Good morning everyone. Thank you for coming to the Winona County Board August 12th. Just a beautiful summer morning. Um not quite as humid and not quite as hot yet, but stay tuned. >> All right, we start our meetings uh with
the public comment. Anybody in the audience or online uh can address the county board about anything in particular. Uh and you have two minutes and we do have a timer on the screen. So, um, please try to adhere to that. So, I ask you to step to the podium and
state your name and your address and, um, let us hear from you. Thank you. >> Dumping the gun. >> Good morning, everyone. Um, >> morning. >> Do my minutes start with my name and explanation or >> Yes. Okay. So, my name is Mr. O'Hanlin.
I live 26532 Kenner Road 17 Winona on just below. I am a USMC infantry battle veteran. I've trained Marines, law enforcement, and foreign militaries in the handling and use of rifles. I've spent nearly 20 years as an outdoorsman, hunting guide, hunter, gunsmith, and
ammunition manufacturer. I'm here to present some compelling arguments in the affirmative to allowing rifles to be used in Winona County. To start, safety. There's a lot of emotional dogma that shotguns are safer than rifles. Let me assure you, this claim is false. Both
shotguns and rifles are extremely dangerous, right? So, firearm safety comes down to hunters applying the four firearms rules that are statutoily required to be taught to all hunters prior to being able to purchase a license. Then, responsible behavior dictates their
safety from then on. Minnesota law already mandates strict and safe use of firearms and reckless discharge of a firearm is punishable by up to a felony. So firing into a people, places, or things with any weapon system. There's no exceptions within the statute for
using a shotgun, a pistol, a rifle, a .22 single shot you found under your grandpa's couch. There's no exceptions under the law. Environmental impact. Shotgun hunting, especially with lead slugs, which are the most in common use, contribute to a sizable amount of environmental pollution. In Winona County alone, hunters could be
depositing over 340 pounds of lead each hunting season by firing only a single shot. a single shot. How many hunters do you know shoot once? Not very many. Um, shotguns don't have the velocity to expand safer modern monolithic copper
projectiles. On the other hand, they offer the option and excuse me, rifles on the other hand offer the option to use lead-free alternatives at a fraction of the cost. Tradition transitioning to rifle hunting reduces the environmental impact. And even if for only 40% of hunters adopted
and switched, it would cut over 136 pounds of lead pollution. And I think that's something we can all get behind with my limited time. Thank you all for your time. I appreciate you very much. >> I only shoot once. >> Exactly. You should. That's the goal. >> And thank you. You've provided us a very good document.
>> Comprehensive cover. >> Thank you. >> Uh good morning everyone. My name is Caleb Peterson. I'm originally from down by Lac Crescent. Uh before I begin, uh just a couple quick disclaimers. I worked the overnight shift last night. So if I seem a little tired, that's why. And then uh also I am a peace officer in
the state of Minnesota and uh nothing that I'm going to say here. I'm speaking in my capacity as a private citizen. I'm not speaking on behalf of my agency or uh the city which I work for. Uh that being said, I'll get right into it. I am an active member of the Minnesota Army National Guard. Uh licensed peace
officer in Minnesota, like I said, an outdoorsman and recreational shooter. Uh this I'll be addressing uh some individuals in Houston counties that have had concerns about the use of center fire rifles
uh to be allowed in Houston or Winona counties. Uh these concerns in my opinion are fundamentally flawed uh to suggest that there is any conceivable scenario in which an animal could be targeted safely by a shotgun but not a rifle due to concerns of ricochet,
unsafe back stop or over penetration. Uh to make those claims would be reckless and irresponsible at best. Uh under current state law, it's covered under Minnesota statute 609.066. Uh any person who discharges a firearm unsafeely in the direction of another
person or occupied dwelling uh is already guilty of a crime can be charged with up to a felony. In my mind, there is no need for any further restriction or over complication of this very clear statute. It's been my experience as a peace officer that people don't respond well to regulations that they feel are
confusing or contradictory. For example, Minnesota deer permit areas do not follow uh county lines. So it I feel it would create a confusing scenario for somebody that they could potentially be legal in one area, you know, 100 meters to the south and then they move north,
you know, in their same deer permit area with the same weapon. Now they're illegal. You know, we're not in the business, we're not out to confuse people or make them feel like, you know, they're they're being entrapped. And I'd have concerns about who enforces it. You know, if it's a county level ordinance versus, you know, game ordinance being
state officers. It there's a lot to think about there. So just uh thank you for your time. >> All right. Thank you. >> Is there anyone else wishing to address the Manona County Board? >> Uh my name is James Gross. Uh I live on
uh 300086 Valley View Road. Um I know you guys are dealing with that marijuana uh petition today. Um we did speak at your uh other hearing uh with the two minutes you don't get much time to bring everything up. Um the one thing that we
did not get brought up last time is the first thing in their report talks about uh these uh drug dealers being able to produce uh drugs next to a park. Um there is a park that adjoins the
proposed site which is called the Valley View Agricultural Public Park. If you Google it, you will see it's on there. Um and the state makes it very clear that uh predators, sexual predators, drug dealers and stuff are supposed to
stay away from parks. Um, I think the report, although I know the gun is to your head on having the the uh governor wanting you to pass this quickly, I think there's been a lot of uh the the report has a lot of flaws in it. We
tried to bring those up. Um, I I do own that park. I do adjoin his property by 100 feet and it's made for agriculture and uh it I think you would have some problems putting and giving him a permit
uh with that as an issue. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone else wishing to address the Winona County Board? get through in two minutes. >> Morning. >> Uh good morning. Um Jeff Hima, 554 L
Street. Uh also member of the uh LEC task force. I wanted to take a moment to provide a summary update about the status of the LEC probuild design pre-esign authorizations. information that I did not have when I attended your
7:22 meeting. The full response uh the full city response which includes both a video of the presentation and the PowerPoint by the city manager along with motions passed at the August 4th city council meeting have been made available to all of you. So this is just a summary and the summary is it's
complicated. It's complicated trying to bring three government entities together who all have rules, regulations, and needs. And we all want to be careful with taxpayer money entrusted to us and use it wisely and efficiently. After 18 months of a
joint county and city LEC task force in January of 2025, both bodies passed actions. A the city authorized pre-esign of the probuild site for the joint LEC with the county and a pre-esign for the combined police fire building at the
central school site. B. The county authorized the pre-esign of the joint facility at the probuild site as long as no county funds w would be obligated and authorized a study to evaluate the potential reuse of the current LEC. It was also indicated through discussion
that future county support of the joint probuild site would be dependent on further funding from the state, which unfortunately did not occur in the 2025 legislative session. Through this spring and early summer, the city attempted to go forward using
the previously granted state funding of 7.5 million to do the pre-esign as authorized. They ran into two snags from the state and received one clarification. Snag one. It was vocabulary. Is pre-esign
included in the grants application use of the word design? Well, one state entity said no. Stag two, one at a time. The state funding requires that only one site be explored at a time. The second
site can be explored if the first does not work out or is ruled out. Clarification. Pre-esign will not give us the detailed discussion about needs versus wants we had all hoped for. That comes later in the process. Pre-esign
gives an overview of suitability of the site for the intended purpose and what it would look like along with a ballpark cost idea. The city at their 84 meeting chose to move forward. Y >> can you wrap it up? >> Yeah. Yeah. I got this to anybody else.
>> I know you can. Okay. We can take a real we can read this >> to stay for the committee of the board or will you be you have to go? >> Well, I just just going to try to do it here just not take up more of your time, but I can stay if you need me to stay. >> Okay. And we can follow along. >> We'll we'll read here. >> Although I am interested in hearing
everything. >> Yes, absolutely. But in fairness to everybody else if you >> That's fair. That's fair. >> All right. Thank you for providing the the uh document though that was helpful. >> As you said, it's complicated and sort everything out. Uh, is there anyone else
wishing to address the Winona County Board? Please step up. >> Hi, my name is Justin Johnson. I am uh applying for the conditional use permit down at 30530 Valley View Road for the Cannabis Cultivation Center. I just wanted to address one of the comments
that was publicly made about the park. And just uh after a quick view, we have going gone through all of our uh spots and locations with zoning and have not found any parks with playgrounds or anything that would be endangering
children. The other thing is is our farm is well over the 500 square feet or 500 ft from uh Valley View Park and I just wanted to clarify that that we are within proper zoning. Okay. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you.
