[2:20] There we go. Good morning. Welcome to
the Lancaster County Board of
[2:24] Commissioners meeting for Tuesday,
September 1st, 2026.
[2:28] Um, I am your chair. My name is Christa
Yokum. To my left is Vice Chair Chelsea
[2:33] Johnson. To her left, Commissioner Matt
Schulty. and to my right, Commissioner
[2:38] Sean Flower Day. Please rise and recite
the pledge of allegiance with us.
[2:45] » I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[2:51] republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[2:58] justice for all.
[3:06] Mr. Clerk, please start the meeting.
>> This meeting is subject to the Nebraska
[3:10] Open Meetings Act. Written materials to
be discussed at today's meeting can be
[3:13] viewed at the county's website at
lancaster.n.gov.
[3:16] Printed copies are available upon
request. Brings us to item one, minutes
[3:20] 1a, approval of the minutes of the board
of commissioners meeting held in August
[3:23] 25th, 2026.
[3:27] » I move approval of the minutes.
>> Second.
[3:29] » We have a motion and a second to approve
the minutes. Please call the role.
[3:33] » Flower,
>> yes.
[3:34] » Schulty,
>> yes.
[3:35] » Johnson,
>> yes.
[3:36] » Yokum,
>> yes.
[3:38] » Motion carries. 1B, approval of the
minutes of the board of commissioners
[3:42] budget meeting held on August 25th,
2026.
[3:47] » Move approval.
>> Second. We have a motion and a second to
[3:50] approve the minutes of the budget
meeting. Seeing no discussion, please
[3:54] call the role.
>> Shelty,
[3:55] » yes.
>> Johnson,
[3:56] » yes.
>> Flick,
[3:57] » yes.
>> Yokam,
[3:59] » yes.
>> Motion carries. Item two, claims.
[4:02] Approval of the claims processed through
August 28th, 2026.
[4:07] » Approval.
>> Second.
[4:09] » We have a motion and a second to approve
the claims. Please call the role.
[4:12] » Johnson?
>> Yes.
[4:14] » Flare?
>> Yes.
[4:15] » Shelty?
>> Yes.
[4:16] » Yokum?
>> Yes.
[4:18] » Motion carries. Item three, consent
items. These are routine business items
[4:22] expected to be adopted without dissent.
Any individual item may be removed for
[4:26] special discussion and consideration by
commissioner of any member of the public
[4:29] without prior notice. Unless there is an
exception, these items will be approved
[4:33] as one single vote of the board of
commissioners. These items are the
[4:36] approval of amendments to the following
county contracts. C-25-0680
[4:41] with Clyde Malone Community Center for
the CEO Initiative Program to extend the
[4:44] contract term. C-25-0681
with the Clyde Malone Community Center
[4:49] for the Therapy Program to extend the
contract term. C-25-0531
[4:53] with Centerpoint for the Square One
program. Uh C-23-0692
[4:58] with Ferguson Enterprises LLC for ice
melt. C-26-0247
[5:03] with Vermer Equipment of Nebraska
Incorporated doing this is as vermer
[5:07] high plains for repair services for
construction for purpose-built
[5:10] equipment. B grant contracts with the
following uh Blue Valley Behavioral
[5:14] Health for the diversion evaluation
program in the amount of $4,698.
[5:19] Pine Lake Behavioral Health for the
Diversion, Evaluations, and Outpatient
[5:22] Therapy Program in the amount of $5,000.
The YWCA of Lincoln for the catch life
[5:26] skills program in the amount of $44,854.
C grant contracts with the following.
[5:32] The YWCA of Lincoln for the catch life
skills program in the amount of $12,500.
[5:37] YWCA of Lincoln for the girls circle
program in the amount of $20,000. And
[5:40] finally, D receive and place and file
the 2026 annual inventory of county
[5:45] personal property for the county
engineer.
[5:50] Move approval.
>> Second.
[5:52] » We have a motion and a second to approve
the consent items. Seeing no discussion,
[5:56] please call the role.
>> Johnson,
[5:58] » yes.
>> Flowering,
[5:59] » yes.
>> Shelty,
[6:00] » yes.
>> Yokam,
[6:01] » yes.
>> Motion carries. Item four, public
[6:06] hearings. The first public hearing is
regarding the vacation of a portion of a
[6:09] public rideway generally located on
Theer Street and North 149th Street,
[6:13] East 300T, Village of Prairie Home.
[6:27] We I'm sorry. We need a motion to come
out of the um recess that we had for
[6:32] this public hearing. We started this a
couple of weeks ago.
[6:35] » So moved.
>> Second.
[6:36] » We have a motion and a second to come
out of the to end our recess and resume
[6:41] the public hearing. Please call the
role.
[6:44] » Flowerick.
>> Yes.
[6:45] » Shelty. Yep.
>> Johnson.
[6:47] » Yes.
>> Yokam.
[6:48] » Yes.
>> Motion carries.
[6:52] » Do you solemnly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give is the
[6:55] truth and nothing but the truth?
>> I do. Uh John Barry, Lancaster County
[6:58] Engineering. You know, as as Morgan had
said, this is the kind of continuation
[7:02] of the public hearing we had a few weeks
ago. So, just as a really quick
[7:05] refresher, Bayer Street is is a street
located in uh the unincorporated village
[7:10] of Prairie Home. It's a street that
looking back at old aerial maps hasn't
[7:15] been used as a street since the 1940s.
Currently, it's full of grass, weeds,
[7:19] and it has a few looks like little metal
buildings on it. So, Lancaster County
[7:24] Engineer is requesting that this street
at this time be vacated.
[7:30] » Just a followup question from last time.
I understand that there were some uh
[7:34] concerns around access
uh if we did move forward with vacation.
[7:40] Just are any updates in terms of
communication between the engineers's
[7:44] office and the land owner who brought
those concerns forward?
[7:48] » I have not heard anything. Nobody's
directly contacted me. I don't believe
[7:51] anybody's contacted Pam is Dingman,
county engineer. So,
[7:56] » they could have contacted though the
planning department too or somebody
[7:59] else, right? Not aware of that. Right.
>> Absolutely.
[8:01] » Yeah. Okay.
[8:08] » Any other questions for John? I mean, I
guess I'll just respond. I I drove
[8:13] through I drove down the alley. I went
down to the end of the street and saw
[8:17] it. Sure does not look like the road
continues there at all. But, um,
[8:21] overall, can we comment on the other the
Are we open for the second item, too?
[8:26] Can I talk about that one as well? The
>> Do we need
[8:31] » Yeah, I mean, they're the same town. If
you want you can do a second one as well
[8:37] at the same time.
It's just easier to keep.
[8:41] » Yeah, it is easier to keep them
separate.
[8:43] » I would say I have been contacted by the
land owner one of the land owners as you
[8:47] guys remember there was this land is
being divvied up due to a recent death
[8:53] in the family. I've been contacted by
one of the land owners over there. I'm
[8:58] until we have a very clear way to allow
the land all the land owners to continue
[9:02] to have all future aspect future
potentials on this one that they
[9:07] currently do. I'm not super inclined to
vacate this particular one um because I
[9:14] want to make sure that hey if there's I
know there's interest in developing some
[9:19] of the land to the east so I don't want
to shut down that opportunity for the
[9:22] land owners.
You'll need to swear him. Do
[9:26] » you solemnly swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give is the
[9:28] truth and nothing but the truth?
>> I do.
[9:31] » Um,
if it's the case, if you vote this down
[9:36] and we we would have to start the whole
process over again. Mhm.
[9:41] » So, it would be better to table it um
for a certain period of time so that we
[9:48] can um work this out with the land owner
and come back. It would be a better
[9:54] solution than to to vote not to vacate
the piece of ground. Thanks for that. I
[9:59] appreciate that advice and I'm totally
open to that. I'm not saying never. I
[10:02] just want to make sure that like I said,
one of the land owners is interested in
[10:07] development. That was one of the
opportunities that was presented to us.
