i'd like to call the April 8th county board meeting to order will you join me for the pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God
indivisible with liberty and justice for all good morning i'd like to call the April 8th county board meeting to order will you join me for the pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence roll call commissioner Coring here
commissioner Lupkey here commissioner Barrows here commissioner Franine here commissioner Lee here all members are present have we got any open forum forms uh I do not okay is there anyone in the
audience who'd like to speak is there anyone in the audience who'd like to speak is there anyone in the audience who'd like to speak hearing nothing review and approve the minutes of the March 25th meeting madam Chair I make a
motion to approve i'll second it motion in a second all those in favor commissioner Coring i commissioner Barrows i commissioner Lebkkey i commissioner
Lee i commissioner Franian i um review and approve the agenda are there any changes madam Chair I do have a change one change on item 6.1 under community services the public health nuisance for 36752 Birch Drive has been
is completed so they are working on that we're removing that one from the agenda however we have an emergency abatement that came up on Friday that we are adding on to the agenda today that one is at 26571 Birch Trail in Garrison i just had
to make sure I had my addresses correct since they both have birch in them we want to make sure we have the right one so we will be removing the one on Birch Drive in Pine River and adding 26571 Birch Trail in Garrison
okay motion to approve the agenda with the change second okay we have a motion we have a motion by Commissioner Coring a second by Commissioner Barrows all those in favor commissioner Barrows
i commissioner Lubkkey I commissioner Lee I commissioner Coring I commissioner Frenzy I motion carries consent agenda is there any discussion of any of the items madame Chair
commissioner Coring madame Chair uh as you can see on the consent agenda there is several um contracts to be awarded and they will be awarded to Anderson Brothers and as
I'm sure everybody has seen there's been an article in the paper i actually heard from a township supervisor who was concerned i had a uh some communication with him i did hear actually yesterday and have a long conversation with
another one of my constituents about this and um reassured her that I was very confident that everything is fine but I would like to hear from our county engineer because our county engineer
works closely and has worked closely with Anderson Brothers for many years i guess I' I'd like to have your comments and then I I will have a follow-up comment when Tim Bray is done thank you Madam Chair and Commissioners
commissioner Coring thank you for the the question and opportunity to to talk about this um so just like many others uh residents and and other officials when something like this comes out in the paper a word of this comes out in
the paper that u there's immediate concern about um the impacts it makes us take a look at our processes and and make sure that that we're doing what we need to do to protect you know the investments that Crowland County residents make
so it's important to note that that the investigation that was outlined in the paper did not include any of the Crowing County projects and so none of our records were pulled none of our employees are interviewed like they may have done with some of the
others so I'm confident that whatever questions have been raised really do not involve us directly crowing County and uh other counties and mindat and other local agencies are required to conduct testing on materials to make sure that the the materials that
were building public infrastructure meet um stringent requirements so we get a quality so the public money spent on quality uh projects that last and some of those include gravel testing for surfacing base materials shouldering
concrete and batuminous which has a lot of testing requirements as well as a few other things some of the things we test for batuminous are the asphalt content we're going to make sure that there's enough binder in there or the glue that holds
it together so it's longlasting we also look at the distribution of the aggregates or the particles in there because that makes a difference how long they last too so we're testing for that and then once it's in place we check on the the ride quality the smoothness of the road probably what most people out
there recognize um as quality if the road's rough there's an indicator that there's probably a workmanship issue and that could be related to uh some of the makeup of the patumis itself and then we check on the density to make sure it's
compacted properly i think most people can um conclude that when the rollers are out there it needs to be densified to a certain density so it lasts longer and then in the past we've also looked at thermal profiling to make sure
that the temperature that the patuminous that goes down is uh warm enough to reach optimum compaction and stuff like that it's important to note that a lot of these tests require two samples to be
taken or two tests one done by the contractor and then one done by the county or MINDOT or another independent agency so there's always some a check and balance and we compare notes and if there's discrepancies it could result in
uh either a deduction or uh sometimes an incentive and in really really bad cases we can require them to remove and replace it if there's so much wrong with it it's so far out of tolerance thankfully that doesn't happen very
often so since Friday um and I was kind of surprised by the article 2 i knew a few years ago that are talking there were some rumors going around the county engineer circles about something
was um being investigated but we really didn't know and it kind of the investigation just went on without really us being involved like I said and I was kind of surprised on Friday to get a call from the president of Anderson Brothers Terry
McFarland preempting saying "Hey this is going to come out in the paper." And we had a good discussion about that and so I've been reviewing our processes some some of the paperwork and I'm really confident that the highway department personnel have the training
the expertise and we have the proper controls in place to ensure that the taxpayers of Curling County get a quality product at a fair price this including this includes that the construction materials of all kinds meet
the established standards for quality and workmanship so since just a few numbers since 2017 the net incentive that was paid to Anderson Brothers was 1.3 million that's eight years that includes the last couple
years it also includes disincentive too because you can qualify for incentive for reaching optimal compaction a few other things that ensure quality product and so we're applying incentives and disincentives
um every year and the lack of disincentives is actually a good thing because we want a quality product it shows that even though um uh there's some disincentive it's a it's a small number compared to the millions of dollars that we can continue
to invest in our roadway system important to note that there are no incentives for anything other than patuminis there's a it's actually stacked kind of against the contract in terms of like gravel and a few other things you can
only get a disincentive and so they have to meet the specification or they're held accountable so the any incentives are based on batuminous which includes ride like I said the smoothness the densification to the optimum amount and
then uh we did some thermal profiling also and so over the years we've I want to go to thermal profiling and just to to talk about how we look at these controls and if they're not working and they're not providing
value we stop them thermal profiling we stopped a few years ago after um uh putting into their specifications which basically took the temperature of the puminous that came out of the paver we
want it to have be uniform so it can compact uniform and the la the road last uh uniformally but we recognized that that was not providing value and there was no way to independently verify it so we got rid of
that it was just really not providing any better uh quality so we got rid of that so we're constantly looking at these things to make sure um that they're working for us and providing value i looked at the engineers estimate for incentives we've been doing that since
2001 um a little bit closer and our estimates are 1.6% of the total contract and the incentives paid to Anderson Ber that same time as 1.7% and so it's really close to what we