Is there anyone else wishing to address the Winona County Board? Is there anyone else wishing to address the county board? And final last time, is there anyone else wishing to address the Winona County Board? I see I see no no activity
on the on the screen. So, we will close that part of our our meeting, but thank you all for um taking your time and energy to come in and talk to us. It it's a valuable asset and a valuable tool. We appreciate that. Thank you. Uh moving on, item three, approval of the
county board meeting minutes from July 22, 2025. >> So, move. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Eling, seconded by Commissioner Meyer to approve the meeting minutes. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Okay. Approved. Um item four
is the acknowledgement receipt of approved committee meeting minutes. Uh 4.1 is health and human services from June 10th. 4.2 health and human services from May 20th. 4.3 is board of adjustment from June 18th and 4.4 is
planning commission of June 18th. >> I'll move to approve items 4.1 through 4.4. Second. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Vegley, seconded by Commissioner Elling to acknowledge the receipt of the approved committee meeting minutes 41, 42, 43, and 44. Any discussion? All
those in favor say I. I. >> Pose, nay. Okay. Approve. Thank you. Um, consent, comments, and approval of the agenda. Uh, Commissioner Vaguely, >> one committee update at the end, please. Okay. >> Commissioner Eling,
>> comment at the end. Commissioner, >> nothing for me. >> Okay. Commissioner Meyer. >> Uh, committee update brief. Okay. Uh, Miss Holty, any changes or anything? >> Okay.
>> All right. And I have a comment at the end. Send that. Do we have an approved agenda? Move to approve the agenda. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Eline to approve
the board agenda as presented. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Approved. All right. Miss Holy, if you would read the items in the record, please.
>> 6.1 Approved conditional use permit for Will William and Carol Aert. 6.2 2 approve conditional use permit for Heather and Garrett Henson. 6.3 Approve renewal of docuign contract. 6.4 Approve
LG220 gambling application for exempt permit team Vogle versus cancer. 6.5 Approve recovery court program and fee with America corps to provide assistance for opiates settlement committee.
6.6 Six, approve renewal of agreement and business associate agreement with Riverway Learning Community ISD 4064 for transport transportation of children and youth and foster care placement. 6.7 approved purchase of service and
business associate agreements with Lewon Alura public schools ISD 857 for transportation of children and youth and foster care placement 6.8 8 approve agreement and business associate agreement with Crescent Hoka public schools for the transportation of
children and youth in foster care placement 6.9 approve renewal of collaborative inter agency agreement 6.10 10 approve resolution to acquire right-of-way for CASAD 19. 6.11 approve
prioritized bridge replacement list resolution. 6.12 authorized disposal of excess furniture and equipment. 6.13 acknowledge receipt of monthly finance and budget update for June 2025 and 6.14
confirm payment of dispersements. I'll move to approve item 6.1 through 6 um14. >> I'll second. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Vagley, second by Commissioner Meyer to approve uh 6.1 to 6.14. Any discussion?
>> Um I do just want to address the the marijuana issue. Later in our meeting, uh we have a a important uh topic, the as you heard, the rifle versus shotguns. And in my tenure, that is only time that I've ever known the state legislature to
allow us to de deviate from state law. I don't think there's any other law that the county board has the authority to uh you know, change or not or not follow. The cannabis uh marijuana legislation has been
less than perfect to put it bluntly. Um and it's been mandated from a higher level of government and has given us virtually uh you know very minimal uh regulations and choices um to to make in regarding that industry. Um I hope the
higher level of government gets it under control. I personally don't have a lot of confidence in that it's going as smoothly and and efficiently as it has. Um, but I do I do understand the concerns. I understand it's a it's an enterprise and and people are trying to
take advantage of that enterprise, but personally, I just don't think it was very well thought out or counties weren't given the tools to do as much uh regulating as as we possibly could. So, I do I do feel sorry for you. Um,
unfortunately I I I I can't recognize you, but we can talk later. So, I guess uh that's my my comment to that. Um, all those in favor of approving the uh consent business say I >> oppose. Nay. Approve.
>> All right. Moving into general business 7.1. Uh, received presentation from DNR on the Great River Bluff State Park statutory boundary adjustment. And do we have somebody here? Okay. Please step to the podium and
explain what you're doing in my neighborhood. >> Hi. Uh my name is John Holder. I'm unit supervisor Great River Blouse Beaver Creek Valley State Parks. Um what we had what uh brought me to the to your meeting today. Um there's a land owner
who owns a parcel about 56 acres and uh part of that parcel lies within the statutory boundary of Great River Bluff State Park. There's 20 acres in the northwest part of that parcel that isn't within the statutory boundary. Um so in
order for us to make a offer on that um that parcel does need to uh completely be in the statutory boundary of the park. Um so what we're looking today would be uh the county approval um of
addition to that parcel to the statutory boundary. Um that's one part of the process. Of course all the other um real estate transaction type things with offers and accepted offers um do need to
take place as well but this um would make that possible. >> Yes, Commissioner Meyer. Our packet says we will receive a presentation, but it doesn't provide us with the resolution. >> Would that come at a later time? >> So, Madam Chair, >> yes.
>> Um, my understanding is that this was an opportunity for the board to pose questions and for you to further explain what the request was. Yeah. >> Um, so we did not put an action item on the agenda. I was really looking for direction of the board.
I'm I'm a little the maps I'm a little confused. Um, one of them it seems like the the parcel I'm looking at page 167 the little red box seems to be to the like you indicated the north and the west but then on page
168 there's another little box that's in like what I would say the southeast corner. So I'm I'm am I Yeah. Are you proposing the red box or the green box? >> Um the red box. Um, >> what's that green box? >> That green box that is another parcel.
So, really unrelated to >> the green box. >> That green box >> unrelated to this topic. Um, that parcel is already in the statutory boundary. >> You were reading. >> Yeah. Check to see if I if I'm color blind or not. Um, you know, I I understand what you're trying to do. Uh,
I personally am not a big uh supporter of payment in Lua taxes because it's not the same. um as a private individual they're paying and I don't know what the amount is but X but the payment in Lewis taxes is X minus something um the state
government doesn't compensate us equal um values unless that's and I don't think it's changed recently I think there's been some corrections and additions through legislation for payment and living taxes but I don't think it equals so I mean you keep chipping away at our property uh DNR and
in in total and across the state of Minnesota and Some counties have huge tracks. Um, we've got quite a bit. We got uh the this park, we got Whitewater, we got state lands. I'm not sure what the acreage is. Anybody anybody in the
audience know how many acres the state owns in the county, Winona County? No, Ross, you you don't have that at the tip of your tongue. >> Yeah, it's like it's it's a lot. So, I mean, as you keep chipping away on our
tax base, I I don't really, you know, totally appreciate that. Um, but the the seller is wanting to do this, >> right? He approached um me. >> Uhhuh. Are there some big bucks in that corner? >> Um, you know, we have a park hunt every
year and um that corner in particular, I don't know because it's not in the park hunt right now, right? >> Um >> but there are some nice deer in the park. Okay. So, that brings up you you have a a park hunt. Is that shotgun or slingshot or lass or
>> It's been shotgun. Yeah. Or any illegal firearm. >> Okay. All right. You brought it up. Thank you, Commissioner Ryer. >> As a person who uses Great River Bluffs and goes for hikes there several times a year, uses it in the winter, use it in the summer, I think it's a fabulous ass fabulous asset to Winona County. Um, so
I support um this change particularly since it's a thing that the land owner wants to do as a part of their legacy. So I would favor this u moving forward. >> Commissioner Olsson, >> I worked in that park uh extensively as a youth conservation corps member back
in my youth. So um I love I have a personal connection to it. So good. I support it. >> Commissioner vaguely. >> Is there any kind of time constraints? Can we wait two more weeks to get to get you that resolution or should we try to craft Word Smith something today?
>> Um it it would be good if it's in um if it's done by the end of August then it can be included. >> We got one more meeting though 26 such. >> All right. Um >> could you then share like what you would like to see with Miss Holy and to put to put into the form of a resolution so we
can have it before us. I also support the request as well, especially because the landowner approached you. >> Yeah. >> So, >> um I know a lot of times when you go and I ride my bicycle over there and and yeah, enjoy the view and everything. So, but that box probably isn't going to
enhance any of the trail system. It's kind of out on the edge and probably very steep. Um I know you have, you know, a pretty nice trail system. >> Yeah. um you know it could um one thing um we're we're looking for just uh level
ground too you know >> yeah that's probably fairly steep at that point >> there there is a portion I think within this um that does level out um kind of the east side of that parcel in particular is a valley but then it it
flattens out some on top um kind of the tan area within that map and I apologize it's so small But um >> All right. Well, I guess uh if you don't have anything else, if you'll work with Miss Holty and see if there's a a
template or something of resolution. Um >> Madam Chair. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I was just going to suggest if you have a resolution and then if if you can share that with our office, too. >> Yeah. I'm not familiar with this process, but but I'm familiar with the
process upon at Henipin State Park and I don't recall that the DNR having to go before the board get a resolution to property. >> Yeah. If if that parcel was already in the statutory boundary, they wouldn't need to.
