We'll call the meeting to order and start with the pledge of >> allegiance. Algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. God, invisible.
>> Are there any disclosures of interest? Hearing none, we'll move on to the previous board uh minutes. >> Move approval. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I.
>> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Uh, next we'll review the agenda. >> There is one change. We will be pulling consent item four, the rural utilities grant resolution. >> So, are we down to two items on the consent agenda then? Because the
>> Yes. >> No. Well, there were four. >> There was four. >> One had gotten pulled earlier. Um, okay. So, we'll remove item uh the last item on the consent agenda. There's no other changes. Is there a motion to approve the agenda?
>> So, moved. >> Second. Any further discussion? There's a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Uh next, we're on the consent items. There's two
items on the consent agenda. Anybody want to discuss anything or if not make a motion to approve the consent agenda? >> Approval of the cons two items from the consent agenda. >> Right. >> Second. >> There's a motion in a second. All those in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. >> Are you hearing an echo? >> Yep. >> Is it working? >> It's Is it Am I doing >> everybody?
>> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. >> U next is report from departments and officials. Uh the first is uh awarding Jessica. >> Yes. Uh chair. Um I just wanted to uh uh
make the announcement. Obviously you have all seen it in your packet, but um the Minnesota County Human Resources Manager Association presents one HR professional of the year award uh statewide. So there's one person that gets that award. Um, and I just want to I'm pleased to announce that Jessica
Albrech uh from Goodyu County uh HR manager has won that award this year. Um we did nominate her. um in in the nomination, uh there's no a bunch of it's in your memo here, but um it highlights her leadership through the
restructuring after Melissa Cushing retired um into the new format um and bringing um you know more streamline processes uh higher level of uh speed to our processes, more responsive uh type
of human resource function. very very professional uh very welldeserved uh person received this award. Um she's she's a great HR professional and a great HR person and a and a great person on top of that. So um
she's really earned the respect of the management team and and also I believe the county board as well. So um I just want to take this opportunity to highlight the fact that she was awarded that prestigious award and and uh she is here today. Um, she has made us start
calling her award-winning Jessica, though. So, >> well, well, on behalf of the board, I want to say congratulations. And I think probably every board member would say that you're a pleasure to work with, but not only that, but that you give good
detail. You'll research and not give uh sort of uh thought you don't give answers until they're well thought through and have some evidence to back them up. So, I think we all appreciate that. Congratulations. >> Thank you, Jessica.
>> Uh, next we're on to uh finance and taxpayer services. Good morning, commissioners. >> Morning. >> Good morning. >> So, I have got uh two items this morning. The first one here, uh the finance department received notice of a
proposed tax increment financing district number 2-1 from the city of Kenyon on May 8th. As required by law, staff distributed the information to the county board on May 11th via email and placed it on today's uh county board agenda should the board wish to submit
written comments. The board is not being asked to approve the project as that is solely at the discretion of the city council. As outlined in the not notification, city of Kenyon is proposing a 26-year redevelopment tiff district that encompasses the old Sunset Home portion of the former senior living
facility. The building is located on two parcels which are currently in the process of being replatted. The purpose of the tiff district is to assist with the redevelopment of the parcels and will consist of remediating a speestous in the current building, demolishing that building and then constructing a
new 43,000 square ft 36 unit apartment development. The old Sunset home property has been determined to be substandard. The city has indicated in writing that the development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the foreseeable
future. Uh the city intends to issue PIGO tax increment financing revenue bonds, notes or interfund loans to reimburse the developer for public development costs and the tax increment will only be used to reimburse the developer for eligible costs.
The county taxes collected on these parcels currently for pay 2026 is just over $1,500, uh, which the county will continue to collect under TIFF law. Uh, the proposed TIFF is expected to generate a total of $104,481
annually from the three major taxing jurisdictions or almost $30,000 for Goodyu County alone. Uh more detailed information can be found on the attached analysis that was completed by their consultant, Northland Securities.
