[0:00] flesh and one in the machine.
Um, so we will start with commission
[0:06] updates.
If anybody have anything they'd like to
[0:10] add or discuss or bring up.
>> I'll I'll start. Um, whatever you do,
[0:18] find a way to avoid the flu. It is not a
nice friend.
[0:24] » That's the whole thing. I don't really
have I can't remember it yesterday.
[0:31] » Basically, it's been it's been pretty
intense.
[0:34] » I'm sorry. Hopefully, you get better.
[0:39] » Commissioner, anything?
>> I think the only thing I update on today
[0:43] is the LD 2158, the legisl Oh, sorry. LD
2158, the legislation that will allow
[0:52] our budget committee to um appoint will
allow the commission to appoint one new
[0:58] member to our budget committee and then
allow the budget committee to convene
[1:03] and uh vote in their other members has
been signed by the governor. It was an
[1:10] emergency piece of legislation. So once
it was signed by the governor, it is
[1:14] immediately lost, which is great news
and we can go forward with our budget
[1:20] convening and have a 2026 budget, which
uh I just want to acknowledge also how
[1:28] incredibly stressful it has been for the
staff and the county and the towns uh to
[1:34] be operating with so much uncertainty.
And I'm just really happy that we can
[1:40] address that right away and uh as soon
as we can. So uh that's the the good
[1:46] news there.
>> Um other legis
[1:55] um
a bill to fund the county jails that's
[2:00] going through the legislature now. I
think it's going to be in front of the
[2:04] uh finance committees.
um coming up that would give the jails
[2:09] an extra all the jails across the
counties in the state an extra $8
[2:14] million.
Uh which would be nice. Almost all of
[2:19] the counties are dipping in reserve
funds to make ends meet in the jails
[2:24] because uh we're trying to keep it from
being put on the backs of the taxpayers.
[2:28] But jails are costing more and more
every county across the state. We're no
[2:33] different than everybody else. And so
the extra money would be nice to have.
[2:37] Um, another bill is
related to that is they want to put
[2:43] together a study committee that will
over the next two years study the jails
[2:47] in the counties and see if there's
something that the state should be
[2:51] doing. Are we organized correctly? Is
there a different way to organize the
[2:56] jails to see if there's uh a better way
to deliver the service? And I think what
[3:03] they want to do is look at jails in
county jails across the United States
[3:08] and see if there's any other models that
we could be adopting. So I think they're
[3:12] putting together a study committee for
that. Um we don't know exactly where
[3:17] that stands, but we think that'll pass.
And then um my understanding as far as
[3:24] the deeds goes is the uh 1% that the
state was going to take from the real
[3:32] estate transfer tax has been defeated.
But that doesn't mean they're not trying
[3:37] to find something else taking money. So
we'll keep an eye on that.
[3:43] Keep fighting that. But other than that,
there's nothing else.
[3:46] » A question about the funding for jails.
Would that be $500,000 to each county or
[3:52] is it distributed based on population or
>> there's a formula that they use that has
[3:58] something to do with prisoners and
valuation and a whole bunch of other
[4:02] things that they already use. I would
imagine that they would just put this on
[4:07] top of what they already have and so we
would get a small portion,
[4:13] you know, but every hundred,000 or every
200,000 would help.
[4:19] Thank you.
>> The next is public comment. Is there
[4:23] anyone who would like to address the
issue,
[4:27] » please? Hey, I'm Donald Gell. I'm chair
of the budget committee in the town of
[4:32] Washington. Now that the budget
committee has it, the county budget
[4:36] committee has a forum. Could you tell me
what the next process and how that
[4:41] budget process will work so that the
public uh both from the municipal side
[4:47] and the public in general can can attend
meetings and have some input into the
[4:52] draft county budget that I see is it's
been defined
[4:58] today. How where did that draft budget
come from?
[5:02] » What's the county budget process going
forward?
[5:07] Um, we're still working through this.
Uh, our part, the commission's part is
[5:15] the budget is brought to us basically by
administration. Administration has been
[5:20] working through the needs for the year.
Um, we'll try to keep it down as much as
[5:26] they possibly can. They will bring that
to the commission and we will uh, we've
[5:31] already looked at it a little bit. We
will basically just adopt it at that
[5:35] point. um unless there's something
that's glaring on it. The next step is
[5:40] the uh county budget committee has not
yet met the have a quorum. Uh we have to
[5:47] appoint somebody to that and we will do
that either in another week or two weeks
[5:52] somewhere in this time period. They have
to because there's a series of members,
[5:56] they all have to get together and meet
on their schedule. Once they've got a
[6:00] quorum, they will then appoint the other
members to the committee. Uh once they
[6:06] have that meeting uh where they have
members then we will sit down with the
[6:11] schedule of going over the budget
because at that point the budget
[6:15] committee is the one who works on the
budget and the budget committee will
[6:20] develop what they think is the best
budget. It may be exactly the same as
[6:24] the uh budget we give them or it may
have some changes.
[6:29] uh after probably a series of four or
maybe five meetings with different
[6:33] departments that are all open to the
public, uh they will come up with a
[6:38] budget that will be sent out to the
towns for the towns to have a minimum of
[6:44] 10 days to look at it and then there'll
be a public hearing based on that budget
[6:51] and then the budget committee will
either adopt it or make changes at that
[6:54] point and then the commission can either
just let it go at that point where if we
[6:59] want to make changes, as long as we vote
on it unanimously, we can override
[7:04] something that the budget committee does
and if the budget committee doesn't like
[7:07] it, they can then override what we say.
So, it is a process. We don't have all
[7:12] the dates at this point and all of the
process once it's out there will be um
[7:18] hopefully all those dates will be on the
county's website uh so everybody knows
[7:23] and knows what departments being
discussed. All of the meetings are
[7:26] public. I think there's a public
hearing, as a matter of fact, before
[7:30] they adopt that first budget. Um, so
there's going to be a series of
[7:35] different meetings. We just don't have
the dates yet,
[7:39] but those are available, will be
available.
[7:43] So, you're looking at probably 30, 60,
90 days out before you finally get a a a
[7:50] public hearing for the budget itself.
Um, no. I think we will probably have a
[7:57] public hearing uh right away
>> within the next two or three weeks and
[8:03] then there'll be when we finally finish
the process which will probably be um
[8:09] certainly over 30 days but less than 60.
Uh we will have another public hearing
[8:14] on that final budget that the commission
the committee has put together. Okay.
[8:20] » Thank you.
[8:25] Anybody else wishing to address the
commission?
[8:31] Seeing there's none, we'll move on to
the the regular part of the agenda. And
[8:36] the regular part of the agenda includes
uh routine business. Um the agenda,
[8:42] which is what we have here. I don't know
that there's anything we want to add to
[8:46] the agenda, so I think that's okay. Uh
department head reports. Thank you all
[8:50] very much for the four reports we've
gotten. Payroll and expense warrants and
[8:54] reserve withdrawals.
May I hear a motion?
[8:57] » Second.
>> It's been and seconded. Thank you. Uh
[9:01] any discussion on any of these?
[9:07] Seeing as there's none, I'll call the
vote. All those in favor?
[9:12] » Yep. Three in favor, none opposed. Now
we can get to the discussion items where
[9:19] we'll talk about some of these things.
Uh the first one is the adoption of the
[9:23] two 2026 draft budget for the budget
committee.
[9:29] » Yay. Um I'm going to go out of order
because I believe
[9:35] the grant language.
>> Yeah, I did. I sure did.
[9:39] » I sure did. Um, I think going to number
C then B then A makes more sense because
[9:45] those all affect the 206
adoption of that funding.
[9:50] » So, we're going to start with C, which
is the grant language and acceptance of
[9:54] the LEPC and EMPG grants. These are
grants through EMA. Um
[10:02] based on the approval or misapproval,
we'll have a final updated budget for
[10:08] the commission to adopt um to provide to
the budget committee.
