Uh before we start public comment, administrator Holty wants to tell us something about the documents in front of us. So please do so. So the first package, it starts with potential ideas
to use the 2025 SAHA. So that is from the May 13, 2025 county board packet. And again, all of this information was previously emailed to you, but it's relevant to the meeting. So I went ahead and printed it off. The
next document is dated July 22nd, 2025. It is item 7.1 um from that particular agendas which again is in relation to the SRA allocation. Um and that also includes the minutes
from that meeting that's stapled together. The next item is uh the Minnesota Department of Revenue 2026 statewide affordable housing aid documents. And then the last one is the email that was forwarded this morning at
701 which reflects the uh numbers uh for the only homeless shelters uh that Commissioner Bley asked me to share with the whole board. Thank you. >> So those are those documents and then uh county recorder Bamnik has supplied hard
copies of his presentation which is also being >> Thank you. Great. >> Thanks a lot. >> We begin our meeting with public comment period. So, if there is anyone in the audience that would like to share some thoughts
with us, I would encourage you now to step up to the microphone and tell us your name and your address for the record and then share your thoughts. Um, we allow two minutes for each person's public comment and there is a timer that
will appear on the screen. In addition to that, uh we also allow individuals who are participating online to uh share their thoughts in the public comment period. So if you are online and have something you'd like to tell us,
could you unmute yourself or raise your hand? I'm going to ask two more times in case there's anyone here in the audience or online that would like to participate in public comment. And for the third and final time, is
there anyone who would like to participate in our public comment period? Hearing no one, I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment period and move on to the rest of the agenda. Item three is the approval of some past
county board minutes. So move. I'll second that. Okay. Start. Commissioner Elsing has moved and Commissioner Vegley has seconded approval of county board minutes for February 24th, 2026 and a close session
that we had on March 3rd of 2026. Is there any further discussion? >> Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> If anyone's opposed, say nay. Passes unanimously. The next item is uh consent and approval
of the agenda. Um, so if anyone has adjustments to the agenda, um, could you share them with me? County Attorney Sonoman. >> Nothing for me. Thank you. >> Commissioner Vagley. >> Nothing. Thank you. >> Commissioner, >> nothing. Just a comment. >> Commissioner Horn,
>> I would like to pull 5.2 into a general business discussion. >> Sure. So, let's make it 6.0. >> Okay. And then a couple uh an AMC conference update and a announcement, please. Yep.
Administrator Holy. >> Nothing, Madam Chair. Okay. So, we have some slight adjustments to our agenda. It would be in order if you would like to approve the agenda. >> Don't move the approved agenda. Amended agenda. >> Okay. Commissioner Ward has moved. Commissioner Begley has seconded
approval of the agenda as it was amended. Is there any further discussion? >> It was me actually. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Really? >> Yeah. >> I didn't even look. I apologize. Commissioner Ward moved and Commissioner Elsing seconded approval of the agenda as it was amended. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Anyone oppose saying nay. >> The agenda is approved. Uh administrator Holty, could you read the consent comments for us into the record? 5.1 Accept certificate of performance
and authorized final payment for Cassad 21 grading and concrete surfacing. 5.2 was pulled. 5.3 approve take our daughters and sons to workday. 5.4 approve mitigation of existing parcel data to ISRY's parcel fabric platform.
5.5 approve contract with dripless region vector control LLC for vector control services. And 5.6 confirm payment of dispersements. I'll move to approve the remaining consent items and a quick comment about
the cost for Highway 21 7.5 million. But I'll move to approve the consent items. >> Concrete. >> Yep. Second. >> Last forever. >> I got it. >> Hey, Commissioner Vagely moves. Commissioner Elsing seconds approval of the uh consent business as it was read. Uh did you want to make a further
remark? No, I just No, you got it. About the cost of the highways. Yeah. Any further discussion hearing? None. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Anyone's opposed say Nate. Consent. Business is approved. We move on to general business. The first item
was previously 5.2 fund a uh approve funding portion of RAP plus program with opioid settlement funds. Commissioner Ward, you want to share some thoughts? >> Yes. Um uh I'm concerned about what we're doing
here with opioid funds and I I um of course the the world of AI generates a lot of information but attorney Sonoman was the one that helped so maybe she can provide some clarity. Attorney Sonoman was the one that helped negotiate the settlement. Where I'm drawing my
experience from is when we got the tobacco money. Um, we got a lot of money back then and and the companies that had made tobacco were forced to pay us and we use that money and some of that money went to really good things and some of that money went to really frivolous odd
things. So, in one of the articles that I pulled up, it's it's a um uh it's written by a drug policy analyst and um it's a best practices to prevent misuse of opioid settlement funds. And the one thing that it highlighted in
here was um there's an ex the national opioid settlement agreement includes exhibit E. And I've never seen I don't know that I've seen exhibit E, but it it stipulates a non-exhaustive list of approved uses centered on prevention,
treatment, and recovery from opioid addiction and harm reduction programs. And so and that's what we've been following. We we've we've we have those three pillars. Um but it also goes on and then supposed to use evidence-based education programs. Um but it does warn
us that um sub supplantation where new dollars are used to fund existing programs. They highly recommend against doing that. And that's I think what we're doing here is this again in this commentary and and the information
I've read is that opioid dollars are supposed to be for new programs, new things to address opioids. And I think I've been provided before a lot of the RAP people and I don't know
have the numbers but it tends to be more of a an alcohol problem than a drug problem. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't know if I've ever seen the breakdown. But here they're they're really they're really um the practice isn't it does go on to say this practice is not
explicitly prohibited, but still workarounds can undermine the intended goal of building service capacity through these funds. So again, I'm I'm a little um if somebody comes knocking at our door someday and wants to do a
thorough um audit of what we did with these dollars, it may be pointed that we shouldn't have done that. Um it says substituting existing funding rather than using the settlement dollars uh to enhance care. So may maybe we're doing
that. um opioid settlement stipulation dollars that funds should be used for specific opioid reme mediation purposes um financial controls and everything. They're they're quite concerned about that. Um, and then, uh, Minnesota, it
says in here, a handful of states that provide accessible and detailed descriptions of the use of these funds is the state of Minnesota, which has a dashboard allowing anyone to track what will be done with the 117 million awarded. The dashboard breaks down by
county outlining who received the money, for what purpose, whether the grantee is using an evidence-based program, and the outcomes of this spending. So, do are we on that dashboard? Are we using that dashboard or does it exist? >> The state does it for us. >> Yeah, I haven't looked at the dashboard
so I don't I don't know the answer to that problem, but I know I can respond if you to your other concerns. >> Well, and so it goes on and it does talk of how we scrutinize how we didn't scrutinize the tobacco dollars and maybe that was a pro problem and how they feel
there should be more scrutinization this time. uh misallocating dollars, undercuts um you know the uh rehab programs and so it and then the highlights is discourage supplementation I'm not saying that right supplantation
um >> supplementing >> yeah through clear spending principles prioritize external providers with efficiency and I know we've been asked that prohibit uh scrutinization uh support volunteer frameworks for evidence-based spending increase
spending transparency allocate a portion of the funds to innovate and emerging treatments. Invite independent spenders review, include community voices in spending decisions, and then there's a whole another report, but it's amazing what you can get with one click of a button, but and I take it with a grain
of salt, but it is it is truly an educational um process. So, >> Attorney Simon, did you want to respond? >> Yes, thank you. Um, well, first of all, you're correct. I had helped negotiate the settlement that resulted in um each
county and city and and the other entity actually receiving direct funding rather than asking for a grant, right? >> Which >> um >> big thank you >> big big thing, right? um and um have been involved with the RAP program from from the beginning. And RAP doesn't just
um cover people who have chem uh alcohol dependency. It substance abuse um which includes um other forms of chemical dependency. I put alcohol under chemical dependency. Um and for instance, many of our RAP
participants are also in our treatment court which um you have to have a diagnosed uh chemical um substance abuse uh uh issue in that. Um and the other component of RAP which is extremely
important is the mental health evaluation part. Um and um I think as we all noticed at the CJCC meeting um recently, which I had to leave a little early, uh behavioral health was the number one um uh issue. And those two
combined even back as as long as 2012 when we first looked at what was happening in our jail, and I know our sheriff and um jail administrator Buzzwell are here. Um uh and that's good you happen to be here today. is that um
the population of the jail have even back in 2012 about 75% and this was our own survey that we did um in CJCC about 75 to 80% have co-occurring disorders both chemical dependency and mental health. So the 60,000 that we're asking
for is a very small amount considering how much if you want to call it bang for the buck that you get um working with our partner Hayawatha Valley Mental Health Center. These folks then are uh given a mental health evaluation. They're evaluated at the beginning by
our jail intake worker for both substance abuse and mental health. And that's a a a what should I call it? A a sort of a general evaluation, but um it points them in the right direction. So um let
me get back to the supplemental part. I don't think and that that that article you're quoting um focuses on it it should go to new programs. Um it is going to new programs, but it also should go to and that was one of the the
ideas that we had when we talked about um in in terms of the negotiation that this money should also be used for effective programs and and and RAP is an effective program if if you saw the numbers, you know, in terms of the recidivism rate that that we have in our
numbers. Um so um it to me it would make no sense to put the money toward just only new programs when you have an effective existing program that um you know $60,000 makes a huge difference in these people's lives as well as um uh
and maybe I don't know if our relatively new human services director could talk about it because she worked in a re-entry program administered one in Wisconsin and and so I think 60,000 is not a big number. You help people. >> Well, I'm I'm not at this point in time
at this discussion, I'm not I'm not questioning the benefits and things of of RAP and everything, but if we're taking $60,000 today and this this opioid money is not is not forever. It will run out. So then are we as you
said, we've got a good program and it's it's working, but again, what was the intent? and you were the negotiator. So I am questioning if we're following what we negotiated for. And again, if some at some point in some time somebody comes back and says, "Hey, Winona County, you
used it's an existing program. So we are supplanting the money. We're taking opioid money, not direct levy money, which in a way is a good thing, but it's a one-time. So then 2027, 2028, how do we keep >> Well, it could be one time for the 18
years that it'll be >> well it seem that that seems a little questionable too. >> And I think also Commissioner Ward um those of us who are working with RAP and I add Jill Chaffy Chaffy right >> to that number.
>> Um we're we are always looking for other means to support these programs beyond the levy. Um and some yes the levy does support because you are or the county is paying for the jail intake worker and the jail social worker was also created.
