Uh, okay. Uh, first item would be the approval of the meeting minutes from October 14th. >> So move. I'll second that. >> Move a motion by Commissioner Eling, second by Commissioner Vaguely to approve the meeting minutes. Any
discussion? All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Okay. Approved. Um, chairperson's report. Well, we're in the cold and flu season and that's uh biggest thing everybody says is wash your hands. Um
>> did you make it to the shack meeting? >> The shack meeting was a struggle. I did not physically meet make it and and Jill was not either and we tried to online and they they they had some major problems. It was hard to follow. Um so I guess I don't have any report from the Shaq meeting. I didn't unfortunately I
didn't see any uh notes yet that came out about it. Maybe they did. I need >> Okay, >> some of it is about foundational like a public. >> Yeah, >> you on the recording there. There's I, you know, I get frustrated with and a
lot is happening at our state at the state level in all forms. I don't know if everybody saw the sheriff sent a letter that they don't trust the commissioner of of corrections yesterday. >> Mayors, 98 mayors sent a letter to the legislature saying, "Hey, quit >> quit Yeah. quit mess messing with us.
So, and so there's a lot of going, but I I struggle with public health because it's changed in 20 plus years and they're still trying to figure out what they're Yeah. who they are. Um, and every time and you know, our commissioners are political appointees
and so every time a new commissioner of any of these major departments in the state level comes in, they have unfortunately a different agenda or a different emphasis. So then the staff, I find the staff and I find them sitting at the shack meetings. They're scrambling trying to figure out what this, you know, commissioner wants them
to do. And so maybe you can shed some light on that. That's just my skept skepticism on >> I don't know that I can shed light on that. What I can talk about is the fact that we did review the foundational public health responsibilities and they gave more definition to some of those
which will be helpful as I walk through uh the presentation this morning and talk about those. It does allow us to be a little bit more clear as we look at some of those uh foundational pieces in the grant that's been provided for that.
But it was a very difficult a big chunk of the meeting we couldn't even get on for and then I exited because you couldn't hear. >> Yeah. It just there was technical challenges unfortunately. >> Very difficult. >> Unfortunately. Okay. Um there being no consent business, Jill, we'll go right
into um general business 5.1 is discuss contract with Hayawa Hayawa Valley Mental Health Center to support post incarceration care coordination services for substance abuse. And that was on page 117 of our general. >> Okay.
>> So, if you can enlighten us what that's all about. >> Uh, the post incarceration contract. I was thought I was doing a presentation at 8:30 this morning. So, I apologize. I'm feeling a little confused. >> That's okay. >> That's okay. >> But I can do whatever.
>> That's okay. Just a second. That it's it's 7.7th on our regular agenda. >> Yer Yeah, >> I guess. And I don't know, you know, how many people are we servicing? I was I was a personally I was astounded. Uh
Commission um Deputy Chief uh Mueller said what the average stay of our prisoners is what six and a half and five and a half days. So they're in and they're out. Um >> what do we do? And this is post incarceration. So what contact do we
have them after we let them out of out of jail? >> I think it's two-part. This is an uh this allows us to even though they're incarcerated, have contact during the incarceration period. And I think that's critical to engage because what we have
found is when you don't have that initial contact immediately and I find this in all areas of mental health and substance use that immediate when they're in the crisis when they're in the moment having that contact and when they're ready um to have that is
critical. This would allow us to provide that service during the time that they are in the jail, which is different from what we're doing. I have had some conversations uh with Gwen of the CJCC and talked about the fact that let's watch this. Let's look at the numbers
and the data to see if we see improvement as we move forward with that uh additional time that we have while they're incarcerated. uh it's just much more difficult to track people after they leave and to engage with them post
incarceration. So that initial contact is critical. >> Um so are ahead. Uh yeah. Okay. So the these would mostly be people who are in rep plus, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. And so the count is because they're full and have a waiting list, right? And I thought that
>> did Yeah. When made that presentation Yeah. >> Yeah. 15 and then another I don't know 10 or something on the waiting list. So that would be the count. Commissioner Ward. I mean I guess at this point. Yeah. >> And if if I could just jump into Yes. >> Commissioner Ward, you mentioned what
you know what do we have to do with them after they get out. That's what the re-entry program is all about too. It's that >> we help them support them um through either Haywa Valley or our treatment court. um in Highwa Valley has two two
people that are working with those folks and then they help them get onto other um funding that is not um or back into back into like their if they have social security disability or other kinds of uh Medicaid things like that that could
help fund them and get them off of of uh the other funding streams. But RAP really doesn't pay um a lot to them. In fact, it doesn't pay anything to them. it goes to the provider, >> right? >> Um it's it's my best example is buying
shoes with metal toes so that people can go to work, you know, and get get a job. So So it's really a continuum this this program that is on what is it? Uh item 77 of the agenda. Um and I thought some
of that was coming from the cannabis >> use it. It's all coming from grant dollars. >> Yeah. If there's no >> Yeah. grant dollars that we have. >> So the funding it does say CSU. So that's the cannabis. Yes. >> And then and then the wrap >> rap is up to 7,000.
>> You know, do we have to prove these people were are there because of cannabis? I think we're there's a stretch here. And we talk about, you know, like when we had the tobacco money, it was all related to tobacco. this cannabis money seems to be floating around out there
>> and we've talked about that with I know Emily's not here but um Emily had before Jill came on board Emily had been working with this and we actually met um myself Gwen Herbert who is the CJCC executive director we met with Haywatha
Valley to talk about this um and yes that came up like any other grant program from the state um or the feds but um we felt that uh there was significant um I mean these folks are suffering from substance abuse and mo
most of the time they're using marijuana so and sometimes that's a gateway >> but now marijuana has been at a federal level what marijuana's been declassified uh >> I think that's proposal by President Trump but
>> oh with him it'll be law >> executive order um I I don't know this >> does that affect any of the this cannabis monies. I mean, I maybe it's too early to tell. >> I think it's I think it's too early to tell, but this is the cannabis monies
from the taxes that are paid by Minnesota um sellers. I mean, the you know, >> people who purchase I just drove down, you know, Second Street and there's the, >> you know, several marijuana shops. The wrap, it says here,
up available up to7,000 and wrap is >> local levy. >> That's levy. >> That's local levy. >> Wrap dollars is local levy. >> Well, it started as a federal grant, two federal grants and then right local levy >> that disappeared >> and very small. Very small about 51,000.
Sorry. >> No, you're good. Two things is that there was a front page article, I think today in the World Daily News talking about what President Trump's executive order might mean for the cannabis industry and people in in Minnesota,
>> but it didn't talk about if it might affect the cannabis dollars or programs. >> Um, secondly, is this just uh this is a process question. Um, are we just discussing it or do you need a motion to approve it here and then approve it? approve it here then approve it at a regular meeting >> just to get it up on the disc I mean
continue this discussion of course I'll move to approve item 5.1 >> I'll second >> we have a motion by commissioner vaguely second by commissioner meer to approve uh the contract with high waha valley mental health to support post incarceration care coordination services
further discussion >> yes so research shows that for you know if someone has a substance abuse if they're addicted Right. Um and you help them beat that addiction and uh we have seen the numbers that the RAP plus
program has greatly reduces recidivism. So our own numbers show that it's really successful. Um for every dollar you can get between seven and 12 dollars back because you help somebody beat their their problem. So I am going to support
this um program. Any other discussion? I'm hesitant because six months, I don't think you change anybody's behavior in six months. I mean, yeah, maybe you get them started down the right path, but six months is a pretty short time to to
to change a hardcore habit. >> I would agree. And at the same time, I would say it's the the intervention at the time. within six months, you can actually make a huge uh ch help them make some steps. But recovery is a
process and it's different for everybody. And although it may take longer, this would give them the opportunity to um post incarceration become employed, have a funding stream, and do all of those things that are going to move them off of the county levy dollars or any other funding stream
and then be able to uh sustain that over time. because you are correct uh Commissioner Ward, recovery is a lifelong process and it's something that people engage in but that first time period of 6 months is critical particularly with folks who are engaging
with systems such as the legal system and it's the most costly time. So the more we engage here the less we're going to have to pay later on. >> Okay. And I'll hold you to that. >> Yeah, we can quantify that. >> But it is a grant fund. It's all grand.
>> Well, no, it's not. It It's The WAP is local. >> RAP isn't, but this particular is, right? And is it >> part of it is local. >> Part of it is local. >> I thought we gave uh opioid funds to RAP. >> It's been requested. Yes. >> But I don't know.
>> 2026 >> if we've in 2025, but we would not have to use living money in that case. >> Okay. Does that >> is there a continuing I mean do does it look like it's going to continue to be funded through a grant or what's what's >> I think >> long-term outlook I I wish I could tell
you a long-term output but I think we're re-evaluating each contract and re-evaluating as we go and doing that in partnership with you >> one of the biggest things that I see happening all the time in government these programs are great they're funded through something the funding dries up and then it's all of a sudden the local
person is stuck with the tap trying to figure out how to pay for it and we're seeing that over and over and over and over, which is why the letters are going out to the state. Hey, these programs are great, but we're having to foot the bill. And it's getting difficult for the average person to foot the bill all the
time for somebody else's mistakes. And the accountability has to set in at some point for people where the the ease of getting out of their decisions makes it so easy to get into it. And that's one of the biggest problems that I see is
that accountability is going out the window in the United States because we're designing so many programs to make it easier to get out of poor decisions. And so it's a catch 22 on that basis of why it it's that way. So, I agree 100%
with wanting to help people, but I also keep it in in in context that at what point is it no longer everybody else's responsibility to make up for somebody else's bad decisions? And that's the catch >> and that's what we see. And because it's
leaning that way, it's going that way full steam ahead of, hey, you don't have to be a convo. We got 17 programs to bail your butt out. We got all these ways to put you up in housing, find you a job, find you the boots with steel toes in them, get everything else and everybody else who's not making those
decisions and making the good decisions to fund the people that are not making good decisions are standing up saying, "Hold on, you hold me accountable. We need to hold these people accountable, too." So, I'm standing up for the voice of reason for the people that have to foot the bill to pay for people who are
making bad decisions. And that is the issue that I have because those people are coming to me saying, "Hey, we're running out of money to help all these people out. At some point, they have to be held responsible for their decisions." And so that is the issue that we have, I think, at hand. So these
programs at face value sounds so good, but is anybody looking at stopping it from the get-go? saying, "Hey, you will there are big consequences for these decisions." And that's the preventative action that we need to make sure just as well as the postreaction.
And so when I go to my constituents and talk about everything that's being pushed down, it's one of the biggest things is, well, why do I got to be, you know, this is literally true conversations. How come I got to be the good guy so they can be the bad guy? How come I got to be responsible so they can be irresponsible? And we now I got
to pay to get them out of the mess. And you know, so I just I want to put that into context so that everybody that's out there that's doing these good programs also has the flip side to this that >> absolutely >> we are we are footing the bill for irresponsibility.
And at some point the people that are being responsible and not making those decisions and choosing to go down the right paths can't keep picking up the tab for people that are not because everybody has the same opportunity to make that decision. I could go do drugs right now. I could go rob a bank. I
could do everything just the same as anybody that's made a decision and I choose not to. So the choices then there's got to be consequences for those choices and that's where I think we need to be careful. So as long as the funding doesn't dry up because what I see happening is the funding dries up for these and then we say well we can't get
rid of that great program when in reality we end up footing the bill now. So >> being that you say that uh this is only a sixmonth extension so that takes us into June. uh how are we what are we doing in June? Are we are
they coming back and looking and have we budgeted for an another six months and I don't think we have. So I mean uh that that that's a big question I have. You know we're doing something for six months and I don't know why we determined six months who
who decided that um because we run our budget on a year. I think it's because it's under under the state fiscal year for the for the cannabis dollars. The state the state has a different fiscal year than >> Yeah, there's different fiscal years for different grant companies.
>> So, it's it's I don't know for sure. >> Okay. Well, that makes some sense. So, they'll be back to us in June or May. >> I'm not This isn't a point to not help people, but we so often don't talk about accountability. >> We've lost accountability in our society. >> Yeah. I would love to have a
conversation with you at some point about how I believe accountability fits into both substance use treatment and mental health treatment and how um it's a piece that I feel strongly about and have throughout my career having been both you know a therapist and a
substance use counselor and how that shows in the process. uh because I hear you and I can understand your perspective and at the same time um being as close to it as I have been and myself being uh a person who feels
strongly about accountability uh and also feel strongly about treatment and how do we get there. So um I would welcome that conversation because I think it's a good one. >> I just think we need to project more of it. >> Son have a comment. Um, since this is the public health uh and I I would like
to speak to Commissioner Alings as as in my role as an elected, not as your as your um corporate counsel, but like Jill, I have had 40 years 40 years of working with people as a public
defender first and seeing how some people just can't get out of a cycle of both poverty um abuse. They come from families that I I've seen three, four generations. Um, and when you say, you know, people they can just pick
themselves up and be accountable and be responsible. Yes, they should, but they sometimes can't. And so these programs, particularly the treatment court program, we designed that treatment court program to make people accountable. And when they're not accountable, the the uh consequence is
that they go to prison. So, they have that that uh incentive to both do well, but then they realize as they go through the 18-month program that that they are feeling better, they're getting they're getting off drugs, they're getting
health treatment. We've combined that. Um so, it's not an easy, you know, it's a very complex problem. So I it's not just about metal tosh boots, but that's that's an example where even that helps them get that job they need so they
become a taxpaying responsible citizen and can be back with their families. So it it kind of pains me for you to say that and I I agree or I should say I respect your position. I would ask you to pres respect the position of those of us who've been working with with folks
who've been um in poverty, in homelessness. I mean, these are people at the, you know, just it's it's it's so it's so frustrating to hear hear what you're saying as if people can just pick themselves up and, you know, get a job.