[10:10] I want to make sure that hey, if they
want to try and put some housing on the
[10:15] east side of Prairie Home. I mean,
there's a
[10:19] there's a neighborhood kind of already
there. Like, it seems very reasonable
[10:22] that that could be something that could
be done in the future. Whether or not
[10:25] they actually do it in this near future,
I don't know. But I want to at least
[10:30] keep that option available for them
because currently they have that option
[10:33] and I I don't want to shut that down.
Can I I know I had suggested that we not
[10:39] talk about the two together, but now I
feel like I want a little clarification
[10:44] because it has been over a week um
between the two properties and I'm
[10:48] getting the stories on both of them a
little muddled in my head. So um
[10:53] » I move that we come out of recess on
item B, however that's referred to in
[10:59] our
>> regarding the uh vacation of the public
[11:03] right away and the wait.
>> Yeah. Well, yeah. Wade Avenue.
[11:08] Do we have a second for that?
>> Second.
[11:11] » Thank you. Um, please call the role.
>> Shulty,
[11:14] » yes.
>> Johnson,
[11:15] » yes.
>> Flard,
[11:16] » yes.
>> Yokum.
[11:17] » Yes. So, that's what I would like is a
little bit of clarification between the
[11:21] two properties just so that we're we
know which what we're talking about.
[11:26] So, John, um, for Commissioner Yokum,
could you please slide both exhibits up
[11:31] on the because she's she's having
trouble figuring out how they fit
[11:34] together, which I I understand
[11:39] a little higher.
>> So, when we see um the unopened road and
[11:45] the alley, hopefully hopefully,
Commissioner Schultzy, you didn't drive
[11:48] down this.
>> I did not drive down that one. I drove
[11:50] down the wider one.
>> I'm I'm thankful for that today. And
[11:53] there should be one thing you're
thankful for. Um, and so the other road
[11:58] would be located right here and it's
highlighted on the bottom of this map.
[12:03] And we could probably fold them together
and and make a paper doll of them.
[12:07] » Okay.
>> For you, but I think that gives you a
[12:09] better photo of what's happening.
[12:15] » Yeah, it's not ideal, but it is helpful.
>> Hold on. I I can get closer.
[12:20] The alleyway I think makes a lot of
sense because it does have a major turn
[12:25] off or has a not a turn. There is the
option to exit a major road into this
[12:30] alleyway that clearly is not a road. Um
my car made it through. I do think there
[12:35] was some question as to whether or not
you guys as engineers might come through
[12:38] and level it out one last time or
something like that. I think that from
[12:43] my opinion that would be a good option
to do. Um but I I mean I'll leave that
[12:48] ultimate to I do think removing that
apron makes a lot of sense there too to
[12:52] shut down the alleyway.
>> Commissioner Yokum does that that is
[12:56] helpful. Thank you.
>> These are my old time engineering skills
[12:59] [laughter]
>> regarding the street one. Um,
[13:05] my recollection from our hearing last
week ago, I think it was, um, is that
[13:13] there was concern that the property to
the east would be completely blocked off
[13:19] from having public access. And there was
discussion around our
[13:25] kind of legal obligation to ensure that
every
[13:30] landowner would have access to a road.
So that's where my question was coming
[13:34] from was just around being able to
provide,
[13:39] you know, kind of meet our obligations
in that program.
[13:45] So right now there's properties that
make up several lots that all are under
[13:51] a single ownership. As county engineer,
you know, we're not aware of when people
[13:56] are transferring ownership or u when
people pass. We have no idea how they
[14:01] pass their land on. So I I don't really
have any opinions on that. Again, if you
[14:08] would like to wait um so that we can
track down uh the person or the actual
[14:15] owners of the land, you know, we also
don't know uh if the person that came
[14:20] and spoke was representing every family
member. And when you're going to deal
[14:24] with multiple family members, in this
case, I think there's at least six,
[14:28] maybe more. Uh we're gonna need a little
time to track that down. Um we
[14:34] if you'd like to delay the vote on that,
I'm fine with that.
[14:37] » Have a vote on it today.
>> So I think that you have a little time
[14:43] out then.
>> And I think a lot of this has to do with
[14:46] planning too, not just engineering,
right?
[14:49] because it has to do with planning and
engineering because when we say access
[14:52] to that property, at least I mean a very
general access, but planning department
[14:58] has very specific regulations on what
kinds of access they can have to land
[15:02] that allows them to develop it.
>> It's not just
[15:06] it has to be a road a road, not just
they have access.
[15:12] » Go ahead.
>> Do you saw me swear or affirm the
[15:15] testimony about to give us the truth and
nothing but the truth?
[15:17] » I do. Um, commissioners, I also just
wanted to add as well, um, if the
[15:20] concern is allowing potentially that
property owner to the east to have
[15:24] access to a public ride ofway. Um, John
and George both reached out to our
[15:30] office to discuss the ability for the
board in their discretion to distribute
[15:35] that land upon vacation, [clears throat]
excuse me. Um, you know, so
[15:39] traditionally we discussed that it was
usually split between the adjacent land
[15:43] owners. um looking back at the statute
3917253
[15:48] um gives some pretty wide discretion to
the board. There doesn't seem to be any
[15:51] limitation on how you choose to
distribute that vacated land. So if your
[15:56] concern is about allowing them to have
that access after conversation um and
[16:01] and it's not really a discussion about
development, but it's more discussion
[16:05] about access and that's where you land.
there's a way to distribute it that
[16:09] allows them to still be able to access
that road um without violating any other
[16:15] issue. Um so there there's both case law
and um statute that support that. So you
[16:22] have pretty wide discretion to decide
where you want it to go.
[16:26] » Okay.
[16:30] Any other questions for anyone who's
standing before us before I ask for any
[16:34] other members of the public wishing to
speak?
[16:39] Is there anyone else present wishing to
speak on this during this public
[16:42] hearing?
[16:53] » Do you solemnly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give is the
[16:55] truth and nothing but the truth?
>> I do.
[16:57] » Can you please state your name and sign
in?
[16:58] » Yeah. Be Travis Jones.
[17:12] uh
as you're aware most likely I was here
[17:16] last month to speak on this behalf and
uh after the meeting I did go ahead and
[17:21] I went upstairs and talked to I believe
it was Stephen Hendrickson from the
[17:26] planning department had a good
conversation with him about going
[17:30] forward and got some information from
him. And then I did reach out to uh Mr.
[17:36] Barry here about 4 days after the
meeting asking what we should do to
[17:40] proceed forward and he told me that it's
up to you guys and there's nothing we
[17:45] can do in the meantime. So I did try to
reach out to the department of
[17:49] engineering to get some clarification on
how we could solve this ahead of time.
[17:53] So I just wanted to state the record on
that. Uh as you're aware with this here
[17:59] though, it will landlock this piece here
and
[18:03] We don't want to restrict access to
that.
[18:07] I drove by it this morning
and there has been some I'm going to say
[18:14] development on that part. The person
that lives there looks like they are
[18:19] bringing in some project material. Uh, I
did talk to one of the other neighbors
[18:25] in Prairie Home here this morning and he
said that the day after the meeting last
[18:29] month, rock trucks started hauling rock
to that spot. I'm assuming it was not
[18:34] the Department of Roads and there is a
giant pile of rock kind of right in the
[18:37] corner there. So, I'm hesitant to delay
this much further because it looks like
[18:44] he's trying to put in a retaining wall
of some sort and bringing in loads of
[18:47] rock. Are you talking about the land
owner just north of the
[18:51] » correct the house owner that's right
here?
[18:54] » I mean there's some pretty permanent
stuff in there already. Right
[18:57] » to to the north he's got a house and uh
and then I think on this easement here
[19:02] or the the the public rideway there is
uh I'm going to say like some old fuel
[19:08] barrels, logs. He is a landscaper. I
think he's piled up some extra dirt and
[19:13] sand and some extra plants that he's had
throughout the years and just kind of
[19:17] filled in the area with what he had
sitting around. I guess I don't think
[19:22] there's anything permitted as far as I'm
aware. There's a small very small shed
[19:29] maybe like 10 foot by 10 foot or
something on the part of the easement or
[19:34] part of the roadway. Uh and and I did
talk to my uncle. I talked to him after
[19:40] the meeting that is going to inherit the
ground and he did state that he would
[19:45] like it opened up so he has public
access and he can access his farm but we
[19:49] were waiting to do that until after the
estate is settled which will be in
[19:54] November the end of November. Uh I
brought my aunt with me uh who is part
[20:00] of the estate as well to to support I
guess to
[20:06] not have this closed to have it opened
up in in all honesty.