had estimated we estimate in uh that that they're going to do quality work and they're going to qualify for the incentives so I just want to let you know that that it is not I don't feel it's outside of what we had expected
and just finally I just want to reiterate that I'm just really confident in our team's abilities to make sure that we're continuing to do the proper testing um to accurately document the results and apply disincentives but also if the
contractor qualifies and creates a quality product that qualifies for incentive we also do that too and so I'm very confident that in our um our team to be able to again make sure that
taxpayers of Crowing County are getting uh what they pay for at a fair price any questions madam Chair yes madam Chair I I would just say that that this uh I did have a a conversation with Tim over the weekend
um I did have a convers long conversation with Terry McFarland the CEO of uh Anderson Brothers on Sunday and I I'm confident you know I'm speaking to my constituents now that I'm confident that that uh all the work that
has been done in Commissioner District 1 or and I'm thinking that all of Crowing County has been quality work you know and and this is This is kind of a a sad deal but I I
will say that I'm going to lend all my confidence and support to Anderson Brothers and and I and I'll tell you why because as I was you know over the weekend thinking about this and you think of like this is some obscure
entity you know oh Anderson Brothers no it's a lot of people and as I just sat here I wrote down some of the people that are my friends and they're my neighbors like Mara Britain Ricky Eisel Doug Busby Brad Busby Brian McCulla and
the list goes on and on of the people that I know that work at Anderson Brothers and have worked there for many many many years and they are quality people of integrity and so I'm confident today in approving these contracts for
Anderson Brothers and um I just I just feel that we've got to move on from here and I'm confident in our quality staff at the county to uh
moving forward do the inspections to make sure that things are done the right way and um so if there's no other questions I'm ready to make a motion to approve the consent agenda madame Chair
yes i just have a question on the uh Thank you Paul i just have a question Tim on the um eight on the on the FAD road specs the changing of the patience from the what what from what 2 in to 3
in is it yes okay um now some of the townships that we serve or that are served in the area have pretty much adopted the county's plan or the county's road standards um are the town with this change are you
reaching out to those townships and letting them know that we have changed our standards so they can change theirs if they choose uh we have not done that i think this is the first step for official approval from the board and we can uh do that we have an email list and
we'll maybe just blanket everybody saying "Hey that this changed." Yes i And um allow them to ask questions they may choose not to go to the degree that we do um really what uh Commissioner
Lkey is talking about is adding an inch of batuminous or uh to our pavement uh structure to make sure that we achieve a 7 ton design and seven ton design is just more robust i can handle
the heavy traffic that is sometimes the dump truck or the garbage truck that comes I I guess the garbage truck they cause a lot of damage in the spring when the load restrictions are on obviously we can't keep them off of there so in the first assessment district and anywhere we want to build roads that
last a long time so we felt very strongly that any of the new roads are built to this standard the change that we made we realized that uh we had not put enough in there batuminous in there
the the top layer to actually achieve 7 tons so in the language we said 7 ton but in the if they followed simply the numbers they wouldn't be achieving that so we just made that quick change um the intent had always been seven ton but we were just kind of misleading them by
mistake that by requiring uh two inches instead of three inches of batumis uh the reason it came up is uh Jenkins Township that I'm working with that's just across the road from where I live never had a adopted the county's road standards to begin with and all a sudden
this came up and I just want to make sure that that if we're doing that we have townships that have adopted the county's road standards just make sure that they're aware of the change that we're making so if they choose to they can make their change so that's all I
had okay madam Chair one question please uh you mentioned as part of the checks and balances system that we um are checking that as well as Anderson Brothers correct that's correct okay i just want to that's all I want to make sure is there's all Mandot also is an
independent tester on some of the tests there's a lot of tests having to do with but uh but two some of the tests we cannot do and to invest in that would not be cost effective or the the expertise that comes with using that equipment so we rely on Minda to help us
test on on some of those things perfect any more questions yes Madam Chair this is Commission Barrow kim here's my question particularly for the road that was already improved where you said
the ordinance or or your specification through 3 in of practical application we're putting down 2 in so when we do an engineer's bid and we're putting it out for these companies to
bid on this and they come in at uh something less than what the engineer estimates how's that impacting that process they getting two inches or they bitting three inches
i'm 3 in compacted right i'm just trying to figure out uh so we're talking about the spad road standards again right not any town any township that we overseen right it'd be the first assessment
district only and so Oh I see okay so each township can adopt their own some have have um agreed to just adopt ours thinking it's it's a good standard others have their own and um important
thing to remember is that we're not probably building new roads in the fed it's up to these developers uh that do it if we have a gravel road that comes forward and they agree to be assessed we will build it to the seven ton standard
and uh include three inches of patuminous does that answer your question um maybe I'm not fully understanding Kim so let's just stick like you said with the first assessment district so we we put a as township
officers we say we want a road engineer comes up with a price and they're saying he prices it out there estimate of 3 in of the cumin but in the past only two inches have been applied
so the engineers estimate is higher than what what are the specs that go out to the contract when people are going to bid on the project maybe that's a major way to say it are they bidding at 2 in or are they bidding at 3 in well prior to today if this passes they
were likely bidding it at two um but again the the ordinance uh subdivision ordinance that that land services um works with there's some requirements it's along with our
policies that an independent engineer must design the road meaning they have to achieve seven tons and that's how it kind of came to our attention we had a couple of these engineering firms that represent developers saying "Hey um you're saying seven
tons but you're only requiring two." And that that doesn't work so uh they wanted us to correct that well here's my concern Tim for the taxpayer that specimen difference we're telling them that they're going to get a seven ton
load with three inches of batum in it but in practical application the bid king and they're bidding it at 2 in and giving that taxpayer less value of their dollars than what expected by our own
specification right that be true i didn't catch the last part there but now I maybe understand better we they will not be able to build the road until we approve it and we won't approve it now until it has the minimum of 3 in of batuminous and then the other gravel
base that requires it to get to 7 ton so here going forward there will never be a road built that's can be bid at two because it will not meet the minimum specifications is it okay that's all I'm sorry maybe I'm not connecting with
you um we can follow up after after the meeting today if Okay okay any other questions Madam Chair yes uh if there's no other questions on the consent agenda I would move to approve the consent agenda
do we have a second i'll second it motion by Commissioner Coring second by Commissioner Lee all those in favor commissioner Lebkkey I commissioner Lee I commissioner Coring I commissioner Barrows
I commissioner Franine i motion carries okay next thing on the agenda is community services public health nuisance good morning i'm Gina Hire i'm the public health manager over at community services and I am bringing
