Board of Commissioners - Regular Meeting

At this time, I'd like to call the meeting to order. Lynnae, is there any additions or corrections to the agenda?

Yes, Mr. Chair, we have one addition under the public works items. Resolution was added for liquid chloride contract final. We're starting with resolution 2655 today.

Thank you.

I make a motion to approve the agenda with the correct addition to it.

I'll second that. Thanks, Jeff. Thanks, Jerry. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Rapp.

Yes.

Way.

Yes.

Meyer. Yes. Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina. Yes. Motion carries.

At this time, I'm looking for a motion on the minutes. Any additions or corrections to that?

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from the July 7th regular meeting. I'll second.

Thanks, Charlie. Thanks, Jeff. Lene, please.

Way?

Yes.

Meyer? Yes. Schmidt? Yes. Kalina? Yes. Rapp?

Yes.

Motion carries.

Thank you. At this time, I'd like to call up Adrian Walter from Calvary Lutheran Church. You're up first. You can stand or sit, whatever you prefer. Okay. I'm glad you're here, by the way.

Thanks, me too. So each summer, Calvary holds a vacation Bible school that's open to the community. We get around 400 kids to come, around 600 total participants, including volunteers. And so the past several years, Calvary has used the by the courthouse to run our games. And so every 20 minutes, Luther Crest has staff there that lead games for a group of kids from 40 to 50 students. And so we would appreciate being able to use that green space for our games time again next week.

Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to allow the Calvary Lutheran Church youth courthouse property.

I'll second that. Thanks, Jeff. Thanks, Jerry. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Meyer.

Yes.

Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina.

Yes.

Rapp.

Yes.

Way.

Yes.

Motion carries.

There you go. Thank you, gentlemen. Enjoy the day.

Thanks.

At this time, I'd like to call up Blair Mace from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Good morning, gentlemen.

Good morning, gentlemen. Good to see you all again.

You too.

Good morning, commissioners. Did everybody receive the letter from June 23rd about the easements we're going to present today? Yes. We present every acquisition to the County Board of Commissioners for certification and the Land Exchange Board for approval. These easements will be funded through the Migerberg Conservation Stamp Act, the duck stamp, and not tax dollars. Due to a procedural agreement in 1962, the DNR required request certifications from the County Board of Commissioners for all acquisitions that the Fish and Wildlife Service does. These will be presented to the Land Exchange Board in August for approval. I have six easements today to present to you for certification. We do have multiple landowners here present in case there's any questions from you all about the easements. So the first one I'm presenting today is Casey and Kim England of Evansville. This is a habitat easement allowing for haying after July 15th of every year. This easement's located in Section 28 of Lund Township and consists about 31 acres. Second one is Craig and Julie Hassman of Evansville, Minnesota. This is a wetland easement protecting one basin. Their easement is located in Section 29 of Brandon Township. David and Valerie Kalina of Alexandria, Minnesota have the third one. This is a habitat easement allowing haying after July 15th of every year. Easement's located in section 34 of Lake Mary Township and is about 76 acres. The fourth easement today is with the Presco partnership. which is Robert, Mark, and Peter Pressrud of Ladina, Minnesota. It's a habitat easement, allowing haying after July 15th of every year. This easement's located in section 13 and 24 of Solum Township, and consists of about 160 acres. Jerry and Donna Rosenthal of Alexandria, Minnesota. This is a habitat easement allowing for haying after July 15th of every year and grazing throughout the year. The easement's in section 24 of home city township and that one's about 37 acres. The final easement today is Joseph Rude and Josh and Brittany Rude, all of Parkers Prairie, Minnesota. This is a habitat easement allowing haying after July 15th of every year. It's located in section seven of Spruce Hill Township and is about 66 acres. These acquisitions and easements are perpetual. The landowner continues to pay taxes on the property because the land stays in private ownership. Weed control and access are still part of the landowner's rights. Do you have any questions?

Charlie? Yeah, I have the same problem I've always had with easements like this is the fact that they're in perpetuity and they're not in, and you guys have well within your ability to have renewables within 25 or 30 years. We have the statutes, I've looked at them too. It's like I said before, I'm not smart enough to be able to sit here and say that this should be forever and ever. You know, we have them troubles today with our ditch laws and different things that were made 100 years ago and the battles we have on changing things. So I still believe that these are great things as far as for the wildlife and for the land and the use. But I think they should be renewable easements 25 to 30 years. I don't think you're gonna have any trouble here today, but I just do believe that going forward, if it doesn't start somewhere, it'll never start, and it is available, and it's being done in other parts of the country that way, where our great, great, great grandchildren don't have to deal with decisions that we made today that might be incorrect at the time.

