Billings County Commission - Regular Meeting

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, good afternoon. I have a special commissioner meeting at 1 o'clock today. Two items on the agenda is redistricting and the, I guess, the closure of the courthouse next week. Is that how we say it? possible the discussion right closing to the public right closing to the public sorry i said that okay um which is first on the deal i don't have an agenda so i'm going to announce first that um i guess i i guess i decided being the chairman but we did allow a little bit of discussion the other day and um I'm thankful that all of you, because most of you were here, but that it was just some questions. But Jared and I have talked about it, that we just need to keep it to a very minimum of public input, because once we start the public input, it just gets to be more. And so if you want to visit with us after, before meetings, you're always welcome to that. And then if this redistricting thing gets let's just say it gets moved to the redistricting board, then there's going to be plenty of time for public input. So we'll start out with Jared. Do you have anything you want to add to anything from the other day?

Not really. Seeing the people in the room, I think everybody may have heard the speech last time. My position remains the same that under the Chapter of the Century Code that authorized the increase into five commissioners there needs to be five districts combining of districts can be done later at the proposal of the redistricting board but ultimately you know five districts because of the population having to be the commissioners needing to be voted on at large across the county but the commissioners need to reside in their districts the laws my opinion clear that the county shall divide i'm sorry the commissioner shall divide the county into five commissioners districts so as a starting point i am of the opinion and the commission can do what it wishes if this printout that we have in front of us here is approved by the commission We'll need to assess that through the redistricting board because the parameters are, in my opinion, not according to statute. This could ultimately work if so chosen, but trying to combine, trying to come up with five districts is where we need to start if possible before the second next week.

I guess I can start with we have been a number of different district drawings have been presented to me anyways and I think some of you looks like you've got some of the same maybe there is some that are very close some that would need some tweaking maybe by cutting a township in half or whatever and i did visit with stacy a couple times on this but that's going to take a little bit to make sure that it's done properly but i feel we could do something with our three member board before july 2nd we'd have to have a meeting next week again but because I think that now that we've got different plans it's just my opinion but I think we can come up with a solid five districts with the right amount of the 10% allowed being variants between districts. I also feel that the five districts need to be defined. That's just listening to Aaron Burst who was here, listening to Jared and reading because he gave me all that same material, but that has to come first. We have to try to make that work because if we Don't like dividing it in half like one of the proposals are that the county Two people could ultimately be in the same township same color same quarter and Run and win, but it is a vote of the public also But I feel that if we get it district it out then there's always going to be some separation I Also feel the city needs to there's been different things i've gotten some calls visiting with people i think the city township there it is growing it's going to grow some more but i think we need to add land to it for now because we got five years left on this redistricting before the state gives us the new census then we'll have to redistrict again And so we're only halfway through this redistricting that we did in 21. So there is proposals here with having the city be within three townships, a couple of different ways even. So that's my thoughts there. I feel also my other The main reason is to keep district one where Jim is, two where Steve is, three where I am. I think those three got to stay the same. It basically spells it out in the articles of reorganization that four and five are the new ones and then they would be the new ones. I don't think we have any order how they would be. Circle this way, circle this way, jump around. This is one through five. Because that way, I think our districts would stay a little bit more the way they are and the way people understand them. It's going to be hard at the first voting. Who votes where, in a way? Or who runs from which district? You know, it's going to be... But that's my opinion for now. I might add more later.

I guess I would add, so for those not aware, the individual mentioned, Aaron, who's Aaron Burst, who is the Executive Director of the Association of Counties for the State of North Dakota. They did a tour throughout western North Dakota yesterday and stopped here in the afternoon. Questioned when the last time they could recall a county increasing from three commissioners to five The response was in 2016 Foster County which encompasses the Carrington area Foster County did it in 2026 through the vote of the people 2016 Sorry 2016 was the vote In looking, there are no minutes for that. I tried to look at it. There are no minutes for the latter half of 2016 or 2017 in Foster County. 2018 is all ironed out and published, but I couldn't find anything more than what their current districts look like. due to other meetings and obligations that ran until about six o'clock yesterday and again first thing this morning until a little bit ago I wasn't able to get that printed for presentation but I will note I don't know I could send it to Marsha but you still can't get pdfs I can save it as a picture and then put it up yeah maybe I'll just send it but what what is very interesting and unique is they took that county and split it in a very very odd way and they took their largest city of carrington split it into effectively five uh five districts and then it just branched out from there but it's just more food for thought knowing that they were likely the last county that would have redistricted pursuant to an increase in commissioners The way that they did it is very unique and I would assume that this had to go through the redistricting board because of cutting many townships. It looks like they have incorporated townships in half and in quarters and then cutting the city of Carrington into five parts. Try to get that at least a link or the photo over. but anyways and that that's not so much for today it's for the Commissioner but unfortunately I apologize wasn't able to get that sent over for for a review by the commissioners prior to this i just looking to see how other counties have done it and the steps that they took for guidance was not able to get the still haven't heard back the response following their meeting on monday sent some questions to the attorney general's office seeking further input i did attempt to speak with the Political subdivision assistant attorney general was not able to get her on the phone today. So on that front, I don't have any further guidance or direction beyond what I said the other day and so far today.

In regards to your comment of this other county, we have a lot of federal land. We have the park that is obviously way different than anybody else in the state. as kind of stated the other day as far as dividing districts and population. I feel like this should just go to the redistricting board so there's proper public comment so everybody can get a little bit of an opinion on this since it's going to affect everybody for how many years. I feel like that's the best thing we can do.

