All right. So, we'll call the regular uh meeting to order and start with the pledge of allegiance. 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. Are there any disclosures of interest? Hearing none, we'll move to the previous board minutes. >> Move approval Anderson. Second. Any
discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Motion carries. Uh, next is to review the agenda. Are there any changes? >> There are no changes. Chair, >> there a motion to approve the >> to approve Flanders. >> Second.
>> Motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Uh there's uh six items on the consent agenda. >> Move approval as presented.
>> Second. >> Okay, there's a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. >> Motion carries. Uh next, the reports from uh departments and officials.
First up is the Celco uh agreement or contract addendum. >> Um yes um the budget committee met on June 9th and reviewed outside agency funding requests. Um at that time the committee recommended that all agencies
funding be frozen at the 2026 level. um the Good Hugh Li the South Library um had representation there and did um agree with that proposal and so we worked on an an addendum and that is
what's attached. So we are asking the board if they are interested in doing that to approve the addendum and then it will be sent to Celico for the libraries to approve. >> Thank you. Uh any questions for Andrea?
I just have a question and I've said it before and um if I specifically read this and I get to the section where it talks about beginning in 28 the funding amount shall
resume use of the established inflationary formula. I just want to make sure that this board and I and it's not going to be this board. It's going to be a future board in 28 isn't going to or in 27 isn't
going to want to reopen that memorandum of understanding because if you want to reopen it, what you're saying here is you're agreeing to in 28 use that same inflationary method.
If that's not your intent, then that's not what you should pass. I'm fine with this. I will pass this. I will actually move this. But just that you understand you're saying you're going to go back and you're not going to reopen that part
of the agreement. Not that you can't reopen the rest of the agreement, but that piece you're saying you're going back to resume that. That's just a clarity that I want you all to understand when you vote. So, I will move this forward.
>> I'll second it. >> Uh Scott, do you have any comments you want to make to uh what Brad had to say? >> I I think Brad's just clarifying. We That's That's what we tried to That's the intent was that we would go back to
the formula in 28. So that's what we tried to make the addendum read >> and the county attorney's office did did >> that's what the discussion was and there wasn't the discussion about changing the formula. >> No, we I mean we have noted that if you
did want to reopen the contract, this is one of the years where you'd have to provide notice to do that. >> Mhm. >> So but I I haven't heard any board members say that they want to do that. And I I know the libraries don't want to do that. >> All right. Any other questions or
comments? All right, there's a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Oppose. >> No. >> Motion carries. >> Uh, next is the uh financial 2025
financial statement audit. Good morning, commissioners. Morning. >> Uh, so as you know, a little over a month ago, uh, back on June 16th, our audit principal here, uh, Doug Host, uh, was here in person, presented the results of the our, uh, audited
financial statements. Um, at that point, the report wasn't actually issued. It wasn't completely finalized. uh but we were basically to the point where our um he was confident our numbers were um correct and there wouldn't wouldn't be any changes at that point. So we felt
comfortable to discuss the results of our audit at that time. Um as of right now the financial statements have been issued. Um the statements were issued with an unmodified uh opinion meaning that uh they're free of any kind of
misstatements um that could have uh been made to them. They have been submitted to the office of the secretary of state. Uh they're not to our website yet, but those should be up either today or tomorrow uh posted online. Um um other
than that, uh I also wanted to mention that the auditor's uh performer of view of our financial statements for compliance with the government finance officers association certificate of achievement um in excellence for financial reporting. uh we believe that
the 2025 report meets the thresholds of uh receiving that award again. So we have submitted for uh for that award uh again and we should find out next springtime. Uh that's typically the time frame on that. Um other than that um you
should have previously received a printed out copy of uh probably about nearly 200 pages of paper that goes into the report. Um, and I also did just note uh notice on here the the memo itself says that electronic copy of that has
been attached. It is actually not attached to the agenda. I'll make sure that gets added on here as well. Um, otherwise, as I said, normally those statements are posted onto our website in the finance department's web page there as well. Um, so with that being said, uh, staff recommends that the
county board accept those financial statements for the year ended December 31st, 2025. Any further questions for Lucas? >> Have a comment. Lucas, how many years now have you uh
has the finance department applied for this certificate of achievement? Is this like the fourth, fifth year? >> I believe we've received it five is either five or six years at this point that we've got it consecutively. So,
>> right. Look, >> it's it's one of those things where once you have >> the procedures in place, you just got to keep maintaining them and and keep up with all of the accounting changes that happen every year. Um it takes a lot of work for our staff to get that completed, not just in the finance department, but countywide um as well.