Commissioner Meyer, I appreciate your perspective and we've had this conversation a number of times and I do appreciate you bringing it up again today as well. While there may be some conservation easements with other agencies within the federal government, the one that I have available to me and the framework in which it's developed is the one that we're presenting to the County Commission today. I do not have the flexibility to change the length or any of the aspects of the conservation easement as it is. It's a national program. multi-state national program. And so while we recognize that for some landowners, it's a good fit, for others it might not be a good fit. But we're certainly not... Today. I'm sorry? Today. I understand. But we are certainly not the only agency that is bringing forth perpetual conservation easements or perpetual easements of other nature that might not be... conservation focused. But we, as part of our procedural agreement and our interest in being transparent and open with the processes of good government, are abiding by the procedural agreement and bringing those before the County Board for your certification. And so I guess I just wanna bring that to your attention that there are other agencies that are doing this exact work that are not going through the additional processes of transparency and openness. Mr.

Chair, yeah, they don't have to come even here. I do agree with you, and I understand that, and I'm not questioning your stewardship of the land and everything else, okay? Everybody means well, and we do too, and that was, you know, and if it's that good of a thing, and it should be, and I do believe in it. I'm a, you know, I think I'm a conservationist and everything else, but what's wrong with renewable? It'll be just as good 30 years, 60 years, 90 years down the road then, but... Nuff said, thank you. Thank you, Commissioner, appreciate that.

Yeah, Mr. Chair, I guess I'd just make a comment. You know, this is bought with duck stamp money?

That is correct.

Yeah, and so there's getting to be less and less duck hunters, and the fact of it is is that this still doesn't allow any hunting on it. You're correct, Commissioner. So I'm just saying is that I have to tell you, I think that there's better ways to spend our duck stamp money where it benefits the hunter, not just the landowner. And again, God, I love seeing ducks and I love seeing hunting ducks, but I'm just saying that I just think when you use duck stamp money to put land in set aside that you can't hunt on, it kind of kicks the hunter out of the equation.

Yeah, we typically use the migratory bird conservation funds for acquiring both conservation easements and lands in fee title. And so generally through a process of prioritization, we're focusing more on the conservation easement side of things because it continues to keep land on the tax rolls, it continues to develop and foster good relationships with landowners, and it continues to have land uses that are complementary to alternative agricultural production. So, grass-based agriculture being one for our cattle ranching folks.

Mr. Chair, I just got one All these blue outlines, those cannot be touched, right?

All the blue outlines, Commissioner Kalina, are simply identified on the map to indicate the approximate size, shape, and location of wetlands that will be restored as part of the conservation easement. They're more intended to be able to communicate to the landowner when restoration activities are taking place what those wetlands might look like. I think it's more important in particular to use the example of the one that's up there right now. That's a hay easement. So it will be a habitat easement. So we'll be planting the grassland or the uplands back to grass and restoring the wetlands. So really what you need to look at is the outline of the red polygon up there. That will be the full extent of the conservation easement and the blue is simply just water.

So what I'm getting at is now anything outlined in blue, they cannot hay that then?

Anything within the red, they can hay.

Anything within the red. So if there's a blue outline around it, that can still be hayed. Correct.

So, I mean, as long as you can get a tractor and a haybine through there, you can go ahead and hay those. There's no, it's not hands off. Okay.

Mr. Chair, just to cut another question. So inside those blue lines, if they would become choked off with cattails, can they go in there and remove that cattail so that there's open water in there?

Yeah, Mr. Commissioner, that's a great question. And I'll say it depends, right? It depends on what they want to do. Do they want to spray the cattails? Do they want to go in with an excavator and dig a six foot deep hole? Removing the cattails typically would not be an issue. We would do that by a special use permit. The permits are typically issued in about an hour or two. They're really simple and straightforward, but certainly active management and our interest in continuing to have active management out there is a priority.

Okay, so they could go in there with a chemical and spray the cattails? They can, yes. I think that's really dumb, but because I think it's hard on other wildlife. Stuff that may be very small, but I just think we've overdone that. Yeah.

Yeah, I think in a haying situation like this, for the most part, you know, if they're small wetlands, those landowners are probably interested in haying right through them if they're dry. So, probably would help keep some of that cattail mat and some of the cattails down. Mr.

Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve what is being presented with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife.

Thank you, Jeff. I got one more question, Blair, because my thing that I was reading, this is a habitat easement, so it's for habitat, but they can cut the hay after the 15th.