Those are integral parts of RAP. But I must say the jail social worker does a lot more and so does the jail intake worker than just rap. But that's another story. >> Yeah. >> Um >> well I'm just putting us on record saying that I'm questioning it and at some point it comes back to bite us.
Well, and I appreciate that because I know there's, you know, the whole issue about fraud in the Department of Human Services. >> I'm very well aware of that and I think you and I have worked together for years enough to know that >> I am always looking for waste in things.
And so, we're not going to be putting these dollars. You know, it's it's efficient, it's effective, and we're not wasting. But maybe Jill has some there's a couple more points in your report that I need more information on. >> Okay. So, then we'll come back to you. Okay, that's fine. >> So, I concur with the thought. You know,
one of the biggest things that I always get scared of is we start to fund something, something changes, board changes, we lose sight of what it was, one time money, and then it becomes a necessity. Hey, don't cut me back. Make you feel bad. You know, the funds dried up. And that that's the scary part. Once
it gets started, it's hard to retract. That's what always scares me about these programs. And we see it all the time. and I watch it when I sat on all these other boards and mayor and everything. So, it always difficult once it starts. It's starts with good intentions, but
then we forget what it once was and then you have to look somebody in the eye and say, "Hey, we can't continue to go down." So, I appreciate that from you, Commissioner Ward, because it is a it's it's how government grows exponentially because it's easy to give it out. It's hard to retract it. So, I would also
like to go on record saying that, you know, whether this goes through that we need to keep in mind that right now it's free money, but we need to make sure that this just doesn't fall back onto the taxpayer when it because we I I see that coming. Two is um I I'm curious,
did you have any other alternatives to to the oid money commission award that you know besides this program? >> Everybody's out there asking and it's free. that the word on the street is. >> So, I was just curious, did you have any? Yeah. You know, >> nothing specifically. I'm we're working
with the community, but we're getting asked uh later in the agenda and everybody points to well, you got opioid money, you can use it for this, that, and everything. And I guess I haven't looked at exhibit E to know what that list is. >> So, I was not aware of, and thank you for your research with, you know, the
fact that really it was designed to start new programs. That was kind of the major intent. I can appreciate, you know, giving to existing ones, especially if there's validity there. My fear with the new programs is we create the same situation where now we start something and now we got to figure out
how to fund it when the money dries. So maybe it's the lesser of the two evils as long as we still duly note and we don't create another one that we might have to fund. Um, but I was definitely open if we had anything else potentially. I like the idea of the one-time thing and say, "Here you go.
Here's the seed money. Get it going. help you and off to the races you go. So, >> uh, admin administrator Jacob, >> good morning. >> Yeah, it is. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Sometimes there's a little delay. I don't know. Okay.
>> Maybe it's the battery dead one. I don't know. back to me if I'm uh but I believe part of what's happening with rap with this particular set of funding is different in that it is at the jail there are no other funding stream that is available
when you are um in the jail and I think this group has talked about that quite a bit in terms of the fact that uh the jail ends up taking responsibility for the cost of a variety of services including medications and things like that the goal of This piece is to do
that earlier engagement if I recall correctly. Is that correct? >> It's part of it. I mean these are support support services and they don't go to the participant they go to the service provider. So it's not a handout of money >> to go to the jail and discard them early. >> Right. Right. >> So that is a piece
>> early intervention. Early intervention wanted to highlight that there are not other services that are funded or can be when you're in jail. And so that is a piece of the puzzle as well. Yeah, they don't have their social security. I think that's still the case,
right? You lose it. So, you'll get in. >> Okay. Thanks, Administrator Holty. And then back to Commissioner Ward. >> So, if I may, Commissioners, just a point of clarification. So, with the RAPUS program in 2025, actually, um the county board did
approve 60,000 of the opioid funds for funding of the program. um namely because we did not have any grant funding anymore. It was exhausted. So with all due respect, this is a program
that was originally funded by grant that became levy money which then we contributed um opioid funds. So this is year two for clarification. Um, what? >> Yeah, just a couple other questions. You
referenced in the report, um, on page 20 of our board agenda, substance use disorder evaluation. Could I get a copy of an evaluation? I have no idea what you what that that includes. >> You submitted the request. We just have to wait for
>> Okay. And then again, I apologize. It was yesterday morning, but you know. Um, and then an interesting you you love statistics. Um you state right in there anonymous too. Yeah. >> Yeah. Whoever. Right. So tie them together. So it's stated in here and I I
know enough um it says 5.35 average times a person has to enter substance abuse treatment. So of the 30 my question is of the 31 graduates you have listed there how many are on their fifth time fourth time? You know what's
our statistics? Is it really you know that that's unfortunate. I know it takes multiple times to get somebody off of something, but where are we on? We pat our back say we got 31 graduates, but are they on their second time, third
time, or is it just one and done again? And I don't know answer, and I don't need answers today, but I would like some followup where we're at with that kind of statistic. You put it in there, so you drew my attention to it, so I want to know where we're at. >> I already made that request. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you,
Commissioner. Commissioner no administer multiple hats >> and again I apologize I asked late I asked yesterday morning um for these information but yeah we'll follow up with >> one more thing and then you commission >> um to with those good points duly noted
I'll move to approve item which had been item 5.2 too. >> I'll second it. Is that it? >> Yeah, >> Commissioner Nelson. >> Yeah, I just go back to, you know, the alternate uses. I mean, do we have a definitive area that somebody else might be interested in this money? I I'm kind
of interested to see myself where this RAP program goes if it continues. I think it's a year-by-year situation, you know, to see how well this does, but kind of one of those keep a close eye on it. um because obviously we you know that
it keep an eye on it but see where it goes. So I'm willing to to move forward on the motion. So >> great. >> Anything else? >> I I I will move forward but I'm watching and I'm concerned and I it's on the record that we need to I I would like to
see and maybe I can access it that exhibit E I would >> it's actually on our website I believe. >> Is it okay? I'm gonna go look for it and see what >> with the settlement documents. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. >> Um and maybe we can um have um Gwen Her
Bert, the executive director, come give us I know that she's given us a report in the past and an update on the RAP plus and give us some of the statistics that we've been talking about. >> Yeah. And I'd also like to note because um there's we are in the process of signing off on another settlement. It's
going to be it's kind of they call it the remnants which is the last few um uh opioid uh distributors if you want to call it. So it's not going to be as much money but it's still another addition to
that pile of of you know money supposedly through 18 years and it's it's helped a lot. And if someone can confirm that this expenditure is covered by the list of things that we're allowed to do, that would be great. Um, I
support this. I in a year as we're talking about next year and already having budget meetings and when we know that we are in trouble and need to reduce expenses um the ability to rely on not the levy to fund programs that
are so successful I think is really important because I'd rather keep these programs going. Um I know that we have several million in that account right now because they've given us the money in advance. So, I don't know if it's the
18 years or the 25 years, but if we keep it to the 180,000 a year. I mean, I think this is a I appreciate the option of being able to use this expenditure. Anybody else? Hearing none. All those in favor of
approving the fund portion of RAP Plus with opioid settlement funds, please signify by saying I. >> I. Any oppose? Say nay. Motion passes unanimously. >> Thank you very much. >> I just have Mr. one comment on that. One
of the things that just comes to mind when we get I guess forwarded this money. Is there a way that we could I guess legally and safely invest it and use the interest draw to continue to fund a particular program rather than
depleting the program and exhausting the ability for it to generate a reoccurring income. And Mr. Hog, >> we actually did do the homework on that when Mr. Elliott was here. So, I'll have to pull that. >> You see where I'm going with that? >> And then we can limit we can cap
>> what it is that we give and learn to live with it because that couldn't be an indefinite >> gift rather than what we see most people do is, hey, let's go buy a whole bunch of stuff and yay, we have money. Uh, let's turn it into something that the gift that keeps giving.
>> Thanks. Okay, next item. um 6.1 2025 real estate highlights and six-year land sale report. That's Mr. Bameick. And there are handouts if those of you in the audience I think they're on that they're on that chair right there in case you want to follow along.
Madame Chair, commissioners, and um everyone this morning. Good morning, and I'm uh pleased to be here. You have had some really long agendas. Uh we're a little bit further behind um getting some of this information to you, and it's just for that reason. 2025 was a
very historic year for Winona County Real Estate. It is the first time in our county history that the most sales in a range reach 200 to 250,000. For years and years and years, it's been
150 to 200,000. It is a very clear indicator of the higher sale prices and the higher values that Winona County homes are having and experiencing. We had the highest number of sales this
past year. Um 558. That was only up five from 24. But when there were no homes available for people wanting to buy, or let's just say practically no homes, we wondered if we could even come close
to the number that were sold the year before. Saw a five more being very, very positive. Another figure to look at is that during October and November, the sales that we had, 85% were sold above the county market value.
And the commissioners know well that the last 3 years value has been pushed up almost as high as we can and still the sale prices are beyond that. And it all comes down to just availability.
We had 43 rural sales. There's two and a half pages if you'd like to take a look in the handout today. And doing that because we had very similarity, very few similarities between sales. They were all over the place. Some of them mixed
properties. Uh we had a couple with timber, but then there was some other land thrown in. And to get comps, it was a very, very challenging year. We had um 37 commercial sales and two of them clearly indicate the value of land on
the east side of Winona. On Francac Drive, which is the main thoroughfare in front of Walmart on the north side of the street, there's a strip mall. It just sold for 5,720,000. The sale price was up significantly. The
Verizon store nearby has a small parking lot. the store and the parking lot together sold for a,460,000. The talk in a lot of the publications um in the real estate arenas were that homes were having bigger jumps in sale
prices than are commercial over a big geographic area. This would be an exception to that. A big exception. All right. It was also quite an exceptional year, an extremely positive year for both Lewon and St. Charles. Uh Lewon had
24 sales. Um usually 12 to 15 is about the norm for them. So very very positive. They um only had two sales that were 100,000 or less out of 24 total. And on those two, one was exactly
100,000. So, that's that's very positive. Um, the sale prices are in your packet and may um want to take a quick look at those. In St. Charles, they had 50 sales. There were no sales under 100,000.
