Good morning. I'll call to order the Dakota County Board of Commissioners meeting for uh today, September 23rd, 2025. Uh we will start first with a uh a um we'll do a roll call, please. >> Commissioner Workman here. >> Commissioner Dassi >> here. >> Commissioner Hullberg >> here. >> Commissioner Slavic >> here. >> Commissioner Halverson >> here. >> Commissioner Hammond Roland here. Commissioner Atkins >> here. >> Thank you. And if you are able, please rise and join us in the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Good morning and welcome. Uh today we're going to start out by going out into the audience. If there's anyone wishing to address the county board on an item not on the agenda, uh they may come forward at this time. Their comments are limited to five minutes. We also gave the opportunity for email or uh Zoom options. I don't believe we have any emails or Zoom, but >> no comments online. >> No comments online, but we do have a speaker who would like to come up. So uh Mike Lavin, if you want to come up, you have five minutes to address the board. Welcome to the meeting. >> Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Uh my name is Mike Lavin and I just wanted to come here today to introduce myself as the new president of Darts and I've been on the job for about a 100 days now. So I'm learning a lot and uh I appreciate uh everyone that has taken me under their wing and and shown me the ropes here uh going forward. Um but I do want to say that I do appreciate the county's commitment uh to creating connections for our aging population. It is so important. There's one thing I learned very quickly when I started was that we all age and uh we're going to continue to have that aging uh take place in our communities going forward. Um darts is uh play such a critical role with our aging population and it's such an important role for us uh going forward. Um it's helping to keep our aging population living independently. Um we're doing our home services which is cleaning our uh units, independent living units. We're doing the home chores to keep their yards and all of that up to date so that they can stay independent. We're also making sure that uh they have healthy aging guidance so when it comes to that time where they do need assistance, they have another resource to reach out to to provide that help going forward. And then we also uh provide caregiving support and when u those families are afflicted with dementia or Alzheimer's, we are providing that help in a in a care caregiving support way. And then uh one of our things that we got started for is transportation. Making sure that um we're filling the gaps where there's transportation needed throughout the county so that our aging population has the ability to go to their uh medical appointments and uh other other areas that they need to to stay in that uh independent living. So, I just wanted to take some time to introduce myself. I am reaching out to all of you to hopefully learn more about your district needs um and how I can and how darts can help uh moving forward with our aging population. So, I appreciate it and thank you for allowing me to speak today. >> Well, thank you Mike. Thanks for being here and we appreciate the great partnership we have with darts as well and look to do that for many years in the future. So, thank you for your time. Appreciate it. >> With that, we are going to move on to the agenda. What are the wishes of the board? >> Move approval. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Haymon Roland. Is there a second to that? >> Second. Second by Commissioner Workman. Seeing no further discussion, please call the role. >> Commissioner Dsti, >> yes. >> Commissioner Hullberg, >> yes. >> Commissioner Slavic, >> yes. >> Commissioner Halverson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Haymon Roland, >> yes. >> Commissioner Atkins, >> yes. >> Commissioner Workman, >> yes. >> Thank you. We have a couple public hearings on our agenda today. Starting with 5.1, which is the public hearing to receive comments and approval of the Dakota County Program Year 2024 consolidated annual performance and evaluation report. We have Emily Anderson, assistant director of community economic development uh here from the community development agency. Welcome. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, commissioners, for your time. Excited to tell you about our accomplishments this year for our uh federal entitlement programming. Uh so, uh just to kind of go over what I'm presenting about today, we uh finished our caper, which is a consolidated annual performance and evaluation report. So it's the year end report that details how federal entitlement grants were spent in the previous year which starts on July 1st and ends the following June 30th. The federal grants are the community development block grant, the home invent partnership grant and emergency solutions grant. So the caper must be submitted to HUD 90 days after the program year which for Dakota County is September 28th. So, in order to receive federal funds for the CDBG, home and ESG programs, HUD requires the county to adopt a five-year consolidated plan, which we just did this year for 2025 through 2029. Hold an annual public hearing and adopt a one-year action plan. And we have to hold a public hearing and provide the annual caper. So, this paper is for year five or the five-year plan for program years 2020 through 2024. Uh, these were the five or sorry, seven. These were the seven priority areas listed in the 2020 through 2024 consolidated plan and uh the entitlement funding that the county received for program year 2024 shown on the bar chart was spent on activities that supported the seven priorities. Not all of the 2024 funds were spent in that year. Some projects take a couple years to complete and we'll use that funding source from various years. Uh in addition to our entitlement funds that we receive every year, the county also receives special allocations of CDBG in 2020 to help prepare for, prevent, and respond to the Corona virus. These funds came from the CARES Act and are subject to the same rules as the regular entitlement funds, but must have a clear tie to the CO9 pandemic. The county received about 2.9 million in CDBGCV funds. These funds are also reported in the 2024 caper and must support the priorities in the consolidated plan. Uh the CBGCV grant was fully spent in 2024. Um I will now briefly highlight some of the activities that were completed this year that address the priorities and help the county meet its goals in the consolidated plan. Uh more details can be found in the executive summary attached to the RBA. So under the priority of reducing homelessness, uh the county assisted eight homeless individuals with ESG funds for rapid rehousing and 14 households with homelessness prevention. The funding went towards rental assistance, damage deposits, and first month's rent. The county also assisted 232 people with emergency shelter. Uh the consolidated plan had two priorities to support affordable housing. Uh activities that support affordable homeowner housing included the CDA's homeowner rehab program, which rehab 64 homes in Dakota County in this past program year. Uh the photos on the left show the before and after for one of these homes. Uh the home program supported two new construction Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity homes in Farmington and the rehabilitation of six section 18 homes throughout Dakota County. Uh this year we also completed the Horizon Heights rehabilitation project in Burnsville. Uh CDBG was used to rehab 25 town home units that are income restricted to those earning 50% AMI or less. Uh over the last year, the cities and the counties spent 300 or around $300,000 of CDBG entitlement funds on public services that focused on seniors or lowincome youth as well, including a great partnership with Dart. So, it's nice to hear from them today. Uh and the CBGC funds were used to assist eligible in or income eligible homeowners that needed help with housing expenses due to COVID transportation for seniors and food banks providing assistance to to food insecure uh Dakota County residents. Again, these funds were fully spent this year. The primary activities in the neighborhood revitalization priority are the well sealing and septic repair programs run through county environmental services and the Hastings assessment abatement program run with the city of Hastings. This past year, 20 obsolete wells were filled, two septic repairs occurred, and five low to moderate income households in Hastings received full assessment of 8. Uh the public hearing notice and public comment period notice were published in September 5th in the Star Tribune. Uh the draft paper was also on the CDA's website so that anyone from the public could review and comment on it. We have not received any public comments on last year's activities. And with that, Mr. Chair, we are asking that you hold the public hearing on the 2024 CER and authorize it to HUD. And I'm more than happy to stand for any questions >> before we Thank you very much for the presentation. Before we open up the public hearing, are there any questions from the board? I'm not seeing any. With that, we'll open up the public hearing. Are there anyone from the audience who uh wishes to address on this topic? Secondly, nobody from the online went in to request >> no comments online. >> And last time, is there anybody from the audience uh that would like to speak on this topic? If not, I will declare the uh public hearing closed. And with that, what are the wishes of the board? >> I'll move the motion. >> Move the resolution has been moved by Commissioner Drossi. Is there a second? Seconded by Commissioner Atkins. Any further discussion on this item? >> Seeing and hearing none. With that, please call the role. >> Commissioner Hullberg, >> yes. >> Commissioner Slavic, >> yes. >> Commissioner Halverson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Hayman Roland, >> yes. >> Commissioner Atkins, >> yes. >> Commissioner Workman, >> yes. >> Commissioner Drasty, >> yes. >> Thank you. The motion carries. Thank you so much, Emily, for the presentation. With that, we're going to move on to uh public hearing 5.2. A little unique and um uh situation. I don't think it's happened any time in my years as county commissioner, but we're going to have a public hearing to receive comments on and approval of a variance to Dakota County Ordinance uh 113 subsurface sewage treatment systems for property lines and structures at 29715 Gerlock Way, Canon Falls, Minnesota. We have uh Benjamin Hoy here. Welcome to the meeting. Mr. Chair, commissioners, property owner unlike Bilsby in Randolph Township is requesting a variance from the uh county septic system ordinance. I'll briefly go over the ordinance, setbacks and site conditions, a map of the site and variance process. The uh septic system ordinance is in place to protect public health in the environment and a variance is required to be approved by the board. The associated setbacks are 10 ft to property lines, 20 ft to structures, 50 ft to wells, and 75 ft to the lake. When you put all of these setbacks onto the map, you can it shows how difficult it is to site a new septic system. By prioritizing setbacks to wells and to the lake uh to protect public health and the environment, the setbacks to the township road and the homeowner's garage remain. A variance of 1 foot instead of 10 feet to Township Road and 4 feet instead of 20 feet to the homeowner's garage will allow a septic system to be installed as required. We have notified state agencies, Randolph Township, all property owners within 500 ft and posted public notice in the official county newspaper. No comments or questions were received. This is a straightforward request. staff recommends approval and I'll stand for any questions that you may have. >> Are there any questions from the board? If not, um we'll open up the public hearing and uh is there anybody in the audience wishing to address the board? Uh I don't believe there are any comments from agencies or uh um uh related to this public hearing or the public. And last time, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to address the board on this topic? I'm seeing hearing none. I will close the public hearing and uh what are the wishes of the board? >> I'll move the motion. Mr. Chair, >> the motion has been moved. Resolution has been moved by Commissioner DSi. Is there a second to this? >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Halverson. >> See no discussion. Please call the RO. >> Commissioner Slavic. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Halverson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hayman Roland. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Atkins. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Workman. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Dsti. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hullberg. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. And thank you, Benjamin. Appreciate it. All right. Uh, with that we are going to move on to the consent ag consent agenda which is item 6.1 the minutes of the September 9th 20125 meeting and items 7.1 to 10.1. And what are the wishes of the board? Any corrections, solutions, removals. >> So moved by Commissioner Atkins. Is there a second? Second. >> Second by Commissioner Hammond Roland. >> Seeing no further discussion, please call the role. >> Commissioner Halverson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hammond Roland. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Atkins. Yes. >> Commissioner Workman. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Drasty. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hullberg. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Slavic. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh with that, we move on to the regular agenda item 11.1. Um under central operations and finance, we have the adoption of the 2026 certified Dakota County maximum proposed levy. We have our finance director, Will Wallow, um here to with the presentation. Welcome to the meeting. >> Good morning, Chair Slavic. Commissioners, Will Wall, finance director at Dakota County. I'm here this morning to present on the adoption of the maximum proposed property tax levy for 2026. Uh this slide just shows the agenda uh of the presentation this morning. A lot of the slides we're going to be going through are slides you've seen at previous budget workshops. We'll just be reiterating what we talked about at those workshops. Um there's a few new slides. We'll be talking about um some potholes that we're looking to fill in 2026. Um and then we'll be also looking at property tax impacts of the recommended proposed levy for 2026. So first slide that we'll start off with here is the recommendation for the maximum levy for 2026. We are recommending a 9.9% increase from 2025 for a recommended maximum levy of 184,246,066 in 2026. As you've seen at our prior budget workshop last Tuesday, um our baseline projected cost increases for 2026 due to both internal cost pressures and then also um increases from cost shifts from the state and federal government. Uh combined with $8.3 million in reductions that staff have identified in levy funded programs and services uh resulted in an increase of 8.1% for 2026. Um however and on this next slide you can see we have the um anticipated increases in state and federal cost shifts in 2026 um and through 2030. In 27 we see um the SNAP program we're looking at administrative costs being shifted onto the county along with uh the potential implementation of um additional staffing for Medicaid work requirements from the recent one big beautiful bill act. Um and then in 28 and 2030, additional um cost shifts occurring. So this next slide shows the reductions that $ 8.3 million in cuts that I mentioned on the previous slide. Um this was after factoring in uh the things that were taken off of the reductions list at the July 23rd workshop and then uh staff recommendations at both the August 19th and um previous last week September 16th meetings for a total of $8.3 million in reductions to the levy, $8.8 8 million of cuts in total um and a reduction of 44.3 FTEES across the organization. So why staff are recommending a 9.9% levy increase as opposed to an 8.1 levy increase to cover operating costs are due to the county's current financial position. So as you can see on this slide, as we talked about at last week's workshop, uh the county's fund balance over the past five years has gone down fairly significantly about $136 million over that period. A large proportion of that decrease has been um has occurred in the general fund which is where uh most of the levy and most of the operating costs for the county are accounted for. As you can see on this slide, which we discussed at last week's workshop, uh the general fund along with a number of other funds, the county is in what's called a structural deficit or ongoing expenditures each year in the adopted budget have exceeded ongoing revenues, which is one of the factors that has resulted in the decrease in fund balance for the county. Um the proposal this year helps narrow that gap a little bit and we'll talk about the items that are ongoing expenditures that the increase of 1.8 an additional levy would cover. So this list right here is what we've been calling potholes, but things that are funded by fund balance that are ongoing expenditures. I'm not going to go through every single item on this list, but couple of highprofile items are our IT capital equipment program. Every piece of hardware, you know, laptop, uh, technology device that the county pays for is currently coming out of general fund fund balance. We also have a number of ongoing expenditures related to insurance. Um contracts which are year-to-year contracts which will be perpetually ongoing which are being uh currently funded by fund balance. But if we increase the levy to 9.9% roughly $3 million will go towards funding these ongoing expenditures. So, this next slide, which you've seen before, is just the five-year forecast of um projected current uh growth in um our own internal services combined with the cost pressures placed on the county by the state and federal government. And then now, uh we are looking at also adding additional money onto the levy for what we're calling the structural deficit reduction plan to help improve the financial position of the county. This next slide just depicts that visually. um showing that this year we're looking at a 9.9% levy increase. Next year we are currently forecasting an 11.7% levy increase due to primarily um cuts and cost shifts from the state and federal government. Um we continue to see that in 2028 before that starts to subside in 29 and 30 um where we look at picking back up with the structural deficit reduction plan and putting more levy funds into those items which are currently paid for out of fund balance. So to address some of the county's financial challenges, uh we put together a high level roadmap for how we are going to start addressing these issues, we're currently in phase one. Um as part of this, we'll be coming back to the board regularly for discussions on things such as the fund balance of all the county's funds. Uh looking at fund balance policies and procedures. Um, we'll also be uh evaluating between now and the December 2nd budget hearing any potential other uh cuts or reductions to items that are currently being paid out of general fund balance. So, you'll be hearing from us more repeatedly and ultimately the the goal of this is to create a long-term financial management plan that puts the county back on a sustainable financial trajectory. This next slide just shows a comparison of other counties um preliminary 2026 levy increases. As you can see, by and large, most of the counties who were uh looking at as this comparison group are also experiencing some of the same pressures that Dakota County is from the state and federal government and because of that are uh looking at levy increases higher in 2026 than what the increases were in 2025. Next, we'll talk about property tax impacts. And these were also provided to commissioners in um emails last Thursday. Uh but for a median residential homestead in the county, the county property tax change as uh a result of this 9.9% levy increase will be about $6611 next year. This next slide, uh, which again was sent out last week, shows what the impact looks like on a median value residential homestead in every city and township throughout the county. So to conclude, I'll just reiterate um, our recommended action before you today is adoption of the 2026 certified Dakota County maximum property tax levy of 184,246,066 for 2026. We will be coming back um for a couple of budget items in the next couple of months. Uh we'll be back in November uh to receive feedback on the CIP. As I mentioned, we'll have the December 2nd um budget and levy uh formerly known as the truth and taxation meeting and then adoption of the 2026 budget and property tax levy on December 16th. And as I reiterated, as we continue to go through this financial management roadmap, we will possibly be setting up additional budget workshops as well to get more into the weeds of um some of the other funds because we've only highlighted the general fund so far. So with that, um I will conclude my presentation and turn it over to the board for discussion. >> Thank you very much. Will appreciate that. Uh with that, I'm going to pass it right to our county manager first. >> Mr. Chair, Commissioner, just one more item I wanted to make sure that you knew. Last week when we talked about this, we said we would go through line by line everything that's funded in that reserves by by reserves and we did. We are doing that. So when we come back to you in December, >> maybe in November, >> November, >> in November, we will have additional recommended cuts of items that are currently funded by those reserves. We're just trying to close that gap as much as we can. Some things that we found in there that we thought we can change so we can we can make some cuts snips more of snips