Correct.

But they can't farm it, they can't do anything with it, can't drain the water out, can't do any of that.

Correct. Okay.

Correct. I'll second it. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina.

Yes.

Rapp.

No.

Way.

Yes.

Meyer.

No.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Mr. Commissioner, could the one landowner wants to speak for a little bit? Sorry, I probably missed my opportunity on that.

You probably did, but go ahead, we'll give you a couple minutes.

Yeah, I'm sorry. It's the first time that actually happened.

All right.

Thank you for your time. We appreciate it.

Thank you for coming.

Yeah, appreciate the opportunity. So ours is on Pocket Lake, 37 acres. Our total property is 60 acres. almost 1,200 feet of shoreline. So my wife Donna and I love the land. Our son Ryan loves the land. It's actually part of the original Miner and Charity Van Loon homestead. One of the earliest homesteads in not only home city, but in Douglas County.

Home city was supposed to be the, yeah.

Exactly, the grant and the homes. Van Leeuwen showed up not too long after. We want to keep it intact. And this parcel with the easement is part of that. And Ryan wants to continue what I would call the legacy of our love of the land. And this easement is a big part of it.

And I'll just, yeah, I just want to add to it. Thanks again for the time too. But In our case, we're gonna have grazing rights, haying and grazing rights. I'm really interested, my career's in food and agriculture, very interested in grass-based agriculture. This gives me a very unique and kind of, it's hard to get into agriculture, or not in it right now, but I wanna be in it. This gives us that chance. That's really important to me. But also, we hunt. We want to be a part of creating habitat for that wildlife. We see it really as a win-win situation, so thank you.

Not to mention the erosion control. Our fields, or that 37-acre parcel, drains two directions, but both directions end up in Pocket Lake. Part of it drains to 114 in the ditch, And the other part of it drains to the south into our woods and through a wooded ravine. But in both cases, it all ends up in the lake. And this will stabilize and create a deep root structure and keep things in place.

Right. I think our point that we've always been concerned with is that it's forever. So somebody down the road from now, 50 years from now, owns the property. You're no longer in your family. Well, now they can't do nothing with it either. because it's in there forever. And the other thing was, is that if we're using duck stamp dollars and different things, well, then we should open it up to hunting. We're buying things and we're not giving it back to everybody else to use it as well. It's just helping that part of it.

If I could just add to that though, is that the way I see it is that it is, I want our land to be used in the sense of creating habitat that does benefit everybody because the things that live there aren't gonna stay there necessarily, right? Pheasants, ducks, whatever, they're gonna make their way around. So the neighbor is gonna benefit from this hunting and habitat creation just like we will. We're not gonna over hunt this land anyways. It's a production space for those creatures.

And I can really appreciate the love of the land. Believe me, I can, I can.

But thank you all. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks.

I'll try to do that different next time.

At this time, I'd like to call up Tom Gerstead, data.

Job game coming along.

Thank you. I am here to represent... The Trail Administrator, Nick, he's not able to make it today. I have a letter from him, if I might read that to you now. Go ahead. My name is Nick Larson, Trail Administrator for Douglas Area Trails Association. We at DATA are proud to be sponsored by Douglas County in providing a beautiful trail system for snow billers to enjoy in partnership with the Minnesota DNR. This year we were able to open the trails with grooming for the whole season and eight weeks of actual grooming new snow. We groomed 568 hours, 3,323 miles. This year we had good snow early in the season and then some warm spells set us back. We did have a good few months of riding which people were very happy to have after a couple of not so great seasons. Considering the lack of snow at times, we had a very positive year and had people from all over the state calling us, inquiring about coming to ride our trails. Each year we meet with you to request that Douglas County act as data sponsor for the upcoming year. We have been in the Minnesota DNR grant and aid GIA program for many years and we wish to continue operating in this manner. Please find the enclosed 2027 grooming and grant application and support resolution The club county contract and resolution also need a second signature from the clerk. We are asking for your continued support of the Douglas Area Trails Association and approval of the 2027 GIA program funding. With acceptance of our application by the State of Minnesota and DNR Trails and Waterways Division, They will mail a maintenance agreement to Douglas County for signatures for the 2026 funding. And it can be dispersed from Douglas County to data to be used for trail related expenditures. Data's current trail mileage is 378.4 miles. The rate per mile is $357. We wish to thank you for your past support. and ask for your continued support in the future. Douglas County is a beautiful area, and we are happy to be a part of the tourism that makes us great. Sincerely, Nick Larson. I would also like to add for myself that I really appreciate what you guys do for us. Snowmobiling is my passion, and I love what I do, and I'm very thankful that you guys are helping us out. And that's all I have for you today. Thank you.

