was Jimmy Johnson that owned that land and he wanted to do the same thing.
Would you have came before us with that? Or if Jimmy John have as much priority as it would with if Jimmy Johnson was compelled the city of Baxter to write us a letter and they make and they take it on. I would treat him the same.
Certainly I'd be coming here. But Jimmy Johnson would have to he'd have a cost share portion just like Sourcewell would in essence, right? in for the future future project with the curve and stuff like that development driven regardless of who it
is and and just like we worked with the school. We use that same cost share policy when the school was doing some work uh on the elementary introduced a couple new intersections. We uh started off with 7525 split with the city of Baxter.
uh we did not get into an agreement with the school district directly and then the school district and the city of Baxter worked out how that percentage uh worked out. Well, I hope this is the exception to the rule. I hope that when we put together a five-year plan, we
don't have townships or different cities kind of uh coming in saying, "Hey, wait a minute." You know, because it just kind of blows up the whole plan. Then if if that's if that's the case, I suppose this is kind of a and this this seems so
iffy. I mean could be three years, could be five years, could be never, you know. Correct. Yeah. And so um I don't know. I I wanted to uh Tim I don't know and I think Brad and Trevor had done some work
from the city of Baxter but uh the the distance of mill and overlay here um that inverse L essentially uh you know how much approximately a mill and overlay for that would cost like your proposed cost is what is it um I don't
you have any idea I think it's it's not a substantial right substantial amount I want to say at one point I had heard and Brad is on his way. He did text me. He He apologizes. He did have an emergency come up, but he's on his way right now. Um that I want to say at one point they had done a calculation that that's about
a $70,000 um it's calling again. It's about a $70,000 uh fix or solution proposed right now. If we were to go with an alternative solution, could it be 2530 or you know or more for that solution? So, I guess
that's what we're we're weighing here is is do you invest the full cost of it and knowing that it could be a never, but it could be three years from now and then we come back and resurface it and is that an okay investment or do we want to be more mindful of the money we're investing into something where we do
have um we we are starting some conversations about some development in that area. So, and and again, it is in conjunction with the city of Baxter and what some of their initiatives are as well. Well, I would from my perspective I I
would be willing to delay it. I agree with Commissioner Coring. We don't want this to be an everyday option for townships and cities. But at for this one, I I would be willing to delay it, put a one one inch layer on there, make
it work for 5 to eight years, and that's the timeline that Baxter would have to work and source well work within to get this done. then we can incorporate it into our five-year plan and and be ready when that when that time frame is up. I realize that five to eight is kind of
sketchy because it could deteriorate in year five. Might be good to go to eight, but that kind of gives them an opportunity to figure out what they're going to do with this property and probably more than Baxter than Sourcewell. I mean, Sourcewell can sit
on it, but Baxter needs to come up with the money to have that 75% participation in their plan. So, that that would be my position at this point. Yeah, Commissioner Coring was looking for a recommendation and and although it did did not
necessarily give options or suggest options about a interim fix, I took this as do nothing for do nothing. My recommendation would be to to do that to give that five to eight year planning horizon. Have something out there that will last that
long. Give them the time to do that knowing that potentially it could they could never be built um rather than do nothing rather than do nothing. And then we're then I feel that we're we're delivering on the promise. We said that the road surface was going to be there.
I think the assumption is we're going to do it, you know, 20-year fixes on everything, but we're still delivering on a smooth surf and improved surface on that area. It's just that it's uh not expected to last as long as we we would on other mil. If we do if we do nothing,
Tim, and it continues to deteriorate, there comes a point where you can't put a blade down to clean the road because the road will disappear when they're clearing it. It gets that fragile, I would say, at some point. Right. I think the option to do nothing
really is not an option because in five to seven years it's already in terrible shape and five to eight years it's going to be really bad and it might require then a total reconstruct. I mean there there might be enough salvageable there
now. So um my recommendation is to to focus on that 5 to8 year fix a thinner overlay continue to deliver a promise to the public uh smooth improve road surface and then ask at the city of Baxter and source will continue your
planning and keep us you know informed continue to invite us to the meeting so we can then start to react and plan for the cost participation that the the county would have in something much larger like building the curve and introduction of an intersection. section. So just a a note uh
welcome administrator Chapolus. We now have three legs to the stool. So Commissioner Coring. Yeah. So question to the city administrator Baxter. What what is the city's position? I mean is this the city's position or is this
source well coming to you and saying hey can you send a letter want to delay this? What what is your reasoning on this? I mean, I was just explaining before you got here, you know, we the county is very planful. You know, we're
and we have a five-year plan and this project is in the five-year plan and I just get concerned that, you know, obviously we want to work with you. I I think it's important, but this kind of blows up the plan that we promised to
deliver to the our constituents. And so, what's your reasoning on this? I guess I don't really understand. Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioners, I apologize for my tardiness. I had an emergency that prohibited me from being
here on time. And being that uh it's busy season, I had no other members on the leadership team to come in my absence. So, I apologize for my tardiness. Um, Commissioner Corin, that is a very good question in that regard.
The curvature of Mapleton Road has been in a in in concept an idea. It was platted in 2004. The goal objective was as development occurs that that road would be um the curve would be
installed. We've had the same owner of that property since 2004. Uh that being the former paper mill. They weren't actively trying to develop the property. They were trying to sell the property. Um the curvature is in our long range
transportation plan and it was always when development warranted the curvature. It was explored in 2019 with the Baxter Elementary um being constructed there. However, the pot
latch uh as referenced as being the third leg uh was not uh was not uh in favor of incurring the assessment that would be incurred with the city
taken on the project back then. Right now, we have a property owner that is actively looking to develop the property wants just a period of time to be able to do the due diligence that they need to do to determine how to maximize and provide
the best use and development of the property. Um, we understand that there is a promise that has been made and we're cognizant of that, but we also believe that the same individuals who the
promises were made to would also criticize the spending of the money for only two three years for it to be torn out. So, so moving the putting the curve in now where the curve would be that would
be a county road. Correct. Correct. Correct. But but you'd have cost share if that's what you wanted to have that moved. You're going to come up. Tim just said that your share would be 75%.
Correct. And you're okay with that? Correct. I should say is the city council okay with that? we were comfortable and were willing to pull the trigger provided that we had that third leg committed to paying their share. Okay. Uh as you know, the city
um assesses the the road improvements to uh benefiting property owners. And um with every project, we gauge how many are in support and how many object to that. And being that the only property
that would have been benefiting would have been the cities and the adjoining property owner, um we didn't feel comfortable in pulling the trigger at that point in time. Mr. Chair, Mr. Lee, Mr. Bray, um yes. So
the portion that is would be affected by this delay is roughly a third of a mile, I think, maybe half mile. Correct. about that maybe a little bit less certable. What would be the added expense to the county if we delay this added expense?