>> No, it wasn't. >> It was it was my family's farm property. >> Oh, really? >> So, um just went through that. We didn't have to go before the board. So, I'm a little curious as to why why you're coming before the county board. So, I'd like I'd like to see what it is. Make
sure if the board doesn't have to act, fine. If they do, fine. Yeah. I I totally support it. Well, it's not my decision, but >> um >> we do get notice though when people are trying to like sell trout stream uh you
know u properties that the DNR takes. notice, but but actually approving the >> um >> seems to me we have maybe under just consent. >> Yeah, >> I don't think it's ever been a contentious issue, especially with the
land. It's not a DNR land grab. The the land owner wants wants to sell. >> This is not my family's was not a land grab either. >> Yeah. Because we wanted >> Yeah. And maybe um I see uh highway engineer Dave Kramer uh you work with the DNR all the time on road projects.
Um, do we have to give them permission to or we have to get permission from them to do road projects with DNR land >> road? >> Yeah. Being that there's a question, we're questioning the DNR's authority
here. >> Yeah. If we if we had a like a public water permit for a bridge replacement, so we work with them on that. And then obviously if we have a construction project that is on uh property that uh you know that we would need a like a
highway easement that the DNR or state managed property is adjacent to that then yeah we would also need to work with the the DNR on that. >> And you say we need to work with they have not always been totally acceptable to our proposal. they have they have
priorities of managing the resources uh for the for those purposes and that's not always uh the same as a priority of a highway purpose. >> Right. Exactly. So ju just so the rest of the board knows it's not always easy. Uh it's usually doable but it's not
always easy. The DNR um Commissioner >> Begley miss >> if it isn't required we'll do a communication to the board so that you know it's not required. Otherwise I'll work with Miss Sonaman. We'll get it on the next agenda. Thank you. >> Sounds good. >> That's I was I was going to ask for you
just do that and the next meeting would be two weeks from today. So that'll be by the end of by the end of August. So >> Okay. >> Thank you, Madonna. >> Um could you send us the and I'm just going with my family project. We worked
with a DNR land acquisition person from the main office. So, is there a land acquisition person that you're working with out of the the DNR office in St. Paul or She was out of Brainer? >> Yeah. Yeah. There hasn't been like we're not that far into the process yet um
because we need this approval before we can't make offer on lands that we're not um you know that aren't within the statutory boundary. So, that's that's why I'm here. Good. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
Okay, we are at uh committee reports and communications. Uh Commissioner Vagley, >> um a real quick update. This is the idea that we discussed briefly at two county board meetings. The idea of um talking with some community partners um to
develop a special celebration for next July 4th, the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Um quick update is Commissioner Ward and I are a part of that planning committee. I sent out invitations to about 16 people hoping
that half of them would reply. Um 14 people have responded from a wide range of community partners. We had our first meeting last week at the history center. 11 of the 14 people were able to make it. So that was wonderful. And again not asking the county board for any funds. This is just an update that there is a
wide range of community partners who are very excited in making this more than just the city of Winona event too. Um, thanks to Commissioner Ward, we have Cindy Tim from the fair board a part of it. Um, and a couple other folks. So, we're going to try to make this a
countywide celebration for next July 4th. That's it. Thank you. Unless you want to add something. No, it was it was a well attended lot of energy, a lot of thoughtfulness, but for everybody it it will probably tend to be more the city of Winona's
concentric, but we want the whole county to be able to participate if they so desire. It's not anything >> and the idea is not to have it on just July 4th. The idea is to more of like over the course of a month or so, etc. So we could possibly support and connect with different community already
existing >> events. festivals, etc. Yes. And days. >> Yeah. More to follow. Commissioner, >> I just wanted to thank everybody for I've received a plethora of comments and emails and text messages and phone calls about uh the gun situation. I am the one
that brought it up to the county board and most people didn't know about it. So, I just want to thank everybody. It's been interesting. um the dialogue uh back and forth and people that you know you think you might see somebody a certain way and they're on one side or
the other side. So it's it's it's a it's a complicated situation that the state left in our hands and I just appreciate everything everybody's brought it forward. So >> Commissioner Meyer >> uh the Windlac policy committee for the one watershed one plan met yesterday. We
usually meet here but we met in St. Charles and we had a field tour afterwards. Um there's a stream. We went to Brook Brook something Park. Um >> where Charles >> in St. Charles? Yeah. >> Jet Jets just Oh, the stream they're
doing redoing it. Yeah. So that's the small >> little park on the bottom side that tends to flood in there a little bit. Yeah. >> So and with all this rain, it sure were lucky they got that hydro heated. >> Yeah. Well, so it was great because they showed they had a section where the grass is already grown and they really did show how it worked because they had
um buried uh logs and tree stumps. They called it wood toes and then they had widened the stream bed to create a fud plane so that it really did do exactly what it was supposed to do. >> Now the other side isn't done and with the rain coming in. I I drive that every
day going to our St. Charles location shop and uh so it's interesting even that hel held better than I thought it would. >> He did >> bar construction he does a he does a good job. >> So >> so that was a great tour. I was happy to see that. Um I talked to Sheila Harms
our um water planner afterwards. She said that we were involved in the um using one watershed one plan funds on about 15,000 of it on the engineering piece of the project. So glad to see the dollars being spent and um that they're
they're helping work to prevent uh runoff and protect from floods. So >> the south side of that was kind of ugly for a number of years and they did a nice job cleaning up. >> It looks great now. >> Water water will do um what it wants to
do. So good good projects. Um just a couple announcements. Um we had uh family night on the farm last week. It turned out to be a beautiful evening. Uh the Clark Farm uh hosted it and uh >> Becky and family. >> Yeah. Um and it's truly the next
generation taking over that farm. Um Mark Clark and his wife have run it for a number of years and his daughter Becky is taking it over. Um just a good crowd. U beautiful buildings and landscaping. The cows were all uh very well, you
know, taken care of and groomed and such. And so it's a great great county event. And I took the liberty of making sure that county commissioners know that dairy is a very important uh Now if you're not going to use it, give it give it back.
>> Um uh and I think did you get yours, Josh? >> Yeah, I am. >> Okay. Um that >> Thank you, Commissioner. >> That the dairies are very critical in our part of the the state and it's an important economic impact. Um, the other thing is remember, uh, the great Minnesota get together is happening
soon, the the Minnesota State Fair. Uh, I I apologize. I was going to ask the the 4 coordinators how many children were sending there. I know it's going to be many many livestock are going to represent Winona County and many um what we refer to as static projects. That's
uh um they don't have legs and a tail. They they sit on the counter or it's a strange name in my opinion, static projects. Uh but a lot of uh youth will be representing Winona County at that event. And so if you get to go to the fair during that first
encampment, be sure and walk through and if you see any Winona County kids, really congratulate them and and thank you them for representing Winona County. So it's coming. And uh for people that don't know Sweet Martha, if you ever go buy that chocolate chip cookie, she went to school in Winona. She graduated, I
believe it was still St. Kates at the time. Um, but she does have a tie to Winona. Won't get you a discount on the cookies, but uh, at least it has a Winona connection. Sweet Martha's Cookies. All right. Thank you. Um, anything else at this time? >> To adjourn.
>> I'll second. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Eline, second by Commissioner Meyer to adjurnn. Any discussion? >> Can you just clarify for the audience what what's going to happen next? >> Oh, okay. Uh this is we're just adjourning our official uh action type
>> of the meeting county board meeting and now we're going to go into committee of the board where uh we have a little bit more just discussion and and typically no no definitive actions are taken. It's just all uh gathering information and um uh maybe making a recommendation but no
no votes or no action. So that's what's happened. >> Thank you. and maybe we'll just take a like a two-minut recess between the two. So, all those in favor of adjourning the business meeting say I >> oppose. Nay. Okay. Ajourn. Let's just take a twominut uh break here >> before we
got a lot of things that um deserve our attention. And the first one is 10.1 discuss shotgun zone repeal. And who's is there anyone going to lead a discussion or
>> Madam Chair? Yes. The uh this was requested by Commissioner Vale uh Vegley and then Commissioner Olsen. So it's being brought back per the request of the board. >> Okay. So we're allowed to discuss it. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. So,
have we got any official I I guess the question and um so I was with a number of county commissioners yesterday at an unrelated at an emergency communications armor radio meeting and we were discussing has anybody received anything official
looking from the state legislature how this all is supposed to play out? there's a lot of unknowns and and everybody said no and it is um Mitch Lens who's chair of the um region what are we region nine or whatever um it
will be a topic for discussion because it's kind of you know southeast Minnesota counties at the fall meeting now I don't remember when that fall meeting is I don't have a date in on mine but it will be discussed there because we're kind of all in the same uh
it We're we're physically all in the same area and we're all at different levels. Commissioner Meyer. >> Yep. I um Ron Gandrew the sheriff was here also Ben emergency management and I had reached out to them um really asking them from a public safety perspective.