and make cuts. But um wanted to let you know we are also working on that. >> Thank you very much county manager. Uh with that open up for discussion, comments or a motion from anyone? just Yeah, Commissioner Hersonson, thank you. Appreciate the leadership. >> This feels uh like like something that deserves discussion. But really what I want to um highlight, especially for the public, is how much work has been done on this budget. Um I think that every year we feels like we start a little earlier having these conversations. Um and behind the scenes what's going on is a lot a flurry of activity um particularly with um division directors looking at where we can be leaner um in a county that's already extremely lean. Um and that is I think a tougher lift all the time. Um but I think that our staff really um answered that call well. um looking for things that um have worked and maybe we can graduate from. To me, that is some of the biggest success when um we hear well this project was put in place and it's been successful and um we can move on from that particular service. Wow. Um that is what we love to see. And so um I I just want to highlight that that is excellent work. because this is not a position that county boards want to be in um anywhere. Um these conversations are happening across the state. Um and we can't underscore enough that we are responding to um changes and shifts at the state and federal level. I will also say that counties have worked really hard to minimize the number of shifts that are coming our way. um and things that could have um rolled down to us in our transportation budget, in our uh community services budget by the millions didn't because um we were able to get in front of legislators and um uh stop that action. And so, um, while it it's not gonna you're you're not seeing a ton of conversation up here, um, I just wanted to give a little glimpse behind the scenes at kind of the yearround work that's happening to manage um, budget and expenses um, at the county level. I think that um, our staff have done a great job. I think that commissioners have done a great job. our partners at AMC and Micah and other um organizations have done a great job at the legislature and we'll continue to do that work um year round. Um but that doesn't change the fact that we are in this situation um today. Um but I feel really good about um the digging that has been done to um uh to put us on a path to rightsize the budget. The other thing I can't underscore enough is that we need to be on a path to uh refill our reserves. Um you have heard that will Heidi's heard that as well. Um it was nice to have uh cash to spend. Uh those days are over and what we need to do to be uh a financially sound county to keep our AAA bond rating is to make sure that our reserves are are healthy and they're not right now. Um and so uh the the focus to do that um this year is is really important and it's something that we're going to have to look at in in future years. So that is my comments. >> Mr. Chair, >> Commissioner Halverson, those are well said. Uh uh Commissioner Hman Roland. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and and I would concur. Thank you, Commissioner Hverson, for that. One of the things that I have spent my time as in leadership uh focusing on is being able to have our property taxes at a predictable, sustainable level. And over the last years, as we've gone through everything that we've gone through, cuts and shifts from the state and the federal government pandemic, um the the challenges that we face, we've had more of a a an opportunity for our property taxes to go up and to go down and or to lay flat and then go up. I think with um our mission now it is to create that predictable, sustainable uh stable level and I think that we are beginning this and thank you will for the in your team um that you've done to be able to do that and all the directors. Uh it's it's hard to do this and uh it's it's a challenge, but we have a responsibility to the now and to the future. So, thank you for that. others who have comments or questions. We've we know we've certainly I think at the point of commissioner Halverson that uh this process from when I started as commissioner we really would have been uh kind of at the beginning of our budget process on this day uh a decade ago and now we are coming to a point where we've fine-tuned I think the board whether they like it or not knows what the budget looks like for 2026. I think we know what what a maximum levy gets you and doesn't get you. I think we know what the impact of the cuts that have been had to make just to be able to get to this number, what that looks like, what that impacts of that are to the residents, to the businesses and to our own staff and employees. And I think that, you know, we are at a point where in the past we kind of picked a number and then figured out a budget that worked with that number. and uh to be able to get to a point where we understand and grasp even uh if we don't exactly like where it's at uh it gets us to a point it adds a much uh improved layer of fiscal responsibility uh to be able to do it that way. Um our challenges are don't end because we picked this number. I think that's one thing to certainly be aware of that when we get to I mean that's one of the great things about what was said in that uh framework was we're going to be coming back in October in November before the truth in taxation after the truth in taxation. We still have flexibility to uh make this a better budget and serve our community better uh in the next three months. This just gives you kind of a point in time that allows you to say this is where we are and um we're not going to be able to we didn't create all of the challenges and problems in one year and we can't fix them in one year but if we don't start taking some responsibility to uh move forward with that um it's just going to get worse next year >> and I think that's what uh what I appreciate that staff was able to uh educate the board more on some of that parts in there. Uh, I think it is important to note that, you know, about a third of the conversation we're having on a levy today is our state and federal um partners and their increases this year. Let's not talk about what they've done for for years and decades and generations that are an impact that really frankly doesn't feel right with unfunded mandates. This is just the new stuff. Next year in the proposed number, that's over 50% of the proposed levy is state and federal pressures and shifts and cuts. um half of half is what we need to do to run the county. The other half is just what the federal and state government is saying this is now your responsibility to do this work. So I think that it's important that as we work with our associations to see if there is something that gets figured in there. We haven't even had the conversation of all of the unfunded mandates from generations that counties are already on the hook for that if you would go to any other county go across the river and and see what Wisconsin has to pay for on some of these services and the state picks them up. Uh not the counties. So, we already are at a at a different point in here, but we know that sometimes, you know, uh you're dealt the cards you get and you have to go in and and work with that. So, I think that that's um where we're at. And it gives me hope and promise because of the great staff we have and frankly the great board that we can do tough things. We can figure things out and and get to the point we're at. So, um I don't like where we're at, but I can only control so many things and all of us can only control what we can what we have any say in and uh so I just want to express my appreciation for getting us to where we are today uh whatever may happen. So with that any other comments otherwise we do have a staff recommendation county manager recommendation uh that we discussed at the um board uh budget meeting last week. Is there anyone who wishes to make that motion or a different motion? >> I'll move. >> It's been that motion has been moved by Commissioner Dross. Is there a second to that? >> Second. >> Second to that. One last chance for any conversation and discussion. Commissioner Atkins. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh and Will and everybody in finance, Heidi, uh everybody that contributed from all the departments and divisions. Um I appreciate all the work that got us to this to this point. Uh had a quick question. Uh and I think my my number is accurate. in order, what is the figure that Dakota County would need to increase our property taxes by uh and yet what is the maximum figure and yet still remain the lowest tax per property tax per capita of any county in Minnesota? any >> chair commissioner Atkins. Um when we were looking at that back in July, you know, holding all else equal, so not anticipating other counties increasing their property tax levy, the number was 31% um to catch up to Anoka County on a per capita basis. >> Thank you. And Mr. Sure. Well, I do not intend to support a 31% increase in the property tax, but I I think it bears noting that uh our predecessors have done a hell of a job um dating back literally decades on uh on constraining the levy as much as possible. Uh this is this is a more difficult period of time. We've obviously got some external pressures uh that we you know don't have any control over that uh that are driving some of these numbers and I I came in fully prepared. You know, we've, as Chair Slavic and others have noted, we've been at this for months. And uh I was convinced that uh that figure uh that the staff recommended was the number that uh that we needed to support today uh and was prepared to vote yes for it. Um what pulled the rug out from under me a little bit was uh there have been some changes in the capital improvement program uh that have been proposed uh that came up since August 19th when we last had the discussion. Uh some projects got moved up. Uh there was a Lakeville Road project for example that got moved up by year. Uh there was uh but many projects got either moved back or eliminate it alto together. And for me, this is just like my household budget. In fact, I'm more careful with these dollars because they're other people's dollars uh than I am with my own. And I'm pretty darn frugal. Ask my wife. I'm pretty dang frugal and careful with our own dollars. But uh in a household budget, um you've got the operations, the day-to-day expenses, and then you've got obviously the what it takes to maintain the the home itself and the yard and all the things that go along with that. uh and the significant changes that I saw that were not brought back before this board um for further discussion about how we were going to address those that has caused me some trepidation uh in supporting the budget today. That being said, I I this is our preliminary levy figure. And after sitting here and listening to my chair and my colleagues, talking to the county manager, uh talking to the physical development director, um and you know, we'll have some further discussion about the CIP here in a minute, but uh this is a preliminary figure, uh that we're supporting today. I think it behooves us to have as much flexibility uh in uh in that figure. So I I will somewhat um just sort of hold my my uh my powder a little bit vote yes today. Um but I got some real strong concerns about what happened uh in the CIP. Uh I'll bring those up in the next discussion. uh and uh look forward to some further discussion about the budget and CIP over the next couple months, but I didn't want to sit here quietly vote yes and you think everybody think everything was hunky dory because it ain't. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you very much, Commissioner Atkins. And I I think that every one of us who ends up voting yes on this is certainly not overly comfortable with how we're having to do that. But I certainly appreciate you adding some context to some of your regretted yes and I appreciate uh your comments with that. So thank you. Anyone? >> Yes. Uh thank you Mr. Chair. I will say this is the third year I've been here on budgets and this is by far the most detailed and clear scope of looking at the status and where we are as the county and I will be supporting this and um clearly it's much higher than what I think any of us anticipated even last year when we significantly changed the direction of the county. But I will say I'm uh very in tune with uh where our population's at. Eight uh 17% on fixed income or social security or uh large uh percentage of our population um where their house payment is u beyond what the 30% what's recommended. And I also realize all businesses when you look at hey these cost all businesses are no different than we are they have to make adjustments also. So it is u again I applaud staff the clarity of the data but I uh am very cognizant in the next two three years this trend line will not be changing. So, the work we have and what staff's been doing, again, I applaud uh tough work, but we have uh more tough decisions before us. Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yeah, I just as long as Lakeville was called out, I just have to make the point that it's not a levy funded project. >> Thank you, Colbert. Any other comments from the board? I have not Seeing any with that we do have a resolution before us. Uh with that, please call the role. >> Commissioner Hayman Roland, >> yes. >> Commissioner Atkins, >> yes. >> Commissioner Workman, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dassi, >> yes. >> Commissioner Hullberg, >> no. >> Commissioner Slavic, >> yes. >> Commissioner Herson, >> yes. >> Thank you. That motion does carry. Uh and with that, we move on to um our next agenda item, which is here it is. Thank you. Uh next agenda item is uh item 12.1 under physical development administration authorization to release the 2026 to 2030 capital improvement program for formal review. We have Aaron Sorva, physical development deputy director. Welcome to the meeting. >> Good morning Mr. Chair, commissioners as you know um this process is a fluid process. It is a um very uh up tod date process. We're constantly moving um numbers and projects around based on our partners and new information we're learning. So today we want to talk about the authorization to release the draft of the 2026 to 2030 CIP program for formal review. Um we'll talk about process today and then we'll give you the overview of the plan. So looking at process um over the last few months we have been um in front of you at a few touch points talking about above and below the line projects. We had some commissioner meetings with you over the summer. We met with the county manager and then we had a workshop with you back in August where we talked about some of the challenges, some of the projects, uh how we were planning and preparing for those. and we're here today. Um, looking ahead, we're looking at another touch point in November, whether that be at PDC or another budget meeting that you're having on the operational budget. We'll be back in front of you to talk about any comments we're receiving and any changes as this is kind of a moving target until we get to that December hearing. Um then we are at our deadline based on this um plan today um by November 7th to have some comments back looking at the CIP public hearing on December 2nd and then um the potential adoption at the county board on December 16th. So looking at the fiveyear summary um the 2026 total plan is at 146.8 8 million and looking at just under 900 million for the total fiveyear CIP. We have several changes that have occurred since we were before you in August. And I'll I'll not walk through each of these individually, but I could certainly um we could certainly touch on them if if you'd like. We do have staff in the audience who worked on putting this together. You'll see all of the facilities projects here. these really worked towards just changing the um funding source. So that was just a shift based on some conversations and then several projects had general fund um listed and were moved to unfunded based on some of the projections and discussions we had before you last month. Looking at parks changes, there were several um new several pieces of new information we had um regarding um parks and trails legacy funding dollars coming in revenues. So, those were changed here. We did remove uh public art implementation from the plan based on some direction last month. Uh we looked at changing names for a couple of projects based on direction, looking at matching funds um and making some adjustments. And then uh we do have some changes to the greenways plans as Commissioner Atkins stated. Um I do want to preface this uh change for the the greenways um and the transportation projects that will be in the upcoming slides. We have been um firming up our fund balance numbers, looking at what we're bringing in for revenues, looking at what our expenditures are, where we're at today on costs. And we did find out just about a month ago about a $10 million less fund balance or I'm sorry, last week a $10 million fund balance um reduction. So that was going to be as a part of the sales and use tax fund balance. Um due to that we had to reduce um the fiveyear plan for sales and use taxf funded projects by that $10 million. Now you know our 10-year outlook um has always been in the black. Our five-year outlook would have been in the red by $10 million. So we did look towards reducing those um starting with the Lebanon Hills Greenway Lone Oak Road project moving from 2029 to 2030 and then several um segments here uh Lebanon Hills Greenway Vermilion Highlands Greenway moving from 2028 to 2030 and then four projects moving out of the 5-year CIP that were previously funded in 2029 and 2030 and those are Lebanon Hills Greenway, Rosemount Greenway, the E Egan Ember Grove Lebanon Hills Greenway project um on Trunk Highway 55 and CASA 28 and the Lake Marian Greenway at Holy Oak. So those were moved out of the CIP. That does not mean that maybe planning work will not continue to take place, but those construction segments are being moved out at this time. going into the transportation projects. Um there are these ones have these projects have way more moving targets I'd say than any other projects um in our capital program. So we did have a lot of construction budgets um updated as a part of this process. That is very typical at this stage. Uh we did have a couple of projects added. Um you'll see the Glacier Way project. Um we have two uh two additional projects uh Allen Way and Cass 73 at Babcock um construction budgets updated and then we did have one project completely moved out of the 5-year CIP that is um Egan Grove border pedestrian underpass at CASA 28 um due to the sales and use tax availability and then looking at Garden View to Handover and Diamond Path the construction budget updated And then um we have just several phasing changes um here. And then you'll see multiple changes to projects uh as we plan for the staff time that is used to develop these projects. That tended to be a oneline item in the plan. We decided to go by project. So that adjusted every single project um in the transportation CIP. So looking at the total picture for each of the individual CIPs, you'll see data networks total CIP for this year zero uh for the coming year 2026 at zero 2026 to 2030 at 4.8 million funded entirely by county funds. The environmental resources CIP totaling 1 million in 26 for a total of 8.8 million over the 5year CIP being funded by the environmental legacy fund in the state. Looking at the facility CIP, which is a total of 17.1 million in 2026 and 118.9 million over the entirety of the CIP being funded by county funds, county debt, transportation sales tax, and a number of unfunded uh or projects that are unfunded at this time based on direction. Looking at parks and greenways, we have several funding sources here, but a total 20 a total 2026 CIP at $25.3 million and a total 2026 to 2030 CIP at 212.7 million. I will not read off all of the funding sources, but we have many funding sources that go into the parks and greenways program. Transportation is very similar. total of $12.9 million for the 2026 CIP and the entirety of the the five-year CIP at 548 million 548.1 million with several funding sources. I'm happy to take any questions um but just to reiterate um there are seven projects that were pushed out um due to the sales and use tax shift in parks. Four of them were outside of the five-year, three were shifted years, and then one transportation project was shifted, and we have some detail we can provide on that as well if you have additional questions, but I'm happy to take any other questions you might have. >> Thank you, Erin. Any comments or questions from the board? >> Commissioner Herson. >> Um, thank you, Mr. chair and um I have some questions and concerns about process. So long long time ago we had a conversation about sales and use tax and um the board uh at the time what I recall the direction being is we don't so because we've got another half cent right or quarter cent quarter cent to go um uh that uh we have not leveraged yet and at the time the board said we don't have to do it now because we're flush we're um in black. Um, and when we are not in the black, we should talk about that and reconsider it. So, I'm very I'm concerned that the conversation is being happened about the cut without talking about how we um actually deal with the fund. And I feel like it puts us in a position of um having part of the conversation, which frankly I think we've done a lot over the years. Um and had a conversation about um uh you know, for example, the levy without having the conversation about maintaining our reserves. Um and so this to me feels the same way. We we're also facing um a lot of risk with the ELF fund and feels like we're getting a little close to the sun and I think that we have to um have a more universal discussion about how we are going to maintain these funds in the future. My concern about taking things off or pushing them out um once they get out past that fiveyear mark um putting them back is going to be harder because it's going to start to look like we don't need to have the conversation about SUT. Um and it's going to impact communities. That little stretch of Lone Oak um in in my district is is really vital. It's something that um as we've because um it's a small stretch of road, but it got a lot of feedback from the neighborhood, I will say. Um and uh adding that connection to um the the Mississippi River Greenway was uh a big part of kind of what we've promised that community and um and we can deliver on that if we um you know have a a bigger conversation than just um what we're not going to fund and what we're going to put off. if we, you know, make the decision without talking about how we're fixing the fund. Um, that's only part of the conversation. I really want us to come back and have the whole conversation um and do the math. The other thing I'll say about the sales and use tax is I am so tired of having to defend this at the at the state um when we are one of is it two counties that haven't, you know, take three. Okay. um uh maximize their levy and we're going or maximize the sales and use tax opportunity and uh we keep asking the state for money and they're like well there's there's money for you and uh and so um it'd be nice to put that to bed too but I just think we have to have a bigger conversation that's all Mr. Sure. >> Thank you, Mr. Yes. Thank you, Commissioner Hersonson. Uh, Commissioner Atkins. >> Oh, I'm sorry, George. Was it related to that that you want? And then we'll go there. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair. Thank you. So, as Erin described, we um we found out that we had 10 $10 million less of sales and use tax than we thought. In order to be uh fiscally responsible and not come into the red for sales and use tax, I directed staff to move those projects. All those projects are still on the SUT list, the the 10-year list. Um, so we are capturing those on the 10-year list. The issue with with the sales and use tax um isn't that we don't have enough money, it's the cash flow issue. Um by the end of the five years, we would have been dipping into the red um based on what was in the plan. Uh at the end of 10 years, which is the list that we give to the state, we're back in the black by about $20 million. So, it's all about when the money's here. If we uh increase sales and use tax, we have the option to increase that about $25 million more a year. we do that um which we can just be aware that that's $25 million over five years that's going to increase us by do the math right it's $125 million um now we're going to have a huge balance in SUT again and that is a problem having a balance in SUT is always told by our attorney is this is supposed to be the money comes in the money goes out we should be maintaining this as close to zero so actually having it close to within a million dollars of of the balance is a good place to be. Um, but it also makes the cash flow issue that much more complicated. We had other options. Um, you know, I chose to move them and and have them on the SUT list. That was my direction. Uh, another option is we could have listed all those as unfunded and leave them in there. Um, as you saw already the slides that we have. We've got a lot of unfunded things in the outy years. Um, that's definitely an option. we could go back and we could take all those items, put them back in um before we release it to the public and just mark them as unfunded and have that further discussion. Um but uh so that's why uh the document looks like it does now. It's because uh we we don't have the money today, but we will by the end of 10 years. We'll have more than we need by the end of 10 years. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. on that topic. >> Yeah, on that topic, I just want to um it just um part of my discomfort with this is that I don't know that we've um had any have had this level of changes come to us before a regular board item um on uh I would say some high-profile stuff, right? Like things that our communities are asking for. And so to not have a board discussion about this um doesn't feel right. I appreciate the um frankness uh about, you know, the uh funding deficit that we're we're looking at um and the concerns around that and the fact that we're going to address it sooner rather than later. Um and uh not but I I just I think that this was a board discussion that needed to happen and and it didn't. And uh honestly um you know I I think you guys are really smart, really talented and all those things. It's um when it's on our our neighborhoods in our backyards, uh I feel like uh the stewardship and responsibilities that we have as we talk to people about what's happening. One of the things we talk about the most is what's happening and in my community, one of the things that people want to talk about the most especially is what's happening around active transportation. Um and um and so I kind of I I feel protective of those things. That's Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Atkins. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I I'm just going to start with a question. I got some comments perhaps for later, but my question is uh and you know, as you know, I represent a district where a third of the folks don't have cars. Um is we saw that in the presentation. So they get around on two feet or on or on two wheels uh or they call an Uber or something like that. But uh most of the CIP changes that came without ever coming to a committee were ones that are actually in other um districts. They're not in mine. Um the the one I wanted to just ask you further about is and I'm guessing Commissioner Grai will weigh in on it as well. It's actually at Highway 55 and County Road 63 aka Argenta um Yankee Doodle. Uh that one was taken out of the CIP altogether. It's a pedestrian safety concern. And since this has now become sort of our opportunity, uh can somebody explain to me why that one was removed? Chair and Commissioner Atkins. Yes, we did look at that project and that project will follow the Argenta 494 interchange. So the first step would be the Argenta 494 interchange and then the 5563 grade separation would occur. So, because that's years out, we we did feel like um it's not on the near-term horizon. >> Thank you, Mr. Barry. And I'm I'm glad that I asked because um we could be waiting forever for 494. We don't because that one is so much out of our hands >> uh and requires potentially state and federal participation. Uh that makes me even more concerned about this particular one. Um and and Bill, I'm not trying to jump on your toes here, but I know Councilman Murphy, the mayor, have raised this one multiple times uh about how dangerous it is for pedestrians to cross uh at 55 and our Genta or a Genta Yankee Doodle. Um and I maybe I'll stop there, hand it off to Commissioner Grai if he's got questions. Otherwise, I' I'd like to talk about it more. Uh we've had fatalities at that intersection, multiple fatalities at that intersection. But I'm going to pause there because I I uh I think I've made the point with respect to that one project and then I got questions about several others. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. for you uh on that topic >> since uh well aware of it and uh areas but I will say within my district I have an even higher priority at 42 and Akran for and under pass with thousands of people living in that quadrant now with uh crossing at street level. So, um, that's one thing, uh, at the county, um, stopping and looking at all priorities and risk and current situations. I think, uh, things have changed. I I think I'm the only one here with an intersection closed because of traffic accidents also, and it still is going to take two years to get open that up and Biscane 42. So um I realize yes this uh surprised me significant changes and I have many many other questions but I realize again we're adopting this and as long as I have the floor I do have a quick question on a separate note. So this is releasing for comments no through to the townships and the cities uh by November 7th, correct? And we push this out. We'll communicate that. If residents wanted to comment on this, is there an online place for residents or is it only the cities and townships? >> Chair, Commissioner Drossi, we have had several residents contact us as well. So we put that out for everybody. We're publicly releasing this document as a whole >> on the website and welcome all comments. >> Absolutely. The only group that we do have a physical touch point is a letter that goes out to all of our cities um so they know to bring back cities and townships to bring back um hopefully a resolution of support from their city councils before the date so we can provide that to you at the public hearing. Thank you. >> With that, I'm going to pass it back to Commissioner Atkins. I can hold for if others got have comments. >> I think you got Oh, >> somebody >> I can I can go. >> Sure. >> So, um this is releasing for draft comments. So, we're we will have the opportunity to make modifications. um some of the projects that have been raised as issues. I I'd like to remind people that uh next year will be the first major solicitation on the active transportation dollars which will be about 50 million and on top of that of course you have the regular regional solicitation dollars as well. So the CIP is changing all the time given opportunities to fund things um as far as whether they're listed unfunded or pushed off the back. We'll have the opportunity to have that discussion before uh final approval. Um we tend to um do okay in solicitation. So there will be something coming. You'll find in my uh update from TAB some uh warning signs for that note, but I mean I think the action before us today is to release it for comment. It's not the final deal and some very good points have been raised that could likely be addressed. >> I will add a comment then if uh because I know you want to go a little bit more in detail, Joe. Um the one I think that very much like I shared our budget process has evolved over recent years where we used to get a preliminary target and then we would do budget workshops between September and December and that's when we really would draft a budget to where we've in essence created a budget by today and now it's a matter of uh what's the where where's the right point tweaks and such. Um I think our CIP process you know it was only a couple weeks ago where all of the things that were technically unfunded we didn't refer to them as unfunded we refer to them as fund balance. Um, and then we've we've changed that part there. And I think that this year probably creates a little bit of a hiccup because we we made a we made a goalpost change literally a week and a half ago to go from fund balance to as we had the fund balance conversation from fund balance to um unfunded. And it's a little hard, but I actually think that being consistent this year and and actually being very transparent and actually saying everything was unfunded prior to a board discussion on some of this probably was would be probably more appropriate. Um is in