[10:14] And the director is here if you have any
questions. Um and I think in your packet
[10:19] is all the language from both grants.
>> How much
[10:25] money we talking about?
One question I wasn't prepared for. I
[10:30] believe it's 68,000.
[10:35] The EMPG was 68885,
something like that. The uh LEPC was
[10:44] two pieces. the 6,000 something for
um
[10:52] wages for one of my employees and then
around 7,000 that goes directly to fire
[10:57] departments to pay for hazmat training.
[11:05] Now, my understanding is having read
through these that the uh since these
[11:11] are Department of Homeland Security
grants that are doled out to the uh EMAs
[11:19] across the country, includes the uh main
emergency management agency.
[11:25] They have changed the wording because of
court cases. So, it no longer obligates
[11:31] the county or the recipient uh to
administer federal law in terms of
[11:38] immigration statutes.
And so, as long as the court cases hold,
[11:45] uh then these are perfectly fine.
If the court cases get overthrown, then
[11:51] we're back potentially to the original
word,
[11:56] » except that the state has the right to
withdraw.
[12:00] So, we we wouldn't have to then follow
that language,
[12:04] » right? But it would put us back where we
were before is the money we've spent we
[12:10] have to return back to the federal
government.
[12:13] » So, it would impact the the budget that
way, too.
[12:16] » Yes. But in the meantime, we are clear
of the uh ownorous
[12:23] requirements that were put in there
before.
[12:28] » Great. Sounds good.
>> We have any uh information on the
[12:35] process of of court uh situation with
this bill?
[12:44] I haven't heard anything else at this
point. There there's a preliminary one
[12:49] has a preliminary injunction against it.
The other one has a permanent injunction
[12:53] against it. But that means that they're
both available for still working its way
[12:57] through the courts.
I have not heard that the federal
[13:01] government has appealed any of them yet.
>> Okay. Um, and so if we okay them, uh,
[13:10] they would go into our budget. Um, but
then if for some reason they get turned
[13:15] around and the language comes back, we
will certainly have to, uh, return the
[13:20] monies. So, it's a it's a gamble, I
guess, but I think I believe the state
[13:28] is very strong about making sure that
wording that they originally tried does
[13:34] not go through. So, I'm in favor of
okaying these uh and
[13:41] rolling the dice a bit.
>> Correct.
[13:47] Um if we are in the position to have to
return funding and will not be able to
[13:56] uh use federal funding to cover these
this money or you know these um
[14:04] expenses.
Do we have any
[14:08] uh funding in reserves that we could tap
to cover this if we find ourselves in
[14:15] that position at the very minimum for
what we would have already spent?
[14:23] We always hope, but this is not the year
I think to to take that risk. I will say
[14:28] something um Candace and I chatted about
this is a grant for 2025 through October
[14:33] of 26. So by the time we right so we're
already about six months in yeah to it
[14:39] already um and I can't remember which
one we we shared this with but uh by the
[14:45] time any kind of court case goes through
and it gets over to we're looking at the
[14:49] 26 27 cycle is probably when we're going
to have to be a little bit more
[14:53] concerned about that happening in in my
opinion. Um, yeah, because that all
[14:57] takes time and we're already well into
this grant year to the point where if
[15:02] these are not approved, 20 budget would
be short in EMA about $30,000,000ish.
[15:10] » Yeah.
And and so
[15:14] any court decision, say we are in the 26
27 year before anything theoretically
[15:21] flips back,
>> um
[15:24] will we have to pay back all the way
back to 2025 to the federal government?
[15:32] » There's no way to know that for sure.
I'm sure that would get haggled out with
[15:36] the various states that are in the
lawsuits.
[15:39] That would be a good question, but I
didn't know if they had already
[15:45] discussed that. And is it So, the state
divies up that money. So, if this So, if
[15:53] this did get overturned, the state would
have a lot of work to do.
[15:56] » Yes.
>> To try and get that. So, that's kind of
[15:58] our carrot that we're hoping
is uh I mean, it's it's it's definitely
[16:04] a small risk, I'll say. Um,
[16:09] » okay. That's I just wanted us to be
really clear on,
[16:13] you know, how far back this goes. If we
know, we don't know
[16:17] » what just what the general implications
are.
[16:21] » Yeah.
[16:26] » Director Richards, how important did
these grants for budget?
[16:32] » They are incredibly important. with the
EMPG in particular because it directly
[16:37] offsets my budget for that budget year
up to that amount. It's 50%
[16:44] reimbursement up to that amount which
offsets all of our wages and stuff in
[16:50] EMA. So since this grant should have
started back on October 1st of last
[16:55] year,
that's why the 25 budget would when they
[17:00] go to do the audit that we are going to
be underfunded for last year
[17:05] significantly and then this year would
also be negatively impacted to the point
[17:11] where we would have to figure out where
to make cuts because the majority of my
[17:16] budget is wages and benefits.
It's a small department
[17:26] » and the so the other the alternative
would be to increase your budget for the
[17:33] regular budget committee and regular
taxes and prefer not to do that at this
[17:40] time of course. Um, so I guess I have to
I have to again lean on okaying
[17:48] accepting the funds um you know and and
uh think that um the right things will
[17:56] be done in the courts if they even
challenge it which they haven't yet and
[18:00] go forward.
[18:03] » I'll make one other observation. We are
making the assumption that if it came to
[18:07] us with the old wording that we would
vote it down. We have not taken a vote
[18:13] on that. There's no reason to to jump
the gun and say we would definitely uh
[18:19] turn it down if it came in with
different language. We've never taken a
[18:23] vote on that. And I don't want to make
an assumption that that's how we would
[18:27] vote if it came to us. But in the
meantime, you know, I think I would not
[18:32] be surprised if there are some counties
that would take it with that word.
[18:37] » Whether the state would accept it or
not, I don't know.
[18:41] It might be that the state would just
turn it back rather than wait for the
[18:46] towns or the counties to turn it back.
But in the meantime, we shouldn't be
[18:49] making the assumption that we will be
sending it right back.
[18:54] That's a different calculus to make at
that point if it's worth whatever the
[18:58] new wording would be. Uh that we're
still willing to go along with it. In
[19:02] the meantime, that's not what's on the
table. What's on the table is the
[19:05] current wording. And with the current
wording, I don't see any reason why we
[19:08] would say no.
I don't
[19:13] » you would like
>> um
[19:19] I think I think we want to put that
aside um as part of the regular budget
[19:24] process rather than do that now because
we'd have to add it to the agenda and I
[19:28] don't know that we need to add it to the
agenda at this point. We'll just assume
[19:38] » don't you have your copy of the agenda?
[19:44] Yeah. So then you wanted to do B next.
>> B next.
[19:50] » Yeah. Get all the hard stuff out of the
way.
[19:53] » Um so B is prioritizing the schedule CPI
and step adjustments for the 2026
[19:59] budget. This I believe was an agenda
item at the end of last year in maybe
[20:06] November or December's agenda. Um it's
been tabled a few times. We are waiting
[20:11] to get to this point where we know we
have a 2026 budget. Um again, not a
[20:17] formal vote, but the 2026 increases are
included in the budget draft that you
[20:22] were provided. Um so that is already
included.
[20:26] I
believe some of the discussion back then
[20:30] was we were kind of waiting to see how
2025 closed out to see what we have
[20:34] undesated and just kind of a a net if
you will.
[20:38] um we don't have that luxury. 2025 is
not closed out. We cannot rely on those
[20:43] numbers. So, we kind of have to put a
decision on your plate to go off of what
[20:48] is proposed for 2026.
Um
[20:52] understanding that some of our und
designated aren't exactly where where we
[20:56] want them to be.