What did they think Ron or one of you would you be willing to share kind of some of the stuff that we talked about yesterday because it's it made a big difference to me. >> Good morning. >> Morning. I would say when I first heard about
this proposed change in the with the legislature that I was there, no, we don't we don't need rifles being uh carried out in the in the woods hunting. We we've done shotguns forever. But in talking to the other sheriffs and in
talking to especially my staff uh the people that are um on the SWAT team on our ERT and that are most of them are the same that are a range officers uh they they changed my mind on the on the
topic. I don't uh I'm not against it any longer and there's a number of reasons, but uh it is true that you know rifles the the bullets will go a lot farther, but it's really again like um the man said earlier, it's on the
shooter. You need to know where you're shooting, whether it's an officer on the street. You know, I can't just shoot. I got to make sure what's in the background. And that's whether I'm shooting a deer that's injured or thank I have have to shoot at a person, but I got to know the background. I got to
know the back stop. Um, Wisconsin's had rifles um allowed for as long as I can remember. We don't have issues that I know of u with shots coming across the river or anything. We're right next to them. Um the the
accidents that we see that we respond to over my 39 years with the sheriff's office is usually somebody my age trying to go out in the woods and hasn't for a year and they fall down or they fall out of the treeand. >> I mean we respond to that more than
anything. Uh those that um do get shot, I think uh the majority of them that you read in the paper, they're usually shot with their own gun because they were a little >> careless. careless. Something happened, you know, they fell or or whatever. Um,
I don't recall any incidents in Winona County, like I say, 39 years where somebody accidentally shot another person out in the woods. So, I think I think it's on the hunter. They need to be safe. They need to be cautious whether they're carrying that gun or they're carrying a handgun or
whatever. Um, like I say in in talking to to my guys especially that are on the range and uh go to school for this. They're they're for it and they they changed mine.
>> Good. Thank you. >> No, thank you. Sheriff, is there is there more that you wanted to say? >> No, I just wondered if there was any questions and maybe I explained everything but I think I left it open. The big thing is and I did have discussions with both our state legislature and and uh senator and I
said gee thanks uh like I say I start right from the premise of what other law am I as a county commissioner I don't write laws we follow the laws >> and and we interpret the laws that they they pass and I said what other what other instance have you allowed me to deviate from state law
>> and um the pressure was I a comment was made that county because of the city of Rochester they lobbyed to get this exemption in there. So, so this legislature put that in there. Um but but like you just said, um the enforcement and this this young
gentleman pointed out if you're doing something wrong with a gun there, it's a fel it could be a possible felony uh with with or without uh the rules. We already have rules on the books. Um but the enforcement and there's no uh as was pointed out also our deer zones and I'm
not a hunter. I've got that old 22 that my dad left us as kids. Um, >> rifle. >> Is it a rifle? >> Oh, okay. But I can only do one shot. >> And I'll tell you point blank, I have to have a screwdriver to pull the shell casing out because it doesn't >> because it doesn't sound safe.
>> It doesn't eject. You know, I just got to pull it out and then I can do another shot. Um but the enforcement and there's no revenue stream attached to it to allow for because an ordinance the sheriff would have to the county would have to in um enforce um state law DNR
or whoever you know would have to >> Yeah. They're putting it on us. >> Yeah. No no no revenue stream. Um and and and if we went to just shotgun, what would be the what would be the penalty? We would have the the right to enforce a penalty. Of course, already if it's if
it's uh mischievous or wrong, there's a felony. But would we have the right? I know DNR at can take hunting privileges away and different uh actions and such. Would we would we have that authority? I don't want that authority, but again, it's it's all these things you got to
think about if you do put an ordinance in place. >> I would say if there's an ordinance, there's a fine that goes with it and then of course we go to court and the judge could hold the fine or change it. >> Yeah. Spend more money than the fine is. So, I know, you know, we've heard a lot of arguments for and against it. Some of
them I decided I don't think that's really true. Some of them I think no, they got a point. But when I talked to particularly Mr. Plinger, our emergency manager, he said that Wisconsin allowed rifles in 2013. Right. So Wisconsin has
had not just a total but also a per capita decrease in shooting incidents whilst hunting and the bringing on of the rifles in 2013. It it did not change the trend line and in fact they say
exactly what one of our folks said is that there are basically four rules and they really focus more on hunter education. Um, and that was all hunting. But when it comes to specifically deer hunting, again, the trend line for the last 10
years is still less incidents of people accidentally getting shot, not more. And when I looked at their reports from 2013 and 2014, when they first started allowing rifles, um, there were, first of all, the vast
majority of accidents happen under 50 yards. like the from the muzzle to the guy that got shot, it's not a long distance. And that remained true even after they had started to allow rifles. >> So that didn't really change. And again,
it confirmed something that the sheriff said, which is the majority of incidents are people hurting themselves, shooting themselves, or shooting somebody in their party but not shooting people at a further distance who aren't involved in
the hunting. And in 2014, once rifles were allowed, still the ri the incidence of shooting with a shotgun was twice that of what it was with the rifle. So what I was really I mean my bias as with what the sheriff said was,
"Oh, probably we don't need this. We should stick with the shotguns." But I really couldn't despite my bias, I couldn't really find evidence to support that position. So, I I uh want to say to the folks who have come and spoken to us
wanting us to go back to the shotgun rules that I I too have a bias towards public safety, we share that in common. But the more I tried to research the topic to support that, I really couldn't justify it.
>> Yeah. I I was just going to mention too I some I hunted for a long time then I didn't hunt for 10 years and then I hunted for quite a few years again. And the thing that that always gets me about being out in the woods deer hunting is when I hear
one I should say I never hear one shot. I always hear that gun just got emptied and now over here that gun got emptied. And I think the point with the rifle is most of them if they're going to have a a rifle are going to have a scope on it
and you're going to hear one shot rather than five shots. Um we're going to have less injured deer and we're going to have more less shells being uh spoon around the woods. >> Sure. Yeah. Commissioner Vley. >> Um first of all for the audience just to
repeat what Commissioner Ward said. We're not making any kind of final decision. This is the committee of the board. This is our work session. This is a discussion. I think what we're going to discuss is do we move it to continue to move forward or do we stop? Because if we do nothing, the default is we move
from a shotgun zone to a rifle being allowed. >> Correct. >> But it's in it's not technically until 2026. The this season currently will be shotgun only in >> they've given us time to review this which is gracious.
>> Yeah. So we do have time. Yeah. And like Commissioner Elz, I received a lot of feedback both ways. There's very valid points on both sides. After our last meeting, I was I had a wonderful two-hour conversation in the parking lot um after our meeting almost entirely
about this issue. >> Very valid points and there's been a number of emails. I appreciate everybody who came today. These are all very valid and excellent points, etc. Speaking for myself only as one of five, I'd like to continue the conversation. Um, this doesn't go through the planning
commission, correct? This is another decision. >> Um, I'd like to see if we could have a public hearing and give people a little bit more time to come and make the presentations both for or against. But if there are three commissioners who don't want to move forward, then the process stops today. But I'd like to
continue the conversation because I'm still getting new information and there's very valid points both ways. So, I feel like I'm learning a lot. I learned a lot in two hours outside in the parking lot and I've learned a lot since then as well, but I feel like there's more to learn as well.