this part in here. Um, I actually really have huge respect and appreciate that staff is trying to look and and figure out a way to really be the the steward of the dollars that we uh that that we all know and expect. Um, but I think that next year this won't won't be the same issue because next year we'll have everything as unfunded which is unfunded and then it's a matter of it might be in a fiveyear CIP capital improvement plan on the assumption we find a way to pay for it. uh if we cannot find a way to pay for it, that is where it becomes the delay. And um so I think that your transparency actually improves with this process a year from now just like our transparency in the budget has has uh will happen in that part there. I don't know. So my my kind of thought with this is um if you were asking me, I would actually support the uh draft CIP as it was presented today. However, I think that that did not really that had a staff discussion and not a board discussion. And I feel like as policy makers, the board should be able to we we saw everything else. We've had multiple times where we've seen the capital improvement plan and then the changes we never really saw and they are dramatic enough that my comfort level personally would have been to be similar to release a draft that actually looked for some of these things that are more contro some of you know the the five uh four or five uh things related to the sales and use tax would actually just go and be unfund keep them in there put them unfunded and frankly as we're going to have conversations this is a draft that we're proposing but as I'm understanding from what uh our finance director said, there's a number of things in that CIP that we're releasing to the public that may not show up for even 2026 and 2027. Uh that we're going to be having that conversation as a policy makers to say, you know, one of the ways to close that gap of that deficit that we are running in fund balance is to go and postpone or eliminate this project here. And we're going to be going from staff recommendations to go just like we did with the budget cuts that we had in July. We're going to go through and see what can be put off for a year, what can maybe be permanently uh removed. And that conversation is going to happen, but the policy makers will make that decision. And I think that that's where my my comfort level is that we um though I don't disagree with most of what was recommended, I think that um being able to be a little more transparent for this year in that process to um which by the way probably ends up being exactly where we'll end up in in in December when we have finalized a CIP. I think getting to that point today where those projects are actually still in a CIP as we saw a couple weeks ago, but show up as unfunded and then we make it maybe actually with that CIP would have had something that actually is a little clearer that talks about these projects that are unfunded may not happen within the capital improvement plan unless funding becomes available. that actually and maybe that's in really big bold letters. Um because I think that that is is the part is if uh if a revenue stream increases and all of a sudden we can put those greenway projects back in. I don't think that anyone including staff would disagree with that. It's just a um the fact of the matter is if you show it as unfunded and then funding becomes available whether that be a state or federal grant, whether maybe that's a a a local business that wants a right check. We've had that happen in certain parts that have reduced a cost. Wonderful. we should take every opportunity we can, but for the purposes of this draft, I don't I think it's a little uh it's not as genuine as it could be to go and just remove things when uh we have other parts of this where we just refer to as unfunded. So being consistent for this year would be my recommendation. I don't know if you can massage that in the before we would release that, but that would be where I would say um and you know whether we have to go in and and we are going to go into recess for our close session. Um, so we do have an opportunity if there needs to be some changes in drafts that want to come back to this, we could go in uh if there's consensus on the board um to make sure that the draft looks like we want, we could go in and um do our other action and then come back and uh make a motion to release it with those changes if that's what the board wants to do. But so we do have we have a lot of flexibility this morning and the fact that we're going to be bouncing between meetings. So if that's a staff direction that the majority of the board agrees to, so be it. if it needs to be something we all actually see, we have time to do that as well. So with that, Commissioner Atkins. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I have a simpler question and that is what is the obligation from a schedule point of view that we have to have this out today? >> Mr. Chair, Commissioner Atkins, we do not have to have this out today. we're just reducing the amount of time um the cities and townships have to get this on an agenda for them uh for their meetings to get the resolution of support back to us. So we generally try to give them roughly six weeks just with their schedules. Um so if we were to come back um I I think that would be sufficient. We have released in October before when we've we've waited to do so um due to some changes. So that's not unusual. Um I will say u Mr. Chair, >> we would probably need a little bit more time. Um this is a pretty expansive document and I would want to make sure all of our numbers are correct. Um and to make a number of changes across spreadsheets I'm not sure we could do in an hour or so. Um I don't I I would rather not have a mistake. And I and my response on staff on that is that we don't meet as a county board until when >> seventh >> the 7th. So that's our next so we have a couple weeks. So I just wanted to make sure that that was enough appropri appropriate time knowing that we're looking to the around Thanksgiving by the time we would have um those comments in there. My other question with that would be and this is really to county manager and finance. Um while that do we anticipate because our budget meeting would be related to some of these CIP changes um would potentially be happening while it is still out for comment. Is that does that create conflict as a result? >> Mr. Chair, say that again. What are you worried what is your concern? >> So if we are out six weeks we're basically to right before Thanksgiving. Uh it was in that month of November when we were looking to go in and see some of those staff recommendations on changes to the CIP. Um and that would be happening concurrent to um public comment period. So we would be potentially making changes. We'll still not being able to get the comments from the public yet. And I didn't know if that changes that timeline. Um which we certainly don't have to approve the CIP till the last meeting of December. So, we do have but but I would hate to go and see that we are starting to make changes to a CIP without having the uh fair opportunity of public comment that we're having this conversation on. >> Mr. Chair, commissioners, I do think that it would make it a little bit tight if we don't release it until the 7th of October. Um I mean it can be done. We were planning to come back to you November November 6th. November 6, the first meeting in November to talk more about, you know, here's what we heard from cities and that's where we anticipated getting more changes. Um, so I think it it might be tough to to wait that long. I do think I mean I think a potential way to sort of thread the needle here is to go back to what you saw on OC um in August just change back to unfunded the things that we moved out. If you're comfortable with the first list that just is name changes perhaps we could leave those in. um but to release it with that change. That would be a way to perhaps thread the needle that um adds everything back in as the chair suggested. We would just list them as unfunded if we can see that as of today we will not have money for that in that year. we'd lift list them as unfunded but leave them in um and and then allow you to have more discussion about whether or not there's you want to pursue other funding options or whether or not you want to leave it as unfunded in November. >> I I don't see an issue with that, but I I'll go to Commissioner Atkins. I know that you were you have the greatest concern on this. So, Mr. Chair and I'm I'm a little taken aback that I'm alone. >> No, you're not. You know, I mean, we've had this same conversation about other topics so many times about how we don't take this kind of action without having an opportunity to have heard about it in committee and ask the I mean, I didn't I don't know, maybe Commissioner Dst's had a chance to visit with Councilman Murphy and Mayor Dietrich about the the pedestrian safety issue at 55 and and our agenda, but I haven't. that wasn't all bad. >> Um, and so in an ideal uh situation, we would have had these changes back when we talked about it in August. In a less ideal, we would have had these changes in between August 19th and today, September 23rd, last week. >> Uh, we haven't had that chance. So unless uh uh and I just I'm just so deeply disappointed um that we're being placed in a position where now we have to choose to have either uh a bad outcome today or a bad process. And I think the best of the possibilities uh is probably what you've suggested. We we keep or what county manager Wells suggested. >> Uh we keep it in the fashion that it was brought to us before. We note that some projects are, you know, just tell them what's going on. Say, "Hey, we were we didn't know what was going on for a while. we just discovered last week uh we've got a $10 million deficit and let them also comment on whether they think we ought to increase the sales and use tax to fund it rather than take out those projects. Um I'm going to take a a little bit of a leap here um because part of the reason you guys I feel so strongly about this. I know four families that have had pedestrian fatalities. >> One of them was in my previous district. We went to the state, we were able to with Representative Halverson's assistance. But you don't just remove projects that benefit pedestrian safety without it coming for a full full discussion. Um, and so, you know, I don't want to name their names. I literally keep their names with me. I know their names. I know their families. And so if I, you know, if it seems like I'm a little emotionally about this, you're right. I am. Uh, but I Yeah, I think doing it in that fashion, releasing it. >> It's not great and it shouldn't happen ever again. >> Yeah. >> Commissioner Hullberg, then Commissioner Herson. Oh, I'm Wait a second here. Commissioner Workman was way at the end. Yeah. I don't know if you still want to. Commissioner Workman. Holberg. Halverson. >> Thank you, Mr. fair. Just so you know, I had a debate, internal debate on whether or not I should even say anything. >> I'm not