Um again, City of Kenyon is not seeking approval for this TIFF. Uh and the board is limited in their actions. Um and attached to the memo, there's the notification letter, the TIFF plan analysis, a photo of the property for your reference, the uh and the pay 26
tax statements. Uh, the city has also scheduled a public hearing for Tuesday, June 9th, 2026 at approximately 7 p.m. to receive public comment on the establishment of that TIF district. If the county wishes, uh, they can submit written comments, uh, by no later than
30 days of receiving the written notice of the proposed district. Um, so staff doesn't see any issues with the proposed TIFF. However, the board should inform staff if they have any significant comments you would like to relay to the city of Kenyon uh, regarding the use of their proposed TIFF.
So, I I think there's uh two questions. One, do any of you have any questions for Lucas? And two, do any of you have any comments that you would like relayed to the city of Kenya? >> I don't have any questions. This a and I
don't have any comments to submit. Um well, I do have a question, I guess. So, the connection between the two buildings on, you know, the the older part and then the newer built part to the west. Um,
is it the same owner that owns both properties? Cuz obviously in this process, they're going to probably unconnect them somehow. >> Yeah. I don't know who owns the the other section of the building. I could look that up though and provide that
information. Yeah. Either way, they're going to >> just concern just the concern about division of that, you know, cost of separating those two. >> I mean, I I got to believe that at one time they were all those parcels were
owned by the same entity. Now it's not. Maybe it's not, but that separation just a concern about that. That's the only thing. Not really a comment, just a concern. Any
other uh questions or comments that you would like relayed? None. I I don't think you need anything else from the board on this issue. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So, the next item that we have on the agenda here is related to the cannabis
ordinance. Um, so staff recently discovered that certain portions of the Goodyu County cannabis ordinance are not consistent with Minnesota statute 342. Uh, based on this discovery of this conflict with statute, we're requesting that the board hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 16th to address the
proposed amendment to the ordinance. Examples of the revisions uh could include but may not be limited to revisions to the statutory citations within the ordinance. um as well as clarifi clarifying when certain limitations do not apply to lower potency hemp edible uh retailers
specifically. U proposed changes to the ordinance uh would be limited to technical corrections only and generally would not be seen as any kind of change in overall county policy. Um so with that uh we're recommending setting a public hearing during the board meeting
on Tuesday, June 16th related to the technical corrections of the Goodyu County cannabis ordinance. And I'm fine with that. The only question I got is they did some stuff with cannabis ordin cannabis at the state level in statute. Now,
is that going to affect it and we're going to have to come back and change something more? >> I don't know what they changed, but I I would it would be easier if we just did it all at once. And if setting it now is premature to understanding those
changes, that's all my question is. And I haven't really looked into what, but I know they changed some cannabis stuff. >> I'll look into that and see. >> Yeah. I I I just if if we did it now and then in a month we had to come back and
do it again, it would be it would make sense to me to know that we're doing all the changes we need to do at one time. So maybe it maybe it's to set it for the 16th, but I don't know if it has to go through the planning process to come to that
ordinance change or or if it's just going to come from staff. this is um being worked on by staff and then we would we're going to be working on updating the ordinance and it would come to the the board for okay that final decision. So, we are working with the original um members of that committee
that worked on the ordinance to see if there are any other kind of changes that need to be made. But obviously, yes, we should look into um statute changes recently. And >> okay, >> does it seem >> if you're comfortable with the 16th, we can do it. I just want to make sure we
make all the changes from what the states put forward and maybe they're not in effect yet. I don't know. But that's so I'll move that we set the meeting for the 16th. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. Any other discussion?
>> Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Megan, you're up. Okay, good morning. The first agenda item is to consider a resoning in
Florence Township from business to commercial recreation. Um the county board because this is an ordinance amendment will hold a public hearing today um to consider an ordinance to reszone land located at 35699
Highway 61 Boulevard, Lake City, Minnesota, changing the zoning of the land from business to commercial recreation. Um the applicant is GCubed which is the engineering firm um that has been hired on the behalf of the property owners. The property owners are
Alex Lorac and Jesse Hansen. Um they did recently purchase the property from the Hansen family which had owned it for dozens of years. Um the parcel size is just under 17 acres. Um as I mentioned
it's in Florence Township. Um it is unplatted property and it's adjacent to Highway 61 accessible from a frontage road. Um for some background um the reason the main reason for the reasonzoning change
is that marinas are not allowed in the business district. It's been it's been in the county ordinance for as long as I could trace it back. Um, so the county has had the property zone business and marinas are an unpermitted use in the business
district. The only district that allows marinas is the commercial recreation zoning district. Um and in working with the applicants early on when they purchased the property, we worked through this um and came to the conclusion that commercial recreation is
probably a more appropriate zoning district for them anyway with the long range redevelopment plans that they have for the property. Um so for context, the site had historically been zoned business and there was a unpermitted
manufactured home park on the site. So a residential use in a business district. And then there was also a marina. Um what the applicants are proposing to do is really lean into that commercial recreation, lake pepin, waterfront recreation and do
keep the marina intact, transient rental slips um and then add a um seasonal campground in approximately the same location where the manufactured home park was. Um the way that the county's commercial
recreation zoning district is structured is that everything is a conditional use in that district. Um so even though commercial recreation allows some creativity and allows recreational uses, every single use has to be permitted
conditionally. So, what this resoning would do would essentially allow the applicant to then apply for a conditional use for the specific uses that they are proposing within within the property. Um, I'll talk just a little bit about Florence Township. The applicants also
had to seek a reasonzoning through Florence Township. Um, I believe the township had it zoned agricultural. Um, so clearly some some zoning some zoning issues that needed to be corrected. Um, Florence Township also recognizes commercial recreation as a zoning
district in in their zoning code. Um, and so they did approve a resoning to commercial recreation as well. Um, just some highlevel things that were talked about at last month's planning commission meeting. Um, the first thing is we um held a hearing at the planning
commission. There was only one um letter submitted or one comment from the public. It's a It was a neighbor who um lives in the area and was unhappy with how the site's manufactured home park had been previously operated. Um so their their conclusion was basically as
long as it's not what it used to be, I'm happy. Um the planning commission specifically looked at um bringing the site into compliance um and did feel that the commercial recreation district was the best fit for the area. Um there
was some discussion at the planning commission level about the septics. Um the site has non-compliant septics right now. The applicants and their contractor have been working pretty closely with our staff to um pretty much do everything to get the site into
compliance. There will likely be at least two new septic systems installed. Um and the hope is to reuse an existing well on the property. Um but with that um included I guess in the packet is a
copy of the application, a copy of the survey, um a cover letter submitted by the applicant, and then an overall layout of the property. Um you maybe will notice that the bulk of the
property is in the county's um general flood plane district and also is subject to the county's shoreland over shoreland ordinance. Um so a couple things to keep in mind there is that there's additional elevation requirements for permanent structures. Um and there's um setback
requirements from the ordinary high water level. Um and then some natural space and um storm water runoff provisions that we like to see whenever a property is redeveloped in a shoreland area. Um so with that I guess um that's an
overview of the overall project. I don't know if there's any questions, but um as I mentioned earlier, there is a public hearing that was scheduled for this. >> Are there any questions for Megan? >> Did you say it is in a flood plane?