They can't. They're they're they are uh they've been abusing substances. they have serious mental health problems. Um, so anyways, >> we we have another agenda item, but we have >> Yeah, I just wanted to say there wasn't a blanket statement that the idea wasn't
that every single situation is the same, but as a whole, looking at society, we we are not near as accountable as individuals, I feel. So, in other words, when we continue to make these processes easier for people to to to obtain
because the consequences aren't as dire as what they once were, it's what keeps me from doing things. It's it's the process. I think we can see it in our schools. We can see it in a lot of situations that just the persona of people is changing as to more of dependent type system. Feelings and all
the things that we never used to discuss when I was in school now become relevant. There's a lot of things that have changed that have allowed situations to get simp look at look at the murder rates. Look at everything that's gone up because there's a disconnect and and the the even getting
rid of certain simple things that law enforcement used to be able to punish people for we can't anymore. So in other words, accountability in my opinion is changing. And so the cautionary tale to any protocol in business or government is to have the flip side to determine which way it's going. So there has to be
an equal and opposite position to every position to make sure that that position is fair and valid. So all I simply said is that the positionary agent is to be sure that we're also holding people accountable, which is the far left, to helping people. That's all all it was. It wasn't a blanket statement that every
situation was the way it is. It's just simply saying we need to make sure we have accountability so we don't make it easy for any parties. One or a thousand doesn't make it doesn't make a difference because if every life matters, one or a thousand doesn't matter. That people understand that this
isn't a get out of jail free card. I can go do what I want and there's 17 services to help me recover. That's all I'm saying. It's not that people don't have it hard. It's not that people don't have any of the things that you brought up to place. So, I find it a little bit offensive to take my comment and put it all into one lump subject and say that
I'm referring to every situation as exactly the same and that all people are held accountable for their actions when ultimately they even are regardless unless they have some sort of >> held accountable but you're making generalizations and I respect what you're saying. Please respect what I'm
saying and we can agree to dis or you know disagree. My parents stopped me to be >> call the question. >> Good conversation and I think know we don't want to cut you short on your public health thing. So we can >> Well, we can have we can have you come back. This is good conversation. I think
everybody's a little stressed this time of year. It's supposed to be a happy holiday season and some of the things we're asked to do today are not making it happy holiday season. >> Yes. And I I welcome these conversations. I think they're important and I I really have seen and we'll talk
about that some with the public health presentation how we have changed over time and I think that goes right to Commissioner Elsing's point. Uh we're ch we're constantly changing and how do we adapt and change to meet those things and incorporate critical pieces.
>> All right. Uh so we have a motion to approve. Um all those in favor say I. >> I post nay. It is. It is approved. Thank you. Um, >> thank you. >> Do you want to bring this next item back to the next
>> to do you justice unless you got just a few things you want to highlight and then we we'll we can come back at another future meeting and go through the presentation because you went to a lot of work. I mean, I don't >> I didn't do most of the work. I want to give Jackie Henderson credit for the work that she did. So, I I think in
order to really give it the time that's needed, let's do it another time if that would be okay with folks. I really I want I want to think about the history of it and how we get there because so much historical context is important. >> I would move that we bring this table it for now and bring it back in January.
>> Second. >> Okay. >> All right. Uh >> thank you. >> Do we have a motion to table any? No. There is no discussion. All those in favor say I. Oppos. Approved. All right. >> Thank you, Jackie. Sorry. Take two.
>> Okay, now I got to figure out what >> Good morning everyone. >> Morning. >> Morning. >> Beautiful sunny morning in southeast Minnesota. We start our meeting with um public
comment. Uh if there's anyone wishing to address the Winona County Board both in the audience and online, uh we ask you uh to state your name and address and you have two minutes to make any kind of public comment that you would like to.
Um so is there anyone in the audience that'd like to make a comment? Seeing nobody come forward. Is there anyone online that would like to make any public comment? And Heidi, the process now Heidi has to
let them in. >> And I know sometimes that's just a slight delayed. Is there anyone wishing to make a public comment? And the last time, is there anyone wishing to address the Winona County
Board with public comment? Okay, seeing no action, we'll move on. Uh item four is the approval of the county board meeting minutes. We have 4.1 was a close session December 5th, 2025 and 4.2 county board December 11th,
2025. >> Move to approve 4.1 and 4.2. >> I'll second. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Vagley, seconded by Commissioner Meyer to approve the meeting minutes from December 5th and December 11th. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I.
Nay. Okay. Approved. >> Um item number five, acknowledge receipt of approved committee meeting minutes. Excuse me. 5.1 is the parks and environment advisory committee of October 7th, 2025.
And 5.2 is the land records of June 4th, 2025. >> I'll move to approve 5.1 and 5.2. >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion by commissioner vaguely to approve 5.1 and 5.2 parks and
environment advisor committee October 7th and land records June 4th. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. Those nay. Okay. Accepted and acknowledged. All right. Uh number six uh consent comments and approval of the
agenda. Um Sonaman. >> I have no comments. Thank you. Okay. Commissioner Vley. >> One comments. Okay. Okay, >> uh comments at the end. Full 71 >> for discussion.
>> 71. Okay, we'll make that 8.0 and comments. You said >> yes. >> Okay. All right. Commissioner Olsson, >> nothing for me. >> Meer, >> I have a committee report. and Miss Holty.
>> Nothing, Madam Chair. >> Okay. And I have a couple comments and a potential uh future board action. And um okay, let's see. We uh hold on a second. I had a lot of them here, but
let's see. Um if if people notice that in our consent business we're approving a lot of contracts and I guess they all have their place. Um but I do have some people here I would like to point uh
poll uh 7.8 get a little more info on that. So we'll make that 8.01 01. And then um let's see. Um I could I could probably pull them all, but I won't. >> Um 7.10,
I would like a little more information on that. Uh 7.19, I would like some discussion on that. So that's 8.03. And 7.22, I would like a little more uh
clarity on that. So that's 8.04. If I got all those If I got those right. 78 7 10 719 and 722
and you've got can you read those? >> I would move to approve the agenda as it has been amended. >> Okay. I'm sorry. Um we have a motion by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Olsson to approve the amended agenda. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I oppose. Nay.
Okay. Approve. Now, Miss Holty. >> Right. 7.1 has been pulled. 7.2 approved 2025 assessment of federal corrections. 7.3 approved renewal of service and business associate agreements for day training and habilitation with ABC works
Lac Crescent. 7.4 Four, approve purchase of service and business associate agreements with family and children center for mental health service I'm sorry mental health services basic living social skills 7.5 approve purchase of
service and business associate addendum agreements with family and children's center DBA Hayawa Hall for intensive residential treatment services 7.6 Six, approve purchase of service agreement with Prestige Care LLC for guardian
conservator services. 7.7 approve contract with Hayawa Valley Mental Health Center to support post incarceration care coordination services for substance abuse disorders. 7.8 has been full. 7.9 approve renewal
of purchase of service and business associated agreements with Thomas Allen Incorporated for general case management. 7.10 has been pulled. 7.11 approve renewal of purchase of service and business associate agreements with
Blue Sky Incorporated for general case management waiver funded services. 7.12 approve updated rest periods policy 5.15 7.13 approve elected official retirees
2026 benefit resolution. 7.14 Approve resolution for 2026 sheriff's uniform allowance 7.15 approved memorandum of agreement with LS61 ship commanders and jail program coordinator
7.16 approved memorandum of agreement with LS64 licensed officers 7.17 approved memorandum of agreement with ASME courthouse 7.18 approved memorandum of agreement with Wixie
7.19 has been pulled. 7.20 approved 2026 funding for aquatic invasive species management prevention plan by soil and water conservation district. 7.21 accept compliance status update and 7.22 has been pulled.
>> Move to approve the consent business as it has been read. >> Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Hing to approve the consent business as read. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. Those nay. Okay. Approved. >> Right. So then going into general
business. Um the first item is uh 7.1 was pulled and commissioner Nelson. >> Yeah. So this wasn't directed specifically at uh obviously it's about administrator Holy, but it's not directed specifically towards her. I just go back to we relabeled what a cost
of living increase is and and put it as a general wage increase. Um, you know, I I look at general wage increases from a multiple different factor, but this is just a relabeled cost of living. And I I'm not a big fan of percentages. Um, you know, we look at, you know,
performance evaluation. We look at, hey, yep. You know, can can can any business absorb uh rates or is somebody being overpaid, underpaid? Um, you know, I think with especially as you move up in the upper echelons of pay periods and pay things, it it makes it very
difficult to justify percentages and I don't think it's fair to the people below to do that. Um, and you know, I realize that the union had what the union had and unfortunately we can't always dictate the way it should be, but we do have some power when it comes especially to our high paid employees to
say, hey, this is a realistic salary for what it is that the job is being entailed. So again, this isn't directed towards any person. It's just my stance on giving blanket raises. I believe they should be merit-based and they're how beyond just the merit of the individual,
but also the circumstances in which they're in. So I I do not agree with the 3% um just blanket called a CO called a general wage increase based on percentage basis. >> Madam Chair, I'm going to move to approve this item.
>> I'll second that. We have a motion made by Commissioner Meyer, seconded by Commissioner Olsen to approve the general wage increase for county administrator. Discussion. Um, did I miss it or did we have a performance review? >> We did.
Who's was in that room over there? >> But that's been was it several >> six months ago? >> Six months. >> Yeah. I I'm not comfortable with handing out a s when you, as Commissioner Al said, when you get to the upper, it's
it's a significant dollar amount um without a real current um performance evaluation, and I would like to see it tabled till after we um would do that performance evaluation and uh that's my stance on it. Commissioner,
>> we're going to be knocking on in a short amount of time, when you do the math, compounded a $300,000 administrative position in the county, which I'm not sure anybody's going to agree with that. So I think we've got to kind of put things into wraps and again it's this isn't specific to any one person or their performance. Mine is based
conceptually based on the concept of just compounding interest. I mean this is what makes compounding so interest in investments. You know we just can't continually do that because it snowballs very very quickly. And I would agree the uh percentage
increase just keeps growing. If it's a one-time, you know, you did a cracker jack job that year, you get a bonus, call it a bonus or something. It's one time and then you go back to the original square. With these percentage increases, it just keeps compounding
astronomically over over the lifetime of the thing. Commissioner Vley, >> um I can relate to what Commissioner is saying. I can also put myself in the position of um county staff, especially newer staff of that 3% at a $50,000
salary. It's very different than 3% at a $200,000 salary. I as a young teacher, middle even middle career teacher, I know how hard that was to look at. Um I know that's a diffic does cause me it is difficult for me to approve this. I am
going to vote to in favor of it. Um, and looking at the other what other county board commissioners get paid, it's simply the market rate. This is the labor demands. I wish it wasn't the case. And if it was, the market was different. Um, that would be a different
um discussion, etc. But when you look at the simple rate, what other county board u county administrators and people in the private sector equivalently make, um, it is in these numbers still blow me away. three years into this new term, I'm still blown away by how much everything costs, etc. So, I'm going to
vote in favor, but I I hear what you're saying in terms of 3% at 200,000 is very different than 3% at 50,000. And that does chew up more of the the levy for that. So, I'm going to vote in paper and I want to thank um every um body
department head and others for the work work that they do. We have a motion made by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Olson to approve the general wage increase for county administrator. All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Nay. >> 32.
>> I still would like to have a performance review scheduled sometime in the first six months of 2026 if possible. Okay. Uh moving then to the next item that was old is uh 7.8 eight approved behavioral health 360
program with credible mind. Um can somebody explain this? I mean, is this a is this a um just a computer program or something that somebody goes to? And and I I do realize it's no levy funding is requested, but reimbursement is through
adult mental health initiative grant. And I always have to question what else could we use that money for? Because it's 13,000. And then we're we're um a platform implementation and platform and then we have a Spanish translation and a mong transl,00.
Is that the best use of $13,900? >> And I thought we had some redundancy in some of these translators that were paying other places. >> Yeah, I don't know. Jill, it's Chief. Thank you. Um, this is something that will be accessible to all of the public
of Winona County. And I think that is an important piece to note. This is not for folks only coming here to receive service. It will be a link that will allow them to link to various ways to look at mental health, to assess for
their family or for themselves and to think about some of those pieces um of their well-being. And so, yes, certainly you could always say we could spend it this way or that way. Uh, I have some ways that I want to adjust kind of our
spending over this next year or two and look at some of those pieces through the mental health initiative. And uh, this I think would be something that would touch more of our community than maybe just people coming in to receive services.
>> And how do we intend to let people know that this is out there? That's that's the big thing. It it can sit in the shelf or in the the web. I think that's a great question, Commissioner Ward. Um, one of the things that I was just talking with uh someone about is how do we communicate when we
do some of these things? How do we get that word out there and let people know? And so that will be something that we will be looking at as we do this because it is not something that we have done historically. >> Madam Chair, >> yes, Commissioner M. >> If we try this for the year, can we get
I don't know some figures, numbers about people are >> access. Yes, they have a lot of data that they collect. Oh, go ahead. >> How many hits on the website? >> What people have used it, what things they've used, most popular. >> That is one of the benefits of this particular organization. They're working with several counties even in the
southeast region and throughout the state. And they do have the uh technology to monitor some of that performance and some of the data that we could bring back to you. >> I'm going to move to approve this item. >> What's that question? >> Okay. Okay. Is it pardon me?
>> Do you have to register to use any of the services or is it an out? >> It's a link. It's just a link they click and they can look at the different tools that we have and some different services. >> So, we had a motion. Commissioner Meyer seconded. I believe Commissioner Olsen >> um to approve this.
Uh it it's for one year, >> correct? >> Okay. One year. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> Nay. >> I I have reservations. I don't know how I register that vote with the term I
need to use. Okay. >> Abstain. >> I don't think you get like I don't think you get a scale >> means no scale out of >> Yeah. I just >> what you vote. >> You know again if if we don't let people know about it, it's a useless
>> and I will I will work to bring that information back to you as well, Commissioner Bard. >> All right. Right. Okay. Uh then next item was um 7.10 10 approved purchase of service agreement with National Alliance on Mental Illness Southeast Minnesota.
