[0:08] Will you please stand and say the pledge with us

[0:14] to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it

[0:20] stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for

[0:26] all.

[0:29] The record show members are present. They got to read a public comment policy

[0:36] statement. If there's anybody from the public that wants to make a comment to

[0:40] the board, they will need to go over to the table over here and read the script

[0:46] and then fill out the form and make to make a public comment. At the beginning

[0:51] of the meeting, we will reserve about 30 minutes for public comments, but you

[0:55] only get three minutes to speak on your topic. The board will not respond.

[1:00] [clears throat] >> Okay, everybody, look the consent agenda

[1:03] over. >> I'll make the motion to approve the

[1:07] consent agenda. >> Thank you. I'll second.

[1:15] » A motion by Miller, a second by Jorgensson to approve the consent

[1:18] agenda. All in favor signify by saying I.

[1:22] » I. >> Those opposed? Motion carried.

[1:26] We got any public comments? >> Not that I'm aware of.

[1:30] » I think there's some Yep.

[1:35] » Okay. Hold on. We'll bring that over. Need to state your name and your

[1:41] address. >> Okay.

[1:46] side. >> Okay.

[1:52] » Go ahead. >> Oh, yes. I'm here on behalf of

[1:56] speaking on behalf of Overland Mobile Home Park and um

[2:03] we're having a lot of problems down there. They're giving us new leases.

[2:06] They're trying to take our trailers away from us. Um and my neighbor and I are

[2:10] disputed about property line and there's never been any property line

[2:13] established. So, I'm looking something like I call city and stuff, but nobody

[2:19] ever will come in and do property lighting for us. So, and they tell me I

[2:23] can't use my back door and be able to close my back door.

[2:27] » Is [snorts] that the one on South 24th Street?

[2:30] » Right up um by Griffin Pipe. when you pass right there.

[2:34] » Okay. >> There's a letter Charles that

[2:40] » and that would be >> a city issue is what that is,

[2:44] » right? >> Okay. So, there's nothing we could we

[2:48] could do within the city. >> Okay. So, this the city would be this.

[2:53] » Speak louder. You need you need to go to the city council or or the mayor.

[2:58] » Okay. >> Community development. I think you want

[3:01] to start a community development. >> Community

[3:03] » community development office is in the downstairs of city hall.

[3:06] » Okay. Okay.

[3:09] » Thank you. >> Thank you very much.

[3:10] » Thank you. >> Anybody else?

[3:15] » You don't wish to speak? >> No, because

[3:18] » Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Well,

[3:20] » thanks for coming in. Thank you. Thank you.

[3:24] » Next up, we got any new hires in here? >> We do. Okay. Maria,

[3:31] » I want to introduce Brian. Brian comes to public health with um over 20 years

[3:37] of experience and a considerable amount from Douglas County Health Department.

[3:42] So, he has uh been with us a week and we're getting him rolling on new

[3:46] projects and we're very excited to have him.

[3:49] » Good deal. Welcome. Welcome aboard. >> Happy to be here.

[3:53] » Thank you for coming in. >> Thank you.

[3:55] » Nice to meet you, Brian. >> Likewise. Got a good team over there.

[3:59] » Absolutely. >> Okay, questions, comments.

[4:04] Thank you for coming in, Brian. >> Thank you. Thanks, Maria.

[4:07] » Thank you. >> We also have a new attorney in our

[4:11] office. This is Zach Joyce. Uh he will be a criminal attorney um starting

[4:16] misdemeanors. He just passed the bar. So, we're really

[4:21] excited to have him on. He was an intern in our office for two

[4:25] different semesters. So, he already has some good experience with uh with our

[4:30] office and he's proved to be an asset already.

[4:34] » Welcome. >> Thank you.

[4:36] » Yeah. Any questions, comments? >> Forward to working with you.

[4:43] » Thanks for bringing him in, Kristen. Appreciate it. Matt

[4:46] » would be here, but he is in trial today. So, okay.

[4:53] Okay, first up, Matt Wyatt, director of planning and development. Public hearing

[4:57] on proposed second amendment development amended development agreement

[5:04] with JJHP LLC

[5:08] and discussion and/or decision to approve and authorize the board to sign

[5:13] resolution number 57-2026 entitled resolution approving second

[5:19] amendment amended development agreement with JHP

[5:24] LLC. Motion to go into

[5:29] » I'll make the motion to go into public hearing.

[5:32] » I'll second it.

[5:36] » By Miller, second by Jorgensson to go into public hearing. Maryanne, would you

[5:40] do roll call? >> Chairman Shay

[5:41] » I. >> Supervisor Miller.

[5:43] » I. >> Supervisor Wickman.

[5:45] » Hi. >> Supervisor Jones.

[5:46] » Hi. >> Supervisor Jurgensson.

[5:48] » Hi. So, for the past six years, we've been

[5:52] working with Mark, uh, John and Jason on Legacy Ridge development on this. And,

[5:58] um, we're like, we've heard a little bit of conversation beforehand. You know,

[6:02] they're getting ready for the roads to be paved in there. and along with uh

[6:08] their recent milestones of where they're at and the tiff law changes that have

[6:12] happened at the state, the development agreement was amended to meet the terms

[6:16] that we previously talked about where it's 15 years uh up to $5 million

[6:24] on there.

[6:29] They'll receive two payments per year from the county. Um,

[6:35] » that really depends on how fast they build out. Correct.

[6:39] » Correct. The time frame does depend on that. Now that we're not having to hold

[6:42] back the LMI funding anymore, it's not even allow. And just to make clear with

[6:47] everybody, it's not even an allowable hold back anymore. So that frees up on

[6:52] the Pawani County side of it, it frees up 46%

[6:55] of what the payments would have been. So, they will their payback as long as

[7:01] they're building out the subdivision fast enough, then their payback will be

[7:05] faster. And I would assume that it would probably be quicker than the 15-year

[7:08] timeline that we have stated [clears throat] in here.

[7:11] » And the total number of lots 88. First phase is 41. That's what we're

[7:18] working on right now.

[7:24] We're on a public hearing. >> Is there

[7:28] anybody want to speak in favor of this?

[7:35] Does anybody want to speak against this?

[7:42] » Open for a motion. >> I'll move close public hearing. I'll

[7:46] second the motion. Motion by Wickman, a second by Jones to

[7:52] close public hearing. Would you do a roll call, please?

[7:57] » Chairman Shay. >> Hi.

[7:58] » Supervisor Jones. >> Hi.

[8:00] » Supervisor Jorgensson. >> Hi.

[8:01] » Supervisor Miller. >> Hi.

[8:03] » Supervisor Wig. >> Hi.

[8:06] » I really appreciate all you do.

[8:10] Rolling housing. [clears throat]

[8:14] Thank you. I'll make the motion that we pass

[8:17] resolution number 57-2026.

[8:22] I'll second that for discussion. >> Thank you. Motion by Jones, second by

[8:26] Wickman to approve resolution 57-2026.

[8:32] » Um Mark, you're still planning curb and gutter on all those

[8:35] » Yes, sir. >> roads, right?

[8:37] » Yep. Uh driver's almost done with all of the installation of the source sewer in

[8:42] construction. Have you um

[8:47] you have a contractor for the roads? >> Yes, we're using Compass Utilities.

[8:52] » Sweet. Um I'm sure you you know, especially

[8:57] listening to Matt, there's no LMI on that anymore.

[9:01] » Understood. Um [clears throat]

[9:06] can we ex can we expect that to get paid off before the 15 years? stemming demand

[9:13] meets our expectations. I mean, it's a difficult thing for us to predict

[9:17] exactly how fast the lots will sell and the homes will be built, but we do have

[9:23] uh some guidelines in the covenants that require a lot owner to commence

[9:28] construction within 18 months of purchasing the lot. So, and no longer

[9:32] than 12 months to complete construction. So, that at least puts a leash, you

[9:37] know, prevents anybody from buying a lot and just sitting on it. Uh we have quite

[9:43] a few people reaching out asking for updates on when they'll be able to buy

[9:46] lots. Just trying to uh finalize everything before we make any

[9:51] commitments and guarantees to everybody. I think we'll be ready to

[9:55] [clears throat] set pricing and take reservations here within the next 45 to

[9:59] 60 days. >> Uh last question. Phase one you said was

[10:03] 41 lots. >> Yes. Um, how many of those need to be

[10:08] spoken for or built on before you start phase two?

[10:13] » I think it would be more an analysis of just the absorption rate. You know, we

[10:18] want we don't want to run out of lots, you know, but if if we're clipping them

[10:22] out fast, we'll probably pay the the next culde-sac, you know, fairly

[10:27] promptly. We we are putting in the water infrastructure for second phase actually

[10:33] during phase one construction. So, all we'll have to do for phase two is the

[10:37] paving. Um, but yeah, if we've got strong demand, we'll we'll put that out

[10:43] for a bit probably, you know. >> Do we inspect that process, the road

[10:49] process, Andy, compaction, all that stuff?

[10:52] » So, the developer pays a consultant to do that and then we review the the

[10:58] consultants reports. So we are not boots on the ground but the developer pays a

[11:03] consultant to handle inspection and then we get that and yeah we are in monthly

[11:08] correspondence [clears throat] with with our consultant.

[11:11] » Good engineering overseeing the project and

[11:15] then we've got geotech contracted for doing the

[11:19] » perfect other questions comments.

[11:27] » Would you do a roll call? Marriott. >> Chairman Shay.

[11:30] » Hi. >> Supervisor Jorgensson.

[11:32] » Hi. >> Supervisor Miller.

[11:33] » Hi. >> Supervisor Wickman.

[11:35] » Hi. >> Supervisor Jones.

[11:36] » Hi. >> I like the names of the roads you've got

[11:40] on there, too. >> They're named after my children and

[11:44] Jason. >> I figured that.

[11:46] » Awesome. I mean, I like it. Well, thank you all for your support.

[11:50] Legacy long long coming, but yep, we're

[11:55] excited. Excellent. Thanks Mark. Thanks.

[12:00] » Thank you very much. >> Okay. Next up, Maryanne Hanusa, auditor.

[12:04] Discussion on her decision to approve and sign proclamation

[12:09] designating the week of September 7th to 11th as National Payroll Week. See

[12:34] Thank you. Ryan, I'll make the motion that we

[12:39] approve proclamation um for National Payroll Week September

[12:45] 7th through the 11th 26. I'll second.

[12:54] » Got a motion by Miller, [clears throat] a second by Jorgensson to approve

[12:59] proclamation national payroll week. Maryanne,

[13:04] » uh, Chairman Shay, >> hi.

[13:06] » Supervisor Miller. >> I,

[13:08] » Supervisor Jorgensson. >> Hi,

[13:09] » Supervisor Jones. Hi, >> Supervisor Wickham. Okay,

[13:14] agree. >> Proclamation naming payroll week

[13:17] September 7th through 11th, 2026. Whereas payroll professionals play a

[13:23] vital role in ensuring employees are paid accurately and on time while

[13:28] maintaining compliance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations.

[13:32] And whereas Padawani County payroll professionals contribute significantly

[13:37] to the financial well-being of employees and their families by ensuring the

[13:42] accurate and timely payment of wages, benefits, taxes, and other deductions

[13:47] for over 500 employees. And whereas payroll professionals serve as an

[13:52] important connection between employees and employers and work diligently behind

[13:56] the scenes to support the effective operation of organizations and public

[14:01] services. And whereas National Payroll Week

[14:04] recognizes the dedication, knowledge, professionalism, and commitment of

[14:09] payroll professionals and celebrates the important role they play in our

[14:13] workforce and communities. And whereas the 2026 National Payroll Week theme,

[14:20] every paycheck creates possibility, recognizes that each paycheck helps

[14:25] employees meet their daily needs, plan for the future, and pursue personal and

[14:30] financial goals. Now therefore, be it proclaimed that the

[14:34] Podawani County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes September 7th through

[14:39] the 11th, 2026 as National Payroll Week in Padawani County and extends its

[14:45] appreciation to the payroll professionals who work diligently to

[14:49] ensure county employees are paid accurately, timely, and in accordance

[14:53] with applicable laws and policies. Dated this 8th day of September, 2026.

[15:02] And I believe we have we have some payroll professionally.

[15:07] » Kelly and Angie head up our payroll department for the county, an office

[15:11] that I think everybody here is interested in because everybody likes to

[15:14] receive their paycheck on which uh they do through the hard work, diligence, and

[15:21] untiring work of these people. >> And um some of you have seen it

[15:26] firsthand. Some of you only know that you get to cash your check. But um

[15:30] deposit your check, whatever. But um thank you. Thank you both Kelly and

[15:37] Angie for your hard work. >> Everybody loves you. Everybody's

[15:42] very relevant. [laughter]

[15:46] » You don't have to.

[15:49] And and you work closely with payroll administrators from the sheriff's office

[15:56] and roads and it takes a team to keep track of everything.

[16:02] » Thank you, Maryanne. >> Where do you want me? I I get off your

[16:06] symmetry here. [laughter] Oh, wait a minute. Badge.

[16:18] All right. Thank you.

[16:27] » Susan, thank you. Thanks. >> Congratulations.

[16:33] [clears throat] >> Oh, they're gonna go do payroll.

[16:40] » Where's that proclamation? >> Okay. They're they're uh they're

[16:45] obviously very important people. Wait, Kelly, Angie,

[16:48] » come back, >> but professional.

[16:55] » Thanks for all you do. I appreciate you very much.

[16:58] » Thank you. That was good.

[17:06] » Yay.

[17:10] Main director planning development discussion under decision to approve

[17:14] roof replacement proposal from West Central Roofing for the recycling center

[17:19] northern building.

[17:24] » Yes. Uh this year our building that's on the north side of the property houses

[17:30] our compactor um and our plastic storage along with

[17:36] our little maintenance room for the minor equipment that we have out there.

[17:41] Uh the roof is in need of replacement. It has some old skylights on it that

[17:45] need to come out and have some metal put down on them. And then we would like to

[17:49] have the roof recotated like we did our building that is runs the east side of

[17:56] the property on there. These buildings are a little bit unique in shape and

[17:59] design for those that who've been out there to see it. The guttering system is

[18:04] actually built into and sits on top of the exterior walls. So they're bit it's

[18:08] not like a normal pull your metal off, put new metal on, you got a new roof

[18:12] type of system. um West Central was able to come up with a design that coats the

[18:18] building and then runs down into the [clears throat] gutters to ensure that

[18:21] we don't have any continuing leaks on the there on the property. So, um and

[18:27] the it's not a funding request. I'm not asking for that. The funds were already

[18:30] budgeted for. It's just it's it's a large expense. I wanted to make sure

[18:34] that I got the board's approval before we move forward with it.

[18:37] » Matt, how old is that building? >> 1980s.

[18:44] seen those gutters before and you just always thought that was an odd

[18:50] replacement odd system, you know. >> So, um Brian, I'll make the motion to

[18:56] approve the roof replacement proposal from West Central Roofing for the

[19:01] recycling center's northern building in the amount of $45,100.

[19:07] » I'll second the motion. Uh Matt [clears throat]

[19:13] the I take it this is in your budget, >> correct?

[19:16] » Um would you would you do the board a favor when you have another project like

[19:21] this come to us so maybe we could fund it out of gaming instead of

[19:26] um budgeting taxing for it? Yes, I can. On the recycle center is

[19:32] where we have the the general fund line item for the recycle center

[19:38] and a portion of those funds each year go to the city of council bluffs for our

[19:44] household hazardous program and then the other portion of the remaining funds we

[19:51] have been utilizing for capital expenses out there like funding new recycle

[19:55] trailers. Um, the roof is just an online item that we've used that way in the

[20:01] past. But yes, I can certainly do that

[20:07] » questions, comments. No. Got a motion by Miller, a second by

[20:11] Jones to approve the roof replacement from West Central Roofing Recycling

[20:16] Center. All in favor signify by saying I. I.

[20:21] » Those opposed. Motion carry. Do you have a timeline for that?

[20:27] » I believe Tom said they would start in October.

[20:38] Okay. Matt Wy up again. Discussion under decision on appointments to the zoning

[20:45] board adjustments. >> Yes. So, first up, the zoning board of

[20:49] adjustment. Uh unfortunately Karen Anderson has to step down. She has uh

[20:56] they have moved into town and uh so with that then we needed to find a

[21:02] replacement for her. We did post it up on the website. We received some

[21:06] applications in and through that application process. Uh Angela Lipert

[21:11] came in and interviewed with us and she's attended a couple of different

[21:14] meetings now to uh familiarize herself with the board. She's been looking for a

[21:19] way to be more involved in the community and serving on a spot like this. Uh so I

[21:25] think she has a uh she comes from a real estate background. Karen was a real

[21:28] estate background. Uh so I think we're it'll be a good swap for us. So Angela's

[21:35] first appointment on that then would be to fulfill Karen's term. Karen's term

[21:40] currently ends on December 31st of 2027.

[21:46] » I'll move that for you, Matt. a second.

[22:02] Motion by Wickman, a second by Jorgensson

[22:05] to approve Angela Liippard to the zoning board of adjustment. All

[22:12] in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed? Motion carried.

[22:18] » Is that L I P E R T? >> Yes.

[22:25] » Okay. Next up, Matt, you're up again. And we

[22:30] have a an appointment to the Board of Appeals.

[22:35] And you >> This will be for Tom Hol, Thomas Holm to

[22:39] the Board of Appeals. And this would be for a term that would

[22:43] end on 1231 of 30. We have been we had been looking

[22:48] for uh plumbing background uh for the board of appeals for some time now since

[22:54] uh Jim Sever stepped down from that. The board of appeals is one that you don't

[22:59] hear of often. It's met one time in the 14 years that we've had building codes.

[23:05] So it's it's not a widely utilized board, but it is a board that because we

[23:09] have building codes established and permitting process that we have to have

[23:13] appointed in case somebody were to come want to use it. It's not a board that

[23:16] people can go to to have uh code varianced or overridden by them. It is

[23:24] merely, we'll just utilize plumbing as an example of this. If somebody were to

[23:29] come in and they had a new technology that they felt met the building code in

[23:34] in the plumbing code for its use, but it had not been recognized um locally yet,

[23:41] then they could bring it before the board of appeals and say, you know, they

[23:45] would like to utilize this technology and this construction method and the

[23:49] board of appeals would be the ones who would say, "Yeah, that's okay. You can

[23:52] you're okay to use that." >> Do you remember what the one time was?

[23:56] The one time we met was actually for an organizational meeting just to bring

[23:59] everybody together and talk about what the board of appeals was and and why we

[24:03] were uh putting it together. So, >> okay.