>> Yes. Um at least about um I'd say half of the property. Um so not all of it, but half of it is in flood >> and it does flood. >> It um it's in within the 100year flood plane. So, in theory, it would flood
once every 100 years. Um, we know of, I believe, four major flood events that have occurred just since the 1960s. So, it's flooding at a a higher occurrence than every 100 years, but it it does flood. >> Because my only concern is
if it floods or it's potentially going to flood, where do all the um campers go? Where do they where do they where's the offsite for them? I know they do at the point in Lake City they
take them off and they have a place to go with those temporary structures. Were >> is there a place designated >> in this plan? >> Um just sort of two observations about that. Um one is we will get into that
detail with the conditional uses. Um on the northern part of the site, the site is higher um and the applicants have indicated the desire to bring in enough fill so that the campsites are elevated above base flood elevation. Um the other
thing that I would say is a better use of the land is being that people are only seasonally camping, one would presume that you don't really, you know, the Mississippi River usually floods in early spring. Um, so what has happened
in other developments along Lake Pepin is the campground does not open until the flood waters have receded. Um, so hopefully no one would have actually moved into their seasonal site for the year and then has to evac have to evacuate. But high level answer to that
question is we'll have to work out those exact elevation details with the conditional use. Well, and with a on-site septic, that takes up a chunk of the property that you can't >> correct >> store stuff on. So, really that takes a pretty >> You can kind of see in the map on the
screen in the the northwest corner of the site where there's no turquoise blue shown where it's just um you know, clear. There's another picture that shows the >> Yeah, >> that shows the um
but yeah, the northwest corner of the site is outside of the flood plane and is the area that the applicants have indicated is probably likely the only place to put in a new septic system to serve the campground >> there. >> The only area outside the flood plane. >> Yep. But that takes up a big chunk of
storage area that would not accommodate moving stuff up. Just just so it gets answered somewhere somehow. >> Yeah. >> Um the county does require um an evacuation plan for any you know
any type of uh residential use in floodplane areas. And so what we'd likely look at here is, you know, get into the details of that seasonal site and are people really um you know, what what is the what does that emergency evacuation plan look like?
>> Go ahead, Linda. >> So admittedly, I don't necessarily know that much about septic, but I think in this day and age, we can't figure on a 100redyear flood anymore. it's probably going to be
within a few years and major um natural events that we're going to have to deal with are coming more often. So I'm curious about in a flood plane if you have a septic then what happens when it floods to the
septic system or is that far enough back that that pro the where the septic is now probably would not be affected whereas >> the campers would. >> I am not a technical expert on designs
of septic systems. Um I believe Chris Preb who is the engineer on the project is here from GCubed. Um if the board wants to maybe if you want to ask him he might know. Um I do know that our environmental health staff does look
over that um as part of their plan review before a system is even permitted. So you know what are the soils how close it is to the flood plane? what is the um you know what is the ground level elevation where you know what is the flood stage going to be
um but I no permits have been applied for for this specific design so I'm not I'm not familiar with what exactly they're proposing >> okay so I guess my answer my question didn't really get answered which is what
happens to a septic system in a flood >> I guess my point is I don't want to go down the pan going down the Mississippi River. >> I, you know, and I I probably went deeper than I should have in with my questions, but but the reason I asked
questions and I think the reason uh Commissioner Flanders is asking questions, we want those addressed during the planning review and so that when it comes back, what we're really talking about today is do we reszone this? And
it's going to be a marina whether we reszone it or not cuz it's grandfathered in. So let's get it within the zoning purview so we actually have some conditions on it. So with that I would move we go to a public hearing.
>> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. Motion carries. Um the public hearing is open. Would anyone like to speak to this issue of reszoning this property?
Second call. Would anyone like to speak to this issue of reszoning this property? Third and final call. Would anyone like to speak to the issue of reszoning this property? >> Okay. Is there a motion public hearing? >> Is there a second?
>> Motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. >> Um motion carries. >> I would move that we um authorize the resoning and
get it going through the process to get the conditional uses and the questions answered that we need to to make this a legal operation. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion
hearing? None. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. >> I think you're up again. >> Second item is a conditional use permit request um for property in Rosco
Township. Uh the prop subject property is located at 15260460th Street, Zimroda, Minnesota. and the request is for a feed lot expansion to an existing permitted feed lot. Um the proposed expansion would allow the
property owners to store over half a million gallons of manure on site and go up to 1,440 animal units. Um the property is um operating under an existing feed lot permit and an existing conditional use
for a existing feed lot. Um so this is again expanding that adding a second barn structure on site. Um a couple things to note is that um included in your attachments is a copy of the application. The county requires
nutrient management plans. Um they are um very very extensive. I did not photo put them into the packet but they are on file and part of the permanent record. Um the soil and water conservation district also keeps copies of those as well. Um we have the some maps of the
general area and then the draft planning commission minutes from the April 27th meeting. Um just an overview of the project. The property is owned by the Bilman brothers which are Brian and Brandon Bilman. Um the
um property is 10 acres in area. It's zoned A1, which is the county's agricultural protection district, and it is in Rosco Township. Um, the planning commission did meet on April 27th um and held a public hearing and is
forwarding a unanimous recommendation of approval to the county board for the conditional use permit expansion. A couple things just to note about this particular project um is that in 2020 the county board approved the
establishment of a feed lot on the property with allowing it to go up to 720 animal units. Um here we are about 6 years later and they're they're doubling essentially doubling the size of the feed lot. Um the site is located off of
a township road um specifically 460th Street. Um the site does operate with an underground manure storage system. Um it's approximately 9 ft in total depth. Um and it would the approximate volume
would be 1.2 million ga gallons of manure. Um the new building that is being proposed is being proposed to be connected to the existing building with a walkway. Um the site does have an existing well and septic. Um, as I
mentioned earlier, the existing structure was built around um, 2020. Couple notes about odor offset and structure setback. This project actually um, recently applied for and was granted
a variance from the board of adjustment. Um there is a existing property um owned by the Billman's south of this property that is not a,000 ft from the existing barn. Um therefore the barn expansion
will not be 1,000 ft from um from that existing house. So the board of adjustment did meet in April and granted what's called a um a setback and odor offset variance for the farm expansion. Um just some reminders on how feed lot
permits work. Um in the A1 district any feed lot where it's over 500 animal units requires a conditional use. Um there is a as I mentioned previously there is an existing variance that was granted for the odor offset and thousand
foot setback. Um and that in this particular case because the total animal units is exceeding 1,000 the permitting jurisdiction for the feed lot itself goes to the directly to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Um so even
though our soil and water conservation district is involved in the process, the actual permit gets issued by the PCA instead of Good Hugh Countyy's soil and water conservation district. Um there are some uh findings of fact that
are recommended. Um many of these findings really the first five um are straight out of the county's zoning ordinance and would ensure compliance with the county's conditional use permit requirements. The sixth finding
essentially states that the board of adjustment did grant a variance for this project. Um, and there are four conditions proposed. Um, number one, that the applicant shall secure all land use permits required by the county, including well and septic permits and an
agriculturally exempt zoning and building permit. Um, number two, that the applicants shall obtain um feed lot registration from the MPCA to exceed over 1,000 animal units. Um, number three, if the use um of the property is
discontinued, it would be subject to the county's discontinuence requirements found in article 4, section 9 of the county zoning ordinance. Um, and then lastly, that the conditional use from 2020 is amended to allow for up to,40
animal units and over half a million gallons of manure. With that, um, I don't know if there's any questions that the board might have. >> One question. Under condition three, you said
if the use is subject, but you said it is subject. >> I think maybe that should be re >> just take the word if out of there and say this then the use is subject to that. Yep. So with that,
that was the only thing I had. >> Linda, >> well, not that I know much about feed lots, but 10 acres for,440 animals seems small and a lot. Is that
normal, regular? is in this case the the family that operates the feed lot does own um several hund well dozens of acres around the site. So the the building is on its own 10 acre parcel but the
billman's own land um around this parcel and um I think maybe if scroll down one maybe one more um maybe there's not a map in the packet um but and actually Mr. for billment.
>> It's just established as an LLC as a separate for the parcel is pretty standard and abnormal for anything for any dairy or anything to establish and they own the property around it and they have to achieve the rights to apply the manur and application around the property. So it's normal. >> Thank you. That answers my question.
>> That's essentially the gist of it which is that it is not atypical for a farm operation to put their buildings on one site um and then have land surrounding it. Um, what I will note here is that, um, this is a fully contained feed lot,
meaning there's not any outdoor grazing. There's not really, I mean, when you look at it from the road, you don't necessarily see the animals. Um, the county's zoning ordinance requires a 100 ft setback from property lines for barns containing animals. A normal
setback would be 30 ft. Um, so they are able to achieve all of those setback requirements as required even though the site is relatively small. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> I'd move approval to conditional use with the change to item three to take
that word if out and adopt the findings of fact. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. I. I. >> Motion carries.