[20:10] » So I just want to make sure I understand
what you're saying. So you're saying
[20:12] that the landowner on the north appears
to be putting gravel that could
[20:16] potentially make be converted. He thinks
he might be able to convert that even
[20:19] though he clearly doesn't own it and
couldn't
[20:22] » I don't know what his plans are. I have
not spoken to him, but he has started
[20:27] some work there. I don't know. He's got
a couple of retaining walls. Uh,
[20:34] go back to this picture here. He's got
these retaining walls here.
[20:38] » Yeah.
>> That's not on the It's all honesty, I
[20:42] think, would be on the county roadway to
begin with, and then he's piling up a
[20:45] whole bunch of gravel right in here
currently.
[20:48] » Okay. So, I I'm hesitant to let it go
much further because I think it'll just
[20:53] continue to compound.
>> Yeah.
[20:58] » Okay. Thank you. The engineer isn't
planning. You guys don't have a pile of
[21:03] rock that you guys have put in there,
have you?
[21:05] » To do anything on this on the road
there?
[21:08] » I don't believe so. Um, talking with
Pam, we do not. Um, the county does, we
[21:13] went out there a few months ago, stake
some of the rideaway points. We do have
[21:16] some plans to regrade the existing
roads.
[21:18] » Sure.
>> Take care of some ditches and just do
[21:20] some dirt work there, but as far as I
know, we haven't done any piling of
[21:24] rock.
>> Okay.
[21:25] » And things like that.
>> Thanks, John.
[21:28] » Well, I wasn't sure. I saw the stakes
and I know that the plan was, but I
[21:32] didn't think that they were moving on
that quite yet. So
[21:35] » yeah,
>> when we last had the hearing, uh, we
[21:38] discussed kind of like the default plan
would be to basically split it in half
[21:43] and with half going to the northern
property owner and half going to the
[21:47] southern property owner. Um, that would
not address your concerns. Is that
[21:54] correct?
>> Correct. After talking to Steve
[21:58] upstairs, Stephen upstairs, he stated
that would give us access, but that
[22:04] would limit any potential future
developments on that property without a
[22:08] piece
adjoining it being purchased. So, a
[22:12] roadway could be built. An easement does
not allow access for
[22:16] I believe any sort of houses in case he
wanted to build an acreage. Not certain
[22:20] on that, but I know if there was some
sort of development with more than one
[22:23] house, it for sure would prevent
anything from happening back in there.
[22:28] Uh I'm not certain on a single house,
but I assuming that would be the case as
[22:32] well because there would not be a public
address to that.
[22:38] And once it gets split up, my uncle will
not have access to his farm. and he was
[22:45] requesting to have it opened up, but he
was waiting till after.
[22:50] » He owns it,
>> correct? And
[22:52] » right,
>> we're we're moving along a little
[22:55] faster. Just odd how things work out, I
guess.
[22:57] » Yeah.
>> Okay.
[23:03] » Thanks. [snorts]
>> Is there anyone else from the public
[23:07] wishing to speak on this in during this
public hearing?
[23:16] Seeing none
here
[23:19] » to talk about the Avenue.
>> Is there anyone? Thank you. Yeah. Um we
[23:24] we also have the hearing for the
property on Weight Avenue open. Is there
[23:29] anyone here to speak on that?
>> Thank you, John. [snorts]
[23:40] You have anything more to say on that
one?
[23:42] » Not really. Again, this is a roadway
that that is the commission Schulty went
[23:46] down. It's basically grass. It has two
little ruts in it. People have been
[23:50] using it to do whatever they do. The
alley strictly is grass. It doesn't
[23:55] appear, I think through the last hearing
people came and talked about it that
[23:58] it's actually used to access any of the
property property currently. So, and
[24:03] Miss Dingman did recommend or did talk
about removing the access onto um 148th
[24:09] Street that return and possibly even
adding some little signs or something
[24:14] saying something like that.
>> Thank you. Questions for John? Is there
[24:19] anyone else wishing to Is there anyone
wishing to speak on this public right
[24:23] away on Weight Avenue? Please come
forward and you'll need to swear in and
[24:29] state your name and sign in on our sheet
if you would please.
[24:33] Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give is the
[24:36] truth and nothing but the truth?
>> I do. Hi, my name is Malcolm Carney. I
[24:41] was here last month to speak on the same
topic
[24:46] and I just want to pretty much say the
story again just because there's new
[24:49] faces. Um, I own the property here. Um,
I'm currently mowing for my neighbor
[24:55] here. She broke her foot and she
couldn't be here today. Um, when mowing
[25:00] her side of the property, um, the ruts
are definitely a problem. I broke the
[25:05] front, uh, axle off my lawn mower cuz I
wasn't paying attention. Uh, there is a
[25:10] lot of traffic that goes up and down
there that, uh, is not, I say, good
[25:15] traffic. We have rats from tire marks.
Another neighbor stated that they go up
[25:20] and down there when it's wet for fun,
which it's fun for them, not so fun for
[25:26] the guys taking care of it. Uh, I'm sure
the county doesn't want to deal with
[25:29] ruts from people just out having fun
either. Um, yeah. Other than that, I'd
[25:34] like to see it closed down. Um, yeah,
then there's no way you'd be getting a
[25:39] vehicle down that road anytime soon
since the trees have been there more
[25:44] than a few days. So, [laughter]
but yeah, I'd love to see that get
[25:48] closed down, maybe restrict access to
the public driving through there,
[25:51] tearing things up, having problems. Like
I said last time, um I had somebody
[25:55] break in through that access point. They
jumped the fence and they were parked
[25:59] along that road. Uh and that's how they
entered my property. Um so one less way
[26:05] for someone to get public access in
jumping a fence and stuff like that. Be
[26:09] very much grateful. So thank you.
>> Thank you for your testimony.
[26:15] » Is there anyone else wishing to speak?
[26:21] Seeing none,
>> I'll make a couple comments. So, I
[26:23] stated at the beginning I was opposed to
that one and a support of this one. I
[26:27] still generally in the same place. I
would like to see us vacate, wait, and
[26:31] divide it equally between the the
adjacent properties. The one that's on
[26:36] the right now, what I would be most
interested in is a six-month uh to table
[26:41] that idea and give it six months for the
ownership to transfer. And then at that
[26:46] point, I'd be interested in asking our
attorneys or the county engineer,
[26:50] whoever, to come back to us with a
recommendation that does allow for
[26:55] development still to happen on the east
side of that.
[27:01] » Please,
>> I advise us how we should proceed on
[27:04] this because we're not making a decision
now in the public hearing. Um, but
[27:08] again,
>> but I I understand your
[27:10] » um Yes. So regarding withholding, so
current county resolution R1940 is what
[27:16] sets our policy on those road vacations.
So generally it's
[27:21] generally it's recommended that we make
a decision at the next meeting. Um or we
[27:26] are allowed to wait for as soon
thereafter as practical. Um I'm not sure
[27:33] that's going to be in your discretion to
kind of determine what um you deem to be
[27:37] as practical. if you want to. I I
wouldn't personally recommend we wait
[27:41] for the court system to figure out
probate. I think there's conversations
[27:44] that could be had with the property
owner um make some decisions prior to
[27:48] that. So, I would recommend not six
months. I think you can you can delay a
[27:51] little bit longer, but I would I would
wait not that long.
[27:54] » Why?
>> Um you it's just not it's not requ.
[28:02] » Well, I mean then that would be going
against our own county policy. we have
[28:04] it written in our own resolution that we
do at the next meeting or assume
[28:07] thereafter is practical.