[24:06] » But Tom has an extensive background in plumbing. Um I think, you know, he'll be

[24:11] a really great addition to the board. He has kind of retired out from, I believe,

[24:16] doing the day-to-day plumbing. He's doing some instructing and keeps himself

[24:20] active in that way. So, he stays up to date on all the latest codes and things

[24:24] that are going on. Okay. I'll make the motion that we appoint Tom Holm to the

[24:28] board of appeals. >> I'll second that.

[24:32] » Matt, how many, if I can, how many people serve on that?

[24:36] » Five. >> Okay. You have to have a plumber,

[24:39] electrician, and a HBAC person.

[24:44] » Yeah. Architecture and engineer. >> That's four.

[24:50] What >> What trades did you say? You have

[24:52] electrical, plumbing, >> HVSE.

[24:56] electrical plumbing HVAC. >> Okay. I didn't mean to put you on the

[24:59] spot. I >> It's listed on the code.

[25:02] » So, he is filling the plumbers. >> Okay.

[25:07] » And that is HOLM. Correct. >> Holm. Yes.

[25:13] » Any other questions, comments? Motion by Jones, second by Jurgensson to

[25:18] approve Thomas Holm to the board of adjust or a board of appeals. I'm sorry.

[25:25] And uh all in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Those opposed. Motion carried.

[25:33] Thanks. >> And that's for a term ending December 20

[25:36] 30

[25:40] » and the previous one was 27. >> 27.

[25:43] » Okay. Thank you. >> Mhm.

[25:46] » Thank you. >> Yes.

[25:49] » Next up, Andy Wix, engineer. discussion in our decision on funding for one-time

[25:54] road improvements for fiscal year 27. Hi Andy, how's it going?

[26:03] » Hey, it's a good day. So, um, we met a handful of times this past

[26:11] year talking about several different locations to improve roads to spur on

[26:15] residential development. And the four we ended up getting approval for were 400th

[26:20] Street just south of Carson, 240th Street just south of Highway 92, 245th

[26:27] and additionally Hackberry near Westfair and then Juniper Road. Um,

[26:36] however, oh, so we just finished 400th Street. Um, we put asphalt down our HMA

[26:42] and so far good feedback from the residents, but we got the invoice and I

[26:48] sent it to Stevie and Stevie said, "What do you want me to do with it?" So, um,

[26:55] we wanted to come before the board and get confirmation on where we would be

[26:59] paying for these roadway improvements. I was under the impression that the board

[27:04] had um put aside money um in the general fund to pay for these onetime roadway

[27:11] improvements one time. >> That's what we agreed upon.

[27:15] » And I just wanted to get confirmation on where that money was coming from.

[27:19] » That was that was the reserves. >> Whose reserves?

[27:25] » The county's reserves. That's what we talked about with those funds.

[27:29] » No. Um We we made it part of his five-year road

[27:37] plan and that those costs were included in

[27:41] his road plan. >> Um and if uh it said um

[27:47] green green items, I don't know if you guys probably don't have this, the green

[27:52] items would be excluded from his plan if funded with planning dollars.

[27:58] I mean, those are our green ones. And those I I keep all this stuff, Andy. And

[28:04] that included the 400th Street, Silo, 240th Street,

[28:10] um, Hecberry,

[28:14] uh, there was a bunch of them on here. Jefferson, Climb Kils, Skihill Loop,

[28:21] um 290th Street, those were all part of your fiveyear

[28:29] road plan and they were going to come off your

[28:34] plan if it were going to be paid with planning dollars.

[28:38] » So, yeah, to provide the timeline like Tim is saying. So in February sat down

[28:44] and went through the my 5-year program and I had 400 street on secondary roads

[28:51] 5-year program and then we also had 240th uh on the 5-year program. Then um

[28:57] in March we did a study session uh with Mitch Kai and he determined or he said

[29:05] that we had some extra funds in the general fund. Um at least that was our

[29:10] recollection. Um and then

[29:16] in June we sat down and said, "Okay, these are the four locations, Packberry,

[29:21] 240th, 400, uh and Juniper." And based off of those four locations, I was still

[29:28] under the impression that we were using the general fund dollars and not my

[29:32] secondary roads fund because in my 5-year program, the 240th and 400th

[29:38] Street were in years three and four and not my year one. So even if they would

[29:43] have been funded out of secondary roads funds, they would not have been out of

[29:47] this fiscal year. >> Yeah, they were in your fiscal year 27,

[29:53] which is And while we're in [clears throat] at

[29:57] the beginning of the year when it when we began the planning sessions for this

[30:01] and the idea was proposed to Andy and I, it was if you both if we were if the

[30:06] board were to give you two $2 million, what roads would we pick and do to

[30:11] upgrade those to help spend down the reserve balance that we had at the time?

[30:16] And so we went about planning together to put together the different proposals

[30:21] and uh number of times that we came before the board proposing the ideas.

[30:26] And then we kind of got it when we had it whittleled down to the final four

[30:29] projects. We were like right at a million dollars. We're actually we

[30:32] didn't even go with the two million, we went to $1 million. So, um, and being in

[30:38] the study sessions with Mitch and stuff, that's what it was always kind of

[30:40] planned to be. It was to spin down the reserve to do these extra roads spur

[30:44] development on it. >> That's how I thought we voted on it.

[30:48] » Yeah. Actually, I initiated this whole thing with Mitch. We had talked at about

[30:52] the time of the radio upgrade that there was some funds that were left over from

[30:56] diligence from the department heads of not spending their full budgets for the

[31:00] last couple years. It was about $2 million. I sent an an email to both of

[31:05] you saying, "Could you please identify some roads that would not only um help

[31:10] the county, but it would spur economic development." You identified those those

[31:15] four projects. It was 1 million as opposed to 2 million. And my thought

[31:20] after my talk with Mitch was that was going to come from reserves.

[31:27] when when we had the cap five-year cap

[31:31] five-year road plan, those funds were in his plan, not coming from not coming

[31:37] from the county um reserves.

[31:44] Uh I think it's important that uh we um

[31:56] I think all all of us agreed on on those four locations.

[32:00] » Yep. Um, I just want to make sure that uh

[32:08] we have those funds

[32:13] to spend. And if not, um, how many have we

[32:19] started, Andy? We've started two of the four. So, we've we've finished Carson,

[32:25] right? Yep. What other one have you started? 245th and Hackberry.

[32:31] by Westfair. >> Juniper

[32:35] started Juniper, too. >> Yeah, we have our staff on Juniper.

[32:39] Correct. So, we have not paid the contractor on Juniper yet or we have not

[32:44] paid to get the contractor on Juniper, but my staff has been out there prepping

[32:47] Juniper as well. >> What's the Hackberry? What's the

[32:50] Hackberry Shield Code cost? >> Yeah, that

[32:55] » Yes, that will be

[33:00] roughly $200,000. Okay.

[33:05] Is how about Juniper? >> That is

[33:12] on on this sheet that I'm looking at. You have it at $865,000.

[33:18] » That's asphalt costs, right? >> Yeah. So, seal coat would only be

[33:21] $200,000. What are we doing? Seal coat. We're looking at 200. Correct. 200 on

[33:27] Juniper, 200 on Hackberry.

[33:32] » What's the other one? >> 240th Street. Um, however, that's going

[33:37] to be pushed to the spring at a minimum. The hope was to get to it this fall, but

[33:41] just due to the contractor, we won't be able to touch that till the spring.

[33:46] And that's $300,000 is what we identified there.

[33:51] » That works out well for us on a dirt moving project that's going to

[33:54] potentially happen in that area. We don't want to ruin a new road.

[33:59] » So, that one won't happen till spring. Um, if the board decides to add another

[34:08] section of road and you get that done before it freezes

[34:16] on a seal coat project,

[34:20] I hope to. I depends on what the weather does. Um

[34:27] the hope is yes that we can do all this and more. Um but just depends on the

[34:33] contractor's workload. There's only one contractor in the metro that does

[34:37] this type of seal cutting and I need to talk to

[34:43] the >> Did you lose the other contractor out of

[34:46] I think they were out of Harlem, weren't they?

[34:49] » So we still work with that contractor. They just only do half the work now.

[34:54] Okay. >> So, 400 streets done. Is that uh is that

[35:00] budgeted number what you spent? >> We spent 226,000 and some change. So,

[35:06] just about that 227. >> Okay.

[35:10] » That's asphalt, >> correct? That Yeah, that is the only of

[35:13] these four identified projects that is asphalt.

[35:16] » Do we turn that over to the city at this point?

[35:22] I believe that's going to be a conversation between the board.

[35:24] » That's what we talked about to begin with,

[35:28] » right? We had several different agreements with Carson on that fact. I

[35:32] think with the number of they've had some turnover there on staff and elected

[35:36] officials, and I think we'd have we're going to have to go back out and have

[35:39] that conversation again with them. Yeah. >> Okay. As we always talked about, once it

[35:44] was done, they're taking it. >> That's the whole goal of it, right? Is

[35:46] to help those small towns. Yep. Okay. So, at the at the top of uh the sheet,

[35:53] Matt, that Andy provided it, it says the items in green would be excluded from

[36:00] the um five-year plan for roads if funded with

[36:06] planning dollars. How many how much planning dollars you got?

[36:09] » I believe in the conversations Mitch had ideas was that the board would funnel

[36:13] some money into planning. >> Oh, is that how we're doing?

[36:15] » Yeah. To pay for those invoices. >> Okay.

[36:19] per from reserve discuss. >> Sorry.

[36:22] » And I and I do >> this is why I asked Andy to bring this

[36:25] because this is the confusion that I have when I'm giving directions on where

[36:29] to pay these invoices from. So I've been hearing different different answers from

[36:37] different people. So I just wanted us all in the same room to decide how we

[36:42] are funding this. My impression [clears throat]

[36:45] » was that there were going to be general fund dollars, part of the 1 million and

[36:51] the extra two million from gaming that Mitch had set aside to go into the

[36:56] capital improvements fund and to come out to these other projects. My thought

[37:01] was that these projects were included in there. However, there was nothing firm

[37:07] ever put down. So, I really would like us to firm it up today so that we can

[37:12] all be on the same page. >> Well, the the the capital plan or the

[37:17] capital projects fund um was

[37:22] bond funds and

[37:26] um it came from the cash reserves or the

[37:30] general fund. >> Yes.

[37:32] » No gaming went in there yet. >> They have not been transferred into

[37:35] there yet. No. Yeah. But that was the intent from what my understanding was

[37:41] the intent was that we were going to move funds in there from gaming and the

[37:45] general fund. The transfers have not yet been requested.

[37:50] » Fund is where we I thought we'd discuss that coming from

[37:55] » and unfortunately I wasn't here when this went with Mitch. So that's why I

[37:59] really need some clarity on the topic. Ryan and I discussed a little bit about

[38:05] having a uh capital plan discussion at next week's uh board meeting and I think

[38:11] that's imperative that we have that and this we can continue this discussion for

[38:16] then for then um if you want to and have all the projects that we know we

[38:23] have and figure out how we're going to fund them all. I mean I don't have a

[38:27] problem with with the roads that were working on sail coding. I just want to

[38:33] make sure we know where the money is coming from because we really didn't

[38:36] decide any of that and my impression, my thoughts, initial thoughts and still

[38:42] were my thoughts even today >> that those projects were in Andy's

[38:48] five-year plan. >> No.

[38:52] » So, you're saying you you want the money to come from his

[38:55] » I'm not saying anything, Keith. All I'm saying that that was my impression of

[38:59] the discussion we had with him. they were included in his five-year plan. Um,

[39:04] I'm looking at his fiscal year 27 proposed.

[39:09] Um, and uh,

[39:15] I don't have I was trying to find his he sent us a uh, I think it was an Excel

[39:22] spreadsheet of each year where the funds were going from his fiveyear plans. I

[39:31] can't find that. So, I think if you re if you could resend that to the board,

[39:36] we can take another look at it, figure out where we're going to go with this.

[39:40] » Yeah, the I can find that Excel document. The board did approve um in

[39:47] May the 5-year program, and it did have 400 street. I just kept it in the

[39:53] five-year program as um a 2030 project. um

[40:01] FY 2030, but >> yeah, the the map Tim is referring to,

[40:06] we talked about March 30th at a a study session, so it should be in the packet

[40:11] from from then, but obviously I did not provide that today. So, I can resend

[40:16] that as well. I think that uh

[40:22] I do remember that discussion and I think Miss Miller and I spoke that we've

[40:28] been trying to get this project done for six to eight years and wanted to get

[40:33] that moved up so far as we could um put some more homes in there. So I think we

[40:39] moved that up if I recall. >> I think it was you and Brian.

[40:44] » Which specific? 400 Street. >> Yes. That's that's been going We've been

[40:50] talking about that forever. >> Yeah.

[40:52] » And then transferring it to the city. >> I don't want to go through the emails

[40:56] right now, but I was the one that initiated all of this.

[40:58] » Well, I I remember the email. >> Okay. And it was definitely based on

[41:04] excess reserve money. That's where the money came from. Now, I understand your

[41:08] point. We have a big expense coming up when it comes to the replacement of the

[41:12] jail HVAC system. Um I I I don't want to raid his money to

[41:19] pay for that budget out of a festival you're

[41:23] talking about. I mean the money is going to come from us one way or another.

[41:27] » Was going to come from the county. >> Correct.

[41:28] » Well, um you know that the discussion we can we can certainly have next. We can

[41:33] have it right now if you want to. Um when

[41:37] uh Steve Lynn came and told us uh that our cash reserves are at 28%.

[41:43] And if the board is comfortable with that, is that what it was? 28%.

[41:47] » Using that calculation. Yes. >> Yes. Instead [clears throat] of the 35.

[41:52] So if the board's still comfortable at 28 or 25, I mean, we can we can take the

[41:56] reserves down as far as you want to. You just have to be able to be comfortable

[42:00] with it. And there's so many factors that come into play with that like uh

[42:06] your bond rating. Not not to say that we're going to bond anything, but your

[42:09] you know your bond rating. um another health disaster like COVID and you know

[42:16] those kind of things you or a flood I mean so we want to be able to have some

[42:22] funds in there to um address those needs too. [clears throat]

[42:31] » So what I provided you was a quick breakdown of if we transferred the funds

[42:36] in from general fund and gaming

[42:42] and then projects that we have slated or possibly slated to come out of that

[42:46] capital improvements plan this year. Although looking at the most updated

[42:52] numbers that Andy's provided, I'm not quite there. Um I used an older email

[42:58] estimate for some of his projects there. Uh but that's putting us at 5.5 million.

[43:06] So it'll be a little less closer to 5 million um at the end of the fiscal year

[43:11] if we look at these specific projects coming from that capital improvements

[43:16] fund. >> And if we do that, we'll be at 25% of

[43:20] our fund balance or 28%. >> So this is Yeah. Well, what's projected

[43:28] for the end of this year? Yes. >> Yes. And this is again that one in two

[43:33] million that Mitch had on the plan for the year that has not yet been

[43:37] transferred. So that has not been put into action. It's just as far as my

[43:41] understanding is was the intent. >> We need to go back and review this

[43:46] because we gave Andy specific instructions to go ahead with these four

[43:51] projects with that funding coming from us.

[43:56] And that's what we need. That's what we need to do and I just assume this was an

[44:02] idea. >> Yeah, we shouldn't hurt Andy's future

[44:04] projects based on what we did in the middle of the fiscal year.

[44:09] » And I don't have any intent to do that. No,

[44:11] » I'm only saying that this is basically if we're saying it's coming from the

[44:15] general fund. This outlines how that looks, we would still utilize that 1

[44:20] million that was set aside, put it into capital projects and fund it that way.

[44:26] So, it's still coming from the general fund. Basically, it's just running

[44:30] through that capital projects. We are still covering our current year's

[44:36] bond payments from the capital projects fund,

[44:40] » which is what was in the bond levy. Um, as far as future levies, my most

[44:47] recent information, so what the final bond levy went through says, we pay this

[44:54] current year's debt service from funds on hand and we levy in future years.

[45:03] thoughts.

[45:08] » So those dollars that are in the capital improvements fund are not specifically

[45:12] set to pay off those bond funds. >> That's ex That's exactly what this board

[45:17] did. We when we got those bond funds, we put them in that capital project fund to

[45:23] pay down that debt. Not to spend on anything else, but to pay down that

[45:29] debt. And um

[45:38] we've already had this discussion months ago and it was not brought up that we

[45:43] were in an adverse position to spend that money

[45:46] at that time and he acted on that discussion. He spent the million dollars

[45:52] as we asked him to do.

[45:59] Where you going to get the money, Keith? >> Well, we don't have the money for the

[46:03] Hback either. >> No, we're working on that. I mean,

[46:05] that's that's part of the capital discussion we're going to have next

[46:08] week, >> but we told him to spend that million

[46:12] dollars months ago. >> Well,

[46:15] » and now we're going to tell him that he needs to find the money himself.

[46:19] » I I [clears throat] don't recall that discussion. you know, I I kept the

[46:25] uh his five-year road plan. I mean, if he send us sends us that um Excel

[46:32] spreadsheet and

[46:37] uh you know, it's it says in there that we're going to take it from the board.

[46:43] The board's paying for it. That's okay. But it doesn't say that, Keith. But I

[46:48] don't recall that conversation or said >> we don't want him to push back other

[46:52] projects that he already had planned based on what we told him to do.

[46:56] » Other projects will be impacted. >> It was part of his fiveyear plan.

[47:02] But >> we asked them to move them up though,

[47:04] didn't we? Well, basically, yeah, we we did actually

[47:08] for that if you had $2 million >> and anything

[47:13] » is basically up in the air. Ain't it >> said go

[47:16] » fiveyear planning is is up in the air. I mean, it's just it's uh give or take,

[47:22] could be, not could be. I mean, I I don't I don't see any fiveyear plan

[47:27] [clears throat] being solid, period, for anything.

[47:33] It's it's a it's a requirement from the state of Iowa that our second that our

[47:37] engineer provides a five-year plan to the state.

[47:40] » All this is subject to change. Am I right?

[47:42] » It can change. >> The five-year plan one and two are rock

[47:45] solid. Years three, four, and five are basically iffy. That's what the

[47:50] five-year plan is. And that road that we're talking about

[47:54] was in year 2030. >> Correct. That's the what was signed in

[48:00] May. Um, we asked him to do this and now we have to finance it.

[48:05] » I agree. I agree too.

[48:10] » And the reason this is coming to a head is we did get the invoice for 400 Street

[48:14] and we have 30 days to pay that invoice. So, didn't you pay that already? I'd

[48:19] like to >> I had sent that through. I will have to

[48:21] check and see if it has actually been finalized.

[48:24] » I thought you mentioned 400,000.

[48:28] » 400,000. That's under the

[48:33] » we did a good thing now that in place >> and they did a lot of extra work on this

[48:39] which was directed by me. Um and Mitch had told me the numbers were there and I

[48:45] acted on those numbers and I presented it that way.