Delay it completely like do nothing? No, I mean delay it and give it the lipstick that you're talking about. If we were to put the in the short Yeah. the one the one in for five to eight years. In the short term, it would not be an expense to the county. Might be a
a less expense. we're putting less patuminous on that section of roadway. Long term, it's just more the potential for increased maintenance, you know, once that thin overlay wears out. So, we
we would go in and re and redo the um No, we would leave the existing structure as it is underneath the pavement is what you're saying. I'm sorry. I I didn't understand. We're not Jamie. We're not just we're not just
um you're not going to redo any of the uh support or structure underneath the pavement then. Correct. No. So it would just be the one in of overlay on top, right? And if we went ahead with it now, we would be moving it over to where the
curve is. Correct. No. No. We're just talking about uh resurfacing it in place. the curve is like years down the road depending on the planning does does the planning that Sourceville do and their utilization of that property. Um so the 2026 does not talk about this re
uh future realignment. No, it does not. Okay. No, it's just the the what to do with the yellow the the L there. Yep. Yeah. Both both plans are keeping it in its current location right now. It's just one is doing it as proposed in 2026
or doing a shorter term fix for that small section in 2026 in conjunction with the rest of the project. So one more thing Brad if you'll take over if the city will take over county road 48 as a city and then I'll support this
then. Understood. However, as you know I don't have the authority to to accept that. I'm just But if that's something that the commission wants, it's a wish thing for me. Understood. Understood. And I do want to and I failed to to mention is is
that on the west side of that curve is city- owned property and it's one of the sites that's being considered for city hall. And so there is not only the development that is going to occur on the source wall property, but there is very likely the potential of the city
property being developed over the years too. Okay. which is another heightened interest of the city in the curvature. Sure, Mr. Chair. Go ahead. Um, I would look at the fact of lipsticking it. I'll use that as a term, you know, because it's
not really doing it's it's making the road better for the people that are using the road today and will be using the road for the next couple of years or three years until this vets out. If it doesn't in those three years, then we'll look at coming back to it or, you know, get it on our promises and go back and
do it if if it's all falls through. But the way it looks, there's enough work that's been done ahead of time. And you said in 2004, you were even looking at that curvature that u I don't think we should spend the money to do the the full promise, but I think the lipstick would be would be something I could
support to make sure it's it's drivable for the people that are using it. Now, that's that's my opinion on that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, do I see consensus for Tim to work with the city in this regard in figuring out what the best short-term
solution would be? Yes, there's consensus. So, thank you very much, gentlemen. Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Thank you. And again, I apologize for my tardiness. Fine. Did you find them, chair? No. Okay. And Mike, we didn't bring you up
here. We could have had about a 4hour financial report. I I gave you your chance to come up here and see if you had any money for us. No, I do I do just want to thank the board and thank uh for the collaborative efforts between the city and the county and Sourcewell. Um just here really
supporting Reed as as a senior leader at Sourcewell and uh um got a lot of respect for the county and and the city and and continue to look forward to those uh conversations to make sure that we make the best decisions possible. So, thank you for your time. We'll see you tonight. Yep.
All right. Next on the agenda is land use ordinance update. Chris, good morning, Mr. Chair, commissioners. I just wanted to give you a quick update on uh on where we're at with the uh current land use ordinance update.
Um, just to kind of give you a timeline of where we're at, we started this process back April, uh, the month of April, we did a 30-day comment period. Uh, then we went on April 15th, uh, to a committee the whole update where we gave you an update on where we're at with the up with the ordinance. We had a work
session with the planning commission and the board of adjustment on April 17th. And then, uh, yesterday, uh, May 19th, we had a public hearing here at 10:00 a.m. with the planning commission board of adjustment. And then we're here today uh for a committee of the whole uh just to give you an update on where we're at.
So um does anybody need an update on some of the key changes to the ordinance or are we comfortable with with that? Okay. Um we did receive uh three comments were submitted. Um they're in page uh 222 of the of the packet this
morning. um they were um basically related to article 6.3A the uh proposed change to the article that would um allow a commissioner to appoint their member to the planning commission board of adjustment but would not be um required
to appoint from their from their um commissioner's district that they were that they're uh that they cover. So those were the changes that uh that were the comments that we received from the public. And then uh at the meeting uh yesterday, the planning commission made two separate motions. I just want to
clarify what those two are. The first motion that they made was uh they recommended denying the amendment to article 6.3A. As we had talked about the appointment of the county board, how they appoint uh the member to the planning commission board of adjustment and that was approved with a 3 to1 vote.
And then they made a second motion um approving the other amendments. So they supported all the other changes to the ordinance and that uh recommended approval from the planning commission board of adjustment with afforded uh voted uh four to nothing on that. So, um, this is, uh, slated to come to your
to you for final review on May 27th, uh, at the regular scheduled meeting next Tuesday. And, uh, um, looking at that point for, um, action on the, uh, ordinance amendments as it's been proposed and then based on the recommendations from the planning
commission, board of adjustment. So, I'd be happy to answer any questions. So Chris, if I can ask a question on article 14, which is the residential, rural residential. Yes. And in that article, we're talking about commercial
may be allowed in these districts. So your RR1, the 2.5s, the five, and the 10s, it may be allowed with a conditional use permit would be the the vehicle to do that. So yeah. So, and I know that it talks about for
commercial being along a federal, state, county or township road, right? We stay out of the cities. Correct. And we probably stay out of Crowing Township and Irondale as well. And Ironale, correct? So, why would we? It just seems like
we're opening up the commercial. Why wouldn't we just make all those other areas that are come under our purview commercial? Well, we and we do have, you know, most uh we do have quite a bit of commercial zoning across the county. Um, and you know, there we have that. If you look at
our land use map, we have cons, you know, quite a bit of that. Um, the the key why we wouldn't want to change all of that zoning to commercial is that when you look at it from a when you're more of a residential district, a conditional use permit is a very um
specific to a type to a type of a use on a property. So, take for example, um maybe you've got a piece of property that's say along a county road and somebody comes in and wants to um change that to a commercial use because they maybe they want to uh like say run a uh
maybe they want to like make log furniture or something along those lines and they say I want to be his own commercial. Uh we might say, well, we'd rather have you probably get a conditional use permit for that because you might want to do log, you know, furniture on that today. let's say it's 10 acres and then tomorrow you decide to sell it to somebody and they want to put
up a used car lot there might not be the right spot for a used car lot and that' be a permitted use in the commercial district. So when you have that commercial it just opens up a lot more opportunities for commercial that might not um be compatible with the uses in the area where a conditional use permit is
very specific and tied to the property. So, like if somebody were to come in and say, "I want to run a home business because I want to make lock furniture," it is for that specific use on that specific property. Now, if it were to get sold down the road and somebody were to come in and say, "I see that you you make you do lock furniture here. Um, I
now want to start selling used cars." We'd have to have a different conversation because that conditional leasement is very specific to the use on that property. And that's why they're such an important tool that counties have at our disposal is to allow some um commercial in that residential district
that makes sense, but we're concerned about opening it up completely, allowing any type of commercial activity in there. So that's the reason why we we do that. So here's and help me understand this. If I'm in a residential area,
commercial can come in there. But if I'm and in a commercial area, you can go in there as a resident, but you know that it's commercial property and there will be development around you that's commercial, right? You don't know that in a residential area until now when we're changing this
ordinance. Why? We're we're giving commercial so kind of a free hand to help wherever they want. What section of the ordinance are you referring to specifically? Well, I read it in uh article 14 is where I started seeing some of this. Can we go
to article 14 of the ordinance, please? Page 75. Y. So, you're looking at 14.1 C. So, you could look at uh any one of those. You're adding the interim use, but we're adding allowed a Yep. So if if you were
to if you were to go to article 10 right now, which is the land use tables for the county, that specifies what uses are allowed in what districts. So if you're a certain zoning and a certain use, is it an allowed use? Is it a permitted use? Is it conditional use? Is it an interim use or is the use not allowed?