[21:00] I think what we want to do is make sure
that all of the employees going back to
[21:07] the January 1st of 2026
get what they're entitled to by
[21:13] contracts or by agreements which
includes the the CPI as well as any
[21:18] steps.
The question is going to be I guess the
[21:22] board of finance. At what point do we
how do we do it? How do we give it back
[21:28] to them once the budget is approved? Uh
is it going to be a lump sum? Is it
[21:34] going to be a
um a figuring that we add to the rest of
[21:39] the year? Um it would seem that it must
be a probably has to be a lump sum
[21:44] because we want everything else to not
be the the basis for where they go the
[21:49] year after this.
So,
[21:52] » so I I think there's um two questions in
there. Um whenever it is approved to
[22:00] move forward for the 26 increases
um then it will be retro back to January
[22:05] 1st to make employees whole and it will
happen as soon as the
[22:10] agreement is made by the commission that
we can forward. I think the um question
[22:16] that came up and when we were talking
about moving it forward to March was at
[22:22] that point to review whether we could
move forward now or whether we'd wait
[22:27] until the 26 budget was approved.
Preliminary figures are closing on 25.
[22:36] We would have to we you would have to
make the decision based on a 26 budget.
[22:41] not relying that it would be undesated
in 25 that could cover those changes. Um
[22:50] especially where it's not just salary
increases in 26, we have a lot of
[22:53] contract increases that we also need to
cover.
[22:58] So the question
right now is whether you're agreeable as
[23:06] a commission to move forward with the
retros to January now. or whether it's
[23:11] going to pause until we get through the
budget cycle.
[23:17] » And your recommendation just based on
keeping us solvent would be what?
[23:25] » I think it is based on whether you as a
commission feel very strongly to support
[23:31] this as we continue to move forward in
26. Um and understand there is a budget
[23:36] impact that is presented to the
commission excuse me to the budget
[23:40] committee. I am saying that from a
undesated perspective
[23:46] we should not be looking at that where
we're projecting 25 to make that
[23:50] decision.
if I may. So, are are we then
[23:57] um
[24:00] making an creating an incumbrance that
we are forcing on the budget committee
[24:05] if we approve it ahead of the budget
process?
[24:09] » Yes.
But it's really no different than where
[24:14] we have entered into contracts, whether
it be a continuation or whether it be a
[24:19] builtin 5year that increases every year
that's already built into the 26 that
[24:24] we're presenting to the budget
committee. Yeah.
[24:26] » Um so they don't have to approve it.
>> It's in the figures that they will be
[24:31] approving when I'm speaking about
contracts or whether I even our
[24:36] insurance for the county that's gone up
substantially. Yeah. um that's part of
[24:42] numbers that are being presented to
them. So salaries are just another layer
[24:48] in that that is being presented in the
budget
[24:52] » for our internal policies. Um I can't
quote it exactly but the commission does
[24:58] need to approve the CPI step each year
is is kind of how it's written in our
[25:02] personnel policy and then it does get
kind of flushed out with the budget
[25:05] committee. Okay. Um but typically that
vote starts with the three of you and
[25:10] would have been
a normal process right last year as as
[25:14] part of that
[25:19] » I'd like to add in in regarding this
that my my stance has always been the
[25:26] people are the most important thing that
we have working for us and whatever we
[25:31] can do to make their lives a little bit
easier especially as we've made them
[25:36] more difficult ult. Uh we didn't
personally do it, but it was it's been a
[25:39] more difficult time because of the
circumstances. Um I think I think we
[25:44] should improve it, but that's where I
stand.
[25:52] » I think I'm not disagreeing in terms of
our ultimate commitment and our uh is to
[25:59] the employees and they we know that
they're going to get back. The question
[26:04] is exactly when is it going to happen
soon? Uh which I think puts the whole
[26:10] process
um in doubt just in case it doesn't
[26:15] pass. Um there is, you know, where does
the money come from if it isn't already
[26:21] there? If it isn't coming in through tax
dollars, is this something that
[26:25] eventually we wind up increasing our tip
spending on? not active spending, our um
[26:31] tax anticipate anticipation notes, um
our CANS
[26:37] uh and therefore puts us in a worse
position financially for the county. Um
[26:42] or if we wait an extra month and we get
the budget passed, then it just becomes
[26:47] a a natural part of what we're doing. I
would prefer the second just because I
[26:53] don't want to put us in a financial bind
down the road.
[26:59] knowing that everybody's going to get
the money. The problem is, you know,
[27:03] there are people who probably can use
the money now.
[27:08] And that's where the problem comes in is
how soon do we get them the money, which
[27:12] is one of the reasons why I want the
budget process to move as fast as it can
[27:17] once we get it going now that we've got
the approval for the quorum. I want to
[27:22] see this get going. I don't want to see
us drag this out any longer than we have
[27:25] to. But I also don't know that I really
want to see us commit to spending money
[27:31] that we don't have yet. Could we
potentially kind of meet in the middle
[27:36] with this that our first budget
committee uh meeting to review budgets
[27:42] that we discuss that with the budget
committee and maybe get a verbal that
[27:46] they're agreeable to move forward at
that point which could allow us to move
[27:51] this forward maybe four weeks earlier
than waiting till the end.
[27:56] » You're a genius. I think that's a great
idea. Yeah.
[28:01] At
>> least that gives us some backing and we
[28:06] know that that's the direction we're
going to we don't usually discuss it
[28:08] that way because we discuss it
department by department
[28:12] » but we are going to have a beginning
meeting where we discuss a little bit
[28:15] about the philosophy of what we're
trying to do and how we approve the
[28:18] budget and what we're allowed to cut and
what we're not. Um so it'll be
[28:22] appropriate to bring it up then. And if
by some chance the budget committee is
[28:27] not completely agreeable, then we're
waiting until the budget goes all the
[28:31] way through, which is maybe another
couple of weeks. But if we can get it in
[28:36] the beginning when we start in April,
that would be great.
[28:40] » Sounds good.
>> Agreed.
[28:42] » You think?
>> I do. Thank you for that compromise.
[28:48] » Mark, you're happy?
>> I'm happy. Okay. Then we will move on to
[28:53] the next one which comes to a which is
the adoption of the
[28:57] » Yes. So based on some conversations
today with the grants and the stepping
[29:02] in cola, I will present or I will
provide and produce a final um budget
[29:07] summary that will go to all of the
towns. We will post our budget draft on
[29:11] the website in the next 24 hours. Um,
and I will get working on our budget
[29:17] binders for budget committee members and
commissioners to pick up. That's their
[29:21] tool to use as we go through this budget
process. Um, and then our visual budget
[29:27] will also be coming out sometime next
week, which is that interactive tool
[29:30] that anybody can find on. So
once these changes are made that
[29:35] proposed draft will go out definitely by
the end of the week hoping sometime
[29:39] tomorrow um again to towns budget
committees will be will be posted on the
[29:44] website etc etc
[29:48] » and this is for the towns to understand
that this is really just a draft that is
[29:53] not even approved by the budget
committee.
[29:56] » This is not the budget that they'll be
voting. This is the vote the one that
[30:00] we'll be using as a working document for
them.
[30:03] » Yeah. But a tool to keep the towns
informed of where we are and our
[30:07] progress just because of this and then
the towns excuse me
[30:12] » and we won't know what the schedule is
till after the budget committee's first
[30:16] meeting
>> most likely. I'm going to try and keep
[30:20] pulling some strings with them. Um I
have heard a little maybe interest in
[30:25] doing a Tuesday Thursday schedule. Um,
so I'm going to try and get some more
[30:30] traction. It looks like the first
meeting of our joint budget to get
[30:33] everything squared away will be March
31st at 6 PM. So again, I'll put that
[30:38] out. Uh, and then at that time
we'll finalize that process with them.
