You know, good morning, everyone. Good morning.
» will call the uh County Board of Commissioners regular meeting to order
on this day, August 25th, um 8:30 a.m. Um please rise for the
pledge.
» I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
» [clears throat] >> Are there any adjustments to the agenda?
» [clears throat] >> I'm sure I'd like to make a motion to uh
approve the agenda. >> All in favor?
» Oh. Oh, second. >> Second.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Oppose, same sign.
Um at this time we do offer the public for comment to come forward to have any
um points they'd like to um give to us. Is there anyone in the audience who'd
like to do that? I see no one there.
Any Any comments from the board members? >> No matter what.
» Don't feel valued, but uh
» Um looking on to the uh consent agenda, a motion to approve as a whole. We have
claims, minutes of the uh regular August 11th meeting,
uh County Parks and Trails Membership appointment, and Airport Advisory
Commission appointments. Would anyone like to pull anything?
» I'd make a motion to approve the consent agenda as a whole.
» Support. >> All in favor?
» Aye. >> Oppose, same sign.
Um we'll move into our first discussion from Land Services. Neva is here to talk
about some work going on in the county.
» All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. The few items for you today from our
department are items from the Planning Commission's August 11th meeting. The
first is the preliminary plat recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission with three conditions. This would be for a new standard plat known
as Little Creek Woods submitted by Howard Hedstrom. And the Planning
Commission first held the public hearing for this on July 29th.
There were no comments from the public on that request at that time. The
Planning Commission did table it at that meeting to allow more time for revisions
to the plat that were noted during the staff technical analysis. And those
items were addressed. And then at the August 12th, they resumed that item and
recommended approval with three conditions. The conditions are mostly
related to two of the 11 lots are split or bisected by the Gunflint Trail or the
new private road. And so the conditions are clarifying that the lots that are
bisected must remain connected together. You can't split lot 1A and 1B or 2A or
2B. And also that the the parts of each of those lots that are
kind of the extra area is not to be improved upon or developed because it's
very difficult to find conforming build sites on those lots. Each of those lots
do have conforming build sites and meet the standards in the remainder area of
those lots. And that's the the overall is a it's been an
interesting project with Mr. Hedstrom. We began this process in the early
spring time and as many people know in development in Cook County, it takes a
little bit of time. So, this is the first item and then the
second item today is the final plat approval for this plat proposal as well.
» Okay. Questions or comments to Neva.
» [cough and clears throat] >> I'll make a motion to approve the
preliminary plat for the Little Creeks Creek Woods
with including the three conditions. >> Support.
» So, we have a motion and >> [clears throat]
» All in favor? >> I.
» I. >> Opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
» Thank you. And then the second item is that final
plat item that I referred to. So, um the Cook County subdivision ordinance
does allow the approval of both the preliminary and the final plat at the
same meeting for the planning commission uh provided that the public hearing for
the preliminary plat was held at a prior meeting. So, as I previously referred
to, the July 29th meeting was a public hearing for this plat, which was then
tabled and then the planning commission reviewed both the preliminary and final
plat at the August 11th meeting. And the planning commission recommended approval
uh with minimal discussion at the August 11th meeting for this standard plat.
» Okay. Questions or comments on that?
Commissioner Sullivan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to make
a motion to accept the unanimous recommendation of the Cook County
Planning Commission to approve the Little Creek Woods final plat.
» Support. >> All in favor?
» I. >> I.
» Opposed? Same sign. Motion passes on that also. Thank you.
» Thanks, Howard. >> Thank you very much. I was prepared to
answer any questions, but >> [laughter]
» You can save your voice for something else today.
» Thanks, Howard. >> Thanks, Howard.
» The third item I have for you is a rezone request in the same neck of the
woods, so along County Road 60. Uh for those of us familiar with the
zoning map, this is a area that is zoned light industrial reflective of the
long-time ownership of the Hedstrom Lumber Mill. Over time that land has
been subdivided and sold into separate ownership. Um and with this request,
this is one of the individually owned parcels that's requesting a rezone from
light industrial to FAR 3, kind of the standard residential zoning of that
area. During the staff's analysis, staff did
identify that uh typically with rezone requests, we like to see all of the
contiguous land upon approval of that rezone still be zoned similarly. So is
to say we'd like to see the outside edge of a rezone um shifting, not an island
of zoning kind of left on its own from a rezone. Um the Cook typically in local
governments we approve rezones when they're reflective of a change to a
comprehensive plan um when it's something that's identified for future
changes. The Cook County Land Use Guide Plan does not speak about a change from
this area from light industrial to FAR 3. However, with that being said in Cook
County we have been a little flexible with rezones when they're adjusting
existing boundaries between existing zone districts. Um so I've brought
several rezones to you over the last couple of years. Typically it's shifting
to existing um boundaries between zone districts and
not creating something left isolated. With this request there is an isolated
parcel that's left uh light industrial south of the subject parcel asking to be
rezoned FAR 3. Um this parcel would create um
conforming FAR 3 parcels with its lot size requirements.