>> That's fine. Bring it forward at the
[28:10] next meeting, but at the next meeting
then we can delay it for six months.
[28:14] Like if we if you put an item on our
agenda next week and we could all vote
[28:18] for six months to delay it,
>> but that's still delaying the vacation
[28:23] or the abandonment of the rideway. It's
not
[28:28] it's not withh you're withholding the
actual vacation itself, not the
[28:31] resolution, if that makes [snorts]
sense. You're saying our uh You're
[28:34] saying that our policy is to make a
decision yes or no either at the next
[28:39] meeting or as soon as practical.
>> Uhhuh.
[28:42] » Yes.
>> Thank you.
[28:53] I still think a delay would be
appropriate in this. I also think that
[28:57] asking for a recommendation from our
attorneys of planning that allows for
[29:00] development to happen further east on a
is a good idea.
[29:04] » I have a procedure question if you would
please. So
[29:10] at this point our options are to close
this public hearing.
[29:14] » Yes.
>> And is item C is a separate public
[29:18] hearing? Yes. So I just want to be clear
on that.
[29:20] » Yes. [laughter]
>> Yeah. We're not
[29:23] » okay. None of none of what was just
discussed will be voted on today. No,
[29:27] » no matter what, because it's just the
action items aren't there. Yeah.
[29:30] » Right.
>> Do we have a motion to close the public
[29:34] hearing for item A and item B?
>> So moved.
[29:39] » Second.
>> We have a motion and a second to close
[29:41] the public hearing on item A and item B.
These are the vacations on the Walt
[29:45] Avenue. Please call the role.
>> Johnson,
[29:49] » yes.
>> Flick,
[29:50] » yes.
>> Shulty,
[29:51] » yes.
>> Yokum,
[29:52] » yes. Motion carries.
>> We will now open the public hearing
[29:55] regard regarding amending the Lancaster
County zoning and subdivision fee
[29:59] schedules.
[30:06] » Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give is the
[30:09] truth and nothing but the truth?
>> I do.
[30:12] » David Kerry, director of the Planning
and Development Services Department, 555
[30:15] South 10th Street. Uh thank you for some
of your time today, commissioners. Um
[30:19] what I have before you uh is also what
we uh briefed you on last Thursday at
[30:24] the staff meeting. Uh is a proposal to
increase the um planning and development
[30:29] services department uh application fee
schedules for both uh 2026 and 2027
[30:35] fiscal years. Um the proposal is a 2.4%
increase each year. That number is based
[30:43] on the Midwest region consumer price
index uh from January. It's a little bit
[30:47] more elevated now than um but what the
purpose is behind the incremental
[30:52] regular updates is to keep these
increases smaller instead of waiting
[30:56] five or more years and then they become
10% 12% 15% increases which is a little
[31:01] bit harder to for applicants to uh
handle all at once. So that is the the
[31:06] process that we've been taking for
several years now. Um and so the
[31:09] proposal uh this amount um would
approximate around $28,000 based on last
[31:16] year's full amount of revenues coming
into the department for uh reimbursement
[31:20] into the general fund for the county. So
um that is our practice is we take these
[31:25] revenues and um they do go back to the
general fund for both the city and the
[31:29] county. Um the city uh council uh on the
city side of this and the city budget
[31:35] approval did approve uh a comparable uh
schedule of fee increases last Monday
[31:40] when they approved the budget. Uh so
that is in place now for the city uh
[31:44] going into the beginning of the city
fiscal year starting today, September
[31:48] 1st. Um, I think I would just uh falize
my comments by saying that this amounts
[31:54] to uh overall for both the city and the
county about $5,400 more in year one and
[32:00] then another additional 5,400 million
million,000
[32:04] uh in year two. Um, so that's the
approximate amount of increased revenue
[32:07] that this would result in. So with that,
I will see if you have any questions.
[32:12] » I have no problem with it. Maybe you
said uh why where' we get 2.4%
[32:18] Where did we get it?
>> Yeah, just where I think you're doing it
[32:20] the right thing. I have no problem with
these. Why that?
[32:24] » 2% or 3% or whatever.
>> Yeah, the 2.4% is literally the January
[32:28] Midwest region CPI.
>> Got it. Thank you.
[32:30] » That's exactly what it is.
>> Thank you.
[32:33] » Now, these incremental um changes make
sense rather than a large uh change all
[32:39] of a sudden.
>> I think they make sense. You said
[32:43] comparable. So, is it the exact same fee
schedule between the county and the
[32:46] city? It is not the exact same. The the
difference there the different one
[32:50] difference I think we're all aware of is
the um the appeal to final action from
[32:54] the planning commission. Um two years
ago the city council determined they
[32:58] would were not going to include that in
their fee schedule and uh two years ago
[33:02] the county board did agree to do that.
>> So that's where if someone has a problem
[33:06] with a zoning action inside the city's
jurisdiction which includes the three
[33:10] miles and they file an appeal, they
don't have to pay a fee. But if they
[33:16] live still outside the settlements but
just a little further away from the
[33:20] city, then they do have to pay a $160
fee.
[33:24] » Correct.
>> Okay. I think we should eliminate that
[33:28] fee. There's no no there's a it's an
imaginary boundary that exists between
[33:33] the three mile jurisdiction and outside
the three-mile jurisdiction.
[33:36] I think it it shows some urban versus
rural distinction. We feel like the
[33:41] urban people, the urban people shouldn't
have to pay it, but the rural people do.
[33:44] Like that doesn't make any sense to me.
So I think we should
[33:46] » I think the urban people should pay it
too. I was
[33:48] » I think that [laughter] we are right and
the city is wrong.
[33:51] » Right. Right. I don't I don't disagree
that I wish there was consistency. I
[33:54] just think they're wrong.
>> Yeah.
[33:57] » Well, we only have we only have control
over what we have control of. And right
[34:00] now we are creating the distinction by
having the fee. No, they created the
[34:03] distinction last year
[34:09] » and this came about because there were
some many people when they filed there
[34:14] is a legitimate reason clearly but we
had some that were somewhat frivolous
[34:18] that took up a lot of staff time um and
and and that sort of resources.
[34:23] » What kind of
>> how this came
[34:25] » was how this came about.
>> I don't remember any frivolous ones. It
[34:30] actually was before you were here, but I
don't want to get into one one that was
[34:34] » I don't want to name anyone. There was
one that was
[34:37] » when you read it, it was gibberish. I
mean, it just it just wasn't it just
[34:40] wasn't sens like it wasn't
it and it did actually take up some
[34:46] time. So
like to this day, I'm not sure anybody
[34:50] was sure what that what what that appeal
was trying to accomplish.
[34:57] I just have a lot of respect for our
urban neighbors and I think our our
[35:01] rural neighbors and I think our rural
neighbors shouldn't have to pay
[35:04] something that the urban people don't
[35:13] » and I would also add this was a new fee
couple years ago. This is one that was
[35:17] added. I oppose it then. I oppose it now
and I will continue to oppose it because
[35:21] it's unfairly charging rural
residents.
[35:28] » Any other um questions or comments for
David Kerry? Is there anyone else
[35:34] wishing to speak on this specific item
on the uh zoning and sub subdivision fee
[35:40] schedules?
Any members of the public?
[35:45] Seeing no one, we could um entertain a
motion to close this public hearing.
[35:51] » So moved.
>> Second.
[35:53] » We have a motion and a second to close
this public hearing. Please call the
[35:56] role.
>> Johnson,
[35:59] » yes.
>> Flower,
[36:01] » yes.
>> Shulty,
[36:02] » yes.
>> Yokum,
[36:03] » yes.
>> Motion carries.
[36:06] » I'm not sure that was a public hearing.
I think that was just a public hearing
[36:08] action item.
>> No,
[36:09] » no, that was the public hearing. Next is
the action item.
[36:13] » Yes, Commissioner.
>> You're right. You're right. I'm wrong.
[36:15] » Yep.
>> 5A, the public hearing action item on
[36:18] the resolution in the matter of adopting
the Lancaster County zoning and
[36:22] subdivision fee schedules.