So currently right now, this that just clarifies what's already in the ordinance in article 10. So in article 10 right now, we already have certain types of commercial activities that are allowed in residential districts with either conditional use permit or that interimm use permit as as
referenced in the article. So it's we're not we're not changing anything. We're just clarifying that that that those there are those types of uses that are allowed in those districts. So in a residential area, why wouldn't we make it if we're going to allow it interim use which then goes away when that owner
goes away? Yep. Correct. conditional use stays for the life of the property. Correct. And so we could clean up some residential areas if we needed to. Under a cup, we can't do that. Correct. A cup does run with the property and it once it does go from
property to as long as the conditions and the approval are being met, that runs with the property. So I think um that is definitely something that we could look at, you know, um down the road if that's something that we wanted to change some of these conditional uses to interim uses. Uh I think the um
sometimes I think folks get a little concerned about that because there might be some investment in some of these properties when they have a conditional instrument and then unknowing if they were to sell it to the next person they have to come in and get another permit if they apply for it again and the unknown of not having that consistency
that's one of the reasons why people prefer a conditional use permit versus interm use permit just for the consistency stake. So to my point exactly, you take a chance. Mhm. With that interim that resident on each side of that commercial doesn't get that option.
Their property might devalue because of the commercial development in between them. Right. So we aren't giving them consideration. We're giving the commercial property consideration. Well, and and to be clear, when anybody applies for like say a conditional use permit where we provide notice to the
neighbors within a quarter mile, we publish it in the paper. We have a public hearing. Um, and then we have considerations in the ordinance that um must be considered by the planning commission board of adjustment before they make a decision. There's a a finding a fact criteria that they have to follow and and some of those issues.
you're bringing up some things that they have to wrestle with and decide is this the appropriate is is that use appropriate in this area and what are some potential you know conditions that might be placed on that to offset any negative impacts to the you know to joining our neighboring property owners. So there is a definitely a process at
least for people to participate so it doesn't happen unilaterally. So the other thing is if we already have commercial when I'm reading this, we aren't adding commercial, we're adding interim uses in most of these cases when
I read this document, right? Um if we're in the process of changing it, why wouldn't we have considered getting rid of conditional use permit in residential areas and just have it interim use so that there is some protection for the adjacent property
owners? This is the first we've that I've this discussion has been brought up to be honest. It hasn't been this really hasn't been discussed before. So that's probably why it hasn't hasn't been brought up. So we what we're trying to do with this ordinance update is to
select the uses that we think that are the most um potentially um have the biggest impact to neighboring property owners. So some of the things that we're looking at would be an interimm use would be um like a outdoor venue for like a wedding venue. those sorts, changing
that to an interim use. Um, adult uses to an interim use, those sorts of things. So, we're we did I think, you know, and we already have like gravel pits or an interim use and and that. So, I think we've we've definitely made some changes to this that would um, you know, maybe address some of the issues that
you're bringing up, but maybe, you know, if if we need to go a step further and and, you know, go from a conditional use permit to an interim use permit on other uses, I think we could definitely have that, you know, definitely have that conversation. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I got a question. When you say conditional use,
if let's say it's it's Betty's Beauty Shop and it and it's being used in a garage in a in a residential area and you've granted them a conditional use permit because it met all the qualifications. Let's say how long does that conditional use permit stay on that property? As long as it's operating of
the business, let's say the business isn't operating. How long does it go before that conditional use goes away? The conditional use permit doesn't go away. So the condition is stays with it stays with the it is recorded on the property. It's recorded it with with on with the property records and so it
stays with with the property title and it transfers upon ownership. And so um and there's no we don't have anything in our ordinance that has a timeline on conditional use permits um as far as you know say if if a use some counties have have something in their ordinance say if this use has been discontinued for more
than a year this condition use permit the condition use permit is expired and is no longer um no longer valid would need to reapply for you know for a new conditional use permit. I'm familiar with that in a city where where if it was used and not used for that period of time, the conditional use went away and
they would have to reapply. If you set it up as a conditional use, does that mean that when you appraise that property, you appraise that part of the property as being the conditional use for taxes? We definitely make sure the assessors, you know, our assessor team are aware of when conditioning permits
and plats and that sort of thing and um are are aware of it. So that was definitely be taken into consideration when when doing their um the valuation and classification of the property. Yeah. Okay. That was that's the only question I had. Chris, can you address um well, a couple
of things, but um can you just go over just to refresh my memory what we're proposing and uh on the um how many unlicensed cars you can have on your property? Because this actually was prompted because of an incident in my
district. Correct. So, we have a right now we have an current ordinance that um only allows you to have up a maximum of two unlicensed vehicles on your property. Anything beyond that um would be in violation. And if you're located in the agricultural forest district, you
could apply for a a conditional use permit to operate a junk salvage yard. Uh and so what this ordinance proposes would be to um say that in the areas that are zoned, our rural residential districts and in our agricultural forest district um to allow up to a maximum of
10 junk cars based on your lot size. So if you have um so everybody gets would have two um two unlicensed or inoperable vehicles regardless of their lot size. So if you had a one acre lot, you could have up to two. If you had three acres, you could have three, you know, inoper
vehicles for up to maximum of 10 if you had 10 acres. That's what's being proposed in the ordinance right now. But if you had 80 acres and you all of a sudden you had 50, you obviously that's a problem and they got to come in and get if they want to do that, they can come in and go
through the process. Depends how it's how the zoning is. So if it's they if it was zone agricultural forested they'd have to come in and apply for a junk salvage yard at that point. Um and so that would definitely be an option that they have. But right now um we the limit
is two regardless. So if you're in the shoreland district which is our the zoning around the lakes and the river streams in that area you're going to be limited to two unlicensed vehicles regardless of your lot size in the shoreland district. It's going to be our nonshorland zoning areas that would have that potential of going up to 10 unlicensed vehicles depending on on your
lot size. So if you have 2.8 acres with this, you get two unlicensed vehicles. If you have 3.1 acres, you'd have three. So it's we're not rounding numbers. It's just an even number based on your total acreage would be the total cars. And I think this is this is actually trying to
make it I think it's make it more workable. You take you come out to Roosevelt Township and tell somebody you can only and they've got 300 acres and they've got two three unlicensed vehicles. They're in violation. How I
don't know how we're going to enforce that. Correct. And and one of the provisions that this um ordinance update makes too is just requiring them to meet the setback. So they have to meet the rightway setback which is 35 ft property line setback of 10 ft. So at least they're they don't have to we don't have any requirements. the ordinance for that
right now. So, and if if we do have any of these issues where we have um you know these unlicensed vehicles and or inoperable vehicles and um people um are unwilling to comply, then our only um avenue at that point is to give it to
the county attorney's office and let them um follow their legal channels that they have to compel um compliance. And then one other thing I want to address is can you go to page 27? Is it on 27? D Okay,
I just was this was brought forward by me and changing that and I want to just explain why. I've got Sue Masky who I think is an excellent person on the planning and zoning commission. She worked here how how many years did she
work here, Gary? Do you remember? It was I think it was 20, pardon me. 15 to 17. Yeah, I think so. Uh anyway, Sue is my appointee on the uh planning and zoning commission. Her and her husband are trying to sell their property down in