>> Okay. I guess my preference would be I I want to hear from my neighboring counties and and there's a lot of points that are unclear um about the enforcement in the in the the rule. Uh I'm leaning towards following state law. That's what my job tells me to do. And
again, I'm I'm appalled that the legislators put it in our lap. um they didn't they didn't let us decide on marijuana or cannabis. No, we didn't have a choice there. Now, is that more important? I think uh again, that's a matter of opinion. Um so, I would like to hear more from my neighboring
counties, especially if they're going to discuss it at the regional meeting this fall. Uh we're we do have the the luxury of time um to to get more detail and make a a wiser decision. Um I I do appreciate the information. Um uh this is very important. You know, the amount
of lead. So, we talk about lead. Now, one thing I think that the DNR and the legislature is letting us down. So, if you drive a boat now, they've been put in a um uh license. I'm not crazy about it because it's another fee and it's another license, but they want to make
people educated how to operate their boats. We have a lot of people out there driving boats that don't know the rules of the the the water. So why with uh what Commissioner Meyer said with the the you know it's a lot of this accidental um shooting um why aren't
they upping the education uh component of hunting and you know you can go out in the woods today and take a rifle and you can shoot coyote and badger and or I don't know there's a season there. They live in Wisconsin shoot the badgers. Um but uh raccoons, snakes, I mean you can
take a rifle now and it it's not against the law. So what's sacred about the deer? And one of the things that that was pointed out to me is the culture of deer hunting has changed so much es even in southeastern Minnesota used to be the family got together. It was a social
event and and people camaraderie and everything. Now it's changed to who can get the biggest buck. it. We got to get the trophy, you know, we got to get the trophy animal and such. So, it just that whole concept of deer hunting has radically changed and it's very expensive. As as the young man pointed
out to me, I don't buy ammunition. It ammunition has gotten very expensive. During COVID, it was almost non-existent. You couldn't get Now, I don't know what tariffs what's tariffs going to do to ammunition, but it is expensive. So, um you know, like Ron said, the rifle, you'll hear one. Um, I
do have a bullet hole on the west side of my big uh uh farm shed that we have no idea where it came from. Uh, you know, but it's it's a bullet hole. Um, so it came from somewhere, but it didn't hurt anything. Uh, just gives me a little daylight pinhole that I can see
when I go into the shed. But I guess I would like to hold off uh being we have the luxury of time to get more detailed information and know what my neighbors are doing. >> I think that's fine. And I would support having a public hearing >> at some point. >> I don't have I appreciate the
willingness to let people speak and I want to hear what they have to say. >> There's a lot more to learn. >> I I reached out to several of my family members that are hunters um that supply me with deer sausage every year. So I value their opinion. Um
and he said if you can't hit a deer with a shotgun then you shouldn't be out hunting. So that was his opinion. Um, I did and I asked Miss Holty to I've gotten a couple emails. This one came in late last night. Um, from the Bluff Country Chapter of Minnesota Deer Hunters Association. So, that is an avid
group and they um this comes from Mr. Fitch and um, Miss Holy will uh, forward it. And they support Yeah, that should have come early this morning. They support the rifle. So, I mean, these organizations are are weighing in. I would agree. A public hearing at some
point in time um would be um appropriate. Miss Holty, if >> I could ask for clarification on timeline, when would you like it to come back? >> Well, do you can you pull up? Do you know when the AMC regional meeting is >> or can we just say after that? >> After that.
>> I can do that. >> Yeah, why don't we say after that because that should gather a lot of information from neighboring counties and everybody's got a little different take on this and different information. some of our neighboring counties have decided to to go back to >> not totally >> that region 9 will include a larger >> Yeah.
>> Right. But but I'm told that they some of the news articles said they did, but then I talked to some of the commissioners and said they really didn't. So, one of the conversations I had was about um using a ri I have a brother-in-law who hunts elk, you know,
out west and of course they use high powered rifles and he talks about the distance that you are sighting that animal and how it's so much it is not the same thing as shooting inside a forest where you kind of need to see the deer deer at 50 yards, right? So, our
topography is very different than Blue Earth County, no Freeborn County, which is one of the counties that went back to the shotgun rules, but they are one where you would have very long flat distances without trees to stop act as a
back stop for bullets. So, I think that kind of identified why potentially they chose to make that decision. >> Sure. Well, I could have a lasso season. And I get some that go right through my by my front door evening. They prune my apple and pear trees. And so they're
they're serving a purpose, I guess. Okay. So, Miss Holty, you have Well, it'll be um this fall sometime. And and if we do elect to have a public hearing, we'll make it uh you know, known. Okay. But but people, please keep uh providing us with information. It's very valuable.
We have some very experienced people and and good uh good facts, good statistics. Um, Ben Klinger, do you have something burning on your mind from it? >> Okay, >> the sheriff covered it. >> Okay. Okay, good. I wanted to give you an opportunity. >> Thank you for coming. >> Yeah. Anything else?
All right. Okay. Thank you. Good discussion. Um, we'll move on to 10.2 update and next steps for the joint public safety facility and law enforcement. Now, if if anybody wants to leave, course here we're talking about guns and guns and people law enforcement
center. Um, so Commissioner Vegley, >> unless Miss Holy, do you want to start off with any? >> Feel free. >> Um, I was glancing over the comments that city council member Hima had shared with us. >> Um, I think
>> if and we didn't have much time between meetings. Could we call Mr. back and just let him not half hour more, but could you just maybe I think the last two or three paragraphs is is important for the county board to hear as we tee up this conversation.
>> I agree. Yeah, >> that's okay with >> Yeah. And I have a couple comments about the uh the snag one and two. I didn't quite understand that, but yeah. >> Yes, there we go. >> Thanks for staying, Jeff. >> Thanks for the opportunity. And uh I did time it. I was thinking I had three
minutes, not two. So, my my apologies. >> What What's the city council give people? >> Yeah. Well, we we're we do two, but we'll extend it, you know, >> because we understand that some of us are verbose like me. >> Um, you know, I I could I can finish this
out in about one minute or I can respond to questions. It's probably for continuity sake. Maybe I'll just finish it out. >> Do both. >> Yeah, go ahead. Finish it out. >> Both. Okay. So, I left off at the bottom of the first page. There's only two. And uh the last paragraph on the first page
is where I where I stopped. And so the city at their August 4th meeting chose to move forward with pre-esign at the central school site. Snag one uh precluded that the design would use city
money for the for the design, not state funds. Snag 2 made the central school site the logical choice because a single site had to be declared for other uses of the grant money which were allowed.
Back page. This however is not a done deal. The city is simply moving from step four to step five in a 20step process to gather the data to see if the central school site is feasible for both fire and police uses. It might be or it
might not be. If it is not, the city can stop the process at any time and can revisit other options which may include the probuild site or the current LEC. Not to be presumptuous, but this also gives the county time to do research as you authorized and gather data about the
current LEC to evaluate your needs and priorities. The city has already resubmitted the grant applications for further funding from the state for the 2026 legislative session session, which is the normal bonding year. Um the city council will continue the city and
county will continue to be partners. I think we have learned at this point through our priorities and needs overlap in many areas. They also differ in a few. The city needs a home for city police and it needs to build a new fire station. The county owns the current LEC building that needs updating and
remodeling as well as has other services that with space needs. That does not mean we are at odds or that we won't eventually find a solution that continues the law enforcement partnership we have enjoyed for over 20 years. My hope is that both the city and county pursue the information they
currently need and by June of 2026 at the latest, we meet again to share the data along with any funding updates from the state to decide what makes sense collectively for a step six. Meanwhile, Chad and Marine have scheduled a meeting to update the lease for the current LEC.
Lastly, it is easy to get frustrated by this process, but it helps me to remember it is complicated for a reason. To make sure buildings are built properly and efficiently and that they will last and be a worthy investment for the taxpayer that is funding them for
all of our benefits. Thanks for your time. So, that's I tried to basically take, you know, there's a whole uh PowerPoint and presentation that was at the city council meeting. I wanted to try to cut to the chase partially in response to my being here
on the 22nd. Some things were raised. Commissioner Elling, you know, kind of raised, you know, where's the information that we thought we were going to have. I didn't have it at that time. And so in now that I did have it, I felt just for courtesy and communication, I'd return and give you
that summary. Obviously, the full amount of information is available to you as well. >> Mr. Vley, >> um, I have different comments. Does have any other comments for Mr. Heman? Well, I got a couple qu I'm still a little unclear. Um, so always uh and snag one
always was talked about pre-esign, but now I think you said in this document that you the city cannot use the any of the 7.5 million that the legislature authorized last year. You have to spend your own money to come up with a design
>> pre-esigned pre-esign. See the the actual vocabulary is is in the larger presentation. When we put in the application, it it listed that the money would be used for all the facets of design. However, there's there were like four committees of the state. Three said
fine. One said no, pre-esign is not included in the word design. So therefore, you can't use the 7.5 million. The city had already authorized, I think, 180,000 for pre-esign of a fire department. So, we were able to pivot and use that, but it
it it made it more even more complicated because obviously the county was quite clear that no, they were not obligate any funds towards pre-esign. So, we had to shift and use just city money. >> I brought that up, >> but that 180 it seems like the contract was a lot more than that.