[36:26] » Uh, I'll second. Do you do you want to
make a motion to break out anything or
[36:30] just going to vote to do?
>> Yeah.
[36:33] » We have a motion and a second to adopt
the zoning and subdivision fee
[36:37] schedules. Please call the role.
>> Wait, wait, no. I'm making a motion.
[36:42] » Okay.
>> That's what you just say. Yeah, he just
[36:44] asked me that.
>> I want to I want to make a motion to
[36:47] strike the fourth line appeal of final
action.
[36:59] Seeing no second, motion dies,
>> we'll go back to our original motion
[37:06] uh to to adopt the z the zoning and
subdivision fee schedules. Please call
[37:11] the role.
>> Flick. Yes.
[37:13] » Shulty.
>> No.
[37:15] » Johnson.
>> Yes.
[37:16] » Yokum.
>> Yes.
[37:17] » Motion carries.
>> Commissioners, that brings us to new
[37:21] business item 6A. A purchase and sale
agreement with New Generation Properties
[37:25] LLC. A Edgie Partners LLC and RH Rogers
Investment Code. Purchase real estate
[37:31] described as lots 1 through 12, Block
90, Original Lincoln, Lancaster,
[37:35] Nebraska. Commissioner, do you mind if I
talk about this one a little bit?
[37:39] » Please. Um, I'm really excited for this
item. This is a big deal. This is a huge
[37:45] deal. In fact, I think the media here
are expecting to cover the budget sto
[37:50] the the budget finalization here, but
they're going to get two stories at it
[37:53] today. Um, I'm looking at all of you
right now. Uh,
[37:57] this is the this is the county purchase
of the block for the Lancaster County
[38:03] Convention Center. We have come to an
agreement with the land owners. I want
[38:06] to thank the land owners. uh they have
been excellent to work with through this
[38:10] process. I want to thank the legal teams
on both sides. They have done really
[38:13] diligent work for months now to get this
all lined up. The county attorney's
[38:18] office, um our staff here, Kent, your
whole team have been really great to
[38:23] work with. Um and I'm very very excited
to move this forward. So, I will make a
[38:28] motion to approve item 6A, the purchase
of block six of 90.
[38:33] » Second. We have a motion and a second to
approve. Is there any further
[38:38] discussion?
>> Yeah, I'd like to say a couple things. I
[38:40] had the chance to travel with the
Lincoln Chamber of Commerce to a couple
[38:44] other capital cities uh over the last
couple years, specifically Boise and
[38:48] Madison. I've also
just personally been through De Moine
[38:53] that all three of them have a public
convention publicly funded in various
[38:58] ways convention centers in their capital
city. And I just think it's it's helped
[39:03] those communities so much to be able to
have a place for conventions to happen
[39:07] in the shadow of their capital, allow
participants to be able to go over to
[39:11] the capital, advocate for their
positions, um learn more about the
[39:15] process, be engaged in the state um
state system. I really like this. I'm
[39:21] very supportive. I understand there are
people that have questions and um I
[39:27] think one of the big questions I still
get asked is why did we land on this
[39:30] location and the location is a very good
location because it's very close to the
[39:34] capital most people expected it to be
closer to the hay market but after a
[39:39] significant study um that that the team
that
[39:43] » what's the group called
>> Assemble Lincoln
[39:45] » Assemble Lincoln thanks that Sean Flower
and Assemble Lincoln studied very hard
[39:50] and they determined that they're just is
not a real viable place in the hay
[39:54] market and this is the best place for
it. It's near the capital. It's going to
[39:58] expand the down the whole downtown. It's
going to expand out and to to meet this
[40:04] create some more restaurant
opportunities and things like that in
[40:06] this area. So, I think it is a great
location. I'm excited about it. I also
[40:11] recognize that while we're buying the
land, we are still waiting for the
[40:14] turnback tax to be signed, right? Um, we
expect that I should say I expect that
[40:20] it will be signed still at some point.
Um, exactly when is to be determined.
[40:25] Um, but I am very very much looking
forward to the Capitol City Convention
[40:29] Center.
>> Well said. I I appreciate your support
[40:32] in this. You've you've been a real
advocate for this project. Um, this is a
[40:35] really exciting next step. It's not the
it's not the whole the whole battle won,
[40:39] but this is a really really exciting
next step. and to have this land secured
[40:43] and to be moving forward with this
project is it's a really really good
[40:46] feeling after having worked on it for a
long time. The funny thing about this
[40:50] site, so Assemble Lincoln did their
whole we did our whole analysis of many
[40:55] many many sites started with over 1500
sites, narrowed it down to one in the
[40:59] end through our whole process. Um, and
the when we finalized it, it wasn't
[41:05] until after that fact that we while
talking with the city historian, we
[41:09] found articles from uh I think it was
1990 when the city council then had done
[41:14] a study and chose the exact same block.
>> Oh, really?
[41:18] » I will get you I will get you those
articles so you can see it. This block
[41:21] has been picked twice generationally
separate. We were totally unaware that
[41:26] that had even happened previously. This
location has been chosen twice to be the
[41:30] site of a convention center and
recommended to the public at large. So,
[41:33] I'm I'm I'm really really excited about
this.
[41:37] » Kent, do you or your team want to say
anything? You don't have to. Just if
[41:40] anybody wants to.
>> Sorry.
[41:42] » It's okay.
[41:51] » You don't need to be sworn in. We're not
in a public hearing, so we would welcome
[41:55] your comments.
>> Well, thank you so much. Uh it's an
[41:57] honor to be here. Kent Serest
representing the block 90 property
[42:03] owners and there's three that were
mentioned already. New Generation
[42:06] Properties. Uh Lawrence Smith, vice
president of Speedway Properties, which
[42:12] is an affiliated organization. She's
here today uh representing that group.
[42:18] And we have Kelly Heirs with the First
Bank and Trust Company of Mindon who
[42:23] represents the other two property owners
on block 90. It's been a long journey,
[42:30] but yet we got so many more steps to go
that will be equally exciting when they
[42:36] can occur as well. Uh, Sambble Lincoln,
uh, Senator Elliott Boar,
[42:43] the other seven members,
Commissioner Sean,
[42:47] thank you for all of that extra extra
extra effort. The the commissioners
[42:53] themselves, you've been actively
involved and that's been so much
[42:57] appreciated. U, the Block 90 property
owners have stayed in there. We had the
[43:04] and still do have the Capital City
Convention Center Coalition, which are
[43:08] the property owners around who want to
see this go forward. Uh we had DLA
[43:14] Rotary Club number 14 as a major sponsor
and I'm probably forgetting many other
[43:20] key stakeholders that have been involved
in this decision process. Uh, we are
[43:26] obviously hopeful as Commissioner
Schulty just mentioned that the I'll get
[43:33] to see if I can say all these words. The
Convention Center Facility Finance
[43:37] Assistant Act Board will approve your
application that you made several months
[43:44] back along the way. And I too want to
thank uh Abby Montgomery, David Durban,
[43:51] Daniel, and team for sticking with us
and working through this. And with that,
[43:58] I'd be glad to answer any questions you
may have.
[44:01] » I just want to say thanks to everybody
on both sides who worked with it. It was
[44:04] a heavy lift and it took a long time,
but I'm real pleased to be here.
[44:07] » Yeah.
>> From that list of names that you read,
[44:09] that shows that how much the community's
invested in this already um and eager to
[44:14] see this happening. Thank you for your
role.
[44:16] » Yes, thank you.
>> I um as you we were talking about
[44:19] location and I see people from the
chamber and visit Lincoln here in our
[44:23] audience. I'm envisioning there can be
activity happening in the Hay Market.
[44:27] There can be a concert or something
happening while there's a two or three
[44:31] day conference happening in another part
of our community. Um so I really do
[44:35] appreciate this location for those kinds
of opportunities. Then this you said
[44:40] people may be here to hear about our
budget. Um, but it's also hard for me to
[44:44] separate this from our budget because
this is the way we think about budget.
[44:48] We think about the things we have to do.
