I have there's a several items here and I'll read them for you and then we'll take a motion to approve uh or otherwise pull any one of them for further discussion. So the first one is a approve the Olmsted County Board minutes of June 2nd. Secondly, approve a gambling permit for the Stewartville Sportsman's Club. Third, approve a gambling permit for the Family Service Rochester. Next, they accept the annual comprehensive financial report for the year ending December 31st, 2025. Next, to approve and enter into a professional services agreement with SEH Incorporated for SP00, pardon me, 055644001, which I believe is the Highway 14 project. Uh next, to establish the absentee ballot board. And lastly, a ranking of eligible census tracts that qualify for an opportunity zone designation is There a motion to approve or otherwise pull one. >> Move to approve the consent agenda. >> Second. >> A motion to approve the consent agenda has been made and a second to appropriate all in favor say I. Opposed, nay. And the consent agenda is approved. So we move on then discussion items and in for pardon me, no discussion items. We made them. Informational items moving into informational items uh exciting report tonight. Nancy or Kathy, rather, Hall, would you come forward and talk to us a little bit about transforming trash. After a great presentation last evening. >> Yeah, thank you all for coming last night. Um it was interesting the artwork. Uh so this is transforming trash and I'm here to introduce our first artist in residence, Selene Huff. Um she's out of Alberta, Canada, but she's not Canadian. She's from New Mexico. Her parents are both geologists. So I an interesting thing, Selene, the rock selenide, and she has a sister named Cambria. So, geological names, which I think is pretty awesome, cuz I'm a geologist. Um so, transforming trash, this is a really unique program. Um I I think we discussed last night there isn't one we know of anywhere in the country. And after my own heart, it's to be used to educate on reduction, reuse, and making something out of wasted materials. And so, Selenay coming came in as she's a welder by trade, um journeyman welder. Um she earned the admiration of the uh equipment operators at the landfill. Um surprised they didn't put her to work um welding pieces of equipment, but they were thoroughly impressed with her welding skills. Uh she held a workshop um couple Saturdays ago, where they made flowers out of utensils. Um I was out of town, couldn't make it, but they turned out really great from the pictures I saw. Um so, yeah, she's the first artist in residence in the program. We have two coming in. We have another one coming in in August or late summer or early fall. Um she was chosen out of 145 candidates that applied to be an artist in residence here for Olmsted County. And these were candidates uh applied from around the world. So, this was a a program that gained a lot of attention. Um and with that, I'm just going to turn it over to Selenay to talk about the artwork, which is it's on the screen. Uh I believe that we named it Carol. >> [laughter] >> Okay, we're going to that. Um Carol will be on display at the recycle center uh for a few months, and then once the waste energy facility is done with the remodel, we'll move her over to the waste energy facility as part of our branded new branding education campaign, new displays that we're doing over there. But with that, I'm going to turn it over to Salena. >> Welcome, Salena. Would you please introduce yourself for the record and we look forward to your report. >> Thank you. My name is Salena Huff. I live in Red Deer, Alberta, Canada. Uh most people don't know where that is. It's an hour and a half north of Calgary, if anybody's been to Calgary. Um but as previously mentioned, I am I am an American citizen, I promise. >> [laughter] >> I was raised in Southern New Mexico. I hold a journeyman's ticket in welding and a Master of Fine Arts degree in sculpture from the University of Alberta. Um I currently am a visual arts technician and part-time instructor at Red Deer Polytechnic in Red Deer, Alberta. Um where I train baby artists to do woodworking and welding and bronze casting and do a finger count at the end of every day. Um Yeah, I think that's about it for introduction. Yeah. Um So in terms of the program, I just want to thank you all very much for having me. This has been such a unique and wonderful experience. I would like to live in your landfill permanently, please. [laughter] I can build a hut out there and just continue to collect garbage make it my garbage. Um The piece that you see on the screen is the biggest piece I did. It's made in exclusively of materials found in the landfill, mostly from the heaps out of the incinerator, although Carol, the Landfill Guardian, is also covered in recycled tires. So, that's what makes up her fur. Um she's about 8-ft long and about 4-ish feet high. Um I started by collecting materials closely supervised by other Travis. Recently [snorts] learned there are multiple Travises in this program. Um and brought them back to a bay that the Landfill folk had very kindly allowed me to use. And I started welding things together and all of the pink barnacle type things you see on the screen are pieces of pipe that I heated up in my little propane forge and shaped and then welded together on top of Carol to give her some texture and barnacles. Um yeah, I this was such a wonderful experience. Um my background for art making, my practice is based in recycled materials. I've been working with generally scrapyards and industrial scrap from oil fields for the last 10 years. Um and I'm really interested in where the things that we spend so much time and energy creating wind up when they've lost their ability to continue to function in their original purposes. And this is so special because we can divert things from the waste stream and hopefully add some some art and some beauty and some interest to the public landscape along the way. Um yeah. Are there other things I should be thinking Mr. Chair? >> Yes. >> If I might chime in, I I just want to thank and congratulate the the both of you for something that started as an idea and it became a program and has resulted in in three just gorgeous pieces of art, um one of which remains with us and that will inspire our community to think about their waste differently and to have uh creative reuse potential, resource, and value in the things that commonly are just discarded as waste. And and of course Kathy, thank you for all of your guidance and steadiness and help helping things move along um on our steady path. Really, you you two are the the perfect people to create this and pull it off in in our inaugural year as our inaugural artist. I I can't thank you enough. So, these are uh just two small thank you gifts for Jocelyn and Solène from the Olmsted County uh Board of Commissioners. You You might You might see that they're reminiscent of the workshop that you that you held for us. And um just thank you. >> Will you accept your gifts? >> Thank you. >> [laughter] [laughter] >> Just want to say a really big thank you to everybody who supported this program. Um Jocelyn and Laurel and Kathy and Travis and Glenn out at the landfill are amazing human beings. You guys are very lucky to have them. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, thank you. Anybody else want to comment on this? Well, thank you so much for being with us and we really I think certainly enjoyed having you, enjoyed the idea. And and I I would just say that the art is a beautiful s- symbol if you will of the idea. Now, it's the the idea in my mind at least is that the we have one Earth, we have limited resources, we have uh many millions of years left to live on this Earth. Somebody will at least and we have to take care of them and the this idea of reusing and the recycling and and that that you're emulating here with your product is uh again symbolic of the need then to change the conversation to normalize it towards a a different kind of attitude towards the way we smother Earth and uh and actually for the listening audience, if you see this art firsthand as I did last night, it is it is beautiful. It's a beautiful piece and congratulations as the other two pieces were as well. So, thank you so much for being here and uh good luck in your travels and come back once in a while. >> [laughter] >> Okay. All right, next uh we move into the Inter County Association, MICAH, which the Olmsted County Board is a member of. It's a state organization of counties. At least about 15 counties are going to tell us more specifically. Nathan Jessen is