forward a public health nuisance today um that was discovered on the 26,000 block of Birch Trail in Garrison uh the property was found to be us utilizing a failing septic system on April 4th when
public health and land services representatives conducted a site visit uh they observed sewage surfacing onto the ground contact was made at that time with the property owner as well as with a septic provider and uh they contracted
to have the tanks pumped and have a compliance inspection conducted uh therefore the immediate hazard was eliminated by having the tanks pumped however the long-term solution cannot be achieved until the ground thaws due to im imminent threat to public health um
public health requested an emergency use of solid waste funds at that time to ensure the immediate abatement we are also now requesting approval to utilize solid waste funds to repair the underlying issue with the drain field as
the weather permits any questions no questions okay do I have a motion motion to approve is there a second
second commissioner Barrows okay motion by Commissioner Lubkkey second by Commissioner Barrows all those in favor commissioner Lee i commissioner Coring I commissioner Barrows I commissioner Lubkkey I commissioner
Franzine I motion carries thank you land services good morning i have four items for uh your consideration uh this morning the first request is for a preliminary and a final
plat for parcel number 6814 0586 located in section 14 of Ideal Township this is for the plat of Butternut Point of 2025 the request is to approve a conservation design preliminary plat consisting of seven
individual lots and one outlot trice can you go to page 115 in the packet please so this is the old Butternut Point Resort um you'll remember that this was actually here before you back in 2023 to be platted but uh there's a requirement
that once the final PL is approved they have a 120day window to record and unfortunately it didn't record within that time frame and so they're then required to go back through um the process again um that you can see here this is the the old lodge and then these
are the cabins that are in place uh there's common open space uh for um that they'll all own in through a home owners association management and then uh all the cabins that are there um basically going to have their own real estate with this so that they would be able to be uh
sold as individual lots uh just a little bit of a history on this a conditional use permit was approved for this back in February 8th of 2001 to convert the resort at that point to a residential use um if you look on your desk I gave you I put a little memo um on your desk
it looks like this here if you have it um just wanted to uh go through the conditions that the planning commission recommended as part of this approval um so the planning commission did meet on March 20th to um and re made a
recommendation to approve the plenary plat of butternut point of 2025 with the following three conditions uh one was that um they are allowed eight boring spaces to be located on the pig lake side and utilize one century located dock that's uh shown on the survey um
any jet ski slips that they would want to use they would put in that little bay that you could see on the survey uh and then they also put on a condition that said uh any condition from the February 8th 2001 conditional use permit must be adhered to um I wanted to point out that
if you look uh I don't I don't have it here but there was a condition number six of the conditional use permit from 2001 stated that should any structure be destroyed it can be only replaced uh in a location meeting all setback requirements the current cabins on here
don't meet the setback requirements as that's what's allowed when you do a resort conversion but if you go to Minnesota statutes 394.36 subp part 4 it does allow structures to be replaced if destroyed by fire or other peril if a permit has been applied for within 180 days when the property was damaged so um
it is a staff recommendation that if the preliminary plan is to be approved that to amend condition number three to say except for condition number six conditions from the February 8th 2001 conditional use permit must be adhered to um and then just for clarity the
planning commission did hold a public hearing on this March 20th of 2025 and made a unanimous recommendation to the board to approve the plinary plat of butternut point of 2025 the planning commission board of adjustment developed the finding effect of fact found on pages 110 to 111 of the board's packet
for consideration based on the application submitted the staff packet public comments and the finding of fact it is recommended to approve the preliminary apply to butternut point 2025 staff have also reviewed the file and concur with the recommendation with the planning commission uh with the condition of amending condition number
three as stated in the memo that I provided today i'd be happy to answer any questions madam Chair um Chris is there an HOA did you say there's an HOA governing this this at this time correct all conservation design developments are required to have
a homeowners association for how they're going to manage uh and so that would manage how garbage how who pays for what how the septic how the water all that is done as correct as the group yeah and they have to have when they record the plat they also have to record those homeowners association documents
covenants and there's covenants for that correct we do not enforce those covenants hoa needs to enforce they just have to have one that meets the state requirements of what an HOA has to has to meet but we don't review those and and we don't give any feedback on that they just have to have the documents and
then whoever buys or sells will will be underneath that HOA's correct not nobody can buy that and say "I don't want to be part of it move it out of So with the conservation design what that means is that with the seven lots that are there um everybody that owns a cabin will have a 17th ownership in that common open
space that they have as well okay any other questions nope do we have a motion i'll make a motion to approve i'll second it madam Chair I do have I have a This is Commissioner Barrels and I do have a question okay okay regarding
I think there was a concern by some of the land owners around butternut point about whether or not these would be utilized Airbnbs or VBO that address at all in the
conditions madam Chair Commissioner Barrows uh I have did a review i did look over the homeowners association documents and it does mention in there that they are not going to allow short-term rentals but to be very clear nothing would stop the homeowners association from amending
those decorations and those documents to allow short-term rentals and if they did that then they would have to um apply and receive a license to be able to rent there so we don't have any um any regulations that would not allow them to they're going to self-impose that on themselves but it's not something that
the county has the ability to impose on them okay and I appreciate that just my personal concern is that when I see this kind of development and there's no garages or anything it indicates to me
that these aren't built on occupants and that they were probably do what they feel is in the best interest of their pocket bill which might not be uh agreeable to adjacent land owners in that but that's just my personal opinion
so thank you very much yeah anyone else no okay we have a motion and a sec a motion by Commissioner Lubkkey second by Commissioner Lee all those in favor commissioner Coring i commissioner
Barrels i commissioner Lubkkey i commissioner Lee i commissioner Frenzine i motion carries thank you the second item now is for the final plat point of 2025 uh all requirements have been met for the final PL application and would recommend
approval i'd be happy to answer any questions okay do we have any additional questions i do not motion to approve do we have a second i'll second that motion by Commissioner Coring second by Commissioner Lubkkey all those in favor
commissioner Barrels i commissioner Lubkkey i commissioner Lee i commissioner Coring i commissioner Franzine i motion carries all right thank you very much just to be clear for the
record the applicant now has 120 days to record and I hope they get it done this time so we don't have to go through it well that's what happened the last time wasn't it they didn't get it recorded in time they didn't get it recorded in time so hopefully the recording will be done in time and we don't have to go through this process again all right well thank
you uh for that the third item on the uh uh today is for a preliminary plat for parcel number 68210711 which is located in section 21 of Ideal Township the request to approve the plinary plat of tip top first edition consisting of two lots uh trees