Thanks, Nick.

Or not Nick, I'm sorry.

Tom.

That's not Tom. Yeah, Tom. Board. Make a motion we approve resolution 26-55.

I'll second it.

Okay.

Sorry, Jerry. Thanks, Charlie. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Kalina. Yes. Rapp.

Yes.

Way.

Yeah.

Meyer. Yes. Schmidt.

Yes.

Motion carries.

Thank you all very much. Do you have a form I need to sign? I don't have it with me. I hope that he'd sent it.

Mr. Chair, I have the forms. We'll get those taken care of.

Thank you. Thank you. She always takes care of us. Thanks, Lenny. At this time, I'd like to call it Tabitha, Human Services Director. Good morning, Tabitha.

Good morning. I have one agenda item for you this morning, and that is requesting board approval of the Dancing Sky Area Agency on Aging Title III-B grant application. So this is the single funding source for the senior services community programs that we have. This supports Bonnie Bina, our senior coordinator, in all of the important work that she does in being able to connect with seniors and older adults in Douglas County. This particular application discusses some additional outreach activities, particularly related to fraud and scams because that is a real significant issue facing everybody, actually, but particularly seniors. And so, we are expanding our outreach in that area. But as you can see, the application total is $26,000. This grant application does require a 15% match. So, the amount requested would be $22,100. The county dollars utilized to contribute to that match would be 3,900 for a total of 26,000.

So my question tab is where are we getting the 3,900 from?

That is budgeted. That's a county contribution to support the important services that our senior office offers. We do continue to request more dollars. We also continue to hear from Dancing Sky that the likelihood is less dollars available. So they're trying hard to maximize those dollars, as are we, but we would commit to budgeting the remainder of that in order to support that service. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, if somebody had a question about Dancing Sky, would Bonnie Bina be better to call or you?

You know, either of us could certainly field those calls. I don't know that I would know the answer right off the top of my head, but we would be happy to look into it.

Very good, thank you. Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve Dancing Sky Agency on Aging Title 3B grant application for 2027.

I'll second. Thanks, Tim. Thanks, Jerry. Jerry, you sit on that committee, right? I do, I do. Any further questions? Lene, please.

Rapp. Yes. Way. Yes. Meyer. Yes. Schmidt. Yes. Kalina. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Tim Erickson, Public Works Director.

Morning, Tim. Morning. I have three items for consideration this morning. The first one is to approve sending out an RFP for the Kensington Runestone Park plan update. So Brad, I believe has five different consultants. He's got an RFP all drafted up. He's ready to send that out. And we're gonna update and figure out the next sets of next planning phases for that Runestone Park, including what we're gonna do with the barn.

Correct. Elimination and addition.

Correct.

Make a motion to approve.

Thanks, Charlie. Thanks, Jeff. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Way.

Yes.

Meyer. Yes. Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina. Yes. Rapp. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you, the next item that I have is to approve the Minnesota Cycling Association event permit at Brophy Park. This is scheduled for September 19th through the 21st, very similar to the bike race that we've had out there in the past. The application is in your packet, their emergency plan is in your packet, also their certificate of insurance.

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve Minnesota Cycling Association event permit at Brophy Park.

I'll second it. Any further discussion?

Mayer?

Yes.

Schmidt?

Yes.

Kalina?

Yes.

Rapp? Yes. Way? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. The third item that I have is a resolution. It's a contract final for our liquid chloride. Crow River Construction was the contractor on this one. They did a great job. They're very easy to work with. They've kept their records very well, even working with the townships that worked out very well with Crow River. You'll notice we did underrun that contract, mainly that just means we didn't use as much chloride as what we had initially thought we were going to. So that is also a good thing. With all that, I would make the recommendation that the Board accepts the completed project and authorize final payment, which is the total payment. in the amount of $298,601.60. Mr. Chair, I got a question.

Being we were underrun on there, was there less chloride applied?

Correct.

Was all the townships, did all the townships still go through us? Yes. Okay.

The ones that went through us got what they did, yeah. Okay.

Mr. Chair, are there some of the townships still do this on their own?

Some townships do this on their own. All right, correct.

Make a motion to approve resolution 26-56. Take care of the chloride bill.

I second.

Thanks, Charlie. Thanks, Jeff. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina.

Yes.

Rapp. Yes. Way.

Yes.

Meyer. Yes. Motion carries.