here and the executive director. Nathan, welcome and please introduce yourself for the record. >> Uh Mr. Chair, Commissioners, my name is Nathan Jessen. I'm the executive director of the Minnesota Inter County Association. Um just the goal here tonight is kind of talk through a recap of the 2026 legislative session, the issues that MICAH worked on um and their impact on uh counties I don't know whether you prefer us take questions as we go or hold them till the end or whatever you all want to do works. >> Why don't we just interject your questions when when the the mood arises or the the topic interests you, so. >> Right. Sounds good. Um so, MACA is a voluntary organization of Minnesota's 17 of the most populated counties in Minnesota outside of Hennepin and Ramsey. We work on the statewide issues that affect counties and try to make sure we're providing analytical lens to our work. We'll have the folks introduce themselves as they come up and talk through their issue areas, but we try to make sure that we're not only providing weekly updates from the capital and being in committee talking to legislators, talking to county folks, but also our work happens during the interim, too. A lot of what we do is at the staff level, bringing county staff from across the state together to talk through issues that they're working through. Allows them to trade expertise and talk through issues with one another and then have that knowledge inform the work that MACA does at the capital. In particular, I just want to thank Olmsted County, Alfredo from finance, Julian from HR, active members that I work with quite frequently. Um so, if we're talking about the 2026 session at a high level, I think it's fair to say that coming in expectations were relatively low, right? This is an election year. All 201 legislators as well as all the constitutional offers officers are on the ballot in November. Not only So, there's not a need to pass bills in a non-budget year when there's not a current biennium deficit, which we didn't have, but at the same time there wasn't the advantage of some previous years where there were kind of these historic surpluses where the legislature felt pressure to either spend money or cut taxes depending on their point of view. So, the the expectations were relatively low, but I would say also on top of that was the tight house 67-67, which is second year of it, but still presents challenges regularly to that body given that it's not really set up to work in a tight environment. Um but I think it was a relatively productive session. Now, the process was I would argue as opaque as it has ever been. Um I'll just give you an example, tax bill. So, the house did not pass a tax bill and the Senate did not pass a tax bill, but instead the final week of session, they dropped an agreement into a transportation policy conference committee from 2025, right? So, there there wasn't a way to necessarily know what's the house position or Senate position quite as clearly as we normally do. That's just one example, but it was kind of making sure we were navigating that process was always a challenge. But, if you look at the results, what we had was and we'll talk about this more in depth as we go along, but a $1.2 billion bonding bill, a really robust significant IT modernization bill, and then not ongoing, but one-time money for things like SNAP and implementing and resourcing the African American Family Preservation Child Welfare Disproportionality Act. Um at a high level, I would say for some of these things, especially around taxes and HHS spending, um those targets were negative targets, right? They were cut targets, which made getting ongoing money in those areas difficult. Um at the end of the day, the state budget, um they ended up spending some about $650 million one-time and on net cutting spending or raising revenue by a few hundred million in the out biennium. Um as far as what the state budget will look like going forward, I it all depends on the national economy to be frank for the long term. Minnesota is very income tax heavy relative to a number of other states. So our surpluses or deficits kind of go as the economy goes and there's just a little bit more boom and bust there. But that that's kind of where we are right now. And obviously a lot of the issues that we talked about particularly snap and after we anticipate coming back next year. So I'll talk about taxes for a little bit. I think taxes what's most notable is what didn't become law this year. You all know County levies increased statewide on average by a level that they haven't in the past 25 years and 2026, right? And that did generate a lot of conversation around property taxes at the capital. There were a number of legislators that were pushing Levy limits. Mike is opposed to Levy limits. We did work with the three chairs representative Davis, representative Gomez and Senator Rest on just trying to inform them about the unintended consequences of Levy limits especially in an environment where state and federal mandates are increasing. So those bills we were able to make sure they those didn't get hurt. Now that conversation is likely going to continue next year. There were bills that were heard around assessments shifting the burden of proof for evaluations from the taxpayer to the county limiting assessors tools. Those were heard but didn't ultimately become law. And then on local sales taxes Olmsted County wasn't didn't have local sales tax but there were some 37 different individual authorizations, modifications, extensions that different counties and cities bring. None of those ended up moving forward. Um, one of the If you're talking about spending that did happen, property tax relief, there was a one-time boost in the homestead credit refund. This is an existing state program that's that's paid out of the state general fund. So, for folks that apply for the homestead credit refund, they go through their normal process this summer, and then the state is going to provide refund that's 15% or 14.9% larger than it would normally be. We did extend the local homelessness prevention aid. Olmsted County had staff come and testify in favor of that and in committee this year. That was scheduled to sunset after 2028. So, that got extended by four years. That's a flexible fund that the legislature created in 2021 to address homelessness and really try to give counties tools. There and there were limited changes when it comes to property taxes. There weren't really significant property tax shifts that will increase the burden on homeowners or commercial property for that matter that passed and became law this year. I did want to talk a little bit more about IT modernization. So, IT modernization did pass both chambers unanimously. But, just because something passed both chambers unanimously does not mean it was easy. In some ways, it's more difficult. But, we spent This was one of Mike's top priorities along with the other ones I mentioned earlier. First, it allocates $75 million this biennium and $15 million in the out biennium, right? And so, it's easy to understand money, but one of the big improvements that came with this legislation in particular is that counties were much more involved with the development of it every step of the way. So, in some past legislative sessions, there's been, you know, investments in IT, but there's been really, uh, I would say broad language. And we worked, uh, with, uh, counties across the state to make sure the projects that we listed in this in this bill really were going to be projects that we need to move forward, uh, for counties as soon as possible. Um, so, that's good. The other thing that's good is that this bill created an advisory council, which I'm sure just sounds like, "Okay, well, what I mean, why is that important to me, right?" But in the past, you what I would say is this advisory council, which has four county appointees to it, is going to oversee the use of this fund. So, the this is money that's going to be spent, and we're going to know how it's being spent to a greater degree than we have a lot of the times in the past. The third thing that is especially important is that the headline numbers here are 75 and 15. That's the money that was appropriated. Um, but there's also an ability for this fund to get up to $50 um, every other year put into it. Um, now, the mechanism is somewhat complicated. It's basically every other year during odd-numbered years, if in between the middle of July and the middle of October, revenue collections come in significantly above projections, that money can go into this fund. But that's important because it's difficult