Next, we're on the for your information, the staffing report, the project status report, and then any new and old business. And how about any committee reports? just from the housing subcommittee just
basically they uh we have 30,000 about $30,000 left in the reimbursement for building permits and then the house in Kenyon I was going to bring up just because we have a house that's looking for a family. So I was hoping somebody
might know of someone. >> Thank you Brad. >> Just a couple of things. I I left one of these on each of your table that was handed out at the uh extension meeting. Um that's the largest youth engagement in 4
we've ever had. So um they're doing great things and really um reaching a lot of kids and a lot of partnerships which is excellent. And then just a couple of comments from our our budget meeting we had that I
wrestled with and struggled with for the last few weeks since that. Um, two things I wanted to point out. Um, one, um, I was a little bit, well, we haven't
voted on it, but we've given staff direction to take some things out of capital, and we did not give them any direction of where to put them. So, in essence, we kicked the can down the road. And I, if there's one thing this commissioner
doesn't like to do, it's to kick the can down the road. If we're going to tell staff that we want to move something to somewhere else, I'm okay. I can do that. Um, but I don't like the idea of just saying we're not going to do this ever.
And that's what we basically told them to do. And I have a problem with that. So, I just I'm not going to be here when you guys review the capital plan because I'll be out of out of the country. Um, I really caution you, do not kick the can
down the road because it will get way more expensive and we won't ever be able to catch up again. We worked really hard for the last I'll say 11 or 12 years or maybe even a little longer than that with staff to build a 20 plus year
capital plan that addresses things so that we could spread things out and do a really good job of managing that. I understand this year is a blip in in
our budget and I understand totally that it is really coming at us from a federal government and a state government that continually pass C costs down to us. And I'm pretty convinced that this is not a
one-year deal. I'm pretty convinced this is probably a three or four year to get back to something where we know what we're going to be doing going forward. And we've built reserves for years like
this. So my challenge for all of us is to really think about how do we judiciously use reserves to climb the mountain we got this year but also think about how 28 2930 look
and I know staff is going to do a really good job of trying to lay that out for us and they're going to do it from my understanding we're going to see a two-year budget again which is not common on an even year or on an odd year
for 27, we're going to see 27 and 28, which is going to be very helpful because I think we saw what happened when we moved some things last year. It just made the next year get a lot higher. So, please go back and study history of where we've been and where
we've come from. Please go back and study history on we never overspend and correct me if I'm wrong. We've never overspent and gone over our budget without the board telling staff to go over our budget.
We've always come in under budget with some reserve. We've used those reserves at times and we've used them in the last few years. This year is one of those years when we need to really think about how can we level this
and not put us in a very difficult situation going forward. And I just I'm just telling you that because I'm really nervous about going down a road that gets us into um five or six or seven years of really
struggles with budget. So that's what I'm the other thing I wanted to comment on and I'm I know you still are on Celco correct. Um I I think we need to understand our partners and Selco is one of our partners so water is one of our
partners. The outside agencies is another meeting that will happen when I'm not around. I just caution you. You need to know the history behind Selco before you make knee-jerk reactions. Um, and you've seen some stuff that
Scott sent out about Olmstead County and and whatever the statutes are and what Olmstead County is thinking about. And they're not thinking about cutting, they're thinking about freezing. And I'm okay with that. And I think our libraries would be okay that. Just
remember in 2011 the state because of the um downturn in the economy took uh 10% of the library funding away. They changed the formula and took 10% away.