can you go to page 280 of the packet please thank you very much so this would be uh on the clamshell side you have Ruter Road here uh the request was to plat this piece of property there's a cabin here and a cabin here and then
this is the old lodge that was in place there um so the final plan of Tiptop was approved by the county board on March of 2021 uh this was the old tiptop resort that was off Rucker Road um this did require the planning commission board of adjustment to approve a variance for lot
size and buildable area before recommending approval of the plat the main reason that the plan commission approved it was that there were two existing cabins on the site and the applicant agreed to remove the old lodge within 24 months which significantly reduce the impervious coverage on the lot uh the planning commission board of
adjustment held a public hearing on March 20th 2025 and made a 3 to1 recommendation to the board to approve the plenary plaid of tiptop first edition the plan commission board of adjustment developed the finding of fact that you'll find in your packet on page 274 to 275 and based on the application
submitted staff packet public comments and the finding of fact it is recommended to approve the plenary ply of tiptop first edition staff have reviewed the file and concur with the recommendation from the planning commission i'd be happy to answer any questions any questions um just one question i see
the township weighed in on this as a uh recommends denial after split lot size is too small is what they have correct they waiting on it but that was from ideal township yep that that is a township so at least township waiting on it they did but again no matter what
their comp plan says it they do not have an ordinance that that uh covers these areas does not have a town have an ordinance and so the county is the regulatory um jurisdiction over planning and zoning for Ideal Township yep any other questions madam Chair with
Commissioner Barrow yes Chris um I do have a concern why we would approve something that is undersized first of all and then the main buildings in fact I I don't agree with approving it when it undersized the buildable lot by a
significant amount compared to our ordinance but then the old building or the the main building the biggest one of the three that are on the particular piece of property they say will be torn down at some time in the future i I know
we probably can't ask them for a guarantee when it's going to happen it might never happen and so from my perspective unless there's a more solid plan presented I have a hard time approving this one so that'll be my
opinion on this one thank you Madam Chair i could respond Commissioner Barrows to that um so first the the planning commission and board of adjustment did put a very firm condition on that would require the lodge to be removed within 24 months so he has two years to remove the lodge um and so we
have that and then just to talk a little bit about the variance so the variances um allowed for each lot to be 20,000 square ft um that is what the state standard is today is to be a 20,000 foot lot would meet the minimum standards set up by the DNR and the shoring rules um
the lots are 100t wide so they meet the lot width issue they just don't meet the lot depth issue because of how shallow it is there to rug your road so they do meet the minimum standards for that uh they we have a standard in our ordinance which requires a 12,000 square ft buildable area for new lots that are
created within uh the shoreline district for a general development lake obviously these two lots did not have that because of the 3,24 ft on lot one and the 3,897 on lot two but the board felt that um the buildable area didn't apply as
much in this situation because there are two existing cabins that will be on on either of the two lots and they would regardless is if the um variance is approved or not to create the two lots they would be able to rebuild the two cabins in their current footprint um
without needing a variance and they could also rebuild that lodge because it is now a residential use and no longer a commercial use uh and so the the the planning commission and they also put a limit on that said that uh the the existing cabins that are there um if they are to ever be rebuilt they can
never be increased in size while coming back for a variance and applying to the planning commission so there's no increase in size to those two cabins that are there and they felt that the trade-off of getting the 5,000 square f foot lot removed in 2 years significantly reduced the impervious coverage on the lot and they felt was an
overall improvement to that and for the water quality of the white fish chain madam Chair Commissioner Barrows again I appreciate that Chris i I guess I missed that and didn't realize that there was a 24 month window for them to remove
that building what happens if we don't remove it madam Chair that's why I see Stephanie sitting up front and we will take it to the county attorney's office and they will do what they do to gain compliance with the ordinance commissioner Barrels do you have any
questions it would come to my office um and then we would go through a civil process uh where we can go to the district court and require them to remove it and if they don't do that in a timely manner then we can ask the court
for an order to go in and have it removed at the um residents requ similar to the public health nuisances that we do um but this has to go through a court action and madam chair if I could also just
maybe uh when we had the meeting um we as a as a county we don't have the ability to just go in and say you have to remove a structure because that could be considered a taking and so when we had the conversation with the applicant Mr swenson he volunteered to remove the
structure so um that was kind of the part of the deal that we worked out that he volunteered to remove that structure in and then in response to that then he would get the variance to create the two lots knowing that the two cabins that are there currently if they were to be rebuilt could never be enlarged by you
know larger than what they are currently so Chris one more question is there two septic systems on this we're having a compliance inspect because of the grounds being frozen right now um we're going to have a compliance inspection on that property by July 1st um but my
understanding is it's a shared septic system on the property for those two cabins and that's that's very common we'll ensure that whatever exists will be large enough to handle the traffic in our two houses correct correct yep yep
we'll have the inspection done and get all the verifications on that taken care of that'll be done by June 1st any other questions if not do I have a motion is there a
motion will anyone make a motion well I've said it three times it dies for lack of a motion so where do we go now madam chair if there's no action taken on it it's essentially denied okay
however I believe that there needs to be some form of action that would be taken as and I will have to confirm this but the PCBOA is required to provide a recommendation to you for final action so Madam Chair this is Commissioner Barrows
i'll make the motion to deny okay we have a motion to deny is there a second is there a second is there a second motion dies for lack of a second
so Madame Chair we can refer back to the PCBOA that there was no action taken and as such effectively denies the petition at this point we'd have to have a motion to do that
too wouldn't we no with no action taken there's no there's nothing that refers it back there's no further action that can be taken um I'd have to defer to Stephanie as to whether or not the PCBOA would have to take any further action on their end
i don't believe sorry I don't believe that PCBOA is required to do any additional action it essentially um is denied and dies here um unless the applicant comes forward with some change and then they would go through the
process all over again okay well for lack of a second motion is denied um I guess let's go on to 7.4 uh the last item we have on the agenda is uh the uh land use map amend
for parcel number 90030516 that is located in the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of section 3 of St matias Township the request is to amend the land use map from agricultural forestry to rural residential 5 involving 33.9
acres um trees could you go to page 314 please so the property is located um this is St matias Road here and this would be Corner Trail here this is where the property is so they're 140 in off the St matias Road could you go to the