to maintain momentum for getting money for IT at the legislature. Uh, we were able to do it this year, but that's no guarantee that we could in future years. Um, so, that would enable, uh, this council to help spend, uh, direct money to projects that we need in a way that we're not totally reliant on the legislature appropriating general fund dollars. But, to be clear, it's not going to be a steady revenue stream, either, right? It's going to be totally dependent on the state economy. Um the last thing that the the legislature did with this bill was um establish a legislative commission that the council will report to with the idea being that they wanted a little bit more oversight and to try to develop a little bit more expertise among legislators on IT issues at the capital. Um I will say I got a picture of Representative Torkelson up there. He was uh chief author of this in the house. The Senate author was Melissa Wiklund um from Bloomington. Uh they were both really good to work with. Representative Torkelson in particular on this 50 million uh alloc uh allocation worked really diligently to get that in the bill. Um and we were uh across associations um very uh involved in the development of this and getting updates almost right up until the last minute, but I it's a geeky process thing, but what really um soothed my mind the last week of session was knowing that this bill passed as a stand-alone. It wasn't wrapped up in an omnibus, um and that's part of why it was able to pass with the margin that it did. I'm going to pause there to see if there are any questions before I hand it off um to our next Mica lobbyist, but I'll come back and wrap things up at the end. >> Members, any questions? Any questions? Uh I guess not at this point, but uh we'll keep you in abeyance. >> Okay. Next. >> Hello, Nancy. Welcome. >> Good evening. >> yourself. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioners, Nancy Selesky, and I handle both public health and human services for Mica, and it's a pleasure to be here this evening. We just finished a lovely dinner at Teresa, just saying. >> [laughter] >> It was very good. I just wanted to mention Nathan gave a very comprehensive overview of the IT thing. I just want to say that every legislator heard from everybody starting with commissioners down to staff to it was hard to tell who was saying which day county day was on the hill because everybody was there all of the time. So thank you. It was definitely heard by by everyone which you know is reflective in the unanimous unanimous vote. Moving on to a couple of things I just want to point out that our results of federal shifts that are coming down to the state. The other two priorities that we worked on in the human services space dealt with snap. The legislature did appropriate one time 10.7 million dollars for administrative costs. That's in fiscal year 2027. And that allocation is based on the county's proportional share of snap admin costs in 2025. Because it's a one time appropriation we will be revisiting this again next year. The other thing was Nathan referenced as well was was the act MAFPA. Again, we received 15 million dollars one time for fiscal year 27. The way it's going to work is each county will be awarded a minimum of a hundred thousand dollars that will sit in this account. This is separate I want to mention from the seventy five thousand dollar floor that we have in another account that was the result of child protection language that passed several years ago. Dollars must be used for staffing and services for child protection. There can be no supplantation of current county expenditures but maybe used to maintain staff and services that are paid by temporary funding or were paid by temporary funding such as ARPA. There was no funding provided to the agency. Our goal is to get the case reviews to the agency to DCYF rather than counties having to do it. They wanted to carve out some money um from our $15 million appropriation and the legislature just would not have that. So, what the result is is that the case case review process is delayed until July 1st of 2027. It was supposed to go into effect this in January. So, that was delayed. And then the working group that's been working on this for the last couple of years um does expire on December 31st of this year. Again, one-time funds, so we'll be looking at this again next year and again making sure that the department does takes over those case reviews. Uh, is that this guy? Yeah. >> You got it. >> Okay. What am I doing? Oh. >> You moved it twice, though. >> Oh, no. Oh, no. Sorry. Is that it? It is. Thank you. Uh, sorry about that. Um, Human Services Omnibus bill. This is the Senator Hoffman bill who um along with Senator or Representatives Noor and uh Schumacher received the only negative spending target when the budget targets were put out and it was a negative number of $300 million. And of course, as we all know, Human Services is a big part of of the state budget. I think it's bypassed um or surpassed uh education at this point. It's like 41, 42%. So, that uh message did not go over over well. I want to mention some of the things that they were able to do. Um, they're looking at transform the transformation of Human Services and this would be both the Department of Human Services as well as Children, Youth, and Families. Um, under the legislation, those two agencies are to consult with counties and tribes to study and recommend improvements to the roles that we have, that counties have, that the state has, and that tribes have in administering Human Services programs. DHS must procure with a contract uh a vendor contract to assess the current status of administration of MA and plan for an eventual transfer of that to the agency by January 1st of 2033, which sounds so far from now, but as we all know, time flies when we're having fun. Um the uh the last thing I would mention is that DHS must contract with a consultant to make uh recommendations to improve its performance as the state's Medicaid agency. So, that was included in that bill. Um NEMT, um as you may remember, in the governor's proposal last year, there was uh legislation that passed that would have given the administration of NEMT to the department. Um they booked some savings from that. I'm blanking on it. It was between 10 and 10 million dollars thinking that the state would do it more efficiently, and they did book those savings. Unfortunately, this year, they came forward saying, "Yeah, we're not ready for this." And so, they removed that July 1st, 2026 effective date and leaves it open-ended. There's language that requires 6 months notice to counties and um MCOs, county-based purchasing operations before the state would implement such if and when the state does implement that uh that takeover. Um under the legislation, all drivers must be individually enrolled and reported on all claims. However, there is an exemption for volunteers and not for-hire vehicles, which counties utilize uh a lot. Couple of things I'm just going to mention. There's a little bit of an error in here. Those two bullets under social worker title change belong in the environment bill, and they are in the environment bill, but they got duplicated here. So, ignore that. I'm just going to mention a couple things that are not on the screen. And that is MN Choices. Um the legislature passed language that DHS is to employ MN Choices assessors that may be deployed to help us, counties, um to do those assessments in the event of backlogs. That that was part of it. I also want to mention that, sorry, that uh the legislature did put additional funding into mobile crisis grants, $3.8 million for this biennium, 26-27. Other bills that were signed into law as stand-alone bills, you'll see the use of social work title. For years we've been um having certain legislators [clears throat] um try to require licensing of county social workers, and we currently have an exemption for that. This year they changed it after much discussion that a person cannot use that title after July 1st of '27. These are for county or for workers that are hired after July 1st of '27, so next year. They cannot use the title social work and let social worker unless they have a degree um in social work or are already licensed as a social worker. So, under the legislation that did pass, current county employees are grandfathered in under that measure. That was the deal that was that was um that they came up with. The other thing I want to mention, this was big for public health. Uh there was language that defines or or expands the definition of medical consultants who serve on community health