Um also what has changed since well so with the planning commission planning
commission did evaluate all of this. They took all this into consideration
and they also considered that it seems that light industrial land is not
seemingly under high demand in Cook County. Um this land has been on the
market for a while and it's more attractive for residential development
it seems. And so whether that's a short-term
change or reflective of more long-term changes in the county um I'm mostly
going into this just to kind of explain that um when we have these rezones of
larger areas cuz let's bear in mind that the Hedstrom preliminary plat and final
plat that was just adopted was also an area that was light industrial that was
zoned to FAR 3. And so um we are seeing these changes over time of this light
industrial zoning getting shifted into the FAR 3.
I'm not saying that's neither a good or a bad thing. It's just that when we do
approach an update to our land use guide plan or a county comprehensive plan,
these are items that would be especially helpful for us to have informed from
community input if this is the vision and direction that our community needs.
We don't want to undermine our land uses and the available land for light
industrial activities if we're shifting that all to residential area because
then we'll see more requests for industrial activities in residential
areas if that's not left. So, that's my platform on just re-zones 101. Uh some
of that is identified in the staff narrative for the planning commission.
So, at the August 11th public hearing, the planning commission did consider all
of this. They did feel that still the demand for residential development is
strong enough and that this seemed suitable for residential development and
they did unanimously recommend approval of this re-zone.
Um and also they they mostly wanted to
identify that um you know, it just seems like there are
shifts over time. So, again, an update to our land use guide plan would be a
very helpful component to inform these types of decisions.
There has been one shift since we submitted this county board item report.
The property immediately south of the one identified as being left as an
island, they did submit a re-zone application uh from the light industrial
to FAR 3 over the last week. Um it has not been, you know, we haven't
had time as staff to review the application for completeness, hasn't
gone through a public hearing, but I just wanted to inform you that um that
is one minor change. Um maybe major depending on how you view it. Um I still
view it as it's still an application, people can still withdraw applications.
It's still not the same thing as an application being under review and
approved at the same meeting. So, staff's preference just from a a
procedure perspective is that both of these applications would have been
reviewed simultaneously and then it could have kept this conversation much
more linear for all of us. But um again, re-zones don't have conditions. It's
just a a approval or a denial. Um so this is recommended for approval without
conditions. And I'm happy to answer any other
questions that you may have. >> Okay.
Questions? I'll go with Mr. Gamble. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair.
So thank you, Neva, for the detailed um foundation for these recommendations. My
question would simply be that uh when we are looking at these, and I assume it's
so, but I think for the public it'd be good to know that um
we look at in the context of the whole. So you alluded it to an extent relative
to the light industrial and residential that we want to find a balance so we
have opportunity, but in in the context my question is specific to we see this
as we're evaluating it in the context of the whole. So we don't all of a sudden
realize when we look individually that oh my goodness, we've left ourselves
short on this end. >> Mhm.
I agree. >> Yeah. Thank you.
» [clears throat] >> Commissioner Mills.
» I I was going to ask about the southern property, so I'm really happy to hear
that there's an application in and um I really appreciate the the larger map
to to give the perspective of just what's going on in the whole area and
the the whole industrial campus or complex. So
uh otherwise I'd make a motion to approve the the rezone from light
industrial to FAR FAR 3 um for parcel ID 53-234-4425.
» Support. >> Okay.
I have a motion and a second. All in favor?
» Aye. >> Aye.
» Opposed? Any sign? Motion passed unanimously for you. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» Moving on to item number five, human resources. We have a couple of updates
with this.
» Good morning. I found my keys.
» Nice. >> [laughter]
» I needed help getting in the building this morning.
I was like, "Where are they?"
» [sighs] >> All right.
Okay. So, the first item I have to present today is a job description
update and more uh in regards to one specific item on the job description for
our emergency management director. Um so, in the
for all of our job descriptions and the heading, we've got the box that says
like what the title, who they report to, so which department they're they're fall
they fall in, the grade, the date it was last updated, board approved, and
there's also an FLSA status box. Um so, for the EMD position right now, it's
currently um a classified with a non-exempt FLSA status. That's the Fair
Labor Standards Act. And in reviewing the job description, which it's always a
good practice to review a job description when we have uh turnover in
that in that uh position, just to ensure like are there any updates that need to
be made to the essential functions of the position, has anything shifted or
modified. Including FLSA status is always something um that should be
reviewed and reaffirmed um or modified as needed. And so, in reviewing the EMD
position given that the current incumbent will be retiring here
beginning of next week, um it it came to our attention that the FLSA status um
could be updated and changed from a non-exempt to an exempt status. So, that
is the only change that I am proposing um and uh bringing for approval today.
Oh, and I should say this would become effective after the current incumbent is
um is retired, so it would be effective September 2nd, so the day after
when that position is vacant. >> Okay. All right. Questions or comments?