next page please so uh the current uh the zoning here to see in blue this is a real residential five the area that's in green is our um is the agricultural zoning and this is the parcel in question there's no zoning up here because this is in Crowing
Township and they do their own zoning and so the request is for this parcel here to go to Row Residential 5 like the adjacent parcel next to it um the planning commission board of adjustment held a public hearing on March 20th of 2025 and made unanimous recommendation
to the board to approve the land use map amendment the planning commission board of adjustment developed the finding of facts that are found on page 311 to 312 for the board's consideration within the packet and based on the application submitted staff packet public comments and the finding of fact is recommended
to approve the land use map amendment for partial number 90030516 located in the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of section 3 of St matias Township and the request is to amend the land use map from agricultural forestry to rural 5
involving 33.9 acres staff have reviewed the file and concur with the recommendation from the planning commission i'd be happy to answer any questions madame Chair yes Madame Chair uh last night um I got a
call from the uh St matias Township Board that um they were having their meeting last night first Monday of of the uh month and um they put me on speaker phone and
the all the supervisors unanimously said that they do not support this i'm a little bit you know I don't mean to scold them and I'm not trying to scold them but I think these townships when they have an objection they need to
start early on with the dirt meeting and the planning and zoning commission but I did promise them last night I would advocate on their behalf they do not support R5 they would support R10 which is in
their comprehensive plan and as Commissioner Lubkkey just asked being that this this township or any other township being that they are not doing their own planning and zoning they go have to go by what the county is doing
and I have always always uh when a township official says something to me I say do your own planning and zoning then if you don't like what the countyy's doing but I did promise last night that I would advocate uh on behalf of the township because
they feel that they want to keep St matias Township a more rural and not have it approve this R5 they would prefer R10 so I would move to deny the uh app the land use map
amendment okay we have a motion to deny is there a second i'll second it i got a question for both of you though before we go any further okay we have a second okay questions um
Commissioner Coring or or Mr pence did uh did the township bring anything up at the the DRT meeting or the planning and zoning meetings or have they had any in input prior to Madame Chair and Commissioner Lee uh St st matias Township did not attend the DRT meeting
they did not submit any written comments prior to the planning and zoning or prior planning commission meeting um uh in March and they um did not attend the meeting provide any oral testimony as well okay did have they given a reason why they're not in favor of it
i have not received anything in writing from the township nor have I received any phone calls or had any conversations with the township sounds like Commissioner Coring might have more information on that than I do madame Chair yes Madam Chair commissioner Lee the conversation that I had with the
town board last night they they really want to keep St matias more of a rural look I guess and and uh like I said they they would support if it was
R10 like splitting that into 10 acre parcels to keep it more rural I guess rather than getting it to um down to 5 acres they they did mention that they thought this would set a precedent and they were concerned about it and uh so
that's that's kind of their reasoning they wanted to just keep St matias Township to be more of a rural rather than having it you know turn into 5 acre lots you know I I I refer you to Long Lake Township the property just uh to
the on Butternut Road east of uh TC Farm where uh the the new property owner was asking for 1 acre lots the township was okay with five the planning commission
uh met in the middle with two and a half if I remember correctly um but you know when I I go back I think of Warren Warren Morgan my good friend when he came before us uh he lives out on 18
on the five mile road and he wanted to do a land use map amendment and he wanted to give some of his land to his grandchildren uh somehow I think we got to be mindful of that that things are changing you know but like I said I'm
advocating today on behalf of the township officials that called me last night and that's why I'm offering up the motion to uh deny well I I seconded it because I wanted to
be able to ask some questions about it i I think that um you know right next to it is five is zoned five acres i think the homeowners have a right to do what they want with their property um and quite frankly I'm a
little disappointed that the township has waited until the night before to say something about it so we have someone in the audience would you come forward and state your name and address hello chairs i am Mark Balnowski St
matias 6179 Corner Trail Fort Rippy Minnesota i'm also a township representative uh the situation that was brought up yesterday we can only discuss stuff with us three when it comes to we obviously didn't see
that because it's the first um Monday of the month and it was a late Monday this month to discuss the situation so when we went through and looked at the situation um obviously as it was discussed we have
for years as we've worked with them before always tried to make sure that you know 10 20 acres and how things have changed through the years have went down we've never liked a 5 acre situation in that situation and also if you can pull
up on the screen about how that lot is stabled the majority of that is swamp and the section that would be being driven into would not even be close to a county road it would be on the township
road and actually I am the neighbor of that situation you look right down the line the road would be on top of a hill and as it shoots through and to our situation we did not understand how 5
acres would be necessary for when the majority big time is all in the swamp situation and how that would even run in at least 10 acres it would be more of a availability of that situation and
also how lots would go because if this passes then I would have a right then too to start going 5 acres five five and then it would move down the line of chain and that's where there was concern of the community about
that situation of changing quickly in the future all the way down that road thank you thank you Chris any questions yeah Madam Chair if I could just respond to the idea of precedent um there is no precedent in
land use so if Mark wanted to consider you know his to be 5 acres he could make an application go to the planning commission we could have the public hearing it would come to the board so just because a decision is made on a piece of property does not automatically mean or assume that would actually be the same decision on the adjacent
property next door in that area so that's that's from case law that's been out there for many many years each each application and piece of property stands on its own merit and the facts of each individual situation so um I can understand the the concern or thought of that but from a legal standpoint um that
doesn't the idea of of precedent setting doesn't apply in land use thank you okay any other discussion um the only question I'd have Madam Chair is if if there is a vote to deny we just need to
come up with findings to you know to deny the application so um would you like me to give you a couple ideas I had if if you wanted to that or does the board have ideas that they'd like to Should we wait until after the vote you could we could we could do findings after you vote if
you'd like but however Madam Chair the the motion to deny should include the basis for denial because you have findings for why you're approving it you should also have findings for why you would deny madam Chair I'd like to hear the findings that Chris came up with
okay madam Chair uh I think nothing would change as far as um I don't know Theresa if you want to maybe go to the findings um I see I had the page number in my report for
you of course now I can't find it here we go findings are located on page 314 no excuse me 312 311 and 312 where the findings
are so I think uh condition you know one and two would stay the same and then I think number three I'd recommend stating that the existing rural rural residential 5 land use in the area is located off the St matias road changing the land use on this parcel from egg