[30:44] Um, but I'll I'll hopefully get some
insight prior so I can at least give
[30:48] everybody a heads up of when those might
be.
[30:50] » It may be a lot, but the other option
could be that we just do more at each
[30:56] meeting. Yep. Yeah.
>> Yep.
[30:58] » We can't do the twice weekly. That's I
know that's a lot of uh using your brain
[31:04] » and looking at numbers, but yeah, it
it's I think there's pros and cons to
[31:09] both, right? I packing it in. I think
it's spot on the brain. We're constantly
[31:14] talking about it. Questions come up. You
wait a week. You kind of lose some of
[31:17] that. But it also gives time to ask
questions and follow up. So, I think
[31:21] that first meeting will be a good good
indication. Yeah. And then even if they
[31:26] do agree to meet that following
Thursday, we'll probably do our admin,
[31:30] IT, finance, um, probate, some of the
smaller department to kick it off, be
[31:36] dive into some meteor ones.
[31:42] » The next discussion item we have on here
is employee recognition presentation in
[31:47] a
>> chair. I just want to sorry, one more
[31:50] question about budget committee. Um, as
I reviewed the budget, um, I did have a
[31:56] few things that came up and so our
opportunity as commissioners to address
[32:03] questions and concerns we have is also
during those meetings. Is that correct?
[32:08] » Yeah. I mean, anytime.
>> Yeah. I mean,
[32:14] » yeah. is the way it will work is we're
going to be having a joint meeting
[32:19] between the right
>> budget committee and the commission and
[32:24] so the departments will be here they
will make their presentation the budget
[32:28] committee will ask them questions if we
don't get our questions answered then
[32:32] once the budget committee is done with
their deliberations then we will
[32:37] ask questions
>> okay
[32:39] » at that point and then you know we'll
have other ideas at that point but we I
[32:45] um sort of as a straw
approve our own budget that we have some
[32:50] idea what we're going to come back to. I
just one of my big concerns is the cost
[32:55] of fuel and heating oil and just
thinking that uh this budget was um put
[33:05] together before the president's war in
Iran which has obviously drastically
[33:11] already increased the price for fuel and
heating oil and who knows what the
[33:16] future will hold but it that could be a
really significant impact for our budget
[33:22] um as we have a lot of facilities to
heat and a lot of vehicles to fuel up.
[33:27] So, um that's just one thing that I want
to be thinking about and I have a couple
[33:32] of other items that can wait, but I
think that that's really the big one.
[33:36] » You can certainly bring that up to the
administrator privately.
[33:39] » Yeah.
>> You know, on your own, okay, at some
[33:41] point to get the answers and get that
that thinking going behind the scene,
[33:46] too.
The question on that is we usually do
[33:51] those as bids
oil.
[33:55] » Yes.
>> When do those bids go out and when is
[33:58] the bids that we're working under or are
there um caveats in that whole thing
[34:04] that says in case of war all bets are
off.
[34:08] » Um so this year we actually went with
Macau to do our bidding for our game. Um
[34:13] so maintenance director Jim and I um I
don't know last week finalized those
[34:18] numbers and what they do is they work
with um I'm assuming they're going to
[34:22] work with maritime again because they're
one of the best but um costwise um so
[34:28] they lock in a price and then that's
provided to county and a lot of towns
[34:32] and the Camden library and a bunch of
other people. So there is a hope that we
[34:37] will be able to lock in especially when
the county did it we were getting kind
[34:40] of less and less less and less and
didn't make it as worth it for whatever
[34:44] vendor we were going with. Um, so now
MCO has taken it over and they work with
[34:49] all the towns, all the smaller
nonprofits, the county. Um,
[34:52] » they work with the schools too.
>> Yes.
[34:55] » We did previously. So what I did is I
just gave the list that we worked with
[34:59] right to Max and Pog and he reached out
to everybody. So he's taking that over.
[35:03] So I'm hopeful just with their
credibility and all of that that we will
[35:06] be able to lock something in soon. That
should be April that April, May. So
[35:12] we'll know shortly. Um, not that that
helps answer your question, but just so
[35:17] you understand the process. Yeah, that
was for planning works. Yes,
[35:22] » you guess my concern is still the
conversation you had on you guys that
[35:27] had last commissioners meeting where
most of us are having our warrant
[35:31] articles and ballots printed prior to
you um really getting into your budget
[35:37] process. I know the plumary work has
been done. Um, and last budget there was
[35:41] a lot of conversation on the floor about
adding this and adding that and
[35:46] you know it's where's the cap and
where's it coming down for us to be able
[35:49] to know like you can't come back to us
and say we need another 50 $60,000 and
[35:54] in August where you were debating last
meeting about adding offices this
[35:59] whatever the topic was how do you get to
the top and then work and have the
[36:04] discussion and bring it down or leave it
there but we're budgeting at the top end
[36:07] versus somewhere we're trying They say,
"Okay, we have to cut something locally
[36:12] to make our asses contribution to the
county, which would be devastating."
[36:18] I would I'd make the observation that
we're um between us and the
[36:25] uh budget committee, the chances of us
adding anything to what we get from the
[36:31] administration are going to be pretty
slim to none. Um, that's the point of
[36:36] the budget committee in most cases is to
make sure we don't go over and I don't
[36:40] think that they will be adding anything.
They did a little bit when we had ARPA
[36:44] funding. They would throw things at they
say, "Oh, look, we've got more money,
[36:48] but we don't have that opportunity and
we don't have that luxury now." So, I'm
[36:53] pretty sure whatever we administration
develops for numbers, uh, is going to be
[36:59] our top. Okay?
>> And it's not going to go above that. um
[37:05] if it does then then you know the whole
process is skewed and so I don't think
[37:10] we're going to do that and we know and
that's going to be one of the problems
[37:13] we have that we're going to discuss with
the budget committee is even if there's
[37:17] a temptation to add we don't have the
money and we won't be able to get we're
[37:20] not going to be able to squeeze more
money out of the towns after the fact.
[37:25] Uh, so what we give you or what the
administration sends out in that first
[37:30] draft budget will be as high as it's
going to go.
[37:36] Does that help answer?
>> It does. Yeah.
[37:39] » Because I can't imagine we're going to
go more than that.
[37:42] » Yeah. Just like, you know, we're sitting
here thinking about um how we get enough
[37:49] money to pay our employees what they're
due. Uh we're not going to overspend
[37:56] just to make that happen. We're not
going to overspend to make the budget go
[38:00] up any more than what it already is
because it's already too high.
[38:04] » Yeah.
[38:08] Any other questions on the budget while
Mark?
[38:11] » Just add one thing. Um
been a member of the Camden budget
[38:16] committee for a number of years. This is
my last year. So finishing that while I
[38:21] take on this responsibility and I know
the anxiety about the numbers and you
[38:28] know having to get it all done and we
need to expedite the county budget as
[38:32] quickly as we can so that all the towns
do have the final numbers and that's our
[38:38] that's our main responsibility right now
I think just getting it done and getting
[38:42] it to you so we can do it properly and
knowing that in this incredibly
[38:47] difficult year which is becoming more
difficult. We're just going to have to
[38:50] live with what we come up with. And it's
it's going to be a tough year, but we
[38:55] have to be prepared for that.
[39:06] » And we will move on to
which is the employee recognition.
[39:12] » Okay. I'm just putting this uh in your
brains that in April we will have an
[39:17] employee.
Um,
[39:20] we'll recognize employees.
[39:31] » Um, so yeah, just making you all aware
that anyone we will have employee
[39:35] recognition uh presentation. Looks like
there's about six employees that will
[39:40] recognize. Uh this is a committee that's
been left over for years and years and a
[39:46] small fun project I hope to tackle in
the next year or two um about our
[39:51] employee recognition. But right now what
we're doing is providing extra vacation
[39:54] days as a thank you. Um so we'll go
ahead and do that in April. Um everybody
[39:59] will be invited their supervisor etc. So
just want to make sure everybody's
[40:03] prepared for that. Um, and actually have
the list.