Um, but where there was one at 100,000 even. Um, very very positive time for um St. Charles. And I did an average on the month of November. I took um an average of a group in the city of Winona and
then also a few in St. Charles. The numbers do not correspond, but the the average tells a story. There were 19 sales in the city of Winona that I put together. The average on those 19 and they weren't picked. They were just
taken at random. Um the average was 231,000. Eight sales at St. Charles just picked at random 361,000 clearly clearly um an indication of the value at St. Charles. I've done a number
of programs St. Charles and Lewon and at each program someone comments about their thoughts of saving onethird of the sale price for a comparable home in Rochester by going to St. Charles. And
then one person one evening said, "And Bob, the best of all hasn't even been mentioned." He said, "I love my job." And he said, "When I go to work in the morning, the sun is on my back, and when I come home at night, it's on my back."
And he said, "I very much enjoy the drive to Rochester and living in Winona County in St. Charles." And I share that with you because wasn't the only person to make that comment. St. Charles is has a lot of people looking at it um it has
a lot to offer and one of the things St. Charles did when I was in high school they laid out a water and sewer plan that no one else had even thought about and that has got a payback today in St. Charles, that puts them in the front
seat that they are. All right. Um during the past year, uh Commissioner vaguely asked about um the number of um land owners in Winona County and what percentage of them were living in Winona County. Well, we were at a 5 and a half
year um time span. We did that and we shared that information with everyone. We said when the end of the year came, we would update that. So, here's the update in your packet. um for 6 years, the most recent six years. Um we took
two um groupings uh over 100 acres and then under 100 acres. uh the over 100 acres the sales for these six years now 73 66% of the owners had Winona County
addresses and then on the bigger group over 100 acres uh there were 217 and in this group 74% had Winona County addresses so I think that we were certainly not in the 100%
range but I think those are positive percentages And then um we will continue to um update that so we can have uh maybe at mid year uh an update on those numbers. >> Thank you for that. >> All right. And that any questions from
anyone? >> Oh no. I just you know something I've been saying for how long and living in Altera Lewon and St. Charles for 30 some years between those three communities. It's even back when I was a mayor back in the 2000s at Alura, I always said,
"Hey, this is a it's a mushroom and how far out does the mushroom grow and so, you know, we saw that already happening as as land values were going up and communities closer and there was always the it's cheaper to live in Winona County on the tax basis. Why why are you
skipping Dover? Why are you skipping Yoda? Why not Byron? Why not Steuartville? Why are you coming here?" And it's cheaper. The taxes are cheaper. I can build the same house cheaper and I can tax it cheaper. And that is a massive draw knowing many many people
why did they why why is Udica growing? You know, why did they sell all those lots? It's the mushroom effects. When I was a mayor of Alura, we said we have to prepare for the overflow because that's what's coming. And now we're really seeing it in Lewon and Udica, especially Udica because that you can build there
cheap, the water's cheap, the taxes are cheap. So, um, you know, this has been going on for how many years? And obviously it's a it's an overflow from Homestead County. Um but there is a definitive attractiveness to the west side of the county and we're seeing it move and creep closer to the center of
the county as St. Charles. I guess I'm not going to call it not it's not affordable to live there or unaffordable to live there. There we go. It's just there is no doubt. I drive up and down the streets obviously rental properties and I think back 15 years ago I'm like man that house was 85,000. I could have
bought that one for 55. I could have bought this one for 65. You can hardly touch anything for under 200,000 though. So, um would have could have should have, but there's no doubt it is hard to find what I'm going to say uh inexpensive housing on the west side of
the county right now because there's just a demand. So, and we need to protect that. It's it's a >> maybe one comment for the uh first of the year. We've had um a very very trying time but still homes are selling.
We are reporting the documentation and we've seen a number of parties from uh the attorneys, the bankers, the sellers, the buyers coming together and working out agreements between them so they
could move the ownership of the home forward. The sad part is that if a party does not want to continue an agreement because the deadline has come, they can probably turn it around and sell it for significantly more in just this very
short period of time. So, it is extremely challenging time for buyers >> if you're not only if you're done. >> That's fine. >> Yeah. >> Thank Thank you, Bob. Um I I do share this with people across the state of Minnesota and they say you get this kind
of report from your I said yeah it's it's valuable and they're they're very impressed. So thank you. >> Set the bar. >> Yeah. Um one of the discussions at um uh the recent AMC ledge conference is the the especially in the bigger metro counties is the shift from you drive
around and you see a lot of commercial properties being built, big buildings, but then you see a lot of commercial properties sitting empty. And there's a big concern and we have some you know look around our neighborhood uh of the shift of uh being that the value of
those big commercial properties has dropped dramatically is the shift as we all know will come to residential or you know the egg lands and that that is something to be aware of. Um how that happens. Um but also you know you talk about these values the we talk about how
horrible uh the property tax system is for the ability to pay these values just keep compounding and so the valuation has contributed greatly to the problem not only our tax you know the amount of levy we request but how these values have increased over the you know the the
years and as our senior citizens which I'm one when I bought my property it was worth virtually nothing now they think I'm a millionaire there. Um, and and it's I am and on paper. Um, >> but it it's there there's discussion of how do we balance that for especially
our senior citizens that own these properties and and uh you know they deal with the increasing values when they're on fixed income. So there is a lot of discussion about the tax system if it will be resolved. It's very doubtful. But I will if Commissioner Vegley would like to note that yes, I live in the
most expensive probably township of of Winona. There is another one for sale. Um, if you like solar panels, you can buy it. It's a beautiful house up on Apple. >> It's actually um Dresback, I believe. >> Um, up on the river. Uh, scenic Apple Blossom.
>> The blue house. >> The blue house. I >> So that's actually relation. >> George and Judy. >> Yeah. Okay. Well, >> George He could buy it and live there. I wouldn't move out of my district. I mean, but he didn't want to. >> They were super nice people.
>> Yeah. Very nice. But again, um, and you talk about absentee ownership. So that big one that was sold in, uh, New Hartford, um, that's somebody from Wisconsin that bought it, you know, owned it and then bought it. So there's a big Mr. Bigley. >> So that figure, take that 10 million out of there and it's not as bad as as what
we think it is, but >> I'm glad that you brought that up, Marcia, because that sale, 1100 acres, >> that's got to be thrown out. It's a >> Well, it'll be thrown out, but it's still being talked about in this past week. I just did a program almost entirely on that for a big group in
Lewon. The questions that we get, they're not necessarily in sync with the time of the sale. The talk goes on for some time and I've we've just we've had interest and we've had every question imaginable and maybe one of the
questions that I had to sit down with a senior um I was doing a program for over 50 at one of the churches in Winona and one of the elderly ladies came in just a little bit late and she said, "Mr.
Bameick," she said, "What am I going to do?" She said, "With those sales, I'm not going to be able to pay my taxes. The sales she was talking about are the sales that are only a block from the courthouse." And this question comes up
repeatedly. They are not going to enter into your regist your residential um values because it is an entirely different use and that will negate that from being included. and that that particular senior was probably the
happiest person that was going home that evening. But the the questions that come up, they're all related to real estate. But people are really thinking, they're really looking. And I'll just share one last comment with you. I am a huge
proponent of working with realtors. there's too many little quirks in the system not to have that per that very professional help when we had a a couple of cases uh where um people were wanting to do this on
their own and I said to them I said why don't you look at the sales see if you can find some properties some homes that are similar to yours make a list and then talk to your realtor I said he's going to be impressed and you're going to feel better about it we've got a whole bunch of people doing that now,
seniors. And what's fun is to sit in the background and listen, oh yeah, Jake, he's got he's got the extra garage, but but we got the big deck. And you know, it just goes on and on. People are looking very, very closely and trying to do the absolute best they can when
they're trying to purchase. Thank you, >> Mr. Bakey. And then Commissioner Elsing. So maybe don't go away so fast. >> Well, I also want to thank you for the work that you do and for this report. This is very helpful. Um I actually share with my brother in um who lives in Oaklair. He's an appraiser. Uh he does
residential, commercial um and he's he's also impressed that you share this with the county board. >> Um and especially um I know that um the ransomware attack impacted everybody, but I know it really impacted your office. So thank you for producing >> We're not done yet.
>> And thank you for producing anything at this time. Um I didn't ask you this question ahead of time, so I don't expect an answer, but I'll follow up with an email. um is if if it's possible could we get that Commissioner Ward mentioned those outliers those those large if we could look at the median
price for like residential you know tillable and woods could I could I get that from you later on and I'll email you because usually your reports have that and I and I didn't ask you ahead of time so there's no reason for you to know but um I think statewide the median price for a house is now 400,000 for a
residential um but I'm curious what it is in Winona County that's that that includes the metro area which throws everything off. So I'm curious what the median um residential home >> we'll have that we we will have that. Thank you. I and I just want to thank
you again for this is very helpful for a full range of people and like Commissioner Ward said, we all feel bad because so often what drives higher taxes is the higher valuations of the properties. And if you look if you if you if you skim through the list, you know, the estimated market value and the
sales price almost every time it the the sale price is much higher than the estimated. So the county is not over assessing, not overt taxing. Um, so that is a that is a concern moving forward. Thank you, Bob. >> Mr. Alson. >> Yeah. Yeah, good point to that. But I
will say oftentimes having bought and sold many properties is that we use the tax basis as a as a bar to a certain extent. So as we raise these values, it artificially pushes affordable housing up with it because that is the way it works. So we again it's being careful
what we do with these taxes because it ultimately has an effect on what people can afford to buy. Um so the second thing is Commissioner Ward brought up a point as we see these larger and larger commercial buildings. What's happening in our small towns? It's getting almost
impossible to cash flow the commercial sectors. It's what's drying up because we're using the basis of what this population has versus what that population has to support the same building. I always say the cost of my front door is the same
cost as the guy that has four times the traffic, but I got to figure out how to pay the same $5,000. And that's the difficult part. And that's why you're seeing smalltown USA dry up because we're using things categorically rather than systematically
geographically to determine values and that is a detriment to our small communities and businesses trying to stay in. You say, well, what's a couple thousand dollars? Um, that's huge. And I sit I do go to the chamber meetings in Lew and I talk to the business owners
all over. we belong to the NFIB or the small business stuff and it's the common consensus that the large buildings that are going up that are determining a value or determining anything or as the big businesses come into play they can
absorb cost through purchase how they purchase um a lot of businesses don't have that especially the small businesses so as we get excited about these um my flag goes up because I represent rule. I represent myself. I
represent what I see happening all throughout nine states that we cover for my company as I drive around and drive down Main Street USA and it's dead because they can't compete. So, I think we need to be very very cautious um in
how we evaluate things and how we look at things because it is part of the compounded problem of smalltown USA drying up. So, >> thank you. Anyone else? >> Thank you so much for the presentation, Bob.
