reads it for the benefit of the uh audience and the uh both here and online. So there's um several items here. I'll just go in order. Uh first item is to approve the county board commissioners meeting of minutes of July 7th. Secondly, to appoint Kyle Swanson uh to the planning advisory commission and the zoning board of adjustment. Uh, next adoption of the Mster County Public Works updated ADA transition plan. Next, uh, approve addendum to the, uh, addendum and amendment to agreement for provision of youth efficiency apartments at Gage East. Next, to approve a liquor license for Jeff's Little House on Maran Road. Uh next a temporary 1 to 4 day liquor license for the high forest old settlers and lastly to uh approve a revocable license with the Buckeye LLC flats on fourth and the landing. So they are the consent agenda items. Uh members, is there anyone that wants to pull any of them or approve them in block >> to approve the consent agenda? >> Second. >> Okay, there's a motion and a second. Any discussion on any of it? Again, sensing none. All in favor say I. >> I. >> And those opposed, nay. And the consent agenda is approved. U moving onformational items. The election facts 101. Uh it is election time. It's time if it's not uh something we do constantly. Uh I think we do this in county. Uh we certainly want to uh recognize the moment. and Luke Turner is here today to uh tell us what's going on as we prepare for the elections of 2026. Luke, >> thank you. Uh Chair Synum Commissioners, I'm Luke Turner, the associate director of property records and licensing. Uh just to share a bit of information about our elections team. Um so today we'll go over the team uh what we do for roster maintenance. We'll talk a bit about the ballot board, equipment testing, security, communications, and some of the post-elections processes as well. Yeah, it's okay. First, we'll start with the elections team. We have four full-time election staff, one supervisor and three election specialists. Uh they've been here for as long as 2019 uh to two that were moved to their current positions just this year. So we have a range of experience on the elections team. Uh what this team does is in general administer federal, state, county, municipal, and special elections in Mate County. They maintain the accurate voter registrations. They train and support um election judges, prepare ballots, test voting equipment, and conduct public access tests. Um administer the absentee voting for all of our 111 precincts, and compete post election uh reconciliation, canvas, and audits. Uh so we're going to take a closer look to just a few of those areas here today. I also want to mention that we do a significant amount of cross training. So the elections team also helps out with the vital records and in other areas in PRL when we're not in those elections times. So the first we'll look at our registered vote count over time. Uh I have from 2006 to 2024. I use the number of the 7 a.m. registered voters before a general election because the roster always changes. This is a moving target that changes day by day. Uh so to use a consistent number over time makes the most sense for us. Uh since 26, we've grown from 81,000 to 105,000 registered voters. In 2026, we would expect to see our 7 a.m. registered voter count well over 110,000 for the general election. The other item we track closely is our absentee percent of the total vote. So this is the number of voters that choose to participate absentee. This includes absentee by mail. This includes early voting as well as the absentee inperson in office before the early voting period starts. We'll see before 2014 and earlier, we really had a a fairly low uh absentee turnout, 7 to 7 to 11%. That would extend back further past 2006 if we looked longer. We had some consequential changes to election laws starting in 2016 being no excuse absentee voting that spiked elections turnout for those absentee processes. Even if we ignore the 2020 uh anomaly of COVID where we had 57% absentee, we see a growing trend. There's f there's been further changes to legislature that would increase absentee over time. Um, some of that being no excuse abs or the automatic um absentee by mail, meaning an individual can register to automatically receive a ballot for every election without submitting an application each year. And then the expansion of early voting. That's one thing that's very popular in Mighty County with about a half of our absentee in 2014 coming through that early voting period 18 days before the election. That's both at the county office and at city hall. >> Mr. Turn, can I just so as I look at the last two slides, so 105,000 registered voters in uh in 2024 and you're saying 37% of those voted absentee. Is that correct? Is that correct? Okay. >> Thank you. >> So, the next portion I'll talk about is our roster maintenance. Our election staff does this all the time. This is even years, off years. Um it it does not matter. These transactions come in. um we have about 42,000 transactions a year regardless of if there's an election or not. Some of the things they're doing um is updating address ranges, updating voter records, uh and I'll share on the next slide of the various different ways that this happens. So, we receive applications from paper, online, driver and vehicle services, health records, state reports, and new construction. Um, so we're always adding and activating challenging as appropriate voter records. How we match the identification process for each of these voters is demonstrated in this graph below. Um, the county creates all the registrations. We then check the identification number. So we either check that against DBS or if there's no match or driver's license present, we compare it to the social their social security number. Step one is the hope is that their identification is verified and that's process is good. If there's no match both from DVS and SSA, uh we'll review the information, reach out to the voter if possible, uh but ultimately we can challenge these voters, meaning they may need to provide additional information on election day. We haven't been able to confirm their identification number ahead of time. So there's a possibility that they would then need to confirm it on election day or affirm an oath to the election judge. The next thing that we do all the time is is verify their address. We use postal verification cards to do this. Um, every individual that's registered to vote is sent a postal verification card automatically and then it comes back and we make various determinations if it comes back. So, the first option is a it's delivered successfully, that voter is registered to go. There's no further steps for us. The second is it's returned and we could have a couple different options. One, it could be returned and we could determine a reason for the return. Uh, oftent times we receive postal verification cards back for apartment complexes. Election judges on election day may omit to include the apartment and that voter is still registered at the proper apartment address. We just don't have a unit number. We can reach out to the voter and try to find the unit number. uh we do need these as complete as possible but ultimately they they are registered at the right location. There's just more work to do on our side. Um if there's no sticker identifying a reason we can challenge and then last is if there's no satisfactory reason on that yellow sticker we're not able to determine we can challenge these voters as challenge postal return which again they'd need to take steps on election day to vote. So that could be um providing a proof of address or swearing or affirming that I do live at this address. So, um, if this check isn't completed ahead of time, voters will need to do additional steps on election day just to make sure that that's accurate. So, this year, uh, some of these graphics are from this review, but the the office of the legislator auditor reviewed some of our voter registration processes in the state. Homemstead County was included in that through survey as well as a visit and an interview. Um, they verified that 99.9% u were correctly identified. Now, these numbers are statewide. Uh I can't break them down to what is Mstead County shares, so we'll share just some general statewide information. 99% of the residency verification followed proper procedures and were done correctly. 96% of new voter registration applications were reviewed and processed legally in and established timelines. So, overall, the state scored very well. They did offer suggestions which obviously we don't know um which county were the 4% or 1% of errors uh but we take it seriously so we're going to take lessons learned and try to implement them regardless. One of the things that they did demonstrate um is the social security administrator matching process. Um this is a often misunderstood. I kind of want to talk through here real quick. Um, when we can't verify the driver's license, I mentioned earlier it's sent over to the Social Security uh administration for verification. There's a couple different outcomes. The first you see in the top category, 20,000 uh were matched. Um, they're verified. That's a good number. 1400 were not matched, no match found. That means there's additional steps needed by counties uh to verify that number or if they're not available or if there's no match or no voter registration, they're just disregarded. So statewide 1,400 of the 2100 did not match immediately. Of those 1,200 didn't have a voter record. So those are not registered to vote. They're just set aside. Only 194 of those had a voter record where we needed to make additional steps to verify their identification. Uh the next is the numbers you'll see from that statewide audit. Um 26 the numbers in green are generally good. Um and I'll talk through this. So the 26 were verified after multiple attempts. Uh this could be as simple as a junior senior, a misspelling of a first name. The Social Security Administration would kick that back as unverifiable, but if we do our outreach, eventually we can confirm it. 16 were verified without documentation. Those were done improperly. Um 145 auditor failed verifications. Properly meaning they couldn't verify them and they failed it. Um and then seven had no verification status. Of the 145 that failed, 141 were further challenged appropriately and four were not. So if I look at my two orange uh or my three orange blocks, you see 27 records out of the original 21,947 or 46 were processed improperly. And this is a statewide sample. Obviously, we'll take the same lessons learned as everybody else and try to minimize that as much as possible. But what this demonstrates is this process is incredibly accurate. Um and the counties across the state do do great work to um verify these appropriately. >> Just quick clarification question. And this process happens annually. >> Yeah, this process happens uh continuous. >> Continuous. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. So the 21,000 is a snapshot. >> Correct. >> Gotcha. That's correct. >> The next uh item that I want to talk about is is our abstract. This is an often misinterpreted uh item. Um this is what we show at the canvasing board that I'll talk a little bit later. Um the abstract shows uh different key items. So the number of uh registered persons at 7 a.m. and that's the number I'm using to show our voter growth over time, the number of persons registered on election day, the number of absentee federal ballots, and the total number of persons voting. These numbers are misleading. Um, the number of persons registered at 7 am plus the number of registered uh, election day registrations does not always necessarily equal our new total number. Many of those folks that registered on election day were already registered. So, we're updating the record. We're not creating a new one. Furthermore, some folks could have registered to vote uh, at another county which would reduce our total. So, that the math can't be it can't be used as a as a number to determine the new total. really the county will need to review our records after the election for an accurate total. And the same thing with total total number of persons voting and the number of absentee votes. The absentee votes are included in that total. It's been added and demonstrated uh before by uh in various uh examples, but that's not how the numbers work. So that 15,000 and the 23 are included in the total 68,000. So again, this this is a public document that's just often misinterpreted. So I wanted to explain that a little bit further. So the next process I'll talk about is our ballot board. So this is a group of both um appointed election judges from major political parties that we hire or on board off of the party lists and county staff uh trained in the ballot board processes. The ballot board has a few key roles in the absentee process. We really integrate them into our team. We welcome them in and and let them be a part of many things. Uh but the we're using this for two things. A we're required to have a ballot board and they help us get through the bulk of the absentee work. The second is it's an opportunity for transparency. We like to bring judges in and we oftent times bring more judges than are needed uh to see the process and gain that faith in what we're doing as a county. So some of their responsibilities are the signature envelope review. All absentee ballots that come by mail or absentee that vote in person using the envelopes must be reviewed for the ballot board and the ballot board accepts or rejects all of those ballots. Um they'll compare the signatures um review the voting record and they follow procedures to accept or reject. Um through that I can attest that the ballot board accurately accepts what they should and rejects with a valid reason. Um we find the most common reasons for ballot rejections are just missing a signature. The voter forgot to sign. The witness forgot to sign. As simple as that. The ballot board also helps with now reconciliation of early voting. Early voting is that 18 days period before the election. Uh where both our location and the popup location at the government center that's open now today operate like an election day. Uh and we do this every day for 18 days. At the end of the night at 5:00 pm to 7 pm, the ballot board with county staff will get together and review and reconcile those ballots to the total number of persons that vote just like they would on election day uh to confirm that number. They'll seal and secure those ballots just like they would on election day and we store those away for 22 months. And last, they help us with the envelope opening. Um this is a tedious process that we do uh once we have all those absentee ballots accepted or rejected. we need to open them. Uh again, reconcile them and count them. That ballot board's present for all of that. So, they're really integrated into our team. Um these partisan election judges see all parts of our process and it's been a great opportunity to have them in and and just really win over their trust. So, next piece of uh the next thing I'll talk about is our our equipment testing. And it's really quite robust. This happens before every election, not just a general election. Um, so we use pre-mark testex um to ver to test all candidates and all races for every election. Uh, we're testing uh not just our assisted voting device, the omni ballots, but we're testing the absentee tabulator, the 950, and the election day tabulators as well. What we do is we have a test deck um with a unique number of votes for each candidate. Um, on the screen here, I have a example test deck with the favorite dog breed. T1 through 31 are the test ballot numbers and then the ones indicate which ballot should have a mark for each breed. What this lets us do is ensure each candidate has a unique number of votes when we count. Candidate A has one, candidate B has two and so on. Um we feed these unique test stacks through and we ensure that the tabulator generates the expected results. Uh this is a multi-week process, hundred of hours. Um for the August primary, these are our numbers. Our test acts required 76 ballots. Um 8,436 tests were done uh through the 950. 50,000 plus through the DS200s uh for a total of 59,52 total ballots were tested uh to ensure our accuracy with 770 uh sets of results. These have to be 100% accurate or we start over. Um, again, 59,000 represents a number that we would expect to have. If we're looking at historical trends, a primary election historically has not had 59,000 votes. So, we're testing significantly more ballots through machines than we're going to see on election day, and they all must be 100% accurate. Following that work, uh, we also have to test the upload process to the state to tie it through. Uh, we use offline methods of, uh, voting on election day. We also use offline methods to program those tabulators. On the far left, uh you'll see your DS200 tabulator. That's the election day tabulator. Um it's never connected to the internet. Never. And it um it's programmed using the next item over the DS200 media, which has also never been connected to a um m a computer that has connected to the internet. Our next step uh step over the electionware PC again never connected to the internet is our programming and results compilation computer. So both it generates the programming for the election that we pass down through the USB and it takes the results as we're passing it up uh but again never connected to the internet. The next step is one more air gap. We use a one-time use USB where we either deliver programming down to our offline systems or results up to the state uh using a restricted USPC. Uh that's really only used to access the programming websites and then the state's results websites just for an added layer of security. Um so all this is done in part of the testing process and it's also done on election night. At the tail end of all that, we do a public accuracy test and we'd invite everybody in Mstead County to attend. Uh we often have the media present. We our pack team at this past one did film portions of it and we're happy to have it on social media. Um I have our two dates for our PATs this year. What this is is a sampling that represents every single race on the ballot. So we're not going to test the full 59,000 ballots on a PAT, but we will test enough tabulators that will represent every single race that we'll see in Mstead County. uh and we'll invite the public to participate as well. Um we've let them feed ballots through, compare the results, and make sure that they feel confident the equipment's working as well. So, next I'm going to talk about a few security items. Um the first thing is the chain of custody plan. This is new this year. It's a new requirement. Um however, many of the components of this as we went through and worked to create this, we discovered we already had them in place. We just didn't have a plan to discuss it. Um the chain of custody plan in general tracks ballots and equipment and supplies um serial numbers and it explains how we deliver those to the polls and how they're delivered back to us. Um it uses the seal logs and documents the transfers um and maintains the security preparation through the process. So I'm going to talk through one item that we track here. Um for example uh ballots. We receive ballots [snorts] from our vendor and that's really the start of our chain of custody plan. staff will inventory ensure we have a for example a thousand ballots for a precinct um if that's what we're requiring. The chain of custody plan explains how those are loaded in the tabulator sealed with a unique seal and then delivered to the polling location. Um we have the signatures of individuals that deliver and signatures of the individuals that receive. We also on the back end will have paperwork that the the head judge will pick up that includes that seal number and that desired number. They're confirming that what's delivered to the poll matches what we sent out our door. On the back end, too, once the election judges bring all the ballots back, they're showing us that the number of voted ballots plus unvoted ballots plus any spoiled along the way equal that original thousand ballots. So, we know if any ballot or otherwise has been injected into the process uh inappropriately, it ties our um it ties our ballot chain out completely. So a thousand ballots were given to our judges to administer voting, a thousand were returned to us and we have that closed loop. So chain of custody plans really helped us talk through that. The second plan we've had for years is an emergency plan. This is really a high level plan that explains uh certain things and overall talks through um emergencies such as fire, moving polling locations. It defines staff responsibilities and includes contact numbers. Um, if there ever were a situation, um, vendor contacts, neighboring counties, additional election resources are all documented here really to help us get us back on our feet quickly. Um, or if someone's inexperienced to take this document and get the county back on their feet quickly. We also take physical security uh very seriously. We use layers through our security. So, first is obviously the badge access for the county. Um, our ballot room has additional security that is limited to a certain number of staff. And we also require two staff to enter every time. Once we're there, that's where we store our historical data or our historical ballots, our 22-month retention, but it's also where our voted ballots go. But the voted ballots add one more layer. So, we have safes um that we use that we use for the voted ballots. Um, all everything that is for the current election receives that additional layer of security. again reduce number of folks have access to the state. So it's not all election staff, it's just our full-time folks um who have the codes for that. We also partner with the off the secretary of state um and then have worked to improve guides using some of the training. Um this secretary of state's office has has really done well to um offer election security trainings periodically throughout the years. Uh we attended two last year. Um what these do is allow us to think through scenarios. is what will we do if there's a fire um or this? Uh it is opt opportunities for us to think through um many different emergencies that hopefully never happen, but if they do, it may not be the first time we thought through it because of these opportunities. The next thing I'll talk about is ballot security. Um I mentioned the two staff for the room. We also require two staff really anytime we're handling ballots, whether that's to administer voting, to you handle the mail, ballot board, you name it, it always requires two staff. So, we have those two sets of eyes. Um, also note that ballots are issued by request. We do not send ballots to anybody uh unless they've requested it. One of the things I'll note here is we often get the comment about a deceased individual receiving a ballot. This is oftent times an application