forested to rural residential 5 is not appropriate for corner trail which is St matias Township Road and then number second point would be that St st matias Township does not support changing the land use district from egg forested to RR5 because the property located on corner trail which is a township road
and I think honestly those two conditions were what you could probably um findings would answer the rest of the questions up there so basically what we're saying is that because it's not located on St matias Road and it's located on a township road that the R5 is lots are too small for a township
road compared to a kind road like St matias Road those would be my recommendations just a question does the township receive the DRT stuff ahead of time they do so they would have time i mean how much ahead of time is there what's the
timeline so the development routines meet the second and fourth Monday of every month and we send out the uh information a week ahead of time the townships usually meet once a month yeah and so we've so we've set it up so that every township meets before the planning commission meeting um the only one that
doesn't is Long Lake Township meets the day of our meeting unfortunately but all other townships do meet before the meeting and so um I can go back and see we had a development review team meeting for the Marshell property was on January 27th of 2025 and then um the notice we mailed
notice out on March 5th and we had the meeting on March 20th so back in January is when we um started the conversation with Mr marshall so would the township have received information in time for the meeting before the one they had just yesterday yes we send all notices to the
township clerk via email okay one last question does the property owner has he given any indication of why he's wanting these to go down to he'd like to break off 5 acres to give to his daughter okay
and with the current egg zoning it's 35 acre minimum you you have to go to a residential zoning to be able to make a smaller lot okay so in this case it's it's for his family correct yeah
is there any more discussion hearing none we have a motion to deny by Commissioner Coring seconded by Commissioner Lee all those in favor commissioner Lubkkey nay commissioner Lee nay commissioner Coring
i commissioner Barrows hi commissioner Franzine nay okay motion is denied um do we have a motion to approve i'll make the motion to approve they voted deny i will second
that motion so they know what they're voting on not be it the motion was to deny and they voted no no and no so it would approve no it the motion to deny failed now they need a motion to approve if they're
going to consider it to be approved okay so the motion we have a motion by Commissioner Lee second by Commissioner Lubkkey to approve i have a This is Commissioner Barl i still now I'm confused because
Commissioner Toring if I understood you right your motion was to deny is that correct that is correct so we had three votes against denying it correct denying it correct okay madam Chair just for clarification
yes just for clarification the action that was before you was a motion to deny the application so the vote was on to deny there were three votes against denying but that it does not mean it's approved it was just three votes against
denying the motion so that motion failed and now you have another motion on the floor yes we now have a motion to approve Commissioner Lee and Commissioner Lebi commissioner Lee I commissioner Coring
I commissioner Barrels Commissioner Lubkkey I commissioner Franzine I motion is approved thank you thank you thank you administrative services establishment of
2025 Crowing County Board of Canvasing for primary and general elections good morning Madam Chair and commissioners i'm here to uh request establishment of the 2025 Crowing County Board of Canvas for primary and general
elections uh that may take place in 2025 as you know uh actually today we have two elections happening happening simultaneously with the Pquat School District um election being held today and then also Pine River that does affect a few of our north residents is
also taking place and then we are also in the uh process of getting set up for the Minnesota Senate District 6 seat uh that is open and that election uh primary election will take place next Tuesday April 15th uh we will do public
test for the primary this coming Thursday and Friday right across the hall here at 911 and 1 and then we will also um turn around in a short time and get ready for the general election where we will uh conduct public testing uh
Thursday and Friday uh before the April 29th uh general election that's taking place so uh the election team has been very busy this month with the elections uh but we are um going to be ready because the absentee voting for the
primary uh begins tomorrow so we'll close the school district polls tonight post those results and when we come here tomorrow morning we will be ready to go for absentee primary voting uh for the Senate seat so uh I am asking that
amongst the commissioners you nominate two people to serve on the board of canvas uh for 2025 and those members will be on the canvas board with myself the mayor of Brainard and the uh district court administrator uh or our
design so do I have any volunteers i Wilson's nobody else up madam Madam Chair yes jory when would that take place uh great question so uh Wednesday
the 16th at 11 o'clock the board of canvas will meet for the primary and then uh Wednesday April 30th at 11:00 uh the canvas board for the uh general election will meet okay are you still volunteering mhm yep
okay i have one volunteer is there anyone else i will not be in the area on the 30th so I can't do the 30th so I will not be able to volunteer this time madam Chair Commissioner Barrows I will accept that responsibility for both of
those okay um Commissioner Lee and Commissioner Barrows have volunteered thank you very much and this will be for the whole year just in case any other special elections pop up so No you didn't mention that we do need a motion
for that we need a motion appointing Commissioner Lee and Commissioner Barrows to I I will make that motion to appoint Commissioner Lee and Commissioner Barrows to the canvasing and primary for primary and general election second coring okay we have a motion by
Commissioner Lubkkey second by Commissioner Coring all those in favor commissioner Coring I commissioner Barrows hi commissioner Lebkkey I commissioner Lee I commissioner Franine I motion carries all right thank you very much Madam Chair jory before you
leave you send a calendar invite so it gets on my calendar yes sir thank you thank you Madam Per go ahead madam chair and commissioners I have
another item for you today or um and that is consideration of the 2025 to 2029 highway improvement plan and the will pull up our the summary presentation
this is again a followup to our March 4th transportation advisory committee meeting where I met with all of you and your constituent representatives to go through uh the plan uh the 25 to 29 plan which included previous years but also
some new projects that that we were uh recommending for 2029 so over the past month or so we have been incorporating comments updating some of the cost estimates and actual bid pricing in in the document
and now uh it's ready for your final consideration and I have a quick summary well I have a summary to go through i figured that would get a laugh i'm going to try my best do you want the summary up then madam Chair I'd like to
know quick came into his presentation i I'm sorry i didn't understand didn't catch that madam Chair I would like to know when the word quick came into Bray's presentation
i don't know i've never heard of that word yes this is the correct one this is the board summary so in in the packet also for your consumption and also the public's consumption is the full 52page not quick not brief uh five-year plan
there's a lot of good information in there for for you as well as the public uh to give an idea of what we're going to be doing over the next five years and I would start off this summary with just talking about the total investments that are included in this five-year plan and it's significant just
like all of the previous years so about $87 million worth of total investment that includes the the amounts uh for the federal federal transportation bill were competitive grants county state aid which is derived from the taxes you and
I pay at pump every end fees uh license tabs fees and a few other things and then also the road and bridge levy out of that 86 mill.8 8 million we're only planning to spend $2.1
