Okay, we'll call the uh board meeting to order. The first order of business is the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Uh, next is disclosures of interest. Are there any disclosures of interest? Hearing none, we'll move on to the previous uh
board minutes. Uh >> move approval. >> Second, Anderson. >> Any discussion? All those in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Motion carries. Next, review the agenda.
Are there any corrections or additions? chair that you should have received the LEALS uh 78 approved contract in front of you and that should be added on the consent agenda. Thank you. >> Any other additions or corrections? >> Move to approve the agenda adding the
LEALs78 contract. >> Second >> to the consent agenda. >> Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carries. Next uh is the consent agenda and I
think with that addition we have six items on the consent agenda. >> I will move approval. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Um there typically isn't discussion with consent agenda. But I just want to make a
comment. That is an amazing bid we got on County Road 11. Um a 30 plus% less than what it was estimated. That's that's amazing bid. So that's good.
>> Good to have some good news. That's uh Any other comments? >> Aaron clarification. Who was the second? >> Uh it was Linda or was it you Todd? >> I thought I made the motion. >> You made the motion, Todd. >> I'll second.
>> Okay. Thank you. There was a second, but I don't remember who made it. >> Okay. Anything else? >> All right. So, all those in favor say I. I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries.
Reports from department and officials. First is administration with the budget committee report. >> Uh, Andrea or Lucas, you want to take that, please? I can take it. Um the budget committee met prior to the board meeting this
morning and addressed carryovers um budget carryovers for 2026 and um all were approved. >> Move approval of the recommendation from the budget committee to approve the carryovers as presented. Second.
>> Is there any discussion? hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. >> Now, uh Jess is on the Morning board. >> Morning.
>> Our first item today is for the 5-year bridge program. Technical difficulties with my chair. All right. So, this update to the bridge construction program is based on the uh last 5-year bridge program that was approved uh last February. Three of the
structures on that list were replaced in 2025. One structure was moved from 2029 to 2026 and that was a condition issue. One was moved from 2025 to 2026 due to a lack of funding for that project. Uh
there were six new additions to the program with one structure in 2029 and five structures in 2030. The point of information, the proposed program includes all of the county structures that are eligible to receive
funding and meet the criteria to be replaced. One of these structures is being funded in part by federal monies made available through competitive grant opportunities. The list uh immediately below uh the first paragraph in the background, there
is a typo under the second bridge that says no number LT10. The owner is actually Leyon Township. I had it incorrectly labeled as Featherstone. And that's the structure uh that has a condition issue that required uh
replacement sooner rather than later. An LT10 structure. If the board remembers, I went over this last year. They are structures that are currently less than 10 feet um and don't qualify in their
present state as a bridge structure, but due to hydraulic analysis uh the replacement structures uh would qualify them as bridges, we work through state aid to get them on the system and then they they're eligible for funding at that point. So we do have two of those
structures in the program. So, with the increased cost of box culverts, higher cement prices, increased demand for construction, the funding available for bridge replacements just isn't as going as far as it used to. Um,
however, with some success securing funding from various sources, you know, we we hope to maintain an aggressive replacement structure. Unfortunately, with the township uh bridge replacements, uh our our allocation for 2026 follows a
a recent trend in the last couple years of declining instead of uh increasing. Uh so with with less money coming available to us for town bridge replacements, we're just going to replace fewer structures uh annually.
but we strive to um go after additional dollars that the state has if if they do have them and we have been successful with those. So, we'll continue to be aggressive or as aggressive as we can be in in getting those dollars and then um packaging our projects and replacing as
many box culverts as we can. So, with that um I'll take any questions from the board. Otherwise, I'm asking the board to uh I'm recommending that that the board approve the attached resolution for the
5-year bridge program as presented. >> Also move that forward. >> Second. Anderson. >> Is there any discussion? >> The only thing I'd say is so will you along with the administration put
something together when we go to the legislature because it is a bonding. They say they're going to do bonding and bridge some of this comes maybe through bridge bonding. So have something that we can point to for our legislators. >> Yep. And we have as one of our
legislative priorities, we have bonding included in there. >> Yep. >> Let's take some pictures of bridges and show them what we're trying to replace. Maybe they'll maybe they'll understand it better if they actually see one. We've been very successful in receiving
bridge bond dollars or LBRP dollars uh for several of our structures over the years. Uh just last year we received LBRP dollars for two of our structures. Um so we're we've been very successful with that.