for a ballot. Uh, third parties use outdated lists that are not from us uh and they're not properly maintained. Unfortunately, there's they're allowed to do that. um they're doing this to really in the best of intention to encourage voting and participation, but it does go to individuals that have outdated records. So, uh when we hear about um a ballot received and we investigate, it's usually or always an application that was received from a one of these third parties um using their outdated information. Also, I'll talk about the reconciliation process. So after every ballot board staff reconciles to ensure that our count on hand matches 100% of the voters that we expect. So we track each uh the number of voters for each precinct as they come in on through our systems report. We'll run that report nightly not to not the names of the voter but the numbers. So each precinct had x number of voters and we'll compare that to the ballots that have been accepted. That number should tie out 100%. Um, so process is usually ballot board the following day reconcile matches. So what we we know what we have on hand matches who's come through the door of our building. So communication and outreach is a is a um newer process for our elections team. Um but we've really uh strive to um share our information and our story as many times as possible. Um, we attended events like Thursdays downtown Junth. Um, we hosted an elections excellence with the Secretary of State to highlight some of our local election judges. We we speak at various different groups, whether they're partisan, nonpartisan, just interested in elections. Um, you name it, we'll go to there and share our information. And we also partner with PAC pretty closely to develop a robust amount of videos, um, social media campaigns, the drip campaign new this year. Uh so we're really working to share our story and our information and our various processes to be as transparent and open to the public as possible. After the election, there's additional checks. Um so the first is the canvasing prep staff review all of the results from all the machines um well before the canvasing board. Um we add voter history, we process election day registrations, and we review feedback. So I'll talk about adding voter history and processing the election day registrations. Some of these processes were allowed to take up to six weeks. We usually like to finish everything in the month month of November. So, we want to be well ahead of that time. However, as I mentioned, the rosters are always changing and the data can be requested from the state site at various times. So, there may be a member of the public that requests data in November. That list, rightfully so, may not be fully updated by us. So, um, just with especially with those requests or of of voters, I I would, um, explain that election staff across the state have that six weeks to finish processing and really the roles aren't fully done until we hit the next year. Again, county seeks to to beat that. Um, we're done before Thanksgiving typically. That last there I mentioned review feedback. Uh, we're are interested in continuous improvement. Uh we take feedback from election judges. We survey everybody that we send a ballot to as well as we have the opportunity to survey voters in person. Uh we want feedback and ideas to how to how to improve our processes and how to make it more efficient um and and just better every year. I mentioned earlier that the canvasing board is is one of those integrity steps. The canvasing board formate county is two county commissioners who are not on the ballot. the mayor of the largest town, so Rochester, um the county auditor forms county, that's director of property records and licensing, and the clerk of the courts. Uh these individuals get together after each election, and I have the dates listed, dates and times listed here, uh to review our local results. The canvas is a check of what the the results of every county are completed at county level. the the state doesn't have a pro a part in generating or um showing the results of the state. This is our responsibility. Now, understanding that they show up on the secretary's site, what we're doing at the canvasing board is often proofing that. So, we have that final abstract that's that's our results. Um at the canvasing board, we'll sit down and we'll start with with square one the results from each uh election day machine. the results from the the absentee machines again that have had partisan election judges through the whole process here locally. Um the canvasing board will review that data to make sure our final abstract matches what's expected. And the last thing is our post-election review. Um we always ask about hand counting. We do hand count. We hand count after every general election. This is a random sampling of precincts that are actually picked at the canvas. Um, and then we open them and handc count them uh at the post-election review. Uh, I've been a part of a number of post-election reviews since since I started in 2019 and we've had a 100% accuracy rate at all of them. Um, what this review is really checking is that the machines accurately tabulated. Um, so we we keep those ballots both absentee and in person and we're tying back to the end um to ensure that everything tabulated correctly. That is my presentation. So, thank you. Any questions? >> Oh, amazing thoroughess. Thank you. Thank you for your work and >> and and your entire department. This is uh I think just an amazing undertaking with a amazing thoroughess and certainly gives us all confidence. Members, any questions? >> I've got a question. >> As as well, >> we'll start over here. >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner >> Pulki. Thank you, Mr. Turner for just for your expertise and uh for the the the reassurances that you offer and as far as I can hear everything you're describing is based in law and fact and regulation. Can you think of anything connected to the work of elections administration that's up to your interpretation or up to your discretion? No, we we follow guidelines from the Secretary of State and law. Um and oftentimes we do seek um almost a county's legal interpretations, but there's there's very few things that aren't described in guide or law uh where we're making our own decisions. Right. So, this is a process that follows procedures and laws um and not the opinions of the local election administrators. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Wright. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Turner. Um, I think that most people understand that the way that Homemstead County has run the elections are uh beyond reproach. I think the concern that the um community may have is disruptions to the voting process at the voting place. Um so how are the judges um uh educated to know what they should do if there is a disruption at a polling place? >> That's a great question. The election judges are required for uh two hours of training every election cycle and an additional hour for head judges. Uh so they do um all go through county for that training. Some of that in training includes uh who's allowed and not allowed at a polling location. Um statute is very clear. Law enforcement and um campaigning and various other folks are not allowed in the polling location. So we describe who's allowed and who's not allowed in the polling location and offer avenues for election judges to report um should something happen. So in general, the process works where election judges contact our office should anything out of the ordinary come come up. So, this could be a campaign at a polling location. Uh, we would respond and inform them of statute and laws and if possible or if needed, we'd fill out an election law complaint form to provide that to the county attorney's office. >> Um, would that include um calling on law enforcement if necessary? >> That's right. Yeah. So, election judges are instructed medical physical emergencies to call 911. law enforcement is allowed within the polling location to res to restore peace for any of those emergency situations and then they must leave the premises once peace uh has been restored. So absolutely. >> Thank you. >> Others perceived in intimidation uh not even in the polling place but uh outside of it. Uh and I'm sure this is guided by law. Uh how an election judge do you believe you know respond to that if the complaint came? >> So we're fairly open. We we want our avenues for complaints are the election law complaint forms. Um if an election judge u perceived intimidation to themselves uh or to the process, we would recommend >> I'm talking about to a voter >> to a voter. So we would recommend that the voter u fill out that election law complaint form and document what happened. So this is the avenue. This is the avenue that's available to all voters. Um these complaint forms are available at all the polling locations. the county provides them and the judges are informed that if there's ever a concern with uh well there's two forms. One is more focused on accessibility and the second is Minnesota election law. So if there's a concern that election law isn't being followed or the voter feels that they can bring it to an election judge's attention uh who can allow or who can provide them that avenue uh to submit the formal complaint. Uh, additionally, election judges, should anything arise to that level, will call elections administrators. Um, for our area, it's typically um one of us from the county that will respond or possibly someone from the city clerk's office if it's one of their polling locations that will respond and explain election law and otherwise help to resolve or um diffuse that situation. >> Anyone else? Commissioner Hopkins. Yeah, I'm you know I believe that your um process is above reproach. I don't think there's any question there. Um I think that you know there is a concern out there whether real or imagined um that there would be some kind of interference um you know with uh noting place but outside of the polling place and questions have come up about the role of the sheriff um in addressing you know whether an obstruction or you know obstructing access to the polling place or whatever the role of the sheriff in in addressing that or um removing that. >> Sure. So for the process for addressing um election law violations um really starts with the election judges to explain the violation and otherwise report it to us. Our avenue is to go to the county attorney's county attorney's office. In general, election law violations must be investigated. Um, and that is up to the jurisdiction of of where that falls. So, city of Rochester, maybe Rochester Police Department, um, broader, maybe the sheriff. So, I I wouldn't speak to their response or the county attorney's response from an election administrator. Our role is is we're reporting it to the property authority uh, and then leaving it in their hands. >> Anyone else questions? I I have one and you know this this has come up uh not not so recently but the the tabulators as you say are not connected to the internet but just kind of just doing a little internet research they do have you you can buy them I don't know if we do with wireless pardon me uh yeah wireless capabilities is that right said right so that they could transmit nonetheless how could a voter be assured that that ours aren't aren't transmitting, if you will, by some method that probably none of us technologically would understand. >> So, it is allowable for counties to choose to purchase equipment with