Commissioner Sullivan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to make
a motion to approve the FLSA status for the emergency management director from
non-exempt to exempt effective September 2nd.
» Support. >> We have a motion and a second. All in
favor? >> Aye.
» Aye. >> Opposed? Same sign. Motion passed
unanimously. >> Thank you.
All right. The second item I have is uh bringing forth a contract with David
Drown Associates, which we often refer to them as DDA. So, this is for the
ongoing work that I continue to do with collaboration with DDA and the
consultant that's specifically working with us and our county. Um so, this
would be a continuation of the contract we had for
um 2023, 2024, 2025. So, this would continue the 3-year ongoing maintenance
of our job description reviews um along with a continued market
analysis on a yearly basis. It would be for in uh the same amount that has been
charged for the last 3 years in the amount of $10,550
per year. Um that has been and continues to be in the HR budget as well.
» Questions or comments? >> [clears throat]
» Commissioner Sullivan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to
thank you for number one um taking this approach. I have seen over my tenure as
a commissioner such a huge improvement in the uh regularity with which we're
reviewing our job descriptions, and just appreciate the fact that we're much more
competitive. And I think it's great that it is just
built into our budget, and the fact that it the price did not go up.
That was really nice. I think that's the first thing I can think of in a long
time that hasn't gone up in price. So with that, I'd make a motion
» [clears throat] >> to approve of the 3-year contract with
DDA in the amount of $10,550 for ongoing maintenance of job
descriptions. >> Uh support.
» Any further questions or comments? Commissioner Gamble.
» Thank you, Madam Chair. >> [clears throat]
» Well, this is a a subject that, you know, I've I've addressed before. I do I
do have a a handout. Commissioner Sullivan said as
opposed to getting into a lengthy presentation, it'd be good to have
handout to support what I'm saying. So, I will hand this out.
There's two pages there, and it's >> Thank you.
» Yeah. So, um
» [clears throat] >> I would respectfully say that while I
support ongoing maintenance of job description on behalf of Cook County
employees, I do not support the basis on which wages were established given the
county selected for comparison, as it creates an extreme fiscal mismatch,
ignores local economic realities, labor markets, and the ability to pay. If we
elect to spend more in one area, we have to cut spending somewhere else. We
cannot fund it all. That is our reality as a small county with a very limited
tax base. We talked about this in the last COW
meeting, and I had addressed some of the the issues of why I have concerns in the
comparable county selection in the documents that I handed
out. It says when conducting a compensation study for Minnesota County,
the most important criteria to consider are geographical proximity and labor
market competition, followed closely by population size and tax capacity budget
size. So, as outlined here in this handout,
the criteria for comparable county selection
geographic proximity, labor market competition, population and scale, tax
capacity and financial resources, full-time equivalent staffing, uh
housing and rental costs, economic structure, household income and
spending, and total compensation. Those are our categories that look at and
there's a narrative that accompanies each of those headings. In the interest
of time, the next page here are the uh
criteria typically used to determine comparable counties.
That's population, per capita personal income, taxable tax capacity, net tax
levy per capita, total current expenditures and property tax revenues.
Under those categories in the comparable counties that were selected uh to
establish our wage base, the top seven counties in the selection
we used were the most populous counties. Um and that's Hennepin number one,
Ramsey two, Dakota three, Anoka four, Washington five, St. Louis six, and Olm-
Olmsted. So, we we we being where we are
as far as population, that comparable counties was the top most populous
counties. Two was per capita personal income. Six
of the seven top counties ranked highest per capita personal income were used for
comparison in the county's compensation study. That would be Hennepin, Carver,
Washington, Traverse, Scott, and Dakota. Number three, taxable tax capacity. Six
of the highest tier, that's the highest tax base and revenue generating and
generating counties, were used for comparison in the county's compensation
study. Hennepin, Ramsey, Dakota, Anoka, Washington, and St. Louis.
Number four is net tax levy per capita. That's the total amount of property
taxes a local unit of government decides to raise divided by the total number of
people living in the community. Small rural or resort-heavy counties
with low permanent populations relative to their infrastructure costs, such as
Cook County and Lake County, often register high per capita levy
burdens. Cook County frequently ranks second highest in overall per capita
relative to tax burden due to high public infrastructure and service costs
distributed across a very small permanent population base. Number five
under criteria typically used is current expenditures. Seven of the eight
counties with the highest total current expect expenditures
were used for comparison in the county's compensation study. That being Hennepin
County, which ranks number one by a wide margin in the billions. Ramsey County,
Dakota, St. Louis, Anoka, Washington, and Olmsted.
And six is property tax revenues.
Hennepin County consistently collects the highest total property tax revenue
in the state due to its large population and immense commercial residential
taxable market value. Rural, less populated counties collect
the lowest overall property tax revenues, often totaling a fraction of
major metro counterparts. So, when I when I look at these
realities and and I've done that for a number of years having been part of
the comp study that we conducted in my in my first term
and in many discussions I I still struggle with this and I
as I think you're aware I believe in evidence-based
decision-making data that supports that decision. So this isn't
something that's driven by an emotion or a personal agenda. It is something that
I feel is my responsibility and stewardship to the people that put me in
this position to be a good steward of limited dollars.