[48:57] Well, I just I mean, we just need to we need to fund them

[49:03] from somewhere where we know we we're going to have the funds and that capital

[49:07] projects fund. Um

[49:13] those funds were set aside for that bond because we didn't you're

[49:18] » right >> didn't let that so it out of there

[49:23] taking a million >> but in the future years based on the

[49:26] bond documents we are supposed to be levying.

[49:32] » Not only that but we actually thought about doing $2 million and they came in

[49:35] at $1 million. So, we could be looking at a $2 million price tag right right

[49:40] now, which we're not. >> Actually, I think we cut the project

[49:43] back some. >> We did. They brought us several roads.

[49:47] » They brought us several different ideas and we sat as a board and said, "Let's

[49:51] do this one instead of that one." >> And here we are.

[49:59] [clears throat] Well, we got a bill due and

[50:06] can't make the the motion, but I think we got funding.

[50:11] » What? Uh,

[50:15] » Lind, do you have a recommendation? >> Well, the 400 400th Street invoice I

[50:21] paid out of the capital improvements fund. I do suggest we continue with that

[50:27] process and if it would make you guys more comfortable, we can come next week

[50:33] and suggest those transfers from the general fund and gaming so that we know

[50:38] those are in place and moving. >> Uh or we can push those off if we want.

[50:43] 500.

[50:50] » So, we have enough funds in there now that doesn't need a transfer yet

[50:55] » and we can talk about that more next week if we prefer um about the extra one

[51:00] and two million that Mitch had on the current US plan.

[51:03] » Well, we've got two other two other projects we're in the middle of, right?

[51:11] So I think either way transfer the funds to 40th Street.

[51:16] » Yeah, I would continue to utilize the capital improvements fund. We have the

[51:20] money in there as it is right now. We're not in dire of putting that fund in a

[51:25] negative position. Um but we can again with the capital improvements that you

[51:32] guys want to talk about next week, I confirm that up and we can talk about

[51:36] whether or not those additional transfers will go through.

[51:49] So, we need a motion today to pay for these three projects that are on the on

[51:58] the board. >> I would request that you guys consider

[52:02] all four that he has. If the intent is still for him to do all four,

[52:06] » it was just a I'll make a motion that we pay for the

[52:13] four projects as decided months ago um from general fund reserves and then the

[52:20] 200,000 from gaming.

[52:26] » How much from gaming? >> What is that what you said? 200 from

[52:29] » We have Well, Mitch's plan had 1 million from the general funds and 2 million

[52:34] from gaming. 200, >> not two million, right?

[52:39] » I've got two million, but he had suggested

[52:43] » the four projects are going to be at about how much?

[52:46] » Just under a million total. >> Yeah. So, we should be okay.

[52:50] » 927,000 is what it's going to be.

[52:52] » Okay. So, we should be fine without touching gaming then at this point.

[52:56] » At this point, we are. Yes. >> In fact, we're we're looking at another

[53:00] project today down the road that's on the agenda.

[53:05] And I assume that was coming from reserves.

[53:09] » Well, >> okay. And yeah, we'll get into that. Uh,

[53:13] » so $927,000 from excess

[53:19] 01 fund reserves. >> Okay.

[53:22] » We don't have any excess. >> Well, we have money that was not spent

[53:26] in the last three budget years. So, that's the money that we're looking at.

[53:30] » It goes right into >> We took which goes right into general.

[53:33] We took some of that >> for 911.

[53:37] » Exactly. Um I think the amount we took from from that for 911 was close to six

[53:44] or eight, right? >> Yeah.

[53:46] » No, about 10 million.

[53:51] What was your desire initially though for that? Was it the whole thing?

[53:56] » Yeah. >> Which means we had reserves left over.

[54:02] We we had enough to keep us afloat and we still do. The whole project was

[54:09] what? 16. >> Yes.

[54:11] » And you wanted 16 million straight. If we did 10, that means we have at least 6

[54:17] million left over somewhere.

[54:21] » That is the 8.6. >> Spend $16 million off the the radio

[54:26] project. >> 8.8. But to move this forward, we got we

[54:30] got four four different road projects here. We can pay four. We just need to

[54:35] to determine what on what fund. Right. >> Right. I need to know if the come from

[54:41] the general fund. >> Okay.

[54:43] » Then if they are coming from the general fund

[54:46] » where wherever it comes from, I want to say these four projects went forward

[54:50] like like I assume they were going to >> Keith's motion was on the general

[54:55] » uh the general. All right. I'll second that.

[54:57] » [clears throat]

[55:02] » Can I read it back, please? See if [clears throat] you

[55:09] » Okay. >> Motion by Jones, second by Jorgensson to

[55:11] fund all secondary roads projects previously discussed in the amount of

[55:16] 927,000 from

[55:20] » general >> from general fund. Okay.

[55:22] » You need to you need to put the roads in there, Mary. I'm going to Can I get that

[55:25] from you, Andy, after the meeting? This project.

[55:29] » Okay. No. U go ahead and name them, Andy. So, she has

[55:32] » So, 400th Street, just south of Carson, uh 240th Street from Highway 92 to

[55:40] Pioneer Trail,

[55:44] 245th Street, adjacent to Hackberry. >> 245th.

[55:50] » Correct. 245th Street. >> All right. adjacent to Hackberry. Um

[55:55] that goes south to Highway 6.

[56:01] And then the last one, >> Juniper

[56:04] » is Juniper [clears throat] from Weston A to L34.

[56:17] » Sorry, Juniper Road, not Juniper. >> Andy, will you uh would please find that

[56:23] uh Excel spreadsheet. Send it to the board, please.

[56:26] » Yes. >> And it's 400th Street,

[56:30] 240th Street from 92nd

[56:34] » Highway 92 Pioneer Trail. Yep.

[56:39] » 245th Street adjacent to Hackberry Road. And

[56:45] » there's some Hackberry Road on there, isn't there?

[56:47] » There is also some Hackberry. Yes. and Juniper Road from Western Avenue to L34.

[56:53] » Weston S. [clears throat] >> Sorry, I have Weston written. I spoke

[56:57] Western. Yes, Weston. >> Yep.

[56:59] » To L34. Correct. >> Motion by Jones, second by Jorgensson to

[57:05] approve funding for one-time road improvement for fiscal year 27 for in

[57:11] the $927,000. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I.

[57:17] Those opposed. >> Would you um please

[57:22] » Motion carried >> send us a fund balance?

[57:26] Becky [clears throat] used to send them to us every week.

[57:30] » Um

[57:36] that's going to help for for next week for sure.

[57:40] » Sure. Absolutely. Have a meeting with Josh this afternoon.

[57:49] Okay. Andy Wix, engineer discussion and their decision on seal coating of Snow

[57:55] Hill plane.

[57:59] » Yes. So I have a handout. I'm sorry I did not include it in the packet,

[58:07] but it is just clarifying the bounds that we will be talking about.

[58:13] Should have made it bigger. There you go. Give me glasses.

[58:19] » Thank you.

[58:22] » Did you make this Andy? >> Yes. This is not a formal. This was at

[58:27] 9:25 today. I put this together. >> Your loops are a little off.

[58:33] » Correct. So, high level, we're talking about Snow Hill Lane.

[58:38] It is a road adjacent to ski hill loop that connects to the the ski hill at

[58:46] Crescent Nature area.

[58:51] » Correct. So yeah, the to get your bearings on the map, Old Lincoln Highway

[58:55] is on the the right side of the map. It runs north to south. uh Hitchcock Nature

[59:00] Center is on the north um very very top of the the handout and

[59:08] then the the ski hill is kind of in the bottom left.

[59:13] And I um yeah, I was talking with a couple board

[59:20] members and we thought that it may be beneficial to Seal Coat Snow Hill Lane.

[59:25] » I have a series of questions. Was this on your five-year plan?

[59:29] » No. >> Who asked you to do this specifically?

[59:34] » I asked him for a price. >> Where's this money coming from?

[59:37] » It's coming from gaming, Keith. >> Did you talk about this months ago?

[59:42] » So, >> we've talked about this for a couple

[59:44] years. >> I'm just trying to get my bearings with

[59:48] this. >> But, but thanks for calling me out on

[59:51] that, Keith. I appreciate it very much. >> I am all for this. uh economic

[59:57] development. >> Yes,

[1:00:00] » it which it it is it's for economic development.

[1:00:04] Part of the discussion that I had with um Andy was that um

[1:00:14] all of our parks have silo rose. There's one that doesn't.

[1:00:22] And um well although the entrance to Hitchcock

[1:00:31] Lodge and and the nature area in general is further north off of Highway.

[1:00:39] It's not a highway anymore. [clears throat]

[1:00:42] » 183. It's sub highway, but it's >> what's that?

[1:00:45] » 183 Lincoln Highway. >> Old Lincoln Highway. Thanks for that,

[1:00:49] Andy. I appreciate report. >> Okay. Thanks, man.

[1:00:52] um old Lincoln Highway, [laughter]

[1:00:57] the other entrance to Hitchcock area and a part of our recreational opportunity

[1:01:05] is to that skiill loop area. We know that we got an estimate for

[1:01:14] $100,000 for keyhill loop and aundred

[1:01:22] 000 estimate to take it to old um Lincoln Highway and that would be part

[1:01:31] of Ski Hill Loop. Is that right, Andy? >> So the the green portion on the map is

[1:01:35] Ski Hill Loop. Um but it would connect to Snow Hill Lane. Correct. Um, yeah, my

[1:01:41] recommendation would be if we're going to seal coat Snow Hill Lane, that blue

[1:01:46] bubbled section, we should also seal coat the green section, which is ski

[1:01:52] hill, though. >> I agree with you, Andy.

[1:01:54] » Agreed. >> If the board covered 10 and half of

[1:01:57] that, could you cover the other 50, Andy?

[1:02:00] » We could. That awesome.

[1:02:07] This is not part of the capital improvements project bill. Correct.

[1:02:10] » Correct. It is not in our 5year program. >> Trying to get some background.

[1:02:14] » Are you confident it will happen this fall?

[1:02:19] » So that that I did have a little bit of hesitation. We are already a little bit

[1:02:25] behind with our co-contractor. So the hope if I get direction from the board

[1:02:30] today to move forward on this, the hope is that we could get it done this fall.

[1:02:34] But >> the the base the base you do yourself,

[1:02:38] right? >> Correct. So, in-house we do base

[1:02:40] stabilization. The the board helped pay for a piece of equipment that we can now

[1:02:45] do base stabilization inhouse. Um, however, the actual seal coating or

[1:02:50] sealing the surface, we still need outside contractor assistance with

[1:02:58] » you're asking for 150 to do this. >> Correct. I'll make a motion that we do

[1:03:04] that. I think it's an excellent idea. >> From what fund

[1:03:07] » uh gaming,

[1:03:11] » you're awesome, Keith. I'll I'll check it. I'll second that for you. [laughter]

[1:03:19] » And specifically, I wanted to confirm from Old Lincoln Highway to the

[1:03:25] to the ski hill. So, that's section A and C hand out. Do do we uh Yes, it

[1:03:31] would be. >> But we would not be doing section

[1:03:33] section B. >> You're talking about the red the red

[1:03:36] lines. >> Yeah. So, we would we would not go to

[1:03:40] Hitchcock. We would just do kind of the east west portion.

[1:03:45] » Do you um do you plow that? >> We do plow ski hill loop regularly and

[1:03:53] um we coordinate with conservation on plowing snowill lane. Do you do you plow

[1:04:00] uh Snow Hill Lane, Jeff? You know >> that was contracted out.

[1:04:09] » I didn't hear you, Jeff. Contracted out >> that work is contracted out

[1:04:12] » by them, not us. Correct. >> That by conservation and the enterprise

[1:04:16] fund to get snow. Well, the part of that was because there

[1:04:23] was no need for us to bring Don't you plow snow with separate

[1:04:28] vehicles versus seal coat versus gravel. That's why.

[1:04:33] » So, [snorts] um maybe you can work with roads and get

[1:04:38] that taken care of. >> Yeah.

[1:04:41] » Save some money there, right? >> Well, that's what you think, Jeeoff.

[1:04:46] Andy, what's the average cost per mile of seal coating?

[1:04:53] » About $200,000. 150 to 200.

[1:04:58] » Really? >> Well, if we're doing base stabilization

[1:05:02] in house. >> Okay. The whole thing done

[1:05:07] about 250. >> About 250. Okay.

[1:05:17] All right. Got a motion by Jones, a second by Wickman to approve

[1:05:22] Seal Coding, Snow Hill Lane, proving 150,000

[1:05:28] » out of gaming.

[1:05:32] » All [clears throat] in favor signify by saying I. I.

[1:05:36] » Those opposed Oh.

[1:05:44] Carry

[1:05:50] decision for discussion decision regarding the compensation board.

[1:05:55] This board tried and

[1:06:00] kind of failed in the last year or so on this compensation board.

[1:06:05] We really feel [clears throat]

[1:06:09] wanted to bring it up. So we feel we need to appoint some people

[1:06:15] to do this. Okay. So back in July 1st, 2024, the state dissolved the

[1:06:23] compensation board >> and we had four study sessions in 2024

[1:06:29] to teach the board how we were going to do it to determine what the elected

[1:06:34] official salary should be. And we did fail miserably. Um I don't like being

[1:06:42] scolded and that's what I've been scolded on more than anything.

[1:06:46] Um, we have several elected officials in the room today.

[1:06:52] And if we were to stand back up the compensation board, would you guys be

[1:06:59] all right with that or do you want the board of supervisors to continue to

[1:07:04] flounder and try and get it right?

[1:07:11] Matt sent me as his uh spokesperson on this

[1:07:15] since he's unavailable today and he would be in favor of the compensation

[1:07:20] board. Obviously, the board has struggled the board of supervisors has

[1:07:23] struggled with the um show your work requirements that the compensation board

[1:07:28] usually takes over and I it's [snorts] his opinion that that would be better

[1:07:35] done by compensation group. I agree.

[1:07:39] » Yeah. I disagree. >> You disagree? Yeah.

[1:07:43] » Because I like holding you guys accountable instead of a compensation

[1:07:45] board. So, >> yeah. Either way, either way you get

[1:07:49] » I just think it's a waste of their time because every year that I've sat through

[1:07:52] the com board hearings, they recommend one thing and you guys just do another

[1:07:55] anyway. So, it's like, do we buy them pizza and listen to them talk for an

[1:07:59] hour for what reason? Besides doing your homework, I guess that's why I think you

[1:08:03] guys should do the homework. And if you keep failing, then you'll learn

[1:08:05] eventually, won't you? Well, we failed twice. We have

[1:08:09] » We didn't fail the second time. We failed the first time.

[1:08:14] Then I wouldn't call it fail. We just didn't

[1:08:18] get enough >> bases.

[1:08:20] » What? >> We didn't cover all of our bases,

[1:08:23] » right? I What's your thought,

[1:08:27] » Andrew? I'm sorry. >> Andrew,

[1:08:30] » I mean, I think Andy makes good points, but

[1:08:33] » I'm with Andy. [laughter] Well, there's three Andies in the room here. Which

[1:08:36] one? >> No. [laughter]

[1:08:41] And I never call it Andrew. Andy. I just >> So, we need middle names. Is that what

[1:08:46] you're saying? >> Well,

[1:08:49] » excuse me. >> She's with Andrew Bugs.

[1:08:52] » There's a motion on the board. >> No.

[1:08:54] » No. I'm asking Andrew had discussion. Your thoughts?

[1:08:59] I like boards where I have representation on there. But Andy, the

[1:09:02] sheriff Brown makes good points that >> at the end of the day, you guys can do

[1:09:07] whatever you want and >> it always happens that way.

[1:09:12] » Our our comp can go to lots of work to supply you, but that doesn't

[1:09:20] always happen. But it all matters about money.

[1:09:25] I understand. At the end of the day, it's going to be 2%.

[1:09:29] » So, one of the things that Matt and I talked about um in preparing preparing

[1:09:34] for this meeting was um I mean obviously the first year that the board did not

[1:09:40] have a compensation board, there was no work shown and so I won't use that one.

[1:09:44] This year it seemed like the approach from the board of supervisors was

[1:09:50] the board had a number in mind for raises and then they used that number to

[1:09:58] kind of >> work backwards

[1:10:00] » work backwards to to what um you know to show their work that way. That's the

[1:10:06] opposite approach of what should happen or what the compensation board does. The

[1:10:10] the compensation board is designed to look at all of the elected positions and

[1:10:17] determine what would be a a fair compensation for those elected positions

[1:10:22] based on their office comparable, you know, elected officials in the state in

[1:10:27] the area. I know some of our departments have comparable in the private sector.

[1:10:33] Not all of them do. And so the compensation board is tasked with

[1:10:37] looking at what a fair compensation rate would be and presenting that to the

[1:10:42] board of supervisors. The board of supervisors did it the exact opposite

[1:10:46] way. And I feel like that is the biggest problem with the show your work

[1:10:49] requirement. And that has been the biggest struggle to get across to you

[1:10:54] five when you're making that decision because when you have a number in mind

[1:10:59] ahead of time and you're just trying to fit, you know, that square peg into the

[1:11:02] rack hole, it doesn't work very well. >> You know, real quick, before we got

[1:11:09] involved in this, you know, the conversation building would come to us

[1:11:11] and they have they had a number a lot of times there's like eight nine%, you

[1:11:16] know, we can only work with what what what we have for revenue.

[1:11:19] » Absolutely. And that's where we're at. That's where I'm coming from. I don't

[1:11:22] care what anybody says. I'm basing my decisions on what we can what we can

[1:11:27] afford for salary increases. I don't care what any other

[1:11:30] » county or whatever whatever they do. It doesn't matter.

[1:11:34] » And and I understand that, Jeff. I'm just saying what the what the law has

[1:11:37] required for the compensation board to do or the board of supervisors when

[1:11:41] acting as compensation board is to do that that work that

[1:11:46] would show an eight or nine% raise and then review it even if the county can

[1:11:53] only provide a 2% raise you you still have to do that work and and collect

[1:11:58] that data per the code. So, so that is what what the problem has been. And it's

[1:12:03] it's clear that the board has a hard time doing that because I I understand

[1:12:08] the county only has a a certain amount of funds available. That doesn't change

[1:12:13] the code requirements for showing your work. So, I

[1:12:17] » I have I'm not an elected official, >> so I'm just speaking to what what the

[1:12:22] code says and what the concerns have been in the past. And it it has been

[1:12:27] clear that the board struggles with that. And and I think again I'm not the

[1:12:33] elected official in the room. That's just from the legal perspective that has

[1:12:37] obviously been hard for the board of supervisors to break out those two

[1:12:42] separate roles because when you are acting as your own compensation board,

[1:12:46] you are acting in a different role than when you are acting as a board of

[1:12:50] supervisor or a board of supervisors. um in determining the actual

[1:12:54] » our role is to manage our county budget, >> but this is county or this is state code

[1:13:00] is what's required of us. >> That that's what's hard to understand.