[40:08] Um, and if anybody can't make that
presentation, if you want to send a note
[40:13] or something that I can read on your
behalf, I'd be happy to do that.
[40:21] » I think it's appropriate. We need to put
as many of those kinds of things into
[40:26] place on a regular basis. One of the
problems we've had over the last few
[40:30] years is we do these things on a
inconsistent
[40:35] basis. It would be good to have some
consistency between that and whether
[40:40] it's a 10 year recognition or five year
recognition recognition for a job well
[40:44] done. We need to come up with something
consistent.
[40:49] » We also only recognize increments of
five. So 5 10 15 20 for the year prior.
[40:54] So, these are people that have hit a
5year commencement anniversary in 2025.
[40:59] So, again, the whole thing needs to be
revamped. We're well aware of that. It's
[41:03] just been lovely, unfortunately. Um, but
we still want to bring them to the
[41:07] commission to present, you know,
recognize some
[41:13] » ready for E.
>> Yes.
[41:14] » Okay. So, public safety coordinator. Um,
in the budget, there is a page titled
[41:20] miscellaneous. Those are uh individuals
or nonprofits that we fund. MCOG being
[41:27] one of them. We just discussed that. Um
another one being the Knox County Mutual
[41:31] Aid Association. Um this year on top of
their request for funds from the county,
[41:35] they also requested a specific position
to be funded by the county. The proposal
[41:42] was for a fire commissioner, I believe.
Um so what we did was we worked with the
[41:48] mutual aid association. We worked with
the Eboard. We worked with some of the
[41:52] chiefs. Um, we have an internal
position. It's titled public safety
[41:58] technology coordinator. This position is
vital in making sure that our dispatch
[42:03] center stays running, all towers stay in
in service and doing what they're doing.
[42:07] Technology needs are met. Um, amongst a
lot of other things. They also go out
[42:12] into the towns and help them make sure
that their radios are hooked up
[42:15] appropriately, helping with new hire
training, coordinating training with
[42:18] EMA, helping looking right, all all
sorts of things. Um, so all we did was
[42:23] slightly update that job description to
be more in line with what the request
[42:28] from the mutual aid association was,
which was more somebody more focused on
[42:31] kind of fire coordination and training.
Um,
[42:36] this is no budgetary impact. This is
just kind of a change in essential
[42:41] duties. It's a more town focused or town
centered position. Um, and we hope to I
[42:47] think training and resources are the top
two goals for all of our municipalities.
[42:52] Um, we weren't sure if we were going to
be able to do this, but we were and
[42:57] we're slowly kind of trickling out uh
some of these some of these requests
[43:01] from the mutual aid association showing
schemes for structure fires and things
[43:05] like that. So, this position is is
slowly getting getting ramped up. Um
[43:12] I'm trying to think of anything else I
can share about this role.
[43:18] » No,
>> and it's a work in progress, right? So
[43:20] » it seems like Billy is taking a position
that was already in flux from the last
[43:25] few years. The the position of um what
did you call it? public safety
[43:33] technology coordinator was a fairly new
position to start off with, only a year
[43:38] or two old and it was evolving as it
was. So, this is just changing the
[43:43] wording and changing the job description
and therefore what the job is just a
[43:49] little bit. It's another tweak to a job
that's evolving.
[43:55] » I think we've done our diligence with
the chiefs, with the mutual aid
[43:57] association, with the commission and
letting everybody know that this is
[44:00] coming. What we haven't been able to
tackle yet is getting with our town
[44:03] managers and ensuring they're aware of
this position, ensuring that they have a
[44:06] a voice at the table for needs and can
have some sort of easy mechanism to
[44:11] communicate with their chief and just
make sure that that's that's flowing.
[44:15] Um, the position itself will be added to
the executive board agenda at their
[44:19] regular meeting. So, it will be a topic
for discussion. That is a public
[44:22] meeting. So, we're just trying to find
ways to ensure everybody has an
[44:26] opportunity to to provide feedback,
especially as we are just now rolling
[44:31] this out in
>> Will this be funded as part of the
[44:36] communications etc budget fees or is
this going to be funded directly from
[44:43] our regular administration budget?
>> Currently, it's in the communications
[44:47] budget. um it's where it seemed to make
most sense at the time. But I do think
[44:52] again after having conversations about
what the role should look like, what the
[44:55] town want to want, what the county
needs, um I think we'll we'll probably
[44:59] re revisit that, see what department
makes the most sense, what that
[45:02] structure chain of command makes more.
The net effect is not that different to
[45:10] the individual towns, whether it comes
out of that fee or whether it comes out
[45:14] of
directly out of property taxes.
[45:18] But it would make it cleaner and neater.
Um, the reason to make it not part of
[45:23] communications is it becomes a wholly
um run part of the county as opposed to
[45:31] something the he has a say in.
>> Yeah.
[45:37] Mark,
[45:41] » one of the things that you know question
somebody might might ask is what happens
[45:46] to the work that the person was doing.
And one of the things a lot of the
[45:52] things still fit in the description
properly, but one of the things that's
[45:55] happened in the last couple of years, I
think the the job has been sort of
[46:01] overseeing dispatch as well and working
really closely with the dispatch center.
[46:07] And as we've the dispatch center,
brought in a new director that that
[46:12] person now has the ability to move uh
into this new circumstance really
[46:17] smoothly. uh without any interruption in
any of the the the job services being
[46:25] provided previously.
So we're not losing anything.
[46:32] » Correct. The only um
butt that I'll put in that is this is
[46:39] when we create a job, it's not about a
person. It's about the position and
[46:44] making sure that if we create this
position, we will find a person uh we
[46:50] just happen to have one on staff who can
do this, but that it's we're creating a
[46:55] a job that is not so tailored to one
person that somebody else could step in
[47:00] and do it down the road.
[47:04] » Great.
[47:07] I do feel like the changes in the job
description reflect that it seems like
[47:13] to me.
>> Yeah.
[47:17] » Anything else on this? Do we need to do
anything or you can just go ahead and
[47:21] change that job description without us?
>> Yeah, typically job descriptions will
[47:25] come in front of the commission if
there's a monetary impact. Um, this
[47:28] doesn't have a monetary impact. I just
wanted to to show the changes and and
[47:31] what was there before and how you do it.
I just want to say I think this is a
[47:36] great example of the county doing more
work at the municipal level and making
[47:42] our services more available and finding
better ways to partner. So, I'm really
[47:47] excited about this transition and I
think it will um hopefully only enhance
[47:53] our reputation at the municipal level.
>> I mean, it could lead down the road to
[48:00] us having a fire commissioner in effect.
it could grow from this to something
[48:07] else. But I think it's a good step in
terms of the services we're one of the
[48:10] only provided counts
>> and a good I don't want to use a
[48:15] position or a person as a tool but it is
a tool to evaluate what hasn't been
[48:20] happening in municipalities. It's it's a
way to excuse me create some equity. So
[48:25] not just one department is getting all
the resources. We can now resource
[48:29] share. We can all go in and fund
something together. So I think it
[48:35] it's a positive.
>> I I can add uh from the day I was
[48:41] elected to the position even before I
was sworn in one of my first meetings
[48:45] with the a select board chair. Um the
discussion was about how we were sitting
[48:53] in Rockland watching a Rockland fire
training and how to coordinate better
[48:58] between fire departments. So they they
the economics of ordering equipment and
[49:04] making sure that the equipment was
spared out to where it should be and no
[49:09] duplication. It was one of the first
concerns that came up and it's it's I've
[49:14] had those conversations many times. This
is something that the towns are really
[49:18] looking forward to.