So the proposal that is before us that has been motioned and seconded
um I support it on the basis of a
commitment to our employees and I said that in the
committee of the whole meeting as well. If this is something that we value that
we want to set this to attract quality people, maintain quality people,
whatever. Um
then um
I I will support it because we chose it based upon priority what our values
would be. And and I've encouraged that we would
take a look at everything that we are have chose to be responsible for in
governance and then based upon our limited funds prioritize those things
and if we make this our top priority then we have done that through a
disciplined process and then we have to decide what we're going to cut. Hennepin
County number one population, number one budget, number one in in tax revenue,
number one across the board this year is having a very difficult time and they
are having to cut staff and [clears throat]
a lot of other things that are and yet they've got the most money. So,
it's up to this board to make a decision on where we're going to spend the
limited resources we have because we can't fund it all.
So, my support in this motion before us is
the commitment to staff with the understanding that we will do the due
diligence necessary to balance the limited resources we have that we can
expend. So, thank you for listening.
» [clears throat] >> We have a motion and a second before us.
Is there any further discussion or comments?
» [clears throat] >> I'll call for a vote. All in favor?
Aye. Opposed? Same sign. Motion passed
unanimously. Thank you very much.
» [clears throat]
» Moving on to item number six, um Firewise with the auditor Brady.
» Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh the Firewise Committee
is planning brush pick-up events this fall for property owners who've done
clearing but need help disposing of the brush.
Uh estimated cost of these events is
28,000. We don't have any current grants
uh available for funding these costs. Uh our limit our Secure Rural School
funds are also limited. Uh we're projecting out to use what we have now,
it'll take us into the next uh funding of Secure Rural Schools. So, I'm looking
at uh our tax forfeit funds. We had
previously authorized these funds to go towards the
Firewise coordinator when we were waiting on the Secure Rural Schools.
» [clears throat] >> And I'm asking to make those available
again for the brush pick-up costs. Uh what we have left is uh just a little
over 25,000 now because we've been using it for firewise and it was planned to
use it for pictometry, so we spent about 40,000 on pictometry since uh we last
used it for secure rural schools. So, anyway, this would uh likely deplete
that fund and we'd come back for other use if we needed it.
And our coordinator, Steve, is also looking at um every source
um of funding uh first of all, the DACA, called the
DACA funds. But, we'll look at any of these costs that might fit that we we
might get replenished on. But, in the meantime, I'd like to have this
available for the brush pick up now and then we'll apply for any refund where
avail- that's available later. >> Especially this year with the fire
situation. >> Yeah.
» Needing to clean up their brush and so forth, but they probably will take
everything that you have right now. Commissioner Sullivan.
» Thank you, Madam Chair. Um just related to the wildfire risk, we
have property owners in District 4 who have already piled up
the brush and are waiting for this. So, this is work that our citizens have
already completed and it's really a practical way to uh reduce fuel on the
landscape. >> Commissioner Gamble.
» Yes, thank you. Yeah, I think um historically and you can get the way
back and find out that a lot of the fires, forest fires that we've seen that
have devastated communities within our state have been because of brush that is
there to fuel fires when they stop during start during the lightning
strikes or whatever. So, I would make a motion to use up to 28,000 um tax
forfeit funds for brush pick up in the fall of 2026.
» Support. >> Have a motion in the second. Any further
questions or comments? All in favor?
Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion passed
unanimously. Okay.
» So, next item is the [clears throat] airport contract for the taxiway
construction project. Previously, we approved grants for the engineering and
we've done that work and this is for the construction. We approved the the bids.
So, this is the contract with KGM Contractors for the Hangar Road taxiway
reconstruction at the Cook County Grand Marais Airport.
And the county attorney has looked at the contract and and made some There've
been some requested changes made to the contract and the additions that you see
in the attachment. Originally, you would have seen just the
two-page contract and the insurance and the uh payment bonds
and bid bonds. And now we're including all of the FAA
uh specs, etc. that outline a lot of the requirements that you don't see, but are
just referenced. And some of them are now made explicitly
through the county attorney's actions. And Jean, you might want to say more
about that. >> All right.
» Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, the contract came to us in short form. I
know that's the contract that the county is used to seeing.
R S & H was pretty clear that they work with that contract on a number of other
counties. However, on a call yesterday, Brandon
Jensen was particularly helpful in making sure that we had the attachments.
The airport improvement project grant-funded
projects require certain language in there. So, all of the specs and things
like that don't necessarily need to be included, but the fastest way we could
get this attached was to include everything and then those um
compliant conditions are included in that packet. So, that's the reason for I
don't like to make things 300 pages [laughter]
when they can be two pages, but we want to protect the grant and we want to make
sure that we're in compliance and the letter of the law says that those that
language and those terms are in the procurement documents and they're in the
contract. So, that's why I made that request and Brandon Johnson was
particularly helpful in getting that quickly.