modems to send results in on election night. Some counties in Minnesota have made that decision. We have not. Um, what I would describe to voters is the process for that our results do come back. It's really through our election judges. After polls close, our election judges deliver. the media stick with results back to us and that's they follow it through the whole process. We'll review their paperwork with them and then we'll plug that media stick into our offline PC. That's how our election our results will go through. The head judges monitor that transfer from tabulator uh to our results computer. >> Good. Thank you. >> Is there time so on that process is there is there a backup? So say I'm an elected judge and I'm going to drive to Rochester. I get in a car accident. Is there a backup so that those votes are not lost? >> So the there's backup programming. Ultimately, we go back to the ballots. Uh the physical ballots can be rerun. We can reprogram a machine in house uh and rerun ballots if needed. >> So those ballots are not in the same vehicle. Is that >> So they are in the same vehicle. Um if they're the ballots are sealed and it's a waterproof uh envelope that we usually have for the ballot or always have for the ballots. Um once they come back to us, we do um we can rerun them if something happens to the physical stick. Um now I do there are two judges that come back to us. So it's not required. Um county does it takes the extra step. So we have the head judge and they're always followed by another election judge to bring that material back on election night so that we have that extra set of eyes and extra accountability. So something should happen. Um the second judge hopefully alerts us immediately and we can respond appropriately. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone? Yes. Commissioner, >> one last question. Uh who are the county commissioners assigned to the canvasing board this year? >> I I do not know that answer yet. Um so I would reach out to Clara uh to see who will have attending our canvasing boards. So I I can figure that out though. >> Anyone not on the ballot? Anyone not on the ballot? That's right. Are there any other questions? Mr. >> There none now. Okay. You here? >> No, I'm good. >> Okay. Thank you for a fabulous presentation and thank you for your work most of all and and the work of all involved in this process and frankly the many election judges out there that aren't here today that uh that we rely so much on that just do a fabulous job. >> Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving on to discussion and decision items. Uh the first one has to do with the adult detention center pdium rate discussion. Uh uh I believe our sheriff is going to kick this one off. This involves u a pdeium rate uh with respect to detainees from Dodge County. Sheriff Tus. >> Good morning. And this is far less riveting than election discussion, I'm [laughter] sure. Um, but uh, and I don't know that it's going to take too long. We've had a lot of conversations over the last months. Um, and this opportunity was simply to come back and just kind of tell you where we're at and uh, we've got some uh, new information for you. Before we get that far, Director Reps is here with me from our adult detention center who leads that crew and is kind of going to go over some of the history of it so we're all on the same page before we finish up. >> Good reps. >> Please introduce yourself and >> uh Director Reps. I'm the current jail administrator. So, um so prior to 2004 is when we did house for um good or for Dodge County. Um >> could you get a little closer to the microphone? >> That better? Yes. >> Okay. So, we did have a current um an agreement with Dodge County prior to 2004. Um as that happened, um our population was significant and we had a lot of overcrowding. So, um spacing issues and we're constantly telling them no, they separated with us and went with Steel County. Um we got that contract back in September of 2022. Um so, that's just kind of the history of of uh the back and forth with Dodge County. um our fees with them um with everybody has really been um for years we've always charged like the $50 to $55. Five years ago we went to the $65 and as of January of 26 we're at $75. So >> so it's it's uh and it's been that way as far as setting the fees. Those fees have been an agreement that the state sheriff's association has done for as long as I can remember. Um, as as director reps noted, there's been some uh changes more recently, as recent as uh this past January. Um, and so with your questions uh that we've been talking back and forth forth with, um, I took th those opportunities and went to, uh, the other sheriffs and, uh, sheriffs across the state, um, asking some of those same questions that you had been asking me. And uh in one of those uh conversations I learned that u uh district 6, I'm sorry, district three uh the state of Minnesota is separated into six districts. We sit in the southeast sixth district. Uh district three which is kind of west central Minnesota out there South Dakota North Dakota border. Um and each uh district is usually uh between 11 or 12 um counties or sheriffs that sit in that. And I learned from the sheriffs out there that um within the last couple of years they had taken a uh different approach. The uh fee was $75 as director reps mentioned and they had uh they have I believe it's four counties in that region in that district that do not have any detention facilities. So four counties um among them in in that uh group uh separate from anything that the MSA had done, they uh took it upon themselves to discuss that further and set a different fee. And that fee was for the counties that have a detention center. And there's are those occasions director reps can kind of go through some of the the occasions when we even though we have a facility we need to move someone to another facility uh for various reasons um then that fee would be that $75 for the counties in district three that do not have a facility. they had raised that fee to $100 um and then they negotiate that um as they wish within that district. So that was the first time I had heard that uh that was just a few months back. Um, so, uh, taking that approach, uh, I had numerous conversation with Sheriff Rose, who leads, uh, Dodge County Sheriff's Office and, uh, who we have, uh, uh, negotiate with and talk with about our contracts since they came back in 2022. And, um, we I brought that up to him. We had numerous conversations about it. and uh he eventually then agreed that it did make sense to have a uh a fee that would be raised uh based on his situation where they do not have a facility um that they would pay the $100. Um, so with that in mind and knowing that Dodge County is the only county in our district that does not have a facility, um, I raised that question because one of the considerations when, uh, Sheriff Rose and I were talking was that, well, if you raise this fee, I'm potentially going to just go to another county where he would pay the $75, which was the minimum that the sheriff's association had agreed to just this past Janu or last December, I believe it was and it was raised January 1st um to the $75. So um he had said that was to keep me from going other places within our district uh which I didn't you know is very logical uh conversation to have and uh um so we brought that to the sixth district the other sheriffs in our region and um it ended up being a unanimous vote that uh we would do the same. So, as it stands now within the sixth district for with with the sheriffs, um that the uh sixth district pdium uh between operating sheriffs, operating jails would still remain at $75. If director reps needs to send someone to Goodyu County or Winona or wherever um for a short period of time, then that would be at the $75 rate. And vice versa, if Winona had to send someone here for a period of time, the same situation would would occur for Dodge County alone because they are the only facility in our region or only county in our region that does not have a facility. Then that is a $100 fee. and they raised it one little extra notch which uh would uh actually garnered quite a bit of conversation um that the sheriffs would then negotiate raises from then on between the two. So in that sense, myself um and Sheriff Rose depending on how we come about with uh deciding when whether it's annually, whether it's every two years, we sign a contract and the contract uh currently states that it'll just continue that we would reopen that contract with Dodge County um after uh this discussion today. and we would reopen that and say that we would either negotiate or talk about a raise in that fee on an annual basis every two years, every 5 years. Uh I wouldn't want to go any further out than five years. Director Repson have talked about that that it seems as though we would really want to talk have some kind of conversation within a 5-year period. Um but anywhere between one and and five years is what we've initially talked about. Uh we haven't had any further conversations. Um I haven't had any further conversation with Sheriff Rose in the last couple of weeks, but uh uh had discussed with him that once uh we had this conversation today with you um and had an understanding here that we would then take that step and director reps would lead that in talking about okay, what is what makes the most sense on how we uh have this relationship and have this contract and and u um not only create revenue for us for Olmstead County, but u also obviously assist a a partner and a and a friend in this sense. So uh then the sheriff's took it one more level. I'm not trying to confuse too much of this, but it was three different decisions they made that day. The third decision was u because we have sheriffs on our border counties um that borders Iowa and Minnesota that they andor u outside of our district is what the decision was that if someone from the metro which Henipin County got into a a challenge here a few years ago where they were over u very full and having some challenges. They were seeking uh sending Henipin County detainees out even as far as here and they had asked us and we at that point said no, we've we're we're doing just fine the way we are. But they said that that would be even a a higher fee and that each sheriff could negotiate with outside the district or outside the state. So our say free freeborn county could negotiate whatever fee he wanted with uh Iowa or Winona could talk with Wisconsin or any one of us if Henipin County came back could could negotiate that fee um on whatever uh level they wanted to. So it was three different decisions and I'll just go through them again. They all agreed that sheriffs with a jail within our district would stay at $75, which is the fee that the sheriff's association agreed to uh last year and invoked earlier this year. And then uh our fee with Dodge County, we raised to $100 with the opportunity for the sheriffs to negotiate as as they feel they need to. And then the outside the district outside the state uh negotiation would be would be handled as well by PDM. And then just one final note again that the uh uh vote was a unanimous vote. Sheriff Rose was not there but he had already previously agreed that uh uh with with me and with us that uh raising the fee to $100 seemed reasonable at this time with again that that uh opportunity to negotiate a higher fee as we go forward. So, that's where we're at. If you have any questions. >> Okay. Any any questions at this point? We've also got