>> Actually, for pre-esign, it's not going to be because and that the money can be used that 7.5 million can be used for the other aspects. >> County isn't okay. county isn't on the line for any >> on that moment and is why I was so cautious because you can with best intentions but all of a sudden you hit
the snag and now we're on the hook for something right very very clear that I didn't want that to happen now the the 7.5 has to be used for a joint so a city is pursuing fire and police but you may
come back at some point in time for police and county sheriff but it has to be two two entities to be >> it has to be two entities. So it can be two entities within the city or it can be county and city but it has to be two two entities.
>> Okay. It has to be two commissioner. >> Um I want to start off by talking about the Lona Post front page lead article. Was it last Wednesday I think that I believe so >> city votes to split with the county. >> Right. as sometimes is the case, uh, newspaper headlines tend to
sensationalize the story, but if you actually read the story, it's much more factual. I don't think that we've split like some, you know, dramatic Hollywood, you know, romance. This is just the city doing what I think makes complete sense is they're going to look at a plan B option based on what the state legislature didn't do. And I think it
makes perfect sense to to do what we've been talking about doing anyway, is to have the county explore a plan B option as well. So, I think that it's not so much the city has decided to split. It's just that we're going to study the possibility of other options that we may
decide that the best option is to keep the two law enforcement agencies together and we may decide to go our different ways, but we both need more information about plan B. So, the breakup is not um happening. Uh we're just looking at other options. I like the in the recommend in pages 171 and
172 I think 170 171 >> the administration has recommendations I I support both of those and in terms of what we asked when we develop a contract with Klein McCarthy um I think this is already included in the bullet points
but just to make sure is I'd like to ask Klein McCarthy to do two things what would it um look like to remodel the LEC to meet as many of our current needs needs as possible that are not just law enforcement and we can't put everything that's currently somewhere else in the
in the community in there but and then to also look at what would it look like to remodel it so that the city police department can stay there as well if that makes sense and if the rest of the commissioners would be okay with that >> well I guess go ahead comms and I think we heard from Mr. be that it
should probably be one or the other, but it can't really be both. >> Why not? >> We already had this conversation. That was like months ago. >> It's going to cost twice. I mean, they will come up. >> We can I mean, but we can ask again for that opinion, but I mean, we already
It's my recollection that we already had that conversation. >> Are we ti My question is, are we ti uh tied into Klein McCarthy? Have they done some of the They've done >> We're not Mr. Luffy. >> Yeah, >> we're not ti I mean I we have no
allegiance to Klein McCarthy. >> We don't. Um and I'm not going to speak Mr. Ley, please. Um I'm not going to speak on his behalf. My understanding is part of the logic is because Quin and McCarthy already have knowledge of the building. They've done a lot of work
with the current building. And so again, I'm I would like Mr. Lefy to address your question. Yeah, we have no ties to them, but they did a lot of extensive work when they did the jail study. So, they already know the current LEC. They got plans. They did digital 3D of, you know, like above the ceiling to see how
pipes and uh HVAC could be ran. So, they already have a lot of that detailed >> information and knowledge. They already did the work. They don't need to redo it. >> They did. Yeah. Huh. >> And a lot of the work they' be doing is more of a space study that we kind of talked in unless we want to get into
more detail, but >> but we don't know what that's going to cost. We haven't asked them for a >> we I don't have that information in front of me. A while ago, we asked for a cost for a space study and I don't have that figure in front of me. >> I thought it was 87,000. >> Question for >> Yes.
>> So the old jail cells, they all exist, >> correct? >> Still there. Um, and that's the most expensive part to try to reuse that portion of the building to >> I think that was 350,000 roughly there >> to demolish those cells to make it more
of an open space if needed. >> Um, so I >> 25 what's in the capital. >> I think about this as a taxpayer that we have this building, we have the square footage, we're not acquiring more property, we're not taking more money off tax roles. I think it's wise for us
to try to reuse that space and recapture that square footage that we already have. Now, it might not be cost-effective to remodel it. Um, but it's there and you know, I'm remodeling a 1936 house and is it smart, but it's a nice house.
Um, we own that space. I think we should reuse it and it does increase a lot of square footage that potentially we could share with the city. Um, and as a taxpayer, I would like to keep that together. >> Commissioner,
>> so to address Commissioner Begley's point, um, we are where we're at with the city, there's still kind of two things going on that we would be there ourselves. It's the sheriff's department and other maybe administration or finance move over there. And the second
one is what it would take for both departments, the sheriff and the city police to be there. So I I it was my recollection that we did sort of talk about what we would be asking for in the study. So is is it possible to ask for the study to do two things?
>> Yes, I believe I don't have the study in front of me what Klein McCarthy did, but I think we had option one and option two. One was more if Winona PD left, what could the county do with the space? And if Winona PD stayed, you know, what would that look like? because I think we had hoped to have a
better like to be able to pick one or the other by July of this year, but I don't think we can. And I do think that you're right. We kind of want to know what both is. July is behind it. >> It's August, so that's right. >> Yeah, we can. >> Yeah. Well, I think we need to clarify any bids or any uh what this is going to
cost moving forward. >> And I think all the recommendation is is to get a proposal for a contract. >> Yep. Um, we're not going to commit to any amount of money, but I think it would be good to know if uh if the contract would include, you said option
A, option B, like what that would cost or what would it cost. I think it's important that we need more information before >> check it out. A cost this, A and B cost this. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> And we I think need to continue to talk with the city in terms of like what they would need, but I think we also begin with a county focus. But I want to keep
the lines of communication open with the city and I want people to think that the that we we're done talk we're not done talking we're still talking actively talking >> y because yes okay so I did have a question about the recommendations from administration so pro the first bullet
point is to provide direction for the administrator to coordinate with the city manager to define functional needs for the le facility so that would be based on if both departments were still there >> and This would iron out the I mean like
needs versus wants. I mean >> basically for that space that's there. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> All right. Yeah. >> Um I did have some other questions kind of like I'll go for them now. Um so we have we're after this committee of
the board meeting we're going to have a budget session and today what we're talking about is our capital request and we have almost 4 million 3.9 for the LEC um that isn't remodeling but it is to finally fix the HVAC and to put in
sprinklers and um to remove the jail cells. So, I saw that the the city is asking for a five-year contract. Can the request the changes that we're asking for in the capital
projects, can they be done while the building is occupied or do we have to move both departments in order to do these changes? >> So, depending on what we anticipate doing, there are parts that can be done.
Um but there are a lot of it cannot. Um we would need to have discussion with the city u and the sheriff's department about how that could work. But I need a better understanding um from someone who is more technically skilled to tell us
what will it take for us to do any of these. Um it's just not my wheelhouse. I'd need to get more information. >> So would this stuff be included then in the request to climb McCarthy or No, that's a space study. How will we get a better work plan on the capital
projects? Or should I just shut up until after we've approved it? >> No. Um I will work with uh Mr. Kramer, Mr. Liffy, the sheriff, um all applicable parties to get the information that we need. A lot of it's going to come from vendors because they're going to know what it takes to
make that happen. Um I just don't have that knowledge to share right now. But my concern is with doing a five-year contract with the city police if it keeps us from being able to do repairs on the building that need to be done. >> So, I just wanted to be mindful of that.
And I I will just say that from my perspective at this point, given the uncertainty of so much, so much with the state, so much with funding, so much with what the city's decisions are going to be, I really feel like um the county
should go ahead and make the repairs that have to be made at the building, understanding that we don't want to lose that investment in that building. But if the city fails to get any of the additional funding that they want, we
still have a functional building that they can be part of if they, you know, they want as their choice. >> Commissioner Veel, >> um, Commissioner Meyer makes good points about a five-year lease agreement. I think it's possible for Miss Holty to
talk with the city about ways to opt out of that with six months notice, etc. We want to talk with our city partners or we could also do one-year lease agreements etc and not be locked into it because to Commissioner Olsen's point we should try if if we're going to go the county only route we should be able to
move sooner rather than later but this is not going to happen tomorrow by any means but even to do something two years from now a year from now we have to get we have to start the discussion and I I think that we should with uh with Klein McCarthy assume the state will not give any more funding. So, we need to look at
those those two options. Option A and option B, assuming there's no more. I do have a concern about actually doing any work before we have the entire plan figured out. I don't want to have to like redo like et like to have the whole plan figured out, but we can set the money aside, but I don't want to start
doing work and then have to redo it later. I've done that at my own house sometimes, symbol of moments, etc. I wish I not had done that before I did this, etc. Yeah, I don't want that either, but I really don't want us to have a fire over there without suppression fire suppression system. And
I feel like there's kind of no end. I mean, we've been fooling around for several years now and there's really kind of no end in sight. The decisions keep getting kicked down the road. Um, and I understand that Mr. Ubel said that he would keep applying for state bonding money, you know, as until they wouldn't
stop him. But we will have to make a decision at some point and and I don't know that that we can leave that as open-ended. So, um I sort of feel like no, we should probably go ahead with the 4 million and get the building fixed. Um
okay. Um this project it's all about law enforcement and I don't think the city needs to do law enforcement different than the county does. I mean the county is the overarching thing and I the rules are the rules the laws are the laws. So it's law it's a law enforcement function
and I think we need to keep that in in mind that it's wishes wants desires yes but it how do we provide the function of law enforcement um the jail cells I I want to minimize the expense I think we could hold our county board meetings in
there and use that space or you know we rent storage for documents can we put some dehumidifier system or something and use it as exists. I I really struggle with tearing something out that could be functional. I don't know.