Mr. Chair, just a quick question here. I was reading through the cycling deal here, you know, we got here. And I guess one of the things that probably concerned me or saddened me was the fact that you have to have active shooter and bomb threat in there too. to cover and I think it's a sad day when we get to that point that we have to do that, it really is.

You probably need dog control too.

I tell you, but this is more serious.

No, I know.

So anyway, I just had a comment.

Thanks. Great. Thank you. Thank you. At this time, call up Dave Rush, Land and Resource. Good morning, Dave. Good morning.

I have a few items for you this morning. The first is a landscaper excavator license. We recommend approval of that license listed in your packet.

I'll make that motion.

I'll second.

Thanks, Jerry, thanks, Tim. Any other discussion? Lene, please.

Kalina. Yes. Rapp. Yes. Way. Yes. Meyer. Yes. Schmidt.

Yes.

Motion carries.

And then I have three items from our Planning Advisory Commission meeting last week. The first being a conditional use permit. This is an amendment to a permit that was issued several months ago for DOB properties near Carlos Corners. They received a permit to put up a storage building and have outdoor storage, and then based on the business requests that they received, they came back to add two additional buildings and to move the outdoor storage. Planning Commission considered this amendment and recommended approval with the conditions in your staff report.

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve with the conditions. I'll second.

Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Rapp.

Yes.

Way.

Yes.

Meyer. Yes. Schmidt. Yes. Kalina. Yes. Motion carries.

So the next item is also a conditional use permit. This is Real Deal Investments looking to put a business on State Highway 21 in Carlos Township. The business would be a warehouse for automobile parts. The vehicles are stripped of parts at another location and then the parts would be catalogued and brought to this facility where they'll be warehoused and shipped from this facility. They're also looking to put in a business office for their business as well as to have rental storage buildings on this property. So Planning Commission looked at this application and recommended approval with the six conditions that are included in your packet.

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve with the conditions.

I second.

Thanks, Tim. Thanks, Jeff. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Way.

Yes.

Meyer.

Yes.

Schmidt.

Yes.

Helena. Yes. Rapp. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. The last item from Planning Commission is a one-lot preliminary plat. This is in La Grande Township. This preliminary plat was brought to Planning Commission earlier this year. The applicants were looking to subdivide a single lot off of their parcel along County Road 104. In Planning that application, the county highway department issues driveway access permits, and so it was inquired with the highway department if and where an access would be granted, and our understanding was is that the highway department requested that the access be located on the north side of the proposed lot. The applicant, was seeking to discuss that with the engineer because they did not want it located on the north side of the lot. And so they asked to table that application while they discussed this with the highway department. A couple weeks ago they approached us and indicated that they wanted to proceed with the proposed plat. They had modified the plan by removing the storage building from the proposed lot. And then we're still seeking to have their approach in the center of the lot because they feel that it provides a more appropriate location for garage and driveway and house and so forth. So at the Planning Commission last week, they expressed those concerns to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission did recommend approval of their plat with two conditions. One of those conditions being that the access to the county road be in the center of the lot And the second being that the driveway that they construct must contain some sort of turnaround area so vehicles would not back onto the county highway. So that is the question before you, is approval of the preliminary plat with those two conditions, if that's what you choose to do.

Mr. Chair, I believe that Mr. Erickson has something to say or share with us.

Come on up, Tim.

Lene, could you move to the plat drawing?

Yeah. Yeah, zoom in if you would.

So as Mr.

Rush did say, when this preliminary plaque came to the County Highway Department, we looked through everything. Our recommendation to be consistent with our policy is to have this towards the north end of the lot. We've actually provided the landowners three different options that would meet policy. They've vehemently rejected all three of those options. If the Board does decide, and it's Board's wishes, if the Board decides to approve as presented, including condition one, the request that I have is that you'd also add condition three. Condition three would be requiring the owners to grant an access easement from their new driveway to the parcel to the north, and have that included in the plat. So the final plat would not be approved until that access is granted and it stays with the plat. That was one of our biggest concerns. So our policy in question is our access basing policy, which honestly there's all kinds of properties that don't meet the access basing policy because there's just not enough frontage Our next step is we look to combine accesses wherever possible. And so that's what we have presented. That's why we were looking at putting this on the north lot. So that would be my request there is condition three.

Mr. Chair, would that have to be then, so they would, if they didn't do that, there would be room for a second driveway or not? No.

Is that lot to the north buildable, Mr. Rush?

Yes. Same owners? No, the lot to the north is owned by Baywood Association. That's part of that condominium thing? It is owned by Baywood. I do not know if they have it. That's fine. But it doesn't matter.