[49:22] And I'll just add because I have to keep
adding things is um how valuable mutual
[49:30] aid is to Knox County that everybody's
willing to work together to get that to
[49:36] to provide services to all of the towns
and share services makes a big
[49:40] difference uh in terms of firefighting
in terms of emergency response
[49:45] throughout the county. And if this is
something that we can help them with,
[49:51] then it's a good thing.
[49:58] Then our next one in terms of discussion
items is F which is policy updates and
[50:05] policy review committee.
>> So just some internal things. Uh we are
[50:11] kicking off our department manager
monthly meetings again. um hoping to
[50:15] squeeze one in in March, but looking
like April. Um I've also offered some of
[50:20] the leadership from the courthouse to
meet regularly. I think
[50:24] all c all uh excuse me, all departments
valuable, but especially when we're in
[50:28] one building together, a lot of similar
issues come up. So, we're just trying to
[50:31] find mechanisms
base and be able to bring things to the
[50:35] commission a little bit easier. Um, but
on top of that, we are revamping, well,
[50:42] I shouldn't say that, we're updating our
personnel policy. We're hoping to get
[50:46] that out shortly. Um, from there, we're
going to create a policy review
[50:49] committee, inviting various employees to
sit at a table similar to this and just
[50:55] chat through our policies. Every
department is so different here. It's
[50:58] really important to have that feedback
um and ensure that it works for each
[51:01] department or if we need to have some
some further discussion. So, um, mostly
[51:07] for employees, but also for you all that
those changes will be coming. Um, and to
[51:11] give you a heads up, we do have a lot of
policies that need updating and those
[51:15] all have to be approved by the
commission. So, I will find the best way
[51:19] to get them to you, make sure there's
background for you to understand why we
[51:22] made the changes, um, and try to not
pack them all in one night. Um, so we'll
[51:28] we'll chat about the best way to to get
those approvals, but we may see some as
[51:32] soon as the next cable commission
meeting.
[51:35] Uh when I was on the school board, we
had a policy committee uh which you know
[51:41] would be hard to do with a commission of
three. Uh we just have to have a second
[51:46] meeting every month. Um but uh we did
have the um policy committee reporting
[51:55] out at every commission or every
schoolboard meeting.
[51:58] » So you know that might just be a good
standing agenda item. And you know, as
[52:04] the committee review committee comes
together, um you know, if we can just
[52:09] have a goal of working through at least
one or two policies at every commission
[52:15] meeting going forward, that gives us
something to work toward. And um you
[52:21] know, if you find that it's helpful to
have a commissioner sit in on the review
[52:27] committee meetings, you know, that's
also something for us to think about.
[52:31] Maybe it could even be a rotation so
that each of us has an opportunity to
[52:35] sit on on that committee in the future
just to make sure that we're all staying
[52:41] familiar with the work that's happening
and also uh just playing our role in
[52:48] moving that forward. It doesn't get
stagnant.
[52:54] » I'll add something that um
wasn't on the agenda related I guess. Uh
[53:00] about a month ago, we had an open forum
where I sat with the um with staff and
[53:09] employees
um which I think was very helpful to me.
[53:13] Um, and I think once we're done with the
budget cycle, we might want to have each
[53:18] one of the commissioners have an open
meeting with staff on a afternoon when
[53:24] everybody can attend uh get input from
them um and give input so everybody has
[53:31] a chance to meet and exchange some
ideas. I think it's a good
[53:36] » Yeah,
>> absolutely.
[53:42] It wasn't mine.
I was just told to do it.
[53:47] You just spoke about it.
>> And I know we already talked about the
[53:53] budget process quite a bit. You you've
mentioned some things. I've mentioned
[53:57] some things, but I think we have most of
our ducks in a row. We've got their um
[54:01] certificates ready to go. I have
people's
[54:05] oh gosh,
can't remember the word off the top
[54:08] where you need all your signatures. So
that's all filled out for them. They do
[54:11] want
[54:15] » Yes. So all their paperwork is ready.
Whether they're trying to come on the
[54:18] budget committee, trying to leave the
budget committee, trying to do another
[54:21] term on the budget committee, we have it
all set up and ready for them. Again,
[54:26] we're
constant communication with the budget
[54:29] committee on where we are. So we're
speak, try and finalize a timeline
[54:36] meetings. So that's all I wanted to say.
Those are the discussion items.
[54:39] um related to that but not necessarily
on this agenda. Um I just don't want to
[54:46] lose track of
a charter review committee and I know
[54:52] you're all thinking about that but um we
do have a sunset for LD 2150 which is
[54:59] now public law but I don't know the
number. Um and uh just want to make sure
[55:04] that we are staying on top of that
because we need to
[55:08] um we can't we won't be in a position to
do what we did were doing this year
[55:14] after
December 31st 20
[55:20] 28
and I think the timeline in my head I'm
[55:26] not sure if you and I have discussed
this yet is this year I get a lot
[55:31] uh education have about it, right? Where
where do we leave? What do we need? Um
[55:36] get people involved because it does come
to a public vote next year. Have all of
[55:40] our meetings get done what we need to
get done. Um and then valid all that
[55:45] whole process in 2018. A lot of the
changes we had already gone through and
[55:50] suggested would rely on the 2030 census.
So, it's it's nice if we can have it all
[55:55] wrapped up by our deadline for the
legislative bill, but as close to 2030,
[56:02] so it's fresh in people's minds as
putting something on. So, it's
[56:06] » we'll have to talk about a timeline a
little bit. Yeah.
[56:09] » But I think I'll add it as a kind of a
every other month checkin status update
[56:15] the commission agenda just so we good
things to just stay on text.
[56:20] Just to point out that the deadline that
we have is sort of an artificial
[56:25] deadline. For 14 years or 15 years, this
hasn't been a problem. Same charter. It
[56:32] just so happened that it sort of slipped
through the cracks when nobody all of a
[56:35] sudden decided they wanted to run to
reelect and nobody knew that they
[56:39] weren't going to run for reelection. So
it may be that if we just pay a bit more
[56:44] attention to it before again that won't
happen again which is what the county
[56:49] administrator is talking about being on
top of the four people whose seats are
[56:53] up for election. Um but it hasn't been a
problem so it may not be as dire
[56:59] sunsets.
>> It's true.
[57:01] » But
>> but it doesn't hurt.
[57:02] » Yeah. But we want to get it going. I
have a number of people who reached out
[57:06] to me who would like to be on a a
charter committee or commission.
[57:10] Any
other discussion items?
[57:15] If there's not, we'll move to the uh
action items. The first acting item is
[57:21] an act to approve the North Haven Deputy
Services contract for January 1st, 2026
[57:27] through June 30th, 2026. We better hurry
up and approve this because it's going
[57:32] to be announced soon.
[57:36] » Yes.
>> I'll I'll make a motion.
[57:40] It's been
>> and second
[57:43] discussion
[57:49] with chief deputy
from the sheriff department and the
[57:56] administrator from Haven and uh was
great discussion. They're very happy
[58:01] with the services they're getting and
they just wanted to make sure that you
[58:05] know this this got done. It was it was a
very pleasant conversation.
[58:12] » Great. Um, would you Kurt, would you
like to make a presentation about it?
[58:16] » Well, I was just going to add that to
echo what Mark said, there is some
[58:20] discussion about potentially
having the contract longer in duration.
[58:27] We can discuss that at a later point,
but there's been discussion of maybe a
[58:32] two-year contract, three-year contract,
so we don't have to keep doing this
[58:37] every year,
[58:42] right? I think the only reason we would
not do that is if we were worried about
[58:47] budget ramifications that down the road
things are going to go crazy, you know,
[58:53] but on the other hand, it would also
give us some stability in terms of
[58:57] budgets
>> and North Haven is also interested in
[59:00] doing a an more longer contract.