million of Crowing County uh property tax levy i think that's just a testament to how we're leveraging these outside sources local option sales tax competitive uh grants from the federal government state aid funding and others
and so it's really low um and we're able to do you'll get to see in a second all the things we're getting to do with with just that property tax levy and then we're planning to spend $4 million in the first assessment district taking care of their roads and that local options sales tax investment is over
half of that or it's like really close to sorry really close to half of the total investment and then we get some uh state bridge bonding and then uh as is customary we work with a lot of our local partners and so far we've identified $1.6 million sometimes our
local partners aren't doing as robust planning as we are and they just don't know what's going to happen four years from now we expect that to continue to grow over time and uh there's the mileage there over 155 miles of surface improvements and they're distributed as
you see there um and I want to draw your attention to the last one is 88 miles fundwide local options sales tax and I point out every year that if uh if we did not have that that would be 88 miles we would not likely be
able to afford or do and so that's really impactful it includes three roundabouts actually I found a correction that's four because we're going to claim what Mandot is going to do starting in 2026 at the junction of 210 and Mill Avenue uh they're going to
install two roundabouts one two on their system and one at the junction of uh three there so I call it four three of them we're doing uh in in house on our system exclusively and then five bridge replacements which includes a
partnership with Maple Grove Township uh to replace a the bridge in Leisure Lane and then one B bridge rehab where it's time to replace the concrete on the deck that's in Cross Lake so a lot of uh money being spent you can see where
where it's being divided and here's just a graphic of all the roads we're going to touch in the next five years and and it's very equally distributed and uh it's a lot of work and this has been our uh this is the way it's been for years
and years and we love it next please here's just a breakdown of the mileage you can see over the next few years we're really going to put some pavement in on on the system you know a averaging over probably 33 miles per year in those
um first three years and then in 2020 maybe a slowdown but again we might see more add in as as time goes on and then 2029 next slide please here's the there's the ride quality index and if I was able to do my funny thing or I could flip between the two maybe theres Oh
theres yeah look at the trained you trained well and now you're leaving um what I want you to draw from that is that we're investing where the roads are orange or kind of getting yellow and those indicate that the ride quality or the roughness is um going up and the
roadways deteriorating we're making those investments in those areas the the worst one now after we've completed 115 last year which used to be the worst now is 144 you just awarded that bid today and that one we're going to uh raise the grade get it out of the swamp and
hopefully uh make that last for a long time next slide please and just a reminder this is what we did over the previous five years so if you combine those two maps we're touching every corner of the
county next slide please and we always include a summary of changes of course our goal is always to complete 100% of the projects we promised to the public last year we had one rural overhead lighting project that had to be delayed
uh because of um a late bid and then um not being able to get the materials to do it we're going to plan that today or this year and that's in that first line there one thing to note uh for this year is that we combine we moved from
2026 into 2025 the east portion of CASA 2 we talked about at the TAC meeting it made sense commissioner Corming brought it forward on behalf of his constituents that wanted to rather than stretch it over two years have the pain for for one
year and uh have a very large paving project we were able to accommodate that and that is also noted in these changes next slide there's a few others most of them are kind of moving up very few are moving back and if and if they do it's
uh because of another funding source i'll draw your attention to uh 2028 where we promised a few years ago that it would be highway state highway 6 and CASA 30 that would be done at that time
we are in uh working with Mandot to study those intersections look at the traffic look at the best alternative to address those two at the same time and during that process they identified county road 11 just to the north of the bridge these are the two that are on either the north and south of the
Mississippi River Bridge near the bridge tavern on trunk highway 6 and through that process they identified because there was a fatality and a few other factors that really the priority should be the northerly one so although we're not being able to do the 31 we have
picked one of the two and we're hoping uh possibly through grants and more partnerships with Mindot that we will follow on in a few years after this and actually get the uh an intersection improvement at County Road 30 also
done any questions about the changes okay next slide and now I'm just breaking uh breaking it up per uh year and just quickly go through it i'll remind you it's 32 miles uh we have the roads listed there you can see where the
combination of Casawat 2 it used to break here this was going to be 2025 and this is going to be 2026 we combined them this year next slide it's just individualizing them um 39 miles of paving two bridges
that year one bridge rehab and then a roundabout at 3 and 210 as I mentioned next slide 2027 it's 35 miles of paving and and no bridge or roundabouts so might have a year where we can catch up on some planning and work ahead a little bit
2028 is that 15 miles of paving two bridge reconstructions two roundabouts um one in Cross Lake and then one that's where that counter road or Cass 11 and
trunk highway 6 falls and that's in 2028 uh I just want to mention that that one there was some federal funding that we um both in in 2028 we received uh HSIP highway safety improvement funds it's federal
funds there's been a little uncertainty surrounding that i know uh Commissioner Lee was concerned about that i'm concerned about that we want to deliver on these promises and and get that uh good improvement for the public um we applied for half of or a portion
of it and MINDOT also under the same program applied for it we received our HSIF funds they use a different avenue of federal funds to fund their portion and that they've had to they've had some
changes that they made to make made to make had to make to that so they had to initially say I don't think we can fund it and which puts our the whole thing in jeopardy i've had many conversations now with Mandot and asking them to kind of
keep on track uh and I believe we found a way to to build it in state fiscal year 28 which meets up with this this promise it would just have to start after July 1st their fiscal year so we're we're working towards that i'm
confident that we will get there i was reassured that our strong partnership with them our willingness and our ability to design it in house and to be able to take care of it oursel was one of the reasons why they felt the the commitment to uh to meet their
commitment with us and and our abilities to do that they had to have the hard choice and a couple others around the state so I'm very thankful about that strong partnership that is going to keep it going um and deliver it in
2028 uh next slide and then 2029 uh 21 miles of paving one bridge reconstruction another bridge rehab and then another roundabout this is the one that we discussed at the transportation advisory committee meeting where the proposal is to remove the signal at Y
Road and three it's currently aging out it's it's around 30 years old and we continue to spend a lot of money fixing it each year and the price of signal systems nowadays is not too far behind a
roundabout and you can get um much more longevity and uh benefits from a roundabout so our recommendation and we talked about at TAC meeting was to install a roundabout there at 3 and 45
to replace that or 49 replace that signal next slide every year I talk about the uh deferment elimination process for those that are new or maybe watching is that the black line you see here is
what we thought with the new money that was coming in with the local options sales tax back in 2015 and 2016 would do to eliminate our deferments a deferment is basically you need to fix the road but you don't have the money so you kick the can down the road i'm calling it a