the Dodge County people here. Maybe I don't know if you are you interested in making any comments. Yes. Okay. Sure. Uh, Commissioner Tyne, what does it cost to house an county? Well, that is the that's the question and I'll probably defer a little bit to director reps. There's not a clear uh definition of that. The department of corrections sets a fee and that fee is currently >> our current fee is a 32313 roughly. Don't get me on the sense portion, but it is the 323 >> and that's we feel that that's in line if we were to take our variable cost for having a adult detent detention center divided by the number of beds that were filled. It would come in around that. >> Yeah. So, it's a very detailed report that the DOC requests that we do every year. I currently just got it, so I have a couple months to get it done to have 2025 numbers ready. Um, but that is it's pretty accurate. Every line has a description of everything the DOC wants us to have added up. So, >> and just reiterate something we talked about uh previously and I don't know if I made a note on that. I did. Um, you know, the beds are available right now and as director rep stated back in 2004ish, um, we were full and we said Dodge County, you got to go away. Um so that that's obviously there and uh Sheriff Rose certainly understands that. Um so there's that option when we are full. Basically what what this $100 fee and then as it moves on uh could obviously it will very likely increase is uh you know the three meals a day we we supply the detainees uh the laundry service that we provide them uh inhouse medical. So when they do have issues inhouse and the medical staff is seeing them, we don't pay for the medications, which as you all know can be very expensive. That's a Dodge County responsibility. Um and they're very aware of that. That's all uh above board. Um so the in-house medical and then the last thing is when they do have u uh court hearings, our court our staff has to monitor that and be and hook do that hookup and stuff. So, um, that's the last piece of it that most of the hearings that I understand that Dodge County has are pretty much on online or zoomed in. Obviously, trials and things like that, Dodge County has to do the work and bring them over and take them to their courthouse and do all of that and they're responsible for that. We don't lift a finger on that. So, um, you know, it's not it's not everything that plays into it, but as Director Ref said, the, uh, the formula is is very detailed on how they get to that 323 number that Department of Corrections. >> That's fair. But, I mean, I I also believe that 323 is just variable cost. That doesn't that doesn't take what it cost to build a jail, right? So I mean if we were to take the cost to build that jail 40 years ago and add that to it a bit >> right >> be quite a bit more understand >> I don't think it has a figuration into u uh the square footage or it does >> okay so it does potentially play into that again it's a mystery we could talk over this all day long but it's in some sense a bit of a mystery as to how that formula all comes together that um is in essence very detailed from what you have to put into it. But um how that they put the percentages in and how that all comes together. >> I'm not disagreeing with the with the >> math on it. I mean I would accept that it costs 323 a night. >> Doesn't doesn't matter. >> Okay. >> Okay. Commissioner, uh >> I have a clarification question. Um, Sheriff, in our previous discussions, I understood that um, right now with the $75, anytime another county had someone come through our facility, we were honoring the $75 and that was statewide. And now, >> not state law state. >> Statewide. Yes. And now I hear you saying that we're going to negotiate and have a contract with every county. No, to negotiate a fee. Okay. Then I >> just for us any county that comes to us and says, "Hey, we need a detainee to stay with you." If they're within the sixth district, it's a minimum of $100. If it's beyond that, yes, we would negotiate that. And it may not be a contract. It'll be an agreed upon rate, whatever that is. Uh could be 130, 150, 175. Um, when I've been talking with the other sheriffs, um, they've they've made that conversation or had that conversation. I don't have any specific numbers. Um, it's been a very long time, I think, uh, and Director Eps might have some information on it, but I can't think of a time, uh, in the recent past that we've had anybody from outside of our district within our facility. >> Okay. So it's it's very very >> got rare >> slim and far between for the for the counties counties again because we're kind of the center of the our region here southeast Minnesota for Freeborn County for instance uh he had a lot of conversation to say about that because he's on the edge of our county so of our district so potentially he has Iowa detainees that come over for whatever reason. I don't understand all of those reasons because we talked about that there's extradition concerns with that. Um but then his neighboring counties, I believe it's Fairbull County to the west, um that's outside of our district and >> um that's something that those guys deal with. It's not something that we've to my knowledge had any real conversation about. >> Any other questions uh on this matter? I I just have one just to clarify. I think I know the answer, but uh should Dodge County on into the future uh want to take their detainees to any other county in the district, it would be $100. Is that right? Okay. >> Right. >> Okay. So, any other questions, thoughts? Uh the recommendation of the sheriff is that we increase our fee from uh $75 a day to $100 a day. Uh uh I either need a motion or we stand mute on this one and move on to the next subject. >> I make a motion that we adopt the $100 a day. >> Okay, there's been a motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> There's a second. Uh any discussion on $100 a day? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> If this is appropriate, I want to amend the motion to $323 a day. Well, you can. >> That would be my That would be my um amendment. >> You can do that with a second. Yes. >> Well, I'll second it, but I don't think they're going to accept it. Okay. We have a motion in the second to uh to amend the $100 a day proposal uh to $323 a day. Discussion on it. >> Yeah, I would wish to discuss that. Thank you very much. Now, the reason why I say that is is that um [clears throat] our people, the people in my district, the people in your district, uh have to pay the cost of running the jail and they have to pay the cost of the law enforcement people that are in the jail and they are paying approximately $323 a day for that. I don't think that the people in my district wants to subsidize some other county for less than that. For instance, uh we also uh have a prosecution team. So what if some other county comes in says well we don't have any prosecutor in our county. We will take it over to Homemstead County and they will prosecute it for onethird less than the cost of what it costs county to prosecute it. And you could go down the rest of all of our services, public health, everything else to say, [clears throat] I'm just going to go to Homemstead County and I'm going to get a deal from them and pay one-third less of the cost that it takes to formstead county to run their business. That's why I think that this is a terrible situation. why we would want to subsidize any other county for the same costs. Dodge County has the opportunity to go build their own jail. They have had that opportunity for a long time. But why would they want to when they can come to Homestead County and we'll subsidize all of their services for them. Now, one could take that one step further and say, "Let's not have a jail. Let's just farm our detainees out to other counties that will take them for $100 a day. We would save a huge amount of costs for the taxpayers in Mstead County by doing that." And that's why I think that this is tilted the wrong way. I believe that anybody that uses our jail should pay the same price, the same costs that our own residents have to bear in our detention facility. >> Okay, further discussion and amend a motion. Commissioner Ty, [clears throat] >> there's a difference between helping a friend in need by letting him crash on the couch until he can get back on his feet and having them move into one of your bedrooms permanently. Dodge County is a full-time partner in our ADC in every way except paying rent. Just as we are a partner in the NOA JDC, I just ask that they pay their fair share. I like [clears throat] Dodge County. I like the commissioners that I know from Dodge County. I want to work with them as true partners, but I will not support Mstead County taxpayers subsidizing any county in a non-rescrocal manner. We don't farm anybody to Dodge County because they don't have a jail. There's there's no back and forth. It's just it's just one direction. Dodge County has the capacity to be a true partners in our jail on their own or with any of their neighbors. As it stands, each county pays multiple times more than a Dodge County taxpayer pays to have access to an ADC. I just ask that we be on the same ground. >> Okay. Any other discussion on this one? Yes, Commissioner Hopkins. >> Uh just a question for the sheriff. Um what is what is the current capacity of the jail? I mean, when I say >> Yeah. But what is the capacity of the jail? Are we at 100%, 90%, 85%. >> Yeah, probably around 80% at this point. It it it's really subject I mean it's been written and documented. We have 202 beds. Um but because of the classifications with mental health and addiction and all the other needs that people have, uh that 202 beds is never uh that's never going to be met. So roughly we're looking at, you know, 165ish. Again, it's just a it's a real is on that emphasis there. Um so yeah, we're probably sitting at about 80% at this point in time. >> Okay. So um so what happens uh how much of that is utilized on a consistent basis by Dodge County inmates? you have those numbers. >> So in 2023 we had an average of uh 28 um detainees per month from Dodge. 24 was 23 and in 25 was 25 average per month. >> And what was the overall revenue either on a monthly or annual basis? >> So I've got both. Um in 2023 our average monthly payments were $18,245. In 24 was $14,218 and 2025 was $16,398 per year. In 2023, we got $218,940. 