Roosevelt Township. They own property up in uh Pelican Township, I think it is. And she just told me that, you know, eventually I'm I'm we're probably going to move up there. And I said, "Well, do you want to stay on the planning and
zoning commission?" and she says, "I love doing this." And and I think she's very very very qualified. And I think that's what all the commissioners would want is a a smart qualified person to be on the planning commission. And I just
thought that this change would be appropriate so I could continue to have Sue serve or whoever I want to serve. I think about my district which is the Mill Avenue is kind of the the U boundary. So if you think about it, if I
on the right hand side is my district. So let's say I had somebody that lived on the on the leftand side of Mill Avenue and a very qualified person to serve on this committee and we'd say, um, no, you're not because you're not from the district. And as far as
somebody saying that, well, I need somebody to represent my district. I am the representative and all five of us are each representing our district. I would hope that a planning and zoning commission member is not making different decisions when they're in the
district they live in. They're all they're doing is carrying out the ordinance that we're approving right now. And I can tell you that if my person moves up there, she will remain my person and you four will
have to remove her. And if you remove her, I will not bring anybody forward and we'll be serving with a four member planning commission. That's how strongly I feel about this. That's all I've got to say on that. I don't know what the big deal is
about this. It should be the most qualified person representing Crowing County, not representing a district. That's my job. That's all I've got to say on that. Thank you, Commissioner Coring. Anybody
else? Mr. Chair, when that was brought up, I did do some homework on it. I did some research on it and and and and uh Chris did also. Um, of the 87 counties in Minnesota that do planning like we do it, none of them
have an atlarge appointee that do it the same way we do it where we do a joint planning commission and board of adjustment. Um, state statute is really kind of ambiguous in the area where it talks about that. Actually, I could not find anywhere in state statute that it
says the appointee even has to be from this county or this state in order to be on that. And so I definitely uh think that that person should be from the district that served. It has worked for this county since we've put it in place.
And I think was that 2009 when we merged those two organizations? Yes, I believe so. Yep. 29 I believe. Yep. Yeah. and and for in my district as as that's where the letters came from. Um I would be hardpressed when all of a sudden um a
decision is made in my district and I didn't even appoint the person from the same district to serve. Um I think it would be disingenuous to the people saying that of the 15 to 16,000 residents in the district I serve, I couldn't find somebody qualified enough
to serve in my own district for that position. Um, that's that's kind of where I come from it. And and the other thing is is if a decision is made in in the district and the appointee is from another district, um, I don't know how I'd
answer that when it says you you voted for this to allow somebody to be served from a different district to serve our district. And, uh, you you won't do it for your own, but you will allow it to happen. You must be endorsing it, you know. And um I I think that's the
questions I would have coming to me um in regards to that. So I definitely I think what we have works and I don't think any one person is that important in a county of 67,000 that we have to change a rule that has worked since
2009. So that's my uh response. Thank you, Commissioner Loveky. Anyone else? Thank you. Next step is to bring it to the board. We'll see you on Tuesday. Yep. Great. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. Melissa's coming up next with the
one, one plan for the pine. One watershed, one plan, Pine River. The Pine River. A lot of one watershed, one plan. So, how many wershed, one plans do we have in Crowing County right now? Three. Um, Mr. Chair and members, yes,
there is uh five major watersheds that'll be going through this process within Crowing County. The last one to start is the Mississippi Sartell, uh, which is kind of the Plat Lake area, which has a very small percentage of Crowing County, but they're just starting this process. Yep. So, we have
four approved plans right now. Right. Uh, Mr. Chair and members, thank you for the opportunity to be here. U Melissa Barrett Crowing Soil and Water Conservation District. I also have over there um uh Supervisor Joanne Weaver who's served on the policy committee uh as a part of this planning process and
then Jared Derick who has done a lot of the work with the individual land owners. Um so Mr. Chair and members uh we are just here uh just to provide you a quick update on the Pine River comprehensive wershed plan. Um so if you remember uh I believe it was about 2019
uh the county board approved this comprehensive watershed plan. It was the first watershed plan that we worked on in the county and um as a part of that process uh we're working with the border water and soil resources to do a five-year update. Um and so we've had
opportunity to start that process. So in 2024, uh, we kind of brought the policy committee together as well as some of the technical and advisory committee members to kind of review what we've done. Um, so we kind of put together a summary which was provided in your
packet of kind of the progress progress we made towards our watershed goals. Um, and so just a reminder that it's not just us alone, it's the land owners, the partnerships, the lake associations, um, and other local government units that have been a part of this process. Um so
I just wanted to highlight a few of the things that we were able to work on. Um we completed about 51 projects um related to more like the shoreline restoration. We worked with the Crowing County Highway Department and the city of Cross Lake and did some major
projects along uh CASA 66 um that were able to help us reach some of our lake goals. Um the Crowing County Highway Department also participated in a lot of the chloride trainings and then Cass County also was able to upgrade their equipment to do brining like Crowing
County does. Um and that is a great asset because they also provide brine to townships in Cass County as well. Um and so we also did a lot of work to um what we call is protect basically work with land owners to permanently protect their land through sustainable forest
incentive act or through acquisitions. Uh Crowing County took on some big acquisitions in this wershed that helped meet our our wershed goal. Um so that's just some of the big highlights in the last five years. Um and then as we did the review process, obviously we know a
lot more than we did five years ago um regarding, you know, some of the things that we're tracking and how we're looking at these watersheds um in these different activities. And so most of our our changes are pretty minor. Um they're
just uh in essence makes it easier for us to show progress towards these goals. Um, and so in appendix K that was provided in your packet, it kind of the gray kind of highlights the different items that we're going to be changing. Um, so most of them are pretty minor.
Um, some of the things we did switch a little bit and incorporated them into other goals. Um, but a lot of the items were more just changing our our potential um, outcomes or what we're looking to is as tracking acres versus uh, percentages. Um, and then one of the
things that we did include in our original proposal was trying to have people maintain their septic systems at like a 90% compliance rate. We found out that that's really tricky uh because there is no kind of requirement for people to do that. Um, and there's
really no way to track that. Uh, we know in Crowing County you have a very high compliance rate for septic systems due to the turnover of properties. Um and so we want to focus more on the education component of trying to educate people on what they should be doing with their septic systems because there is so many
septic systems in this watershed uh and wells. Um and I think uh the other thing is is we did keep all of our lake goals the same, our prioritization process the same. Um and we increase some of our phosphorus goals for some of the lakes
that are are significant to the county from a tax base such as big trout uh the white fish area um just due to the development pressure. We know that uh through COVID, so if you think about this plan was done prior to COVID um
that that you know number of people that have requested addresses in this wershed has increased and development continues to be an issue and so we wanted to make sure that we still have these activities available uh for land owners uh as a priority to continue to protect these
lakes um for the the the county tax base. So, um, we have an open comment period until June 5th. All the information is on Crowing County's website under watersheds. Um, people can fill out the, uh, online forum and we'll
be taking their comments till June 5th and we have a public hearing scheduled for June 17th uh, up in Bakis to review those public comments as well as the state agency's comments and then um, after that we'll be submitting that to the border water and soil resources for
approval. we will not be having to come back to the county board uh because you guys have already approved this plan and it's considered a minor amendment. Um if you would like us to come back with that, we can definitely do that. But as of right now, we're not required through the state process.