And that's on page 177. And I think that was a a $10,000 expenditure. And again, what are we getting for our $10,000? So there has been recognition throughout the historical context of service delivery where uh we recognize that
people with lived experience have very valuable input into how people engage with mental health and substance use services as well as how our services are delivered in the community. And so this group is a group, the National Alliance
of Mental Illness, is a long-standing organization where family members and people experiencing mental illness um come together and use their experience as well as their education around topics to really help design and give us
feedback on the systems and the service delivery so that we have better outcomes and we have better ways of providing the service. this particular group is um leading that in our area for the counties that are listed and with that
it is no tax levy, no local county levy funds. This is an expectation that we deliver um this type of advisory or or local committee that gives us feedback that we utilize such a a a group and
doing it within the the counties that we have creates some efficiency in that regard. Madam Chair, >> Commissioner Meyer, >> I did not have anything to do with this contract coming to fruition, but I have been concerned about this for about eight months. Um, we have a statutory
requirement to have this mental health local advisory committee. I have been to the meeting that was being run by Haywa Valley Mental Health um and really felt
like in the seven years I've been a commissioner, I've never had a report and that is one of the things that the statute asks for. So I feel like we maybe haven't been getting the information that we should have been getting about this committee. So, I
think this is a great opportunity and I do support this um request. So, I would move to approve this request. >> Let me get this. It's going to cover a statutory requirement in essence >> and that's a little bit different than
obviously just here's another group and I I look at a lot of these groups and this is just hypothetical and there's merit to every one of them. But I also sat on how many waterboards and I saw the redundancy in waterboards over and over. And then what happens is as every
individual, nothing to you, but every individual stands up and wants to believe in their cause and their group. And then when the funding dries up, it's now I need you to fund me. And we saw that in all the waterboards. And we saw that we had 32, I think, at one time. I
mean, it was just insane. And I see the same thing happening. And then when every waterboard comes to be, it's their cause is the greatest. You need to say that is my fear with every one of these. Now statutoily is a little bit different until we can change the statute. >> But that's what I see happening. There's
just so many groups that all have a good cause that all want us to publicly take something from a taxpayer and say fund me. And that's my fear is that I I see waterboards happening all over again. And there's so many of them. So obviously I'm going to agree to do this
simply the statutory aspect if it covers our our rear end on one thing and I do believe there's probably some good to it. My fear is that the funding dries up and then we have somebody coming saying hey we want to put the local taxpayer on the hook and they don't even know what they're getting for
>> but this is this is just not Winona County. This is multi >> four counties. Correct. >> Is it the 10,000 for all the and of course the National Alliance of Mental Health NAMI? Uh I think they probably get federal funding.
>> No, that's a nonprofit. Yeah, it's a nonprofit >> and that's what's federal funding. Yes. >> Yeah. >> But but that Sorry. Yes. >> That alludes to the other thing. If it's a grant money, if it's it's it's just taking it out of this pocket >> coming from somewhere, >> right? >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, if it's
statutory and uh if we can get some more additional information, um I'm I'm a little concerned. Okay, so we just approved that website that's supposed to be mental health. And then this is mental health. So when you click on and you know when you click on the internet, they're listening to you. If you thought
about buying if you thought about buying a kitchen appliance, the next time you open up, you get 10 ads for that kitchen appliance. So, I guess my one of my concerns is once you click onto one of these functions
and and I've seen this happen, uh, you know, you go to a medical doctor and they do these surveys and they ask you, they take, in my opinion, they take you right down a dark rabbit hole. Have have you felt depressed lately? Have you felt like not doing this? Have you, you know, they take you down? So, when we create
all these things, where does it take an individual? What dark rabbit hole does it take them down? And is it really beneficial? So that's one of my overall concerns. Commissioner Vaguely, >> um about a year and a half ago, I attended one of the local advisory council meetings in Winona. Um it was a
great discussion. I think that your point, Commissioner Meyer, is a good one that it would be good to have some kind of summary of the notes afterwards. So I've only been to one of >> me too. >> Um but if if you either you or I could contact Eric Severs who could then contact um the NAMI folks, etc.
>> We could talk to Megan Tony. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> Yep. tonight. I'm going to also go in favor, but I think it would be good to get more information from to summarize those conversations. >> And when you I'm sorry, please. >> Lastly, the neat thing about that, there's actually more people who use the services and staff. Sometimes I go to
meetings and it's all staff and like a little bit of community. Here it's a lot of community and a little staff. So that's that was good to see. I >> mean, I think I would have appreciated education when I first became a commissioner seven years ago on >> Yeah, we hear nothing. >> The existence of this committee because I got asked about it on stage at a
presentation. I was like, what? Right. So, I think it'd be good even if we hadformational little presentation about what our what the statute says and what our responsibility is and what we could get out of it >> as a program. >> Be happy to do that. >> Thank you. And and I hate to say I've
lost faith in statutory requirements because statutory requirements don't necessarily come with the proper tools, meaning funding and services to uphold the statutory. So I I I hesitate when I'm for when statutory requirements are
thrown in my face. Commissioner, >> I would sooner have the powers to be that are creating the statutory situations to not fund it at the beginning because I think 80% of them would never go through. The biggest hook is when they're funded >> and then it quits
>> and then it's established. And we've seen it I've seen it over and over and over in government and even in some private sector things that there's money out there to get things started and then it draws up and then they fail. So to me I think it would help decision basis without taking the money out of my other
pocket to get it going and then later on taking it out of this pocket. >> Okay. So we have a a motion and a second and I think I heard a request for additional information at some future future point as to the functions of this group. Any further discussion? All those
in favor say I. I. Post. Nay. >> Passes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Chaffy. Um, then let's see. I think the next one that I pulled is 7.19. Approve the 2026 CEDA economic development uh page 227
and Ross is here. So, we've been paying these we've been having a what once a once a week staff person. Is that correct? Is that it? and they assist with uh with loan application evaluation um asset evaluation for determining um
loan risk and uh then assist with developing the loan documents for executing the loans >> who's if I may >> who's at the heart who who is our I I see Chris Han who I know personally right >> um but who is actually our liaison now
it was just >> um blanking on her last name right now. Um, >> don't remember. >> Okay. >> S H SS. >> And is that your question? >> Um, I question it because uh that fund
is there's some activity. Um, and not as much as probably there should be, but you know, when we're paying $32,340 a year, and if my math is right, we divide it by 52 weeks, divide it by an
eight hour day, we're paying $77 an hour for somebody to come in here and do I, you know, some paperwork. Um, that that's a lot of money per hour. And I have seen some of the smaller communities around. I think I just read something about
Rushford or somebody that went down to, you know, once every other um week as far as a staff person. So, I guess uh I haven't said on the EDA I I and again coming up in one of the next
items, we're looking for dollars and I'm just I'm looking for dollars and not totally losing the the concept of the word but uh trying to turn it back a little bit when I look at the $77 per hour that that's a lot of money. >> For sure. >> Yes, Mel. I you know I've I've had a lot
with CEDA in the past just trying to get small community development Lewon St. Charles Udica dealing with those things. A lot of these cities are contracting individually on their own to do some of these things. >> Um there's no doubt like when Dusty was
here she she did some stuff you know trying to help bring businesses in and grow these communities for not only things that I had going but for other people who I was trying to help. Um, how how many requests are we actually getting
that justifies >> what Lou uh Lou is handling the dayto-day right now? >> I mean, I see a lot of the municipalities taking this on on their own. How many actual county projects is this actually covering? Because I can't imagine it's a whole lot.
>> Well, um, at the beginning of the year, we started with over, um, um, right around $1.2 $2 million in the RLF fund. Um this year we've spent that down um and closed on four loans and um um so we
have $900,000 out in loans in the community. But >> how many how many people is that serving? >> How many how many applications do we see and how many projects are we actually serving? >> Those are four four loans um um to small businesses across the county.
>> So what's the average cost per loan? You can go up to $200,000 the maximum loan amount. >> Our cost to initiate the loan for four. So we have how much annually are we spending for CEDA? I'm looking at what does it cost the taxpayer
per loan to administer that loan to help gain this loan. >> Um we don't track our our our >> But I mean what's the cost of >> time like that? >> 32,000,000. Okay. Last year was 32,000 and then some of your time. So to
process four loans was, let's just say your comp is $8,000. Um that's $10,000 for administrative cost per loan. >> Is that arguably correct? >> I would. Yeah. >> Seems exceptionally high.
>> It takes a lot of time to process those loans. I can I can tell you that when they come through um it's um it's uh administratively um without the CEDA um um person even with the CEDA um rep I'm
spending maybe half my time um you know um trying to process that loan and um and they're putting and and their team >> you said half the year trying to process four of those loans. No, like during while those are coming through, it t probably takes a month to um to process
that loan and over the course of that month um just the um communication um between our board, bankers, attorney's office. >> Yeah. >> And the loan applic. >> So if we say arguably you're $100,000, two months out of 12, you know, roughly
20% of your time. So that's 20,000 on top of the 35. So that's 55,000 divided by four. So we're up to about give or take 13,000 alone. Is that right? >> You I I'll I'll take your numbers. >> Yeah. I'm just saying I'm looking cost
of the program >> for the value in which is being received and trying to determine, you know, they it could be extensive, but is there a way to lower the cost to use these funds? You know, is is this the best case to get those loans processed
through CEDA? you know, that's what I'm trying to figure out. So, >> um, >> vaguely, >> um, Lou, remind me. So, um, we only pay it's it's a full-time position that's split between different entities. We pay for one one day a week. There's Good View, there's St. Charles. What are the
other entities as well? >> Uh, who have CEDA contracts? Um, it would be St. Charles. It used to be got it was St. Charles, Lewon, Good View, and us. Y >> um as of this year, ne for next year, it's just going to be us. Um if the
contract's approved and uh Good View, um St. Charles is uh is going full-time. They're hiring um they're doing some restructuring in in their admin. They're they're hiring a new administrative assistant and they're going to bring on half of that time is going to be um is going to be EDA. So, they're bringing that in-house. Mhm.
>> Um Lewon um had a new um administrator and they let it go and um she was going to also bring that in-house. Um I don't know that they've done that, but um but that was their plan. >> And I'm sorry if I just finish um the EDA has a number of different bankers on
private sector bankers, etc. If any of the other commissioners would like to see how it works, I would invite you to come um and attend one of the EDA meetings um especially when one of the loans is being reviewed or approved, etc. It is a I think it's a I sometimes also have been concerned when I look at one
day a week how much that costs and would it be better if we just hired someone part-time, halftime, full-time and get like a better rate per hour or rate per per day, etc. Um, but I think that right now considering we don't this is all this contract. We don't pay benefits, we
don't pay anything else. This is just a time by warps the the hourly rate, etc. >> Oh, we're paying for it. We're paying for it, but also paying for a program that allows us to administer um uh loans and grants to businesses that the private sector is also interested in
helping support in terms of stop gap financing as well. We're never we're never the first stop on their in any business redevelopment or development project. We're just gap gap financing. I'm I'm in favor of >> Meer.
So, uh, county used to have a full-time EDA person and that position was eliminated after that individual left. When I was first on EDA, um, we didn't have loans really. We'd have like one.
Um, Jim, God, what's Jim's last name? He's the >> BCOT. >> Yes. Jim Berkota was the chair and he's a banker and he used to take it sort of as his responsibility to market >> the availability of these loans. Um, and the reason that we initially did the
small contract with CEDA since we don't otherwise do any EDA work really at the county, um, and very little time is allocated for our staff to to work on that. >> Um, part of the job was going to be to promote it. um because not enough banks
if the like the concept was that it needed sort of continuous promotion at the bank so that lenders knew that it was available, knew that we had money and would help us to make sure that it got used rather than just sitting there. So, uh, from that concept, I, um,
supported it and I, I still I believe conceptually I believe in economic development work and want the county to continue to do some even though we don't do anything near what we once did. I mean, I see the value of it. So, Commissioner Hson.
>> So, the argument is though that if we look at four loans last year, if the municipalities are pulling out with the exception of one, but we're asking all the taxpayers to fund this, that really is not going to go work in
these other communities. They're only going to work outside of those communities now. Correct. They're not going to be part of Lewon, St. Charles. I'm going to say our larger municipalities that are were I guess we could say a larger percentage of the population base was going to benefit from that.