>> Thank you everyone. >> You I'm not for sale, Bob. >> Yes. >> Don't send them my I get postcards every day. They want to buy and sell for me. No, I'm not for sale. >> You have a big meeting this evening. >> Yes. New Hartford Township Township meetings. >> Our annual township meetings are this evening uh for many. There's a few in
the afternoon. Um but there's an invitation out to all of you to stop in if you can do that. Thanks, Bob. >> Uh, next item is item 6.2, receive update on Minnesota City School property. Are we getting an update today? Uh, Miss Wilbright is on.
>> Okay. Auditor Treasurer Wilbright is online. Uh, there she comes. >> Sorry, I couldn't unmute myself. Uh, can you hear me? >> Goodness. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, we just got communication back
from the attorney team. Uh we're reviewing it at this point um to see what the next steps are. So I apologize I don't have more of an update for you right now. My focus is um tax kelk as well as today is March Township election day. So I need to be available for them
as well. But the hard focus right now is tax kelk. Um but we are working pushing that forward as well. >> Describe the issue. What do you mean >> what the issue is >> trying to sell it right
>> with the property in Minnesota City? >> Uh after the Tyler versus Henipin case, we needed to wait to figure out um what the process was for those legacy parcels, if you will, the ones that were forfeit forfeited 23 and prior. And then there's a different
process going forward from now forward. And that's what we're trying to zoom in on and figure out exactly what we need to do for those leg legacy parcels. Um what what we needed to have done as far as notifications etc. Uh
that is also very hard to determine right now since um we don't have access to some some of the files to see what had been already done. So that that's there's a little bit of rework there, but then trying to figure out the
next steps for these legacy parcels, if you will. >> Great. Commissioner Elsing has some questions. >> Maybe I'll dive into it a little bit more. I think the the real concern from the residents of Minnesota City is that if you look at
their infrastructure, um this is a big deal to them. And the issue is this is drug out for many, many years. And what's happened is we're we're we're lumping it into a sum with other buildings that if I could, you
know, me if there's something in Winona that might not be a big deal because that one building in the grand scheme of things isn't much to all the residents. But in Minnesota City, they don't have the same collective pool of resources. So this is their big deal. And we're throwing it in with a pool that probably
isn't a big deal. and they've been very patient for many many years trying to figure this out. And what's happening is we have an eyesore. A a resource for them that could be big in their community is sitting there and it's dilapitating
and it just keeps putting getting pushed by the wayside. So, what I've asked for is in their small community because this is a big thing to them, maybe a small thing to everybody else, but hey, is there a way we could expedite this and
get this one small thing done because although in the grand scheme of the county and other larger cu uh cities, it may not be, but it's important to them and they don't have much else. So, um and I don't mean that in a disparing or negative way. It's just this is a big deal. So, I've brought it attention
again because it's been a number of years, 13 years, I think, six years under the county, whatever it's been. Um, it's time it's time to move it forward and the building is getting in disrepair and it's going to come to a point where now it just becomes a liability, knock it down instead of
turning it into apartments or all the things that they've talked about potentially trying to do. So, um, the longer we keep kicking the can down the road, the opportunity for that community to try to do something with that building is just basically gone. And I don't think there's going to be anybody that's going to want to come in. And
once you get past a certain point, there's no saving it. So, this is a massive thing for them and I can't seem to get the traction to get it fixed. So, that that's what's really going on. >> Administrator Holty.
>> Oh, just a second, Chelsea. We'll come back to you. >> No problem. >> Thanks. >> Um, with all due respect, there are many things that have u impacted moving this forward. Um, it's not that we haven't heard the concerns.
Um, there are many individuals that are part of the equation of getting this done. Um, we don't have control over everyone's schedule or how they may prioritize the work. Um, but we are uh focused on moving this
forward. I do have to respect uh Miss Wilbright's deadlines for tax calc. Um, but I I do hear you, Commissioner Elsen, and we will move this forward. >> Yeah. >> Um, Auditor Treasurer Wilbright, and then we'll come back to you,
Commissioner Elsen. >> Uh, Marine kind of hit it on the head there. Um, I there's not enough manhour to get all my responsibilities done. It it it is I have to prioritize and I have to prioritize tax calcul right now. Um
it's another election year. I don't want to kick it down the can down the road either. But they every day I have to prioritize what needs to get done. And right now it's making sure I don't have to send out 4,000 plus adjusted tax
statements. We need to take my team is taking the time to proof everything without all of our proofing tools that we had. Um so it's going to take a little more time than normal. >> Mr. Alson, go ahead. >> Yeah. Uh none of this I I I realize
there's a there's a little bit of an algorithm or a priority here, but the reality of it is is that we this didn't just start two months ago. And so if I don't keep pushing, when I first got it was one of the first things I went to their township. This was their major concern. I brought it up. It got
kicked down again the first year, the second year, the third year. And if we don't, it's just gonna that's why it's drugged out for so many years. And they're saying, "Hey, come on here. At some point, we have to become the priority. We can't keep letting everything else come in front of us. So, this isn't like this was two months ago
this got brought up. This has been brought up for years." And it >> I understand that. >> So, what I'm doing is finally saying, "All right, you've had three years three years I've sat patient and nobody came back to me with anything. So, I'm
just simply saying, "All right, we need to bring this up and I'm going to make focus on this." And the first thing I was told was, "Well, we're waiting to pool group it in with a whole bunch of other things." And it was just another kick the can down the road. And now today, it's hey, I got to do this and at some point this has to become priority
very soon so that these people can have some uh reconciliation on what they've been overly patient to to make happen. So, that's the point of it. >> County Attorney Salman, you have the floor. Thank you. I just wanted to speak
to um the fact that as uh administrator Holtzy said there's there's really a lot of moving parts in this and among them are things that are out of our control. There was a tax forfeite case that happened in Henipin County
that threw everything into a a um what should I say through a lot of wrenches and um and we're uh trying to deal with that to make sure and we didn't have a lot of property that was affected by that. In fact, I'm not sure we had just one, but but then the legislature made
changes. Um, and in my office, um, we we have put put together a memo. Um, assistant county attorney Steve CR has has done that and, um, and that he was able to finish that. I mean, we've got a lot of demands on our time, too. But he
was able to finish that um, yesterday. And so um it's a memo talking about the process to sell current inventory of tax forfeited land which includes the Minnesota city property. So u we will be moving forward with uh the administrator's office and with Miss
Wilbright and her office um to address these. There's four other properties too. So thank you. >> Any other discussion? >> Madam Chair, Commissioner and then I'm going to go to you if you like Mr. Go ahead. Come ahead.
I'm going to just share this with you. This past weekend, I worked a long day of overtime with one of the staff in my office. And because we didn't have all the interruptions, the staff person was able to complete two weeks of
recordings. And we were able to do that. And it's entirely because Chelsea and her office worked overtime. They met us. we have we have to have a dual signature from the auditor and from the recorder and there's a lot of good reasons why and her side is primarily taxes. So I
want you to know that we all have a lot there are a lot of requests out there especially right now and I think that we're all putting a lot of effort in. We have gotten some nice comments back. I didn't want to come today and tell you that but we have and we're trying we are
diligently working on a on a number of projects. the uh cyber attack is still kind of upfront. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Vanick. Commissioner Vaguely and then you again, M Commissioner. >> Um this is a question I guess for Commissioner Elc and and Miss Holy. Is
is there something that you think that can happen to get it done or do we maybe ask the staff like what would it take and it might and it might require additional some kind of funds because I understand that the existing staff is maxed out etc. But is there something you'd like to see? I agree with you. This should be taken care of. Yeah, this
isn't this probably right. >> Yeah, great. Thank you. And you know, this is it. I mean, what it boils down to is this. >> Everything else has taken precedent. Everything, every project, everything, every tax thing. All the people in Minnesota City says, "When's our turn? We've waited for years. 13 years. When
do we go to the forefront? Another 13 years. When do we become important enough to get this done? This is a big deal to us. When is it important enough to you to be important for us?" And that's the question. So what I'm doing is putting pressure on it saying we can't keep kicking it to the background. We can't wait till we dissolve every
other problem that we have and everything else has got to go in front of it. Tell me anybody else that's waited that long to resolve an issue. It's got to be very very rare. So I've been patient. I've been patient as their representative for three years and there was nothing brought up and finally I
just brought it up again and said, "Hey, what are we going to do? Put three more years of stuff in front of this again? That doesn't make sense. We need to make it a priority to some extent within reason, but it has to come to the front. We can't keep kicking it to the back. That's all I'm trying to do. >> Uh, anything else, Commissioner Ward?
>> U, just so the public understands what's going on here, it's a property that's been u forclosed on and the law that attorney Son referred to is it used to be you could just turn a property after such a length of time and we'd have a sheriff's sale and it would be back on
the tax ro, somebody would buy it and go move on. Well, the law changed in that um a participant they sold in the metro area sold a condo or something. And heaven forbid this this the county made a profit, >> but you couldn't keep that profit to and
really was it a profit? No, because a lot of time, energy, and money spent on doing this job, but they made a profit on that individual parcel. And so then the person who owned it last wanted a percentage of that profit. So that complicated you said wrenches. No, we
threw a lot of nuts and bolts in the system, but they didn't provide us the wrenches to get the job done. >> They threw a big wrench. >> Yeah. Yeah. But that's what it it is a state law that changed and and I I agree. It needs to be it needs to be handled, but that was part of the complicating process.
>> Well aware of all that for the public to know. >> Yeah. Well aware of all that. the the the idea is that nobody's putting it into perspective the importance this is to their community in comparison to another community that one building absorbed is no big deal. >> Right? >> That's the difference. And they're
looking at one of their major community resources that they have for development, tax value, everything else sitting there deteriorating and nobody wants to talk about it. >> Y >> and I'm just trying to keep it in the trying to keep it going so these guys can do something with it.