>> Good. One more question, Jesse. On that county 11 that came down 30%, were there any bridges replaced on that project? There's several box coververts that are on that stretch of road. I don't know. Um, off the top of my head, I don't know
which there weren't any structures in our program that were up for replacement on there. >> Thank you. >> Do you have any thoughts on how that bid was able to come in 30% below? uh when we when we're estimating, we we look at
recent trends and we also uh because of the nature of the job being a grading project, we're looking at how people are potentially going going to source that material. And one of the one of the main grading items that we're looking at,
there wasn't a source that we knew of that was relatively close to the project. So, the contractors, we don't know exactly what they're looking at or how they're looking at it, but they must have been able to find a source that was
able to provide them the ability to bid some of those contract items way cheaper than than what we anticipated. So, >> it it looked like all three of them were >> they were all three below. Yeah. >> It also could be they're hungry. >> Yep. Time of the year is always
important. And is there any reason to believe that coming in low will be a trend? >> Hopefully. >> That's hope. But is there a reason? That was the question. >> Um if we look at the per mile cost
um and and start to look at how things have been trending, we're a little we're a little bit more expensive than we were on previous projects, but not by a whole lot. So, um I don't know if inflation is definitely not uh high uh in terms of of
grading increases at this point. So, >> I would expect to see it stay pretty pretty level. >> Linda, >> Jess, what is the estimate per mile? >> Estimate per mile for grading right now based off of this bid, it was right
around it's just under 1.5 million per mile. >> Per mile. >> Yep. Thank you. >> But that's all variable because depending on how many >> culverts, structures, approach roads, all those different things add to the
cost. >> Y >> if it's just a straight road without much of that, it's cheaper than if it's a road that has a lot of that, >> right? So >> it does make a difference. >> County Road 11 has a substantially uh larger amount of dirt that needs to be
moved on it where County Road 2 did not. But County Road 2 had a lot of other features that County Road 11 doesn't necessarily have. So there's a give and take. >> Every job's different. >> Every job's different. >> No, my point was simply that I don't
think the average person has any idea how expensive roads are and yet we absolutely positively have to have them to get to and from work, to and from school. So, and I think it's important that people start understanding what the
>> and that's just the grading part. It's not >> that's not putting down asphalt. That'll be in the next the next thing we're going to approve. >> And and of course, they want safe roads. >> Yes, >> that's a high priority for most people. >> Are there any other questions?
>> Just comment. I mean, so in 2029, you got a $2.5 million roundabout. I mean, is this the direction that we're going as a county? Is roundabouts and intersections, more intersections? So, the the net result of the roundabouts that are in the program were based on an
intersection analysis study that was done at at intersections in the county that are notorious for having uh traffic accidents. So, one of those is the County Road 66 Cass One intersection here in Town Bench Street and Pioneer
Road. Um, the report identified that as being a need for a roundabout to reduce the accidents that are taking place there. County Road 6 and County Road One has been notorious for um impact accidents, people running the stop
signs, uh, fatalities. Um, is it a trend? I mean, we're not pursuing other intersections at this point, but everyone that was identified did come back with a roundabout identified as being the solution. >> Well, but even the one here in town on
Bench Street, you we identified it as a problem. You said it was a safety issue, but we found other methods around the safety issue because the money wasn't available. So, really wasn't a safety issue because we found other methods so we can push it off a few years. I thought we pushed it out because we were going to get
>> federal or state money >> to do it. If we waited, we're going to get 750,000. >> Yes. What I said is because we found other money. So money So safety wasn't an issue. We found money was the issue. >> Well, and to me, I think it's always
that that balance. I mean, if you wanted to make things 100% safe on every road, we wouldn't be able to afford that if we taxed all of the money. And I think this was trying to find a balance, moving towards safety, but also balancing the
the cost to our local taxpayers. That's how I saw it. >> Right. But $2.5 million in roundabout is how many miles of road repair, too? >> Um, well, not too many miles of road repair. >> No. >> Yeah. I mean, you can speak to that. I would guess
>> just a comment just the first >> folks can focus on the fact that you're spending two and a half money. >> Just a comment. It's two and a half million on a roundabout out in the country. I get it. There's a lot of traffic on County Sex going to the >> going to the casino. So >> maybe Prairie Island will help.