And it's a it's actually a lot of extra work for our auditors as well to do additional testing that's required of those statements. So, there is a lot of work that goes into it, but I would say it's certainly uh important for the the county to maintain that Well, I applaud you and your department
for doing it and appreciate it very much. You know, I know people disagree on how the money should be spent, but it's very nice to know that we are have very high standards of achievement as far as documenting where the money goes.
So, thank you very much to you and your staff. >> All right. Is is there a motion to approve the financials? >> So, moved. >> Second. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I.
>> I. Opposed. >> Motion carries. Next up, uh, land use management. >> Uh, good morning to the board. The first item being presented to you for your consideration is to award the Kman encroachment project contract. Um it
would be construction project number 25301001. Um the request is that the board um approve the contract to the lowest responsible bidder which is Fitzgerald Excavating and Trucking. Um for a little
bit of background, the project was put out to bid this spring. bid opening happened on June 17th. There were two um complete bids that were submitted. Um the project includes primarily removal
of retaining walls um on county property over in um Stanton Township over um on land that is adjacent or part of um the Good Hugh County Lake Bsby Park. Um the project will also include quite a bit of
restabilization of steep slopes and bluff areas that have been disturbed. Um just to sort of go over the bidding process, I um the county public works department was tremendously helpful in helping get the project out to bid and
overseeing the bidding process. Um they uh we did the bid opening and as I as I stated earlier, we do have a low bid for Fitzgerald. So that is the recommendation to award that contract in the amount of $93,500. Um I will note that there was an
engineer's estimate that our engineer um put together kind of anticipating what we thought the project would cost and the bid did come in um about 40% lower than what we were anticipating. So we're really happy with that number. Um, this
is a project that the county will have to essentially pay for upfront and then assess back to the property owner. Um, so it is something that we're using. We're paying for it out of a land use ordinance enforcement fund that has a
sufficient balance to cover the anticipated costs. >> Go ahead, Dad. >> Um, is the engineering costs and your time and cost for our staff is that added into that 93,000 also? We've not
added that in um this project I believe um we're going into probably year number three or four of it and we have not really accounted for staff time on um just in the enforcement, the investigation, the time spent with the land committee,
um the time spent preparing the bid docks, all of that. >> Well, shouldn't shouldn't we be charging for that? >> We will. Um I believe we have the authority at the end of the project to look back at the total county what the county encumbered to to essentially the
burden that we had to investigate this project and to assess that back to the property owner. >> Go ahead. So really all we're doing with this is approving the contract.
>> When we when we get to the excuse me when we get to the end of this process there will be all the costs will be put together some staff time engineering this bid and whatever this bid in you
know if it goes over it goes over that's what it is. Um, and then my understanding is the landowner will have the opportunity to pay that right away upfront or the county will assess it on taxes and decide on an interest
rate, decide on terms for years of paying it back or whatever. That's a decision that's different than the decision to go forward with this. And this has been a monster of a problem to deal with. And it's unfortunate it got
um got to this point, but we've worked on it for a long time in the land committee uh to get to this point. So, I will move the contract to contract with Fitzgerald and there will be more to come uh at the
end of the construction part. >> Second. >> There's a motion in a second. Any further discussion? Go ahead, Linda. Well, I just wanted to follow up on Brad's comment when it this first started several years ago. Um,
we did talk then about starting to keep track of all the staff time. >> So, I know it's started keeping track. Hopefully, we have continued because yes, this was a huge hit to the county.
Thank you. And I guess my only question is uh does this uh the Coleman's do they are they aware of this number and the um plan to uh charge for staff time as well? >> We have um the county has communicated with them to the extent that we feel like we need to communicate with them to
keep them in the loop. Um I >> I cannot say that I I mean I personally have not let them know exactly what the bid amount is. >> I see. Just to follow up on that, there were multiple opportunities in this process
for them to hire an engineer, >> do remediation that needed to happen and do it on their own dime. And as long as it met what it needed to meet for us, they've chose not to do that. Repeatedly
chose not to do that. So, we're at a point where now we have to take control of that piece of it. And it isn't like that's why it's been three or four years is because we've tried and tried to make
it not be this process, but this is the process we're stuck with right now. >> And um I I agree with Todd and Linda and perhaps you as well that the staff time should be their cost. I wondered if there's examples of uh the county um
charging individual land owners for staff time and I wondered if that had been successful or not successful and I know possibly no one has the answer but I wondered what kind of a bees nest were waiting into at that
>> here's my here's my comment and we've chosen to do um land use as a part of our work as a county. This is part of land use. So to a certain extent,
we chose to choose enforcement and that's what it is and the cost of enforcement is is the cost of enforcement. So I while I agree engineering needs to be included in there if there's some other costs in
this process that need to be in there. I'm not 100% convinced that all staff time should try to get included in this because we chose to do land use. So part of that cost is a choice we made a long
time ago and this is just the enforcement piece. Scott. >> Yeah, I'll just comment to your question. So, I mean, there's a number of times where we have build back for staff time. Sometimes you get paid, sometimes you don't. Sometimes it ends up on going tax forfeite. Um I don't anticipate that in this case but uh
there's a number of times where we have and and yes we've uh we've chosen to do land use but the individuals have also chose to take actions that are causing us to you know lead to more work and and that's it is appropriate that we build back those hours.