>> Thank you. The item in our packet is have a discussion. >> It seems as if you probably did not get an update even though we did have a discussion. Did you want to table this for a future >> um meeting so that it comes back? >> I don't think there's I don't think
there is anything that there's no decision to be made by the board. I just want it brought to light that we have to as a group have a consensus to hey as we guide and talk to the administrator and the county like can we somehow make this
a little bit of a focus just like we've done with other things to say hey can we focus on this or that. So the idea is not to create a motion or force anything. It's just to continue to highlight the need to get this done, >> cross it off the to-do list
>> at some point in the relative's future so that little community can move on with life and keep trying to generate stuff. >> Okay. So, you consider it resolved? I mean, >> I don't consider it resolved. I consider it >> and I can bring it back up and get it.
>> Okay. All right. >> Chair Meer, I think that Chelsea wanted to >> Oh, thank you for pointing that out. And auditor treasure will break, did you want to share some thoughts? >> Uh um I was just going to clarify it
forfeite versus foreclosure. Um there may have been a little confusion with uh Commissioner Ward's statement. Uh foreclosure is when you when the mortgage doesn't get paid and those go to sheriff sale. forfeite is when the taxes don't get paid and those don't go
to sheriff sale, they go to auction through my department >> and that's what this >> No problem. >> Thank you for that clarification. Uh, Commissioner >> and um I appreciate what Commissioner Ward did. It's good to summarize it for the public and for people or just to
remind us where we are in this process. And I also think 13 years is a long way. I've been waiting 22 years to help speed up a license center and that's partially on me, partially on the staff. So um that's something that I'm actually responsible for as well too that hasn't happened but that's a different issue
there I could see that needs to take place but that would create a positive ripple effect is that once that could be renovated sold etc in terms of that small community so but I also agree that it would take either some maybe some more staff time or dedicated somehow is we can ask staff um but it should be
moved to the top of the pile and it might require >> to a certain extent I'm not I'm not asking this is we're not life and death but it's >> I agree with you >> in one aspect it is because this building's going to be going beyond repair and then they're that little community is going to lose a tax asset
that they want to try to save and there's not too many people looking to put up monstrosities or anything in these small communities. So, they're just trying to save themselves. >> Yeah, I I actually agree with you if that wasn't clear. I think that we should try to get get it done. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Right. So, we're not bringing this back until a certain point when you might suggest to bring it back. >> Just I'm just trying to bring it to light. Great. Okay, moving on to item 6.3. Discuss potential contribution to homeless shelter. Commissioner Belly, do you want to kick us off? >> I could begin or Miss Holty or Miss
Chaffy, do you guys want to start in terms of summarizing the documents that you provided or should I either way? >> Okay, >> that's a little taller than me. Um um good morning. Uh so in front of you
or in your packet was information in which I believe this came forward in November originally and there was some discussion about how to proceed and do some research behind the scenes. So what you have in front of you is the first
document would be a memo or a uh kind of a synopsis of what was done and then also you have um some notes from a meeting that I had with Washington County and also you have what Gwen um
from CJCC put together Gwen Herbert around the housing continuum. The reason we wanted to look at some of this was to best understand what are we trying to what problem are we solving with the funds and what are
we trying to do with those funds and how does that all fit together. So with that uh really trying to look at the full picture of what is available in our community and what are the gaps or what are the needs and also thinking about
overall what is our long-term goal and focus in addition to a shortterm uh addressing of an issue. And so uh what you had in front of you was a synopsis of that as well as the research completed the general findings and potential options listed on the back. In
addition post these documents I believe uh chair uh Meyers you had a um you had some questions and we brought forward some information on SAHA funding. Um and Commissioner Vog vaguely you also had some questions and we had some some
points made around that and some numbers were provided in terms of the number of people that have been served by the shelter. So with that the question I think coming forth is how do we want to proceed if we were to fund it knowing
the realities of the situation that we have with funding in general. Um what are the is this a crisis need of if we don't do this what happens and what is our long-term thought process around how
to actually support what I was impressed with to be honest with you in the continuum of housing services available in the community and so with that we have options and I have to be very clear
there is not additional resources from um county employees to offer up to provide some of the things that would be useful. Uh it just isn't present right now. Um and we'll be talking about a number of those things we as we move
forward with the budget and other pieces. Um but so the options include uh the the Catholic Charity request of $15,000. Uh this would cover costs for 2026 only is my understanding and commissioner
vaguely you can correct me. Um dedicate this there's overlap with other services that we do and you can see that through the housing continuum that many of those services are coordinated through us andor funding streams come from other levels and we are a gatekeeper for those
said services to some degree and ensuring that tax funds are being used appropriately. We could utilize levy dollars to fund the service. Uh for people experiencing homelessness, it would be an additional cost. We could apply for grants.
I will tell you, and you could probably see that from the Washington County notes, that all requires infrastructure over time. Okay? And so the infrastructure is a big piece in a challenge that comes with the services because just because a person is
experiencing homelessness, that is not their only challenge. It is a very complex issue. In addition, being in a position of being homeless does not make you like every other person who is homeless. So, the complexity of the challenge is certainly
there. We could use uh existing resources, but we would need to redirect those resources and stop doing a non-mandated service to meet the needs. Um, we could apply for a recovery core support position. We have one right now. Um, and we have a I put in a request for
two and I put in a request for that to be reduced. I can back out of that second one at any point in time. Um, so that we could help support that process. In addition was the SAHA funding. Um, and I believe Commissioner Begley, you made some statements this morning as
well. So I will pause there for any questions or additional input. >> Yeah, I did just want to say this. I I had asked you so we get the SAHA money in two payments one that's early in the year and then one in December. So the 26
the 2025 amount was 57588 and the question that I had asked is did we allocate both portions of that to Smra's housing trust fund? >> We did not. >> We did not. So we actually have funds that we would have received for SAHA in
the bank and even even if it was just the one half year that's still like almost $29,000. we would not have to use levy funds. And um the research from back in uh Mar April May May of last
year um >> finance director Chuck Elliot >> Elliott thank you. >> Um had indicated that this would be an appropriate use. Okay. Now so Commissioner Ward, Commissioner Elsing.
>> U yeah a question. Um, again, societal problems at the expense of basic services and counties are, you know, supposed to be basic services and this is not we're not unique in this problem. But I I appreciate you reaching
out to Washington County because they're pretty progressive. Washington County is outer metro and but but it's huge. Yes. And it has a very diverse it's got a very diverse population. So, thank you for, you know, not trying to recreate the wheel using somebody else's wheel.
>> Um, the 15. So, I see this just this blank $15,000 request. What is that for? Because I've heard um I think it states in here services or something like that. And then I've also cost 15,000 costs. What are the costs? And then I also have
heard that that somebody is looking at remodeling a church for future um use. And again, if it's one-time money, is it ongoing money? Is it something that's, you know, if it's just cost, it's spent and it's gone. If it's remodeling an
existing structure that would go into the future, you know, that has some play in my decision- making. I don't know what the 15,000 request is for. I didn't see it. Maybe I missed it. >> Do you want to answer, Jill, or should I >> Yes, please. No, you go ahead. >> Okay. Um, so to answer those questions, and after they're done, I also want to
jump in as well. >> Sure. >> Okay. the the original request um from John Meyers, executive director of Catholic Charities. >> Um >> in the original request, it talked about funds. >> The um now don't ballpark estimate the
two shelters, the budgets about we'll say $260,000. I reviewed some of the emails from before. Um, and what the request was for was for extended hours and extended year. Um, and to make the shelter, especially the night shelter, go for a longer period of time. And extended
hours and a little bit more staff time allows us to leverage more volunteer time. Um, and actually I see online that the Reverend John Spanilo is actually online. And I'm not asking him a direct question, but he one of the two churches
that has been hosting the two shelters this year, we have St. Paul's Episcopal Church and then we have Wesley United Methodist Church. Um there is currently no plans for large remodeling. There was just um utilities being paid through the through this season if that's a short
answer um to your questions. But the original >> no creation of a permanent facility. >> No. Um that's actually an ongoing problem, but that's beyond the scope of this $15,000. >> Did I answer those questions? >> Unfortunately, yes. >> Okay.
So, it's just $15,000 for >> right now staff >> for the well staffing and it staffing that allows for more hours ex basically it moved from it's 24-hour coverage right now uh between the day shelter and the night shelter and the all Catholic
Charities which is the shelter's um I'm anticipating Commissioner's um comments and concerns which are very valid ones about um uh county taxpayer dollars supplanting private charities you know, individual donations. The
chair the the shelter runs on roughly twothird state grants, one-third donation model, plus or minus. And in Winona County, the only two shelters that exist, those are the numbers that I shared this morning. What a little investment of staff does in terms of how
it leverages a lot more community volunteer time. I think this is the best of both worlds, but the $15,000 basically is also part of the larger budget request and the larger goal to create 24-hour services and also to create a case manager position, not
through the county, but through Catholic Charities like in Washington County, you mentioned the street outreach to do more proactive work to get people better. Then this is outside of RAP, outside the county to do case manager work. And they've just hired two months ago at the executive committee of the shelters
which I'm on. They mentioned they finally hired a case manager to do that kind of outreach work which is not part it is true. It is not part of this is not a mandated service from the state. I believe that we have a moral obligation in terms of the core function. Now I'm over answering your question of um
public welfare and public safety. If that answers your question, >> 15 $15,000 are these these people are pretty much for how many months >> right now? >> Are they going to continue this? >> The day center is >> that doesn't pay much wages.
>> That doesn't that this is 15,000 is less than 6% of the overall budget. >> But but how long are you wanting to keep this emergency shelter open? I last meeting you mentioned them dates. >> The day center is is year round. the night shelter. This is part of the later
community of the board agenda. Unless another shelter is found, the overnight shelter will end on March 31st, which has been the practice ever since 2017 when the shelter is first >> winter months. >> And and >> for the night shelter >> and a $15,000 does what?
>> $15,000 is part of the overall budget in terms >> Oh, it doesn't increase. It doesn't put it out into April or May. Um it it it >> there are the reason that's going to close on March 31st versus April, end of April is the the money would have helped
extended into April. Is there some simply some building issues? >> There are plumbing problems. >> Plumbing problems at Wesley that are >> I understand Commissioner Elsing did not want the floor. So I'm going to come back to you for your own comments. >> No, this is
>> Oh, you do? >> No, I can I can speak. I'm just I'm learning trying to wrap my head around the need. Um you know there's a noble cause around every corner. That's the reality of it is that everybody's cause is greater than the
next or equal to. And the difference here is again um forcefully taking it from people rather than willingly giving it. And that's what we do and have the power given to us to do. So we we go
from charity to uh forcing it's a forced grab to fund things. Um so again we could march 100 noble causes into the door and everybody says hey this is all noble moral put a fancy word to it.