[1:13:05] » Is talking about handing off that off to another.

[1:13:08] » You can't predetermine where we're at per state code if we're the if we're the

[1:13:14] compensation board. The spirit of the law, if not the letter of the law, would

[1:13:19] suggest that if not required, that if you're acting as your own compensation

[1:13:23] board, that then at least one member of the board would visit with the elected

[1:13:27] officials. That did not happen in the case of the auditor's office, even

[1:13:31] though an off tour was offered um to the board member assigned. And um I I

[1:13:39] completely agree with um Kristen's assessment. You do you do have to step

[1:13:45] outside your roles as board members and act in a completely different capacity.

[1:13:50] » And we we admitted we failed. >> I mean, you know, we're not perfect.

[1:13:57] We're human. >> Well, and I I think we learned a lot and

[1:14:03] we'll value the compensation board when they come and speak to us. I mean, we

[1:14:10] won't just discount what they're telling us.

[1:14:14] » I don't think we did a bad job last year. The first year, I would agree that

[1:14:19] um we didn't put our homework in writing,

[1:14:21] » right? >> And you know, [clears throat] however,

[1:14:25] however Christian wants to um say [snorts] it, you know, when when

[1:14:34] we get I don't know 800 to $1.2 $2 million

[1:14:39] worth of new money. And we know a 1% raise for everybody in

[1:14:43] the county cost $400,000.

[1:14:48] If there's no money there, there's no money. I mean, there we we can't we

[1:14:53] can't uh make that up. It's

[1:14:58] that's all there is. Believe me, I think we have some elected

[1:15:03] officials that deserve a little bit more.

[1:15:06] » I agree. I sure totally agree. >> But when you when you look at them and

[1:15:12] you rank them across the state in the counties,

[1:15:16] we are the 10th largest county and all of our elected officials are in the top

[1:15:21] 10. So, we're not doing everything wrong.

[1:15:26] Now, if you want to um there there's some of our elected officials that make

[1:15:31] more than um statewide elected officials and um

[1:15:38] there's um high ranking state law enforcement

[1:15:44] officers that make less than our sheriff. I'm not [clears throat] putting

[1:15:48] putting Andy down at all. I mean, I think think that he has a huge

[1:15:52] responsibility. We've already started that homework.

[1:15:57] Um, and as as Andy said, Andy Brown said, you know,

[1:16:04] when when the compensation board comes to us and says, gosh, we're going to

[1:16:08] give them all an eight or nine 10% raise. No, we don't have we don't have

[1:16:11] the money. So then we say, gosh, we can't we can't accept that

[1:16:16] recommendation. Tim, when I say I thought we failed when we didn't talk

[1:16:22] » to them at the I believe it was the first year.

[1:16:25] » Yeah, we we learned I think this board learned. So, it's

[1:16:31] important and I think we have a study session

[1:16:34] and uh bring them in and sit down and talk with

[1:16:38] them at some point. >> You know, the I know that um there were

[1:16:44] some representatives on the compensation board that were

[1:16:49] pissed because they do the work. They come in

[1:16:52] here and have pizza and they they recommend 6 8 10 12% raises

[1:17:00] and don't look at the financials financials of the county or they don't

[1:17:04] have them yet. They don't have the information that uh this is all the

[1:17:09] county has in new money and that's all we have to spend. They don't have that

[1:17:13] information. So when they when they make that recommendation,

[1:17:18] um, we can't we can't agree with it. We

[1:17:23] don't have the money to do it. >> If it's over, then we got to look at

[1:17:28] cuts, strong cuts, and they're not fun. And

[1:17:33] that it's not easy for this board to make cuts.

[1:17:40] Hopefully, it won't come to that. I I don't know what what the right thing to

[1:17:45] do is. I don't think we did a bad job at all last year. Um I think we done our we

[1:17:51] had our homework and whether it was correct or not, I thought we worked on

[1:17:57] it pretty good. So,

[1:18:02] okay. So, what's the board want to do here? We got discussion or no decision

[1:18:08] decision regarding the compensation. I will make a motion to approve

[1:18:13] reinstatement of the compensation board with the elected officials. Second that

[1:18:26] » and I make that recommendation with or I make that motion with the recommendation

[1:18:31] that we u apply all of the lessons learned since 2024.

[1:18:40] Okay, I got a motion by Miller and a second by Jorgensson

[1:18:45] to reinstate the compensation board with elected officials.

[1:18:51] » You will. I'll call that brand. >> Yeah, I would. Please.

[1:18:56] » Chairman Shay,

[1:19:00] » can you start with someone else? Okay, I'll go first. Uh N.

[1:19:11] Mr. Chairman, do you want me to come back to you?

[1:19:17] » Hey, real quick. Sorry if it's even >> Yes. Go ahead.

[1:19:20] » Are you guys going to be appointing this board or we need to go find our people

[1:19:23] again? If if this passes, >> you guys get to appoint a representative

[1:19:27] to the compensation board. [clears throat]

[1:19:30] » And I do think we done an all right job last

[1:19:34] year. Here's my thought, and I'm not going to be here next year, so I'm just

[1:19:38] saying this from as a disinterested person. We're going to bring in a group

[1:19:41] of people from the community. They're going to do a lot of work, and because

[1:19:44] of the 2% floor or ceiling, um, most of their ideas are going to be negated. I

[1:19:51] just feel bad doing that to a group of people from the community. Um,

[1:19:55] » was it 24 that a lot of them spoke out that they weren't happy?

[1:20:00] » Yeah. >> I I mean, I get recumbent. My

[1:20:02] understanding you guys don't have the money. It's like but they come in here

[1:20:04] and do recommendations and I think in 24 >> 2023

[1:20:08] » was it 23 >> in 23 none of the board showed up to the

[1:20:13] hearing >> and they all they did was essentially

[1:20:17] speak their you know I want to word this they weren't happy

[1:20:22] with you guys because they would recommend something do all this work and

[1:20:24] then you guys would do what you needed to do

[1:20:26] » and that could happen again this year >> it would happen again this year

[1:20:28] » it will happen again >> that's why I said why waste the time

[1:20:31] just >> I'm writing

[1:20:35] Chairman [clears throat] Chairman Shay. >> Nay.

[1:20:39] » Uh, Supervisor Jones. >> Hi.

[1:20:41] » Supervisor Miller. >> I.

[1:20:43] » Supervisor Jorgensson. >> Hi.

[1:20:48] » Hi. >> So,

[1:20:51] that means this board's going to be the compensation board

[1:20:56] » and we're going to do our homework and we're going to show our work.

[1:20:59] » I like what you said, Andy. Sheriff's

[1:21:03] fine. I I think that's important.

[1:21:11] » Okay. We need a discussion decision on appointment to fill vacancy on civil

[1:21:17] service commission. >> Okay. With the passing of Frank Package

[1:21:21] checkek, um we have an opening on the civil service commission and I know that

[1:21:27] the requirements according to state code require um have have specific

[1:21:35] requirements on party affiliation and who appoints them. And Josh Goutah is

[1:21:42] currently on the Civil Service Commission and he was appointed by the

[1:21:46] Attorney's Office and he is a Republican and his term ends August 15, 2027.

[1:21:55] Kim Preston um is a Democrat that the board appointed

[1:22:00] and his term ends August 1531. um when they actually had sitting down

[1:22:09] for the civil service testing that was done in May,

[1:22:15] um John Dalton, who was previously on the

[1:22:20] board on the commission, stepped up to help with that testing because the

[1:22:25] others were not available. And John has expressed interest in

[1:22:31] remaining being returned to this board. And with the vacancy, I would make the

[1:22:36] motion to appoint John Dalton to fill the term that is left or fill the

[1:22:43] vacancy on the Civil Service Commission. Are you in agreement with that, Andy?

[1:22:48] » Yes. And I've spoken with John and he's willing to step up and help us. So,

[1:22:53] » is that [clears throat] your appointment, Andy, or the board?

[1:22:55] » The boards. I don't have an appointment. It's one for county attorney, two for

[1:22:58] board. >> The board.

[1:22:59] » Okay. Um,

[1:23:03] is he a Republican?

[1:23:06] » He's independent. So, we would have one of each party in the house. So,

[1:23:11] » I thought you said those other two were Democrats.

[1:23:14] » No, Josh is a Republican. >> Oh, okay.

[1:23:18] » And Kim did show up. Kim Preston did show up. Oh, good. May. Okay.

[1:23:22] » But of course, that was his first experience. And he I'm glad John helped

[1:23:25] us out because, you know, John's been doing it for many years. So,

[1:23:31] » got a motion by Miller to appoint John Dalton to the Civil Service Commission.

[1:23:38] I need a second. >> I'll second that. [clears throat]

[1:23:42] » All in favor signify by saying I >> I.

[1:23:46] » Those opposed. >> John will be good.

[1:23:51] » Thank you. >> Okay. Next up, Jasmine Elmore, director

[1:23:55] of human resources. discussion in our decision to approve and authorize the

[1:23:59] board to sign the contract with WIQ Spark for the employee wellness

[1:24:05] provider. >> Um,

[1:24:09] as a a note from my office, uh, we I did review the contract and we've reached

[1:24:16] out to Wix Spark with some concerns and those have not been resolved yet. So,

[1:24:21] I'm working with the um their legal team. I will be working with their legal

[1:24:27] team to get um some of issues resolved. >> So, we should table it today.

[1:24:32] » I I would request that. I'm because I didn't really get to dig into it until

[1:24:38] um Tuesday last week. I am a little behind on this one. So, I I would

[1:24:43] request that we table it so that we can get some on those issues fall. there

[1:24:47] there seem to be some inconsistencies between um there's there are there are

[1:24:52] kind of two contracts and the like price sheet and there are some inconsistencies

[1:24:58] among all three of those things I I don't think that we should be

[1:25:03] signing a contract that has that inconsistencies

[1:25:07] and I I believe that was they were inconsistent as given to us from the

[1:25:13] » question um I reviewed a little bit of Can

[1:25:19] can you help me or do you with where where's the cost?

[1:25:25] » So >> cost were 17,000 and I could only find

[1:25:28] like nine in the contract. I mean what's going on with that

[1:25:32] or did I miss something? >> That might be more of a Jasmine

[1:25:36] question. Um, I know that there's a separate like cost sheet which was um

[1:25:42] like the I think the order form is how it's laid out with some of the costs in

[1:25:47] it. Um, and then they did update the compensation part. It's on the the first

[1:25:54] page of the contract um near the bottom. Uh they updated that uh to show the

[1:26:02] correct fees I believe. >> Correct. what

[1:26:05] » the correct TVs. Um, which I don't have the newest one in front of me. My laptop

[1:26:09] died, so I don't I have the old contract with my notes on

[1:26:14] it, but not the the new version that we got sent,

[1:26:20] » but we're going to put it off till next week.

[1:26:22] » I would request that we do. I I'm hoping that um early this week I'll be able to

[1:26:27] get the the things that I needed resolve resolved with them. Um there are a few

[1:26:32] questions that I had because like I said there are some inconsistencies

[1:26:35] um that are not clear. I I'm assuming they have a form contract and they for

[1:26:41] everybody and they don't generally have um questions on it and so I think that

[1:26:46] it'll take a little bit of time to get this ironed out.

[1:26:48] » Okay. >> I I apologize uh for for any delay that

[1:26:52] I have caused on this one. >> Any other questions?

[1:26:56] Um, no. I think that didn't I see 9,000 in here somewhere soon.

[1:27:02] » 9,900. >> It's seven. It's 17. I mean, it was

[1:27:07] 6,000 last week. It's [snorts] 9,000 this week. I mean, I

[1:27:11] » So, so what you're what you're actually seeing, sorry. Um what you're actually

[1:27:16] seeing is um we got we got some original numbers for the um for the on-site

[1:27:21] screenings which would have been the 52 to 50 to 52 um per participant. So they

[1:27:27] overshot and gave us the highest number in case we wanted to have some of the

[1:27:30] on-site screening. So, because we're going to um essentially review um and go

[1:27:36] through I I mean, if somebody wants to go, you know, to the to their provider

[1:27:40] as opposed to us having the screenings here on site, um that's causing the

[1:27:45] difference in the cost. Um we also quoted them the approximate number of

[1:27:50] people who were on the plan. Now, um so that brought down the cost as well. Um

[1:27:55] originally we I think they used a number of like 500 participants which would

[1:27:59] have been I think a $130. Um but when you drop that number down um it

[1:28:06] increases their number per participant to like $160. So that's why you're

[1:28:10] seeing the difference in the discrepancy between what was originally quoted for

[1:28:14] like the 17,000. and they wanted to give us the highest possible number uh just

[1:28:19] in case depending on what we chose as a county um to what's closer to what's

[1:28:24] more realistically uh what we can take. >> Can you spell that out for us next week

[1:28:30] so we can understand that a little better?

[1:28:33] » Sure. >> All right. The the the one just real

[1:28:37] quick I I really can't follow any of this. the the plan the three-year plan

[1:28:43] as uh Spark quoted us was 17,868.

[1:28:50] A one-year cost is now from them 9,948. So if one would just do the math and

[1:28:58] figure that's a three, you're going to do that for three years, right? That's

[1:29:01] what they quoted here. That takes it to 30,000. That's that's $13,000 more than

[1:29:06] what they quoted here. I don't get it. dependent on the services that we decide

[1:29:12] to utilize. >> I'm a little confused with some of it. I

[1:29:16] know that there's the the per member rate is the $160 per member per month.

[1:29:23] And so I think that was the estimated $4,600.

[1:29:27] I know that there's an imple implementation fee for $1,500. And I

[1:29:32] understand that that's a onetime fee. >> Yes.

[1:29:34] » So those two would be part of it. That's $6,100.

[1:29:41] And then from what I understand from Jasmine,

[1:29:44] there is another fee that they charge per person per or for um the individual

[1:29:51] employees to have their um workups, their blood work done at the courthouse.

[1:29:58] It was my understanding we weren't going to do that for most people because with

[1:30:02] our prior program we you know most people went to their doctor got their

[1:30:07] screening at their doctor's office and then that is wrapped up into their like

[1:30:10] annual physical fee and so I don't see that

[1:30:17] on this sheet anywhere and so that I think is leading to some of the

[1:30:21] confusion. >> Do we have time this week?

[1:30:26] » Well, I'm sorry. Is that right? >> You will have time this week.

[1:30:28] » Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. >> Okay.

[1:30:30] » And I I think >> then get it spelled out for us a little

[1:30:33] clearer for us if you would. >> All right. Thank you. Next up, committee

[1:30:38] appointments. Jeff, >> uh I have not, but I was at the uh uh

[1:30:43] days yesterday.

[1:30:48] Appreciated

[1:30:56] had some appointments with uh unleash council bluffs

[1:31:03] the uh loss hills

[1:31:08] um I was gone for the weekend so that was

[1:31:14] it

[1:31:18] » I attended the east pot soil and water tour bus tour and it was

[1:31:25] it was very informative and eye opening. I enjoyed it very much. Um I had

[1:31:31] pancakes at Botna Bend on Saturday morning and I got a phone call at 4:00

[1:31:38] on Friday afternoon to let us know that our occupational health

[1:31:44] » provider had quit providing effective immediately.

[1:31:50] And that's really concerning and I'm sure it'll be an agenda item for next

[1:31:54] week.

[1:31:58] » Okay. Okay. We're going to go into some study sessions here.

[1:32:05] Um, we take a break for a minute.

[1:32:16] [clears throat]

[1:38:11] a portionment of lime kiln per road improvement policy. Andy,

[1:38:16] » yes. So,

[1:38:21] » in the five-year program, we've had the last this fiscal year, we have

[1:38:26] identified reconfiguring limekilm as it ties into Old Lincoln Highway, and

[1:38:32] there's a safety concern there. We've had crashes there and years ago,

[1:38:36] residents came to the county and said, "We want Limekil seal coated." And the

[1:38:42] county said, "We can't seal coat it because this intersection is unsafe. We

[1:38:46] need to get the tie in to Old Lincoln Highway reconfigured. Currently, it ties

[1:38:51] in at a a gnarly Y and we're going to the hope was to reconfigure it to tee

[1:38:56] into Old Lincoln Highway. Um and then we can seal code limekill. We have met with

[1:39:02] land owners. John met with land owners. I've met with land owners. We finally

[1:39:06] are in agreement with the land owners to um acquire a little bit of two parcels

[1:39:13] and tie in lime retie in Limekill into Old

[1:39:17] Lincoln Highway so it's safer, better sight distance. Um that paperwork has

[1:39:24] started. We haven't actually acquired the land yet, but we're in we've had

[1:39:28] discussions and we're in agreement um with the land owners. So the next

[1:39:33] step is if we want to seal coat lime kill road next calendar year. So

[1:39:40] calendar 2027 um most likely it'll be paid for out of

[1:39:44] my fiscal 28 not fiscal 27 but calendar year 27.

[1:39:50] Um we need to get this petition to the residents and I need to get signatures

[1:39:56] back from the residents by October 1st according to county code or sorry state

[1:39:59] code and county um policy. In order for a seal code petition to be

[1:40:05] approved for the next year, it needs to be signed by October 1st, the prior

[1:40:10] year. So, I'm I should have had my ducks in a

[1:40:14] little bit better. Um, in order to seal coat lime kiln in calendar year 2027,

[1:40:19] we need to get signatures by the residents by October 1st of this year.

[1:40:24] So, that gives us three weeks basically. So, I wanted to bring the draft um

[1:40:32] petition to you all so that we are in agreement before I push that out to the

[1:40:37] the residents and it should be in the your packets. But basically,

[1:40:44] I know you should have brought handouts, but I want your thoughts on three items.

[1:40:51] one, what kind of interest rate should we set for this petition? Two, how costs

[1:40:57] should be assessed per parcel? And three, is my parcel map accurate? Um, I

[1:41:04] think in past petitions, parcels were included or excluded, and I want to make

[1:41:10] sure we're all on the same page so that when it gets pushed out to the public,

[1:41:13] there aren't residents that say, "Hey, my parcel is included and it shouldn't

[1:41:17] be." Or vice versa. If you come off the road and your access is from that road,

[1:41:22] you're on the petition. >> So, that is how I proceeded with that.