2024 was $170,2620 and in 2025 was $196,780. >> So, who would be making up that difference if we no longer had this agreement with Dodge County? We would I mean I mean >> so county taxpayers >> correct. >> Thank you. >> Further discussion. >> I just I have a clarified question. >> 20 28 per month. Is there an average per day or per night? >> It it fluctuates. I mean sometimes we have five in, sometimes we have 10 in, and sometimes it's just overnight, >> right? So I wish we would had like an average per night. I think we had that in discussion earlier. >> Maybe tag on to that. Uh might there be occasions when Dodge County would call over and can you take a detainy? And it probably hasn't happened, but if if it did and we were full, the answer would be no. Right. >> Right. And that's what we did back in 2004 is we got to a point where it wasn't the right place to do that and we started telling him no and then ultimately said you just need to go somewhere else. We we can't do it. >> So, effectively, we say yes if there's a vacancy. >> Correct. >> Okay. Yes, Commissioner. >> And that would go for any anyone, too. I'm sorry, Commissioner. That would go for any, >> you know, if Winona College, you anybody >> Commissioner R. >> Um, yeah, this I'm I'm really struggling with this. Um, I absolutely agree that Homemstead County taxpayers are subsidizing Dodge. They have absolutely no incentive to build a jail, which I think we're going to move to a regional model anyhow because of the cost of building a jail, etc. And we're a good partner. We want to continue to be a good partner. Um, as has been stated in previous discussions, do or really makes a lot of sense for Dodge because they have a lot of inmates that need to come for health care. So, if they went to another county, there would be additional costs of transport, etc. Have we ever gone deep enough into conversations to truly understand from them? Because I think we need to up the fee. I'm struggling with take tripling it to the exact cost that we don't slowly move there. Um knowing that we're all in major budget crisis and there's a lot of stress on our budget in 27 20 28. I'm also of the I I struggle that Mstead County taxpayers are subsidizing another county and give them no incentive at all to take care of their own services in their own county. This happens in other services because we are such a strong county in Homestead County. I don't know that there's one where I've seen that it's triple the cost for us and we're subsidizing it to that level um with no other outside financial support. >> Okay. Further further comments, discussions. Uh the motion before us, the amended motion is to uh to amend the $100 a day proposal up to $323 a day that was offered by Commissioner Wright. >> Uh sensing no further discussion, all in favor of the amended motion to 323 say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Nay. >> Nay. Nay. >> Nay. >> A division of the house. >> Division of the house. Uh madame clerk. pretty fast. >> Would you call roll? >> Commissioner Tine >> I. >> Commissioner Wright >> I. >> Commissioner Mueller. >> Nay. >> Chair Sanja. >> Nay. >> Commissioner Rasman. >> I. >> Commissioner Baroi Smith. >> I. >> And Commissioner Hopkins. >> Nay. Where did that one fall? >> Or three. 43. >> Motion pass. >> Motion passes. Uh >> the amendment passes. >> The amendment passes. Okay. >> So the amendment passes. >> The amendment passes. Now we have an amended motion uh to charge Dodge County $323 a day. Um going forward. Uh so we need to vote on it. Uh all in favor of that motion once again say I. >> I. >> Oppos. Nay. >> Nay. May and uh I believe that's uh why don't you do it why don't you do this once again I >> think it's quart to three but just >> commissioner tine >> I >> commissioner Wright >> I >> commissioner Mueller >> nay >> commissioner Sanjum >> nay >> commissioner Rosman >> I >> commissioner >> I >> and commissioner Hopkins >> nay >> okay >> amendment pass >> 4 to3 uh the new fee then has been set at $323 per day per prisoner from Dodge County. >> Commissioner, I have one more comment that I'm just going to make you all aware. Um, obviously that would mean that Dodge County will go away. Um, I I should have asked earlier. I didn't think of it till right as you were going through your vote uh whether or not this is as of today. Is it January 1? Um, that there needs to be some awareness of that. And then secondly, um we've uh been doing some additional talking about this and whether or not the county board has the ability to set this fee. Um and there's some question whether or not that's only on sentenced detainees in statute or if it's uh for all detainees that are housed in a facility or in essence um coming from another county. Uh so there's some question on that that we are going to uh continue to look at and probably reach the county attorney's office to um ask for further clarification on that whether it's just for sentenced detainees or if it's for all detainees. So um I think we'll be back to discuss that again once we have some clarification through the attorney's office. So, we have a we have a vague legal question, but we could probably answer the the implementation date. Uh, Commissioner Wright, do you have an implementation date? It was your >> Well, no, but I I I believe that we would have we Well, >> okay. I have to think out loud just a second because I don't know how long Dodge County might take to if they want to make another arrangement. Uh I I don't say that we ought to take their people out of the jail, you know, at 4:00 today. >> So what a month from now? Is that a >> re I do I if I may just I believe the agreement is >> Could we ask could we align it with our fee schedule implementation? >> I don't know is this fee in that? I don't know. >> I'd like to make a motion. >> This fee is not in that. I do think we need to um you know I I don't I haven't seen the contract that exists right now. Um but my I believe that commits us through the end of the year. So why don't you if you're okay with this um based on the direction of the board here today provide us a little bit more time to look into some of the questions that are being asked right now. >> Well, I would I just like to make a motion that this goes in effect January 1st of 2027. >> Okay. Okay. You have a right to make that. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion and a second. Uh start of the new year. Uh discussion on it. >> Okay. Any discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Uh oppose. Nay. >> Nay. >> I'm going to say nay because I don't want to go in effect. >> So I'm a nay. So uh I believe that passed uh five to two. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Okay. >> May I just one make one final comment? >> Um, Dodge County has been a trusted partner um in law enforcement with with Mstead County for a long time. We work very closely with them on a number of things including probation. Um, we have Mstead County has probation officers based in Dodge County. Um and uh I hate to see this happen because I fear that you know that level of partnership um will uh will be frayed and uh >> um you know and and no longer um as strong as it has been in the past. And I had a discussion with the sheriff Rose about a month ago and I I know he's going to be disappointed and it will be freed and but that's that's where we are today and uh that's where the votes fell. So that's uh we go forward. Thank you Sheriff and thank you uh members of the Dodd County delegation. I'll call you. Okay. Uh moving on then we have one more decision item, the approval letter of commitment uh with the South East Performing Arts Center. Who is going to kick this one off for us? Our county administrator, please introduce yourself for the record. >> Uh good afternoon. My name is Travis Kreny, the Mstead County Administrator. Thank you, Chairman Senum and commissioners. uh this is a topic that you've spent a fair amount of time on and really the journey started in December uh but this is the first time this discussion has actually uh made it into this room uh for the full board to to discuss. uh the the administrative committee of the county board has re been reviewing information that's come forward uh both from the Southeast Minnesota Performing Arts Center and then here more recently in May another request that came forward from Spark uh the Children's Museum. Um and so today the uh request before you really and I've got some information on the slides that you reviewed the last time we met uh at the first meeting in July. Well, frankly, the only meeting in July, we reviewed these slides to just kind of walk through the timeline, but this this conversation really started last December. Uh, and it's continued to move forward throughout this year. Then in that administrative committee, as I've already mentioned, and as also mentioned was the spark request that came forward in May. And then Spark and SMPAC actually met and had some conversation amongst themselves to see if they could both potentially be compatible in that same space. Uh and as we've moved through this process and SEMPAC continues to gather information uh for their feasibility study uh we reached the point the administrative committee reached the point where they voted to bring this to the county board. So, an agreement was uh a letter of commitment, I should say, um was drafted by our county attorney's office and Tom Cananan. That letter was reviewed uh by the group, the SEMAC group, and they felt comfortable with that uh letter of commitment coming forward to the board, at least in regards to the terms and conditions that were in that. And then just as of yesterday, and I'm going to read this for the record if you will, but uh as of yesterday, I received an email um from from Rick uh as you've come to known Rick through his work with SMAC. And this was shared with you in an email that I sent yesterday, but I just wanted to u for for the rest of the public that hasn't had a chance to review that and we didn't have a chance to get in the packet before the packet was published. I just um I think it's important context as the board considers this request that's before them today. So it said we appreciate the county's consideration of our organization for the Senica site. After careful review of the current proposal, we understand that the available space cannot adequately accommodate a performing arts building, a parking ramp, and Spark's facility simultaneously. Given that Spark has demonstrated the ability to develop and build on a shorter timeline than our organization can currently achieve, we believe it's in the best interest of the community and the county's objectives to grant Spark first right of refusal for the site. Should Spark decline to build on the Senica site, we respectfully request that our letter of commitment for this location be continued and remain in effect. We remain con committed to working with the county toward finding an appropriate solution that serves all parties involved. Uh thanks Travis. Let me know if you have questions. Dan Kudsky will be at the meeting and Dan Dan is seated here behind me although I don't know that he will have much more that we can say. So I just wanted to in full acknowledgement of everything that's in the packet also acknowledge that this this was received yesterday as the board today. Then really what what you um what what's on the board agenda is for your approval of the letter of commitment that you'll see in the board packet. So with that that's all we have. >> Thank you. Any questions of our county administrator at this point before we go into discussion? Uh okay. So, the requested action is a approval of the letter of commitment to uh the Southeast Minnesota uh performing arts center uh group. Uh and Mr. County Administrator, I do have one and perhaps you can't answer, but just as we get into this, are we talking about this group being a an incorporated? Who is the Southeast Minnesota Performing Arts Center now that we're getting into almost not necessarily contractual, but certainly letters are commit. We're getting into lawyer land here. >> Yeah, we are. Well, then we've got a lawyers in the room. But I can tell you that we have verified that the Southeast Minnesota Performing Arts Center is a 401c3 state of Min 501c3. Okay, good. >> So, they've filed that. they've received their um information back from the state. They are a a nonprofit organization in the community. >> I did have that question just I wasn't sure. >> Okay. Uh the uh the action before us is to uh either adopt or not adopt the letter of uh commitment to the Southeast Minnesota Performing Arts Center. >> Move to approve the letter of