exactly politically correct all the time, but this is a draft. It's not set in stone. It's a draft. And if someone, a city isn't happy or a constituent from whatever district isn't happy, they'll say so. And then we can either acknowledge it, make adjustments, or do whatever it is we have to do. I am perfectly fine with the way it looks right now and the way and all the work that staff has put into it. I have no issues with it because it is a draft. And I have intersections in my district that don't even connect to a county road that have had fatalities. So, I'm sorry those things happen, but but you know, maybe if people paid more attention while they were driving, they wouldn't. Um, and you keep bringing up the sales and use tax, and I will never vote to increase it. Now, if the state wants to take that on and do that, then have at it, but I too am also tired of defending our position. Um, and George explained very well what would happen if we did that. And we don't need to have that kind of surplus. So I say we release it as is if and wait or continue to have conversations while the draft plan is out. That's fine, but let it go. These are the experts, not us. We all have our pet projects in our districts, and that's what this is beginning to sound like. So I say, let it go as it is. let people comment and we can address the comments after the um time is done for public comments. >> Thank you, Commissioner Workman. >> And I better stop. >> Thank you, Commissioner Workman. >> Point, Mr. Chair, not one of these projects is in my district. Commissioner Workman, >> not one. >> No, not any not any of the projects that have been altered since August 19th uh is uh is one that I've raised a point about. Thank you. >> Thank you, Chris Atkins. So noted, Commissioner Hullberg, then Palverson. >> So thank you, Mr. Chair. My apologies for speaking twice and Aaron came to the stand and maybe she was going to make this point as well. Just going back to the August document would not include all of the changes that we agreed to or told them to do up until this point. So we would lose that work product as well. So I I it seems like a simple solution, but it might actually throw us farther off track than said I mean I I I think the cities need at least six weeks. This they have to figure out how their cost shares and everything would um interact with their budgets as well. I I don't know if there's a way to put a introductory warning or paragraph saying that this is a draft, budgets are changing. You know, we expect there to be additional changes as a result or I mean I we're kind of in a sticky situation, but all things being considered, I think we we should put it out. Plus, I think that's what I told him yesterday at the state of the colony. >> I have I have a solution. >> I like that. >> But you have you do have the floor then I'll come up with a >> Yeah, thank you. And um >> I think that you know that is a good point that some work was done, you know, prior to to August 19th. Um, and I think you're you're putting something together, so I'm not going to um preempt too much, but you know, my first question was going to be um with regard to um scheduling notice that the city's needs um can they, you know, get a pre-letter to say this is going to be in your hands on such and such a date. um so that they can get the scheduling done um for their public meeting um and then also anticipate when it'll be in their hands for analysis um so that we can have the time to do the work. So that's one question and then my other um uh question was um you know if if it does go out you know there's been some conversation about having it go out um having these projects say unfunded that there should be narrative involved. Um these uh projects that were pulled since or changed since August 19th with outboard discussion um could maybe be highlighted and there could be some narrative about we found this $10 million hole. Um so and could we add some narrative around that for our cities? But those are just two whatifs and I'm gonna >> All right. So, thank you, Commissioner Halverson. I'm just trying to crunch some numbers and some thoughts on here. Um, and just throw this out here for a second. If we would propose to actually bring this back to the board meeting on the 7th of October and release it on the 7th of October, that gives staff the appropriate time to be able to address a lot of what we talked about and make sure that we clean up language, clean up this the things that we already agreed upon on the 19th, but also go and address some of the concerns of the board here, released at the board meeting on the 7th of October. If we do not go and have that conversation on the 4th of November when the GGP there and potentially schedule an an additional GGP on the 18th of November that goes in and um that is only a a board and regional rail so that's going to be an earlier day regard so we actually have enough time to do an additional to do two GGPs in uh or it could be a budget workshop for all that matters but something on the Tuesday the 18th doesn't give you exactly um six weeks to release, but it gives you uh five plus and um with the fact that with the exception of our small cities and townships, all of the larger cities meet at least twice a month. >> So, they would have uh ample time within that schedule to be able to put something on and maybe we could give a courtesy of a heads up. I've already done that with my townships to let them know that there's going to be a CIP and there'll be road projects that might be coming up. So, I've already sent them an email to all of the clerks and board chairs giving them a heads up of a CIP as I do it each and every year. Um, so it it isn't six, but it is five. And it allows the board to not get ahead of public comment, but also give the ample time for staff to go and address the concerns of today. Thoughts on that from my colleagues if we could, >> Mr. Chair, >> to make that work. >> Mr. Chair, this is this is what I was thinking all along, the idea of tableabling this today. And I like that you've given us the the timeline so that there's a comfort level that there is sufficient time uh and not we're not going to be rushed. The cities are not going to be rushed. They're going to be we're going to make sure that they're aware that there were concerns that did come and you did it. I want to thank you for the work that you did do uh and let them know that we had we needed more time for the board to have this conversation. So, I appreciate your timeline, Mr. Chair, and um it gives everybody a chance to be on board >> with the CIP. As tableabling is a non-debatable motion, I don't want to quite take a motion yet on this, but make sure that people have their voice heard, but uh that is something we could consider. Does somebody have something they feel they need to say >> um about that? I'm looking around. If not, I would encourage one of my colleagues to vote move to table it um with the direction that we've had in the discussion today. Um but before that, I'm not going to take a second because I have Erin who has to say a few things. >> Thank you, chair and and commissioner. Um, I just wanted to clarify. I was doing for a friend while I was sitting down and I was confusing some projects. I thought Commissioner Atkins was referring to the grade separation of 55 and 63 when in fact he was referring to the pedestrian underpass and so that was pushed out to line up with the greenway construction which is anticipated to occur in 31. So design is still ongoing for that project. So I just wanted to clarify that. >> I appreciate it. I think that's a good example of how we're trying to go in and make sausage in in live time and being able to take the step back and get this thing these things figured out really is an appropriate uh way to do that. So, >> Mr. Chair, >> so we have a >> I will make a motion to uh but before I make that motion, I just want to say I really appreciate the conversation that we've had here and I appreciate the work that staff has done. I feel much more comfortable about being able to have time for the dialogue and then bring it before the county board when we know that it is at least um everyone has had a chance to be able to look at it. With that, I will make a motion to table. >> It's been moved to table until the next uh regularly scheduled board meeting. Is there a second to that? >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Hverson. Once again, that is a non-debatable motion. Uh with that, please call the role. >> Commissioner Atkins. >> Yes. Commissioner Workman, >> no. >> Commissioner Dsti, >> no. >> Commissioner Hullberg, >> no. >> Commissioner Slavic, >> yes. >> Commissioner Hersonson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Hayman Roland, >> yes. >> That motion does carry a table till the 7th of October. >> All right. Wow. So, that 10-minute conversation took us about an hour. So with that we will uh uh move on to uh just to walk through once again um our item is to recommendation to go into a closed uh uh session. Uh we will do is we'll make the motion to go into that. Then we will move to uh inter agency announcements and reports the county manager report. Then we will go into recess. Then we will do the regional rail and then we will go into the close session. though walking through that item 13.1 is an action item by the sheriff to go to a closed executive session Dakota County Board of Commissioner safety training. >> Is there a motion to that extent? >> So moved. >> Commissioner Herson is and is first and uh Commissioner Haymon Roland was a second. I'll uh please uh call the RO. >> Commissioner Workman. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Dassi. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hullberg. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Slavit. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hersonson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Hayman Roland. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Atkins. Thank you. That motion carries. And next we're going to go on to inter agency announcements and reports and commissioner updates. We start with the Association of Minnesota Counties. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I sent out the summary to all of the commissioners. >> We also have the policy committee um where we started formulating our our policy agendas for um for the next legislative year. Um I will start by saying that general government where I serve in usually deals with property taxes and a number of other uh fund money issues. And uh this year actually uh for the first time chose instead to do its legislative priority is really to fix the um fix the technology and and fix our our state systems that are not working right. I think that those who were in attendance got to see a great presentation by uh Dakota and Scott Community Services of kind of a live action on literally uh the green screens and DOS systems that we have as as um state systems and eligibility and why that is truly costing the taxpayers um millions of dollars each and every year. Um we uh so we realize that even though we've received a lot of dollars to do that part in there um if the state had to do eligibility instead of counties I guarantee you this would have been done years ago and it would have been fixed right and uh but for that uh this is the part that is is that brings us back and when we talk about our high taxes and our high levy this is one of the major things that goes in um that we have no control at it wasn't a shift and a cut from the last year or two this is something that's been going on since the8s Um, I think one of the most glaring part to me was when we saw that, uh, literally when you input a new birth, a new child, you have to go in and say, is that new baby, um, are they married? Are they have they served in the military service? On every single one of those things and there's there's not a way to just skip those questions. You have to answer each and every one of those questions. And when we look at our staff time, which is so valuable, that's what they're doing there. So, not only was that a a human services and social services priority at AMC, it was also um a priority for the tax committee basically. And I will also say that we had some amazing presentations on both some federal updates as well as the um we had a legislator panel that was a that was just eye opening in terms of their conversations on what they can do together. I think we we certainly had champions of counties that were on the panel and I think that makes a world of difference but um what they are able to do these were some more senior tenur members uh to hopefully educate the other members of the legislature on some of these big issues that face counties. So I thought it was a great conference and a great step into addressing the issues that we need to moving forward. With that we'll go to Metropolitan Emergency Services Board. >> Yes. Uh I'll uh mention we had a meeting on Friday. Uh key item on the meeting, we hired a vendor to uh do the mapping for schools throughout the state, six of our seven regions. It's a little over 2400 schools. And the deadlines by June of 2026. And just for the public on mapping what it means is uh once a school is mapped some of them are acre could be two 5 acre with fields that the 911 caller will get the location on their complex of where the emergency is whether it's medical or fire. So to cut the response times, the legislature allocated 7 million in 2024, and this will be a great thing once it's finished. >> Okay. Uh thank you, Minnesota Intercount Association. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. We met last week um and uh did some uh preession um planning trying to do some anticipating of of what we might see. One of the major topics of conversation again was um the IT modernization issue um and uh digging in deeper to what has been spent at the state and what hasn't. And um the appropriation uh hundreds of millions of dollars have gone to DHS and haven't come back out. And so we're talking a bit about what kind of response counties are going to have in the next legislative session to um bake in some accountability, bake in some back stops of if certain actions aren't taken by um a certain time that um maybe those dollars uh revert back to counties and we start building our own solutions. So um because right now it is completely out of the hands of counties. It is exclusively in the hands of DHS and we need to um be at the table in a bigger way. Um, also we're working to anticipate um what is going to happen um next year um as more people become uninsured as um uh pressures uh to uh our county budgets around SNAP builds. So um counties are feeling it acutely. I think that's that's not a big secret. Um so anything to add Commissioner Drossy that I missed? >> Good. All right. Uh with that we'll move on to the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District Commission. Well, they should be less annoying. Um, >> but the ticks have u woken up from slumber and are back out and uh so check yourselves when you come inside. Um but we do have an executive board meeting tomorrow. >> Thank you. Um now we'll move the National Association of Counties Niko. Anything? Transportation Advisory Board. Commissioner Hullberg. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Chair, the last have meeting last week was pretty pretty much justformational items, but um there was a meeting yesterday where they rolled out kind of uh the first round of how scoring would occur um in an order to I don't know I'm going to get in trouble so I'm not going to say what I think but um they uh uh are proposing ing that 25 or 20% of the points on all projects across the board uh be uh related to um what historically has been referred to as DEI. They've renamed it to some community conversations, I think. Um, and then in addition within that scoring category, if a project scored high on the three subcategories, they'd be guaranteed funding for the project no matter how they scored on the rest of the matrix. There was some consternation around um that proposal. So um but now now we're starting to kind of see the the meat on the bones, if you will, of how it actually these different categories would be funded and um stay tuned. But I as I stated yesterday at state of the county, the next couple months are going to be really imperative that we stay on top of this and engage our partners. And then also um Mandot has released their Minnesota Go. I don't know if we can do a social media post or whatever that it's a a process where MDOT's trying to gather feedback from across the state as to what the transportation system should look like uh moving forward. And again, if our region fair fails to participate in that input process, it will likely be detrimental to our county. Right. Anything further with that we'll move on to the Vermillion River Waters waterershed joint report >> quickly. Uh thank you. We have a meeting on Thursday and we have a tour Thursday morning visiting uh four locations with completed projects. >> I'll be there. Sounds good. Uh Workforce Development Board. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh our 2025 Dakota Scott Workforce Development Board uh awards celebration will be at the Playworks Link Event Center. Um it will be held on December the 10th from 8:30 to 10 and deadline for nominations is October 31st. So it's coming up. Uh the keynote for the event will be a speaker on generational differences. So, thank you. That concludes my report. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> We'll move to others. >> Any other things that anyone had? >> Commissioner Halverson. >> Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to say briefly, um, a congratulations for the state of the uh, county event last night. Um, and Heidi might be covering this as well, but um, couple things that I noted while I was um, in the audience is um, the uh, great story that we're telling in terms of our ability to partnership and and innovate and leverage resources. Um, it was impressive. The other thing that I was really struck by, and I think about this all the time when it comes to uh the Dakota County Board, is how much experience and knowledge there is among the seven folks here and the fact that um and thank you for kind of sharing the the uh spotlight and and kind of giving everybody a chance to um share what you know things that are important to each one of us. Um, and but the expertise was, you know, I think is kind of unmatched and it was impressive to me. So, it stood out. The other thing I just wanted to congratulate is our communication staff. Um, I think that they had some technical bugs that honestly from an audience member standpoint, I didn't notice. That is a great success. Um, and I really thought that the messaging um was well done. So, just wanted to say congratulations all around. and I really walked out of that feeling proud and got some really great feedback um from uh the business community and our government partners. So, thanks any others. I will just say that uh Dakota 911, which I serve as the county representative on it, we did meet for our quarterly meeting last week. Uh we talked actually about the school mapping that uh Commissioner DSi shared with and uh uh are working on some of our um we actually approved some of the labor contracts and and we're working on some of the wage study as we got a great from the state of the county yesterday from the executive director of Dakota 911 on on many of those things. So, um and with that, we'll move on to the county manager report. Mr. Chair, commissioners, I don't have uh much to say today other than we're busy full-time on budget as you've seen. Um notwithstanding a little bit of a messy conversation here, I've been very proud of our board. Sorry. Well, I have been bored of our board and I've been proud of staff and how much work um they've put into this and and we're we can see the finish line up ahead. So, thank you. >> Thank you, uh county manager. Before we go into recess, usually I do my uh day of the uh day of the What's it? >> What's the day today? There is nothing good good that I could find a correlation between Dakota County and this um but I just wanted to just get out there enjoy the fall and uh all we have to offer in Dakota County. you know, before we um I actually was intending to start our board meeting uh this way, which is um uh but I got a little with all that the commotion that was going in there, I kind of got lost track of it, but you know, so since we did meet last uh we had another political assassination and I think that it's uh uh we need to be able to use our voices as all of us have as was noted many years of elected experience and and uh we are very passionate people. One of my favorite things about all all six of you up here is how much passion and care you have for the issues that are most important to you. And frankly, as you can even saw up here today, uh those are not always the same issues depending on which one of us uh opens up their mouth at that given time. And uh what is such amazing about this country and about uh what we have here is that we can go in and and say uh and be as passionate and shout from the rooftops about what we believe in. and we have that freedom and that right and no one deserves to be able to lose their life over something like that. So, um before we leave and and take recess, I do want to just unfortunately it feels like almost every meeting we've had to have a moment of silence for something, but I think it's very important just in in this to offer a moment of silence for the Kirk family uh as well for this one here. So, would you please join me in that? Thank you very much and um then thank you for our very quick meeting that has taken us almost hour and a half, two hours, but you know what? We got good stuff done with that. And uh we are going to go into a close session. We'll recess for that part. But I just want to remind everyone that the next regularly scheduled board meeting of the Dakota County Board of Commissioners is October 7th, 2025 here in the boardroom in Hastings. And with that, I will go and declare us in recess.