[1:41:26] If you have a driveway on Limekill or if you own a pri if you have access through

[1:41:30] a private driveway, uh, which would be Imperial Lane, um, then I include an

[1:41:36] Imperial Lane as well. The code I believe says that a half mile

[1:41:42] on either side of the road. Anybody who owns property, if it's a farm and

[1:41:49] doesn't have a an entrance

[1:41:53] off of Limekill on that farm is still part of

[1:41:58] the petition. Correct. You don't have to have a driveway.

[1:42:04] Correct. And it's It's your it's the resident's

[1:42:11] responsibility to get that petition signed, not yours. Correct. Yeah. I will

[1:42:17] not be out there doornocking. It's the residents will run with the petition and

[1:42:21] if they get signatures, I just want to make sure that we are of the same

[1:42:24] accord. Um if the residents get the signatures, so it's not on me, it's not

[1:42:29] on you as a board to go get the signatures. It is on the residents along

[1:42:33] Lime. Um, I've identified so and going to the code that Tim referenced, it's

[1:42:39] state code section 311.2. Um, you can't include a parcel. I'll

[1:42:46] just read it. Any such secondary road assessment district shall be not more

[1:42:50] than one half mile wide on either side of the road or roads to be improved by

[1:42:54] said district. So up to a half mile, can't go past that. Um,

[1:43:00] so I excluded parcels on Hillsboro North. Um, because that's a separate

[1:43:06] road. >> Did you get that map, please?

[1:43:10] » Matthew

[1:43:14] weird. >> So Stevie is going to put it up on the

[1:43:17] screen as well. >> I'm gonna give it a shot.

[1:43:20] » That would be helpful. We're all the same thing.

[1:43:24] » I I see the list of names, but I don't see the map.

[1:43:28] Maybe as I got done two blank pages while

[1:43:31] » that's what I said. It is loading weird and I had struggled with it all weekend.

[1:43:36] » So I I finally took the board's advice and worked with GIS. So GIS provided a

[1:43:41] really good map and that's what this uh so Steve is going to be pulling up a

[1:43:46] parcel map. It follows L road. That's why I have three blank spaces.

[1:43:56] » Lined up beautifully. >> We have it sufficient.

[1:43:59] » Stretch it as big as you can. >> Joslyn Avenue

[1:44:05] 29's over here. Um, all these Shelberg parcels for Midwest products have a

[1:44:11] driveway right here. None of these parcels

[1:44:15] go to Joslin and they're within the half mile. So that's why I included them.

[1:44:20] » And he also said he would participate. >> I have not talked with her.

[1:44:26] » I said I did. >> And they're going to run their rock

[1:44:30] trucks down. >> No, we passed an ordinance

[1:44:34] for Limekill that there can be no rock trucks up and down there.

[1:44:39] » [clears throat] >> So, as far as I'm concerned, that

[1:44:41] ordinance should continue to stay in effect. We should not have rock trucks.

[1:44:44] » I think we passed it. Was it four or five years ago, Tim? I

[1:44:49] » I don't recall that. I mean, >> I remember we, you know, I think John

[1:44:54] put something up there says no rock trucks. And the guy says, "Well, I'm not

[1:44:59] hauling rock. I'm hauling dirt. It's a dirt truck."

[1:45:02] » Yeah. Well, >> so I don't remember. may be something we

[1:45:05] need to look into because I don't remember if the ordinance referenced at

[1:45:08] the road or gravel road but

[1:45:14] » we will have time to go that >> so I mentioned Imperial Lane I'll just

[1:45:20] go down so we're on sheet two of your handout Imperial Lane is a private road

[1:45:25] the city or the county does not maintain Imperial Road and therefore

[1:45:31] that is why I included parcel of wat they have to use a private driveway. I

[1:45:36] did not include a Hillsboro Lane North um parcels on that because

[1:45:42] it is a public county maintain road. Yes, it ties into Lfield and that's the

[1:45:46] only way out. Um but I didn't think that these people should

[1:45:51] be on the hook for improving a road that they that their house doesn't abide.

[1:45:58] If the board would like me to include those, I can.

[1:46:02] But I excluded those because it's a public and

[1:46:07] it's not >> I think that's the right thing because I

[1:46:09] think they want to bring a petition and you talked about it not being 22 foot

[1:46:15] wide. >> So we line is a fairly easy seal coat

[1:46:19] process. Basically um toughen up the soil and then add seal coat on top.

[1:46:25] Hillsboro, we will have to widen the road, um add ditches. It'll be a much

[1:46:32] more expensive process and so Hillsboro residents are excluded because they're

[1:46:37] not getting direct benefit.

[1:46:41] So with that and like this parcel right here, they have a driveway over here. So

[1:46:47] I excluded them and you can scroll down to the last sheet.

[1:46:58] There's really nothing else from us, Andy.

[1:47:01] » So, I want a rough idea of or your blessing to say, is this parcel map

[1:47:07] sufficient? Is there any glaring, hey, you forgot to include this piece?

[1:47:13] Andy added, and again, I would say this piece is owned by one of these two

[1:47:18] property owners and not one of these. So, I thought this piece

[1:47:23] comes off. Yeah. >> So, anywhere you look, I think I

[1:47:27] excluded this piece because they have a driveway on Hillsboro Lane North. So,

[1:47:32] » I did not include everybody within the half mile. State code says you can

[1:47:36] include everybody within a half a mile. Um,

[1:47:40] so >> can you bring that map down to the

[1:47:43] entrance of the highway? >> Yeah, it's a good call.

[1:47:46] » Do you show that? >> So, that I did not show that actual

[1:47:50] reconfiguration. We're straightening this S-curve out and then tying in

[1:47:55] roughly right here. So, we're acquiring

[1:48:00] um some of her parcel and her parcel. >> And how are we paying for that?

[1:48:06] » That'll come out of secondary roads. Um that's in the five-year program or in

[1:48:11] this fiscal year of the five-year program is to acquire right away and

[1:48:14] then do some regrading. It's pretty steep through here. There's some large

[1:48:20] embankments that we're going to cut down to allow for better sight distance these

[1:48:23] driveways to for those residents to get on limekilm.

[1:48:27] » There is a couple sharp curves there and buses during the winter have slid off

[1:48:34] into ditches with children in them and it's just it's always a mess there.

[1:48:40] » What are you going to do with your right away?

[1:48:44] So are you saying on this piece we get >> the

[1:48:49] I would leave that up to the board but one thought is we sell it to this

[1:48:55] partial owner this partial owner we allow this partial owner too

[1:48:58] » even even Mike Wick or uh Sandberg >> yeah am I allowed to say names is that

[1:49:05] okay >> yeah that's all I'm

[1:49:07] » so we would either sell it to the sandbergs sell it to the let Joan Elman

[1:49:14] maintain ownership or the county could retain ownership of it. I think it is

[1:49:19] worthwhile to sell to probably Sandberg's or to to

[1:49:25] » if we do offer it for sale to

[1:49:30] Sandbergs. Do we ask Miss Olman if she's okay with that?

[1:49:36] » I think we have to put it up for like public hearing.

[1:49:40] » Okay. if we're going to sell the property.

[1:49:43] » I I can't off top my head, but I I feel like

[1:49:46] » I say we get the project going first, then worry about that.

[1:49:50] » Yeah. >> Yeah. I think that's a secondary issue.

[1:49:52] So, >> I think it would be wise for the county

[1:49:54] to not maintain that right of way if you're not using it for road anymore

[1:49:59] because we've run into that problem a few times where the county has some

[1:50:02] weird right ofway parcels that we have to maintain and we don't need them or

[1:50:09] want them. Yes,

[1:50:13] I should have started this conversation by saying if we don't get 75% of the

[1:50:16] signatures, this is is all kind of a muga point until next year anyways, but

[1:50:21] I think it's worth all us all being on the same page if we do get the

[1:50:25] signatures. >> Andy, if you you're still going to do

[1:50:28] the end piece no matter what. >> Correct. This is happening regardless of

[1:50:33] seal code. >> Is it going to tee up with Holly Lane?

[1:50:38] So, we initially wanted it to. It will not um we would have the house it's we'd

[1:50:45] have to move the house. Oh, >> so we would were not able to get it to

[1:50:49] to we wanted it to, but no, we're not able to.

[1:50:54] » My sixth grade teacher. >> So, that was question one. Is there And

[1:50:59] again, we don't have to decide. This is a study session. You don't have to

[1:51:02] decide completely today, but I'd like to push this out to the requesting

[1:51:06] residents. So, if there's any parcels that you're

[1:51:10] like, hey, why isn't this added or can we add this? Let me know. The second

[1:51:14] question is on the interest rate that we should set. So, for the last seal code

[1:51:20] petition that was approved, we set a 0% interest rate. Um, according to state

[1:51:24] code, I think we can set up to a nine or 14%.

[1:51:28] I'm fine with any. I think it either makes sense to do zero or what we could

[1:51:33] get in the market. And so Steve and I talked and that's about 4% is what the

[1:51:37] county borrows money at. Sorry. So if we want to get a flat return for our money,

[1:51:44] I'd say we do a 4% interest rate um amortized over the the 10-year period.

[1:51:50] But does the board have a preference? The last one we did was zero. So maybe

[1:51:54] it makes sense that >> I think for the taxpayers, I think it

[1:51:56] ought to be 4%. They really do. I don't think the zero's

[1:52:04] » I think it's better for >> the reason I I don't know why why the

[1:52:09] nobody was on that board but me and you Brian that made that call. Well, Jeff

[1:52:15] and Susan came in at the very last part of it. That that's the only one we've

[1:52:20] ever done and that was a total disaster from the beginning to the end.

[1:52:27] And um

[1:52:32] » what's the cost of a project roughly? I'm sorry.

[1:52:35] » So it is a 7030 split. The total cost upfront cost $900,000. I would have to

[1:52:42] come at it. Secondary roads would pay the upfront cost and then secondary

[1:52:45] roads would get reimbursed over a 10-year period 70% of that. So overall

[1:52:51] the county would be on the hook 100 minus 70. So, we'd be on hook 30%. Which

[1:52:55] is roughly $270,000.

[1:52:59] » Well, you're on the hook for >> We're on the hook for 9

[1:53:01] » 900,000 >> up front.

[1:53:03] » Up front. >> Correct.

[1:53:05] » But do you have a ring leader that's going to run this petition?

[1:53:08] » So, I've been talking to the Sandbergs and yeah, give it to them. They run with

[1:53:13] it. And then >> we got we got two two others that will

[1:53:17] take it on too. So, whatever we got to do. Um,

[1:53:22] and you know, we've talked about improving roads for homes and stuff, and

[1:53:27] there's several along there.

[1:53:32] I've heard up to 16 that could possibly go in over time.

[1:53:40] » Yeah, I think that there's opportunity with some of these larger parcels, but I

[1:53:46] have not discussion. That's up to the residents.

[1:53:52] So, so everybody okay? I'm going to include 4%

[1:53:56] on the the document I give to the residents. And again, if they voted

[1:54:01] down, that's their prerogative. Um, and then the last question is, how do we

[1:54:06] want to assess the increase to their taxes? So, they're on the hook for 70%

[1:54:12] of the increase. Um, there's basically three options that I laid out. Do we do

[1:54:16] it proportionally based off of property value? So say this person's property

[1:54:22] value is $700,000. So they'd pay a higher

[1:54:26] overall cost. And say this person's property is $1,000 assessed value. So

[1:54:31] they'd pay pennies extra a year in their property tax. Um that's one option.

[1:54:37] Another option is we divide the cost evenly amongst all residents. So, if

[1:54:43] they're on the hook for $700,000, then we'd subdivide it equally. Each

[1:54:48] parcel would pay the exact same amount. Um, I think that there's a handful of

[1:54:53] parcels that are only $200 assessed value. I think that one's one of them.

[1:54:58] And then there's one on the first sheet. But if we assess it evenly across

[1:55:04] everybody, I think that that really inhibits some of the residents from

[1:55:09] wanting to sign off. So, say their assessed value is $200, but they're on

[1:55:14] the hook for a $700 a year increase, they

[1:55:19] would almost immediately say no. Whereas, if it's a $200 value, but

[1:55:24] they're assessed proportionally. They'd be on the hook for a buck or two

[1:55:28] increase a year. Um, >> I'd say we do it proportionately.

[1:55:32] » Is that a buildable lot? >> I don't think it is, Tim.

[1:55:37] » I don't know. >> I don't. It needs to be at least two

[1:55:40] acres. So, I don't believe so. Let's Stevie, can you scroll? Oh, 11. It's

[1:55:45] only one acre. So, no, it's not buildable, but I believe they own Yeah,

[1:55:51] they can't. That can't That's not even buildable.

[1:55:55] » Yeah, they could share a well, which [clears throat] turns into a mess.

[1:56:02] Well, I don't think it's fair that if somebody

[1:56:10] is a millionaire and has a $700,000 house,

[1:56:16] um, pays

[1:56:20] I don't know, let's just call it $500 a year.

[1:56:24] And the next door neighbor has a $150,000 house

[1:56:31] and he only pays $100 a year. They're both getting the

[1:56:36] same benefit regardless of this the cost of their

[1:56:42] home or how much money they make or how much money they have. I think when the

[1:56:47] board we we this it's important for Annie to have that

[1:56:51] information on which way the board wants to go.

[1:56:56] whether these people even sign a petition, but um I don't

[1:57:04] uh in my opinion, property tax is the worst tax there is because it's very

[1:57:08] unfair for everybody. U you just you pay based on the on the

[1:57:14] value of your home, not for the services you get, but the value of your home

[1:57:18] because we all get the same service. somebody lives in a more expensive

[1:57:22] house, you just pay more for it. Is that fair?

[1:57:27] So, if we we put them there's I don't know how many lots there

[1:57:33] are, how many parcels, but if if it cost uh let's see, it's 30%. I don't have

[1:57:39] that in front of me. What is it? 560,000 that the residents have to pay. That was

[1:57:44] darn close here.

[1:57:51] » I didn't scroll down. >> We have a mixture, don't we? We've got

[1:57:55] some corporate land, we've got some farmland, and we got some residential

[1:58:01] land. >> Correct. And so the the third

[1:58:04] alternative is we assess it depending on the type of property that is there. And

[1:58:11] that could get subjective or >> it is subjective. So

[1:58:17] » there's not a lot of farmland back there. It it is on paper, but not many

[1:58:24] people farm back in there. I think we do it proportionately because

[1:58:31] » it truly for someone to pay the same as someone who's got a $700,000 house as a

[1:58:38] $150,000 house. I think that's unfair, too. I really do. I think the only way

[1:58:45] to get these petitions through is to do it proportionately and let let that road

[1:58:54] uh come to f fruition. It needs to there would be possibly up to 16 more homes

[1:59:02] that road that there's people that are you can't

[1:59:06] you can't base >> I'm not that uh you're [clears throat]

[1:59:11] it's part of your opinion. I mean, whatever this board is going to put

[1:59:14] together, I mean, it needs to be something that can withstand the next

[1:59:18] project and the next project and the next board and

[1:59:22] » which we done proportionately last time, >> which nobody agreed to.

[1:59:28] » I I thought it was the way to go.

[1:59:32] » I I don't think any way you do it is going to be fair because it's not

[1:59:36] there's no way to be completely fair on something like this. Um, I think there

[1:59:41] there are ways that are slightly more equitable than others. Um, I think all

[1:59:47] three of the the methods that Annie's presented have some matter of equity in

[1:59:53] them. So, it's up to the board, but I don't think

[1:59:58] I don't think anybody's going to say it's fair for any of them. I mean, I you

[2:00:03] can't we don't really have a great method to get it exactly truly fair for

[2:00:08] these people. I want the project to go through. So my

[2:00:12] my votes proportionate and 0%. >> Proportionate. Explain what you mean by

[2:00:19] that. >> The proportionate taxation of the person

[2:00:23] » based on assessed value. Yes. >> Yeah. And Andy's got a column on here.

[2:00:28] » So yeah, proportionally would be against the 2026 assess value.

[2:00:33] » So the Kemps their assessed value it's 253,000.

[2:00:39] at a 4% interest rate over a 10-year

[2:00:43] amortization, they'd have an additional 976,000,

[2:00:47] sorry, $976 added to their property tax bill

[2:00:53] » per year. >> Per year.

[2:00:56] You need to scroll down. Would you scroll down on that just a little bit

[2:00:59] for me and find uh a couple of couple of parcels where it's

[2:01:05] land only? If you look at the property tax,

[2:01:11] » yeah, like this one, 12 acres assessed at $15,000.

[2:01:16] If we did it um based off of what if we did it based off of just

[2:01:22] their acres. >> What's the name? What's the name

[2:01:24] [clears throat] on that? >> Patricia D.

[2:01:27] » I don't care about that one. >> Uh

[2:01:32] we could do Carl. They have 36 acres. >> Duplicate names. Is there one with

[2:01:37] duplicate names? >> Joplain's on here. David. Okay. What

[2:01:43] does he got? >> I mean, he has some that are four

[2:01:46] tankers for $4,000. >> So, he's right up against

[2:01:52] another one. >> Okay. So, if he would he would he be

[2:01:57] paying on both of those parcels? >> Yes.

[2:02:01] » Yeah. So, >> so does he get two votes? So he would

[2:02:03] get two votes is how I would propose it to the board.

[2:02:07] » Um and just so everybody's aware, there's a hundred parcels that I've

[2:02:10] identified. So it's fairly easy. >> So he would sign the petition twice,

[2:02:16] three times, four times. >> And he actually owns, I think, seven

[2:02:19] total parcels. >> And then he's got a sister there, too.

[2:02:22] And I can't remember her name. >> Um that means he'll carry the vote all

[2:02:26] by himself.

[2:02:29] » He'll carry the vote all by himself. He'll make this determination for us.

[2:02:33] » He could easily. Yeah. >> Yeah.

[2:02:36] » Cuz how many do we need? 75%. >> So the Yep. The county's um Yeah.

[2:02:42] minimum of 75% sign the petition for it to get

[2:02:46] approved.

[2:02:49] So I think one of the last petitions we only had just over 50% and so those have

[2:02:54] been revised to a 75% threshold to get approved.

[2:03:02] I'm comfortable. I would recommend proportionally.

[2:03:08] » There's no way to be equitable, but >> I'm with you. I think that's the way to

[2:03:12] go for us.

[2:03:15] » And the other option is I provide basically this whole thing to to the

[2:03:21] petitioners and then they decide evenly based off of acreage or proportionally.

[2:03:26] But >> Tim Tim, [clears throat] you said the

[2:03:28] last time this was this happened, it was a disaster.

[2:03:31] This was before Susan and I were what made it a disaster. Can you explain a

[2:03:37] little bit? >> You want me to go? We really don't have

[2:03:40] time to go back into that. >> A lot of issues.

[2:03:43] » There was It was It was terrible. >> Primary.

[2:03:48] » People were splitting land to get more votes.