boards. It expands to include nurse practitioners, osteopaths, and physician assistants. What didn't happen? Um as you know, there is a work group that has been working on trying to find savings in long-term services and supports. This uh was part of 2025 legislation where instead of transferring costs to us, they said, "Hey counties, try and come up with $178 million in LTSS." We need to do that by next July. Um we this work group has been working, and they've identified a number of of proposals that would book savings, and the legislature did book savings on of these things, but did not get We did not receive the credit related to that. So, um that was given the $300 million negative target again in human services. My understanding is that the report, which includes a number of county county people on it, will point out that hey, these were the things that were that we found and that should at least we we should get credit for. Um those things include There was a long-term services and support loan program that's not been utilized. There was a balance of $65 million, so that's a big chunk of it right there. And then also there was the Senate at one time had proposed buying back 31% of this, so it would have reduced that 178 to about I think it was like 120-ish or something like that. And then there's language that right now under disability waivers, individuals can modify their vehicles or cars on an annual basis for up to $40,000 annually. The legislature did change this for home modifications can only be done now every 3 years and vehicles every 5 years. So, those were some of the things we did point out and again we'll continue to point out to the legislature. Um if this doesn't happen, we're looking at a cost shift in July of next year. I also want to mention that CMS has to approve some of this and so um we need to continue our work on this, but as you know, the legislature doesn't really complete anything until the last last couple of days of session it seems. So, we'll be working on that issue as well. Um what what else did not happen? Some good things. There was a proposal that would have added a cost shift related to the behavioral health fund. That added cost shift did not happen. We're still paying 23.1% of the behavioral health fund. And then there's been a lot of discussion on contracted case management, which a lot of counties utilize. Um there were proposals last year and this to ban that um and it comes out of a couple of high-profile cases. I would say that um so somebody was unhappy with with a um contractor on this. Um what we were able to get was instead a rate study and a report that is due next year. So we'll be revisiting that issue as well. Uh finally I do want to want to call out your staff uh work with a a number of you um Mr. Chair yourself um you you were at the capital a lot this year as were many of you. I want to want to call you out. Jen Berquam, Dan Johnson, Amy Thompson, Amy Rothwater, Denise Daniels, you've got an incredible staff that are very active in our our committee meetings and our committee you know setting our agendas etc. and are really a value not only to your county but to counties across the state uh state and I just want to mention that. They're they're wonderful to work with. And with that um the only thing I would say is that session begins next year on January 12th. >> [laughter] >> And we're already looking ahead. >> Any questions of Ms. Leske Zaleski? >> Jordan. >> Any questions at all? >> Uh Mr. Mr. Chair. >> Mr. Hopkins. >> So um I mean it it's a wonderful report. One thing that I'm just curious about is um I mean fraud was a huge issue for this session. What was the what were the outcomes as it related to health and human services because we're we're seeing some impacts here um right now um in terms of a number of providers um who are being shut down. Um and I'd like to understand if there were any legislative outcomes related to that. And maybe if any of these actions are related to some of those legislative outcomes. >> Uh Mr. Chair and Commissioner, yes, fraud has been on everybody's front on on the on everybody's plate here for a long time. What the legislature did do is they did create a state office of Inspector General, which is separate from it's its own agency, so it's its own you know, will have its own folks, so it's not part of you know, we already have Inspector Generals in the various departments, but this would be a separate state person. Um and I >> May I ask, is that strictly related to health and human services or across all the different departments? >> Mr. Chair and Commissioner, it's across everything cuz the Department of Education also had issues and I'm sure others as well. Um the other thing related to human services and Medicaid fraud specifically is they did appropriate $1.6 million, I want to say, to the Attorney General's office a year to kind of shore that department up in going after Medicaid fraud. In terms of the providers, we're all seeing what happened. I think they just enrolled like 50% of the providers. My understanding, however, is that a lot of it was because the paperwork wasn't turned in on time and that now there was a backlog with that. There was a deadline of May 31st, and so I think they were under the gun to to produce something, but my understanding is that the a lot of those are now being paid while they're either appealing it or that paperwork was turned in at this point. So, a lot of discussion. There's also legislation that's looking at grants. Um with you know, with some of the foundations and such. They they also passed language related to that. So, it was very much a bipartisan issue and taken seriously by all parties. >> Anyone else? >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? I'm seeing none at this point. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Who's next? Well, welcome. Please introduce yourself. >> Yes, thank you uh Mr. Chair and Commissioners. My name is Amber Backus and I cover transportation issues for MICAH. There we go. Um so I wanted to start out talking about what happened and as Nathan already mentioned, one of the very exciting things was that the legislature did pass a bonding bill. Um we think this is probably the first time in over a decade that they passed a bonding bill during the regular session in the even numbered year, which is when they're technically supposed to Um the other good news is that the price tag of it was a lot higher than anyone had anticipated going into session. When they ended last year, there was talk about having a $700 million bill during um because of the state's ability to pay debt service, but we the state had more capacity, so they were able to do a $1.2 billion bill. But as Nathan also said, things were very opaque this year. Neither the Senate nor House ever put forward a bill. This was one of those things that was agreed to behind closed doors and was released on the very last day of session in the very last hours. Um it was great for MICAH as we got several of our top priorities funded in it. Um as you can see from the list on the left, um a lot of infrastructure and assets were preserved, but there was a big focus on transportation, not only statewide pro- programs, but local projects. Um and specifically for MICAH, we were very excited to see funding again for the local road improvement program at $47 million, which was $5 million more than was received last year. Um the local bridge rehabilitation program for $25 million, which was also an increase um from 25 levels, 2025 level. The local government wetland replacement program received $4.5 million, which will keep it moving and prevent any of those credit errors from being at a deficit. And um my colleague Rachel Oops, I was taking notes there, so I'll skip over that. Um So that was bonding, which was fantastic. Um there was not a transportation bill this year. The Senate had tried to move one. It got as far as the Senate Finance Committee. Um but was um stalled out there due to some internal discussions and the house never put one forward um because the the Repub- Republican co-chair didn't think it was necessary to do a supplemental budget bill this year. Um but again, those backroom negotiations produced one change and that was a passing a one-time reduction in the tab fees that Minnesotans pay on their passenger vehicles. That will be effective in calendar year 2025. Uh so, Minnesota car and truck owners will pay what they paid um prior to the increases in 2023 that were part of the landmark transportation package that passed that year. Now, of course, a one-time reduction could have meant that the trunk highway fund would have lost $250 million in revenue, but part of the deal was to spend some of the surplus general fund dollars to backfill that. So, the highway user tax distribution fund will be held harmless well. Um Minnesota vehicle owners will see um a break on their tab fees in 2025. >> 2020 >> Excuse me, 2027. Jeez. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm stuck on 2025. We appreciate that. Um and then as far as what's on the horizon, there were quite a few issues that have been discussed the last 2 years that didn't go anywhere, but we suspect um that they will be back in the future. So, I just wanted to hit on some of those. Um the first is with regard to the state aid design standards. Um those are promulgated through rule making typically and they try to preserve some uniformity across the county state aid and the municipal state aid road system. However, some of the key transportation officials have been upset that those rules haven't been updated in a while and don't incorporate um some accessibility for other road users. So, there was legislation to try to have the state dictate what those standards look like and to change the variance process. Um that discussion prompted MnDOT to reconvene its rules advisory committee and start that rule making process um to update things like allowing for 10-ft lanes in a corridor and to um have some updates to how bicycles use the roadway system. So that prevented any legislation from moving forward um this past year. However, next session if the rules committee hasn't made significant progress, we expect to see some legislation again where the legislature might weigh in on this issue and make some decisions about how your county state-aid roads are designed. Um a top priority for MICAH the last few sessions that is still unresolved is how to implement the new greenhouse gas um offset and mitigation program, which is required when you are building new highway capacity or uh new uh separated um interchanges. Um that bill was [clears throat] initially passed in 2023 with some tweaks in 2024 and MnDOT has a group working on how to implement it, but they've only really gotten as far as figuring out how to come up with the assessment for the greenhouse gas emissions that will be created through these road projects. They still have not landed on um a a good way for the um project sponsors to mitigate that increased greenhouse gas. And that's causing folks a lot of heartburn. A lot of folks are sitting on projects and not moving them forward cuz they're not sure how much that mitigation's going to cost or what that process entails. And on top of that, MnDOT's um probably not going to meet a deadline to come up with a system where it wouldn't be a project-by-project sort of a mitigation, but where you could offset across a portfolio of MnDOT projects. Um that's supposed to happen next August in 2027 and MnDOT's far from doing that. Um MICAH and AMC were successful in getting the House Transportation Committee to have a hearing on this issue, to have MnDOT present, talk about where they're at, all the work that still needs to be done, as well as um an opportunity for some of our Mica County Commissioners to talk about their concerns, particularly since some of these mitigation efforts are outside of the purview of MnDOT or counties. For example, transit systems aren't in the purview of MnDOT or counties, um nor are land use decisions and increasing density. So, those are some of the best ways to mitigate to increase greenhouse gases, and MnDOT and counties have no control over how to do that. So, um that conversation did um prompt MnDOT to have a meeting with us the last weekend of session. They have committed to have a working group over the interim to talk about legislative fixes that will be needed to make this program work, because right now we're we're far from seeing that happen. >> [gasps] >> A couple other things I wanted to highlight, um particularly if the Democrats have control of the governor's office and the House and the Senate again, we expect to see some additional bills that could limit the ability to deliver road projects for your constituents, um as well as the possibility that some um monies that have typically gone for um roads and bridges be diverted to transit. Um there was a whole suite of bills that were similar to the greenhouse gas bill and that they would prohibit um the building of new highway capacity unless certain conditions were met. One of those bills would require um project sponsors to have a 60-year maintenance plan on the new um the new construction, as well as identify funding over that period, um which is well beyond the sort of planning that typically goes into those projects. Um some other bills would require more alternatives to be looked at to um doing highway expansions, or to have um a a statement to justify the need for the um highway project before it could go forward. Um so, those did not move forward, but I know some key legislators were very involved in those and um, they are listening to transit and um, environmental and multimodal groups who who really would like to see a diversion from roads and bridges to those other systems, which I I I think everybody wants to provide choices for um, all of their constituents. I think the issue is there's just such a backlog and need to continue to deliver highway projects and of course those do support a strong bus system and and pathways for cyclists and other things. So it shouldn't be this you know, confrontation and we should be working hand-in-hand to to get this done. Um, lastly, while this was geared at the metro, there were several bills looking at transit planning reform. Um, the one mentioned here was focused on the seven-county metro. There was discussion during an informational hearing about creating uh, transit benchmarks potentially that could be instituted statewide. So that if you were going to invest in transit, it would have to meet certain ridership numbers, um, certain um, cost efficiency numbers, um, certain potential density numbers about where you're going to build um, and um, that's something we'll be following cuz as proposed those density requirements only worked for really uh, Hennepin and Ramsey County and the other counties in the state. Um, so with that I will stop there and be happy to answer any other questions, but just wanted to give you an overview of what happened and what we're planning to see next year. So. >> Any questions of Ms. Beckus? I just have one. Is Was there any activity uh, one way or another on uh, electrifying transportation? >> Um, the only conversation was how to get revenues from electric vehicles to support the the system. There was a task force that was passed in 2025 and worked over the interim to come up with some funding recommendations. Um, but beyond that there wasn't really any serious discussion about how to to build out the um alternative fuel and electric vehicle infrastructure. >> Anyone else? Well, very good. Thank you for wonderful report. And uh who is next? Rachel. Welcome. >> Hello. >> Please introduce yourself. >> Mr. Chair and Commissioners, my name is Rachel Sisnochek and I cover environment issues for Mike at the Capitol. Great to be with you all today. I did the wrong button. >> [laughter] >> All right, we did it. Um so, at a high level when it comes to uh the environment space, we did not have very high expectations for a lot of new spending or policy changes in the environment committees and those expectations were uh very much met. Uh there was no additional general fund spending um in the environment bill and really all we saw were uh some appropriations bills for the Outdoor Heritage Fund and Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund, um which those dollar amounts were listed on the side. Um and then there was also some good progress in the bonding bill. Uh little over 10.5 million was included in the general obligation bonding bill for uh the capital assistance program to fund solid waste infrastructure projects. That money was earmarked for three specific projects that were the highest ranked among um the nearly 60 million in total requests that local governments submitted to the MPCA um as they were kind of gathering information um over the last year, but I think as we think about kind of the statewide need related to solid waste infrastructure, any amount that we can chip away at those cap requests, it's all helpful um so that next time there's a bonding bill, we can start funding additional projects. And so, glad to see um some money included in the bonding bill for that. Uh between the cash and GO bills, there was 2.15 million