>> They'll they'll allow us to coordinate with them, but yeah, they won't be working for them within those communities. >> And so it's really hard for me to put the same amount of dollars in and I would argue with the four loans that were done, how many of those were in the municipalities and how many of them were out were they were they all out of the
municipalities? Was that county related? >> It's a mixture. Yep. Yep. Somewhere. >> No. Now we look at >> we look at you know and and and commissioner I know where you were going with that but I argue that we don't have much staff time. We have according to Lou two months of staff time of just one
individual to process four loans. So when we look at when we look at what that cost on the $900,000 evaluation that's roughly 6%. We look at what a bank charges it's somewhere between a quarter and 1%. So we are looking at somewhere between
six to 24 times the cost to administer a loan through these programs than what a bank would charge to administer the same loan. >> Gotcha. >> So that's where it becomes hard for me to say is this the most efficient way to hire CEDA to do something when they have a low impact and exceptionally high cost
to the taxpayer to administer a loan. Could we be doing this a better way? It's just a question. I'm not against CEDA. They've helped me out. Do is there a better way that we could do this? Commissioner Meyer. >> And so the point was that that initially and I'm assuming still her only this
individual's only task is not to just administer those loans. It's also to promote those loans. And um I know that sometimes depending on what the interest rates are, it is or isn't more attractive. And I don't know what the rate is right now because we had changed
it at one point because our rate was too high to be competitive. So, I would argue it isn't just processing four loans. It's promoting the entire program and making sure that citizens are aware of it and then gets taken advantage of. >> And I don't, you know, I mean, I don't
know about the maybe the feasibility of redirecting some of the time to do something else or cutting it in half or whatever you want to do, but this recommendation comes through the EDA. >> Yeah. So, Commissioner Olson >> and Lou, in the past, we have used our
funds to help other communities, EDAs, when they were out of funds. So, it does help the entire county and other communities. And I know that we've come full circle with uh Natalie. Um and then we've gone down to this and we've gone
down to the one day a week. And um I I would say that the one day a week is kind of the minimum to make it, you know, useful at the county. If you go to two days or one day every two weeks, it's really it's really not useful for us. It's not enough to like keep them
engaged and be doing anything. Um, so, um, you know, I think it's the minimum if you're going to have a CEDA contract to do one day a week. >> I just question it if other municipalities are getting out of it. >> To me, I'm questioning the value of it
and I'm questioning the value of the cost. I'm not against CEDA. I honestly am not. But I have to be I have to look at the value to my constituents. >> And I see the value diminishing and I see the costs going up. Mhm. >> Is that something we could do and take
that 32,000 and do what the other communities are doing and saying let's bring it in house and can we do something like that? So I think CEDA has to prove their value. Chris is a good guy. I know well we live several blocks from each other. Kelly's his wife is a great person but ultimately we have to
have the value of what this is. So >> yeah I think it's fair to to to look at you know whether we bring it in house or we contract out. I mean that's always um something that we're constantly assessing and I think that's fair you know >> couple questions this this all this
whole EDA dollars came from the 2007 floods >> and yes our rate is high so it wasn't attractive it didn't make sense if you if you took our rate you probably didn't have the best business plan if you're going to pay the high rates because our rate was high loan and and part of the
problem I see is okay we're not the first lender We're probably third or fourth on the line. So if if a loan defaults, chances are So how many defaults? Have we always collected all the the loans that we've put out or do we have a default rate that's unacceptable?
>> Well, I think there's been a couple of defaults over the >> 15 plus years that we've had the RLF. There's been a couple. >> St. Charles was one, wasn't there? >> There was the one uh in St. Charles for that uh recycling place out in their new industrial park. >> One, I think
>> um that was in the late teens. Did we recover from that? Because that >> was Yeah. How much was that? >> Um >> I think we did recover part of that. >> We Yeah, I mean they paid on it for a bit. So once they default, >> they stole the building and they got paid down a bit. Um
>> but um but there again I I guess I don't know why if all the banks have all their you know they have their checklist and their scrutiny to give them the initial loans and we're just a little pocket at the end why it's taking us so long to approve it not using the bank process
and their paperwork. I I I I don't know your process. Um I I've taken out very few loans in my lifetime and um uh nothing >> part part of it Marcia is that I'm not a banker. Um neither are the Cedar representatives. We're not bankers. So
we're we're muddling through with our bankers and with >> bankers a committee who are >> we do but they're not their job isn't to actually close our loans. Um, so we we do it takes a lot of >> community banks, >> a lot of communication,
>> they they survive in this community because they are community banks. Um, anyway, um, and I know we have talked about it, but and I don't know if we've ever asked if this, uh, fund and again I think it was
statutory, but statutes are to me in my opinion to be challenged. Can we what is the flexibility of that $900,000? Is there something else we can do with it? And I don't know. We've we've hinted at asking that, but I don't know if anybody's ever asked what it's what
we're limited to using that money for. Commissioner Meyer, you can >> told in the past that we would need to go back to deed >> and asked them permission to do something different, >> right? But I don't know that we ever have. And I mean, I don't know. I guess I would like to know what the flexibility of the money is. We we have
been in contact with deed over the past year if you remember we were here a year ago and we had a similar conversation about because at that time we had a lot more money in the fund and was like the the conversation was this isn't being utilized so how can we utilize this better and we were looking at different options and we did go and um we have uh
spoken with deed and um and um got some uh some clarification um it is limited but it would have to go through deed for for approval for anything that we're doing outside of what's in our guidelines. So, we'd have to change our guidelines and then, you know, and DED would have to approve
that. Um, if you look at the other revolving loan funds that come from DED, there is very strict criteria for that. And so, that's I've I've used that as kind of a ours came from the flood, so it's different. Um, but it's still being used for the same purpose and it's still
coming from the same place. So, I've used that as kind of a guideline for how these funds would probably be approved and and should be used. um there is some opportunities for um using them for lending to other communities like other
EDAs or other government entities and um I think I would take that and there is a actually within that statute in those guidelines um there's ability to lend to um let's say a housing authority like um HA and so that's one like a SERA loan that
would go to SERA and they could revolve it within theirs for their um um for the housing that allowed or we have to ask permission to do that. >> We would have to ask permission for that, but I think it's something that would be within the realm of possibilities to be approved. >> And Commissioner Eling,
>> just to first of all, with all the dealings I've had, I don't know anybody else has with people wanting to establish business, it's common conception to just ask a simple question. Can the government help me? What level of government? Right? So awareness of these programs is as simple as I've never met somebody that hasn't
asked that question already. And you just go, "Yeah, talk to the city administrator. City administrator already knows what's available." Boom. So as far as handing out pamphlets, brochures, and TV commercials for these types of programs. Everybody knows there's something there. They just might not know, but there's already somebody in place that can direct them where they
need to go. So public awareness of this is very minimal that we need to promote. The biggest thing is is that the cost of the program. And one of the questions that I have is when we, you know, and Commissioner Olsson alluded to and I think Commissioner Ward did about, you know, in essence giving money to other
communities is the, for example, let's just say money was given to Lewon or UDICA, whoever, are they on the hook to pay us back or is the city is their EDA or whoever we administer those funds, they're on the hook. So, if they lend it
out, are we scrutinizing who they lend it out to or are we putting the city or the municipality or the township or whatever on the hook to pay us back? >> Um, they would be on the hook. Um, and in the in the the case of like an EDA, um, they would uh be involved with um closing those loans. It would be from
the um the city of let's say Good View if they were to to to borrow. >> Winona County loans Lewon money. Whatever they throw in a pile and burn it, Lewon's responsible, not whoever burned the pile. Is that correct? Well, that would be correct. >> So, it's a pretty secure level.
>> That's a a legal matter, but but we're borrowing the pretense that they have the speculation what to do with that. >> That would be my understanding. >> Right. Right. We're borrowing under the pretense. We're not setting the regulation what the money goes towards. We're just simply giving it to them and they're creating their own regulation as
it goes. And if they did if if there's a default on the loan, it trickles back to that community, not to the individual that borrowed the money from them. So what I'm saying is it's a very secure loan if it's municipality backed. >> So it should be absolutely. >> So is this $900,000 in an
interestbearing account? >> That'd be um a question for finance, but I believe that they did have that. >> We are making interest on our higher than we're lending it out. I would close. Commissioner V, >> thank you for all the info. It's something we could perhaps call a question on this. Also,
>> there is not a vote. There's not a table. I thought you I'll make a motion to approve the 206 CAD EDA um account. And the just a note for my fellow commissioners, we're at 9:45 and we're still in the consent items. I can be here until 12:30. I cleared my schedule
for a three and a half hour meeting. So unless the intent is to fill the bus, which that's not the intent, just like a time check, but maybe we maybe I don't want to like um kill conversation. Maybe there are some things later on to to table or to to move somewhere somewhere else. Well, I'm assured you will
speedily move the meeting along to meet you. >> I'm surely >> I know I know how you do that. Um, okay. So, we have a motion uh and a second to approve the CEDA economic development professional services contract. Any further discussion?
I would say that I think with this conversation we have some questions to ask both of our local committee and of deed of what can we do. One thing that does come to mind and I don't know if it's anything we want to pursue but I know other counties have taken EDA money and a few years ago we had and I don't
know if we still have a a child care crisis u the lack of child care you know infant childcare and everything they they actually you know renovated uh existing buildings and turned them into child care with EDA money. I don't know if that's something that we want to do or even contemplate, but they have used
it. They don't just have a revolving loan fund. They use it for other things. And I guess that's that's where I would ask for some research. >> I would be I would be open to also having a conversation about repurposing some part of it if that was agreeable to
enough commissioners or perhaps for SER. >> Yeah. Well, it's something other than just a revolving loan >> that commissioner. >> Well, I think these conversations have come up multiple times over the years and we've addressed them at our board. So, I >> Well, I don't know if we've ever gotten concrete answers.
>> Well, then I think Lou just told you when we've contacted D. >> I mean, you have you have good questions. Maybe put them in writing and we discuss it all the future EDA meets. >> What can we do with our money? Okay. All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Nay. for it this time, but it's under
scrutiny. >> Okay. All right. Um, then let's see. 7.22 confirm payments and dispersements. And I do apologize. I usually give uh Miss Holy a long list and I was uh time got away from me and
it was a long long um uh long day. But if you look at the warrants, um I just have to stop and question and maybe we need to look at our process. We have a new finance person. how we pay our bills and what goes on the credit cards and who has authority for the credit cards.
A couple items stood out to me uh real quick in the last group of warrants. Um we paid $171 well it's on the warrants. $171.99 for a Greyhound bus ticket to Los Angeles through the RAP program. I didn't know we were sending people to Los Angeles, California on the RAP
program. Um newspapers, we have, you know, like four or five newspapers were paying for subscriptions. uh a Google YouTube account and I'm not sure is that for doing doing our things here. Um tools there were tools and it was the exact amount $475
three times in one very short list. So I don't know what those tools were but it's odd to have the exact same you know and I I guess I have to relate to my own personal account. My husband scrutinizes every purchase and make sure the receipt matches up with the bill on the credit card statement because they can get very
large sometimes and you have to you have to watch them. So, I I question that. And then there was a software, Absolute >> um Amazon software, $10,800. I have no idea what that's for, but that's a big chunk of change. And then ammo. I mean,
do we really go through about $17,000 of ammo? I don't know. I know we have a shooting range. They need to practice and everything. I don't know if that's a year supply, two years supply, >> limited, and just >> um it just, you know, >> Well, deer hunting. >> Deer hunting. Yeah. Was it rifle or
shotgun ammo? I don't know. But again, I don't know our our process for people ordering things. And if you got a credit card, even in a personal life, a credit card's easy to whip out and such. And I would ask departments who have the spending authority to stop and think,
would I spend my own money on this purchase? And then I know Miss Holty will will get back to me with what these things are. Um, but they just jump out at me and and I have to question what it is. And I do really have an issue with software. If it's something software we use, do our neighbors use that same
software and can't we maybe make a joint purchase? Um I've always felt software is never used to its maximum more users can use it at a lower, you know, if you have to buy a license or something versus the real, you know, hard software. >> Yes. >> Don't take away the Google account. I
watched the >> Is that for watching? I watched the planning commission meeting yesterday just to prepare for one of these agenda items today and I did not know what what that was. >> I'm going to move to approve the warrants. >> Second that. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Vagely to
approve the warrants. Uh any further discussion? I do look at them so I I want to let people know I am looking at them and it does make me kind of nervous how how many things are what we spend our money on. Um all those in favor say I. >> I oppose. Nay.