>> Joke. They won't they don't pay taxes. Move on. >> Is there any other discussion on the bridge program? Hearing none. And I believe we had a motion in a second. Erin, am I correct about that? >> You are correct. All right. Um, all
those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Uh, next is the five-year highway construction program. >> All right. So, the next item here, the highway construction program uh has been updated uh since the last approved
construction program which happened uh last February 4th. The 2026 program includes concrete paving of uh CASA 2 that we graded this last year. The grading of CASA 11, patuminous reclamation and aggregate surfacing of
County Road 50 or a portion of it that we that we're working on turning back to the township and then uh bridge replacements on County Road 7. Those are the two box culverts uh just on the north end of of the village of Welch.
So the 2026 construction program consists of grading, paving, bridge replacements amongst other projects. While there are not many projects on the county system for 2026, the Casatu paving project and the Casaw 11 grading project will certainly constitute a lot
of our staff time. The CASA 11 project will begin in the very near future with tree removals and grading work that'll last well into the fall. Uh and then there's also the 2025 carryover projects that will be completed early uh this year once once
it's suitable to be out working. Presently there are six new projects that were able to be added to the 2026 to 202030 program. The majority of the new projects are buminous surfacing projects added in uh fiscal year 2028,
but also includes a roundabout project in 29 and a county bridge replacement in 2030. Overall, uh the construction on the Goody County system and the 5-year program is estimated to be just over $74 million.
Um, the five-year construction program is a living document. Uh, as conditions change, budgets change, new projects arise, funding, extenduating circumstances, all require adjustment to the 5-year program.
So, today I am I am recommending that the board discuss uh the approved and approved the attached 5-year construction program so we can continue to deliver the projects that are identified in the program. And then it's also recommended that the county board
uh reconsider and and develop a new list of projects eligible for lost funding, which we'll handle in the next agenda item. With that, I'll take any questions from the board about the 5-year proposed program. >> Are there any questions?
>> I I I don't have any. Jess and I have talked about some things. We we know we're coming out with a new transportation plan, >> long range transportation plan, and I think that may may affect this as we look at that and
adopt that. But right now, >> um I think this list looks good. I from when I first got on this board, uh, a $74 million construction over 5 years was like
not ever going to happen. And I think we've done a really good job of of leveraging things to make it happen. So, we are keeping our roads in better shape. And I know farmers that talk to me, that's one of their main things is they
want good solid roads that they can haul stuff on. So I think we're doing what people are looking for. >> That I'd move to approve as presented. >> Second.
>> Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Okay. Uh, next is the public hearing on the local option sales tax eligible
project. Correct. >> Correct. >> And do we start this with that or do you have an intro? >> Uh, I I usually just go through briefly and then All right. >> Um, make some recommendations to the board. on an annual basis. Uh Goody County Public Works prepares the uh and
updates the five-year construction program that you just approved uh that addresses current issues with our infrastructure. These programs are driven by available funding issues that arise during the year and changes in what is happening in the industry as it relates to market trends. The road and
bridge programs are fluid documents as I just mentioned in the previous item that change from year to year because of those factors. 2026 is no exception to that, especially with pricing that we've seen other than grading has been pretty constant. As programs change and new projects are added, there becomes a need
to revisit the list of lost eligible projects. Updating the list ensures that the collected dollars are able to be spent on projects approved in the 5-year programs. Uh during the February 4th, 2025 meeting, the board of commissioners,
um the list of lost eligible projects was updated. Over the last year, six new projects were added to the program. The 2026 5-year highway construction projects that are highlighted indicate their lost funding eligibility. Staff is requesting that the county board approve
a new list of eligible projects to utilize proceeds collected through the local option sales tax. So, some alternatives available to the board. Uh, we can consider adopting an updated list of projects to use those
revenues on or seek funding from other sources to fund those projects or take no action and continue working off of the list that was approved in 2025. Adoption of a revised uh local option sales tax project list requires a public
hearing. Notice of this public hearing was published on the county's website and in the Kenyon Leader as well as several other local newspapers. After the public hearing and considering public comment, a resolution containing a list of projects that would be eligible for funding is needed to
utilize dollars from the local option sales tax. These funds cannot be used for maintenance, paying staff, buying equipment, or other purpose. So with that, uh staff is recommending uh two separate act actions. First, that the board hold a public hearing to consider
the public's opinions and then decide how to proceed. And then second, it's a recommendation of staff that the board consider adopting the attached list of projects. Um, just as a point as a as a note for the board, I did not receive any written um uh responses from the
public in regard to the public hearing uh or any emails. >> Thank you. Uh, do any of you have any questions before we uh go to the public hearing? >> No. >> To open the public hearing.
>> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. All those in favor of opening the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Uh, so the public hearing is open. Is there anyone who wishes to speak regarding the local
option sales tax list of eligible projects? for a second time. Is there anyone uh wishing to speak on the local option sales tax eligible projects? Third and final time. Is there anyone who wishes to speak on the list of local
option sales tax eligible projects? >> Move to close public hearing. >> Second. Um, all those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries.
So, um, did the public hearing? Uh, are there any additional questions or is there a motion to approve the list? >> Move to approve the list as presented. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
>> Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. I opposed. Motion carries. Um, next is the uh fourth quarter financial report.
Any questions for Lucas? Hearing none on the other for your information. Uh, any questions or comments people want to make? All right. Now, we're to new and old business. Is there any new or old
business anyone wants to raise? Linda, >> the um Representative Finstead was able to get a bill through that would bring $193 million to the state of Minnesota
for mental health. There is a round table tomorrow that I will be going to so I'll know more when I get back. Um but I have collected information from health and human services and from court services on the
three priorities to bring up. One that obsolete technology that HHS is dealing with. Two that we have three and a half we are 50 out of 50 states as far as how many mental health beds we have. We have
three and a half per 100,000 people. And that puts us at 50 out of 50. And then the third one is um the continuum of care for children running into mental
health problems growing up. Um there's things in the early ages and there's also once they're teenagers, but apparently between seven and 14, that's when it falls off and there's nothing. So, those are the three things that I'll
be bringing up and I hope that this year we might be able to truly get the technology upgraded um to bring us into the present and ideally the future. And I would just comment that being 50
out of 50 even economically costs us money because we're trying to figure out solutions that don't exist. And so then we sort of gerrymander solutions that end up being very expensive. And having a system that actually dealt with these things would be far more efficient and
less expensive than being 50 out of 50. >> Far more. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Is that the meeting in Austin? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I'm glad you're going. >> Yeah. Any any other new or old business? >> Any committee reports?
Just a go ahead. >> I'd like to touch on uh planning advisory committee. Something was brought up to us and I'm just going to bring it up. Spoke with Aaron this morning and uh Megan brought it to me is um swearing in of our
planning advisory committee. Apparently it is a state statute. Correct Aaron? Something that we have never done before but sounds like we should. Yes, thank you, Commissioner. I would recommend that you adopt a new swearing
in. Uh, Miss Bank has a generic oath um that can be used and certainly we can move forward with this plan. >> About uh any other committees that we've missed on this something that we should
board of adjustments should they also >> I think so >> or maybe they do already. I don't know. because the board of adjustment their decisions go direct not they don't come through us they make a decision >> whereas and that's why I was questioning
the planning advisory you know and I was thinking or thinking of course it was like 1:30 this morning but thinking about what if somebody refuses to take the oath then we find another person for that position or I I don't I don't know
why they would but I'm just trying just running different scenarios through my I think it becomes part of part of the process of appointment that they know that there will be an all >> and that they have a copy of it when
they when they say they'll do it. So >> Erin, I have a question. the uh township meetings are coming up and many townships do have planning advisory commissions and I'm sure none of them have taken oaths and I would assume that if this applies to county level uh
planning and advisory commissions it probably would also apply to them. >> So I I just have a question and Aaron maybe you can help me with this. >> Yeah. None of the decisions of the planning commission
um are in concrete till we approve them. >> Right? >> So they're only an advisory. They're not uh end all beall. >> Right? >> So why why is an oath for an advisory
is that different than I think it's different than the board of adjustment. I'll agree with that. >> Yeah. I just I need to understand why. If it's in state statute, fine, then we have to do it. But it's just an advisory committee. Kind of like extension is an
advisory committee. They're not they're not decision makers, they're advisories. >> Well, the statute that um has been referenced is Minnesota statute 358.05
05 called oath of office. And what that statute says is the oath of office to be taken by members and officers of either branch of the legislature shall be that prescribed by the constitution of the
state of Minnesota, article 4, section 8. Every person elected or appointed to any other public office, including every official commissioner or member of any public board or body,