» And given the way that um state and federal are dealing with
contracts these days, they're getting much more uh
let's say detailed in in following we're noticing that especially in the state
contracts. So, it makes it makes a lot of sense to
make it very explicit in our response.
» Commissioner Mills? >> I was going to say
with some [clears throat] of our past experiences I I'd say bravo on this.
Thank you very much for the the diligence. [clears throat]
» Thanks. Commissioner Gannon?
» Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, I think um
anytime you have an agreement, contract, whatever that being explicit and
inclusive is hugely important. And getting clarity and understanding and at
the point that documents are drafted, that is the point to make sure that you
are protecting your best interests. And I appreciate your reference to the
letter of the law which sometimes we we just are grow numb to it, but it but it
is what protects us and I I appreciate so much your efforts in this area and uh
your department and your thoroughness. Thank you.
» Thank you, Commissioner. >> [clears throat]
» One other point I make, we don't have the grant yet. Uh we've made the
application. This is not unusual. They always put us in this position. I
shouldn't say always, but often. We have to approve the contract and
start even though they have to get um get the work started even though we
haven't got final approval, but um it's it's all but assured. So, it's it's work
they want done also, so. >> Commissioner Gallivan.
» Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh given our previous experience with
the airport and the discussions we had with multiple regulatory agencies on the
expansion of our runway, the the
this is uh a lived experience that informs what we do at this point to make
sure well, let's get it right and be thorough on it. So, we have we
understand it because nobody likes to diffuse their efforts and energies and
resources because of misunderstanding, so this is great.
» Commissioner Sullivan. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to make
a motion to approve the $1,443,788
contract with KGM for Hangar Road Taxi Lane reconstruction at the Cook County
Grand Marais Airport. >> Support.
» [clears throat] >> Have a motion and a second. Any further
questions or comments? All in favor?
» Aye. >> Opposed, same sign. Motion passed
unanimously. Thank you to Attorney Peterson, to
Brady, to Anne who's on committee there that this is
um a good move forward. Let's just put it that way.
» It's a a very important move forward. Um we, if you recall, had a prop strike
» Yeah. >> in the past and we want this repaired
and brought forward in good condition and construction should start the week
of September 14th. So, thank you. >> Okay.
All right. So, we'll move on to item seven, uh administrator.
» Thank you, Madam Chair. So, the first item that I have is the courthouse
security memorandum of understanding and non-disclosure agreement. And to give
you some information on the the background of this, the sixth judicial
district contacted me, um Mark Coin and Sarah Taylor, the district
administrator, um to let us know that the court had
secured funding to provide a security assessment for every county within the
sixth judicial district. So, they are paying for that and um engaging in the
uh contract with the consultants and are asking for our support in moving
forward. And so, with that, we will receive information that is then
confidential. And so, want to make sure that that information remains
confidential um between the court and the county. And
so, they have asked us to support this memorandum of understanding and
non-disclosure agreement. Um that work should begin the end of September, and
we should have more information within a few months.
So, at this time, I'm just asking all of you to support moving forward with the
MOU and the NDA. >> Okay.
Commissioner Mills? >> Very very supportive. Just curious, when
was the last time this was done? >> 2012.
» Okay. And um
certainly [clears throat] this will factor into our
future capital. >> Absolutely. This So, to add more to
that, thank you for that question. So, um I did have our architect on the call
with the six sixth judicial district so that we could talk about how the two
would connect. And we may be moving back when we bring the recommendations from
the building study to the board to make sure that we have the time and ability
to incorporate the recommendations from the security assessment, as well.
» Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Chair.
» Yeah. >> Commissioner Gambles?
» Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. So, um given
the nature of this assessment, it's it's not information that is fully disclosed
because that's the nature of security. And so, as we do look at this and with
our remodel and all of these kinds of things, there'll be elements that will
be discussed that'll be more confidential in nature. And then those
elements that we can disclose will will discuss.
» Correct. Because I was going to ask the question what all will it encompass, but
in doing that then it would compromise the security [laughter] nature.
» Correct. >> Yeah, so this is
this is where you have to trust the process in this one.
» [laughter] >> Commissioner Sullivan.
» Thank you Madam Chair. And just for the public, I know when we hear the
letters NDA or non-disclosure agreement, everybody goes crazy. So, for the
public, just know that approving it for closed security briefings and
purposes, this is legally permissible. We're not doing anything awkward or
unfair or illegal. We are being transparent as much as we
can. >> Thank you, Commissioner Sullivan. So,
it's basically the the court um providing security to us as the county
that they will not be sharing the security information out with anyone
outside of us. So, it's their data, it's their information, but they're providing
it to us, like you said, likely in a closed session for information to the
board and to help guide our building remodel discussions, but that's all it
is. >> Good timing.