Ownership, what the hell.

So, Tim, how far is it off the north line now that they're asking? About 50 feet. 50, thereabouts. Okay. And how far would it normally be from the line if you wanted it to the north?

It would be right on the line. So is there any way we can meet in the middle? Well, and that's why I'm requesting that we'll let them put it where they want it, but have them plat an access easement to the north. So that access easement would be on this new lot, but that's how they're gonna access that new part or that existing parcel. So then we can meet our policy.

Well, what I mean is if it's supposed to be on the line, why can't you be 20 feet from the line and be okay or you don't want it there either?

It can be 50. He just said it can be 50 feet as long as we put in the fact that they have to allow an easement into the other plant because it can't make its own, right?

Okay. Okay. And then one other item, when we were reviewing the plat, we really didn't have a ton of time to review the plat, but one policy that the county has that we missed, it is the county's policy that when we're platting land alongside an existing county road that has less than 50 feet of right of way, that final plat dedicates whatever right-of-way is missing to get out to 50 feet. And we choose 50 feet because when we are rebuilding a road, that's our standard. So we acquire that in the plat. We missed that condition in the preliminary plat. That is absolutely on us. I would also request a condition four because County State Aid Highway 104 currently has 33 feet of right of way. Condition four would require the developer to plat an additional 17 feet of right of way to be consistent with County policy. I can think of three developments very recently where we have done this, so this is not out of order. We've done this at County Road 7, we've done this on County Road 3, we've done this on County Road 28. I believe Mr. Nyberg was the surveyor of record on all three of those plots, so he can verify that.

I JUST HAVE TO ASK, MR. CHAIR, WHAT, I MEAN, SO JUST WHY COULDN'T THERE BE ANOTHER DRIVEWAY TO THAT EXISTING LAND THEN? WHY COULDN'T YOU?

Our access spacing, we try to limit the number of accesses coming out to, so it's the number of crossing traffic, the number of people coming in, the number of different spaces. And that's why we look to try to do a shared approach wherever we can when we can't meet the access space.

I guess my logic there is that if you have an extra driveway and you got the same amount of people, you're only dispersing where they're coming onto the highway.

Correct. No, that's exactly the point, is we're trying to limit the number of places they're coming into the highway.

David, do you know if there's a problem granting an easement with the landowners?

I'm unaware of an issue that would prevent them from granting an easement. It does not look to me that there's any encumbrances there. Yeah, and with the additional 17 feet of right-of-way, I don't think that would...

cause any issue the setbacks 100 feet from the center line so i just have to ask the question as well so when you share a driveway what happens in the uh snow removal end of it is there squabbling going on or who does it so really all they're sharing is that access so the access gets built in this the right of way and then they have their own driveway that splits off from there Mr. Chair, I'm gonna make a recommendation that we table this until our next meeting.

I... Why can't we send it back to Planning Commission and let them figure it out? Okay, okay. I could even, I could agree with that.

So yes, Mr. Chair, I mean, the board does have a choice. You can table it for more information. You can remand it back to the Planning Commission. And if you do, I would ask that you specifically give the Planning Commission some direction as to what you're looking for. And then, of course, you can approve it, changing, adding, subtracting conditions, or you can outright deny it with cause. So those are your choices.

They don't make any more land. That's what makes it usable that way. It's a unique property without a doubt. I would think we should send it back to where you guys can get it to where it's legal for.

I agree.

Public works too.

I think that's what they should do is send it back to the planning commission and you with working with public works and come up with that. Because right now it's kind of muddy.

So Mr. Chair. And according to what Mr. Erickson says, it would make the other lot unbuildable in theory because of the rules that the county has, that we can't stick another driveway in that north lot. This way at least, and we know land is of a premium around our lakes and everything else. So we don't want to do that. We want to use it as best we can and as much as we can.

So Mr. Chair, I think to do that, you would need to have a motion and a second and the board to vote to send it back to the planning commission. Make a motion to do what Mr. Rush just said.

I'll second it. Any further discussion? Anyone? One A please.

Meyer.

Yep.

Schmidt. Yes. Kalina.

Yes.

Rapp.

Yes.

Way. Yeah. Motion carries.

So my last item for you, Board, as you're aware, we've been working to fill a position we created, compliance technician. We had a candidate apply that has significant experience, law enforcement experience, and we'd like to be able to recognize that experience in where we position them in the grade and step system. Obviously the grades are set by our consultant. We're not asking for a change to that, but we're asking to hire above step one.