This is the way this board has thought
[44:52] about our our budget all along, the
things we must do in our county, but
[44:57] also what's the future and this really
represents the future and and some
[45:01] diversification for us. So, um, I really
appreciate this.
[45:06] » Anyone else wishing to speak on this
topic?
[45:08] » This [clears throat] is exciting. Thank
you for all of your hard work to make it
[45:12] happen.
>> Um, please call the roll.
[45:16] » Johnson,
>> yes.
[45:17] » Flower,
>> yes.
[45:18] » Schulty,
>> yes. Yokum,
[45:20] » yes.
>> Motion carries.
[45:25] » Brings us to item 6B, a resolution
recognizing the month of September 2026
[45:30] as Mash National Preparedness Month.
[45:40] Good morning. Jim David Saber, director,
Lincoln Lancaster County Emergency
[45:43] Management. When it comes to planning
and preparedness, that's a message that
[45:47] I share with everybody, every
opportunity I get. But I certainly
[45:50] welcome the county board's consideration
of the resolution before you this
[45:54] morning. Um, anything I can do to
emphasize that, uh, to leverage that
[45:59] moving forward so people make simple
plans to minimize the chance that
[46:03] they'll be negatively impacted. The
graphics that I'm showing are the ones
[46:06] that have been adopted by the Department
of Homeland Security to promote this
[46:11] year's uh theme of Americans stand
ready. And then as we work our way
[46:16] through the month, there are weekly
themes. It's not new information. It's
[46:21] just emphasizing, reinforcing the
information that's already out there.
[46:25] So, as I said, I I try to promote simple
information, give people good
[46:29] information that allows them to make
good decisions that will hopefully uh
[46:33] end in good results. So, I I appreciate
your consideration of the resolution
[46:38] before you this morning.
>> Again, this is important to our
[46:43] community, isn't it?
>> Absolutely.
[46:44] » Any questions for Thanks.
[46:49] » We have a motion.
>> Move approval.
[46:51] » Second. We have a motion and a second to
approve this resol important resolution.
[46:56] Please call the role.
>> Johnson,
[46:57] » yes.
>> Flower,
[46:59] » yes.
>> Schulty,
[47:00] » yes.
>> Yokum,
[47:01] » yes.
>> Motion carries.
[47:06] » 6 C. A resolution in the matter of
authorizing the county clerk to issue
[47:10] payments while the county board is
adjourned.
[47:12] » Move approval.
>> Second.
[47:14] » We have a motion and a second to
approve. Please call the role.
[47:17] » Flower?
>> Yes.
[47:18] » Shelton?
>> Yes.
[47:19] » Johnson?
>> Yep.
[47:20] » Yokam. Yes.
>> Motion carries.
[47:24] 6 D. Resolution in the matter of
approving the Lancaster County fiscal
[47:28] budget for fiscal year of July 1, 2026
to June 30th, 2027.
[47:33] All right. Dennis Meyer, Lancaster
County Budget and Fiscal Officer.
[47:38] Today is just kind of I'd like to say
our final step, but we've still got a
[47:45] couple couple more. But, um, today the
resolution is to adopt the budget.
[47:52] And, um, I'm going to pull the
resolution up here
[48:01] so that you can kind of see in this
resolution, we kind of note changes from
[48:08] the budget hearing that was held last
week. So, last week at the budget
[48:12] hearing, we talked about a lot of
different things. The one item that came
[48:17] up was the discussion of the allowable
growth piece. Moving from 4 point or
[48:24] moving from my projection
of 1.6 to 2.26% 26%
[48:31] which then would allow the county to
bump up to um a 3.99%
[48:40] increase [snorts]
in property tax, which would still
[48:46] leave us out of what I always refer to
as the pink postcard meeting. And I know
[48:50] me and Christa kind of talked a little
bit about pink postcard. Just to remind
[48:54] everybody, uh that is the joint public
hearing for any school, city, or county
[49:03] that um does not levy within a 2% plus
growth number. Um there's a there's
[49:10] another hearing for that. This would
keep us out of that. So, um that was
[49:16] kind of the goal from the beginning. The
adoption of this budget maintains that
[49:21] goal. So, what's on here is um
increasing the general fund property tax
[49:29] by 402,000 and from last week's
discussion was increasing the
[49:33] contingency piece
um knowing that we've got the spending
[49:38] authority there as the board figures out
what what they actually want to do with
[49:45] that.
[49:50] » Any questions?
I think you and your team should be
[49:53] really proud of this was another heavy
lift and it's taken, you know, half a
[49:58] year to build this thing and you've done
a really excellent job. I'm really
[50:01] pleased with this. I think we can all
hold our head high not having to go to
[50:05] the pink postcard meeting. I think we
can all [snorts] hold our head high
[50:09] knowing that we've been responsible
stewards of, you know, taxpayer
[50:14] resources. So, I'm I'm I'm very pleased
with this budget. It's it it feels a lot
[50:18] better to be where we're at now with
this budget than what we did a year ago.
[50:22] » Absolutely.
>> I Dennis, I did talk to you about one
[50:27] little change I wanted to make. I'm just
curious. So, I I want to make sure that
[50:32] the traffic study, transportation
traffic study is paid not paid for out
[50:37] of the building fund, which was where it
was originally proposed to come out of.
[50:41] Said I'd rather be paid for out of the
contingency fund. How should I do that
[50:45] before we make a motion? And how would
you like me to address that particular?
[50:49] » Well, I I think I think for the from my
standpoint, I think it can be done
[50:54] either way. The the reason we're setting
it up this way is that
[51:00] » discussions can still be held by the
county board on what they want to do
[51:04] with that.
>> Um,
[51:06] » we already have the spending authority
in the contingency fund. So, if it's
[51:09] there, we can do it whenever.
>> Okay.
[51:11] » Which I'm not saying don't. I'm just
Yeah,
[51:14] » you can do it now. You can do it next
week. You can do it whenever. I and the
[51:16] reason I just I didn't I wasn't didn't
have a chance to be here Thursday to
[51:19] really make my case for that. But the
reason I want to do it is our building
[51:22] fund. We've got some major things
pending with our building fund. Uh
[51:26] specifically around some of the engineer
facility study stuff we've been talking
[51:30] about of needing to upgrade or replace
some buildings that are
[51:37] very old and can't even hold the
equipment we're about ready to buy
[51:41] because they were built so long ago.
They're not large enough. So, I really
[51:45] want to protect that building fund so
that we can um
[51:50] so we can be able to make some
adjustments to those facilities so we
[51:54] can rightly store our equipment. So,
that's that's where my interest in that
[51:58] comes.
>> Yeah. And and and from my standpoint, I
[52:02] think that discussion can take place um
throughout this budget year. Okay.
[52:09] » And so, I don't think it has to be a
final decision right now. Yeah. Okay.
[52:17] So, that will come up then when like
>> um
[52:21] » I stay ahead of it because it's easy to
lose track of
[52:23] » Yeah. I mean I I think um what what I
would say is we still have to to hold a
[52:29] hearing to set our final property tax
request. What I would say it would come
[52:34] up uh and that's got to be all done
before September 30th. So, I would say
[52:38] it would probably it could very well
happen in uh in October. [clears throat]
[52:43] » Okay.
I I mean I'm very excited about this
[52:47] budget for the most part. I think it
does a lot of things. It does keep us in
[52:51] the right in the right lane as far as
the the growth cap and stuff like that.
[52:55] One area that I am concerned about and
has continued to come up over and over
[52:58] is the engineers budget and questions as
to whether or not that budget is growing
[53:03] fast enough to keep up with demand to
accomplish our strategic plan of paving
[53:07] some roads uh that need to be paved. I
think there's legitimate concerns as to
[53:14] how much is the budget actually growing
because we are rolling over a bunch of
[53:19] incumbrances. So, it's easy for us to
say, "Hey, well, we're giving them more
[53:22] than they had last year, but a million
of that is actually just we're rolling
[53:26] our spending authority forward forward
to this year." A big chunk of that is.