» Yeah. >> Yes, Commissioner Campbell.
» Yeah, thank you Madam Chair. So, I'd make a motion to approve the courthouse
security memorandum of understanding and non-disclosure agreement between the 6th
Judicial District and Cook County. >> Support.
» Any further questions or comments? All in favor?
Aye. Opposed? Same sign. Motion passed
unanimously. Thank you on that.
» Next item. >> All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. So,
my next item, as everyone knows, um Mike Keyport, our emergency manager
and management director, is retiring um on September 1st, and we have selected a
finalist and offered a position uh to Ruth Fogel as our next emergency
management director. She has accepted, and she will be starting on September
24th. We're very excited about having her coming on board, um but that
provides a little bit of a gap where we don't have a director in that role. And
so, my request is to appoint Steve Van Ketrix um to the position as an interim
director of emergency management from the time period of September 1st until
Ruth is on board on September 24th.
» Commissioner Gamble. >> I'll make a motion to um appoint Steve
Van Ketrix to the position of interim county emergency management director
effective September 1st. >> Support.
» Any questions or comments? Commissioner Gamble.
» Thank you, Madam Chair. So, just a a question, we did have correspondence
from um our fire chiefs asking if they could be involved at all. And so, my
question is just what was any involvement at all on the part of fire
chiefs >> Um
» in the hiring of Ruth? >> Yes, thank you for that question. So, we
had one of the fire chiefs from Luton Fire, um Steve, and I'm I'm Duclos.
Duclos. Thank you. Steve Duclos um assist us in that
process, and during that process, he was consulting with the fire chiefs from all
of the different uh fire departments in the county, and um highly supported and
uh the recommendation to hire Ruth and was part of that determination.
» Yeah. That's that's great. Yeah.
I think uh you know, the evidence of being
responsive to that is is hugely important, not just for the hiring, but
for what it says in our working with you know, community and people have
vested interest in us. That's great. Thank you.
» You're welcome. And any further updates?
» I do. Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got two updates. The first one is that I
joined uh attended the county tribal meeting yesterday. It was in Duluth.
And um it was a great meeting. There were um
I I think probably 20 some people that attended, so it was great great
attendance. Um the items that we talked about was the State Community Health
Services Advisory Council. Uh they are looking for representatives from the
tribes to join that committee. Um we talked about the OMB rule changes on
federal grants and how that is impacting tribes as well as the county. And then
state legislative priorities. So, we anticipate having our next meeting right
before the AMC um conference in December. I think it's
December 6th or 7th, if I'm not mistaken.
Uh so, that will be our next meeting. But um was happy that I was able to join
that. The only other update I have is the fact that we have our all-staff
potluck tomorrow from noon to 1:00. So, if any of you can join that, should be
fun. Uh we're hopefully doing it outside if the weather permits. I know.
» [laughter] >> And Brooke has graciously offered to
bring a grill and uh grill brats. Yep. Yep. So, it should be fun.
» Okay, thank you. So, I need to back up here because we need a motion.
» Yeah. >> To approve, of course, Steve to be the
interim. >> Oh, yeah. Madam Chair, I I
uh I made a motion and then we had support. Okay.
» We just need a vote. >> Okay. Thank you.
» All in favor. >> I.
» I. >> Opposed, same sign. Motion passed
» Represent that in the notes that it happened sequentially.
» [laughter]
» Right. Okay, so um we'll move on then to
employees concerns or missioner commissioner concerns or meeting update
reports. Anyone has anything to report?
Meetings? We had a busy August, I know.
» It was very busy. Thank you, ma'am. >> Oh, Commissioner Sullivan.
» I'll go >> Go I have to go right ahead.
» Okay. >> So we started out with our local
emergency preparedness meeting on August 11th and
talked a little bit about the wildfire smoke, the wildfires themselves and kind
of talked about given that what we would
like to do in terms of activities both, you know, particularly tabletop within
the next year. Um and that was the first meeting that
Avi ran for us through PHHS, so that was really great.
And then we were involved obviously in the
emergency management director interviews.
And then um Sag Seagull Area Property Owners
Association met and I attended that and two big issues. One was about their
garbage area. They pick up off of a road off the Gunflint Trail, which unless you
have a truck is impassable. And so a second canister has been added by
Northshore Waste up by the Loon Lake um canisters and that will be for people
who have a Toyota Prius like me or some low-to-the-ground car, but there is an
option for everybody then that's there. And so we really appreciate Northshore
Waste you know, free of charge putting that
extra canister um at Loon Lake. And then Commissioner
Gamblin I attended the HRA meeting and um
that was very, very productive um and we talked a little bit more about
our housing trust fund and are in the process of getting that rolling.
And airport advisory um obviously the taxi lane reconstruction, which we just
approved and discussed our new commissioner members.
And then uh last Friday was a Gunflint uh gratitude gathering, which was an
opportunity to thank all of our firefighters, EMS, EMTs, all the first
responders that assisted during um the wildfires back in July and ongoing.