included for a new statewide drinking water contamination medication program that was established in the bonding bill that passed last year. Um, and then there was also a small amount in the cash bill for a study on the illegal transport of infectious waste. Um, another thing that passed that I think is just good for us to be aware aware about as we think about, you know, my goal's platform related to um, contamination from things like PFAS, um, nitrates, stuff like that. Uh, there was a change to Minnesota's uh, PFAS reporting system. So, starting in September of this year, uh, manufacturers are required to report on products that contain, um, added PFAS. And that's, you know, kind of the first step as the state thinks about how do we phase out, um, the the sale of products that contain, um, unnecessary PFAS, um, and ultimately are with the goal of reducing future contamination. Um, this is obviously a huge issue in many communities across the state. Um, and there was an exemption included in the, uh, health and human services bill that exempts legacy parts from this new reporting requirement. So, anything manufactured before July of 2023. So, just something I think for us to be aware about, um, as we look forward and kind of what this new, um, reporting is going to look like. And then obviously as the state moves towards enforcement, um, of that. >> Can you explain it just anything manufactured before uh, twen- is it 2023? >> July of 2023. Yes, is now exempted from reporting requirements. Whereas before, they would have been captured by that. >> Okay, thank you. >> Of course. Yeah. Uh, there is a longer list of items that did not pass this year that my goal uh, was working on or has worked on, um, recently. Um, and so this I think does sort of serve as a little bit of a road map for what we can expect to come back in 2027. Um, my goal along with other county groups was very active in advocating uh for a new battery product stewardship program. Uh, there's a lot of back and forth and really good negotiations with um, you know, industry groups and other stakeholders um, to try to get to a place where we could get uh battery product stewardship bill across the finish line and in the last days of session, we thought we were close and we we had an agreement and then that just kind of fell apart as as part of the larger negotiations that were happening with leadership. Um, so that was disappointing, but I think the good news is that we're in a really good starting point for 2027 and can kind of take that final version of the bill language and and bring that forward again next year. Um, in addition to other conversations about other types of product stewardship um, related to electronic waste and and other issues. Um, we did not so I I included um, just I wanted to talk about score funding cuz I know that's something that my guy has and and we'll continue to be very strong advocates for increased score funding for counties and all the great solid waste uh programming that that you do. Um, we had a really strong bill last year, really great hearings in the House and Senate tax committees. Um, we chose not to invest a ton of time and energy in that this year um, but it was something that did come up in committee conversations on other solid waste topics. So definitely still something that's top of mind for legislators um, and so we'll be bringing that back next year um, and continue continue the conversation around score. Uh, there was legislation that was introduced that was um, specific to the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center, the HERC, that would have placed um, limits on how much uh waste that that facility could process as well as set new emissions and monitoring standards. Um, while it was specific to that one facility, we take that very seriously. Um, you know, that our top priority on our environment platform is uh really around protecting waste to energy. Obviously, that's very much an issue for you all here in Olmsted County. Um, and so was something that we were monitoring. It never got an official kind of formal bill hearing, but it was something that came up during an informational hearing in the Senate Environment Committee about halfway through session. Um, and so something that we expect that folks will will bring forward again in future years and so something we'll want to be on top of. >> Can I ask, do you remember who the bill authors were? >> Um, it was Senator Fateh in the Senate and I believe Representative Lee in the House. It was two Minneapolis legislators. Um, which I mean that's been I think we're kind of the nexus of that debate has really centered around folks in in Minneapolis. So, um, the bonding bill did not contain any money to help with transition costs associated with new MPCA rules that we don't have an exact implementation date for yet, but new rules related to construction and demolition landfills requiring new like lining and cover systems basically just related to data that the MPCA has collected showing that um, unlike what was previously thought construction and demolition waste is also leaking problematic things into the groundwater and we need to better address that, but that comes at a pretty significant cost for local governments who own these types of landfills. Um, and so we were hopeful and the MPCA had pushed uh uh for some additional resources through bonding to help offset some of these costs for local governments. They put the statewide need at around $118 million. Um, that money was not included in either the cash or geo bonding bill. This is definitely something where I think there's a lot more just legislator kind of education and awareness building that's needed. Um, as well as just I think when we have a better sense of kind of the timeline for those rules taking effect, um, I think that will create a different sense of urgency for legislators. So, something that we'll continue to talk about. Um, and then lastly, um, I know there were some some mega member counties that, um, were pushing for a renewable development account RDA appropriations in the energy bill. Um, the same thing happened last year, uh, where we the Senate had some really great appropriation RDA appropriations included in their proposed bill, uh, but just because of challenges between the House, uh, energy committee co-chairs and then the House and the Senate, we ended up not seeing an energy bill and so no where for those RDA appropriations to go. So. Um, well, you know, see what happens next year. But, that's it for me, but happy to answer questions if folks have them. >> Any questions, members? Seeing none, thank you for excellent report. Mr. Jessen. >> Thank you. Um, want to talk a little bit about, uh, pensions. We did have a pensions bill become law this year. Um, some of the highlights, I would say, are you know, the most significant items, I suppose. Um, uh, there was a task force that met throughout last interim on looking at potentially a new plan for probation officers and 911 telecommunicators. Uh, that group, which Mike had on pointed to, um, uh, and did come to recommendations that would essentially say, "Okay, we'll create this new group. Um, we're going to keep the employer rate constant at 7.5%. That's how much employers pay for the state check para general plan right now. Um, and it's going to be funded primarily through increased employee contributions. Those will be about 8.8% um, starting after January 8th. Before then, they're going to ramp up 6.5%, 8%, 8.8%. Um Uh Mike didn't take an official position on that in favor or oppose other than to say that like if the legislature decides to move forward with a plan like that, that we think the task force recommendations made sense. Um the other most notable thing is that uh the legislature created a duty disability reform work group that's going to start meeting by the end of this month. So right now for um folks that are claiming a duty disability, that's paid for out of the public safety officer benefit account. In 2023, the legislature allocated $105 million one time to this account. Right now that account stands at about $40 million. This is sometimes referred to as the PTSD issue as well. Um so that's once that account runs out, that shifts from a funded mandate to an unfunded mandate, and that's going to be funded through local property taxes, right? Um so there's public employers and public employee groups that are appointed to this work group, as well as legislators that have the option of serving on it with the idea that they'll come to the legislature next year with kind of a combined ready-made position to move forward that can identify