Again we look at what are we required to do as government. it. The moral thing that I have is taking money from people that may not have it to give to other people that don't have it also that are saying, "Hey, I'm just barely getting by. My
taxes keep going up. My housing everything keeps going up, groceries, whatever it is." And saying, "Where does where do you draw the line?" You know, where's that line that this person that's struggling now has to donate to that person that's struggling? So I I
try to defend the moral on both sides because that's what we're asking to do. We are now taking from people rather than asking them to give. So public philanthropy is is something that I struggle with in in government and always have. So, um, alluding to your
point, however, you know, the compromise that I see here, because if there truly is something I I, you know, is this the city saying, "Hey, we no longer want to deal with this. Let's push it, make it a county issue, whether that's real or relevant or not." I I I know one
homeless person that I believe is to be homeless in St. Charles. Um, my bigger fear is that it starts with 15. Uh, it gets posted in the paper. The county's county's funding a fun founding the shelter. Oh, okay. The county's got
it. We're done. That's what happens. Soon as government steps in, it is almost even Rochester is realizing this that private donations quit when public recognition is that we're paying for it to the tax base. So,
argue that and prove it to me wrong because that's what that's the statistics. So, and I always say, how many people walk in to donate a check to the road and bridge committee that or road fund? It doesn't happen. So, there's an expectation that it comes out of all the taxpayers.
That is my fear is that if we get involved, we will see a decline in private philanthropy. And I say that wishing it wasn't that way, but that's the real situation. So, I think maybe
there's a couple things that I've been thinking about on this to try to help. If we can take it from somewhere else and say, "Hey, maybe we take a break from some of the SECRA, some of this, some of the library, some of something else and say, hey, are we looking at a
one-time seed money to get this thing off and going to help cover the cost and re-evaluate it with a promise that it won't be continuing to get it going or to overcome this short-term deficit? and re-review this every year and we don't add to the levy. We take it from another
organization to pay for it. >> Alison, would how would you feel about using the Saha funds? >> Yeah. So, the SA funds could be one of them, but we might not all agree on that. Right. Or we could agree on that. I don't know. Real the SA funds, you know, >> they go to the housing trust fund for >> correct. Right. That could be one thing,
but I don't know how anybody else is going to vote to that. Right. So, the Saha fund is one thing, you know, are there other things that we could take it from? Um, I I say that so it's on record that we're not just looking at the Saha fund, but I also don't want to start a precedent that we're going to do this every year. I don't want to raise the
levy. I don't want to create a government dependence. And I want the community to know that they have to continue to rally behind this in in private philanthropy because this is not going to become another government entity because I believe you'll see donations crash.
>> Thank you. Um, I would I there's a couple different ways to fund the $15,000 request and um, county administrator Holy or Director Chaffy can jump in, but to me I would be supportive of using $15,000 for the Saha funds. I think it's the biggest bang for
the buck um, in terms of potential impact. Um, because this isn't just these shelters are not meant to be anyone's forever home or location. Now, and I cannot promise everyone who comes through a shelter is a homeowner and a taxpayer one year later, but there are
services and people who surround them that help people get through certain periods of their life and there are many success stories etc. So, I think that' be the biggest bang for the buck in terms of Saha using Saha funds um moving forward.
>> Commissioner um Ward and then did you have your hand up, Commissioner? >> Okay. Saha funds. So, I sit on the SEMRA board and we're always now we have a new uh executive director. It will be interesting to see where this person takes the organization.
um past director Buffy Baronic, we bailed out the city of Winona a number of times by running the section doing the administrative work of section 8 and the city of Winona depends on section 8 quite it's important and it's a federal government and uh Miss Bronnic used to
tell me well we'll lose less money I said I don't like losing money but it was spreading the administrative dollars over a larger audience so we've done that I if I'm not wrong. The Saha dollars also went to the city. City of Winona
received some Saha dollars separately. So >> if we want to use and our you know SAHA was established it says right here you know to preserve affordable housing uh keep families from losing housing and
experience homeless find housing. So yes and no. But again the great state of Minnesota has seen fit to cut this in half. Will they continue it? I it's it's questionable. So, I would say if we have a $15,000 request in front of us and the
Saha dollars that this county gets are supposed to be countywide and I've always had a bug up, you know, my my sat burr under my saddle that the city of Winona does not pay. You >> should say the bug part. What? You bug up your butt? >> Bug up my butt about this. I'll say it. It bothers me that the city of Winona
does not pay into the SMRA levy request. It's outside now. The city of Winona is supposed to have the port authority. So I and I think the port authority, I don't know what their balance sheet is, but but I think there's some money there. So I'd say the county at at most
the county should go half of this 15,000 because it is primarily city focused. Uh, I won't have people coming from Dakota or Dresback to to stay because they can't get there. You know, it's it's it's prohibitive. So, it is primary city. So, I'm saying that the city
should kick in half of this $15,000 request and move forward. >> I I guess I thought that they had used a portion of their SA funds from last year for the warming center. >> Well, this is a new request. So, if they did, great. But I again, this is coming
to us now. And so if they got money, I think they should be kicking in. And I'm hoping this new director will see fit to request money from the city of Winona to run even the section 8, you know, that we're not operating that at a loss for the city of Winona without them
contributing. I I I apologize. A very small I think we we are asked for hundred and some thousand and I think they may contribute four or $5,000. It's pretty >> I'm thinking 5,000. Yeah, it it's it's it's not anywhere near um the same uh formula.
>> So, I'd go half and let the city put up the other half. >> How do you leverage that? You know, I that that's what I I I want the city to have skin in the game because this is you and we can argue, hey, we pay for roads out in the country. Well, we like to eat, too, and we got to produce the
food. So, um you know, look at Brazil. Why doesn't Brazil take over American, which if they ever did, we would all be poor because of the impact agriculture has in the United States. Why doesn't it grow? Because they don't have roads. Why doesn't China grow and produce their own
foods? Because they don't have roads. That is why we succeed as a nation because we've built the infrastructure to be able to feed ourselves and half of the world. So, we can't keep using that argument because we eat pretty darn good in court to just go to India or any of these other third world countries and they don't. So we've built the
infrastructure to be able to supply the food. So we can't use that as an argument. But we can say, hey, disproportionately how big of this is a county problem versus a municipality problem. And you know the municipality aspect to it. We've got enough challenges in the small. I just brought
up why is Walmart Menard's doing so well, but how come every little lumber store and all the other communities have all dried up? There used to be one in Alter. So why? because we can't keep absorbing the cost to some of the municipalities problems. So I go back and I look at this and say how much have
we leveraged to the city that proportionately this is really their issue. I caution on build it and they will come. That's one of the big things that I always say. Um hey there's free help. Go to Winona County. There's a free place to say go to Winona County.
And all of a sudden it disproportionately becomes a problem when they come out of that warming shelter. So again, we've got to be careful with the noble causes. I really look at this and I want to I want to I like the reallocation of funding. Now I'll have some people that'll argue with me and say, "Well, you lost if we could afford to take it from them and give it
to somebody else. Why didn't we just get rid of it to begin with?" That's going to be the argument. I'm going to hear it from a half dozen people. And you know, but can we look at this as a means to just a one-time help him get by? And again, I am scared for the sake of the
shelter for the government to get involved because the headline's going to say government funded shelter. People are going to look at this and say that, "Oh, that's the one the county pays for. It It'll just happen. It happens everywhere." So, that's my thoughts on it. >> Mr. B,
>> I understand your concerns. This would be less than 6% of the overall budget. there, you know, there's not a zero extra zero behind it. And already twothirds of the overall shelter budget is state is public dollars that leverages private donations that then
leverages >> um private unpaid volunteers, etc. So, I hear what you're saying. Um but I I would be I'll make a motion to allocate $15,000 from the current undedicated SAHA funds
>> 2025 or 2020. 25 >> from the 2025 Saha >> we actually have that >> to be used in 2026 for the shelter request from Catholic Charities. >> If there's a better way to state that let me know that it
>> the the >> I'll um I'll second that. Please go you u you have the floor commissioner also. >> Thank you. >> And Dwayne I I know and I realize it in the grand scheme it's a small part but it's public perception. That's what you have to that they're people aren't going to recognize it as if I went out and
asked anybody how to fund a highway. The only people that have no clue how they're going to fund a and what look at the major portion of what that is. They should know how our highways are funded. But if I pull the room, most people aren't going to know three-digit, two-digit numbers, how CASSAW works, nothing. This major part of what they
pay for, they have no idea how it's even funded, let alone paying attention. They're going to see the government's involved. It's a government thing. I'm out. So that is that is 6% is noble, but when does it become 20% 30%. Hey, we can't cut this program off. We've lost
the donations. It's now the county's responsibility. I need some sort of guarantee that we're not going to just start pushing this on if public or private philanthropy quits and say, "Well, this is now the we started something. We can't let it go backwards. How you going to let these people go out?"
That's my fear is we're starting another program that exponentially we're going to have to figure out how to fund in the future. >> Uh so I'm a little confused. 15,000 out of the 2025 which was the 57,588
but we gave 25 of that to SEMRA. >> No, we did not. >> Well, I don't think we've allocated any of >> Yeah, we did. Housing trust fund. >> They're using part of their levy. >> Yeah. Yeah. To the put in the trust fund. >> Yeah. To administer the stock. >> We did in 20.