before transactioning any of the business or exercising any privilege of said office shall take and subscribe the oath defined in the constitution of the state of Minnesota, article 5, section six. So I think that
um a member of any public board or body um those like the planning commission those types of board even though they don't have um the ability to make independent decisions or advisory if they fit into that definition this they would be
covered by the statute. Certainly we can do a review of everything that is pretty clearly fits in and maybe the ones that we think we want to have a discussion on. >> Um I would also as devil's advocate say
taking an oath of office even though we haven't done that doesn't harm doesn't create harm. >> Nope. And certainly to Commissioner Gresa's question, um I think that if someone was to object to it, it would be
worth listening to what their objection is and to see if there is a way that we can um compromise but still follow the law >> because as as I think words as I think of it, >> we have joint powers boards all over the
place and they all are appointed and They some of them Canon Valley Trail. >> Yeah. >> South Country. We do take an oath at the HA. Um but any other joint powers that were
part of do they technically then need to have a I think we need a real we need to look at it more than just planning commission. It needs to be this is something that needs to happen. It probably needs to happen around a lot of
counties that maybe aren't we aren't following things as we need to. >> And I know Andrea's looked into this too. And who can issue an oath? I mean, apparently the board chair can and the
vice chair can. I did talk with Steve O'Keefe a little bit about this when Megan brought it up and um I don't know if Megan's on but she is Megan. Do you have anything? Um I don't have a lot of notes from Steve O'Keefe's correspondence with you. I
just was looking for them but um it's my understanding that >> Sure. Good morning. Um so normally like in a city the city clerk would administer the oath. we don't have a clerk. So that would fall then on the
board um chair or vice chair or a judge um but staff can cannot administer the oath. So when it comes to the planning commission and the board of adjustment what we thought would probably work best is because commissioner Gresith sits as the
liaison um he could administer the oath because it happens at night. we don't want to bring in a judge or anything um you know at six o'clock at night. But that was kind of the plan we had in place. Um but what I wanted to say is that I'm hoping to make this kind of
part of an orientation for new members where I really go over the ordinances that the county has. um kind of the the lay of the land with the the plans that have been adopted, kind of how the
county is organized, and then also talk about the oath of office. Um which is really just two sentences. It's pretty straightforward. Um sorry, my computer might be glitching here a little bit.
Um but yeah, so we um we've kind of worked it out. We're going to actually do the oaths at the meeting next week for planning advisory committee. >> Did you want me to come early for the board of adjustment then? Also, >> we're we canled the board of adjustment
because of lack of agenda items. >> Um, >> but the following month maybe. >> Yeah, maybe the following month. Yeah. >> And I I think Brad, your point about the joint powers agreement, it's going to be important to clarify that because there are lots of people on these uh
>> Yeah. >> I don't know if they're boards exactly though. They're more more committees. >> Well, they're they're subunits of government. >> Yeah. >> The joint powers board is like a subunit of government. So is so is South Country.
The le the LEC committee for example is I believe uh falls into the joint powers agreement category and there's all kinds of people at those meetings. >> Most the the decision makers are you and >> right >> are already taking an oath.
>> Yes. >> Well, same with the city >> is the one I'm questioning whether we need >> the city council would already. >> Yeah, they'd have. Yeah, I think everybody involved in that. >> So there'd only be the one or two of the
citizen citizens you're talking about. >> So if it's a staff, that's what we're asking about. And if there's a citizen representative, that's different than a staff representative is and that's what we're just I think wanting bit clarification on who needs to actually
take it. >> Thank you. Any other committee reports? >> Just a comment. Um Susan, Todd, and I were at the um township officers, Goody
County Township Officers meeting, and it was very well attended. Um as I was leaving that, the chair, the treasurer, the clerk for that organization was very complimentary of county staff. The
information they brought was very valuable. They said we just really like the format and even though it went over and I don't know why they don't just schedule it longer cuz there's just too much information to get out in a little short time. Um they were very appreciative of
the staff and and working with our county staff. So that's good to hear. Um probably the probably the best thing I heard that day. >> Thank you. Anything else that anybody wants to bring up as
far as committee reports? Is there a motion to pay the bills? >> So moved. Second. >> All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion carries. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. Second.
>> All those in favor? I >> I opposed. Uh the meeting is adjourned.