Mr. Chair, I guess I got a couple of questions. And the funding for this position is going to be paid by, is there any grant money in there?

No, the funding for this position would be paid by county revenue, and that's either revenues from fees or revenues that you collect from property taxes, general revenue.

Well, again, I've made this comment before, but my concern here is that most of these issues are being caused by let's just say VRBOs, and I think that they should be paying for this, not the taxpayer.

Right, Mr. Chair, the revenues that we collect through licensing fees, I've been discussing with Horizon Public Health about, you know, sharing some of those additional licensing fees to help cover the cost of this position. But to your point, that's one item that in our ordinance that this position would deal with. As you just took action on, we have conditional use permits that we issue and variances and other things that require enforcement and follow up as well as all the other components of our ordinance that we need to stay on top of, so.

Yep, that's all I got.

And I know when we discussed it too, Dave, about on those fees and things about charging more to help offset some of these expenses. It's been talked about. Should be on the finance committee probably be some of that be discussed.

Mr. Chair, I got a question.

Go ahead.

you know, above step one, how far above step one are we looking? Because the thing that bothers me is we start hiring people and we give them more steps, it gets to be a trickle effect of everybody we hire is gonna ask for a higher step or they're gonna say, well, then I don't wanna work here, you know? And once we set a precedent about it, I'm afraid that might be a little controversial. with other departments?

Yes, Mr. Chair, I agree. I will say that in our department, one, we don't have that much. Recently, we've had some turnover, especially in our administrative staff. But we try very hard to hire at the initial step. and we've been successful at doing that. I think this year I've come to you, this is the second time now. Unfortunately, the first time I came to you about a position we were gonna hire, that person actually turned that offer down and their wife took a job somewhere else. So we're still working on that vacancy. But yes, in this case, I think the... there is a significant benefit given this person's experience in law enforcement that would really help us, especially this being a new position. It gives us an opportunity to really lay out some procedure and policy as to how and what this position's gonna do. I think up to step four would be what I'm asking for. I'm hopeful that we don't need to go to step four, but,

Well, the thing I got is this is a new position. It hasn't ever existed before. And they said we had a wage set up. We did a study on it. We had a wage set up, and that's what they come back with. And I just feel that we haven't tested the water yet on something like this to know is it being underpaid or is it going to be overpaid for the amount of work that they do?

That's a very valid question.

Mr.

Chair. Mr. Chair, the one thing too, though, Tim, is we have a probationary time on all new employees, irregardless of where we start. So I, and I know in today's market, it's difficult. I've changed that way too. And I hear what you're saying. I'm not thinking for, you know, Lee has helped. I've asked him tons of questions about this. And what you just said is exactly the fear that we have is setting a precedence with, everybody else, but also if we're gonna get good people, we're looking for people with experience, sometimes we do have to pay more for that. I wouldn't think of four or six or anything, but maybe half. I would recommend that we do a step three. That would be my recommendation. You've got six years of experience with a little bit of what we're looking for because the position that we've created is an enforcer. No, he's not going to run around with a baseball bat and things like that. But I mean, his idea of the job is they're enforcing the rules and the conditions that we've laid out. I would make the motion that we hire at step three. And make the motion. I just did. Okay.

I'll second it.

Mr. Chair, I got a question to follow up, though, and that is that the one-year probation is a big thing, and I want to say that we got maybe a six-month window where this position is probably going to have more activity than it will in fall to spring. during the winter time, I mean, you're not gonna have people outside, you're not gonna have people complaining about making noise. So I'm just saying, do we have adequate work during that slow time to keep this job?

The answer is yes. I mean, what we see in the summertime is a lot of issues related to complaints and follow up on those complaints and documentation and so forth. But some of the cases that we've had related to junk removal, cases that are in the court system right now. We've got three ongoing cases. In addition, in the wintertime is a great time to sit down and go through all of those vacation rental advertisements, making sure that they're compliant with the things that they're supposed to be posting, go and visit the properties to ensure they have in them what they're supposed to have, as well as, if you can imagine, for the last, at least since I've been here, almost 20 years, we issue about 20 conditional use permits a year with conditions. Somebody's gotta go back and start to look at those and then determine if those permitted uses are, one, still occurring, and two, are they meeting all of our conditions? So there's plenty of work, especially given the fact that we have, you know, years, almost 20 years of aerial photographs that we can go and look at those and these conditional use applications. So there's plenty to do in the wintertime, but I do understand your concern and we will be keeping an eye on that. All right, thank you.

So we got a motion by Charlie, seconded by Tim. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina. Yes. Rapp.