[2:03:51] » I think that we've developed a little simpler process. Um I think part of the

[2:03:56] problem was our threshold was lower so that there was a lot more discourse

[2:04:01] amongst the land owners. Putting the threshold up at 75%

[2:04:06] gets you a lot more buy in from the individuals who are going to be

[2:04:10] involved. So I think that helped. Um I I think that there were there were

[2:04:15] lots of inconsistencies in the process because we didn't really have a laid out

[2:04:18] process and now we do. So I think it should be a little smoother. Yeah,

[2:04:23] » the petitioner was a problem. The petitioner wanted to decide what parcels

[2:04:28] were in and which ones were out. >> Yeah,

[2:04:30] » it was it was just there was nothing. >> No, they're either all in or they're all

[2:04:33] out. >> It was just there's nothing right about

[2:04:36] any of it. >> You got a good basis to start with.

[2:04:40] » We don't have a basis. S we're working on the basis. Unfortunately,

[2:04:44] » I thought you were talking about the previous Let's go. I'm saying Andy has

[2:04:50] learned from that and what he's presenting here kind of speaks to all of

[2:04:55] those concerns. >> Do we need to determine the

[2:05:00] taxation part of it before the petition goes to the people?

[2:05:06] » That's what he's got up there in the right hand column. talked to the

[2:05:10] treasures department and they said they didn't need anything until

[2:05:14] it's we get board approval to move forward with it. So that would be after

[2:05:19] we get signatures, I come to the board and say, "Hey, we got 80% by hand. Is

[2:05:24] the board comfortable moving forward with that?" And then at that time, the

[2:05:27] board would vote yes, we're interested. >> We should give them full disclosure

[2:05:31] before they vote, though. >> I think it would be hard to give them.

[2:05:34] » You don't have this, do you? >> They they need a number. Like if I were

[2:05:40] » right here, isn't that on there? >> Yeah.

[2:05:43] » I I would want to know what >> I've got that sheet right here.

[2:05:46] » Yeah. It puts it proportionately. >> So I would hand

[2:05:51] » or zero. >> Yeah.

[2:05:55] » I mean it has to be on there when they we sign. They don't want to sign not

[2:06:00] knowing what they're going to pay every year.

[2:06:03] » We're going to make people mad no matter what. My vote is proportionate 0%.

[2:06:08] » I'm with you Keith. >> I'll go along with that.

[2:06:12] Sounds good. Mr. Wman, what do you think?

[2:06:18] We're not going to make people happy no matter what. And it may not pass.

[2:06:23] » Well, the the only thing I would I would say

[2:06:28] is that Andy is going to spend,

[2:06:34] let's just call it a million dollars, and it's going to take him 10 years to

[2:06:39] get paid back.

[2:06:42] And that

[2:06:46] 100 just conversationwise at $100,000 a

[2:06:52] year. Uh 4%

[2:06:56] » 4,000 a year. >> I think that uh

[2:07:02] we're going to which we have to we have to front the money.

[2:07:08] We should we probably should have some sort of a return,

[2:07:12] » right? But it's $4,000 a year. We want to do the project anyway. It may hinge

[2:07:17] on the project for being voted upon and it's economic development if we get 16

[2:07:23] more houses on this. >> Well, the residents want to do the road

[2:07:29] some. >> Yeah, it may be not enough.

[2:07:32] » We may not get 75. >> We may not get it. the the only thing

[2:07:36] that I shouldn't say the only thing because

[2:07:40] um I think the major thing that needs to happen here is we need to straighten the

[2:07:44] road. If we straighten the road, I'm good with that. Whether it gets seal

[2:07:51] coated or it doesn't, I don't care. But they care that they brought the bike,

[2:07:56] » they brought the petition to us. the road straight city,

[2:08:01] » right? >> And the biggest return on investment for

[2:08:03] us will be the improved property values from them having paved roadways. Their

[2:08:09] home valuations are going to increase >> and the possibility of 16 more houses.

[2:08:14] » Jim, that 205th Street since it's been sealed, there's a lot of

[2:08:20] new homes on that. Lots. >> A lot of poor people live on that road.

[2:08:26] » [clears throat] >> Well, but [laughter]

[2:08:31] just one, [clears throat] but it's uh I think that's re been a

[2:08:37] good return for us. And the

[2:08:40] » and that was that was done in the '9s. >> I I get it. But it really has come

[2:08:46] about. I think this will too. And I'm not banking on that or anything, but I

[2:08:53] do think these people have been wanting this for 30 years since since 2005th

[2:08:59] Street was and uh Badger Avenue was seal coated and Mud Hollow. Mud Hollow has

[2:09:07] really come alive after that, too. There's a lot of valuation there.

[2:09:13] » We can go back and forth all day. Let's just come up with an idea. We're looking

[2:09:16] to grow this county and I think the roads are key to

[2:09:21] getting these getting our county to grow.

[2:09:24] » Well, it looks like a consensus is no no interest and and uh and

[2:09:31] proportionally. >> I can go either way on the interest, but

[2:09:35] I do I do want to see the >> have a return.

[2:09:39] » Okay, I'll go 4% then. I [clears throat] I uh

[2:09:44] » I I think $4,000 a year or whatever it is, you know,

[2:09:50] I think it ain't going to matter much. You get a credit card, it's what? 30% or

[2:09:56] 25 or whatever it is.

[2:10:03] » Yeah. >> Most prudent people don't.

[2:10:09] » Susan, please calibrate it. You okay with 4% proportion?

[2:10:15] » Yeah, I can live with it. >> I'm always looking for the middle worst.

[2:10:23] » You know what? He's already put I agree with Tim. It's We need a little bit of

[2:10:28] return. >> Be careful.

[2:10:33] » Okay, I'll stop. Okay, we have >> Tim. I got enough. I've used enough case

[2:10:36] time. >> You okay with that?

[2:10:39] I um you know >> 4%

[2:10:42] » seems to be okay with it. He's going to spend a million dollars

[2:10:46] » and he's going to get >> $100,000 a year back in property tax

[2:10:51] from that which he virtually pays for

[2:10:57] maintenance on a couple of road graders. That's it.

[2:11:00] » And he has to front a million dollars.

[2:11:05] And good. And thankfully that'll be out of FY28's budget, so it give me a little

[2:11:09] bit of time, but that is a valid concern.

[2:11:12] » Okay. All right. You got our nod.

[2:11:15] » Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, Andy.

[2:11:18] » And Kristen, you'll look at the ordinance about the gravel trucks and

[2:11:22] trucks. >> Well, I thought we passed one.

[2:11:25] » I think there is an ordinance out there. I don't know what it says or how it's

[2:11:30] worded. I before this is done. >> No material hauling

[2:11:35] trucks to use the road. >> That's the sec that's the second or

[2:11:41] third sign that's been up there though. The first sign that went up was said no

[2:11:45] rock >> no rock trucks and people also passed

[2:11:48] some legislation between when we did the ordinance and now that might affect it a

[2:11:53] little bit because there there are some >> she'll look into it. John and I talked

[2:11:57] about this when I first started here because I'm filming was coming up then

[2:12:02] and so this was kind of on Marator already. Um, but I'll look into it and

[2:12:07] see I if we are able to and we need to update our ordinance, then we can do

[2:12:11] that once this has been. >> We I would like for

[2:12:16] » it's on the list >> for the board to

[2:12:19] either put an ordinance or a policy or procedure together

[2:12:24] that spells out how we're how we do this. I I don't think it should be a

[2:12:30] » case by case scenario. >> I don't I think it should

[2:12:33] » I think you're right. You're right. So, we have a really nicely written policy.

[2:12:36] I think maybe did you bring that in front of the board

[2:12:39] back in the spring or was that >> Yeah. Yeah.

[2:12:41] » in April. >> Um I don't think that the the percentage

[2:12:46] was included in there and I don't think that the the way that we assess was

[2:12:50] included because we wanted to leave it up to the board. So, if the board wants

[2:12:53] to update that policy with those two >> pieces of information, I think that's

[2:12:58] appropriate. I mean, I I if you're going to have a interest rate, I wouldn't give

[2:13:03] it a percent interest rate. I think I would do like a market to

[2:13:09] » tie it to the market. >> Yeah. 2 to 10%.

[2:13:12] » I think right now it's zero. >> But wouldn't we set the percentage when

[2:13:18] we come in? I mean, look at the Tim, we remember years ago when it was 18%.

[2:13:26] You know, >> yeah,

[2:13:27] » I think that's appropriate. And so the current funds rate is 4% basically.

[2:13:30] » That's our most recent coupon rate for the bond issuance was that 4%.

[2:13:36] » So I think that makes sense. >> Andy, thank you.

[2:13:39] » Yeah, thank you for your time. >> When will you get the petition to them?

[2:13:43] » I got to get a little bit more in writing and then yeah, I'll send it out

[2:13:48] tomorrow or this week. Yeah, this week for sure. [clears throat]

[2:13:53] » I'm sorry. Can I add one more thing here?

[2:13:55] » Yes. Did you notify everybody on Amarak?

[2:14:03] I have all the I haven't sent it out, but I have all the addresses. I just

[2:14:07] need to get them added >> uh to letters and sent out. So, we are

[2:14:13] notifying all the Tamarak residents. Um that construction is going to start

[2:14:18] Monday. >> It's starting next Monday,

[2:14:21] » the 14th. >> That is Yeah, it is the last we got

[2:14:25] contractor. So, >> well, they're more than ready. I can

[2:14:29] tell you. Yeah. >> Do what you can to get those out today,

[2:14:32] tomorrow at the latest so they can get that. Yeah.

[2:14:35] » And maybe put a couple signs out there. Construction.

[2:14:39] » Yeah. That is priority number one. >> Send it to the

[2:14:41] » They'll spread it amongst themselves. >> Y please remember to do that. You make

[2:14:46] the board look bad when all of a sudden the road gets shut down. There's flagmen

[2:14:50] out there and and nobody knows anything about it. And remember Andy, we can make

[2:14:56] ourselves look bad pretty easy. So [laughter]

[2:14:59] » I will try to keep you guys out of the >> social media.

[2:15:02] » And they had it closed down today for working on.

[2:15:07] Yes. >> Okay.

[2:15:09] » Yeah. City of Minton did that. >> Thanks, Andy. Tate, you're up next.

[2:15:12] [clears throat]

[2:15:15] It's going. I sat here long enough. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. I didn't think it was

[2:15:18] going to be

[2:15:21] » um

[2:15:27] I'm getting fixed because I think Lindsette

[2:15:33] second

[2:15:42] county >> this is at pace correct

[2:15:46] » yes and So, if you're familiar with that space on the main floor when you walk in

[2:15:50] to the left, they do receptions and other um notary and things like that.

[2:15:57] And that's where we will be. So, not in the theater space to the right. So, uh,

[2:16:03] the main objective for today's final study session, because it's officially

[2:16:08] next Monday, so we can't have a study study session about it next week, is to

[2:16:14] make sure that we have a good flow um, and that we're not kind of not

[2:16:19] necessarily stepping on each other's toes, but that we're not repeating

[2:16:23] information that's being covered in another section and that, um, it's

[2:16:27] fitting into the most logical places. Um, I think all of you in the various

[2:16:34] pieces that you've shared with me, whether it's through notes or kind of

[2:16:39] your speaker portions or through actual slide outlines,

[2:16:44] um, have a pretty solid idea of what you want to speak about, but I just want to

[2:16:48] make sure that um, we're not all hitting on the same few things and that it looks

[2:16:54] like we all actually had a conversation together.

[2:16:57] » Have you seen overlap with our slides? I do feel like there's a little bit of

[2:17:01] overlap on a couple of topics. Um, and so I just want to make sure we're

[2:17:04] putting those in the most logical buckets, I guess. And some of it I think

[2:17:09] is okay. Um, for my computer's going to die. Um,

[2:17:15] but some of it I think we want to be a little bit more intentional about where

[2:17:18] we speak to things. So, um, Brian shared with me some of his notes about

[2:17:24] preparing for growth. And Brian, I don't you don't need to read through it all

[2:17:29] right now, but um do you have your notes with you by chance?

[2:17:34] » My written notes, >> the printed out ones that you showed me

[2:17:37] this morning? >> I do.

[2:17:38] » Okay. Can you kind of share with the group some of the the main kind of

[2:17:42] highle things that you want to speak to since I don't have any of that in the

[2:17:45] slides yet?

[2:17:50] And just as a reminder for everybody, Brian,

[2:17:52] » I go into a deal about roads and they're the backbone of our economy and their

[2:17:56] our county. Um

[2:18:00] they connect families to schools, jobs, farmers, businesses, markets,

[2:18:07] residents are major. Then I go into major

[2:18:11] subdivisions, minor subdivisions, which of course

[2:18:15] would be what we were just talking about kind of

[2:18:18] if there was more housing put on some of these roads.

[2:18:23] Matt Wyatt and I looked over some of that line kill and the way it kind of

[2:18:28] angles allows some to put two or three homes on properties in the future and

[2:18:35] there are people looking for that. um strong planning

[2:18:41] uh planning zoning department uh momentum are our subdivisions

[2:18:49] that are common Legacy Ridge and Pioneer Meadows

[2:18:53] and Bob Ming's lot. Do you remember the name

[2:18:58] of his >> Stony Brook?

[2:19:00] » Stony Brook. >> Two or three.

[2:19:06] He's got 12 out there. >> No, I meant Stony Brook has got one

[2:19:11] edition or >> Oh, this is second,

[2:19:14] » but Stony Brook two has new 12 and like 10 of them are

[2:19:21] some are being built and there's a handful of them that are

[2:19:26] built. I can't remember the guy's name over there on McFersonson east of the

[2:19:32] airport. >> Peterson.

[2:19:34] » Peterson.

[2:19:38] What's the name of that project? Do you remember?

[2:19:41] Peterson's project. >> I don't recall.

[2:19:45] » And it was a 10 home. >> And it has a stony brook in its

[2:19:50] driveway, too. >> Stony

[2:19:56] Haven. >> Not bitter about that.

[2:20:01] » Uh then I go into our little towns a little bit. what we helped and one thing

[2:20:07] I needed help was didn't we we helped Crescent Trainer and didn't we help

[2:20:12] Carter Lake with the project over there with ARPA funds?

[2:20:17] » I sent a list to uh

[2:20:22] Jeff, do you have that email list that I sent to you that had all the different

[2:20:28] small towns where you had helped? get I mean this my laptop here now is is

[2:20:34] battery's dead. All right. I might be able to find it on my phone. Okay.

[2:20:38] » Then I want to go into how the schools because each of our schools out in the

[2:20:44] county, Trainer, AOKA,

[2:20:48] Oakland, uh, Tri Center and Underwood attract a lot of people. and I go into

[2:20:57] what they've added in each little town and how they're working on more land

[2:21:04] for development. Um

[2:21:13] then I just touched base on um

[2:21:18] people want a good quality of life. They want safe place for their children to

[2:21:22] play, trails where families can walk and bike and parks where they can enjoy the

[2:21:27] outdoors. That's where our conservation department plays an important role. Um,

[2:21:33] a better place to live.

[2:21:38] They're not extras. They're just amenities that we get to live with.

[2:21:44] healthy connected communities where people put down roads, roots,

[2:21:50] uh,

[2:21:54] quality of life, private, and then I talk about

[2:22:01] the commercial development down south of uh,

[2:22:06] Lewis Central. I just touched base on that how that's filled up and we there's

[2:22:13] more coming and hopefully we continue to fill that

[2:22:18] spot and grow the road

[2:22:25] viably a piece at a time.

[2:22:30] » Great. >> That's the overview. Okay.

[2:22:33] » Yep. And so this is the preparing for growth section just as a reminder to

[2:22:36] everybody. Um, so obviously responsible population,

[2:22:41] housing, economic growth, um, development, race sites, which I really

[2:22:44] think that touches on all of that. Um, does anybody have any questions for

[2:22:49] Brian on any of those points?

[2:22:56] » That was quick. That was easy. >> Great.

[2:23:02] » What was that? >> Said he's not done yet.

[2:23:05] » I'm not. Well, we don't know. We're doing this, I guess.

[2:23:09] » Oh, okay. >> Okay. So, then we go to Susan's section

[2:23:12] on investing responsibly. Um Susan walked through her presentation with

[2:23:18] myself um and Matt Walsh on is that just Friday?

[2:23:23] » Friday. >> Um

[2:23:24] » and also with Tim. >> Oh, great.

[2:23:26] » And then I've got a meeting with Stevie on Thursday so that she can help me with

[2:23:30] the data behind some of the tables. And so Susan's section um is definitely more

[2:23:37] chart focused and graphs and because obviously there's a lot of data

[2:23:40] supporting this um and obviously Susan I'll let you kind of take it away from

[2:23:46] there but basically it's just talking about the

[2:23:50] levy rates and how they were pretty stagnant back in 2021 and that they

[2:23:57] truly have been coming down. And if you go on to the next slide

[2:24:02] where we could be charging property taxes but we're not.

[2:24:09] And the next slide >> the bottom one's us correct.

[2:24:13] » Yes. The bottom one's us. >> What's the top one? The green one.

[2:24:17] » The average in the state >> estimated what we could collect.

[2:24:20] » Yeah. >> Okay.

[2:24:21] » And that average of the state. >> No, this is estimated based on uh our

[2:24:28] » No, the green one. Yeah, that's based on what we could be asking for from the

[2:24:34] » growth of the values of correct >> based on that and changes in levy rates

[2:24:40] of what we can collect.

[2:24:45] Then just some photos of what's going on with the counties and I've got some

[2:24:49] speaking points to recorder's office and [clears throat]

[2:24:54] I don't have my slides in or my material in front of me. That's fine. I just

[2:24:59] wanted you to be able to touch on a few of the main points in your section so

[2:25:03] that again as we go through if we start to feel like we're hearing things

[2:25:06] multiple times um or anything like that that we can adjust.

[2:25:11] » Are you going to change that one picture?

[2:25:13] » Yes. The one on the very front. >> Yeah.

[2:25:16] » Yeah. >> Which one? Yeah. Which one?

[2:25:19] » The deputy's car. Oh. >> Oh, yeah. I was wondering what that why

[2:25:23] was that up there? Well, Kate was helping me find

[2:25:27] » It's hard to find some photos that work for some of these topics, Tim. I'll be

[2:25:30] honest. Um, I was trying to find something that was communicating, you

[2:25:36] know, some of the investment in 911 and things and we don't have a lot of

[2:25:40] photos. >> Shiny Chrome is easier than 911 tower.

[2:25:45] » Yeah.