>> We did allocate the 24 in in full. >> Okay. Maybe then I've got my years >> allocated the 25 at all. >> Okay. All right. >> Did not I double check that. >> Okay. But I'll go back to a a societal problem. I mean the SMRA organization
and their mission is basic needs. And so we're in a way cutting off some of our basic responsibilities through that organization, basic services. And again, I would, you know, if we could get the city to pay half or
if this was going to I mean, it's just it's expenses. Um, but what what's the story about, again, it's somebody calling about remodeling the St. falls that there's no plan to remodel or I mean if it was hard structural things
that we were doing but we're just giving them 15,000 to do I don't you know >> it was in the original budget proposal that we I could sh that we could be shared with you again um >> it's not going to happen what's going to happen next year >> that's actually a big discussion right now that involves a lot of city stuff
>> they have to find another >> we have to find a long-term facility um and right now that's still a work in progress >> okay and I would be long-term facility. I can see investing in facilities because that helps out considerably, but
just to give them another 15 to do whatever I and again without the city without knowing if the city's contributing, I I can't support it. >> Commissioner, >> what's the time frame? I mean, is this a need it right now? Is this I mean, can we exp
We have no city involvement. They basically washed their hands of it. Sounds like >> it's funny because the city thinks that we've washed our hands of it because we've never contributed a penny, which is true and the city has dedicated a ton of staff time to this issue in terms of um fire inspectors, building inspectors,
um their housing specialists, etc. >> Or being a city. Yeah. >> In terms of like this falls I think this they have a valid point. This falls squarely in health and human services in terms of like this this function etc. $15,000 is a relatively small ask. It's
a small investment for a big return >> today. Yeah. My fear is tomorrow and what it does to private philanthropy and the organization itself. I say that again. It's this is we can we can minimize today's effects and and the outlook, but it's I'm looking down the
road what the scope is going to look like through the barrel and how the community sees this as a government funded shelter. And as the burden gets pushed on to us, as everything's falls off, all of a sudden it becomes another major priority for that. And at some point, it even could garner enough
attention that state mandate just like a library says, "Well, you will do it now because you created a monster." >> They almost have. >> Exactly. You've created the monster and now you got to feed it. So, I'm not against it. It just it takes it out of the hands of the private aspect
and making the decision to donate back. And you know, that's that's that's my fear is it turns into that if we're not careful in how we present our ability to maybe help. >> Um, Director Chaffy and then you, Commissioner Ward.
>> Yes. Um, while we haven't contributed to the shelter, many of the items on the housing continuum are funded through health and human services. So, I want to it often times comes as a different source of dollars, but I do want to highlight that in a number of our
employees um work and authorize some of those services as well. Historically, and I've lived in a couple of different communities where this has been and continues to be an issue. What I heard a lot from folks was
how does the county look at all of the resources and bring them together versus funding individual resources because how does that infrastructure as you noted commissioner Elling how do we do that to
maximize the resources and so that's why the options set before you are those options I would also encourage another agency to look at that recovery core opportunity because it's only 10,000 a year for a full-time person for a year.
And so just trying to think of different ways to really maximize some of those resources. >> Mr. Ward, are you >> uh I believe so. So, um, >> never did it. >> SMAR comes every year to request
preliminary levy budget amount and this last year was $144,234 and I think that was passed on a maybe a 3-2 vote. Again, it's not the city of Winona that pays that. It's the county residents that pay that. Um so are you
willing to if you want to give 15 are you willing when they come to look for levy requests to reduce it 15 to to allocate because it's kind of in my it's all housing >> I was going >> it's all my it's all related to housing
so are you willing to reduce >> is it just the rural people paying that yes right so we're paying for a warming shelter >> well if we use No indirectly indirectly Yeah. Yeah. Th this the sa the the saha dollars were state dollars but they keep
cutting it back >> but we use that in the total allocation. So in essence cut out it's going to put a bigger stress. So in essence the real community pays for >> Yeah. Yeah. So again is there a commitment to reduce the 2027
>> which is where I was going. If we reduce we take out >> that's why I mentioned other things that we could look at besides just that. >> Mr. Regularly, would you be open to furthering this so we can get an answer on whether the city has contributed >> any soft funds?
>> Sure. >> So, we have a motion on the floor that was made by you, seconded by me, to uh approve the 15,000. >> I don't think the city has dedicated any soft, but I can ask, >> but we can clarify that. So, if it's
okay, we'll table it to the next meeting. >> So, and would you like to retract your motion? I think >> I'll retract my motion. >> I will accept that. And then would you make a motion to table >> make a motion to table it to the next I think two weeks should be enough. >> I'll second that. Okay. Commissioner >> I'm not against this. I just if what I'm
saying is we need to do it correctly for the longevity of the program. Will that be enough information? We'll see what they say. >> Yeah. >> Could be >> further discussion. Well, then I guess a big like I say, I don't want to just
give money because that just the accountability what that money does and everything. If you really truly are looking at a permanent location, that's critical to my trying to support this. >> We almost spend almost all our time, especially right now the season. >> Don't we have enough empty buildings
that are like that discussion? Love to have more eyes. >> Have a lot of empty buildings in downtown. >> What road do you live on? >> Downtown Nine. Yeah, you're an empty neester. I think Commissioner Regley, you got two extra bedrooms. >> I have plenty of time. >> No bedrooms. >> I'm dedicating a lot of time. >> No bedrooms. You have two empty
bedrooms. >> Two is not enough, but it's a third. >> Help. Two is better than none. >> Okay. So, there there's a motion on the table to table this uh until I think our next meeting as made by Commissioner Begley, seconded by Commissioner Meyer. Further discussion? Hearing? None. All those in favor,
please signify by saying I. >> I. Anyone opposed? Say nay. >> Okay. Motion carries. We'll bring this back up at our next meeting. Okay, that is the last agenda item. Uh we move on to um comments. Commissioner Elson,
>> I just wanted to remind everybody, you're going to start uh see a little farm equipment moving around and uh it's something I'll bring up every week uh for until probably end of the year. But um just you know as you see farmers moving equipment and planters and
tractors just take the extra time be patient you know statistics show the extra whatever to get around somebody is uh is is very very minimal in travel time. So um give them the right away and um um be cautious and um let's try to
make uh the planning season here safe in Winona Valley. >> Commissioner Ward I think you have some updates and some comments. >> Yes. Um, so last week, uh, we had our Association of Minnesota Counties, uh, legislative, um, session. Uh, it was well attended. Uh, I did get to meet
with, uh, Miller, Jacob, and Dascowski. Um, and I have a number of sheets on kind of each policy area. I'll ask Miss Holy to forward, um, to everybody. Um, big talk, uh, technology modernization.
And they all, regardless of what hat they wear, Republican or Democrat, they're all realizing there is a great need, a great problem, but nobody's got a solution. Um they are more and more um legislative people have looked at they
had the green screens that our staff use. So they're starting to realize this um and a lot of discussion about how we modernize and how we maybe pick and choose small parts and move forward and such. But they are realizing that they are asking us to do something that's
that's ridiculous. And my ask when I go into these meetings, I says, "Can I have your cell phone on your computer? I want you to do your job for a week without it the tools you need to do a good job." And that's what you're asking our our employees, our social workers.
It's impeding hiring because how do you hire a new young college graduate that has more technology in their hand when they go out on their lunch break, meaning their cell phone, than they do when they come in to do their job. So, it's affecting workforce, it's affecting services to clients. So, they're getting
it, but again, will they allocate enough money to to do it? Um, and I've got some really good county partners. uh Dakota County, Scott County, the uh Washington County, they all really and the Hannipans and Ramseies have so many staff that they're really working on this and trying to get it figured out.
But there's key issues in in all all these papers. So I will ask Miss Holty to make copies and send to both department heads and and um >> I hope >> county um staff. Um also, you know, there was talk about the property taxes.
Um we're we're lucky that we have a few county commissioners. Commissioner J, former Commissioner Jacob, he gets counties, but so many of his counterparts don't understand counties and what they're asking us to do and everything. So, he is a good ally to have the in in that position. And um
it's kind of crazy um the legislative, their buildings, their security moving around, but it was was really good. Um today is township, as uh Mr. Bameick said, today is township election. So, if you live in a township, get out there and vote. attend the annual meeting. Uh
you get a say a direct say in in passing budgets at the township level. It's uh really the true grassroots of local, you know, government. So please, if you're in a township, make sure you go out and vote. Uh make sure you know who you're voting for. Uh some places people didn't
put their name on the ballot. They forgot to. In my township, somebody forgot to register. So you got to remember, I don't know if you have to spell the last name correctly or if you get the first name, it counts >> and such. But it is a big day for townships and their budgets passed and everything. So thank you.
>> Uh that's it I think. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Second >> made by Commissioner Elsing, seconded by Commissioner Ward. Although is there any further discussion? All those in favor of adjournment, please signify by saying I. >> If anyone's supposed to say nay. >> We are adjourned. Do you want a fivem
minute break? >> Yes, please. Okay. Then we will >> then we will move on to committee of the board. I like the video. My son. Well, so after you get done with us, are you going to do something fun?
>> Um, not today. Um, not tomorrow. I'm going to go to Oaklair, my parents day, >> and help my help my daughter move. >> Oh, well, that won't be that fun, but okay. Maybe you'll maybe you'll enjoy. >> Denine had a medical. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> You take a sprinkles. One with
sprinkles. >> I did. I thought I made glass. >> Go for it. Yeah. Reliving your childhood. You're I think you're in charge of the facility. So >> yeah, if anyone can uh make a mess you
>> Thank you, Joe. Thank you guys. >> Yeah. >> Same with the dogs and Carl, I should say. Not just not just the dogs, but Yeah. But taking the dogs out is a big thing. Oh. I did and I emailed you like right
before the meeting. >> I had a good situation. >> That's exactly what it was and I printed it out. I can make an upgrade. >> All the detail of the final payment, but
it was basically cutting the material that pile. But I had also she said question >> I know people asking So, Moren, before the next meeting, are
we going to get the giant pages? >> Yeah. Okay. >> If you >> print those and they're available before that date, I will come pick them up. >> That's what our plan is. >> Yeah. Because I thought that's what the last set was and then I was like eight and a half. I couldn't have done that.
>> I mean, even thank you. But we didn't want to do those because it's a >> like if you add two together if we finish all and there you go. And it's dry. And it's dry paper. Yeah. >> But 375,000 of that is not that's been
cleared or that's still on a check basis, not a draw basis. Right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Like you only did you only authorized the 10und and some thousand. >> Thank you. >> Right. So the three so the 375 will come through, but that's on a check basis
because we had two checks. So Okay. >> All right. So, >> you know, that road cost a million dollars more than we had anticipated too, didn't you? >> Yeah, that was a >> and it turned into a horror show. >> I think I think we just leave it >> because
>> you know if we run situation we don't get out now but I think what we should do is in the future we need it if we know we got to have a meeting >> because otherwise we got a half a million dollars floating out there. You know what I mean? >> Well, half of it was state funds or more. >> Yeah.
Right. Because we're going to have a we're going to have a bigger draw of a couple million. So >> good. >> Okay. Sounds good. Thanks. >> But I do have something. >> Great. >> Okay. I would like to call this back to order. >> We'll begin the committee of the board.