Uh yesterday we had a safety committee meeting and talked a little bit about um
with our new emergency management director having her look at our training
schedule and do some of the planning for upcoming events for our employees. And
then lastly uh yesterday um the subordinate governmental service
district committee met and both Commissioner White and I attended that
and we talked about just county responsibility and jurisdiction issues.
Um as we know, some of those SGSDs are
pri- on private property or private road, DNR and US Forest Service. And so,
talking about are there agreements, joint powers agreements that we need to
put together, but what do we do to ensure that all these unique little
places might have an opportunity to continue. So, that was one of our uh
discussions, but very, very busy month and um
still the wildfire up on the Little Knife is continuing. It's 90% contained,
but it's not over till it's over. Just reminding everyone.
» [clears throat] >> Commissioner Mills.
» Thank you. Uh yeah, I was up uh up the trail
yesterday and smelled smoke and all the weekend smelled smoke and so
there's still there's still smoke there's still fire.
Um but I guess it's over over the border largely is what I understood but
» [clears throat] >> what I wanted to share is that um on
Friday Peter Mark and Siri the commissioners
from the EDA um successfully got the EDA through the
closing process on the sale of Spear National. So that's big news and it's
not done done done done because we still have to you know meet the obligations of
of the sale contract as far as the irrigation and the septic are concerned
so still going through that and that's
still on our plate but just a huge step um I feel like for for that organization
and for our community um you know it's it's been on the EDA's
plate since the formation of the EDA and yeah it's a it's a significant
change and transition across the board so
just want to thank those guys for the work that they've put into this which
has been a lot and a lot and a lot and um
» [clears throat] >> really excited for for what's
» And I'll just add we we've received the funds.
» Then we got them. Yeah. >> The no that's coming but this is this is
the funds from the sale. >> Okay.
» So we received a wire now which we had to have in order to plan the closing of
the bonds >> Okay.
» on October 1st so the funds are in our accounts.
» You scared me for a second as far as
accept or or is that >> [laughter]
» Thank you. Uh and I think that's all I I have to
share today. >> Okay.
Commissioner Gallon [clears throat] >> Yeah.
My reports I'll give it public health human services it's on the list there
for Um but the question I would have if the
board would agreed on this at some point maybe at a cow meeting or whatever, but
uh to understand actually how those dollars translate relative to our bond
obligation, the money's received, the money in escrow for completing the
things that are compliant with the contract. It'd be good for us I think to
to see that just >> package
» Yeah, yeah. To see that, understand that and how what has been paying down those
that debt, how that translates into that 160,000. So, just seeing that picture
would be beneficial big time. >> Oh, yeah. On that note too, thank you
Commissioner Gamble. Um
kind of following up with the conversation about
uh I I think you were alluding to it or maybe said specifically just that where
the tax dollars, which tax dollars and just our overall costs historically, I
think just for the total package would be really helpful to to
better understand it cuz I still get questions about that too. Um
how much did we pay versus how much have have visitors paid and we can't know
exactly, but you know, we can get a better idea just overall so everyone
everyone knows where we sit and yeah. >> I've done that summary [clears throat]
before, so I think I can just pull it up. We're good. Yeah.
» Yeah, thank you Madam Chair. So, yeah, I think it it's it's important for us to
to understand and put it in a context because you learn from those experiences
and so that's that would be good. Thank you.
» Yes. >> Thank you Madam Chair. I forgot one
thing. There's a piece of paper every commissioner got
on a draft proposal for AMC for the presentation that Jeff Brand and I would
like to make it AMC in December. It's called from housing crisis to housing
ecosystem and so we are working on a proposal and we'll submit that and have
put together kind of a draft power point, but I'll keep you informed about
that as that presentation hopefully is accepted as a more than a just a
proposal, and then we'll go from there. >> Great. Good mission.
» You probably don't need ideas, >> [clears throat]
» but I wonder if um either one of the Hamilton sisters in the game.
» Oh, they are um on page seven.
» And Red Arrow and >> [laughter]
» Awesome. >> Bravo.
» Do you want to say excuse me? You want to say anything about the Mayhew?
The Mayhew project given That was at the EDA or was it not?
» Um just uh it was just an amendment for the
timeline. >> Okay.
» So, yeah. I think that's the only update I'd have for you.
» [cough] >> Still
still waiting to break ground or any further progress there.
» She attended the ARDC meeting last week and we're
um in a position where we can help people in terms of the fire that
affected businesses, so try to get the word out on that, too.
» [clears throat] >> They're gearing up for um
October insurance decisions. The staff that they have there for that. We're
readjusting our meetings in September because it's just
everything is happening, it seems like, in September because we're going to
Bemidji for AMC, so we have our next meeting in 2 weeks. So, it's just a
matter of, you know, making sure we can adjust. Um and also [clears throat] we
um we formed a committee for our bylaws,
which haven't been reviewed for I'll just say several years, and so um I'll
be a part of that, too. Coming up in um October.