commitment. >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second to do that. Uh, is there any discussion? >> I have a question. >> So, Commissioner Wright, I'm sorry. >> I want to ask our lawyer team. Um, you believe that the letter of commitment leaves uh appropriate places for offramps in case something goes bad for both the county as well as for the performing arts. uh when we discussed this last uh in front of administrative committee I think I pointed out to you that um this is not a for example a purchase agreement selling the land to the southeastern Minnesota Performing Arts Center. It's not a development agreement. I think you probably remember that I I mentioned to you that when you have a contract uh lawyers will tell you that you need to have something called consideration on both sides. Basically, each side needs to offer the other side something. This is structured to keep the county's options at a maximum amount of flexibility. This is a one-way commitment with no commitment, no formal commitment on the other side from the Southeast Minnesota Performing Arts Center. It's a commitment to see if they can reach the thresholds that are spelled out in the commitment letter. And then the the idea would be if they reach those thresholds then we would pursue negotiations to enter into uh well either a purchase or a ground lease. Actually the ground lease uh was what was actually discussed rather than actual transfer of the land. If it was a ground lease, it would be structured that they would build their facility on it plus any parking facilities and that the county would continue to own the land beneath the PAC and the parking ramp for a ground lease of yet to be negotiated but tenatively 99 years. >> Thank you. >> Further discussion? Yes, Mr. Roman. >> As we're all aware, the performing arts group is in the middle of a feasibility assessment. So literally at this point in time they don't even have the data in hand to say yes we are moving forward with this project. They will have the first um iteration or portion of that feasibility assessment at the end of August. I am not in any way comfortable signing an agreement with an organization that is saying we don't even have the data in hand to know if we're going to do this project. In 30 days, we will have some more data. They will have some more data. We'll be coming back to us to let us know what the community told them. Um, in correspondence that you all have, they've said explicitly that this is absolutely not a slam dunk. There are a lot of variables they do not control. Um, but all that will be laid out in a feasibility assessment. So today I would request that we think long and hard about the commitment we're [clears throat] making, wait 30 days to have some more data in hand, more much more information that will be informing the path forward for the group and at that point revisit this discussion. >> Okay, further discussion, >> Mr. Chair, >> uh, Commissioner Podaki Smith and then Commissioner Hopkins. And did you have >> Michelle covered what I was >> covering? I've been in planning discussions with the performing arts group since December of 2025. Um, as has Travis, uh, Mark, myself, and the performing arts group, all within the the goal of securing a commitment of time for the performing arts group to achieve the thresholds that they aim to to reach their goals, to uh, find discovery ies, fundraising, secure, community support. So this is a commitment of protected time and never once in these discussions or any of the communications was there the caveat unless a better offer comes along. In fact, the whole point was a protected commitment of time. And we don't even have consensus that a better offer is in the mix. To me that is a a separate issue that shouldn't even be part of this conversation. Uh we've been moving forward with the majority of the board comfortable with dedicating a protected commitment of time to this group from the very beginning from as early as January. I saw my first draft of this letter of commitment in April. This has been um a many monthsl long ongoing process of planning. >> So my I'm I obviously fall in the camp of moving forward with this letter of commitment. >> Uh Commissioner Hopkins and back to Commissioner Rasman. >> Okay. So um [clears throat] the performing arts center group um has seated right of first refusal to the spark um children's museum which is the other contender for this for use of this property um due to the considerable uncertainty of their situation of their organization of their proposed project etc. Um, we have the chair of the the board of Spark right here. Would that timeline waiting 30 days be consistent with your timeline for a decision to be made? >> God damn it. >> I'm sorry to put you on the spot, Ken, but would you mind? Yes. welcome uh to the board and uh please introduce yourself for the record. >> Ken Brown, just an ordinary citizen [clears throat] happen to be on the board of the children museum at this point in time and is 30 days a killer? No. Um if the result was yes, we will start immediate discussion and looking for an agreement and move forward because our timeline is tight. We need to make a decision. We have been in the throws of strategic planning, campaign funding, site selection, site investigation for couple of years now. looking at the end of our lease, coming up with uh the mall. We need to be out by 2030. We need to have a site secured, built, and the timeline now is not so much building the building, but we need to engage in a very niche business, which is the exhibit manufacturers. We need to design and proceed now with commitments for that. So if you can as a county board and we wait 30 days to make that final decision. Yes. And start discussion serious discussion with cost securing the the property. Yes. Any further? No. So hesitancy is always how quickly the board can move. I was on there 20 years. have a feeling for just how quickly public entities move. But that's so that's where we're coming from. >> That's we've stated this in the admin committee and now in public on film. So >> follow up. >> Uh no followup, but no, thank you very much, Ken, for that. >> Anything else? Yeah. Um well actually maybe I do have one follow not necessarily for Ken but can I amend >> the uh motion? >> Surely. >> So um a motion to amend the original motion to instead consider a delay of 30 days. >> Okay. There's a motion on the floor to uh delay this decision for 30 days. >> Second. >> Is there a second? There's a second further discussion on it, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. Well, let's Does the mover want to make a point about doing this first? >> Just that I think that um making a having a vote on on something that where we just received a letter from that organization saying that they seed right of first refusal. I think giving them enough time to actually have enough information to make an informed decision. They're clearly not in a position right now to make some kind of an informed um decision or to move forward with this project whether we would like it or not. So I think a delay would make sense. They'd be in a stronger position and they can come back and say if they're not ready at that point then we have a very viable alternative. Wisher Pulocki Smith, >> there have been numerous delays and periods of waiting through this entire process since December and the performing arts group has been [clears throat] patient uh responsive, completely professional through this entire process. And I'd like to see no more delays and no more waiting. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Ty, well, I'm kind of ambivalent on this. Uh, I think if we did a delay, then we'd have the same result as if we didn't do a delay. But I'll just point out this board in January and February was supportive with one exception of moving forward with this and directed the performing arts center that we will literally see them in a year. And the only thing that's changed on that on on that agreement that those words is that we get someone else coming forward with a with a proposal that some of us like and now we now our word doesn't really mean as much. And that bothers me. If we have to have everything in writing for it to mean something, then we're worthless as a board. So my word means something and I said, "We'll see you in a year. We'll see you in a year." Now, if they come back in 30 days, whether we approve this going forward or whether we approve a delay, if they come back in 30 days and say, "Hey, it was a big shot, we can't get it done," then we move on. I don't know whether we move on to Spark or whether we move on to something else. I mean, this property is a gift that keeps on giving, but at some point we'll [laughter] we'll get to something that will hopefully benefit the citizens of Homestead County. Okay, >> further discussion? Commissioner Wright, >> thank you very much. So, yes, uh I we did enter into this uh in good faith with the performing arts and we did say that we would give them the time to do that. Um, and uh, I believe that the performing arts needs to know that the homestead county will is good to their word so that they can really go out and and make that plan that they have to have in order for this to come about. So, I don't I don't want them to question whether, you know, 6 months down the road that the county board might change their mind. They really have to have the idea that we're behind them on that. So, um I I'm really not for a delay because I think that they they need the uh letter of commitment uh in order to to move ahead. And um I assume that you're talking the September 1st board meeting. Would that be 30 days? September 1st. That's the But I would I I'm not going to vote for this anyway. Uh maybe just for the for the record uh would you want to at least for the record uh what's your intention with the motion 30 days means the first meeting of September? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes, Mr. R. >> I do have a comment. um without committing something without even a feasibility study, we're we're going back or we're proceeding uh backwards. Um it's we do need to delay that uh because if we don't know what's feasible, it's I I it's we're going backwards on the process or we're doing it backwards. And >> that's what I'm at. >> Uh further the chair the chair would agree. Uh I uh I think uh the 30 days additional time does uh does not hurt the project. It probably actually helps us better understand the implications of our vote because this this is a letter of commitment and uh and it does tie I mean the out is a six-month uh >> right there's >> uh period of of execution of the out. It's 180 days within the document. So uh so uh that's just the way it it it reads and so I think we have to acknowledge that. So, unless there's any others questions, uh, is the board ready to vote? >> All in favor then of the amended motion. Uh, >> Travis wants to >> Yes, Travis. >> Excuse me, chair. Um, I I do feel like I've got one piece that I just need to clarify because there's been all this discussion about the 30 days and just to remind you that that SEMAC has suggested that they've got two parts of their feasibility study, right? the first part of which they anticipate uh will wrap up by the end of August. The second part they anticipated would wrap up by the end of December. So I just want to clarify that um that that's the information they provided to us is that there's two parts to this feasibility study from their perspective August and December. So there's been a lot of discussion about 30 days and I just wanted to make sure everybody was clear about that. >> Thank you. >> Now um maybe Dan can address this but my understanding of the first part is would tell them whether this um market would support a performing arts center. Um, and so to me, that's probably the most critical piece is if this market could actually support, you know, what would be upwards of an $80 million investment? >> Can you confirm that, please? >> Well, he's got choice. Miss Kusky, you can you can do that or not do that. Okay. >> The first part For the record, Mr. Kudsky says that is what the feasibility study. >> Sorry to put you on the spot. Okay, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> I know you you've already offered your rebuttal, but I'm really uncomfortable with the degree to which we keep attempting to manage the various steps of what should be a year of protected time commitment rather than we're on top of every phase of their explorations as you're suggesting. It's just not in line with our original commitment of one year. Check in with us after a year and show us what you've done. Hands off. This monitoring of the first part of their feasibility study, the second part of their feasibility study will build so much delay and waiting into a protected period of time that we're meant to offer them. It's the time, not the micromanaging of their process. I really ask you, Commissioner Sanjum, to reconsider your position on this 30 days. >> The the um Commissioner Pinoy Smith, the this has we talked about this in this city in n in the 1990s. uh and and I'm sure this work has uh been going on with respect to the the interested parties almost since that time uh at various stages and so the idea of 30 days is is is almost minuscable whatever you know just just so uh so basically short in terms of a blink of an eye in terms of [clears throat] the history of this project that I I think We need to hear from the group. Do we think we can do this in this community? Do we think we can build a 2,000 seat performing arts center? >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. Let maybe just finish. And and just looking I mean doing the best research I have been able to do. We're talking at a a medium quality facility at like $130 million. That is a lot of money to raise. I mean, I just admire this group enormously because they know these numbers as well. I mean, they these are back of the envelope kind of numbers. They they know what their challenge is, but and and they're willing to again persevere on it at least up to this point. Uh but this feasibility thing, can we raise $130 million? Can we build a 2,000 seat performing arts center in this community is that is a that's as big as it gets. I I don't know which private organization has ever done that. None frankly except Mayo Clinic in this community. Uh so this is a big deal. Commissioner Tupoki Smith. >> I see hand. >> Hey, but I'll remind you that that's that's the second question. If we short if we end this at at the first question, we don't even get to the second question. We made we made a commitment to these people. They've spent time and money getting to this point and now we're pulling the rug out from under them just because there's a shiny object out there. We have we are either people of our word or we're not. >> Mr. Chair, >> the first step, >> the first step that will enable the process to continue is a commitment of protected time and that does not include micromanaging their process of how they move forward. That's a second step and it's that's within their domain. Our domain is a commitment of time and I think that starts immediately with no further delays, no further waiting. >> Okay. >> And and that we set a tone of honoring our word, honoring our commitment. >> Okay. Mhm. >> So members, we have a an amen motion before us to amend the decision on this until the first meeting in September. Uh and uh any further discussion on it? If not, uh all in favor of the amended the motion to amend to 30 days, uh say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed say nay. Nay. >> And let's do a roll call on that. I think it's 4 to three, but let's make sure. >> Commissioner Tine. Commissioner Wright. >> Nay. >> Commissioner Mueller. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Sanjum. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Rasman. >> I. >> Commissioner Peroki Smith. >> Nay. >> And Commissioner Hopkins. >> I. >> Amendment pass for three. >> The motion to amend then is uh the motion is amended to a 30-day delay in the decision. uh awaiting further information from the proponents on this. Uh any further discussion on the motion as it stands now? If not, then we vote again on the amended motion. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. We already voted. >> We amendment. >> Justice. All in favor of the motion as amended to >> take this uh 30 days hence to the first meeting in September. All in favor of that say I. >> I. >> I. and oppose say nay. >> Nay. >> Nay. And let's do a roll call on that one as well. >> I think it's the same. >> Commissioner Tine >> nay. >> Commissioner Wright. >> Nay. >> Commissioner Mueller. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Sanjum. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Rasman. >> I. >> Commissioner Podokism. >> Nay. >> And Commissioner Hopkins. >> I. >> Okay. The motion then is amended to uh bring this forward again on uh as amended passes and to bring forward the motion of the uh the subject matter again in the first meeting of this of September. Okay, where are we? >> Board reports and committee reports. >> Board reports. Uh let's start with uh Commissioner Tyne because I think I've been going the other way. >> No reports. No report. >> No report. All right, Mr. Hopkins. >> No report. Mr. Podkis, >> I have a lot. >> Yes. Hold on. >> I have a lot of report. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, bear so bear with me. Three reports all of all major. So my first report is yesterday I attended the 2026 active threat full-scale exercise at Century High School. It was an extraordinary experience, a such an impressive exercise. Uh I was uh uh just continuously impressed with the degree of um multi- agency um coordination uh just throughout the city of Rochester and Mstead County just in our group of about 50 observers. Uh we were represented by people from UMR Mayo Clinic, the medical examiner's office, the fire department, sheriff's office, city council, the entire school board, uh the school district, Mstead County Public Health and Human Services, uh Salt and Light chaplain, representatives from Senator Clolobashar's office and Congressman Finstead's office, and other officials from the city of Rochester, including the mayor. So the the observers were like a little microcosm of the many agencies. Uh I listed about a dozen agencies involved in this uh multi-sight [clears throat] um multi- agency dayong response to the scenario of an active shooter. Um, and I was just so impre continuously impressed with the degree of detailed response coordination at every level and primarily what I saw were people who were remaining calm, remaining clear, understanding their role and their relationship to their colleagues, learning as they And uh uh once our group was shuttled away from the the active threat area itself, everyone um everyone in a human services capacity or organizational capacity leading with uh with care and kindness. Uh it was really something. it it felt like a a once in a-lifetime kind of experience. I'm so glad that I um that I participated and I'd be happy to tell you all more detail about it, you know, in private conversations. Uh so earlier last month, I attended a disability summit that was hosted by uh UMR and the city of Rochester. There were two panels. One uh featuring caregivers of children uh with disabilities and the other panel was a was about disability and aging. And both were so informative, so educational and insightful. And it gave uh all of the disability advocates a chance to uh really thank the uh policy makers and elected officials in the audience and further advocate for solutions and needs and and areas of improvement. Uh it was such a wellorganized uh summit. I know I came away um much more informed and um uh just feeling more capable of um of discussing and shaping policy around disability in general. And my my last report is on the annual conference, the annual NAKO conference um in New Orleans. Uh it should come as no surprise to you that Louis Louisianans love to party and really they set the bar so high. I don't know how they made a conference so much fun. They they just have added all these really fun, engaging, funny, joyful uh social uh uh pieces in, you know, in in all the ways that we that we learn and communicate um at the county level. It was it was really a blast. Uh I think all of you would have gotten a lot out of it. I know I did and I'm sure you did. Um Commissioner Senum. Uh of course the the general sessions were really um vibrant and engaging with keynote speakers including an astronaut who pulled out a a guitar at one point and sang a David Bowie song. It was [laughter] really something pretty much not a dry eye in the in the auditorium. Uh the the tours. So they they offered uh municipal tours of of city and county functions like 911 emergency response center, uh a dam enclosure, a realtime uh crime center, mosquito, termite and rodent control, which I am telling you was fascinating. and they had to pry us away from that uh from that tour. And um a pump station that has equipment from World War I area still functioning and still pumping storm and rainwater out of New Orleans city streets and into canals and into Lake Pon Train was was so fascinating. I could I could go on and on. Um but but basically my point is that these um these national and legislative NAO conferences are incredibly enriching and educational and I'm just grateful for uh the opportunity whenever I have to attend. >> Great. >> I'm going to pass due to time constraints. >> Okay. Uh well, I'll just uh maybe tag on a little bit. I also was in New Orleans. I would say the takeaway uh a lot of obviously I we've talked about this discussion on the evolution of data centers in this country and the urging at least uh that uh counties be involved in these uh these issues that uh they engage the community profusely and uh and frankly that they proceed the the advice was proceed proceed with the ordinance because you're going to get caught without one and and then you're going to be in in moratorium land. So, uh that those those two well the other takeaway was uh uh more and more encroachment in terms of uh local control on county governments and uh and shifts certainly in costs as we've all seen from both state and and federal governments onto counties. The expectation that county budgets can pick these up and obviously we all know that they can't. And so again, the urging was get involved legislatively both at the state and federal level and uh send messages uh to both of those uh entities, if you will, with respect to the uh the fact that uh we'll do the service, but uh you've got to fund the the uh the program. So those are my takeaways uh at least coming out of New Orleans. So with that, is there a motion to adjurnn? Move to adjurnn. >> There's a motion and a second. All in favor to adjurnn say I. >> I. >> We arejoured. >> Chairman Sum. >> Yes. Uh what's the preference of the board here? You've got administrative committee scheduled to start at 1:00. The