>> Okay. Approved. All right. Um, moving in. Thank you for tolerating that. But there's a lot of stuff there that uh um I hope we all learn something about what we're spending our money on. Um because we're not spending our money. We're spending our taxpayers money. And uh
just very little comes out of each one of our individual pockets, but it comes out of our pockets as Commissioner Eling reminds us. Okay. Moving into 8.1, adopt resolution for the 2026 budget. uh page 247. Madam chair, for the sake of discussion,
I will go ahead and move to approve the resolution for the 2026 budget as it was presented in our packet. >> I'll second. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Vegley to approve the budget as presented in our P
packet for uh revenues of 82,818,698 and expenses at 82,818 690. Um discussion, we have a motion. That's um Commissioner Meyer and Commissioner Vagley. Discussion. I cannot approve that. Um that it's
to me not being fiscally responsible and and really taking uh into consideration all all the things we have. So I've asked all along for just few categories in that line item budget which I don't know the line item budget is just the right tool for us to use to analyze. Um
it it's it's very cumbersome. you you uh Miss Holy and whoever puts the pat together reprint it, but I have no idea what changed in that line item um and such, but I did for for my own entertainment um yesterday. I used the 1119 2025 printout. That's the one I had
a hard copy of. So, I sat down with that and my pet peeve has always been uh professional services and supplies. I feel it's kind of like the black hole of the county government and not knowing the individual breakdown. But when I added up the professional fees and
services, there were 65 line items in the budget and that totaled 5,994,643. That's a big black hole to me. $6 million. And then so I went through supplies. Almost every department has a line for supplies. Now again, I don't know what's that. Paper, pencils, uh
cleaning supplies, whatever. But there there was 61 line items in the budget. Uh, and that totaled I was surprised. It wasn't as much as I thought. That was $543,357. Um, again, there's a lot that goes in there. I don't know. I could buy a lot
of paper and pens or cleaning supplies. I'm not sure what each department puts in as quote supplies. I don't think it's computer software or any of those things. I I again I I I can't tell you exactly what's in there, but I think those two items alone
and then just we haven't cut anything. I'm sorry people have we we've rearranged the dollar sum. We've rearranged some people. Now I do have to I did question in the environmental services it said in the meeting minutes
that one half-time person became a full-time person but then Miss Holty shared that we actually reduced 1.6 six persons and such overall which I didn't realize that we hadn't um uh done but
then I have to listen to last uh meeting uh one of our electeds uh Chelsea Wilbright put in a plea that her department is probably I don't know I don't know if it's underst staffed if it's lack of training or or lack of
knowledge of the systems or what the combination is but when we as a again you talk about statutory, you talk about mandates. One of the biggest jobs we do is put out tax statements and we didn't get out tax statements in time for some of our citizens to meet their local uh
city's uh truth and taxation. That's problematic to me. Now, what the what the res uh resolve to the problems are, I don't know. I've heard, well, we need new software. Well, we spent a lot of money again on Tyler uh software for our tax calculations and I'm not ready to
abandon and buy something new shiny out of the box that has the same problems or or because Tyler is used by a number of counties. Um so when we have those kind of expenditures but then later on on our agenda uh 8 um
uh I guess it's like 8.8 8 through 8 uh 29. Uh we're giving away some and and I I call it a giveaway. It's philanthropic giving of taxpayer dollars. U a couple on that list are mand are are statutory
requirements, but the bulk and the majority of them are not. When we can't pro provide our taxpayers with current accurate tax statements, we're failing people. But yet we're giving money to private nonprofits. Not to say they
don't do good work, but it it's not a a mandated. It's not a core function. Um I think we need to readjust our budget somehow to address our tax preparation uh that our citizens depend on it. And if we can't trim some of this professional uh services and some of the
supplies, those are just two items uh that I I pick out that were easily to tabulate. So, I I would like to see us get that budget down um into a much more reasonable um and I think I came up with about uh I'd like to get it down to uh about uh
26 20 25 to 26 million down to about a 5% levy. Not not uh this 12 point no 10.9 >> 10 point yeah >> Mr. We're I just >> it so Commissioner Lord had called and
asked me about the situation with the with the taxes and >> one of the things that I said just looking at the way I've tackled problems in the private sector in the past was and then immediately running through and hiring somebody now this doesn't allude to the contract services point that you
brought up but oftentimes you got to spend a little money to figure out what a problem is. So, one of the things that I had brought up was, okay, if if it's surely a staffing situation, often times >> there's a lot of things that can happen in those situations and sometimes our $100 an hour people are doing $5 an hour
jobs >> because somebody has to do it or maybe that's what they do to fill their time, whatever that might be. So, one of the things that I brought up was not to immediately turn to looking to hire somebody, but is there a way just the same as we do in our business, we rely on our accountants to pick up the slack
for a certain amount of things that can happen internally. So, is there a means to get to the bottom, get somebody caught up, and then we look at potentially having to bring somebody in if that position is severely understaffed? It's going to allow us to really determine what the true problem
is before we go out and hire somebody. So, that was just my two cents on that. So there there clearly is something happening in that department. I also can't support this uh for a multitude of different reasons. Um
we look at everything that's been thrown at us and you know I look at businesses. I look at farming right now. I look at all that stuff and and it just at some point we have to say no. At some point we just can't fund everything out there
that looks like a good idea is a good idea. At some point the constituent says these might be great opportunities or they might be good things but we have to figure out a different way. The second side is is that I go back to what we said before. We often times get thrown a very small portion of what we deal with
and then we scrutinize that to death and without looking at the other 60 70 million that's on the board. I realize that we've had some tough obstacles with health insurance and things like that, but um you know I I go back and say if we would have looked at every department
and just set the precedent that there is no moving forward. In fact, there's a 5% reduction to cover the cost of what it takes to have a job. um would that have set the precedent different on the ask and forced every department to really
scrutinize because the way it's set up right now I feel as though it's kind of business as usual and then we're just taking the ask that everybody has and whittling that down to slightly less than 50%. And saying hey we did a good job. Some of these things are good
eliminating people and things like that, but I don't think it's enough to appeal to the taxpayer and with the continuence of all the taxes, I think the pencil's just got to get sharper somehow and we got to figure out where that comes from. Um, thank you. I didn't realize you had
wrote down everything on the supplies. I just did a mental note scrolling through that and I roughly figured it was around a half a million. Um, and it's something that I had brought up too, you know, I mean, just taking something as simple as that and really finding out is it a black hole or not? And
somebody brought it up to me and I'm just going to say this as a voice for them. If we cut 10% out of government, would we all would everything shut down? I said, no, it wouldn't all shut down. Would you see a few things different? Yeah. Well, how much would that affect
me? I didn't have an answer because it's all relative to the services in which he receives. So at the end of the day I think you know we have to cap this thing to a certain extent um to make it palatable to the public and um you know where that
money's come from. That's why there's people getting paid a lot more money than I am to sit here to figure that out. >> So >> Commissioner Meyer. >> Thanks. I'm going back to the packet that we had. This is back in October, our second meeting.
And so, um, Commissioner Ward made this comment. Well, we haven't cut any. I'm going to say a not true. So, our health insurance increased a million. Our salaries increased two million, a quarter million for the Minnesota Paid
Family Leave Act, 350,000 increase in what the Department of Corrections said we needed to pay, a million in capital requests, uh a quarter million to make up for the cuts in SNAP, and there are a few more items. So, our staff and administration
have cut over two million in order to make up for those shortfalls. And so I think they've done a great job of trying to meet the initial demand. Do I think that this is too high of a levy increase? Yes, of course. Do I think
that we have been dealt a set of circumstances from a state and federal government um that has shifted cost on to us and made that even more difficult? I do. Um but I think our staff has done a great job and I I do want to tell a
story. Um, I'll try to anonymize it as much as make it as anonymous as I can, but a constituent u, actually the a family member of a constituent called me during the summer and um was upset. It's the story is really about an elderly
couple. They're they're in my district. They've lived, worked, raised their kids in this in our community and they're both in their 80s. One of them's been suffering with um some dementia issues and the other one has stepped up to be
the caretaker, but the the caregiver uh part of the couple is failing now. And so they'd been spending some of their own money to try and get some help to be able to stay in their home. And this family member called me. They were
exasperated and angry because they had come to the county asking for a help in July and were told the soonest that they would get services and an assessment for services was going to be March or April
of next year because that is the amount of time that it takes for us based on our staffing levels and the complexity of the products that we have that the state has given us to help Now the individual has had some more
degradation in their abilities and um the family member felt like it this is now a dangerous situation. So I think for us to say oh well if the federal government's going to push more administrative requirements on us but
we're not going to fulfill that we're just going to go with our current spending level. we're going to make what is already a difficult situation, an inadequate situation worse. And part of the reason that I wanted to run for county board is because the services
that the county delivers re directly affects my neighbors and the most vulnerable people in our community and and I want us to be able to deliver those services. So, I do support this budget. Now, uh to Commissioner Ward and Commissioner Sing's thoughts, you know
what? I am totally open to scrutinizing the budget and I don't find much value in that line item report. those spreadsheets that administrator Holy showed us, I think two meetings ago, that do some summary and then categorize
the the services that we provide by what is mandatory, what is discretionary, what is a core function of this department and how much does each of those cost, how much are we paying with the levy, you know, how much are we paying for reimbursements that come from
the other government entities. I think that will give us a terrific ability to do some of the detail level scrutiny that you guys are asking for and that I totally support and we are going to start that right after the first of the year. Am I right?
>> Yep. >> Yeah. So, I definitely want to take a number of the steps that you've talked about. Um, but I also feel like I think Commissioner Vaguely said this last year that you may see this uh, Commissioner
Warden as outrageous, but this is already a compromise. Um, and I really do want us to be able to provide services. Um, and that is the tension between efficiency and taxes is one that
we all live with. And um I thank you for everyone in our staff. I thank you for your work on the budget. >> Um there's thank you for that. Uh there's two documents that um we need to take a serious look at and it
was provided it was inventory of mandates, core functions and other service functions. >> That one. Yes, that one. >> Yes. Um and we need to put page numbers on it or maybe they got cut off >> and we need to do all departments. >> Yes. Yes. because like most of them are blank right now. Uh yes and there's a
lot of uh Y's and N's in the is it mandated or not and I think that's a tool that we need to look at um to start with um because like it just very quickly it's the well I it's the statewide health improvement program again it's showing that we're spending
quite a bit of taxpayer dollars to make that it is a major grant they talk about uh language interpreter I don't know if that's in just one certain area but you can go down this list and there's a lot of uh wise and ends and I think we need to scrutinize and use this as a tool um
to um uh condense because if we start this year with 82,818,698 uh that's an increase base. What are we going to start with next year, Miss Holty? Are we going to start at the
$82,818698 as a base and then build from that? It seems like it's almost like the wage comparison. Oh, I'm getting X and I need 3% more. So, here we've started at Okay, if we go to this 80, say $83 million, what are we going to use as our base
next year? And maybe you got a plan to change something, but if we just if we keep starting with that original base, it's just going to keep growing. And I don't know and I know you provided us a chart one time of the last you know 15 20 years what our levy increase has been. There was one or two times when it
was like zero and one. But even if you start at zero are you starting with the base of 83 million. I mean that's my that's my fear. It just keeps growing exponentially. Where do we stop and draw the line? We know it's all
going to get worse. The federal government is doing lots of things. uh the state government's doing lots of things. Um so we know it's only going to get worse, but how can we per keep perpetuating the problem? So the question is okay and and we'll start that process
real soon. What what do we start with for 2027? Miss Holty >> for me. >> Um in conversations I've had with um our administrator, uh I know that we face a
dire consequence next year. um that that that budget and levy is going to have uh a tremendous amount of pressure on it. So to answer your question that there's no I mean the tide is rising. So um and
this is uh the answer that we have to come up with. I do appreciate um I I do a lot of the purchasing for Houston County for uh supplies uh janitorial supplies. Um
the toilet paper I buy um is the best deal I could find. And um and we use the same amount but the price has increased um because everything's increased. So I, you know, I could break it down to just
supplies like that. And I'm I'm very I keep a very small inventory on hand of all my supplies just because why keep it in our uh store room when when we can keep it in their warehouse. Um, so I I do know that as an employee of
another county, um, in my small little department and how I add to the budget that I do, um, I'm I'm I I really look at our purchases um, closely and uh, you know, to the
some of my co-workers um, and staff would say I'm too cheap because they want a certain product and I won't do it. So I, you know, I trust the employees uh that are making these decisions um are doing so uh with the
utmost um outlook on cost and availability and consequence. So >> do you doc the question I have is do you purchase the toilet paper for the whole county or just the jail? >> The whole county. >> I don't do the jail. Jail's separate because uh they use they use a better
grade of toilet paper in the jail than we do for the employees. So >> figure Yeah. So you do I mean again we've talked about this many years ago of having a supply system and I don't know that we ever did that where yes one person would control
how many pens or pencils we how many you know rolls of toilet paper do we buy and and my fear is that we've got multiple people buying multiple things at maybe not the best price. Um it's just you know it's easy to I hate to say it it's easy to flip that credit card out there. We buy a lot of things on Amazon, which
you have to trust is is usually one of the better resources. But again, I don't know that. But thank you, Miss Holty. >> Commissioners, as I've shared at previous meetings, the intent is for us to start working in January to have the
data for you so that you can have an understanding of what it costs for the services and programs. We're going to break it down to the best ability that we can. um that takes time for the leadership to do that. It's a work in progress, but the intent is so that we
can have conversation about what things do you as the board want to continue doing as discretion discretionary spending. Um and at what level do you want to provide the services that are mandated?
That's in a nutshell what we're going to have to talk about. Um, yes, we are going to continue to focus on where can we generate revenue, where can we fine-tune expenses, but the discussion to put us in a better
position for 2027 is the prep we're going to do in the first quarter of 26 because we have to make decisions the first quarter in order to implement and have the impact that you need for 2027's budget.
Well, that's the intent. >> Okay, Commissioner Vley, >> I'll try to be brief. Um, this is what tax breaks for billionaires and the ultra rich looks for looks like. Um, the tax cuts get um the buck the buck gets passed from the federal
government to the states and states to the counties. The counties should not and cannot and should not pass the buck to cities or townships. Matter of fact, I think the only real increase that we're seeing is an increase to soil and water. that's instead of passing the buck, we're actually investing in that program because of the returns and how
it impacts people in rural Winona County. Um, I also agree with the issue of unfunded mandates. Um, the Minnesota African-American Family Preservation Act is a great intent. >> Good job saying it. >> Um, that's that's not even all of it.
There's there's still the second half that was added later on. I I don't have that, >> but yes, we need >> it's being scrutinized. Yeah, we need to ask our all of us need to ask our elected officials to either fund it or get it off of our backs because that's an example of what happens when you pass
the buck and the county is the last line of defense. We um are where the rubber hits the road where people um have we need um to be accountable. In the 1970s, Minnesota, this Minnesota miracle, this is not the hockey team.
This is not 1980 the hockey team. um this is the 1970 Minnesota missile miracle um led to a big change because property taxes were increasing so much. What they did with conservatives in power was lead to a shift in towards more funding coming from the state
level. Property tax is the worst kind of tax by far. So, I hope that we can continue to put pressure on our state and federal elected officials to stop passing the buck down to local government because that has a big impact on us. And it forces us to make decisions that are pennywise and pound
foolish. There's a difference between being cheap and being fisc fiscally conservative and fiscally intelligent, etc. One of our goals is effective and efficient services and just cutting for cutting sake. There's always room to be to be trimmed for sure and to be fine-tuned. Um, but Sometimes we need to
be careful about being pennywise and pound foolish. So I'm going to vote in favor of of the mo of the levy I'm sorry of the budget amount and then the levy which was in the which is the next item at 10.96. I'll stop there.
>> Okay. I do have a question on the um capital improvement plan that's part of this motion. How do we as the year goes on? How do we scrutinize what we're really going to spend and if the money is available to do these capital improvement projects? Uh, one of
the big ones that comes to mind is I've got several citizens that are concerned about a major road project we're trying to do. And if uh in that particular we get bids so we know what it'll cost us. Not unlike the health and human service where we have no idea what some program is going
to cost us. How do we do do we have the authority or how do we insert the authority to say no, we don't have enough money to do these things? It's just like this um courthouse roof. You know, if we're going to if we're going to bond for it, that that $3 million
roof will cost us $6 million by the time we get done paying any kind of bond or anything. So, where and when do we have the authority to say, let's re-evaluate where's the money coming from? Do we have the money in the in the to do these projects, Miss Holty?
>> So, this is one of your opportunities is as approving the capital projects, right, >> for the next year. Y >> um another opportunity would be the direction to have each one come before the board for approval prior to implementation.