[2:25:49] And then when we go to this real busy slide, it's got a whole bunch of

[2:25:53] information in there. And I'm planning to have handouts made of my slides with

[2:26:01] some of the definitions that speak to it'll have narrative that explains what

[2:26:07] capital projects are, each of those categories, what's bucketed into it. And

[2:26:14] Tim wants me to be able to answer questions when they say, "Well, your

[2:26:20] capital projects went from 3% to 18%. Why? What is that? How did that happen?"

[2:26:27] So, I've got to be prepared for all of that. But basically, that's

[2:26:34] that's how the county is funded and operated.

[2:26:40] And then for 2026 27 this is how our budget is and over 50% is between

[2:26:50] um this public safety and legal services >> louder public safety and legal services

[2:26:58] is the biggest blue one. >> Well we should cut that legal service

[2:27:03] deal. [laughter] >> Yeah and roads and transportation is

[2:27:06] your next biggest blue one there. >> Yeah. So over 50% fall into both of

[2:27:11] those categories

[2:27:15] there. Again, it's just a high level. >> Be interesting to see them broken up

[2:27:19] though. Public service and legal services.

[2:27:23] » I'm really hoping that somebody doesn't want to call out to have us explain what

[2:27:26] we spend our legal services for. But this is the budget.

[2:27:33] This is the budget we're currently operating under.

[2:27:37] And then I think the rest of my slide, yeah, we go back and we talk more about

[2:27:41] the capital projects, specifically the 911 communications

[2:27:46] and >> Oh, yeah.

[2:27:50] » Then I've got some more photos I need to put in.

[2:27:53] » Um, one of the things I talk about is cyber security and how that's something

[2:27:58] that's relatively new in the last five years that we never had to fund for

[2:28:04] before. And then the 911 communications, how

[2:28:08] that's going to set us up for success for at least the next 15, 20 years and

[2:28:13] how it interacts with all of the other counties around us.

[2:28:20] And then

[2:28:23] yeah, when we're speaking to how we're investing the county's future, did I

[2:28:27] have a slide after that one? >> You do have this slide.

[2:28:31] Oh, and then I want to talk about GIS and the importance of keeping track of

[2:28:38] addresses and making sure that we are set up for a good census in 2030 because

[2:28:45] every person helps fund. I mean, the census numbers do a lot and

[2:28:52] I just explained that and how our GIS works with all of the small cities to

[2:28:58] make sure that their addressing is all correct and that we're counting for

[2:29:02] everybody. And then we talk about Tamarak Road and

[2:29:06] how it's starting that day. um our process for budget and how we

[2:29:13] work with the department heads and we have multiple study sessions

[2:29:19] we just determine how we're going to move forward. So

[2:29:26] how we're investing is that mine >> I think that at this point is just a

[2:29:30] duplicate slide now because I feel like you've essentially answered that on the

[2:29:33] previous slide. >> Brian, do you cover Tamarak in your

[2:29:36] section or is it okay for Susan to have that? I would prefer you did it.

[2:29:41] » Okay, that's fine. >> No, I I I have not touched base on that.

[2:29:47] » The two slides are a little different. One says, "How are we investing in the

[2:29:50] county's future?" The other one says, "How are we investing the county's

[2:29:53] future?" >> So, you need

[2:29:57] » I know you're going to pull one of them, but pull the one that doesn't have the N

[2:30:00] in it. >> Yeah. I I've got some clean up to do,

[2:30:03] but I've got my narrative all written. >> Yep.

[2:30:07] » Okay. Um, any questions for Susan's section from any of you right now?

[2:30:14] » And I can I can send you my talking points.

[2:30:18] » Bye. >> You got them.

[2:30:21] » Um, so then we go to Keith. Um, I know you had asked for the photo of Jeff. Um,

[2:30:28] I don't know that I love having it on this divider slide because I feel like

[2:30:34] instead of it's about people behind county government and this is very much

[2:30:37] a person singular. Um, so >> I'm going to talk about Jeff and his

[2:30:43] importance with economic development through the parks. So there's a reason

[2:30:47] why I wanted Jeff. >> Okay.

[2:30:50] » If you want a different picture of Jeff, I completely understand. There's a

[2:30:54] reason why I want Jeff. >> Okay.

[2:30:58] and not like more from his >> and here's why. I'm going to introduce

[2:31:02] the picture say this is Jeff. He's our director of uh conservation for Paw

[2:31:06] County. Believe it or not, he might be one of the most important people in this

[2:31:10] room when it comes to economic development and we will talk more about

[2:31:13] that later. My name is Keith Jones. I have the pleasure of talking with you

[2:31:16] today about the amazing people of Padawani County. I'm going to do that on

[2:31:20] two different levels. One are the amazing citizens that we serve. one are

[2:31:25] the um the public employees who give the services to me. That's how I'm going to

[2:31:31] start. The concept is simple. We have a cycle

[2:31:36] of service that starts with our residents who vote for the board of

[2:31:40] supervisors. I can't I'm sorry. I should be looking at my own. Um the most

[2:31:45] important thing that we do as supervisors is spend other people's

[2:31:48] money. We do so by putting together a budget and loving your tax dollars. Um

[2:31:53] and then the second most important thing that we do is surround ourselves with

[2:31:56] amazing people who are department heads. Those people will then employ over 500

[2:32:02] employees who give back essential services to our employees. Next slide.

[2:32:09] Here are some of the things that we provide as a county. Most of those

[2:32:13] things you will see are pretty basic. Next one.

[2:32:18] And this is yours, Kate. Um, you know, I guess I can further say that our

[2:32:24] services are broken down in four different ways. We protect and respond.

[2:32:28] » Yeah. Basically, I just took your information and tried to format it in a

[2:32:31] way that was more visual and um a little more categorized instead of just being

[2:32:37] like one long list. >> Right. Okay. Next slide.

[2:32:43] Um, >> and this is as far as I'd gotten, so I

[2:32:47] have not reformatted from here. But also with some of these, I wanted to make

[2:32:49] sure we talked through some of this to make sure that we weren't repeating a

[2:32:54] lot of the tax levy things that Susan would have just talked about.

[2:32:58] » All right, hold on for a second. If you go back to her slide,

[2:33:02] go back. No, go back again. Okay, I'm Did you take out a bunch of my

[2:33:09] slides? This is all the information that you had just reformatted and anything

[2:33:14] that I did reformat I hid. I didn't delete. So, it's all still there. We

[2:33:18] could go back and reference it if we need to.

[2:33:21] » Right. So, I have our functions and our mandates by Iowa code. That's important

[2:33:25] for me. >> Um,

[2:33:28] » so on I have all my original slides. >> Can you flip to the next? Sorry, Stevie.

[2:33:38] Not I don't even have that on my slide deck.

[2:33:41] » Well, this was the one about the talent with the new detention officers and

[2:33:46] everything. So, this was your content just reformatted. Um,

[2:33:53] I can't pull up my computer because it died. So,

[2:33:56] » um, okay. So, I'm going to talk about our

[2:33:59] functions. We have to have a courthouse and it's mandated by Iowa State Code. We

[2:34:04] have to have a sheriff and is mandated by Iowa code. We have to have a jail, a

[2:34:08] recorder, an attorney, so forth and so on. Most of that stuff is pretty basic.

[2:34:13] But what you don't know is the fact that we have to have a health department. We

[2:34:16] also have to give behavioral health services. And then here's something that

[2:34:20] you probably never thought about. We also have to offer rent assistance by

[2:34:24] the Iowa code. >> Um, and then what I'm going to say is

[2:34:28] our functions are statutory. We are not a business. And here's a hard

[2:34:32] conversation. Most of the people in this room live very good lives. They don't

[2:34:36] live like kings or queens or rock stars, but we can, you know, we have cars to

[2:34:43] drive. We have roofs over our houses, but there are many people in Padawani

[2:34:47] County that need our services. Which takes me to the next slide, which

[2:34:52] that's the one that had your picture on it.

[2:34:55] » That's this. No. >> All right. Stop right there. It says

[2:35:00] county property taxes are about 20%. That's only if you live in the corporate

[2:35:06] limits of a city. >> Correct. Or most of us.

[2:35:09] » Okay. >> So, don't Yeah, that's not true.

[2:35:12] » Right. Okay. So, for most of us, which is 66% of the county, that is that is

[2:35:19] correct. And I'll explain it when I get there. If you don't feel good about it,

[2:35:23] then I'll take it out. But we're going to have a lot of people who say, "I pay

[2:35:27] all these taxes when in fact most of the taxes are the schools in the city."

[2:35:33] And I'd like to touch on that without making people mad.

[2:35:36] » But did we cover that enough in how Susan broke out the levy and the

[2:35:42] property tax or do you feel like this is >> I don't think she really did break out

[2:35:47] there. shoot our that levy breakout is really just the different areas of our

[2:35:52] levy. We really didn't touch on connecting jurisdictions.

[2:35:58] » Okay, before this slide, this is the slide I actually have. I I'm going to

[2:36:02] talk about the personal highlights this year. We added a department head and

[2:36:05] that is Kate Gerber. We added four new jailers. We are added a sheriff's

[2:36:09] department process server who also does things for

[2:36:14] the sex abuse registry. And believe it or not, we have 315 people on that

[2:36:18] registry that she has to help keep track of. I think that'll be good for people

[2:36:22] to know that she stays very busy. Andy Wixs also reorganized secondary roads

[2:36:27] for greater efficiency. Dr. Elliot will be leaving soon. We need to finance a

[2:36:31] replacement. >> Actually,

[2:36:34] he [clears throat] said he would continue on.

[2:36:36] » Okay. Well, then I'll take that. >> I thought I'd mention that to everybody.

[2:36:39] He called me and told me he would continue on.

[2:36:46] There's still long-term succession planning with him though, right? Because

[2:36:49] isn't it only for a year or is he continuing on inevit definitely

[2:36:53] » years I think is what I was going to say. I think it's we should start

[2:36:57] looking for somebody because it will probably take a while to get something.

[2:37:00] » I think you can still refer to it as succession planning.

[2:37:05] Um, and then like I said on my other slide that I had before, employee

[2:37:09] turnover is always a significant issue, especially when it comes to the

[2:37:12] sheriff's department and the jail.

[2:37:18] Okay. And then I get to this one. Okay. This is a hard conversation. The board

[2:37:23] of supervisors can reduce your property taxes. Keeping in mind that about 20% of

[2:37:28] your taxes of the people here comes from the county. That means cutting employees

[2:37:33] who provide services. 80% of our budget is personnel. County employees only

[2:37:38] received a 3% raise this year. The consumer price index was 2.8%.

[2:37:43] So if we cut your property taxes, we have to ask ourselves, what services do

[2:37:49] we cut? If that's too blatant, I'll take it out.

[2:37:54] But I think it's something >> I think that's important for people to

[2:37:58] realize. >> You know, we we get this conversation

[2:38:00] quite often. I want my property taxes lowered. Great. What do we cut? Because

[2:38:04] it's literally to that point. And I think we need to frame it that way. We

[2:38:08] need to be straight with these people. They're business people and they're

[2:38:12] prominent people in our community. They're going to understand

[2:38:17] there's a trade-off. >> I think it's huge. You show the

[2:38:21] percentage of schools,

[2:38:26] your city taxes, and the county taxes. Well, I don't want to get into a fight

[2:38:30] because I know we're going to have people from the city and probably even

[2:38:33] the schools there, too. I don't want to get into a shouting match, pointing

[2:38:37] match, or whatever you want to call it. But when you look at the property taxes,

[2:38:43] we're not as big as the city or the schools, and people need to know that.

[2:38:48] » Okay, >> my schools are 62.

[2:38:50] » And then be negligent of me not to talk about artificial intelligence. I'll

[2:38:54] touch about that real fast. And then I get into this whole thing with if you go

[2:38:59] to the next slide, county does have a problem. It's

[2:39:04] something you probably never thought of. No, it's not muppet vampires. It's

[2:39:09] stagnant population. I'll talk about the census over the last six times and how

[2:39:14] we really [clears throat] haven't moved. And even the state of Iowa had a decline

[2:39:18] of 3%. Next one.

[2:39:22] And without population growth, we don't have economic development or an

[2:39:26] expansion of the tax base. Basically, the same people, the same

[2:39:31] property owners have been paying our property taxes for the last 50 years.

[2:39:37] Okay. So then as a community, we need innovative solutions to uh attract and

[2:39:42] retain people, preferably younger people, and that's because they're going

[2:39:47] to be our workforce and our future leaders. Next slide. Our

[2:39:54] goal is to set an environment um so that we can attract and retain um

[2:40:00] businesses

[2:40:04] uh which will bring a workforce here. That means we should try to worry about

[2:40:07] low property taxes and fees, better infrastructure, better services, and

[2:40:13] maintaining public safety. And we have a real problem with that that maybe

[2:40:16] haven't thought about it, and that's rural EMT coverage.

[2:40:20] Young people seek experiences. My final slide. I come back to Jeff.

[2:40:27] That my final slide. No, I don't I have one more. When young families relocate,

[2:40:32] they look at this school systems, recreational opportunities, and the the

[2:40:36] economics of the move. And that brings us back to Jeff Franco. Believe it or

[2:40:41] not, our county conservation can separate us

[2:40:45] from other communities. We have Botna Bend, Air Park, Hitchcock, the trail

[2:40:50] centers, and even the ski hill. >> Old old town. Don't forget Oldtown in

[2:40:55] there. Okay. >> Then finally, even the governor thinks

[2:41:00] that we're moving in the right direction. I encourage you today to go

[2:41:04] outside and enjoy your parks

[2:41:10] » right now. >> Well, let's wait for a couple minutes.

[2:41:14] Thoughts? Have I strayed too much from what you

[2:41:19] guys thought? >> I I think a lot of what you're talking

[2:41:23] about strategically about cutting cost and stuff is kind of what I've already

[2:41:29] touched in with the narrative that I didn't tell you about. But

[2:41:34] » well, keep in mind I'm only going to talk for a second about cutting costs,

[2:41:38] and that is there's a trade-off. We can cut your property levy, but we're going

[2:41:43] to lose services. That's literally as far as I'm going to go.

[2:41:49] » That needs to be said somewhere in this presentation.

[2:41:52] » It's a hard conversation that people don't want to hear, but I mean, they're

[2:41:56] all professionals. >> Yeah, I think connecting it back to the

[2:42:00] people who provide the services helps keep it relevant to your section. Um,

[2:42:05] the AI slide threw me a little bit as kind of a like random topic shift. Um,

[2:42:12] so I don't know, part of that might just be that it didn't have as much context

[2:42:16] as I'm, you know, just clicking through slides and everything

[2:42:19] » of the workforce to AI. We don't know when that's going to happen. My guess is

[2:42:22] the time arises two to five years. But for, I mean, the treasurer's office and

[2:42:28] the auditor's office, if the auditor does 600,000 payments a year, at some

[2:42:33] time or another, deficiencies will take over and we will

[2:42:37] lose people from that office. Do you want to also mention anything about the

[2:42:42] county having an AI policy or an AI committee or anything like that? Or

[2:42:46] » the AI policy at this point basically says we're not going to we're not going

[2:42:51] to use let AI come up with our ideas. I don't know how that's going to affect

[2:42:56] the community as a large >> at large.

[2:43:06] Right. Does anybody else have any question? I'm trying to be careful and

[2:43:09] I'm not going to say >> we're going to step on each other just a

[2:43:13] smidge human. >> I just wanted to look intentional, I

[2:43:17] guess, and as if you're reinforcing each other's points versus if you're trying

[2:43:21] to remake someone's point or as if you think you're the one who's making it for

[2:43:25] the first time when someone has just heard it. Like, I just don't want it to

[2:43:29] look like four completely distinct presentations that never met each other

[2:43:35] before 11:30 a.m. on Monday. the 14th. That's really what I'm hoping for at

[2:43:41] this point. >> Okay.

[2:43:44] » So, does anybody else have any other questions or I'm just kind of looking

[2:43:49] back through to see so because people behind county government. I mean,

[2:43:55] we're on topic here. That's >> and I've got to update the employee

[2:44:00] number because I want to make sure that we're using the same number throughout

[2:44:02] as well, which is 500 plus. So, anytime you're referencing the number of

[2:44:06] employees, we're saying 500 plus or more than 500, however you feels comfortable

[2:44:11] for you to say that um because we had it mentioned in like three different

[2:44:14] numbers in everyone's p section of the presentation. So, we pulled that

[2:44:18] directly from our wonderful payroll team uh to make sure that we're using the

[2:44:22] most accurate number possible >> and over 80% goes for wages. Correct.

[2:44:27] » Where did that come from? >> What directly from Kelly?

[2:44:30] » 80% of being the personnel cost. What's the actual number?

[2:44:35] » Because I had Becky run it twice in within about three months before she

[2:44:39] left and it's from her and you know she's wrong. She's wrong. That's fine.

[2:44:44] But what she kept came up with consistently was about 48 49%.

[2:44:50] Which I mean if you think about it 80 I heard

[2:44:55] I heard one of you say 83%. That leaves 17% of the budget to buy all the

[2:44:59] sheriff's cars, to do all the paving to I mean that's I don't know. I I just And

[2:45:04] maybe there's a Stevie, have you run those?

[2:45:07] » I haven't run it, but I'm making a note. I will run it and we'll get some firmer

[2:45:11] numbers up there.

[2:45:16] » Yeah, the jail's $20 million, although a lot of that is personnel.

[2:45:22] Roads is $20 million. A lot of that's personnel. I don't know.

[2:45:27] » Yeah, I couldn't quote it for you right now, but yeah, I'll get you something

[2:45:33] » more backed up. Yeah. >> Okay. So, Stevie, sorry. You were saying

[2:45:37] » um I do agree this one does feel very different and just looking at the fates

[2:45:41] of it, it doesn't really tie it back directly to people, but I think you can

[2:45:44] tweak it. So, you can say >> artificial intelligence might be um

[2:45:50] [snorts] you might feel like it's jeopardizing our employees or something.

[2:45:55] » Let me ask you this. If I don't bring up AI, who will? Somebody needs

[2:45:59] » That's a good question. >> Uh,

[2:46:01] » yeah, >> it's gonna be a very relevant issue and

[2:46:03] somebody should at least touch on it. >> Yeah, and I think I think you're on the

[2:46:06] right track. I think it just needs to be tweaked because we're talking about

[2:46:09] we're bringing in new talent. Um, we're mainly up to this point talking about

[2:46:14] our employees. So I think if you kind of just tweak it a little bit and say our

[2:46:19] employees, you know, we're putting in steps to make sure that our employees

[2:46:23] are not going to face the challenges of artificial intelligence replacing a lot

[2:46:28] of their duties. >> We're not

[2:46:31] » we're not doing that yet. We don't know how it's going to affect us. It

[2:46:34] certainly will affect us in the next two to five years.