>> Uh first item is on our agenda, page 105. It's item 9.1. And um to clarify this, at least as my understanding, um Commissioner Begley asked and I seconded that we add this item to this meeting. Uh this is the
second conversation, not the actual conversation. Um so if three of us agree to move this forward, then it would come on an actual agenda where we could vote on it. Okay? And the issue is that we make a formal statement about whether we will or will not uh take any action
towards uh either accepting the uh legislature uh the legislation that makes it rifle or if we revert through shotgun only. Um so we just make that statement. So >> if we do nothing it just moves forward
>> to the state. >> So is there even a need? So it would have to be somebody wanting to basically repeal what the states put in any place to create the motion. Correct. >> I I think >> so. My thought is so for the public to
know to reduce one of our bunches of emails and phone calls that come and so that the staff knows where the county board just go around the table and have all of us state where we're at. Then the staff would know. I think it's like do
you support reverting back to shotgun only zone or are you okay leaving it as is which means do nothing else just so that people don't need to guess like where where the commissioners are at. I'll start off if that if that's okay with the rest of the board. >> No, I'm saying that's not this
conversation. That's the next conversation. I think if we just all clearly if we all clearly state where we're at. >> But the but the point would be so that the press and the public aren't like waiting like we're going to secretly bring this back up in six months. And you know >> what's our deadline? 24th. >> May.
>> May. >> No, it's this year. May. May. >> Yeah. May 24th or something like it's in May. So >> and counties have done it all different ways. This is a hot topic at >> county meetings. >> Can we just go around and say where we're at with it?
I'll start off. So, originally um I had a lot to learn. I was um open and still am open to any and all viewpoints. Had to learn a lot, listen to a lot of feedback from people. Originally, my default setting was in terms of public
safety and public freedom was to lean towards public safety. And I still think that there's a lot of very legitimate concerns by people who are concerned about especially residents living next to state land about moving to rifles. Just last week, um, a military veteran
and an avid deer hunter said in the military were trained to always know what's beyond the target. He said, "But when deer hunters, some, not all, some, when they hunt, they'll they don't just fire at standing deer, they shoot at running deer." and you shouldn't, but he said they take six, seven shots and with
a shotgun slugs, it's going to drop sooner and less of a possible danger. So, I get there are very valid reasons um why people are concerned. Having said that, um listening to the input of many community members, from the county sheriff, um from other members of the
sheriff's department, etc., in terms of the experience over in Wisconsin like right across the river. Um I have now shifted my view and I am okay for and we can we can revisit this one year, two years, three years from now and see how if this becomes a major safety issue and
of course we don't want to wait until someone gets shot and dies but just to see how much of an issue it is. I'm okay leaving it the way that it leaving it the way that it is in terms of the state change. Um, and it's no secret that Senator Droskowski and I have a few
differences. So, my my concern also was if he was for it, then there must be a problem with it. But I must admit that there's a lot of research that went into it and I changed my mind on it. So, I'm okay with uh rifles and we can yeah to to keep it as is to end the conversation
about considering reverting back to shotguns though. >> Yeah. I there's inherently a risk every time I get into my truck and drive down the road. It's part of what it is. The statistics is 16%. When my grandparents were killed, they were 16% at fault
because some lady swerved over the center line and killed them simply for being there. That's the reality of it. And we inherently have risk every day. I can completely appreciate people that live in those areas. It's a choice to live in those areas. Um, you know, if somebody absolutely feels as though it's
a problem, I don't expect anybody to move. I don't expect anybody to do anything different. But, you know, we look at this and we simply say inherently rifles. I own rifles and shotguns and handguns and probably more guns than I should. But, um, at the end of the day, it's it's it's in the guns
don't kill people. People kill people. And, um, so inherently, it's in the hands of that. And, you know, I'm more than willing to see what happens. And so I I supported it. I guess you know I I wanted the public comment. I was actually surprised that there were not
as many people against it. Um that's what I was anticipating. So um you know my stance is an overwhelming support for their rifles, myself included. Um because again I I it's guns are only dangerous in the hands of people that
have something inattentively evil in their mind or tentatively evil in their mind. So, um I I I have no issue leaving the state law as is >> uh state law. I mean, I've asked what other state law can I circumvent and
none. Um I do highly encourage though rural land owners and we heard from some of them very concerned and such is to and I apologize that post senior land is so overburdensome but rural land owners should post their land. Yeah. It it that's something we have to work on. if
you're if you don't own the land, you should know that you're trespassing. I mean, but it just seems like how many people trespass and and and uh it creates problems. So, they need to they need to post their land even though it's overburdensome. And they need to control the hunters they allow on their land.
They're still in control. If they have people if they're leasing their land or if they're neighbors, maybe they can get together as a community, you know, small group say, "Hey, we only want, you know, shotgun or slingshots or bow and arrow." There's some people that only restrict it to bow and arrow hunting and such.
There's all kinds of of of options so that they can control who is on their land. Yes, they can't on other people's, but on their land they are in control and such. So, yeah, I think we just and again it can be addressed in the future if we do see a problem.
>> And just going back to the alluding to that taking running shots and I think anybody that's ever deer hunted has done that. There's no doubt about it. I got so bored with deer hunting, I shot the last nine of them in the head just because shooting their body was too big
of a target. So, I made it challenging, right? They were all dos. >> We do need them to hunt because we have this chronic wasting disease and everything. >> Well, and it's the reality of it is is taking a pop shot with a rifle isn't very accurate because typically you're scoped up and that's very difficult to
do. It is in essence the definition of a shotgun. It is designed for a quick fire, lower accuracy, bang, bang, bang, versus a rifle, you're taking a calculated shot. So, I see a lot of people, you know, in stands, like I I hunt in stands and um you know, versus
if I'm doing some sort of a drive, I would sooner have a shotgun than a rifle just because the accuracy of trying to move a target that fast is standing in the woods on a sidehill, whatever it might be, is going to be much more difficult. So, and chances are when you're doing those types of drives,
you're in some sort of a wooded area that you can't distance is, you know, you're only shooting out so far. So, I honestly see people actually packing both guns depending on how they hunt. Um, and having a shotgun for the drive
scenarios, have a rifle for posting, um, you know, day or night. So, that's what I anticipate happening. And so it's another reason why I say, hey, the the realistic aspect of this being a danger um is is exceptionally low. So,
>> Mr. Begley, do you want to have a resolution come before the full county board at a regular board meeting? >> Um I thought that if we just indicated our our thoughts right now, the issue could be put to bed with the rest. >> Do you have a Commissioner Meyer? Do you have a opinion? We all shared ours.
>> Yeah. Yeah. This is not the actual conversation. This is the conversation to have the conversation. So, >> I think we're trying to put it to bed. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, so to not follow my own rules, I will tell you. Um,
initially I reached out to Sheriff Ganrude and to uh our emergency manager Ben Klinger and they both sort of initially had a negative response but then asked me to look at the data from
the Wisconsin DNR because in 2012 they passed allowing of rifles. They had been doing a safety campaign prior to that. the numbers of incidents, meaning people getting shot, was on the way down once they had legalized the rifles that
continued to go down. Um, so it didn't make a difference in terms of any data supporting that there would be a public safety issue. The majority of incidents happen within 50 yards and the majority of incidents happen with people shooting people within their own party or injuring themselves. So there isn't a
statistical increase in the sort of shooting incidents after that was changed. So I despite the fact that I have a lot of empathy for the folks that came before us and have concerns because they're shooting and they're concerned about the people who are on public land and they don't trust the hunters, there
just isn't public safety data to support um reverting back to shotguns. So um I see our uh Winona Post reporter is online. I would highly encourage more articles in the paper about gun safety.
what are the rules and the regulations and encourage young people and and maybe you know some of the senior citizens need some safety reminders too. So maybe the press can help us enhance um you know rules, regulations and and just
basic gun safety. Um >> we've gotten so scared of guns when again a gun can't do anything until you put it in the hands of somebody. >> Yeah. So maybe they can help us out educate the public education. So, we are not going to bring this back to >> No, I think based on I think the staff can clearly say where the board is at so
we can put it put it to bed. >> Yep. >> Okay. So, moving on to item 9.2, discuss potential use of the annex for emergency homeless shelter. Um, there's not a lot in the packet, just the front page, but >> is it okay if I start off?
>> Yeah, >> I I need to leave at 11. So, >> just clarification. This was to discuss whether you wanted to discuss it at the committee. the first time, right? So, >> we don't discuss >> we aren't discussing it. We're just >> Okay, so we should be able to do this in four minutes. Commissioner Elsing,
>> thank you. >> All right. So, >> um there is a need for because there are sub there there are cold temperatures in during April. Um there is a need Wesley is going to close the the night shelter
on March 31st. Wanted to see if we could consider the annex or some and again this is on an emergency basis. It would not be every night. It would only be on below a certain threshold and we could skip showers. Bath toilets are needed. But we could we're not talking about a
full shelter full the Taj Mahal. We're talking about to see if this would be one option. And trust me, there's a lot of other dis I'm talking with multiple churches. I'm talking with other people as well who known um trying to find uh through April because there are cold temperatures in April as well. the hope
was to have it at Wesley, but there's just the the plumbing is just overwhelmed. >> I would be I would support at least having that conversation and bringing forward the data that we've gathered um from the sheriff's department and other folks in dispatch, etc. So, I would
support at least bringing this forward for a conversation. Yeah. >> Where are we on the bigger picture of what are we going to do with that facility long term? Do you want to? >> Do we do we need I mean >> this is just for the month of April for one winter.
>> Yeah, >> but I don't think you can just use it. That's the problem with ADA and all that stuff. >> Before we go into a long, you know, like 15 more minutes of discussion, I would say fine, but this is appropriate for the next meeting. >> Meeting. Okay. I mean that that prepare
your comments for the next meeting, please. >> Mr. Sing, before you go, >> hold that thought. Hold your breath, would you? >> Are you interested in having a fuller discussion? I'm interested in the discussion. I mean, I I don't want to downplay the situation, but again, I'm just cautiously >> Okay. So, I support that as well.
Commissioner, >> information is always good. >> Okay. So, I think yes, we we're willing to have a polar conversation. I thank you for all that. >> Although, can you put it in chat GPT and just >> Yeah, there you go. Okay. So, >> Commissioner Warren, you're you're surprised. >> I thought you'd be the last one we have
beyond after me. That would be >> the board is adjourned. Thank you. >> Really condenses stuff. That's good. >> Oh, Marie, is there any chance I could mine >> broke? Broke.