>> It's their direct action that created the cost. >> Yeah, >> I understand that. as have other people who have not followed land use have caused us to take action that costs the county dollars too
and we haven't always you don't try to you can't recoup all those dollars that's just part of >> Megan's work or right >> if it's regarding something else and brings Jess and the parks into it and >> that's just it's the work we've chosen
to do so some of it can be I agree will you get every dollar. No. And I don't think you should. That's my opinion. >> I think >> fair amount is a fair amount. That's what it should be. >> I think we're with the motion in the second. Uh all those in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Uh next is the circle KU. Um, the county board is being asked to consider a request for a conditional use permit for property located at 3559
County 45 Boulevard, Lake City, Minnesota. The request is to allow allow an expansion of an existing feed lot. Um, which will include storage over half a million gallons of manure on the site and over 300 animal units in an A2
zoning district. Um the request will bring the total site animal units to 3,458 animal units. Um, included in the application is um or included in the staff report is a copy of the
application, maps of the site prepared by staff, um, the draft meeting minutes from the June planning commission meeting, um, and then the draft affidavit of the conditional use, which is the recording document. Um, for some
background, the applicant here is the property owner, Mike Coenhoffer, um, on the behalf of Circle K Farms. The property is 93 acres in total area and it is zoned A2. U, the property is located in Belvadier Township. I will
note that Belvadier is one of our townships that does not have its own zoning ordinance. Um, so that is something that, you know, the county is aware of and so we make sure that we're very thorough in our reviews whenever there's not zoning at the township
level. The planning commission did hold a public hearing on this matter at their June 22nd meeting. Notice was mailed out in accordance with the zoning ordinance and published in the local new the Kenya newspaper. Um, no one from the public
was present to address the commission at that meeting. Um I will go over just some of the key changes that are being proposed. Uh the first is a construction project that includes a proposed 350 head pharrowing
barn which is proposed the dimensions of that are 83 feet by 280 ft with underground manure storage capacity. Um, and the second construction project is a 1,000 head um, guilt developer unit
addition to an existing barn that is about 81 ft by 160 ft. Um, there's also underground manure storage in that building. Um and then the colon hoffers are proposing to remove an existing above
ground steel slurry tank in um in conjunction with this project um with the addition of the underground manure storage. There is some information in here about what our staff looked at, you know, when
we conduct our planning review. some information about what the recommended findings of fact were that were presented to the planning commission. Um, I will just make note that there are two sections of the zoning ordinance
that the county is required to consider when reviewing a conditional use permit for a feed lot. One is our standard boilerplate conditional use findings, but then there are additional specific findings related to feed lots. So, both
of those sections of the ordinance have been reviewed and are being recommended in the um recommended as findings of fact in the attached affidavit. The planning commission did unanimously forward a recommendation of approval um for this conditional use to the county
board. I do want to also note that the colon hoffers first received a conditional use in 2015 to expand an existing feed lot. that conditional use was amended in 2019 for another
expansion. Um, and then now here in 2026 for for a third expansion. They are considered to be in good standing with the county, meaning we don't have any outstanding compliance issues. Um, and then lastly, I will note that because the site is over 1,000 animal units,
this site has has been and will maintain under the permitting jurisdiction of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Um, who will be issuing the what's called the NPDES permit and the feed lot permit. Um, and in fact, those have actually already been issued. They were
approved by that PCA about two, three weeks ago, and we have copies of those in our file. Um, so with that, I guess if there's any questions, um, otherwise the recommendation is to approve. >> Any questions for Megan? >> Just a comment. From what I heard you
say, they already are over a thousand animal units and they're going to 3,000 some animal units is what I thought I heard. >> So they're right now they are at 2,894. >> Okay. So when you when in the conditions
it says the applicant shall obtain a feed lot registration and NPDes permit from MPCA to exceed over a thousand animal units. What they're doing is expanding
they're expanding a thousand head area. So they're that that wording makes it sound like this the first time they're going over a thousand and it's not. They're expanding in a permitted
site by MPC already. >> That's condition number two. >> So it should be instead of exceed to expand a unit something like that. I just the wording didn't make sense to me because
they're already there. >> Okay. I would approve of that. I can make that administrative change. >> All right. With that, I'd move approval. >> Second. >> There's a motion in a second. Any other questions or discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. Opposed. >> Motion carries. There's several for your information um items. Um, and does anyone uh I guess the the one I'd like to comment on,
Linda, it sounds like that meeting uh for the rural broadband may have been successful. Um, so that would be pretty darn exciting and uh your uh your efforts it looks like to me unless I'm reading that
information. >> Have you heard back from what is it? New Vera that now had to make the a decision on a couple of other questions future questions. >> They they will have we actually still need to get them the revised documents.