So Melissa, clarify if you would reach 100% on all these goals, do you just amend them then and and go on to additional acreage or phosphorus, whatever the goal we're
talking about? Um, I think it's going to depend, you know, um, some of it is is like the priority we picked was a lot based off of the the water quality data of what lakes were declining in water quality as well as sort of that economic
significance. So, there's other lakes that we could then sort of focus on if we reach these goals in these other areas because we didn't pick all of the lakes. There's over 500 lakes in the watershed and I believe there's I can't remember the number off the top of my
head but it's roughly about 30 that are within the uh the prioritization. So we could pick those or other resources within that plan once we reach these goals. So when we have these plans and and I know from my experience that we look at the ones where we can have the
biggest impact. So the low fruit once we eliminate that, do we have to go back for additional funding because we've already presented that to Bowser and and other government
agencies or does it just go on hold which then potentially we backslide on what we tried to achieve? what is what's the process going forward once we've achieved all these goals? Okay, Mr. Chair, members,
thank you for the question. First of all, that's a good question. Um, so the way the funding works is it's all based off the legislature. Um, so every two years there's a new appropriation of money. Um, and some of that's based off the money that the the state has
available through the clean water land and legacy amendment. Then that that money is distributed throughout the entire watershed. So the amount can vary. Um and so based off that is kind of what we have to work with to work with land owners or projects within
these watersheds. Um, and so one of the things I guess I would like to consider as a part of this, at least for Crowing County, other areas might be different, is that there is a lot of work done by the DNR right now to look at shoreline
degragation. And about every 10 years, we're losing like 1 to 2% or 2 to 3% of all our shoreline. And obviously, we we see that here in Crowing County, the planning and zoning sees this a lot. uh you know where redevelopment occurs or
uh additional development has occurred along that shoreline. And so the goal of this plan is to kind of keep up with the loss. So um maybe in some areas you would be able to uh actually obtain that. But I feel like at least with the
resources that are in this specific wershed, the white fish alone to even to try to maintain what we have is is a very heavy lift. Uh, Mr. Chair, I could also just put on my hat from when I was with working for the board of water on solar resources.
Um, there's not enough money that comes from the state to fully fund these pro these these plants to get them completely implemented. So, I mean there is there is there's always going to be a gap even though I mean we have more funding I think for watershed planning than probably any other state across the
country as far as how much we're putting into this and the consistent funding. But the reality is is that um there's not going to, you know, we need voluntary compliance. We need folks to do things to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do and not because there's always funds to really get the plan completely implemented. You
know, there's federal dollars, there's state dollars, there's local dollars, you know, that. So, the reality is is that I think if we were to get these three lakes completed and all the projects we wanted done on them, I think that would be a monumental task. And I
and I so I think where do we go, you know, after that when we get there, we'll probably have a plan for that. But right now, I think we're just trying to work really and and with the lakes that we've already prioritized and and to get those completed. And these are only
10-year plans. And so after 10 years, you know, we'll have to reup the plan again. And then you have to remember that the um clean water and land and legacy amendment expires 2034. And so if that doesn't get renewed um and back up again, you know, for that 3A1% the funding for the watershed, you
know, and 2034, I thought that used to be a long time away, but it's coming pretty quick, you know, it's less than 10 years away now. So that's another thing just to think is just the funding source is that as well. Very good. Thank you, Commissioner Coring. Thank you. either Chris or Melissa, how how much
how much money and staff time does it take to put together? And if you don't know the answer to put together a plan like this and and the plan, I'm guessing, well, I'm not guessing, it's it's identifying things that can help
with clean water. Correct. Kind of like the project up at Serpent Lake. That's kind of one example, right? Yes, that is correct. Um I guess u Mr. Chair, members, just a clarified question. Are you talking about just the plan amendment or the full comprehensive
plan? The whole plan, how much is how much money and how much staff time? If you don't know, that's fine. I'm just kind of curiosity. So typically um we have hired consultants. So it's based off the consultants time and effort. Typically in the past the board of water
and solar resources have given around $200,000 to uh hire a consultant and do this process. So it is an expensive endeavor um u by no means there's a lot of uh money invested in this process. Sorry about that. How do they identify
these different projects? you know, the consultant or or is there input from townships or um how does how does that work? Uh Mr. Chair, members, great question. Thank you. Um, so we do follow kind of a
similar process that the county would do with their comprehensive plan that you guys went through, uh, where we, uh, set up a a technical advisory committee and also, um, invite township citizens and other, uh, government entities to be a
part of those discussions. So, um, you know, as a part of this amendment process, we did, uh, contact all the townships and the cities to let them know of this this amendment, but they are notified through that process and, um, encouraged to participate in forms
that they can. Mr. Chair, I'm I'm going to kind of steal your thunder for today, your normal spot. I'm going to say thanks to Melissa because I've seen Melissa lots of times up here. She's obviously she's
passionate about the work she's doing. I appreciate you and I want to say thank you to um Joanne Weaver for serving a long long long time and I know you're super passionate about soil and water. I
want to shout out to my cousin Leonard Coring who I believe has served on the soil and water board for 50 years. Am I correct? You are correct. 50 years. And I can remember years and years ago, 40
45 years ago, Leonard was um an advocate and and believing in organic farming and everybody kind of in the neighborhood kind of thought he was silly, but he was 40 years ahead of everybody else. Now you go into Costco
or you go in and it's all organic, organic, organic. So Leonard was ahead of his time and I wish he was here. He's he's done an excellent job. So, a shout out to all you guys for the excellent work that you do. You know, we kind of I think sometimes we take water for
granted because we have so much of it here. And if you were down in Arizona or some of these places where they don't have much water, it's like really precious, but we have to make sure that we continue to uh uh protect it. I know that living on
South Long Lake and um being involved now somewhat and going to the meetings with the lake associations, there's a lot of passionate people. They want to keep the lakes nice and so thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Coring. Any other questions for Mr. Chair? Mr.