>> So, I mean, that is within your discretion. >> I'll support that. >> Okay. I think I think I would I think the public deserves that and I think we deserve that because this is a very massive no list. Uh circumstances, conditions change, priorities change. So
if do we need to make that just as a a policy? >> I would appreciate a direction, you know, a majority of the board providing that direction for me to move forward with. >> Okay. Uh what's the feelings on the board? any do we want to put a dollar amount to it or just anything on the
capital improvement plan that we have a final vote on the item I mean and it can come in on on consent or general and it always can be pulled and that way we get the question and actually look at the you know if we're getting bids >> I like the pardon me
>> the ability to do that and pull specific things yeah >> Mr. vaguely. I see >> I think just to be clear what we're asking the county administrator to do is to put any and all capital improvements for may we do that >> any capital items have to come before
the board even though it's in the budget >> plan. Yeah. >> Is what I'm understanding. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> So it leaves you the discussion to say yes or no. >> I mean we do we do it with roads and bridges. That already happens, right? >> Um and the courthouse roof is a whole
conversation. Ah yeah about everything. >> Yeah. Okay. Sure. >> If it's if that is a sign usually a significant item in a in somebody's budget and changes. Okay. So you have direction on that Miss Holty. >> Yes ma'am. >> Okay. All right. That's it. >> Just with that conversation I think it's
important um that we have a good understanding of certain capital improvement things. And I'm going to give another example for my current uh employer. Um, I had some boilers uh in the budget this year. Um,
so the boilers I have uh no longer I had can no longer get parts for. So they were cut out of the budget um and to my aggravation. Um but we're going to sit and we have to get parts made to fit these boilers at a great expense just to
keep them operating. And uh so just as a caution um pennywise pound foolish um sometimes the decisions to cut certain things um end up costing you money in the long run. And if it's January and 10 below I sure hope those boilers are
still working. Yeah. >> Well, it's not the intent to necessarily cut, but to give some discretionary thought to >> it's good conversation to have, but you have to know that >> it's amazing with these 3D printers how many parts you can make nowadays.
>> I'm getting one made for $4,500. >> Yeah. I mean, it is,000 $1,000 part last year, >> but our manufacturers, right? Things get old and worn out and they're just not going to keep sh parts on the shelf. I know. Okay. Um All right. So, we got the capital improvement plan. Uh, I guess the
question is in Janu, you didn't answer the question. In January, when we start looking at the budget, are you assuming an 82 83 million budget and you're going to build off of that or we where where's our starting point? Do we have a starting point to start the next year's
discussion? >> I would say we do not have a starting point because we have to evaluate everything. >> So, basically looking from the ground up. Okay. Right. And and the one unfortunate part and talking with a lot of citizens is when we send out the tax statements, it's
it's not necessarily the county that's the biggest increase. Our school districts are asking for a lot of money. Our cities are asking for a lot of money. And then then it gets down to my dear sweet little township is pretty conservative, but then again, the amount of services that are required at a
township level are are minimal. Um, but it it's the total and of course I've offered for school districts or cities to send them out and we'll pay the postage, but they don't seem to want to take that over. It's part of our obligation. All right. So, we had a motion
and a second to approve the budget by I'm sorry. >> Meer and Vaguely. >> Meer and Vaguely. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. Oppos? Nay. Nay. Okay. 32. All right.
Um, then moving into 8.2 is page 355 to adopt the resolution for the 2026 levy. >> Commissioner Ellen, >> I make a motion to uh adopt a levy for 3
and a half%. >> I'll second that for discussion. How do you get us there? >> How do we get us there? Yeah, that's that's the challenge. And um you know, there's a lot of outside agency funding. There's a there's a lot of things internally that I don't think have been
fully scrutinized. Um you know, I brought it up before. It's doing the math on what Commissioner Meyer talked about the savings that we had. If you deduce that into an 80 million $82 million budget, that's 2 and a.5%. So we we we found 2 and a half% to get
rid of and we're asking to bring on another 11%. So in reality the true cost to the taxpayers right around 13 12%. Because the 2 and 12% is what I brought up last year. Are you sure we keep are you sure we're running at 100%
efficiency? And the answer is no. We found 2 and a half% to get rid of. So you know I asked the same question again. Are we running at full efficiency? Uh I look at the a industry right now and there are no options for a
people to get out of what they're in right now. There's no option for me as an a business to get out of what we're in right now. I have to let people go. I have to scrutinize everything. I have to limit our ability to do things. I have
trucks on the road that have 250 to 300,000 miles on pickups because we can't replace them. It's not kicking the can down the road. It is simply the money isn't there. I can't go out and just take it from somebody to replace
that. So, I will have some thousand fixes that are now going to be a little more expensive long term, but we cost average them out to stay in business. And I still say government should be run. I've asked this question multiple times to multiple people. Do you feel government should be run like a
business? And overwhelmingly, yes. And so if we're faced with those challenges as business owners, if uh families chased with with paying the increase in all these taxes, they can't demand from their employer that they get
a raise to cover them. So I I I still think there's room for improvement. Um I don't have all the answers. You know, this information I know is coming, but I think sometimes, like I said, like somebody else said, if I cut 10% out of government today, how would I be affected? The reality of it is is I
think the roads are still going to get plowed. I think we're still going to have the same amount of security with our with our jail and with our police force. Um things might look a little bit different, but we're still going to be able to provide services that we need. They might not be perfect, but I can't do business perfect either in this type
of situation. So, um I think it's there. I think it's justifiable. I think it's palatable for uh the taxpayer at this point to understand that there will be some sort of an increase. Um, but I just think year over year over year these types of things are are are just not
being it it causes scrutiny to the public eye and um, so that's what I said. Okay, any other discussion? I think I brought up most of my points in the first conversation. Um, okay. We have a motion to set the
2026 levy at 3.5%. We'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Oppose. Nay. >> A. >> Motion fails. Commissioner Meyer. Oh, Commissioner Vagley.
>> I'll make a motion to approve the levy to be set at what's included in the um agenda packet. Uh 10.96% 10.96%. >> I'll second it. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Vagely, second by Commissioner Meyer to set the
levy at 10 >> 96 >> 96. Further discussion. I think we made all the points. It's not to say that we can't try and save money. Um every dollar we manage not doesn't belong to us. It belongs to somebody
else. and it doesn't belong to the state of Minnesota and it doesn't belong to the federal government. It belongs to the people living on the in the land and such. So, we have to we have to um honor that, I think. And the only way we can get taxes down is if we don't spend
so much money. And I've said I think we have a spending problem um not a not a revenue problem. And I think we need to learn to say no and set boundaries. um we just can't uh in my opinion we cannot keep nodding our head to everything that
everybody wants and uh doesn't want or nod to the the spending and not the the cuts. So um again I I can't support that kind of levy. Um I apologize to my constituents who have called me. Uh they know I'm trying to get it down to a
manageable amount and they understand that. Um, I still feel very bad, um, that that's what it is. And I do encourage everybody to take advant when we send out the statements in the spring, the actual statements in the spring for everybody and anybody to
apply for that special refund on property taxes. Now, unfortunately, that's just the county. You can't take I don't think you can do the school or the the city's uh maybe that's a separate thing. Ours is the >> and I I I'm unclear. >> I think it applies to the whole package.
>> Does it apply? And we need clarity on that because like I said, school districts are taking one of the biggest chunks out of everybody's. So I encourage everybody to apply for that because I think that hits the state of Minnesota that doesn't affect us greatly. Not to say that it won't at some point in time >> causes a redistribution.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So I mean I encourage everybody to do that and we have those forms uh readily available. Commissioner Begley >> and thank you for bringing that up Commissioner Miss Holty. It's on the county web page if people want to find out because some people are definitely being hit disproportionately and the
increase is all over the board, right? I mean, >> when we used to do this when Commissioner Wars I first began, it was just a matter of practice that it look like like what it would look like about the impact on different county commissioners. So, they would literally put our stuff up on the board. So, I asked the county auditor if it's if it's
public information, can I see what the impact is? It's all the way at 1.2%. something wrong there. >> 13% in terms of but it definitely impacts some people a lot more. Um so there is a way if it is it's over 12% or
at least $100 that that there is a way and no income to get a tax re. So >> it's called a special yeah special refund. >> So thank you for bringing that up. Is that it's on the county main web page. If anyone wants more information contact
any of us directly bring that up. Okay. >> Because it definitely does impact some people more than others. >> Yes. >> One of the big things the >> being in the business of trying to help people out um with housing, of course, there's got to be some sort of return. But, you know, I've got been asked this
question several times, people understanding I'm the county commissioner now, but also prior to being mayor and different things, you know, about taxes. And I said, absolutely. When you vote for a tax increase, that's why your rent goes up, you know, because we pass that on. we we we have to we have to pass that on.
>> So when you look at the affordable aspect of wanting to fund, you know, affordable housing, but then turning around and raising taxes, that just gets passed on. And a lot of people don't think about that, that it has a direct impact on people that probably don't
have the ability to absorb some of this. >> Well, we have a motion to set the levy. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Those nay. May passes. Okay.
We want to just take a quick two minute break. So, uh, the auditor treasurer sent us a link where you can download the entire data set of taxes from the state and it goes back. I don't know. I was only interested in last year, but I did
download the entire data set and then pulled out Winona County and started looking because interestingly enough, what's on there is our portion, the the c the uh township portion, the school district, and the city of Winona. Um, and then it comes down in the end to an
actual tax rate after all the exclusions and exceptions, which was pretty fascinating. I had some questions about it um that I wanted to talk to Chelsea about, but u not it's not a new thing. So, >> interesting looking at the property tax
proposed statements. Commissioner Meyer, I'm sorry, Olsson had the largest increase at 13. >> Pretty fancy improvements at his house, though. Maybe he didn't show you the pictures. >> Then I had the second largest increase of 11.4, 8.8, 7.5, 1.2.
>> I replaced a garage is what I did. I don't know how fancy that is. >> It's a living space though, isn't >> the garage? No. >> Oh my goodness. >> In that case, it's your assessment. Yeah. But it's it is interesting the range the range of of >> car lives there. >> Your car lives there. are not mine. I
forunately >> predicting Casey to come live with you, you know, come move. >> Yes. Yes. That was a my >> I'll fix up the house if you come if you come marry me. >> Yeah. >> And it clearly it clearly worked. So
>> I had a a question for Chelsea the other day. This was interesting. So I I have a friend that has a duplex. He has 10 college students living. >> Yeah. So when the college students go for their they get their certificate of rent paid and then they apply for a reimbursement. Where does that money
come from? They get like two and a half times what he pays in property taxes back and reimburse >> reimbursement. >> Yes. >> Oh. >> And it comes out of the state general fund. >> Does it? >> Not not the our
>> doesn't affect us locally at all, but it does cost the state money. What do you mean they're trying to make up for the fact that uh rental owners don't get a property uh the homestead exclusion? >> That's where the money comes from though. So >> yeah,
>> I was I got the email involved. >> Are the city you're giving the city of St. Charles, aren't you? >> As far as my residence, >> when I looked when I asked for the is this used to be when we first started, I looked at all five of the the commissioner's properties. It looks like
you have egg land, but you must have a bigger lot or something. >> I don't have eggland. >> Okay. >> I took really he looked at that. I took the biggest hit. >> Mhm. >> It's a percent increase. >> You're welcome. All of you
>> 13 >> property. That's considered industrial a but I don't have egg land. >> Okay. >> My family does, but I don't. >> But your address is city of Winona, right? >> Mine. Yes. Yeah. >> Mine was 1126 >> 46%.
>> I can't hardly write 2025 26. >> That's always confusing after the change. >> I pay more in taxes than the average median household. Yeah, >> I'm sure you do. You want commercial real estate?
>> Oh, that that is the thing. The commercial rate is at 2% and residential's one. >> Yeah. Did you I think Chelsea sent out that the tax. >> Yes, >> that that's absurd that many categories she sent that document. >> I wouldn't disagree with that.
>> Yeah, that is absurd. But anyway, um okay, we'll go back into the session here. We're on um 8 three adopt the 2026 fee schedule. And that was presented to us last meeting. Um, and I don't know I
didn't Were there any other changes? It was red line back then. I don't know. Were there any other changes? Miss Holty, do we know? >> Um, so what we did is we have the um the fee schedule that was presented at the
December 11th meeting. And then we also have included in the packet the one that was completed in April of 2025. And the logic for including both of those is that the cannabis fees were um
overlooked or left over in there, >> right, of the one that was in the December 11th. So, we will do the public hearing in uh January and have all of it done uh to include the cannabis fees again just to make it official. You
know, it was a sight. >> Do we adopt this or not adopt it or table? We do. >> We do adopt this and then with >> and then you'll do a public hearing and adopt a new one in January. >> Madam Chair, I'll move to adopt the 2026 fee schedule. >> Okay. >> I'll second that. >> A motion by Commissioner Meyer, second
by Commissioner Vaguely to adopt the 2026 fee schedule with the caveat that we will be readressing this in early 2026 to put the cannabis in there. Okay. Any further discussion or questions? All those in favor say >> I.
>> I. Nay. Okay. Approved. Um then uh 8.4 approve resolution designating transportation sales projects 385. >> You know that is there. I don't think there's been any changes to what?
>> No madam. There's no changes. >> Attorney or engineer. >> Okay. >> I'll move to approve item 8.4. >> Second. >> Okay. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Vaguely, second by Commissioner Ellison to adopt well
20 um the the um transportation sales projects. Um the only thing I have there is I guess you know like I said I got that one road one major road in my district that people are questioning. Um I guess once the bids come in, we'll
have an idea if it's and and that would come back to the board to approve with our Yes. >> our capital improvement plan. Okay. >> We need more information, please. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Uh, all those in favor of adopting the resolution say I. I.