[53:31] And so, I have a lot of concerns around
that particular piece of the budget. I'd
[53:35] really like for us in future budgets to
look at prioritizing that piece from our
[53:41] strategic plan. Uh, as well, I am going
to vote for this budget, but I do want
[53:46] to be very clear. we do need to
prioritize some of the roads and roads
[53:51] issues um in future budgets
and specifically next year. Um so I I I
[53:58] recognize there's been a big a lot of
conversation around the engineers
[54:01] budget. I know you can slice it multiple
different ways, but I do think we are
[54:06] not at the end of the day we are not
growing it fast enough to be able to
[54:10] accomplish what's in our strategic plan.
That is for sure.
[54:15] Any other questions or concerns?
[54:20] We have a motion.
>> I move approval.
[54:23] » Second.
>> We have a motion and a second to approve
[54:26] the Lancaster County fiscal budget for
fiscal year um July 1, 2026 through
[54:31] 2027. Please call the role.
>> Shelty,
[54:35] » yes.
>> Johnson,
[54:36] » yes.
>> Flardy,
[54:37] » yes.
>> Yokum,
[54:38] » yes.
>> Motion carries.
[54:42] 6E. a resolution accepting maintenance
responsibilities for certain roads
[54:46] located within the Miller Edition.
>> Uh good morning again, John Barry,
[54:51] Lancaster County Engineering. Justin
Mueller, who is one of the developers
[54:55] for Mueller Edition, came to us probably
two to three years ago requesting that
[54:59] the county take over maintenance of this
subdivision. Um the subdivision was was
[55:04] originally platted in 2014. Uh you as a
board in 2023 passed a resolution about
[55:10] new roadways and subdivisions being
private. So unfortunately or
[55:14] fortunately, this one is one of those
that's grandfathered in. Um this
[55:18] subdivision is a little bit unique in
that the roads here are concrete, you
[55:22] know, so they spend some money to get
this right. Um generally when we get a
[55:26] request to go out and the county to take
over maintenance, usually the county
[55:30] surveyor, myself or or whoever it was at
that time, also we get the road
[55:34] superintendent and we get a couple of
our engineers. We go out and we do
[55:38] inspections of the roadways. We just
look at the roads. We look at the
[55:41] culverts. We look at any obstructions
that are in that roadway. We look at
[55:45] ditches. We do we have a little list of
of what we take take. We then send that
[55:50] list to whoever the applicant is. In
this case, Mr. Mueller. Um it's taken
[55:54] him about two to three years to go
through his list and repair all those
[55:59] items. A couple of weeks ago, Roger
Hooenfeld, who is our district
[56:03] superintendent, and myself, we went out
and we looked at this subdivision. Um it
[56:07] appears that everything has been
completed and now we are he is
[56:11] requesting that Lancaster County take
over maintenance of this.
[56:21] [snorts]
>> Any questions, comments?
[56:25] » I move approval.
>> Second. We have a motion and a second to
[56:29] approve. Please call the role.
>> Johnson,
[56:32] » yes.
>> Flower,
[56:33] » yes.
>> Shelty,
[56:34] » yes. Yokum.
>> Yes.
[56:37] » Motion carries.
6F. Recommendations from the purchasing
[56:42] agent on behalf of the county engineer
to award and execute purchase orders for
[56:46] the following. Nebraska Machinery Co.
for one CAT 4207 backhoe in the amount
[56:52] of $168,32.
Nebraska Machinery Company for two 953
[56:58] track loaders in the amount of $673,770.
Midwell Turf and Irrigation Co. for one
[57:04] Toro Groundmaster 4000D in the amount of
$99,259.95.
[57:10] Bobcat of Lincoln for two Bobcat 185LE
air compressors in the amount of
[57:14] $68,700.
Anderson Ford for two 2027 or newer Ford
[57:20] F-150 4x4 Super Cab pickup trucks in the
amount of $90,984.
[57:26] Anderson Ford for one 2027 or newer Ford
F350 4x4 regular cab pickup truck in the
[57:31] amount of $71,671.
And finally, truck center companies for
[57:36] four 2026 or newer cab chassis only with
accessories in the amount of 5,800,
[57:43] excuse me, $584,94.
[57:47] Pam Dingman, Lancaster County Engineer.
Uh so to just start at the top of this
[57:53] list of seven, um our uh our current uh
and we call this our little backhoe.
[58:00] This is our little rubber tired low uh
load uh backhoe um pad has experienced
[58:06] engine failure and so it was about 20
years old. So this replaces that
[58:10] machine. Um the Nebraska machinery for
the track loaders, our two track loaders
[58:15] in this case are from 2005.
Um so this will replace those.
[58:21] um our uh Toro groundmaster mower. And
so we have 12 facilities as well as we
[58:29] mow uh our own main campus um to include
the area around the sheriff's building
[58:34] and the extension building. Uh we had
bought a mower about 10 years ago as
[58:40] surplus from parks. We looked for a
surplus mower. Again, um recently, uh
[58:46] while looking at 98 Street, um on the
PES property, I noticed they had about
[58:52] 10 of these new mowers. And I have to
say, I was like super envious. Um in in
[58:57] this case, we were not able to find a
used mower. So, uh this would replace uh
[59:02] that uh mower, which is um no longer in
good running condition. Uh the Bobcat uh
[59:09] for the two air compressors replaces two
air compressors uh that are from the
[59:13] 1990s.
The um Anderson Ford replaces two
[59:19] trucks. Uh we had bought uh surplus
police uh vehicles from LPD because they
[59:27] um they put those up for internal sale
at a much lower mileage rate. Um they
[59:33] still have some good miles left in them.
Uh however, we had one last month that
[59:37] started on fire, which is not awesome,
and another one that has a failing
[59:42] engine. Uh these two trucks will replace
those for our inspectors. It's very
[59:46] important for them to be able to get out
to site in a timely way. Um and then, um
[59:52] the Ford uh 350 is for our grading crew,
and it replaces um a truck that also is
[1:00:00] having extreme mechanical issues. We
have not been having good luck with
[1:00:03] these trucks lately.
And then lastly, um the truck center
[1:00:07] trucks for uh 2026 or newer chassis
only. And so uh you'll be re you'll be
[1:00:15] seeing a another item to upfit these
trucks with plows and all the gear that
[1:00:21] they need in order to uh move rock and
snow. So, um we are going with a
[1:00:28] different upfitter in the future because
we have had a lot of delivery issues
[1:00:33] with the seven trucks. Uh three of which
we ordered in uh four of which we
[1:00:38] ordered in 2024 and three of which we
ordered in 2025
[1:00:42] uh have still yet to be delivered to us.
Um, that being said, I am very concerned
[1:00:48] about our truck fleet going into the
winter and I'm hopeful that we can um
[1:00:53] get some trucks delivered so that we can
start um uh not worrying about the
[1:00:58] mechanical issues of our trucks as much
as we have the last couple years.
[1:01:07] » Sounds good. Thanks for doing what you
can to keep our roads in good condition
[1:01:13] and make some improvements, too. I move
approval.
[1:01:16] » Second. We have a motion and a second to
approve. Please call the role.
[1:01:21] » Johnson,
>> yes.
[1:01:22] » Flity,
>> yes.
[1:01:23] » Shulty,
>> yes.
[1:01:24] » Yogurt,
>> yes.
[1:01:26] » Motion carries.
6G,
[1:01:31] authorizing Daniel J. Z, Chief Deputy
County Attorney, to sign an engagement
[1:01:35] letter with Great Plains Appraisal
Service for Appraisal Services.
[1:01:39] » Move approval.
>> Second. We have a motion and a second to
[1:01:42] approve. Please call the role.
>> Flower,
[1:01:45] » yes.
>> Shelton,
[1:01:46] » yes.
>> Johnson,
[1:01:47] » yes.
>> Yokum,
[1:01:48] » yes.
>> Motion carries. 6H, a memorandum of
[1:01:52] understanding with the Nebraska
Department of Health and Human Services
[1:01:55] and the Lancaster County Attorney's
Office regarding death information
[1:01:58] reporting.