You know, the whole thing that I think was really important is way back when I was sitting as the sitting mayor of of Jenkins, I served on this on this watershed. And for me it was more about education and and but being on that advisory part of it I was able to bring
some stuff in there because I didn't understand the importance of the chloride and the management of the chloride and and I've actually gone ahead and become saltcertified just because I I realized the importance of it and that and those have been put in the plan because of those advisory have
whether those advisors be from a a township, a lake association, a city um and and Just to make a point, the city of Jenkins has 15 feet of lakeshore, so it isn't a lake centric township. Um, and one of the things as I've I've also
been now involved in the Crow Wing Plan, um, I'm beginning to realize that, you know, the it's it's not about the lakes, it's about the quality of the water and what impacts the quality of that water is not just the lake shore. It's everything that that encompasses around
that. That's that's I think one of these things on these plans that I think really helps the the the general public to understand that it is the education that we are the stewards of that water and in Minnesota especially in our area and a few of the other counties that I
consider lake centric. We're almost getting to a point where we're loving our lakes to death and the maintenance because we're using the water so much, our maintenance has to increase and and for it to come to a county levy, it's almost impossible. It has to be what you
are doing at soil and water. It has to be what the Bowser is doing with the support of that in order to make that happen. Otherwise, we will end up uh as as southern parts of the states of the state have what color green is your water going to be in July? And I think
that what we're doing is very very important and not just for the enjoyment of the people, but it is the economic engine. Our county runs on water. We're one of the counties in Minnesota that runs on water. So I'm uh signing up for that back I don't know how many years
ago, what 2019 or whatever it was. I had no clue what I was stepping into by being on a one watershed, one plan. But but it is it has taught me so much and I appreciate all the people that were in those plans helping me including the consultants. So that's all I had to add
to that. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else? They've said everything that I would say and I appreciate it. Everything. Well, on this subject, you know, I am open to other subjects, but thank you very much for all you do. Listen, Chris
and Bowser, if they're online listening, thank you to them for for their efforts. Next, we have Miss Luick coming up for the community living
infrastructure grant. Good morning, Chair Barrows and fellow commissioners. Um Tammy Luick, adult services manager uh at community services. And with me, I think on our agenda, it said um Cara was maybe going to be presenting, but um I have Rachel
Zeta. She is our supervisor for housing um adult mental health and um substance use disorders and actually currently covering adult protection and our law enforcement social workers while we have somebody out on leave. Um we decided
that we thought it would be important to bring forward some of our housing work um over the next two months. Uh we have two uh renewal grants that are currently into the state that I'll be bringing probably back before you most likely in June. Um so we just thought that it
would be important to give you an update of what work we've been doing in this area. So our housing and homeless program for adult services I kind of went back just to take a look. Um we received this grant in July of 21 and
prior to that um looking back to 2017 1819. Um we were serving about approximately around 200 unhoused or doubled up individuals through our intake department just within community services. Um in 2020 if you remember during COVID we were asked to do
protective sheltering and we did that. Um we did a hotel model. Um during that time we served right around 200 um 295 indivi um I should say 295 people 24 of those being families.
Um so um and then since that time uh we're going to step into these numbers but our when we got this grant in July of 21 it was a two-year grant and then we received a two-year extension. So, we didn't have to come back and um bring a new grant proposal before you or
contract before you. So, we got a two-year extension. Um this program, the we have two housing specialists that are funded through this program, Lisa Hamilton and Heather Santi. So, we have two full-time positions. Um the grant award for the
first year was 341,715 and we served 351 individuals and some families um because sometimes there's individual adults that we're working with that have kids, right? Um and then 277 of those were considered um
homeless or unhoused. And then um our that third and fourth year we received 255,221 and we were allowed to use from the first year in the second year we were allowed to use anything we hadn't expended yet for the um for those
staffing. We just applied now it's a competitive cycle for this community living infrastructure grant and we should be hearing in June and I'll be coming back before the board on that. So what is the goal of this program? Um, our goal is to assist people with questions and supports
related to eligibility and community referrals for housing. So, really specializing in what options an individual has for housing in our community. Provide housing consultation support and services to individuals with disabilities. Typically, a lot of these individuals do have some sort of
disability or they're very low income. We coordinate with local community providers um to work on this continuum of continuum housing services we have in our community and we educate the community about housing disparities and raise awareness of housing issues and
needs. We serve on um just many different groups in the community. We um our staff attend the landlord meeting to try to work through any kinds of barriers um questions, things that we can maybe assist in kind of helping um our our our
people stay housed once they get into housing. Um and um so we try to work through those issues. Rachel's going to talk just now about our last year of some of the data and then um at the end we'll take some questions.
No, go ahead. I'll I'll hold off. Are you sure? Yep. Okay. Unless you want to ask it now. Doesn't matter. I can ask it because you talked about you go to the landlord meetings and I know that there's an organized one here in Brainer. What about the other communities in the county? Because
homelessness isn't Yep. Just for sure. Yep. Correct. So, um, currently within our county, the only one that we're aware of is the Brainer one. And they invite people from, you know, outside of the Brainer area. I know they've been looking at trying to expand that, but they're the ones that are the most
coordinated. But if you know you have um other um groups within the county, we'd love to um get that information to participate because it's important. We we do go up to both the Lakes Area Food Shelf um well, a couple of them. So, Lakes Area Food Shelf, we go up there
and we provide our services up there. Over to Crosby, they um the Crosby Food Shelf is only open one night a week. And then Emily, our staff have been up there too to provide supports and services. So they'll be in they are in those locations um when they're open or at not
every time they're open, but we are up there. So All right. Thanks. All right. So um thank you for allowing me to be here and share this um the information with you guys. So we're just going to um share some highlights um from our last annual report that we submitted for this
grant. Um, so our funding year always starts July and ends in June. So we'll be um preparing our next report here shortly. Um, but this is our last annual report. So here's just kind of a breakdown. So um, I broke down the numbers per quarter. Um but um between
um intake and then going out to the community like at the food shelves trying to serve some other areas um around our county um both Heather and Lisa had made 424 contacts throughout the year and all of those contacts were for individuals who were facing some
type of housing disparities. So there was some type of housing need that um they were helping them with. So in quarter 1, so July through September, they had 97 contacts. October through December was 90 and then we always typically see a spike in quarter um
three and four. So in January through March they had 127 contacts with individuals in our community and then for April and June it was 110. So we always like to kind of figure out what's situation they're currently in. There are many forms of homelessness
or are being unhoused. Um, and majority of the folks that Heather and Lisa have been in contact with were experiencing homelessness. So, what that looks like is, you know, they may have been utilizing shelter, hotels, a car, fish house, um, a storage shed. Um, so that's
what that form of homelessness looks like. And 48% of those contacts um were experiencing some that type of form, the prevention side. So, that was about 34% of the individuals. And prevention means that they're in a uh some type of housing, whether it's through renter or
home ownership, um and they're about to lose that opportunity. That's what prevention means. And then doubled up means that they don't have a permanent residency. They're just staying with a family member or a friend on a temporary basis until they can find their um their next stable housing option. And then we
do have a group of people that just aren't willing to share kind of what situation they're in, and that's okay. So, sometimes you're going to see some of those higher numbers for the unknown. Um, again, it kind of takes trust and and build that relationship with someone before you can kind of get into some of
that. Um, but that's just kind of the breakdown of where people in our um area um and what type of housing they're currently in. So, I always like to share data about the county of residents. I know this is a topic that a lot of people ask um and overall um the
majority of the individuals that we are working with are from Crowing County. Um, so we had a total of 69% um that were from Crowing County. Um, we had about 13% that were outside the county. And typically that's kind of within our surrounding county area. Once in a while
we'll get um a few outliers from like um Duth or the metro or something like that, but majority it's it's from our surrounding communities. Um and then just a small percentage is from out of state. Um typically when people are coming from out of state is that they do
have some family ties here. um once in a while some people are just passing through but um if they're coming from out of state it's because they have some connection to our community whether it's friends or family or they grew up here and then again we have kind of another percentage that 12% of unknown again
some people just aren't willing to share that information and that's okay with us um we just started reporting some more information about age demographic um because I think this area can be kind of a big misconception a lot of times when People are thinking of individuals who
are experiencing homelessness or unhoused as like more of the younger generation or early 20s, 30s when in fact um what we're seeing a newer trend is individuals kind of in their 30s, 40s, 50s um are kind of that that peak in in that type of thing. So the fastest
growing um age demographic is our 50 plus that are experiencing homelessness and that and they typically are um getting that it's their first time experiencing that. So, they've been stable pretty much their whole lives and then something happened um where they
were kind of in some type of housing instability. Um retirement um is just not some people just can't live off retirement and that's one of the biggest challenge or biggest reasons why we hear that in that category. And then just a breakdown of
our service outcome. So what Heather and Lisa do every time they are in contact with somebody is we try to help them with some type of connection. Um, so the the largest percentage is that housing consultation service. So they're talking with that individual to figure out what is the best housing situation for them
and we're trying to get them connected um to some type of housing option or work on a housing plan. Sometimes I mean most of the time we don't have an immediate option for them. So we have to work on a plan like step one we're going to do this step two. So it does take some time. Um but that's what that
service component looks like. And then the the next highest one is um community referrals. So typically when we're referring out to the community is more for financial assistance. So here internally growing county doesn't have a lot of financial assistance for first month's ranch or deposit. We look to our community partners to help out with that
because we have um some partners in the area that have more financial assistance for them. And then just a small percentage um a total 6% um for crisis services and treatment. Um so we're helping them get connected to that service. And then 21% is not reported.