[2:46:37] » Yeah. >> And that's all I'm going to say. We

[2:46:39] don't know how it's going to affect us, but it will. And it will affect us when

[2:46:43] it comes to employees. There's no doubt. Yes. Okay. Uh

[2:46:49] » and correct me if I'm wrong on that. >> And then this moves to population.

[2:46:53] I think the unknown is what's true. I I agree with that.

[2:46:59] So you shift from county employees to population. I think that's a good shift

[2:47:03] because it's still what we're looking at people

[2:47:08] always dealt with. And I did like

[2:47:13] » and you're saying it ironically that it's a problem that no one has thought

[2:47:16] of, right? >> Well, the chamber has thought about it,

[2:47:19] » right? >> But the [clears throat] audiences at

[2:47:23] large probably hasn't. >> You know, they probably audience at a

[2:47:27] chamber event has been forced to think about it.

[2:47:33] » You guys talk about it all the time. Um, I mean, at the midyear meeting, um,

[2:47:39] Chris Lefera introduced himself as, "My name is Chris Lefera and I care about

[2:47:43] population growth and council bluffs. It's nice to meet you." And if you

[2:47:46] haven't heard me say that, then we've never met.

[2:47:48] » The state of the county is for the public. It happens to be hosted by the

[2:47:52] Chamber of Commerce. >> But it's not a public event. It's a

[2:47:55] ticketed event still through the Chamber. Is it?

[2:47:57] » It'll be covered by media outlets. Hopefully, there will be a story from

[2:48:01] the Napil. And will there be news stations there or not?

[2:48:07] » Um, I don't know how much news coverage this one typically gets.

[2:48:11] » Probably not. Probably not cameras. >> So, you're saying [clears throat] this

[2:48:14] should all be patterned toward the Chamber of Commerce?

[2:48:18] » No, not necessarily. I just knowing how of the 92 people that are registered for

[2:48:23] this event right now, because those are the ones that you know you have are the

[2:48:26] ones who are going to be in the room. There's no guarantee for any visibility

[2:48:29] beyond that. um making sure that we are not coming across as

[2:48:36] believing that we're saying something for the first time that this room has

[2:48:40] likely heard many times because it is often

[2:48:43] » a very repetitive >> observation could be a part of the

[2:48:47] economic development of this town or this area. They probably never thought

[2:48:52] of that connection before. They think in terms of hey we want more

[2:48:56] businesses. We can't have more businesses if we don't have young

[2:48:59] people. And the young people deserve or they I'm sorry, they seek experiences

[2:49:04] which will be satisfied in our conservation.

[2:49:08] » I mean, I don't know if they ever heard of that twist before, which I'm going to

[2:49:12] be bringing. [clears throat]

[2:49:14] Help me. >> No, I think that's fine. Like I said, I

[2:49:17] just I I don't want us to try and deliver a message that

[2:49:24] they have heard. Obviously, there's elements of it that they haven't

[2:49:28] necessarily, but I guess part of it when I was trying to

[2:49:33] clean up slides and make edits and things is I couldn't quite tell the tone

[2:49:37] with certain things and what direction you wanted that to go like with the

[2:49:42] Muppet or the Sesame Street character. >> I'll take that out. I was just trying to

[2:49:46] think of something scary. We don't even

[2:49:50] » Okay, >> we have a problem and you have a

[2:49:53] » because I was like trying to figure out I was like is it specifically about it

[2:49:56] being count? Like are we talking about counting things?

[2:49:58] » So that's the ironic is he's also a counterhu

[2:50:00] » you know what I mean? >> Okay.

[2:50:04] » I'm challenging the minds as well as and again if you want it out I'll take

[2:50:09] it out. I'm just trying to think of something scary.

[2:50:13] » Sure. But ironically, it's it counts. And we're talking about population.

[2:50:22] [clears throat] >> Get it now that you explain it.

[2:50:24] [laughter] >> Like I said, I'm trying to be uh cutting

[2:50:27] edge. >> You are, Keith.

[2:50:31] » Thank you. >> Okay. Anything else for this section?

[2:50:34] » If you want me to tweak it, let me know now.

[2:50:37] » Yeah. And we can talk about I'll go back and look at the hidden slides and make

[2:50:41] sure that everything is >> I'll do my own slides. I don't mind

[2:50:44] that. I thought you wanted to format slides so they all look the same, but I

[2:50:49] want to use my slides. >> Okay.

[2:50:51] » So, if you want I mean I'll I'll clean up my

[2:50:56] slides, but like I said, I thought you wanted all four.

[2:50:59] » Yeah, I was trying to give it like I said more like the visual element with

[2:51:02] like the cycle versus it just being like this this this this like bullet points

[2:51:06] and so but I felt like I retained the content. If you don't feel like it's

[2:51:09] there, then we can look at it. I want to keep it real to the point. Um, and then

[2:51:15] I'll give the narrative. >> Okay.

[2:51:20] » Okay. Anything else on that? >> I introduce Jeff. Correct.

[2:51:24] » Yep. >> Yeah. You guys all introduce the next

[2:51:26] person who follows you. >> Put your hands together for Jeff

[2:51:29] Jorgensson. >> A lot of feedback on that one, Keith.

[2:51:33] Thanks for thanks for listening to us. So then we go to Jeff with one county

[2:51:37] connected communities talking about connecting and serving a geographically

[2:51:41] diverse county. >> Yeah. [clears throat] Uh you know I

[2:51:45] don't I'm not going to have a lot of slides period. The one slide that I

[2:51:48] would suggest adding is the list of communities that are in water county. I

[2:51:52] think there's 14 maybe 15 if uh if you count BBtown as an unincorporated

[2:51:58] community. Uh but I'm just going to basically come out and

[2:52:03] » come out and u uh just just explain I guess Ottawa County how the supervisors

[2:52:08] interact with you know the different residents and businesses in Baltimore

[2:52:13] County and you know there's a whole plethora of ways that we do that. Uh,

[2:52:16] one of the things that I was amazed at when I first got on the board was the

[2:52:20] the number of organizations [clears throat]

[2:52:23] and and u and uh those kinds of things that that we were asked all of us were

[2:52:28] asked to sit on and you know counseling governing boards for instance you know

[2:52:35] or whatever uh observers uh you know there's there's [clears throat] a whole

[2:52:39] plethora of those uh those uh agencies that were in and asked to get involved.

[2:52:46] with and also um you know the residents come into the to the courthouse and and

[2:52:51] uh do presentations before the board and that's another thing that you know I was

[2:52:56] going to be mentioning uh as a way to interact. Um also um the different uh

[2:53:03] departments and that we have that uh uh that that go out into the county. Uh,

[2:53:09] one of them is our uh, veterans services organization, you know, that service all

[2:53:15] the uh, military veterans in Baltimore County and get them involved, get them

[2:53:20] registered, uh, you know, whatever services that that they uh, they have

[2:53:24] coming to them. Uh also uh different ways that we interact uh our elections

[2:53:30] office, you know, we got 40 different precincts in Pawatami County and uh we

[2:53:37] we do the do the ballot counting for all of

[2:53:41] those precincts. Uh so that's that's basically touching base with the with

[2:53:46] the people who are voters in order county.

[2:53:51] uh the waterway um linkage whatever you know introducing uh

[2:53:58] the different things are going on in the county you know to to the rest of us in

[2:54:03] the county that might not know uh what's happening in trainer Iowa hudoo days or

[2:54:09] whatever you know I mean just an interaction

[2:54:12] take out those those things and um I'm g say it again no there's a I mean are you

[2:54:19] okay with with as as a few uh slides as possible.

[2:54:25] » Yeah, I think that's fine. Um

[2:54:30] » we had talked a little bit about the funding not including that including

[2:54:34] that. Um so I don't know if you wanted to talk to the group about that to get

[2:54:38] their thoughts. >> I was just mentioning the the funding.

[2:54:42] Uh I'm going to say you recommended we not mentioned that. I I would

[2:54:46] » at least not the specific dollar amounts would be my opinion.

[2:54:49] » But but how whatever businesses or whatever

[2:54:53] charities come to before the board, you know, they're they're out in the county.

[2:54:58] They come before the board, do their presentation, and then you find a way to

[2:55:02] respond. Uh sometimes that's, you know, a dollar donation or dollar, you know,

[2:55:07] financial assistance, which is great. Uh I I think it'd be worth mentioning

[2:55:12] yourself. >> Maybe use the word nonprofit

[2:55:16] instead of >> Well, I there's there's a whole there's

[2:55:20] always there's a list. Um you do you have that?

[2:55:23] » Yeah, my computer is dead. Um but it was uh Swida Sco um I don't know that if

[2:55:31] Wida was on the list or not. Um Pace was on there. That was one of the things

[2:55:36] that was >> I was gonna

[2:55:38] » since I'm on those boards I was going to do

[2:55:41] that's on my other notes I didn't >> um it's not in the slides yet because I

[2:55:46] want that was one that I wanted us to talk about as a group to get thoughts on

[2:55:51] how to include that or what to include. Um,

[2:55:59] » uh, yeah, I've got a list of of the agencies. I was going to mention

[2:56:06] veteran services, the Council of Gloss Conservation and Visitors Bureau, uh,

[2:56:09] the Pond County Elections Office, uh, Recorders Traveling Office hours, and

[2:56:15] 911 operations, which all has to deal with Ottawa Countyy's big county. That's

[2:56:21] what kind of the theme I was going on. you know, how do we get out into the

[2:56:25] county uh with uh with services and and whatever needs to be attended to for

[2:56:31] county residents and our county business.

[2:56:33] » Then also I was going to mention uh public hearings. You know, the county

[2:56:38] has been out or the county supervisors have been out into the county to do town

[2:56:43] hall meetings. Big one was of course the windmill

[2:56:47] issue. you know, we went out and did uh did uh town hall meetings and you know,

[2:56:53] kind of getting people's feedback, you know, and which is which I think is a

[2:56:58] great way to >> Thanks, Kristen.

[2:57:01] » And uh >> Oh, I thought you were leaving.

[2:57:04] » And so that and and so that's where I was I was just going to have an open

[2:57:07] discussion of how we interact with our with our county residents and our fans

[2:57:13] that seem like a workable workable plan. >> Yeah. And I want to get this group's

[2:57:20] opinion as well because I've seen the list of organizations and everything,

[2:57:24] but I want to make sure that everyone else up here is on board as well.

[2:57:32] » Are you mentioning Southwest Iowa and Wida

[2:57:36] » as my section? No, I think >> Okay. Because that was one of the

[2:57:40] things. Are you >> No, I think that falls into Jeff's

[2:57:43] category. >> Okay. I was trying to steer clear, but

[2:57:46] it could be in mine also. >> Well, I just I just mentioned it as as

[2:57:53] you know. >> I think Advanced Southwest Iowa very

[2:57:56] much does still fit into yours specifically in terms of growth. Um

[2:58:01] that's their whole mission especially in terms of the rural part of the county.

[2:58:05] So I would not not mention them and same with Wida obviously as the rural

[2:58:09] chamber. Uh I think that's very important for you to include. Yes. those

[2:58:13] two specifically >> and then with unleash CB and Pawatami

[2:58:17] County Tourism I'm also on those and I

[2:58:22] » le I think it's less about whether you're on the board and whether it

[2:58:25] connects back to growth. >> Okay.

[2:58:28] » I was going to mention that because again it's an interaction

[2:58:31] » then I'll do advance southwest Iowa. >> Yeah.

[2:58:35] » Yeah. And again that's where I think it's okay because you're reinforcing

[2:58:38] something and you're talking about it from a growth angle. You're talking

[2:58:42] about it from a we're a big county. We're geographically spread out. We need

[2:58:46] these organizations and that's why the county engages with them is because they

[2:58:49] help support the work that the county is wants to do and that the county believes

[2:58:53] in. >> I know I know 911's part of the

[2:58:56] sheriff's department, but 911 and they they are in contact with all the fire

[2:59:02] and rescue uh operations that are out there. uh and they got contact

[2:59:08] information, contact numbers, you know, they know who they know who to call if

[2:59:13] something is going on out there. And that again, that's an interaction with

[2:59:16] the county and residents of counties. >> You have all this written down

[2:59:22] somewhere, Jeff, >> in my mind. I I I took I took uh uh

[2:59:26] Brian's suggestion. I said, "Wing it, [laughter]

[2:59:32] » but you got to write something down." >> Well, yeah. Well, I'm gonna have notes.

[2:59:34] I mean, uh, you know, I I I'm just going to go up there. Just

[2:59:38] » The other thing I wanted to ask about was wind and [clears throat]

[2:59:43] data centers. >> You want me to give you some help with

[2:59:47] that? >> Do we mention it or not?

[2:59:49] » No, it's going to be a question though. With with data centers,

[2:59:54] um, they are not permitted in this county.

[2:59:56] » I got that. All you have to say, but I haven't

[2:59:58] » Don't say anything else. >> Okay.

[3:00:00] » Well, there's a second part to that. There are absolutely no projects slated

[3:00:04] for the county. And then if they ask about when you we

[3:00:10] have an ordinance that um

[3:00:15] » determines where a wind farm can be located.

[3:00:22] » I just want to touch on it briefly. >> I wouldn't even touch on it unless they

[3:00:25] ask a question. >> Okay. That's why I wanted to ask

[3:00:29] » they're going to answer. would be prepared that if that question arises

[3:00:31] that you will be the one who answers it. [laughter]

[3:00:38] » If you bring it up, they're going to say, "Well, Brian, what about what about

[3:00:41] the aquafer and what about our water?" Then you're getting a then you're

[3:00:46] getting a pissing match with a skunk lose. am going and I won't be there yet,

[3:00:53] but I leave

[3:00:57] » but Texas for that symposium and everything I've been reading they're

[3:01:02] really going to the closed loop cooling

[3:01:06] minimizing water.

[3:01:10] » Okay, Kate, what's in your section? >> Um, so my section is the informed and

[3:01:15] engaged community. Uh, I focus on I still have a couple slides that I need

[3:01:19] to add in to mine, but the first one being that we obviously want to make

[3:01:24] county government understandable and accessible. That's part of why we do

[3:01:28] presentations like this and events like this. Um, and then the main bulk of my

[3:01:33] presentation. Um, and you can click ahead at least. Yeah, this one is about

[3:01:38] six key ways that residents um, and citizens can engage with the county. Um,

[3:01:43] I walk through examples of all six of these. Um, my thought is to add in a few

[3:01:49] photo examples of what these kind of look like in action. Um, I kind of

[3:01:53] talked through my notes about this section last week, so I don't

[3:01:56] necessarily feel like I need to fully repeat it because not a lot has changed

[3:01:59] here. Um, but then the last slide that I'll put in is that we're not just

[3:02:03] pushing it out onto the citizens. We know that the county has responsibility

[3:02:07] in all of this as well and that we want to make it accessible, understandable.

[3:02:12] We strive to use plain language whenever possible. We try to get out into the

[3:02:16] county. We know it's a big county and kind of again reinforcing some of the

[3:02:20] things that all of you have said. Um and that ultimately we want it to be a

[3:02:25] two-way conversation and that one of the first ways that we can do that is to

[3:02:30] answer any questions that they have and then we just tee it straight into

[3:02:33] questions after my section. Um, and then my plan during questions is to try and

[3:02:39] as much as possible direct them to whichever one of you is best suited to

[3:02:44] answer that question. Uh, I'm going to rely on hopefully you all giving me a

[3:02:48] little bit of verbal cue or some sort of inclination that this is a question that

[3:02:53] you're ready and willing to respond to. Obviously, if relates directly to

[3:02:58] information that you presented, I'm going to assume that that's going to be

[3:03:01] a question that will fall to you. But if it's something that we did not address

[3:03:06] like the wind or data centers, then having a bit of a plan is helpful. Um,

[3:03:11] are there any other kind of hot button topics, questions that any of you

[3:03:16] anticipate or think we should be prepared for?

[3:03:23] » Probably property taxes. Somebody might come up with a

[3:03:27] » valuations. Valuation might be a big one.

[3:03:30] » That that would be a big deal. What are you going to say if they ask

[3:03:35] that, Brian? >> I'm going to say that the board of

[3:03:38] supervisors only has control of the levy and that the assessor does that with per

[3:03:46] state code. >> Sounds good to me.

[3:03:49] » And they have to do it every two years. And if they don't revalue your home,

[3:03:55] they can put a blanket valuation on all I'm not going to get

[3:04:01] into that, but >> that's that if they don't do their job,

[3:04:06] the state does an equalization order, >> not the not the assessor.

[3:04:11] » Okay. That's your the state assessor. I got a question for you. And so, uh, you

[3:04:16] know, I mentioned, for instance, our veteran services. You know, I I was just

[3:04:21] going to talk about it. Should there be a slide?

[3:04:24] » Yeah, I have photos of >> you. You have those photos. Okay.

[3:04:29] So, I don't have to you >> I'm going to drop that in there.

[3:04:36] » And I And then a list of the of our, you know, 14 or 15

[3:04:41] uh committee small town >> the ones. Oh, the cities. Yeah.

[3:04:46] » Small towns part list. >> Do you want that as a list or as a map?

[3:04:50] » I would say list. >> Okay.

[3:04:54] » Then I'll mention I will just mention a big part of what we can't hit.

[3:04:59] » Marian, were you gonna ask something? >> No. No.

[3:05:05] » All right. Anything else? >> Yeah, we should ordered pizza.

[3:05:10] [laughter] >> Yeah.

[3:05:12] » Nope. That'll do it. >> Okay. Hey, thank you.

[3:05:15] » We won't let you down. Thank you.

[3:05:22] » We won't let her. >> That's Susan.

[3:05:29] [clears throat]

[3:05:33] » He's on his way over to take the rest of the meeting. I had to go to my therapy

[3:05:37] appointment. So, >> okay. Thank you.

[3:05:40] This long. Yep. Am

[3:05:45] I okay to end this? >> Yes, we are. Going to

[3:05:49] » Well, we have to do it. >> We up to the point we vote for going in

[3:05:54] close session. >> They take the vote. You keep it running

[3:05:57] and then once they voted to go into close session, then you stop the

[3:06:01] recording. >> Okay. And since we're on recess, I'm

[3:06:03] going to mute for a little bit. >> I'm sorry.

[3:06:05] » I'm going to

[3:09:49] Let's

[3:10:02] let's get going here.

[3:10:07] one again. >> I'll make a motion we go into close

[3:10:11] session pursuant to Iowa code 21.5 number one pair I for discussion

[3:10:20] andor decision on personnel matters. >> I'll second that motion.

[3:10:25] » Chairman Shay >> I supervisor Jorgensson. Hi. Supervisor

[3:10:29] Jones. Hi. Supervisor Miller. Hi. Supervisor. Hi.

Board of Supervisors - Open Session - September 8, 2026

Transcript