I don't believe that's gone out yet. Has it Lucas? >> That's correct. the um as of right now, we're still working through revising the original assignment agreement that had been um both deemed appropriate by New
Vera and the county. Hadn't actually been signed yet, but both parties had said indicated that this was acceptable. So, we're going to revise some of the language in that to fit with um additional information from the rural utility service as well as they provided
an operating agreement that we are working on revising to fit our specific situation. So, once those agreements have been I guess I would say finalized on our side, we need to share those with new Vera and see if they would have revisions as well. But it is moving forward at this time. Um, as of right
now, uh, the staff is working on that. >> That's maybe congratulations might be a little premature, but I know it was a gonna say >> it was a frustrating and difficult, >> but it is still moving. It is still moving and I appreciate that. Thank you so much. >> Honoring your persistence on the phone
calls is what I'm doing. >> It will it will be real when it's in writing. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But it's appears to be >> deliberate. >> Uh, that her efforts were not in vain. It's um >> verbal. Ver verbal is verbal, but written means they've agreed to it.
Yeah. So, I hope we get written agreement from the feds and from all of this. So, >> any other comments on uh uh for your information? >> Just a comment. Um I don't know if how many of you looked through that road and
bridge report, but there's a lot of numbers. There's a lot of there's a lot of accounting that goes into that. I don't remember was it 70 pages, 60 pages long that has to get submitted and I appreciate the staff and all the work they do. That's what that's what drives
our road projects is the ability to work together with the state on that. So, thank you for all the work they put into that. Just following up on that, um, this week Susan and I, and I think you probably
did too, went out, had an opportunity to go out with public works and see how, um, concrete road was put together. And that is quite something. You really start seeing why the costs of a mile of
road are so um, is so incredibly high. Um, there probably were 50, 60 people, probably 10, 15 huge gigantic trucks. The weather was absolutely horrendous that I recognize everybody knows. Um,
so, wow. I mean, what a job to put in a mile of road. >> And it literally was 40 to 50 people because there were probably 10 at the concrete plant and 40 at the site. And then that they bring in their own mobile
plant to make the concrete. That was >> quite something to see as well. >> Well, and you guys went in the morning. I went in the afternoon. They actually laying concrete when we got there. I heard they were >> kind of having trouble getting started when you were there,
>> but we we saw it move slowly forward. Yes. Until it broke. >> Yeah. No, there I mean it's just truck after truck after truck backing up. It's it is truly amazing. uh the work they can do. We also did we also went to
County Road 11 that they're rebuilding and I think you should take a drive down there and see all the equipment and all the work that goes into rebuilding a road before you're going to get put >> putting asphalt or concrete down. So you should if you can get the opportunity to
drive down there and take a look at that. That'll be going for a while. Um, but it it just people go in every direction and they all know what they're doing. >> They do. Yeah. >> All them little stakes mean something out there and they know what the heck they're they're doing the whole time.
So, it was very >> It is always worthwhile to get out on a project and actually see how much it takes to get something done. It doesn't just happen like that. >> So, thank you, Jess, for giving us the opportunity to go out there and see it
in action. You're very welcome, Commissioner. >> Did the the crew work on that terrible smoke day or did they not work? >> Uh they they worked every day except for Saturday. >> Okay, >> they're working right now.
>> Yeah, I believe it. >> Will they finish today? >> Uh not today, but it'll be this week. They got set back with some of the weather. They had to have some short days. Uh the crew was getting a little overheated. >> Mhm. >> It was unbearable. >> Unbearable.
Uh their their favorite thing I think at that site was the uh food stand Kitty Corner from the uh >> they're getting a lot of business. >> Yeah, they were. Yeah. All right. Um anything on new and old business or committee reports?