>> Move approval.
[1:02:02] » Second.
>> We have a motion and a second to
[1:02:05] approve. Please call the role.
>> Shelton,
[1:02:07] » yes.
>> Johnson,
[1:02:08] » yes.
>> Flowy,
[1:02:10] » yes.
>> Yum.
[1:02:11] » Yes. Motion carries.
Brings us to item seven, which is
[1:02:16] reserved for exec session.
[1:02:20] » Uh, I would move we go into executive
session at 10:02
[1:02:25] for the purpose of receiving legal
advice and to protect the public
[1:02:28] interest.
>> Second.
[1:02:30] » We have a motion and a second to go into
executive session for legal advice and
[1:02:34] to protect the public interest at 10:02
a.m. Please call the role.
[1:02:39] » Johnson,
>> yes. Flower Day,
[1:02:41] » yes.
>> Shelty,
[1:02:42] » yes.
>> Yokum,
[1:02:43] » yes.
>> Motion carries.
[1:02:46] » We are now in executive session for
[1:57:10] move we come out of executive session at
10:57 a.m.
[1:57:13] » Second.
>> We have a motion and a second to come
[1:57:15] out of executive session at I don't have
my time stamp for me. At 10:57 a.m.
[1:57:22] Please call the role.
>> Johnson,
[1:57:25] » yes.
>> Flower,
[1:57:26] » yes.
>> Schulty,
[1:57:28] » yes.
>> Yokam,
[1:57:29] » yes.
>> Motion carries.
[1:57:32] The next item is item eight, public
comment. Members of the public wishing
[1:57:36] to speak on items relating to county
business not on the agenda may do so at
[1:57:39] this time.
>> Are there any members of the public
[1:57:41] wishing to speak on items not on the
agenda?
[1:57:45] » Seeing none, we may entertain a motion
to adjurnn.
[1:57:49] » Move we adjourn.
>> We have a motion and a second to
[1:57:53] adjurnn. Seeing no discussion, please
call the role.
[1:57:56] » Flower,
>> yes.
[1:57:57] » Schulty,
>> yep.
[1:57:58] » Johnson,
>> yes.
[1:57:59] » Yokum,
>> yes. Motion carries
[1:58:12] at the back of the room.
The first item on our agenda is approval
[1:58:16] of the minutes for the board of
equalization meeting held Tuesday,
[1:58:19] August 18, 2026.
>> Move approval.
[1:58:23] » Second.
>> We have a motion in a second. Please
[1:58:26] call the role.
>> Flower.
[1:58:28] » Yes.
>> Schulty.
[1:58:29] » Yeah. Johnson. Yes. Yokum.
[1:58:35] » Motion [snorts] carries. Do you have an
agenda? Okay. Next item on the agenda is
[1:58:40] additions and deductions to the tax
assessment rules.
[1:58:43] » Approval of the additions and deductions
to the tax assessment rules.
[1:58:47] » Second.
>> I got it.
[1:58:49] » We have a motion and a second. Please
call the role.
[1:58:52] » Shulty.
>> Yeah.
[1:58:53] » Johnson.
>> Yes.
[1:58:54] » Flower.
>> Yes.
[1:58:55] » Motion carries.
Next item is appeal of the 2026 special
[1:59:01] green belt valuation.
[1:59:06] » Move approval.
>> Uh,
[1:59:07] » we got
>> Oh, sorry.
[1:59:09] » Please come.
>> Sorry.
[1:59:10] » Yep.
>> I didn't I was I was just reading it.
[1:59:12] » Yeah.
>> The number of times I've done that.
[1:59:16] » Hi, Brian Grim, Lancaster County
Assessor Register of Deeds. I was
[1:59:19] looking through the information on this
and I just kind of wanted to make a
[1:59:22] clarification. uh the property owner
didn't believe that the improvement
[1:59:27] value could go up if his land value goes
down. That's why they were protesting
[1:59:31] this
and I want to clarify how that happens.
[1:59:36] If you use a straight market regression
analysis or a cost approach that would
[1:59:41] be very valid, but we use a sales comp
approach which makes adjustments. So
[1:59:47] anytime
you have a change on that subject, the
[1:59:52] three comps also make adjustments. So in
this case, what it did, and it's treated
[1:59:57] the same way on this property as every
other property in Lancaster County, it
[2:00:02] made more adjustment on the improvement
side. And then what it does is through
[2:00:06] the calculation process, it's weighted.
It moved the improvement up a little bit
[2:00:11] more than what it was. and then it
splits off the land from the
[2:00:15] improvement. So just wanted to make a
clarification is that's how how that can
[2:00:20] happen.
[2:00:24] » So you're you're just telling us you're
not making any adjustment to the
[2:00:29] recommendation.
No, that I would say the the value that
[2:00:34] the county put on it was was equalized
because if they would have had that
[2:00:38] special valuation at the beginning of
the year, this is exactly how it would
[2:00:42] have been calculated.
>> Okay.
[2:00:45] » All right. Thank you.
[2:00:55] So,
>> so do we are you recommending
[2:00:59] that we approve the appeal or deny the
appeal
[2:01:03] » because it's an appeal? Those always
those can throw me off sometimes.
[2:01:10] » What I would recommend at this point is
to deny the pe the appeal.
[2:01:14] » Deny the appeal.
>> Yes.
[2:01:20] And you just sounds like you've been
talking to him. You feel like the
[2:01:23] landowner understands your position on
that.
[2:01:27] » I am not 100% certain if the land owner
if if or the property owner if they
[2:01:33] understand the process of how it was
arrived. Yes, he did receive green belt
[2:01:39] status. So his land value went down
>> down. But then when you recalculate that
[2:01:45] and you're going through that
calculation process, the three comps and
[2:01:50] they're the same comps, but they start
making different adjustments because the
[2:01:54] overall value has changed. So now it's
compensating a little bit more on the
[2:01:59] improvement side.
>> Oh, okay. So it just fixed the
[2:02:03] » Yep. So, it's going for that an overall
weighted a total overall value and then
[2:02:08] it splits that land value out
>> it when we've lowered their valuation.
[2:02:13] » It It's probably pretty uncommon.
>> Okay. So, I would
[2:02:18] move to deny the appeal.
>> Second.
[2:02:21] » Have a motion and a second. Uh, any
discussion?
[2:02:25] » See none, please call the role. Johnson,
>> yes.
[2:02:28] » Flower Day,
>> yes.
[2:02:29] » Schulty,
>> yes.
[2:02:30] » Motion carries.
The next item is a public hearing. Motor
[2:02:34] vehicle tax exemption applications for
Lincoln Christian Fellowship, Neighbors
[2:02:39] United, Women and Community Service
Incorporated, Sisters of Mary, Queen of
[2:02:43] Mercy, the Bridge Behavioral Health
Incorporated, and the American Legion.
[2:02:48] Are there any members of the public here
wishing to speak on these motor vehicle
[2:02:52] tax exemption applications?
[2:02:57] Seeing none, uh,
>> you can just close the hearing.
[2:03:02] » We'll close the public hearing.
>> So, the next item is item five, the
[2:03:06] public hearing action item for the motor
vehicle tax exemption applications.
[2:03:10] » Move approval. Move approval of the
motor vehicle tax exemption
[2:03:13] applications.
>> Second.
[2:03:15] » We have a motion and a second. Please
call the role. Johnson,
[2:03:18] » yes.
>> Flower,
[2:03:20] » yes.
>> Schulty,
[2:03:21] » yes.
>> Motion carries. The next item is public
[2:03:24] comment. Members of the public wishing
to speak on items relating to county
[2:03:27] board of equalization business not on
the agenda may do so at this time. Are
[2:03:32] there any members of the public wishing
to make comment?
[2:03:39] None. We can our next agenda item. Next
item is adjournment.
[2:03:44] » Approval or move to adjourn. Second.
>> We have a motion and a second. Please
[2:03:49] call the role. Flower.
>> Yes.
[2:03:51] » Shulty.
>> Yeah.
[2:03:52] » Johnson.
>> Yes. Motion carries.