>> Yeah. Great.
[59:07] For anybody who doesn't know, this is a
budget. This is a contract between the
[59:13] county and North Haven uh the government
of North Haven Island uh to provide a
[59:21] sheriff's deputy service to the island.
And so what we're doing is basically
[59:28] approving the contract that is very
similar to the one we've had in the
[59:32] past. How many years have we been
providing that service to a contract?
[59:37] easily 20 to 30 years longer.
>> Yeah. So, we're not breaking new ground.
[59:48] » Any other discussion?
>> I was just going to say I think when we
[59:51] met with Final Haven last year, they had
some interesting ideas on how
[59:57] how this could work better monetary
discussions. So, this is really an
[1:00:01] extension of last year's contract to
allow some time to to have those
[1:00:05] discussions and especially with other
towns interested in sheriff's contracts,
[1:00:09] we want to make sure we take a step back
and and look at what that should look
[1:00:12] like to make sure it was as equitable as
possible while still understanding the
[1:00:15] islands are unique and they are going to
be different no matter what.
[1:00:20] I'll just bring up the one unique thing
is statute does say that as the
[1:00:25] commission because islands are not
contiguous that there is a tax relief
[1:00:30] you can give them. Uh that has been
something that's been between these
[1:00:34] contracts for some time as you get
questions from the other communities.
[1:00:38] That is the difference between the
islands and the main communities
[1:00:42] essentially are expected to pay 100%
whatever that may be based off decision
[1:00:47] discussion. But the islands, they do get
what's called a tax credit or a tax
[1:00:51] assessment credit. Uh we just handle a
little different in how it's worded in
[1:00:55] the contract, but essentially it's the
same.
[1:01:04] » Um any further discussion?
>> Uh I'll make a motion,
[1:01:09] » it's already that we have to authorize
the Knox County Sheriff to sign Oh, no.
[1:01:14] That's 21. Sorry. It's already been
moved and
[1:01:18] » deputy services contract for uh January
1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2026.
[1:01:25] » Great. Um
[1:01:29] seeing no further discussion, I'll call
the vote. All those in favor?
[1:01:34] » Mark says yes.
>> Three in favor, none opposed. Well, the
[1:01:38] next item we have, and I don't know if
this is necessary or not, is an
[1:01:42] executive session.
to convene an executive session pursuant
[1:01:47] to one MRS section 4056F
a discussion of information contained in
[1:01:53] records made maintained or received by
the sheriff's office that are not
[1:01:57] accessible to the public by statute
and I will leave this to the uh
[1:02:03] commission
[1:02:09] before we before we make a decision
about that I just want to take a moment
[1:02:13] and thank the county administrator, our
finance director, all the directors of
[1:02:18] all our different departments, and all
the employees for all the hard work they
[1:02:23] put in in this sort of very
unpredictable budget season, and that
[1:02:28] we're finally coming out of it. Uh, and
I especially like to thank uh,
[1:02:32] Commissioner Hine because she, you know,
took the the the took the direction of
[1:02:38] getting the the legislation through the
legislature. And uh I'm so thankful for
[1:02:43] all the hard work that everybody did.
>> I'm a cynic. I'm sorry. Have you been
[1:02:48] watching the Oscars? I mean, all those
thank yous. I'd like to thank my
[1:02:53] director. I'd like to thank Oh, anyhow.
>> Well, I have my little piece of paper
[1:02:58] here, too, that
my tuxedo.
[1:03:02] » Yeah, but I do agree. You're absolutely
right. Thanks are always due to all of
[1:03:07] those the people who've been putting in
so much work for this. Anyhow, let's get
[1:03:11] back to the executive session. Is there
a motion to move into executive session?
[1:03:16] » Do a a motion and then discussion before
voting.
[1:03:20] » Yeah.
>> Okay. I'll I'll make a motion.
[1:03:24] » It's been moved and seconded.
Discussion.
[1:03:27] » Um I wonder if maybe we want to hear
from the sheriff first and what the
[1:03:34] sheriff can share about thisou.
um and
[1:03:40] uh and then decide from there if we
actually do need an executive session.
[1:03:45] Does that seem like an appropriate way
of handling this?
[1:03:47] » Sure. If he's willing to just give us a
little bit of background about why we
[1:03:51] would need an executive session.
>> Yes.
[1:03:55] » I was under the impression you folks
asked for the move the action item
[1:03:59] because I provided you with the the
public facing.
[1:04:04] Um, but I understood that there was
additional questions you may have.
[1:04:07] That's why you wanted the executive
session because there may be items that
[1:04:12] specifically private that we can't share
that you may want to know about.
[1:04:16] » In full transparency, I don't know if
I'm the only one, but I asked have it on
[1:04:20] the agenda just so it was there in case
we needed it. So if we don't need it, I
[1:04:26] don't think we need to go into executive
session, but I would like to hear you
[1:04:30] know just a short presentation from you
first on a second video to make that
[1:04:35] decision.
>> So uh so you have the forward facing one
[1:04:39] I brought you with me today so we could
speak on some of those things especially
[1:04:43] during the exact session. Uh but what
this is is uh an agreement with the US
[1:04:49] Marshall Service uh to basically
broadbrush deal with sex offender type
[1:04:54] of uh violations we see both at the
state and federal level. It's a task
[1:04:59] force. It's put together. This will be I
think the eighth annual or ninth annual.
[1:05:04] It's been a few years anyway. Done this
for several years. Um the important part
[1:05:09] for us was that this is not tied to DHS
US Marshall Service. None of those
[1:05:15] immigration things that we have talked
about in this agreement in particular,
[1:05:19] but that's part of why I shared it with
you ahead of time. So you folks could
[1:05:22] see that it is not hard. It's literally
few thousand dollars to use our staff uh
[1:05:29] because there are things we can't
enforce federally, but there's also
[1:05:32] things they can't do statewide. So they
need us and they need them in a way for
[1:05:38] some of these things to work as a task
force in order to fully enforce some of
[1:05:43] the things that they were looking into.
>> Thank you.
[1:05:48] » Yeah. My my
thought on the executive session and
[1:05:54] if it's stuff that the public doesn't
know or doesn't need to know, we
[1:05:58] probably don't need to know it either. I
mean this is about uh individuals and
[1:06:04] it's not about the process, it's about
the individuals themselves and I don't
[1:06:09] need to know that.
So in terms of the executive session, um
[1:06:15] I would vote no. I don't know how
anybody else will I I will be voting no
[1:06:22] as well. I just wanted to make sure that
we had the discussion and there wasn't
[1:06:28] something I was missing wasn't for me
and I just wanted to be really clear
[1:06:31] that I wasn't missing anything and I
think it's a good opportunity to educate
[1:06:36] the community if they're watching about
what this is about and
[1:06:42] helpful. So, thank you. It also ties to
like we discovered this past year that
[1:06:46] all money's in and out have to come for
you
[1:06:49] » and it was a little bit of a a struggle
to find exactly where in the exceptions
[1:06:54] for executive sessions may fit. Um
because although so much can be forward
[1:06:58] facing that's a challenge for law
enforcement in particular uh similar to
[1:07:02] the medical records thing with HIPPA
there's certain things we have to
[1:07:05] protect and and we can share them with
you in executive session to a point some
[1:07:10] things there that we can't share but
that is the option but like said we've
[1:07:13] done it for some time we just didn't
necessarily come to you in the past
[1:07:17] because it was no necessarily internal
policy but like like we said once we had
[1:07:21] that legal review even it's $1 in and
out still has to come before in some
[1:07:25] fashion
So, we're just making sure that we do
[1:07:28] that bottomless correction.