We've discussed um we've always met at the Hermantown facility. However, it's
um considerable big and um echoey and
always cold. So, you would wear three layers if you wanted.
» [laughter] >> Sounds so nice.
» Right to it. The always cold.
» And expensive. >> [laughter]
» So, we're looking into going to Lake Superior College.
And they have a meeting room there. You drive in, it's the right building on the
right side, and there's plenty of parking, and so I think we'll give that
a chance. But, you know, this is how we work as a group, isn't
it? We evaluate, we reassess, we say, "Okay, can we do different, or can we do
better, or can we um try it out and see what happens?" So,
that's uh that's where we are with that. Any further thoughts about meetings?
» Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. The um
ARC, the corrections, is uh something that I report on public health and human
service, but something we don't normally talk about, but we did address because
we're in budget cycle, is that uh St. Louis County administrator Kevin Gray
was there, and he said that their insurance, they self-insure as a county,
their health insurance is going up 39%. >> Oh.
» And uh they're trying to absorb some of that cost as it relates to
the corrections. And uh so, it'll be 15% that is passed
on through that that gets passed on in our supportive charge. But, um as I
mentioned before, because of some uh changes in personnel and some other
issues in accounting that transferred dollars to where they belong, uh that I
» think you referenced about 32,000, which was correct, and I
So, I it's 32 to 34,000 reduced amount that would be Cook County's share this
this year for 2027.
» [clears throat] >> And I did have an insurance company
because I told Kevin, I said, "Well, I had an insurance company to me when we
were looking at our insurance, and they're saying just that your your
claims are driving your your rate up and when you're self-insured, that's going
to be the case. And so they said you just need to hire
healthy people, get rid of the real and hire healthy people. I said, "Well,
that's not how it works though." >> That's not how it works, you know.
[laughter] >> That is I mean that's
funny and also though true and that is something that the benefits
and wellness committee is, you know, aware of and really trying to get ahead
of. How can you help employees be healthier and thereby reduce your claims
and thereby reduce your costs and it's it's a a challenge but I think with, you
know, >> awareness
» awareness, feedback, participation, it it can happen.
The challenging part also is really our rates come from our pool.
Um, and so you have to somehow have the whole pool kind of get on that bar but
every bit helps. So we'll do our part and
try to help do
more education for the broader pool or I don't know but step by step.
» I I would say that relative to pool to having a pool
is that when we are evaluating our health insurance both in the benefit
that we receive and the cost to the county that the pool is significantly
better than like if we were in a position of St. Louis County where we
self-insured. So distributing it out over, you know, but you're you're right
that it's we can't control everything. >> Yeah and and uh
I have been interested and still am and attempted by the self-insurance because
we have had presentations at AMC about [clears throat]
I think it was Swift County. They just
uh 1% increase, you know, 0% increase and
just like for 10 years having that kind of, you know, excellent rates and with
being self-insured, but then they'll have a neighboring county who had
experienced the same thing and they'll have
one bout of cancer amongst their employees or their employee families and
it's all out of the water there, so. >> That's the situation with St. Louis
County. If you have several million dollar claims, you're going to see your
rate >> Yeah, yeah. So, it's it's it's risky and
that tempered by >> And you'd have to understand Swift's
experience relative to claims >> Yes, exactly.
And the age and all the demographic, yeah, it's really
» they must have claims managers that they hire.
» Yes, yeah. >> Even St. Louis County.
» Oh, I don't know about that. >> I assume.
» Yeah, I I maybe we didn't discuss that, but I would assume, too.
When you got that much money involved.
» So, Allison will probably start doing that soon, huh? Just kidding. Just
kidding. [laughter]
» Um, but on a side note, um, I did hear back from Northeast Service Cooperative
uh, late in the work day yesterday and I'm actually meeting with Lauren Sterk,
who is the rep that we work with for our health insurance there, on Thursday
morning to actually hear about our renewal.
» Okay. >> I was ready to write something, but no.
» Yeah. >> Stand down.
» [clears throat] >> Okay, anything else from anyone?
No? Okay. >> [clears throat]
» So, um, I'm going to move down to item number 10, correspondence memos. In our
packet, we have the sales tax comparison through June of 26 and the HR board
report on staffing changes. And um,
I'm then um, announcing that we're going into a closed session with the review
one-year review of County Administrator Administrator [clears throat] Trebel.
And so, um, we'll be uh, be making a motion to close and then we will go into
our closed session and we will not return as a board group.
So, I will >> [clears throat]
» have a motion to close the meeting pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D
subdivision 3A to review the annual performance of
County Administrator Trubel Hersema. A summary of the review will be
presented at the September 8th County Board of Commissioners regular meeting.
» So moved. >> Support.
» All in favor? >> Aye.
» Aye. >> Opposed, same sign.
We are adjourned. >> Did everyone sign this? Mike's card?
» Only I don't think I did. >> Okay.
» Thank you. >> Yep.