some changes to the current process and ongoing funding. The other note most notable change from a county budget perspective is on the correctional plan. There's some I think 4,100 4,200 correctional plan members statewide. Um that plan is currently funded above 100%. So the legislature passed um a law change which we are supportive of that lowered both employer and employee contributions, while also increasing the the cap on their uh cost of living adjustment from 2 and 1/2% to 3%. Um one thing that's not on here uh that's not a pensions issue, but I do want to mention because of its its significance is the age of delinquency. Um so effective August 1st of this year, the age of delinquency is moving from 10 to 13. This was a law change that was passed in 2024. Um counties raised some issues about this. There's not going I mean, there's not a widespread number of these cases, but the the impact and the individual instances can be significant. We did have good conversations with the Department of Children Youth and Families on that, but a law change while there were amendments proposed didn't move forward at the end of the day. Um I wanted to close with I've got our contact information up here, but I did want to close with just some 2027 outlook thoughts um about kind of where we stand heading into the next legislative session. I do think that counties, speaking across associations, have had some real successes the last couple of years. In 2025, we were relatively effective in pushing back against cost shifts that were proposed um in the governor's budget and and legislative bills. Some of them are did go into law, not to the extent that had originally been proposed, and Nancy talked about the LTSS cost shift where if we don't act, that goes into law. But we were relatively effective in that last year. I do think we had some wins this year around IT modernization, one-time funding for SNAP and the act. The way that I choose to think about that one-time funding is much like a bonding bill project. We the legislature acknowledged that this is an issue and this is an obligation that the state has, and we're going to come back next year and push for ongoing funding in those areas in response to that acknowledgement. But we did show, thanks in part to the advocacy from county commissioners and their talking directly with their delegates, as well as the work that we do at the capital that's informed by you and your staff. In 2027, the challenges are going to be just as significant if not more significant to be frank because it's going to be a budget year. Revenues are still 1.7 billion dollars or so below spending on an ongoing basis at the state capital and I mean 1.7 billion dollars, it's you know, inflation is real but it's still a significant gap that the state is looking to address in any budget year. Of course, a lot of what happens will depend and with the state budget on the state economy and of course we do have an election in November that will dictate a lot of the the setting but I mean the issues that we'll be pushing as our top priorities will the political composition isn't really going to matter for what our priorities are. We're going to be pushing for the things that matter most to counties but and we'll start figuring out that priority setting process with the my board in August. But did just want to that is our presentation but happy to take any questions. Oh, I did mention local homelessness prevention aid. I neglected to mention how much goes to Olmsted County. Olmsted County receives $675,000 a year or so in local homelessness prevention aid. So that's extended for through 2032. That's that's another thing that happened this year. So But did want to again thank you thank you all and Commissioners Wright and Rossman who serve on our board especially but also Commissioner Senjem who's previously served on the board and saw you at the capital frequently and and know that you're a very respected voice there as well. >> Any any questions, comments? Commissioner Wright, thoughts? You're a board member. >> Well, no. I I think that the grouping of the like counties that are in my face very helpful. Olmsted County Uh we do speak uh with one voice when my case goes in and I think that that's very powerful at the legislature. I know that Nathan is respected uh by the legislators up there because of his past work in the legislature and that uh he's very well informed and they know that. So, it's uh it presents a very good case when he's talking to the legislature. Appreciate that. >> Commissioner Rosmann, any thoughts? >> Um well, I would just support everything that Commissioner Wright said. It's it's been my first year um engaging with the Micah staff and yeah, they're super informative meetings um learn a lot from other counties who are also at the table, but the staff are always just super well informed and bring great information to us and I've I've learned a lot and really enjoy working with the group. >> Well, thank you both for your service on that to it's uh it's it's it's a great experience honestly and uh you're right in the middle of the tornado and so, Nathan and uh and the rest of your staff, thank you for how much uh for all you've you've done for the counties of Minnesota and uh I say that because you're nimble enough to act and you're nimble enough to to move when the action requires you to to to act and that's that's I think >> Mhm. >> the real secret in the of of success with respect to to Micah and and how it works and beyond that, you're smart, you know your issues and you know your people and you know your touchpoints. That's all you need to know in the legislature. So, >> [laughter] >> so, thank you so much for being here tonight and for your presentation. Uh well done. >> Thank you so much. >> Yeah. So, uh Ms. Berquam, are you going to report to us a little bit more locally? >> Yeah. Gary, if you wouldn't mind, I think we can start on slide five. Um it was uh all >> Good evening. Introduce yourself first. >> Yeah, good evening um Chair Senjem and Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jennifer Berquam. I'm the Government Relations Coordinator with Olmsted County. And I really appreciate Micah being here tonight and um they're wonderful people, they're friends, they're um you know, we work collaboratively together and I just really appreciate uh the partnership. So, thank you so much. Um Olmsted County had nine priorities this session and I'm saying we had success on about five and a half of those nine. Um it's kind of a an art more than a science to whether you have success or not, but um our first priority was seeking additional bonding funds for the Materials Recovery Facility and that did not pass. And then um I'm actually going to cover all these, I guess, in the future slides, too. So, we can kind of skip ahead, but this just shows in a nutshell all nine of them and and kind of how that worked out. So, this is a nice rendering of our MERF that we did break ground on and super excited about that that we can still move forward um despite not getting additional state funding. Um I was really I was feeling good about it. So, I'm actually really bummed about that still, but um you know, sometimes you'll win some and you'll lose some and that's just is the way it went this year. Uh we can go to the next one, Carrie. Thank you. So, we did receive our full funding request for the CSAH 3 and CSAH 5 proposed interchanges. Uh these are out in the Byron area. It was $8 million, 2.4 in trunk highway bonds and 5.6 in GO bonds. And um this funding will be to uh get the project shovel ready, basically. It doesn't, um, it doesn't cover the construction, necessarily. We also are fortunate to receive 2 million for this project in congressionally directed spending. So, that was for fiscal year 26. And we also received 1.37 million from the State Corridors of Commerce program. And again, that's for the planning portion of of the two interchanges. Uh, we can go to the next slide, please. Um, well, I guess I have the clicker. Would you rather have me do it? >> [laughter] >> Okay. Um, Okay. And then, um, you're all familiar with our Southeast Regional Groundwater Protection and Soil Health Initiative that started in Olmsted County and we've found success in reducing nitrate in the groundwater, which is a concern down in our region. So, we've been working the last few years to expand that regionally. And, um, I give credit to Skip Langer and his team in the SWCD for seeking out LCCMR dollars. We were recommended, um, for 2.817 million to begin, um, expanding that to the 11-county region. Um, and so that funding came through. It passed in