>> Oppos? Nay. Okay. Approved. All right. Um 85, conduct public hearing to amend and approve revised cannabis registration ordinance. Uh, good morning, Mr. Dunmore. >> Good morning. Um as the state's uh roll
out of the cannabis program has evolved uh the it has been communicated to us that we need to register low potency hemp edibles which was not an original provision that we had provided for. Uh
so the uh the amendment before you um includes provisions for registering low low potency hempedibles, adds a definition for low potency hempedible retailers. Uh clarifies some of the other definitions and some of the
processes uh and submitts for special event cannabis events. Um so Mr. crayons had gone through this and just what with everything that has involved we've clarified the language uh but the the
driving factor is we need to be prepared for the new year to be able to register low potency habitatable retailers >> and we have no control over the cities in our correct this is just a a rural >> unless they have delegated that to us.
>> Yes. Okay. This is just a public hearing. If I can make a motion and approve approved. Okay. No, we need a motion. >> I'll move to open the public hearing. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Meyer. Second by Commissioner Vagely to open the public hearing. >> All those in favor say I.
>> Oppos? Nay. The public hearing is open. Is there anyone wishing to address the Winona County Board concerning the revised cannabis registration ordinance? Nobody in house. Anybody online want to address
the Winona County Board concerning the cannabis registration ordinance? I'm seeing nobody. >> Okay. So, there would be um a motion to close >> one more time. >> One more time. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Is there anyone else
wishing to address the county board about the or revised cannabis registration ordinance? Okay. >> Motion to close public hearing. I'll second. >> Okay. A motion by Commissioner Elling and second by Commissioner Vaguely to close the public hearing.
>> So, uh, the red line is the changes. >> Should we vote? >> Oh, yeah. To close, I'm sorry. Close the public hearing. All those in favor say I. Nay. We're public hearing is closed. So, we're we're being asked to adopt all the the changes were highlighted in red.
>> Okay. >> I I'm just looking for cross Phil. What do we need to be concerned about? Um really this is administrative. Uh the the ordinance also provides for the transfer of uh day-to-day duties for the registration of of uh of cannabis to the
planning and environmental services department to take that off of uh auditor treasurer um being that we need to do the zoning reviews um for any type of registrations and we also have uh the
access to the state of system which is where we report to office of cannabis management. It just seemed to be some additional duplication that we could simplify the process. >> It doesn't directly relate to this, but
we approved the the operation in Dresback and there hasn't been any real uh activity. How long are these permits for? Is it a one-year time or is it a lifetime permit or is there is there a sunset on the permit?
>> Well, the the state licensing would be separate than than our than our approvals. So our our cups if it obtained a cup or if it was a permitted activity would not have a would not have a time limit. >> No no deadline >> unless it was an interim permit >> or IUP. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Unless it was an interim permit which I don't believe we've issued any interim permits for >> No, but I mean I think that part of the issue has been the state has been pretty slow and then there wasn't product available and so >> yeah and they keep changing changing rules. >> Correct me if I'm wrong. if we're only
issuing a certain amount of permits. Right. >> Right. >> So definitely if somebody applies has the permit and then never actually carries through with the project. Correct. That's the sunset aspect of following up. Did you actually do what
you said you're going to do? Because we only we're only granting a certain amount. So should we be looking at ensuring that people are actually otherwise somebody could arguably file for conditional use permits tie the whole market up have one and they got it right and not do anything else and under
three different entities I can create very easily business mindset create five LLC's I can hide who's in charge of them and off we go right I mean that's easy to do so um you know I'm just arguing I'm just making a point should there be some sort of a sunset to ensure that the
projects are going through because we do have a limited amount. >> You know, >> I don't know. >> I I mean, you would need to check I my memory, which could be bad, is that upon sale, it goes to I thought it was an IEP. >> I I guess I don't remember.
>> State Licenses can't be transferred without state approval. >> I'm thinking about the permit that it's a conditional use, right? So, they would have to get an IEP or CUP from us. >> Can correct me. Usually that would that would go with the property that stays with the property.
>> Yeah. But if it was an IEP and it ended on sale, but we do you remember, Eric? >> Yeah. I believe the one we're talking about has been slow moving because we haven't had any action. They haven't cleared their state approvals. That would be our indication that they're going ahead. But my I believe it was
either late 2023 or early 24 when we issued that it was a conditional use permit. Yeah, >> there you go. That's >> I like the idea of making one of the conditions at some kind of time, some kind of >> Yeah. Maybe we need to re review what
our It stops the stagment or stalemate because there is only a certain amount that are going to be used, >> right? Okay. Okay. >> I'll make a motion to I'm sorry. >> Yeah. Go. Yeah. >> I'll make a motion to approve the revised cannabis uh registration. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Vagley, second by Commissioner Wilson to
approve the revised cannabis registration ordinance. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. Nay. Okay. Approve. Thank you. >> All right. 8.6. Receive presentation from the Leonard's findings of fact and
petition for amendment and conduct public hearing. Eric. >> Hi. >> Um, this is followup with the planning commission from last month. And um maybe Heidi can I have in your packet there was a group of PowerPoint slides and
I'll just touch on those and then I'll answer any questions you might have. Um this action is to essentially do some housekeeping in the St. Charles Township area. Um we
have had a couple of petitions this late fall in that area. One involving this property. uh mainly there was variances to ask for relief from setbacks from the road and there was also uh setback variance that was on the adjacent
property I believe the seed business that's adjacent to this and in researching um county records and also our GIS beacon system we recognize that there were some some abnormalities that
existed so this action is to essentially reflect the desire of the property owners. Um, Beacon currently is depicting this area as agricultural as well as adjacent property. Um, and going back and researching the records back to
2001 that both those properties are actually commercial B and I think that is the desire for the seed business, the heim property to keep that in that manner. But on the flip side is this 1 acre parcel which uh I believe is still
zoned commercial but we need to revert that back to agricultural because of uh the adjacent landscape and the desire of the property owner. So this action in front of you today is to change two things. It's to change the zoning map
officially to agricultural and to change the comprehensive plan back from rural residential service to agriculture. Um, the way that we have it phrased in the public noticing are those two paragraphs as you see. I won't read
them, but that's essentially the heart of this of this action is to do those two things. Um, we did conduct a public hearing at the planning commission level. Received no comments. Um, if we can go ahead with the slide,
just kind of maybe flip through these quick. Um, actually what we're looking at, that little snippet is actually the Winona County Comprehensive Land Use map. That's still the official document. It goes back to 2001.
If you It's hard to see, but if you were to That's part of the issue we got into was such a small area delineated that you can't see it. But if you were to actually dissect that and look at the data records, it would be that blue category, rural residential service. So
we'd keep that um for the commercial zone property with the seed the enterprise, but the one next to it, the one that uh is moving forward with a proposed uh improvement, we need to convert that back to agricultural.
Again, it's the section 20 and this is right along Highway 14. Next slide. uh the 1acre parcel is kind of a T-shaped one and some of the reasons that were brought forward is that this is a remnant of an old railroad that was
in that area and that was documented in the staff report believe it was the Minnesota or the Winona St. Peter and then it went on to Chicago Northwestern then it was vacated. So that's why we have an irregular shaped. Mindot has made some improvements with 14 and they
were asked for comments all along the way. >> Next slide. >> I'm sorry Eric before you leave though the the tan on that slide. So you got the green that's what we're talking about turning back to egg. The the tan in front of that is still >> this is all right away.
>> Oh it's just right away. >> Okay. It's not buildable. You can't put houses in there. >> No. >> Okay. >> In fact, the diagram that's up there is showing the setback variance request. At the time, they were asking for 80 ft instead of the required 130 ft >> for the park.
>> Yep. And then the buildings located to the west are actually closer than than what they wanted to build this building. >> It's not a buildable parcel. And then what? The state of Minnesota or the railroad still owns that? >> Um, no. The state it's part of the right
right away. Uh but the the T parcel is um um being developed. I guess they there's a a permit that's been issued for the building and it will actually have um occupancy. It'd be kind of a a
apartment set. So it it is uh proposed to be a residential too, >> but under the egg district rules. >> Yes. Yes, that's that's the intent. Okay. Ne next slide. And this is just a beacon diagram if I
could touch on that. Um, this would be commercial and then you it is flanked by city of St. Charles property but then it's also has egg properties next to it. I believe there is poultry operation and there's a
driveway there. So >> that you said the that T section that that Mark owns you said that's currently isn't it currently a now? >> If you look on Beacon on the county system it is but going back I've seen
we're in 2001 it's not >> but then being taxed is a but it wasn't actually for all these years but it was commercial. >> Yeah. There was some reluctancy on the previous owner because they were exploring potential commercial endeavors
such as mini storage uh sheds, those type of things, but that never developed. >> New buyer wants to carry through and and do do the project as uh they have proposed. >> Yeah, they've already the ground already broken. >> They have they they've uh put in some
holding tanks and they're um going to share a well with the with the neighboring property. So looking at Greg's property next to it, he does not have an issue or he does have an issue. >> He does not. >> Okay. >> Yep. By this action, he'll keep the status quo that we just need to correct
things with our system with GIS to make sure it's accurately depicted moving forward. >> Was unanimous. There was no one. No one spoke up. I was curious about that, too. Is there any reason not to? >> Well, Greg is really the only one and Jay obviously is his brother or
whatever. the other stuff. It's got that ranch house there and then it's Jerome Foods and I'm sure Jerome Foods would say, "Well, you want to build a house next to our turkey barns?" But it is what it is. So, >> I did I did listen to the planning commission meeting. I think maybe you were absent. Yeah, I was not
>> Yeah, at that one, but I didn't remember anybody speaking against >> No, there was no like Eric said, it's kind of housekeeping correcting. >> Yeah. in in looking at how we amended our amendment section for this. I think
we actually could have sufficed with one public hearing at the planning commission level, but we went to the trouble of noticing this. We published again. We sent out another round and I thought just to be safe, we're having the public hearing today on this and to and to basically um see this through.
Did we ever determine how the classification got messed up? I think because of there were some annexations that were going on and there were some changes that were were funneled through um I think it just got lost in translation. >> Never been in the state never been in
the city's correct but some of the adjacent properties right on the >> Yeah. Interesting. >> Okay, next slide. Next slide. And this just lidar showing twoft
contours for reference. Uh next slide. And this showing the survey parcel B kind of showing the historic nature of uh the remnant of of a of a railroad that used to exist. It used to continue on to the east and west.
>> They're keeping the driveway in the current location. >> They're using the the shared driveway with the Sun's property. Next slide. Yeah. Yeah. >> And this has changed. This was earlier in the fall and as mentioned now, you
know, there's been some excavation prep work that's been uh done. Uh the pole building that you see is a neighboring property that is a him that is going to continue to stay commercial. Um but the the basically the base has been established to where the new building's
going to go. On this side, you can see where the state do rightway marker is. that just shows that it is really hamstrung for space and room to actually make that a viable a truly viable building site. So, what the new owners
have done is they brought forth the most um viable project that they could. >> But did we we haven't issued any kind of does it require a conditional use permit? You said a multi- housing unit. No, just one one housing unit with with
living quarters inside an existing building. >> They don't need a conditional use permit for that. >> No, >> no, because that's an existing parcel of record. If this was a new parcel, a new proposed split, then we'd have the density issue.
>> Question. You said that is listed as commercial. >> Correct. >> It's on Beacon as agricultural resource conservation. >> Correct. that would need to be corrected. But I believe if you look at the tax rate, they are being commercial commercially taxed, but the actual
zoning district is incorrect and that would need to um be depicted correct correctly as a commercial. >> Does that come back to us? >> No. Well, I don't know if that is because
it's valued at 386,000 and only being taxed at 6,500 and I have properties that are valued at 400 and some,000 commercially and I'm getting taxed 13,000. So, there's some sort of discrepancy there. Okay. We we will correct that as far as what
the assessment records in the GIS map and beacon. So, if they have to revisit it, that's something that they'll have to do. Uh, next slide. Again, just kind of showing the
idle nature of the parcel at this point. Uh, where the vehicle's parked and then the left is essentially uh the drive access coming from a drive that's located to the east. Next slide. Oh, next slide.
>> Okay. Um, we did meet with the St. Charles Township board, kind of went over the circumstances, and um, as typical with this township, they just elect to say no comments in regards to the request. Next slide.
Uh recommendation is that planning commission conducted a public hearing November 20th and uh with the two amendments. So it is a two-part uh request. Um staff had prepared findings of fact in conjunction with the county attorney's
office um to reszone to reclassify property. Essentially it's the findings of fact of why the reasons are to do that. Um the planning commission uh adopted those and recommended them be forwarded to the county board. And I
next slide I won't read those. These are in your packet. It's pretty small print. But anytime you again reszone or reclassify this an amendment action that's the crutch of of the issue. So,
>> question, Eric. Why why why won't they be able to homestead if they're building a >> a home within the shed? Why can't they homestead it? >> They can homestead it. >> But it says here will not be able to home. >> Would technically not unless we make this change because then it stays
commercial and there's there's breaches or there's avenues out there for them to try to get some type of residential um accommodations on there. But um right now um okay >> turning it back to agriculture
agricultural is the best >> are going away rapidly or being reduced values. Okay. But they will be able to home. >> They would be able to. Yes. And last slide and that's number four,
number five. And essentially looking at the harmony that it's not consisting of spot zoning that it's done the benefit of the whole. Those are the key elements in this action. So with that, I think that's it.
And the last slide is just any additional questions before you conduct public hearing. Uh your motion could include both as long as uh the findings of fact are included in with that recommendation. Other than that, um any
questions on this? Are you turning over? Um the it I don't know how I feel about this but I've heard from other counties around the state where people are building more and more of these living quarters in a agricultural shed and there is a problem being created with
them being able to get uh insurance. Now if that puts anybody at risk for I I don't know I don't know where this is just anidal. I haven't talked to any insurance agents or anything, but I don't know if we put anybody at risk by allowing them to do this or if we put
any um you know like if it's an emergency management situation where they need ambulance or fire service or something that somehow we have to let the local uh volunteers know there's living space in these these quarters. Um but that's something we may have to deal
with in the future if if they can't do is insurance required? No. And would I go without it? Probably yes. But um again, is that creating a problem for the neighborhood? I don't know. >> Yeah, those are all good points. I mean, in this case, an address assignment has been um
assigned to this property for that purpose. When they come in, we ask questions. Um you know, it is a metal pole building, but what's the trust? What's the snow load? Do you have fire barrier walls? Um those type of questions. Those are all for the safe
being the occupants that are >> enforce the building code, but I I we do need to keep people safe and and if we're granting permits, it kind of says we're at the table. Commissioner Vegley, >> um >> open the public. >> So, yeah, I'll make a motion to open the
public hearing. >> I'll second. >> Okay. All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Vegley, second by Commissioner Meyer to open the public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Okay. Public hearing is open. We got more questions. Anybody?