Typically what happens in that is um they're um the option we're trying to work with them isn't meeting the need that they want right now. Um like for today for example, I mean we know the weather is not great outside. So someone comes in, they're like, I need housing today. And it'll be like, well, we don't
have it. You know, that can be very disheartening. And sometimes it's hard to work on a plan with somebody when all they're thinking about in this moment right now is I want to get out of the rain cuz I'm cold. and you want to work on a housing plan with me, I'm not there yet. So, that's kind of what that looks
like. And I just kind of want to share um a little case study with you guys. Um so, this is kind of um this is just one individual situation, but um there we have individuals in our community that fall into this category as well. So, I'm
going to share a case study with you on Jake's unhoused journey. So Jake um the first contact that we had with Jake was in 2016 and um he was experiencing homelessness at that time. We we can we know that he was experiencing
homelessness prior to 2016 but this was the first contact that we had. And then there's this kind of a gap in that timeline. So between 2017 and 2022ish um oops I have a that should be 2020.
Sorry about that. Um, so in between there he had multiple contacts with the county, with law enforcement, with emergency services. So Jake didn't have a phone and it was really, really hard to stay in contact with him. Like if he wasn't presenting here at the county um
or if law enforcement wasn't in contact with him, we had no way to get a hold of him. So it was just kind of this revolving door for Jake. And it it was very frustrating for him um for our community partners um just because it was so so frequent that you know he
would be accessing all these um emergency services. But luckily in at the end of 2021 the bridge on 7th opened and Jake had a safe place to sleep for the first time in over 5 years. And um every night or for the most mostly every
night he was there at the shelter. So, it was pretty easy to know where he was at and if we need to get a hold of him, you know, we could connect, um, you know, with him through the shelter. And then, um, another great community service, um, opened up in 2023. That was
the open arms drop-in center. So, now Jake had somewhere to go during the day. So, again, if we needed to get in contact with him, we had a a place that we can um, connect with him on. And then um, throughout that work, the wraparound services. So between um the county open
arms the bridge on 7th all of us were working on a coordinated plan for Jake. So we were all on the same page getting the same message getting things you know work through and then luckily very very very happy to report that in 2025 here
in the spring he u moved into his housing for the first time since who knows when. So the part that I want to highlight through this is that just the long gap between not having community services and that coordination and then
when these pieces were put into place in our community, how short of a time span it was to get Jake into safe, stable housing and he's doing fabulous by the way. Mr. Chair, question uh the um age of Jake, you know, you said you met him
first in 2016. Do you have an idea what his age was? Um, you're going to make me doing math. Um, so currently right now he he's in his like late 40s right now. So he would have been in his 30s. Mhm. So he's in his 30s when he was experiencing homelessness. Mhm. Yep.
Okay. Correct. And prior to that, what we know, I mean, he had a job, things were going well, and then, you know, for whatever reason, there's so many reasons why people um experience this type of instability in their life. Um, so he hasn't been willing to share that
information. I was kind of shocked to see the age group. I was thinking it would probably be more youngers, but I but I'm amazed that that that middle age group and and what you brought up the fact that that things have been going good or they, you know, things were working fine. They were keeping everything together, but through
whatever through whether eviction, whether it be a house they lost through foreclosure, whatever it is, all of a sudden they're they're out on the streets and they had no idea they were ever going to end up there. Correct. Yep. That's that's the very pretty scary for him. Yep, it was.
Thank you. All right, so that's just a little highlight of our report. So now we would love to um turn it over to you guys for questions or conversation. What's the impact since the city of Brainer decided they wouldn't allow the
shelter to be open during the summer months? Mh. What's the impact that you see? Yep. for our staff and for individuals that might be experiencing this homelessness. Yep. We're going right to that part. Absolutely. Um so what I can say from
our staff is it's very hard to look someone in the eye and say, "I'm sorry. I have nothing for you. Here's what you have tonight. You know, the rain and the cold. That's hard for them to do." Um the impact of the shelter closing um is just again we're going back to that 2016
2020 with Jake situation. It's incredibly difficult to find them and it's incredibly difficult to keep moving forward when we don't know where they're at and we can't continue to work on um some type of safe stable option for them. So, they have seen a decrease in
you know the number of contacts of individuals that they have been working with you know when the shelter was open. We just don't know where some of them are. I'd also just say that um when we first partnered together with um many community partners to work towards developing the warming shelter um and
Bridges of Hope stepped into that um at that time we were really focused on trying to create a safe warm place for people in the winter and I know that's been a question of um well why now a yearround shelter and I think when we started that we didn't realize that
every May we were throwing people into kind of a crisis because now where were they going to go? You know, now what do I do? Um I think the shelter ended with um they've been averaging from January through April 26 individuals that were being at were at the shelter every
night. Um and so 26 individuals are sitting there asking, you know, like where do I go? and and then the ordinances that have come about have just I think when we think about where do people um need where where will they go when they leave many times they are
camping um some of the things that Rachel mentioned they find a a shelter somewhere an empty vacant shelter a fish house I mean and they do want to try to stay close to resources uh in the community such as our soup kitchen and the open arms day center that they could
go to during the day um you know we've been just reminding people um that um of the ordinances and um but we also have been, you know, trying to help people um have some shelter. Uh like Rachel pointed to the rain today and in the
last two weeks we've had really hot weather in the '9s and we've been really chill, you know, cold here in the evenings and we've had rain. So, um, it has kind of thrown all of us into, um, I think crisis mode every spring, which was, I think, why we had thought that
doing the year- round shelter would maybe be, um, a good thing. Um, so that we could stay connected to these individuals. For us, staying connected to them and continuing to work on their housing plan is what really truly gets them into ongoing housing, stable ongoing housing. Um, you know, I think
on average, uh, I was looking back at some of our numbers, but, you know, it takes us about, you know, 50 days at least to even try to get somebody into some sort of housing. And that's probably a little bit more of a temporary housing like one of our housing support homes, something like that. As you see here, it took us a
couple years, you know, to really get um, Jake into his own apartment and work through all those things. So, I don't know if that answers your question, but it's frustrating. Excuse me. Geez, the printer lpped off a finger there. Um, it's the chair.