deferment when we started off it was about 159 miles per year we were doing we could never get on top of that we had 150 miles of pavement that were uh beyond our thresholds for roughness and we had not enough money in the system and so the solution was money and so
that money and this is systemwide county state aid and then county road deferments broken out separately that what that money could do to get on top of those deferments and I report every year that this is what we thought the money could do the black dash
line and this is what it's producing up to this point and this is what it's projected to do in the county state aid system these are the one to twodigit roads we are getting closer to our goal of zero in 2030 that was always the goal to to be
on top of it by then it looks like in the cas we system system we might be lagging behind despite having in the next three years 90 miles of paving so what happens is that we we fix it but there's other parts of the system that continue to deteriorate and get past those thresholds so it's a little bit of
this but it is trending down you can see in the county system we feel that we are on track to meet zero by 2030 which was our main goal um so I want to report on that is there any questions that we talked about a little bit at the transportation advisory committee
meeting i wanted to just bring it up again and and then also inform the public we are tracking that and and and tracking our progress and what the sales tax is doing and other funding sources next slide we also uh do the planning and
construction for the fad here is the list it's all on on here next slide is kind of just a summary we try to average three miles per year we when we did some recent cost analysis that we wanted to make sure that the 60 miles of road uh
there was a turn every 20 years so you have to do three miles a year so you have a 20-year cycle so eventually in 20 years we'll get to all these roads the average that you see up there is just about it's just over three miles so we're on on track with that some higher
some lower next slide you don't need to do the fancy thing on this one but we're making the investments if she was to toggle that you see that we're making the investments on the roads that that are uh getting red orange um and so we do
track the pavement in that area too it's a little more difficult because of the dead ends and kind of um a lot of times narrow and urban type settings next slide oh and this is what we done previously just similar slide
done a lot of work out there too in the first assessment district and I'm getting near the end because I I'm trying to learn the word quick is uh these are just isolated over the last uh this is what we're planning to spend the
local option sales tax on either fully or partially funded it's it is helping these projects along and I believe that's that 88 miles we talked about there they are and then the next side I believe is what we have used it for over the last five
years it's making and continues to make an impact i'm very happy to say that this red blob or these right here are done county Herald 115 you know 10 years of planning blood sweat and tears uh getting that done so we're very happy to report that that's
completed and that is my last slide except for the next uh well I'll go to the next one the previous one and this is just what is in your packet or request for board action to um approve that 2029 highway improvement plan and
direct the county engineer to continue to proceed with planning engineering activities required to deliver the projects identified in this document and so I'll be happy to answer any questions um Madam Chair just a comment you know I
remember back long before I sat up here coming and speaking in front of that half cent sales tax speaking for it uh what would this map look like if we hadn't done that well we don't want to know a lot less colorful and real colorful
so yeah it's been very impactful and it continues to to perform i think the the growth maybe is not there but it's definitely sustaining um and it's going 9.5 getting close to $10 million that's very impactful that can
allow the property tax levy to be lower and still deliver a record you know amount of projects almost $90 million of construction and so we we feel that we're providing great value in leveraging those sources delivering with
our in-house staff madam Chair yes Commissioner P uh Madam Chair I just just kind of a little FYI um if you think about it I believe
our levy last year was 45 million debbie am I correct on that roughly yes so that means that every 1% would be 450,000 and Tim how much are we spending
this year on roads 8 million i not I'm not positive for this the the dollar amount this year i don't have that in front of me right now but it's it's a lot of paving um right maybe 12 to 14 million on construction
yeah even if it was let's just say it was $10 million if you think about it every $450,000 would be 1% on the levy can you
imagine if we tried to pay for that on people's property taxes i mean they literally would be taxed out of their home uh if we tried to do the paving that we've been doing and the work that we've been doing
so I hate to say it again i was the lone noboat on the sales tax but I am not afraid to admit I was wrong on that this has been a a tremendous way to repair the roads
in Crowing County without having to tax people on their property taxes that would literally put them out of their home if we tried to do it on the property taxes so just to comment on that I'm just really proud of what we've gotten done i know that I and all my
constituents in southern Crowing County are very appreciative there's some darn good roads and there's going to be a lot of road work uh done down in southern Crowing County so I'm I'm really tickled about it so thanks to you Tim and your
very capable staff great job thank you any other comments questions can I have a motion to approve the 2025 through 2029 highway improvement plan i'll make the motion
motion to approve second okay motion by Commissioner Lee second by Commissioner Coring all those in favor commissioner Barrows i commissioner Lkey i commissioner Lee i commissioner Coring i commissioner
Frenzine i motion carries thank you very much thank you county Sheriff okay county attorney i do not have anything unless some questions have to have come up
anyone with questions thank you hey county administrator madam Chair I'd like to be the lone hold out but the SMT did not meet yesterday we have a meeting next week so I have nothing to report unless anyone has any questions for me
well thank you any additional business [Applause] Madam Chair I'll make a motion to adjourn do we have a second second a motion by Commissioner Leb second by Commissioner madam Yes Madam Chair
before you continue I gone mute and I couldn't find my button for a second but I do have a couple things to bring up under additional business if you don't mind not a problem go ahead i'll withdraw I'll withdraw my second because uh a motion to adjurnn is
non-debatable so I'll withdraw my second I'll withdraw my motion there you go amen do we have to make a do we have to do do a Okay thank you thank you Commissioner just real quick just want to remind people that April 7th through the 11th is severe weather week and that
we should all take time to prepare ourselves for any potential hazards that might come our way during that week or the coming uh I guess what I would call the tornado storm season the second thing is April is also child abuse prevention month and a good time to
recognize the importance of families and communities working together to strengthen families and prevent child abuse and neglect so when we invest in those children we're investing in our communities which is helping us bring attention to all the different ways we
can help children and families my last thing is over in the sheriff's department april 13th through the 19th is 911 dispatchers whole week in April is recognized as the public safety telecommunications week so let's say
thank you to all of those dedicated individuals at the sheriff's office for their continued service and commitment to our community they are the first call for help and dispatches are the lifeline to keeping our community safe they bring peace to chaos thank you for your
compassion knowledge and patience to bring 24 hours a day each and every day and with that Madam Chair I would uh I'll make the motion to adjurnn okay and I will second that motion we now have a motion by Commissioner
Barrows a second by Commissioner Lubkkey all those in favor commissioner Lubkey i commissioner Lee I commissioner Coring I commissioner Barrows I commissioner Franzine i motion carries
meeting is adjourned