Okay. Is there anyone wishing to address the county board on the public hearing on the Leonard's property? Is there anyone wishing to address either in person or online? Is there anyone wishing to address the county board on the public hearing for
the Leonard's reszoning amendment? Being nobody. >> That was that the third one? Yep, that was the third one. >> I'll move to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Meyer, second by Commissioner Olsson to close the public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. N.
>> Approved. Um uh is there any further discussion? Commissioner Vagley. >> Um Eric, tell me if I um if there's a better way to make this motion. I'll make a motion to accept the findings of fact and to approve the amendment. Is that what you
were looking? >> Yes. to approve the amendment which includes a reclassification to the comprehensive plan map and a amendment to the official zoning map of the county. >> I'll second it. >> Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Vegley, second by Commissioner Meyer to
officially approve the amendment and the official uh zoning map. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Okay, it's approved. >> Thank you. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, moving on. 8.8.
>> Eric, >> it is correct. >> I did the math. >> Okay, Commissioner Vaguely. >> Um, I'll make a motion to approve if it's okay like with the rest of the board to bunch items 8.8 through 8.16.
>> I'll second it. >> Okay. Um, >> if this is all the >> the legion >> Yep. >> the different legions and VFWs and >> for which one through which >> 8 8.8 through 8.6 2016. It's all the legions in veterary. >> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner
Vegley, second by Commissioner Meyer to approve the outside agency requirements 8.8 through 8.16, which is the American Legion and Sons of American Legion and the Military Order Purple Heart and the Foreign War veterans BFWs.
>> Um, and it's a a $90 um contribution. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> Oppos? Nay. Okay, that is approved. >> Okay, then we're moving into 8.17. Uh, Madam Chair, I would move then to go
ahead and as a group approve 8.17 through 8.25. or 29. Uh, >> I'll go for 29. I do the welcome. Okay, we'll do the whole shebang. >> Okay, we have not by Commissioner Meyer. Did I hear a second?
>> I'll second that. >> We have a motion by Commissioner Meer, second by Commissioner Vagley to approve the outside agency pass 817 through 829. Discussion. Um, I can't support those. um lumped
together. Some should be specific contracts um and then some we've got agencies that have in excess of million dollars in their reserves and such and for us to be giving and them needing to come ask us
uh in this financial economic times for more money I just find irresponsible. Um it's not huge dollars but there is principle involved here. Um, I know the Southeast Minnesota Initiative Fund, I think they've got like 1.9 and even I
think the libraries have I looked up um like 1.3 in reserves and and then um some of the others have have uh I didn't dig into all of them again, but they do have reserves. Uh I do question the 8.19 that's uh 45,000 for interpreter service
if that truly is a contract or that's a gift. Um uh and again when I went through actually when I went through that uh mandates one of the places says that interpretive service is not mandated and I've been told both ways so I'm unclear on that but I I I cannot
support those. My constituents do not support those. >> Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving one uh 8.17 to 8.29 say I
>> oppose. Nay. Nay. >> Um, all right. That concludes our regular business. Uh, Commissioner Vaguely, >> just want to say merry Christmas and happy new year to the calling board, county attorney, county administrator, all the staff, and all the staff in the
county. Thank you for what you do. And merry Christmas to everybody. >> Me, too. Uh, happy Hanukkah. >> And what other >> and all the other stuff? >> Yeah. Quanza >> Quanza and and yes, many many different celebrations this time of year. Uh,
Commissioner Eling, >> I just wanted to say merry Christmas to everybody also. Um, and uh, just wish everybody a safe safe holiday and uh, look forward to another new year. So, >> that takes care of that. Uh,
Commissioner Meyer, you had a committee. >> Yeah, I went to soil water earlier this week. They um had this chart and I have a few extra copies if anyone in the audience wants one. Um this is funding that comes from watershed based oops
here it is from the watershed based initiative. So on this big piece of paper you can see from the windlac one wershed one plant and the wind and the river um the variety of programs that they are funding. And I made some notes
on here because they said the brush management and the conservation cover um were the programs that they have double or triple the demand for the money that they have. And those are the ones that they wish if the county was going to fund something else that we would give
them money for that. And then the smaller sheet is really the lifetime of the measure. And what I was impressed with is you can see that their cover crops um they're really have a lot of
work that they've been doing in cover crops, but that's only for one year and some of these other practices have a much longer lifespan. And I think if any of you are interested in hearing any more about that that uh I would certainly support asking someone from so
I wanted her to come in and talk more with us about what these programs are. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Let's piggyback on that. I've seen many many many many of these over the years um just looking at different funds
and things that are programmed. One of the one of the big things with the SWCD that I've said from the very beginning, somebody that preached cover crops before even SWCDs picked up on them, different things like that. Um, the last thing I wanted to do was create another
taxpayer subsidized program. So that's why a lot of the early implementation of these programs were designed to teach people. And just as importantly as taking money from constituents to help land owners realize something, there's two sides to every coin. very similar to
accountability. Um, a lot of these programs are based on education. And we need to make it so that it isn't a long-term subsidy. In other words, just as equally as trying it is equally as understanding the results of it. Otherwise, a lot of people take taxpayer money, use something, but don't really
understand the true short and long-term benefits. So, it is something that is designed with these SWCDs to solve immediate problems, but also to provide long-term benefits both to land owners and the people that are affected by uh land owners. So, it's interesting enough
to see a lot of these numbers and the different programs that are put into place. Um, so when they talk cover crops and the demand for those, how that's gone up and down over the years, keep in mind those programs are never designed to be long-term programs. At the same level with SWCD, I've also said the same
thing about accountability. And I just bring this up and I'm glad that Commissioner Meyer brought this to attention. At the flip side, I've also said, when does it become no longer the taxpayers's burden to solve other people's problems? when somebody acquires a piece of land that has a well
that hasn't been inspected or has a bunch of invasive species but uh they've decided well I'm going to buy the land anyway because the real estate person isn't telling them that the banker isn't looking at it and then all of a sudden the taxpayer has to foot the bill for something they're ultimately responsible
for so the common consensus becomes well if we do nothing nothing will happen and they'll let it get out of hand and then the other side is well why should I have to pay for your problem Right. So, uh very similar to some of the debates on wells and and situ and and and uh septic
systems meaning the person who lives in a municipality paying a tax now not only has to pay for the cost of their well and septic system but also somebody else that made a conscious decision to move out in the country and then say, "Well, sorry, I don't have the money to pay for it. I want everybody else to pay." So
the system of checks and balances that sit in this department is something I've advocated and gotten on my soap box many times that we need to be careful that where we're taking taxpayers money is not just simply to subsidize somebody being irresponsible with decisions and
how do we do that. So, um, it is the the the 10 12 year history of sitting on these boards and having looked at many of these that you had two sides to the coin, but I still say it's one of the best ones out there for boots in the ground. >> Madam Chair, >> yes,
>> just to correct part of your assertion, Commissioner Elsing. Um, a big share of the I mean, you can see on this column what's coming from federal, what's coming from the land owner, but the point is part of this is coming from the wershed based implementation funds. the residents of the state of Minnesota
voted to tax themselves with the sales tax and that is a big portion of the ongoing funding. So um it is a thing that motans care about clean water and have decided that they would like to support and fund clean water efforts. So
>> uh I'm not sure what I disagreed with with that. I'm not I'm lost here. What what was the Did I say that wasn't in favor then? >> Yeah. What you're saying is oh the taxpayers don't want to fund this. They just do it initially and then it isn't their burden. What I am asserting is the state of Minnesota and much of this
funding is the taxpayers saying yes, we do care about clean water and yes, we do want to fund these >> and that is an ongoing supply of funding when at a time when state and other federal programs are cutting back on the amount of money that's available. >> Yeah. Um >> and we're lucky for that and I'm
grateful to the taxpayers for that. >> Yeah. I I think maybe misrepresented what I was trying to say. We know that there's finite dollars to do these programs and it is physically impossible, if you could do the math for me, and
you'll find out what I'm saying is true, to subsidize every agriculture acre in the state of Minnesota. The tax burden would be so overwhelming, we would literally bankrupt the state. That's data. So, the ability to tax
ourselves into that prosperity is impossible. So what I brought up was the fact that I've been in the industry for 25 years and I've seen the benefits of cover crops. So knowing consciously that we can't subsidize every acre,
we have to do the best we can in the short amount of time to show them the results so they take on the economic impact of it to also receive the benefit. So I said if we're going to do this, let's set a time frame so we can recycle
the money because it's impossible for us to subsidize every acre financially. So that is the point of having a time frame to it. Whether everybody wants it or not, they might not understand. It is physically impossible to subsidize every agriculture acre at a state level at
that economic sector because you're talking 40, $50, $60 an acre. that impact on that on millions of acres is just not sustainable to our federal to our state budget. So, and that's just the cost of that subsidy, let alone everything else it takes to go with it.
So, the idea was to put a short long enough time frame for education, educate the land owner why it's beneficial for them to adopt the practices and then recycle that money to a new land owner. >> Well, and it would be interesting if they could add here. So, you got 20 contracts, which is great. I mean and
and and it it's good work, but how many acres have they really impacted in Winona County with these projects? Pretty substantial. It should it should be high. But it it's unfortunate that I remember in my experiences with even my own family when my father was actively farming
he would do practices and he was a conservation of the year for Filmore County one time but he didn't want the government money because he wanted to he got better prices and he got you know um contractors did the work efficiently and such. So there's a lot of people unfortunately and do we have trust in
the government um that they don't want to deal with the the paperwork part of these projects is enormous and we talked earlier how much administrative time do to go into these projects and hopefully it's good you know well spent but it it
>> increases and uh again and I hate to say it some of these projects are wouldn't be done without this but um I would love to see prescribed grazing lifespan. I'd like to see more acres in prescribed grazing in Winona County. So that's just
>> the people some people don't like cows. >> I know. And I know and and they don't realize the the commitment it takes to be a livestock producer. It's huge. >> Okay, let's see. That took care of a couple comments. Um Commissioner Meyer said earlier the government isn't going away. Well, unfortunately, I think it's
at a tipping point. I read the articles this morning. the sheriff's association uh sent a letter of no confidence to the commissioner of department of corrections and you know over the years we've been kind of nona county and every county gets kind of jerked around by the department of corrections they they have
one staff that comes in and say you need to do this in your jail and then that staff changes and then the next person comes in no you need to do this so um there was uh I want to say um I don't know if our sheriff was there they had a association statewide meeting a month or so ago and they they drafted this letter
And the reason it comes to mind is that through MCIT, we work very hard with the sheriff's association to make our jails safer to eliminate the risks that are inherent with jails and we do a lot of work there. So it was interesting that the sheriff's association sent this
letter. And then the other one was and I don't know if our any of our mayors in in uh Winona County 98 mayors sent a letter to the legislature I think it was saying that kind of like a vote of no confidence. you can't keep doing this to us. The tax implications and everything
that you're doing are are filtering down uh too much. So maybe the government is on a little shakier ground, Commissioner Meyer, they're not going away, but they're a little shakier and people are people are taking taking a stance. They're taking notice. Um future board
action, uh I would ask um I think we still have a fraud investigation unit that we're part of. Isn't it a multi-county? We used to get a report. Isn't it a deputy from Wabasha or something? I I would people have asked me where's fraud in Winona County and I
said, "Well, we do partake in that and we haven't heard any kind of report." So, I'd ask for support to get some kind of report from that particular group that's working on that in Southeast Minnesota. >> Okay. So, we moved that up to a to another board meeting. And um
>> you're asking for a summary there. >> Yeah. What what's going on? We used to get a report. he came in and kind of alluded what what they'd been doing and I I don't know. I asked I don't know. We haven't gotten a report any other board action and I don't know what Miss Holty has planned and and um uh Mr. Sonnenberg
for doing this budget stuff but it's come up again. Uh several constituents have asked are you going to create that advisory financial committee? And I would like to have a little more discussion on that if we want to do that sooner than later. So I would ask for support to uh >> investigate a little further now that we
have a finance director in place. >> I don't know if anybody else will support that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. So we can move that forward for a little give it some thought over the holiday and and maybe give a little more um direction something like that. Uh other than that yes I
trying to get your attention >> for fear of missing Christmas. A motion to adjurnn. >> Well motion to adjurnn. >> I'll second. Second. Uh, we have a motion by Commissioner Olsson. >> Vaguely's got 45 minutes. Um, >> all those in favor say I.
>> I oppose. Nay. I would just publicly I not the Grinch. >> Um, my own personal family. I think you're the Grinch. >> I'm very very supportive of my uh individual family and everybody's families in their their holiday celebrations. But be safe. Be uh, you
know, it's amazing now that we have snow on the ground. You can see the deer traffic much better. You drive out in the country and you can see their highways to um some deer in my neighborhood go right across my property to the neighbors to his silage feed bag. And I know they're right where they're
going. They're going to have dinner at his silage feed bag. And and so >> see no meeting on but a meeting on the 13th. >> Yeah. The next meeting is the 13th. >> We don't have to swear anybody in. That's that's the statutory requirement for that early meeting. >> The second
>> Oh, I don't know. Did we vote? Did we did we have that motion to adjurnn? >> Yeah. Okay. >> All right. >> These up in the back was