Again, and I don't remember how big a space that is. What? Again, we'd have I'd have to look and >> we could get a tour. I'm sure we could get a tour. >> We could do a tour again. Um but again, I you know, being that we rent space to store stuff, secured stuff. Well, what's
more secure than a locked jail cell if we can make it I know there's humidity and and things like that, but you know, I got two dehumidifiers running home and I empty them twice a day. Um, I think that's possible. Um, we talk about uh having to move out. I see sheriff
deputies out in my neighborhood and they've got awesome mobile offices. They really do. We have we have put the investment in to my knowledge into those uh patrol cars where they can sit there and do the all their work. So I don't
know if uh police people can do that but I think you know I think the the idea today of an office is overrated. Look how many people work from home or work remotely or such. The whole concept of having to have brickandmortar office
space is kind of antiquated. I mean, like I say, I can drive by and see my uh patrol deputies out there doing their and I sometimes if I'm walking or riding my bicycle, I say, "Hey, what you doing today?" "Oh, I'm doing my reports, but I got to stay on top of the hill because I got connectivity. I can't go to the
bottom of the hill," which is fine. So, again, um if they need, you know, we we can rearrange the furniture. We Commissioner Olsson talked about remodeling his house. I remodeled a couple houses and you know we one time we climbed a ladder up where we had the microwave and the and a refrigerator
upstairs because we were gutting the downstairs course we didn't have any children at the time but it you know you make things you you make things work because we know it's going to be short term and such but I guess we need some more information what it's going to cost even to get the quotes from Klein McCarth Klein McCarthy and um you know
go from there. So is that what you >> we need to continue to look at the exploration of consolidating you brought up the documents but the other department >> department >> we've had this building >> it need if the city chooses to be there is going to set it one direction if the
city chooses not to be there sets it another direction and so I think either way we have a tactical advantage that we can repurpose that building for our better needs or we continue to receive
receive the funding and the income and help the city as well as the county at the same time. Those are really to me where it needs to be. So, whatever the time frame is really going to be placed on the city to determine what we decide to do with that piece of property. So, we're back to some sort of a time frame
to say, hey, we're going down this road or that road. What's that time frame look like? And then I think we need to heavily explore consolidation. Well, I think Klein McCarthy in their own knowhow they they can put timelines to some of the some phases of the project too. So yeah, Commissioner V.
>> So we don't make motions in the committee of the board. Is there a consensus that we'll we'll move forward with the recommendations on 70171? >> I support that. >> And Miss Holy, is that clear to you? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. >> The whole key is public don't put a
stress on our law enforcement. Behave yourselves. We don't need any crime or criminals or mischievous activity. I mean, it really is um the community that puts the draw on it. So, if people behave themselves, we won't need as much
uh law enforcement. Um right, Ron? I mean, if everybody just behave themselves. All right. 10.3. Receive, report, and discuss process for future Apple Blossom Park 2011. >> Thank you, Jeff. >> Thank you,
>> Ross. Good morning. >> Morning. >> Um so as the pavilion project at Apple Blossom Park kind of concluded um we had been in contact with the city of Lacrescent as kind of a potential
partner in different activities and uh we did receive an inquiry from the city uh on whether the county would be interested in turning the park over to them. Um in after we received that inquiry, we
did some file research, went through the documents that we had uh and uh I had a discussion with Miss Holdy. Uh it raised a number of legal questions that we referred to um Mr. CRS uh to research
and provide the background uh that we felt was necessary for the board to to understand the the process that would be involved to do that as well as the information on whether you wish to explore that opportunity. So, uh Steve,
did you want to take from >> I could I could describe it if you want. >> Is is there a desire to go through Mr. Cran's presentation or was there? >> Well, put it bluntly, there's no way in I'm going to allow the city of Lacrescent to annex any of Winona County
and my homeowners and property. I've actually been uh solicited by that most uh new development on top of the hill. They would like to get out of the city and go back to the township. So, I mean, I'm not going to ask citizens to be put in that phase of annexation. Absolutely not. So,
>> I think that I think that the immediate question is we probably don't need Mr. Crayons to summarize. Yes, >> you did a lot of homework. >> It was in the in the packet. Yeah. >> And I would say thank you because thank you both for all the work that you've done on it because it's an excellent document. I mean it gives a lot of
history. >> Yeah. >> Commissioner V. >> Um uh Commissioner Ward gave me an earful. Um I want to talk about some of >> Give my county away. Don't give my part of the county. >> So I want to give some more background and I also wanted to introduce there is a member of the Lac Crescent City
Council here, Terresa O'Donnell Ebner. I don't um I didn't >> I didn't have a question for her, but later on if we have questions, we can maybe invite her to come up and speak. >> And thank you for coming. >> Thank you for coming as well. Um it's great to have two different uh city council members come to today's meeting.
So this process began when we were discussing Apple Blossom Park and the DNR grants and the proposals that came in way over budget, etc. Um, I began a conversation with Miss O'Donnell Edner about a whatif scenario because I was
interested in who is best positioned to take care of the park because that is a long ways from most of our other county services and functions and I don't care who necessarily owns it as long as it meets the original intent of the park and that can be that can be maintained.
I was asking a general what if like theoretically is it even possible and if not then the conversation could stop and then Marine spoke with Ross who spoke with Mr. trends and we have a very long report which by the way is fantastic. This is way more information than I was looking for but it's better to have too
much than not enough. So this is fantastic. I also didn't realize that a discussion of possibly transferring the park would trigger annexation talks and I wasn't aware of that. Now that is I think a valid question the the topic of
orderly annexation because there is going to be some kind of conflict in the future not a conflict complicated discussions between the city of Lrescent and Dressback Township etc. But um it's is it possible to disentangle annexation from the park or is are they it sounds
like they're all mixed together. >> Uh well the annexation of the private parcels does not have to occur with annexation of the park. It it just uh creates a situation in which uh historically you know adjacent
municipalities tend to uh exert their their desire to uh annex and and that could end up being a process that we can't just veto >> um >> that would end up
decision. >> Okay. Um, go ahead and put another question where I stood with you. We were both concerned about the city of Winona's annexation of that Wilson Township property many years ago. So, I understand where you're coming from on that 100%. And it should
but this would the idea is this would be orderly versus the string of balloon thing that happened then. But I was just I was interested theoretically in discussion of would the city of Lresen be better positioned staffing wise? literally it's what five minutes from
the city boundary etc or 10 whatever and do they have because asking our staff to go down there and do more maintenance but and but I also want to maint maintain the original intent of the park a more basic a more what's the term primitive not an overly developed city
park you know with water slides and all that silliness the idea could could we do both etc so it was just a theoretical discussion a what if and then then it triggered a whole bunch of other questions as well so that's where that came from. So, I'm to blame for part of this discussion. Then, Miss Sadon Lamar
talked with the city staff is and then that's where that conversation goes. So, I need to own this one. >> You definitely got my blood pressure up. >> Yep. >> Um because I have some history with the city of Lac Crescent when uh the Dakota Dresbeck was trying to create a sewer district. >> Yep.
>> And they and it probably would have been most costeffective to run a sewer line, you know, create a small municipal. I don't think anybody else was on the board at the time. Create a small municipal city uh sewer uh just run it down along the railroad tracks into the city of Lac Crescent and then it shoots
across the river into and they don't even treat their own. They ship it to Lacrosse. >> Yeah. >> But again, the political uh landscape of the city of Lacrescent at that time and I don't know if it's changed was we won't consider anything unless we annex
the properties. And there again, the the that's kind of what the project fell apart. The city Dakota and Darzbeck had wanted nothing to do with um being part of the city of Lacresen. So I've got some history there of of potential annexation uh issues.