We'll talk about theou in a minute, but
[1:07:34] we're still talking about the executive
session. Mark,
[1:07:40] » then let's let's call the vote. All
those in favor of going into executive
[1:07:45] session, all those opposed.
>> No.
[1:07:52] So now we have on the floor the next is
the action item which is an act to
[1:07:58] authorize the county sheriff to sign
anou with US marches.
[1:08:06] » So move
second.
[1:08:11] » So it's been moved and second
discussion. an animal if you would I
[1:08:16] think we've discussed parts of this
before that there are people out there
[1:08:21] we don't want on their streets and uh
the best way for you guys to deal with
[1:08:28] them if it's on the federal basis is
through the marshall service and I'm
[1:08:32] assuming this is part of that
in a sense may I please
[1:08:39] so and would you like to introduce
yourself a total detective with
[1:08:43] sheriff's office. I've been there for 28
years. The last 21 of those 28s, I do
[1:08:48] all of the sheriff's office sexual
assault cases. So, it's just something
[1:08:53] I'm very familiar with and deal with on
a daily basis.
[1:08:57] Um, in 1991, state of Maine started a
sex offender registry. That registry was
[1:09:03] revamped in 95, again in 1999, and then
again in 2013.
[1:09:09] Each one of those revamp of the sex
offender registry in the state of Maine
[1:09:13] brought with it new
regulations that sex offenders need to
[1:09:17] adhere to. And as you can imagine, not
all people adhere to the rules that
[1:09:22] they're supposed to. Um what's unique
about it is that every time there is a
[1:09:28] revamp, there's a period of time, let's
just say between 1999 and 2013,
[1:09:33] that the people in that time frame was
grandfathered under those rules. And
[1:09:36] then when it changed again, these so the
rules are different for everybody so to
[1:09:41] speak. So it is a little bit complex.
Another thing that makes county a little
[1:09:45] unique is that we hold in our county the
main state prison. So our numbers of sex
[1:09:49] offenders are higher than most. They
still need to be maintained, documented,
[1:09:56] their movements
uh tracked and of course when they get
[1:09:59] released that's a whole another
situation as well. In Knox County,
[1:10:04] currently there are 170 registered sex
offenders. 27 of those are housed in the
[1:10:12] main state prison, which means we have
approximately 140 registered sex
[1:10:16] offenders in Knox County out and about
that need to be monitored and to ensure
[1:10:21] that they are in compliance with the
standards of the main sex offender
[1:10:24] registry. As you can imagine,
trying to keep track of 140 people to do
[1:10:30] everything that they're supposed to do
in the time frames of whatever sauna
[1:10:34] that they were uh charged under
can be a daunting task. What the
[1:10:40] Marshall Service does is provides us
with funding to be able to allow a small
[1:10:47] group of us to be able to have the time
to ensure that these people are
[1:10:52] compliant. And if they are not, they're
dealt with accordingly.
[1:10:57] questions.
[1:11:02] » Is thisou that was signed purely for um
sex registry administration?
[1:11:09] » Yes. So when this first started back in
with us 2018 somewhere right in there
[1:11:16] 2019
uh it started it would be a two-day
[1:11:20] operation. There would be members of the
Marshall Service that come up here. We
[1:11:24] would plan and coordinate. We' section
off the county. We would team up and we
[1:11:29] would try to hit everybody in two days.
A two-day fail swoop, day, night, try to
[1:11:33] get everybody done.
After a year or two of doing that, they
[1:11:37] realized that we had a pretty good
handle on how we handle things here. Um
[1:11:43] that we knew what we were doing. We
didn't need to be babysat. in the last
[1:11:47] five to six years at least
uh they've simply just funded us and
[1:11:53] allow us to do our own operation so to
speak. So our primary concern and what
[1:11:59] we do with that funding is simply to
ensure the sex offenders are complying
[1:12:04] and nothing more.
>> How many staff are working on that?
[1:12:08] typically because it because it's kind
of complex in nature. Typically there's
[1:12:13] only two of us that do these details.
>> Do you still do it as a a batch like
[1:12:19] that within a day or two or do you do it
over the course of the whole year? Now,
[1:12:23] » so these have a time frame. Uh usually
they're about 30 days, 30 to 45 days.
[1:12:30] Yes. in here that's somewhere in that
time frame
[1:12:36] trying to locate people where they're
supposed to be can be difficult during
[1:12:40] the week. So it's typically nights and
weekends. So in that time frame we will
[1:12:44] try to utilize as many nights spend in
those weekends that we can locate as
[1:12:49] many people in a time frame.
[1:12:56] » Other questions? One more question. Just
thinking about um like succession.
[1:13:01] You've been doing this for a long time.
>> How long?
[1:13:04] » Yeah. So, I'm guessing there may be a
point when you want to retire.
[1:13:08] » Several years.
>> Yeah.
[1:13:10] » And
you have one other person who's been
[1:13:14] working on this with you. I don't know
who that person is if it's always the
[1:13:18] same person but just wondering how this
skill set is uh being shared with other
[1:13:26] folks in the department. So if there is
turnover in the future because it sounds
[1:13:30] like you maybe have it down to a science
um and others may not time
[1:13:39] and that's more for the sheriff I think
probably than for you. So that was the
[1:13:44] original intent of it. A lot of deputies
were brought on at the same time
[1:13:49] bringing off deputies and detectives now
because it is more spread out. We tend
[1:13:53] to use just who's available that
understands. But to your point, it may
[1:13:57] be important for us to look at that for
these future ones to start bringing
[1:14:01] those in. Um, typically what we've seen
though is the investigators will decide
[1:14:07] which purview they want to be in, but
the sheriff will ultimately say, "Well,
[1:14:11] you're the the better one at this choice
because we do have several detectives.
[1:14:15] They all take on all of the functions,
but they each have specialties."
[1:14:21] In preparation for that, we're looking
at who do we bring on as that. Some of
[1:14:26] the staff having worked with Titan
Twitchell throughout the last few years
[1:14:30] kind of gleing knowledge from him as as
it were anyway.
[1:14:38] » Does sound like we're running a fairly
good program if the Marshall Service has
[1:14:43] handed it over and said you guys can do
it.
[1:14:47] So, thank you that you're doing a great
job doing it. Um
[1:14:54] because if we weren't, I'm sure the
Marshall Service would still be
[1:14:57] involved. On the other hand, they're
probably willing to let it go.
[1:15:02] But it it is a testament once again that
how well our sheriffs have gotten
[1:15:06] through.
Thank you, Mark. Anything?
[1:15:12] » No, I'm just in a lot that you know
people do this kind of work on a
[1:15:16] constant regular year after year basis
and thankful for that.
[1:15:23] No other discussion. Uh all those in
favor of theou
[1:15:29] says yes.
>> Three in favor none. Thank you.
[1:15:35] » Other items. There's nothing else on the
agenda. And if you need to discuss we
[1:15:41] need to discuss our next meeting which
may be
[1:15:45] » March 31st.
>> March 31st.
[1:15:49] Tuesday. Yeah. Which is going to be the
one and that's joint budget committee.
[1:15:55] » Correct.
>> Yeah.
[1:15:56] » Yes.
>> Y
[1:16:00] that's going to be the purpose of the
meeting is the web
[1:16:07] 3.
>> Yeah. 6 p.m.
[1:16:11] 6.
Okay. Thank you.
[1:16:16] » I will take a motion to adjourn.
Second move and seconded
[1:16:23] and then once we meet on the 31st then
we'll have some idea what all of our
[1:16:27] other meetings will be.
>> Yeah. I'm hoping four
[1:16:32] » and those will probably be evening
meetings or late afternoon meeting
[1:16:36] » Tuesday
we still have our regular meeting in
[1:16:41] April whatever date that is. Yes.
Great. Uh nothing further. All those in
[1:16:47] favor of adjournment.
[1:16:51] » In favor, none of Thank you.