It's frustrating for me, and most people up here don't know this, but I was homeless for a year myself and lived in a car through the winter months, through the summer months. It's not a nice experience. I was lucky enough to have a
job that I kept during that time. I was able to have a little bit of money, but not very much money. But I slept in my car. And when you try to do that in January when it's 10 below, that car doesn't stay warm for very long. And so it's not a fun experience. But go to
summer and you have these temperature differences and the wetness, it's just as miserable as any other time of the year. And in fact, I would argue that it's worse because now I'm sping wet. I've got clothes. I can't go to the
laundromat because I don't have the money to dry them. I can't couldn't clean them anyway. It's a miserable experience. And if anybody thinks that mosquitoes are friendly in the summer, they are terribly wrong. The gnats, everything is impactful in your life and
makes you not want to be here. I'll I'll say that bluntly. It's a terrible experience and for this and I'm going to go on on a limb here. I'm sorry administrator but you'll probably get a lot of calls on this but to shut this shelter down when it
operates extremely well. Bridges of Hope has done a terrific job down there and you're not changing the number of beds that are available. You're not, you know, the minimal cost that the police department has in their involvement down there is really nothing. They do it all
winter long. I would guess there's even probably less in the summer, but that's my own observation. I just think I don't and the police chief can shut it down at any time he thinks that it's out of control down there, which we haven't seen in in
what number of years they've been there? Three years. Three seasons. Three years. And you can't operate on a one-year license anyway. Your your donors aren't going to give money for a one-year operation.
So, I don't see why they're doing what they're doing. These are human beings. And I I heard a person last night at their meeting talk about we take better care of pets. We call them and put them in a shelter. We won't put humans in a shelter. That is just absolutely
wrong. I'll keep my mouth shut now. I'm getting a little worked up here. So, any other questions, observations? I have a question. Lee, it better be along my line. Okay, good luck with that. Um, 2016, you said with Jake, but
prefaced it was a job loss. Did the Did he find employment anytime between 2016 and 2025? Um, he had stances here and there, but again, through his journey, it was really difficult to maintain um a job because he didn't have he didn't know where he was going to sleep from
night to night and getting there too. So Jake also did not have transportation. So it would there were a lot of barriers um that he had every single day trying to get to a job, but he definitely wants to work and still does. Okay, that was my next question. And apparently he's
not working now. Um not at this moment, but he is seeking employment. Mr. Lee, do you need a truck driver? Yeah. Well, it's funny you say that because there is a program um someone out of the east metro that actually has
a uh program for homeless where they'll train them on how to drive a semi and get them their CDL and put them to work. So Oh, thank you. Any other questions, observations? And thank you. You'll let us know about
the grant. Yep. Whether we get it or not. Yep. Very good. Okay, we'll see you in June. Thank you. All right, thank you. All right, next up is a DNR land acquisition, Christine Reese. Is that
how you say your name? Rice. Rice. I knew I was close. Started with an R. That was pretty I was in the right alphabet. I It's all I can say. But thank you for being here. Yeah. Thank you for the gentleman wants to introduce himself. Yeah. My name is Joel Lmberg.
I'm the backis area forest supervisor for the division of forestry. So you are, huh, Joel? Yes, I am. Yeah. We've got to know each other over the years. That's why a little bit. Yeah, a little bit.
Um, first off, is everybody aware of the Minnesota Forest Heritage Project or Minnesota Heritage Forest Project? Okay. So, um, Potlatch, which is now Pot Latch Deltic, owned a large hundreds of thousand acres in the
state of Minnesota. Um, the conservation fund kind of got together. They were kind of selling it off as they could to private land owners, but the conservation fund put together a proposal and purchased all of that land. And um the conservation fund, their main
goal is to keep managed land uh public instead of making it go private. So they purchased that land and they offered up that land um to some of the native Indian reservations um counties and then we came in the
state after that. So, um there's a pro there's a proposal put together, correct me if I'm wrong, using outdoor heritage funds and um in March of 23, we came to the board at seeking a letter of approval um which you gave to us and um
now at this time because we are some of the wildlife lands are using rim matching funds. I think that's the correct term. That's correct. Um, as a result, we came back seeking a resolution to proceed with that purchase. So, there's two properties you're
purchasing. Is that right? Correct. So, the original um letter of support included an additional parcel in Fairfield Township, which we are no longer seeing. Correct. Um, so you'll notice a change in the map. So, the map that
um that go went along with that letter does not have the parcel up in Fairfield Township. Um if you want to zoom go to the zoomed in map, it's a little bit more helpful. Yeah. Um so, there we go. There's about
265 acres on the north side of Sorenson Road that are proposed to be a state wildlife management area. And that's primarily our interest in that property is is adjacency to Spider Lake. That's a shallow lake that um has we've surveyed
over the years and has some good waterfall aquatic vegetation and waterfall use. So um providing access potentially to that lake and being able to manage it for waterfall is is our interest there.
The forestry lands are in green up there and you can see they butt up to both a county parcel and a state parcel in our forestry parcel. Um, number one, they're highly productive pine plantations for most of it and it also gives us access into our
parcel and into the county for that matter. They were here today just to answer questions. We'll have to come back to the county board to seek that resolution that Joel mentioned. Um, so if you had questions about these proposed acquisitions that we can help
answer today, Mr. Gordy, how many acres is it again? Uh, total of 543 or 43. And then these would be eligible for PE payments, correct? And if I if I recall correctly, I heard the legislature
uh the uh AIS and the U pills were on a chopping block, but then they're not on a chopping block now. Am I correct on that? That's my understanding. That's my understanding. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I guess I
don't I don't have any guess I don't have any issue, Mr. Chair. Only the only only issue is if you can put a board in on my dam down there on on the division of forestry
wildlife. Find a hydraologist. Mr. Lupkkey. Yeah. Um these lands then will be forest managed and they will you will be managing the timber on those lands as a as a DNR. That'll be the green lands will be yes the green lands will be the rest will be just
conservation then no I mean we um on state wildlife management areas we manage the timber on those lands but the the focus is on creating wildlife habitat. Okay great. We will be working on so most of the proposed um upland
habitat on the wildlife management areas are pine plantations which is not the best for wildlife habitat. So we would be working to create better habitat there. And a question for Joel. None of these are school trust lands. No.
Mr. Lee, did you have a question? Uh no, that kind of answered my question. I'm good now. Okay. I don't see. Yeah, we're going to get our consensus to to bring it bring that resolution forward. Have a resolution ready if you can forward it to us. Okay.
On the agenda. Perfect. Perfect. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Great. Short and sweet. You had to sit through a lot of others. We like little lighter subject here. You don't want to go out in the woods anyway today, do you? Not really. No. I only get to go out in the woods when
like you call or something. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Nice seeing you guys. It's easy. Anything else? All we have today, Commissioner.