>> And so speaking for myself and then I'll let others speak is that I'm still interested in if we could have a discussion about the park only, but if it would trigger other other things that we couldn't control, then that realizes a valid concern. Maybe we should step back from that. But um if the question is for the full board, do you want to
continue it or just say no thank you and then end the conversation today? I know where Commissioner W. >> Yep. No, thank you. >> Yeah, she gave me an >> No, thank you. I think the park is like it was intended. It's just kind of a a a
focal point. There's some trails and and you probably should cut down some trees so you could see the river valley a little bit better and stuff minimally, but I think it was designed to be a minimal uh maintenance type of uh reference point. Um so I think you know Winona County is quite capable of
keeping it at a a minimal maintenance type of park. >> Madam Chair, can I ask Councilman Council Person O'Donnell a question? >> Oh, okay. And the question is, do you think that Lac Crescent would be willing to consider uh first of all, you know,
annexation of the park without the other parcels or second of all even just an arrangement with the county in terms of park maintenance? Um I think it's a lovely park. I'm thinking that frankly Lacrescent would do a better job than we do taking care of it.
>> I'm interested in your thoughts. >> Yeah. and and I was hoping I would have just a couple minutes to talk with you to give you a little bit of background from Lac Crescent's point of view if I can share that. Sure. >> Um if that's okay. Um um I'm in the middle of my second term on the
Lacrescent City Council. So I don't know the history of some of those other other conversations. Um but I I grew up in Rushford. I've gone to Farmers Park, you know, for years and I was a Winona State
student that uh learned about wild flowers at Farmers Park and all of that. I serve on our park and wreck commission and I helped to create our long-term plan document from 2022 that covers all of our parks and there's a detailed
summary in here and it speaks to the Apple Blossom plan and was reviewed as we worked on our long-term plan. Um, and so where we started with this is that we would love to have a conversation just between the two entities about the
parks. even if nothing changes, it would be good to have a conversation about what are your long-term plans, what are our long-term plans, because I think you'd understand um a little bit better that one of our long-term goals was to create a trail system, a hiking trail
system that would create a loop um around and provide a lot of opportunity for those um hikers that love to be able to explore all areas. You'll see in the plan the talk um we have a north end park um that is by that development.
It's not developed yet, but the plan was to put a trail through that that would hook up to some other trails. The plan speaks to cooperating with Winona County to create a crosswalk across the highway to get to Apple Blossom Park. So again, you're creating this network of trails.
Um so that's where our inquiry came from. um not not because of um any other you know details but I guess the the discussion about the pavilion was of interest to us because we do think that would be wellreceived by those that we
know use the area. We agree with you under development uh the minimalization of any kind of development at that park. We separate our um park and trail systems into our parks and then we have Bluffland preservation areas and we're
very dedicated to that. Very dedicated to that. So So we understand the idea of keeping that as pristine as possible. It's not something that even if we partnered with you that we would be looking to to overdevelop or or do
anything extensive there. Um, in fact, I'm in the Lions Club and we helped plant trees up at Apple Blossom Park a couple years ago. And so, um, that's part of of the effort that's underway. Um, so we are we are focused on that. I
think the conversation would be good. Um, quite honestly, until I read the report, um, you know, we never in any conversation I've had, annexation never came up. Never ever came up. Now, I understand in a thorough review that
that makes sense because you're stepping back and going big pictures. What's you know, what's the implication of doing this? So, so I understand that it's in there, but I can tell you that it was never part of our conversation. It was always park maintenance cooperation and
things of that. So, I think at this point it would be best for us to try to develop that conversation and learn from each other. And then if there are some concerns about the annexation, in my mind, I would transition that to the county attorney and the city
attorney to have those discussions and and figure out where that plays a role, if at all. Um, so that's my thought on it. Um, I know that park is special to a lot of people. Um, and I'll just I'll just wrap it up by telling you that um,
Lacrescent's working on a indigenous um, history project and trying to to learn from the Ho Chunk people and the Prairie Island people about what was there before white settlement. And we took a group of Ho Chunk youth to the Bluff.
Many of them had never been there before. It took their breath away. I mean these were lacrosse black river area kids and they came to the blufftop and you see that vista and their adviserss were explaining to them the history of the region and what it meant
to the Ho Chunk people and and you know I think that's the same reverence that George How and others had for that space. So, we understand the importance of that space and I hike that area often and and I love it and when you take people up there, it does it takes your
breath away. Um, so just know that that's our intent is a good conversation, good planning between two entities and then let's see what the discussion leads to is is my point of view. So, any other questions for me?
>> You got money in the budget for a well? >> Okay. Um, I don't know that a well I don't know >> water issues because I can ride my bicycle over there but I can't go to the bathroom and I can't get a drink of water. >> Yeah. So it limits
>> it does. Um although quite honestly we um some of our other trails we have portaotties that we put in place and they're they're adequate and people that are hikers and bikers usually are good planners
>> and so they're making um arrangements. They know the area, but it's a way to I mean, the last time I was up there, I'm thinking about there was a car from New Jersey and I had I stopped and had a conversation with those people and said, "Welcome to the area." You know, what
brings you here? And so, those are the things that I think can benefit both Winona County and Lacrescent. Um, just having that welcoming and and information up there. You know, there's so many things you can do with QR codes and things like that where you can help
people learn about the region and they can take it all in visually, but then you can use a QR code to provide history and background and substance and um and help to understand um you know what that area was and why it's so important to preserve it. >> Sure. Commissioner,
>> Commissioner Ward, to your points about the water and the you know possibly some kind of bathroom facilities, even seasonal one, that's part of why I thought maybe Again, I I was interested in what's what's the best possible public use? Who who is best positioned
to maintain it and provide even more services keeping the original intent in mind. That's why like if you're talking about portaotties or other maintenance rather than add more to ours requires maintenance. >> It does. That's why I thought the city that's why it was just a theoretical brainstorming such and it turned into a much longer report which is very
helpful. >> Well, and and if I can add Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't >> for sure. I was not going I thought even before we bother or scare the folks at Dresbach is to find out is it even remotely possible if not then then just drop it completely. I would be interested in that idea of myself only
like the county parks and envir environment committee meeting with >> um the city and and maybe invite some dresbach folks. It's totally optional just to a conversation where there's nothing there's no >> right >> no binding decisions being made but just a just an ongoing discussion. Last week,
u myself, Ross Dunore, and some others, a subcommittee of the parks and environment committee met up at Apple Blossom to talk about things like prairie burns and other invasive species mitigation stuff like that. So, just to continue that conversation about what can we do to help provide the best
public benefit for that. And then the the last comment that speaks a little bit to what Dwayne was just talking about. Um we have a a part-time sustainability coordinator and he's Jason Lewigson and he's done an excellent job in getting grant dollars.
So we have some invasive species mitigation work going on in some of our bluffs um our park areas and it's it's going to be really helpful in the long-term health of that space. Um, and so that's again something that I think a
partnership on that. I know Annne Morris has been involved in that in the past, but with buckthorn management and all of those kinds of things. Um, native prairie planting, we've incorporated that in to almost all of our our park areas and and um water drainage, you
know, systems for the, you know, to have that percolate through. And so I know that's been a big part of our ongoing planning and continues to be that sustainability piece and that invasive species management. So we might be able to learn and help each other on some of
that too just in in conversation. So that's what that's what I would like to see is just at least that starting conversation and then report back to each side and kind of figure out what makes sense. Okay. That is just to run the idea by
the different parks committees. Would that be okay with the board? >> Yeah. You have my support. >> Careful what you put on the table >> because it it things grow eggs. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Put this at the parks parks to
parks committee, >> right? >> Okay. >> So, we can't decide now, but we can put it on the >> Miss Holy. Does that make sense? Is that like a future board action? >> Yes. Thank you for coming. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Stop and have lunch in Winona County.
>> Buy some. Do shopping. >> I will. >> We We appreciate >> the buildings. >> We appreciate the the revenue. >> All right. I think that wraps up >> the committee of the board. >> The committee of the board. >> Okay. Anything else? No. Now we're going
to go into uh discuss the 2026 draft capital budget. So do we adjourn the committee board? I'll move to >> Yeah, I'll second it. >> Okay. A motion made and seconded to adjurnn the committee of the board. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. Nay. Okay. >> We have a fiveminute break.
>> Five minute break. >> Thank you, ma'am. >> Y I got to find some scotch tape, too. >> You don't have any tape or anything. Good >> thing you added tape at the end. >> Yes. >> I got to find some scotch. >> My bowl here.