the LCCMR bill and, um, Skip is already reaching out to the SWCD supervisors in the, in the region to get that program up and running. And in the meantime, we're also working with Bowser and the Clean Water Council to try to, um, get more funding to like sustain the program a little bit longer. Uh, we also had, uh, um, a priority to get some funding for the Oxbow Park bridge structures. And this is Carlin Ziegler. She did all the work to, um, secure funding for this. Uh, it was 2.04 million from the Legacy bill, the Parks and Trails fund. And it will replace two aging pedestrian bridges and will improve accessibility of the park. And we believe this funding should be available starting in fiscal year '27, so July 1. Um the Legacy bill also included some policy language to extend our uh Oxbow Campground project. That was appropriated, I believe, in 2024 and was expiring on June 30th. I think we're really close to being done. Tony, do you have any updates on that or Yeah, so the extension was kind of like just a guarantee to make sure. Um but we're we're really close to having that project done. Um and then Skip's team also worked on the Cascade Creek stream restoration. They've been partnering with the city of Rochester and the DNR um to straighten a or I mean to restore a previously straightened segment of the South branch of Cascade Creek. And that received funding of 952,000 from the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Fund. And then um we were seeking a sales tax exemption for our exhibition center project. We had hearings in both uh the House and Senate tax committees. Thank you, Commissioner Sandjum, for coming up and testifying on those. Um we didn't have success this year. The tax bills of last year and this year just didn't include many of those types of project or types of uh exemptions, but it is it's an issue statewide. Lots of local governments came forward with those requests and um I think it's something we have to continue looking at. Um okay, so now these are more um, statewide priorities that we had. Uh, Nancy covered most of these. Um, as she mentioned, we received a little over 10.7 million statewide one-time SNAP funding for administrative costs. The estimate for Olmsted County of that amount would be um, a little over 330,000. Um, there's no ongoing funding and it does not include the cost increases associated with the error rate and benefit cost share. So, something we will want to look at again in the upcoming session. And I just wanted to also call out our local Senator Liz Bolden. She chief authored um, the bill to help to help um, get funding to coalitions to to offset these cost increases. So, hopefully she will continue wanting to work with us on this next session and we really thank her and and all her hard work on that. Um, and then we also had a mental health priority. We as a county board, I think we're mostly focused on like increasing state-operated mental health beds and nothing passed in that regard. We also were have been working for a few years now on a Medicaid benefit for children's crisis uh, stabilization services and that did not pass either and we're still waiting um, on a Department of Human Services report on that issue. Um, as Nancy mentioned, there was a positive 3.8 million for the mobile crisis um, teams. That was I don't know that it was expected, so it was nice to see that funding increase and I remember like maybe the first or second year I came to Olmsted County, that was one of our priorities. I think we were one of the first counties or regions that had a mobile crisis team. And as they started expanding across the state, the pool of money was getting spread out more. So, we were asking for more funding. So, I do think this will be a positive um for our county in the region. Um and then as Micah mentioned, the Human Services Technology improvements, I put Dan Jensen up there, our staff member, because he testified a lot last session and this session. Just very knowledgeable on this topic. Um appreciate the I appreciate his work and dedication to it. I appreciate Micah and AMC. It really was a great team effort and um still a lot of work to be done, you know, to bring these technology systems uh up-to-date, but I think it was like just a mo- uh a really a really great thing that passed for counties this year. So, uh we can go on to the next slide, please. Um there's a few other key issues for our region in the bonding bill. 2.3 million for the Olmsted County History Center, 12 million for the North Zumbro Sanitary Sewer District, and that includes the communities of Goodhue, Pine Island, Wanamingo, Zumbrota, and the Prairie Island Indian Community. Um 13.224 million for a City of Rochester project, the East Zumbro Sewer and Water for Housing. Uh 3.096 million for the 15th Avenue Northeast improvements in Stewartville. 10 million for emergency shelter grants. And then local transportation programs. Amber mentioned those, so I won't repeat that, but all all things that I think are positive for our area. Um I also want to mention a few housing things. The housing bill actually had quite a um quite a few investments in it. Um, and we have a robust housing program here. So, I'm hoping that we can take advantage of some of these funds. 100 million in housing infrastructure bonds, 40 million for the family homelessness homeless prevention and assistance program, 14.275 million for the greater Minnesota workforce housing development program. And then um Micah mentioned that the local homeless prevention aid sunset was extended 4 years to 2032. Um It was interesting. This I believe this bill was funded with some um interest funding that the housing finance agency had like in their bank accounts. And also with I think some funding that was left from a settlement. Um counties were involved with it with the tax forfeiture process when that changed and there were potentially going to be some court cases. They set aside some funding in a a settlement account and not all of that was needed. So, that's where they were able to come up with a lot of that funding. Um next slide, please. Um I think Nancy covered all of these issues, so we can go to the next slide, please. Um and then also um on the federal side, Olmsted County submitted a $2 million request in fiscal for the fiscal year 27 congressionally directed spending. Um and that's for a project at Trunk Highway 63 in CSAH 21 just north of Rochester. And that was approved on the house side in a in the House Transportation Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Subcommittee in May. So, we haven't seen the Senate bill to my knowledge, and so hopefully um some funding will be included there, too. But, one thing I thought was interesting, this might have been the only transportation project that Congressman Feenstra moved forward. A lot of his projects this year were in like the water and water and sewer infrastructure. So, um not as many on the transportation side. And I think this is my last main slide. So, over the interim, we've had some groundbreakings and celebrations. Thank you for all of you who were able to attend. I think it's nice to celebrate our successes and keep building on them for for future projects we want to work on. Um we're going to begin work on the 27 legislative priorities. Um and then we uh so that will include potential bonding projects, seeking opportunities for external funding for Olmsted County projects, and then preparing for advocacy to mitigate unfunded mandates and cost shifts, the SNAP, LTSS, MA, CWDA, and others. And there'll be other issues, too, but those are kind of top of mind right now as we go into the summer. So, thank you all for um your support and your help advocating for these issues. I'm happy to take any questions. >> Questions, uh Ms. Berquam? Questions? Certainly extend to you, as well, your your our thanks uh on behalf of your efforts, not only at the capital, but working with our legislative committee, and and all that you do, and again, how you how you do it. Outstanding. >> Thank you very much. It's a fun job, and I appreciate the opportunities. So, thank you all, and I think that's it. >> Very good. Okay, uh at this time then, uh we're at least per the agenda in going to move into a recess, uh, a closed session, uh, to discuss the Melvin Bush wrongful death matter entitled Ariana Bush versus, uh, Advanced Correctional Healthcare Incorporated. I need a motion to move into this into, uh, recess, uh. >> Motion. >> We have a motion to move into recess. Second? >> Second. >> Second. We got a second here. Any discussion? If not, all in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Aye.