>> Um to for Jess on County 50 we did up in Wanamingo. There was definitely some frustrated um residents there because that road was getting turned back to gravel. They said they had no knowledge of it, but you know, when I explained to them, we've had several meetings. We met
with the township. The township did not want to keep maintaining the black top. And so I I don't know if you've heard any gotten any calls on it or not, but uh very few calls. Um one individual in particular has called repeatedly, so
we've been working with him and uh started communicating a little bit with the township. So, >> okay. >> At the end of the day, the project is while the county is turning back the road, the township being the receiver of the road, uh, agreed to, you know, what
the plan was uh, to do to the road. Uh, they had a lot of input and ultimately their board approved the project. So, uh, approved of the project. The county board actually made the motion to award
the contract and move forward. But um for the volume of traffic that's on the road and what we're doing to it, it's it's very applicable to that type of road uh in the county. So it's a big change for some people. Uh we all
understand that going from a paved road to an unpaved road. Um there's a lot of feelings that go with that and we recognize that. But um also it was a township township's decision to move forward with that. They we could have
kept it a paved road. Um it wouldn't have been necessarily appropriate given the volume of traffic and um having highway 52 bisect it um with no no crossover um it doesn't make a lot of sense to keep it in a paved state and I
think the decisions made were appropriate. It's no fun hearing the complaints, but it's part of it. >> It is. Um, and we'll work we'll continue to work through it. >> And, you know, unfortunately, a lot of people don't pay too much attention
until it's right in front of their face. Absolutely. That's what happened. >> Okay. Is there a motion to pay the bills? >> I just I have one I have one thing on committee reports. Um, for all uh
quarterly report from our Association of Minnesota Counties. And the one thing I wanted to point out is Linda sits on that board. Um and they had some comments from commissioners who sit on that board and I thought hers was an
excellent comment and I'm going to read it. Counties have always been where government becomes real to people. Throughout America's history, counties have built roads, protected public safety, maintained records, supported
public health, and delivered essential services. As communities grow, as communities continue to grow and change, counties will remain vital because this is where government stops being an idea and becomes a service. And
I thought as commissioners, we need to keep that in mind because that is really what our role is is to make it real to people, make sure we deliver services, make sure we're listening to what our
constituents say, and I thought it was excellent. There were several excellent comments from several other um leaders at that. And I was talking to um our District 9 rep that sits on that board
from Filillmore County the other night and he said it is amazing the discussions that happen at that level. Um and the sometimes there's a disagreement between commissioners, but they always come away
with a better decision and they always they always are uh in agreement at the end. So I and I do and I know Linda seeing that I saw that on that board, but her comments were spot-on excellent
comments about what county government really is. So thank you. >> Thank you. I have one too. Yesterday the housing subcommittee met and just a few high points from here
in um Redwing. The Jefferson school did make it through the resoning process. So, it has been reszoned and an RFP has gone out for um interest and Three Rivers might be one of those
that is seriously considering um putting in an RFP. So, it's kind of >> Is it just the school building that has changed or has the whole area been changed? >> Not the whole area, but that lot. I
think it's a twoacre lot. >> Yeah. So they it had the park and stuff hasn't changed but they have put some preferences in the in the doc in the request for proposals and one of them is to maintain you know the park and some of the green space. So I think I think
they could propose to do something with some of that area but they need to somehow still have park and green space there. And they are also giving higher priority for uh uh applications that maintain the building because it is
possible that the building could come down to >> raised. Yeah. >> Well, and they have experience with that in Canon Falls. Uh uh I think they >> Yeah, they repurposed when the when they built the new elementary, they repurposed a portion of the
um old school into apartments >> back in the '9s. >> Yeah. And now I think Three Rivers owns those apartments and are are operating them >> and those newer ones, right? Kind of >> and they built that was part of it too at the same time they built multi-family
town houses. >> Yeah. So it could be that they'd end up who knows that that hasn't come before the Three Rivers Board yet, but it could be that they'd remodel that building but also use some of the land >> for addition. Typically a school building like that fits for
>> um um smaller apartments, not large apartments cuz just with room configuration, you just you don't moving walls in there is going to be >> virtually impossible. >> Um so it fits for,
>> you know, elderly housing, um senior housing, not so much for family housing. Mhm. >> And that's what they did with the Canon Falls project when they did that is they put senior housing and elderly housing in the school and then built the town
homes for the family housing. So, it was a good mix. >> Whether that is how this plays out or not, um it'll be interesting to see. >> For them, it all depends on the funding they're able to get to. >> Oh, yeah. Absolut absolutely.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other comments or is there a motion to pay the bills? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. A motion carries. Is there a motion to adjurnn?
>> So move second. >> All right. So we'll have a brief break and then have >> we have the vote. >> Oh. All in favor? I >> I uh the meeting is adjourned and we'll have a brief