So that's the maintenance of effort we're talking about. It went to 90% of what it was after that. They did some other stuff around reallocating it, but it's still since 2011, they have not raised that maintenance of effort
formula. It's the same as it was then. And you and I, everybody here knows we would certainly not be smart to budget from 2011 numbers. So, I caution you on thinking about that. They did get some
regional support in 2023 for the regional part of it, but what we do maintenance of effort is not regional. That's local. That goes to our libraries. So, um, I'm just caution you on that. You need to know the history
before you make real knee-jerk reactions now because of that. So, um, those are a couple things I had comments on. >> Linda, >> my comments are to Commissioner
Anderson's comments. So, one, there were several things that were on the capital plan that weren't planned for on the capital plan. So when you were saying that
staff had built it so that moving forward we knew what year we were going to have to do things. Well, all of a sudden there were quite a few things on that capital plan that weren't planned for. Um >> are you talking about that? Are you
talking about the study we did to know what we need to do to the justice center and some of the public work buildings? >> Yeah, the report that was done. Yeah. >> All right. So, that's one that was not planned on,
but if I mean several things that were not planned on, but if they are considered to the point of being kind of an emergency, then we have to deal with that. I understand that. Which brings me to the remodeling things that there were
several things that I do believe we asked to take off the um >> off but yeah the capital plan because we hadn't even started them yet. So I mean Neielson's one the remodeling is of the
front is another. So if we haven't even started those things, I think considering we are facing such incredible financial challenges because of federal and state
decisions plus what's happening um with housing and with unemployment and there are many many factors >> um and I guess I personally don't quite see that
looking at the direction of, okay, we can't have, in my opinion, a 20% levy because we don't have people that can afford to pay an extra 20% levy for this year. So, I guess I don't see it as a knee-jerk reaction that, oh gosh, well,
we got to take this out or that out when we're facing a budget that makes it very clear, oh, we've got to do something. >> And I totally agree with you. I think we can do something. I'm I what I'm saying is just saying take it off and never put
it somewhere is a problem for me because because eventually we're going to have to address um safety equipment in the jail. Eventually we're going to have to, you know, we made a commitment
to the parks and trails. We we're going to work on a park and we've made a commitment because we took a something that we have to take care of into perpetuity. Not just tomorrow and not next next week. We have to take care of
it forever. So, and I'm not saying where it should go. I'm not and I totally agree what we got handed with the the dollars it takes to do that. But, you know, sometimes you have to sit back, take a breath, really think about it.
Um, we can minimize the impact for a couple two and a half years until our debt service goes off and then we'll have an infusion that will allow us to
absorb those costs over there. And if you just look at it very shortsighted, short term, you will make decisions that will cost you way more downturn. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying what the answer
is. I'm saying I'm not comfortable just saying no, I won't go and then leave it there because staff got no direction where to go with that going forward. So, it's out of the capital plan.
The adjustments made probably got us to a 16% levy. How hard is it to get to 12 or 13? Would probably that I think that's probably we're going to end up.
My message to everybody that talks to me is tell me how to get the state or the federal government to quit passing things to property tax that shouldn't be on property tax. And they I to a person
they all understand that and they agree to it. So I'm not going to qu I'm going to quit taking on the state's responsibility and say it's our fault in Good County. We got to fix this. We can't fix that.
That's St. Paul and Washington. And I'm quite frankly offloading some of that to them. And there's an election this fall. People have to make a decision. Do we want the state to keep doing that? Do we want the federal government to keep doing that? And if they do, they will
vote the same people in that continually do that. If they don't, they're going to find somebody who will not do that. That's my That's where I'm at. So, and I didn't want this to be a budget discussion. I just wanted you to know
that because you're going to look at something that I'm not going to be here to see or comment on when you see it. So, be cautious. We got time to figure this out. And we got we put money away
specifically for years like this. We built fund balances specifically for years like this, not just to have funding. We built it for a reason and this is the reason and we have to use some of it to minimize what's happening
now. >> Well, I I think you made your point and I think it was heard. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Any other uh comments on new or old business or committee reports? Hearing none. Uh we'll move on to the
claims. >> Move approval. Second. >> Motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor of paying the bills say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Is there a motion to adjourn? >> So moved. >> There's a motion in a second. All those
in favor say I. >> I. >> Motion carries. The meeting's adjourned.