Yes.

Way. Yes. Meyer. Yes. Motion carries.

And I'd just lastly like to report to the board that I heard yesterday from our attorney, and we did, the Court of Appeals upheld your decision in the case of DOB properties. Your denial of that permit was upheld. So any appeal of that would have to go to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Thank you. Thank you, Dave.

Thanks, Dave. Have a good day. At this time, I'd like to call up Vicki Doling, auditor treasurer.

Good morning.

Good morning, Vicki.

I've got a resolution on behalf of United Way Lakes and Prairie seeking to do a raffle on September 15th out at Alexandria Shooting Park.

I'll make a motion. Was that a resolution? 2657, thank you, Tim.

Second. Thanks, Jerry. Thanks, Charlie. Any discussion? Lene, please.

Kalina. Yes. Rapp.

Yes.

Way. Yes. Meyer. Yes. Schmidt.

Yes.

Motion carries. Great, thank you.

Thanks, Vicki. Jill, finance director. Good morning.

I just have one item today, just looking for a motion to approve bills totaling $4,770,649.66. Motion to pay the bills. This summer is very expensive. I'll second it. Thanks, Tim. Any further discussion? Lene, please.

Rapp. Yes. Way. Yes. Meyer. Yes. Schmidt.

Yes.

Kalina. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. At this time, I'll open up the floor for items from the floor. You have three minutes. Please, if you come up, state your name and address.

Good morning.

Good morning. David Forrest, address 660 East Lake Calgary Road, Alexandria. I just have some questions about the vacation rental compliance position. So if I understand today, there was a motion to approve a salary range adjustment, that doesn't mean it's hired, right? So this person could come back and say, it's still not enough money for me, I'm gonna turn down the position. Is that correct?

Correct.

Okay. So I just want to remind everybody that these ordinances have been in place for 10 years and have not been enforced for 10 years. And as a result, the residents of Douglas County have had to suffer. If you read the article in the Echo Press today, they talk about the increased amount of vacation rental applications in Douglas County. It's doubled since 2020. So I just want to reinforce the importance of getting this position filled and getting some support here. You talked about how to cover the cost. I had a meeting with Dave Rush and a couple of commissioners probably over a year ago. We made the recommendation if you charge each vacation rental between $250 and $300 per year, that will cover the cost, approximate cost of this compliance position. No added money coming out of your budget. It's all taken care of. And as far as the, you know, you're worried about the amount of things that this person would do in the off season. So we've got five weeks left in the rental season, right, you guys? So now is the time then after that is to take a look at ordinances. We all agree the ordinances were written 10 years ago. Some are very gray. So if you can imagine you're gonna try to penalize a vacation rental for an ordinance violation, it has to be black and white. So for example, you have the noise ordinance. 55 decibels measured at the property line, sustained for 30 minutes. Nobody's ever gonna be able to prove that. Most other counties go with quiet time at 10 p.m., can't be heard in or outside the home regardless. There's a couple other ordinances that are very vague, and I would hope that you even engage public input on the ordinance to be rewritten. I think there's about four, and I think that should be rewritten. If you go to litigation with these vacation owners, it's black and white. You are in violation or you're not. If you have a gray area, there's gonna be an out for these vacation rentals. So I just want to make sure that you guys are open to rewrite ordinances. And again, if you do hire a person, now is the time to communicate to the vacation owners that next year this is going to be put in place. And these are the penalties if you do not comply. I would also recommend that you notify all the neighbors within 500 feet of the vacation rental who the person is. And of course, this is how you get in contact with them so you can interact with them to try to put a stop to some of these vacation rentals that are not being compliant. All right. Okay.

Thank you.

Yep. Thank you guys.

I do want to comment though, just to let you know that some of these ordinances are going to have to be updated and stuff's got to be put in place. So it's not going to happen overnight because you can't just start finding them when you don't have something in place.

I agree. And I guess that was my point.

And we have discussed it.

Yep. Yep. Okay. Thanks. That was my point that let's do that September 1st until May 1st of next year. Okay guys. Thank you.

Thank you. Any more items from the floor? Anyone else? Items from the floor. I'll ask one more time. Items from the floor. Hearing none, I'll take a motion to adjourn. So moved. Thanks, Jerry. Second. Thanks, Jeff. Anything else from the board? Lene, please.

Meyer. Yes. Schmidt. Yes. Kalina. Yes. Rapp.

Yes.

Way. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. Gentlemen, don't forget, we have a work session after this and our August 4th meeting is over in the courthouse because Vicki Dolan's taking our room.