When you mentioned Foster County, I never saw it either. He just mentioned it yesterday, but is there any county in North Dakota, there's 53 of them I think, right? Is there any district in the county that has one district that is strictly a city? Because that was mentioned the other day. Or do we always split the city in half or do something or combine it with other land?

Without looking at all 53 counties individually, just the handful that I've looked at including Stark County, now Foster County, It doesn't appear that, you know, especially I just emailed that to Marcia. She can turn it into a photo for putting up there. You can see how Carrington is split apart into, I guess it appears to be one, two, three, four only.

Well, Dickinson's split up too. And Dickinson is also, yes. I ask a question. Well, we're going to just leave questions until maybe at the end, because otherwise if you ask a question, he can ask a question, and he can ask a question.

I'm getting there.

You're getting there?

Feedback I received was from most was to where we have a north and a south district, not necessarily five, you know, before we could get them combined. That was most of the feedback from calls that I received. and one for Maduro.

That's the bus coming up. So what company is that? That's Foster County who increased to five back in 2016. That's a mess. Carrington, is it Carrington for Foster, or is that in Rockford?

No, that's Carrington. And then there's a second and a third page to that, Marcia, to that specific PDF, but that just shows how Carrington itself is broke down into the four, which I assume was done for population equivalence.

Yeah, so you basically have two from the city and three from the world, or possibly even four from the city.

Yeah, if you split the city, then you could have one person in each ward within the city run for all those county districts, too.

Yeah, you could. So they all could be from the state.

Like Beach right now, like for Old Valley County, Beach is split up into other three districts. and so yeah like it's kind of a weird like north north and then east and west so that part is in some of these parts and all the other parts in each world but yeah but we have an old valley county basically a lot of times two out of the three are city residents

So it's split by the highway and two highways.

So basically it's like city blocks or whatever and the railroad is the angle, yeah. Because you could split in Medora by the railroad or whatever.

Which that's very similar to how Stark County does it. They have, I believe, three of their commissioners cover and then for equivalents of population, they can move within the city limits of Dickinson to make the district's population equivalent.

so

Jim, do you remember anything?

i like from the beginning i like to see the one two three stay between the lines around the districts to get our numbers to where they gotta be and we have to reduce them i think we can make it work no problem you know it's confusing it's been i'm just going by the little bit i know all in the world it don't matter if my line is over here or if it's over there nothing's ever going to be said until somebody runs for an office then they better make sure they're in that right industry so it can maybe all work it's after this gets done it's not going to really be an issue as far as where the lines are as far as the commissioners in the districts it's just got to make it work and District one, two, and three were spread out through the county to represent the whole county. I said a little bit last meeting, I was a little bit undecided about Medora. i personally would like to just see the doors split into however along with the districts and go that route this last map i mean i got a bunch of maps i've been going over all week now this one looks better but you got to tweak it a little bit but i think we're there i mean no matter what we're close to doing it as far as redistricting okay

I think this newest one could be, we'd have to get some calculations figured out, but I think the bottom half of that bottom township could be taken into the other district and then it would be split. This one here? Yeah, it would be split according to the way the statute says about being 10%.

Okay.

No, we just, we can't ask questions.

We don't, I don't know what you're talking about. One, two, three, is it this old map that we had? Just read the numbers on your one, two, three, the number of people you have in them so I know what you're referring to. She might have a different one than what I've got. The amount of people in them. So I know.

You mean?

Well, I'm in first district, second district, and third district. What's the number of people in them?

Well, I never, yeah, on this new map, it would be different.

Is it this map here? Kevin, we're not allowing anybody to talk, Kevin. Did you understand when I said it at the beginning? Because if one talks, then everybody gets to talk. So at the end of the meeting here... Okay, so then we can't ask any questions. I'm just trying to know if this is a map. There's so many maps here that we've got, so...

I feel it's worth that we have public comment on this regardless of whether we have some ideas or not. I move we pass this into the redistricting board.

Okay, we have a motion on the table to move the redistricting to the redistricting board so is there a second to that motion is there a second to that motion You know, the motion fails for lack of a second. And I'm going to say my reason is this can get figured out. And if we can't do it today, we're going to have to have another meeting next week. Because we've got until next week, Thursday, it's going to be a crazy week. We aren't forced to do anything today, really. I mean, if we all agree and share, we can do it. And it might come down to your emotions. I think we need to try a little longer or a little harder. That's my reason.

I've just seen this map here not long ago, so looking at this map, this map can work right here just by changing a little bit of a few things to come up with the redistricting.

Well, we really can't make a motion on it, because we don't know exactly where that split would be. I know Stacy is working on it right now, but I know she don't have the answer. I couldn't get in here.

in time to get the question asked to her but i did i mean you're splitting up 37 people so i do have a best guess that there's 21 people on the north half of that section and 16 people on the south which section uh yeah these townships like the The eastern ones are easy to split up because the township or the section lines are the sensitive boundary lines. But like here, like this, a piece like Julianne Williams and Jordan Hill lives, that's all one piece and I feel that there's 11 people within that area. So that would be a split between the north and the south. But there's four on the south. There's like John Julian and John and Becky. And then another split, there's between like Mazos and Peshawars, very Peshawar. It's almost like it's basically, I don't know. Well, I can figure out at 16 on the south half and 21 on the north half.

It would have to be for sure, Neil, before we... Well, you can't do that. Right, we can't do it on the...

The sense of data doesn't split by section lines here. So you have to go by best guess. That's where we wanted to keep townships whole, or if you can, solidify census block, because that's the official record versus having an estimate based on knowing where people are.

But like Foster County did, they split the town, they split a couple of them.

Yeah, well, and they're also east of where everything's nice. Nice and north, south, east, and west.

And there's some of these blocks that fit the city blocks. You know, like Carrington is, you know, the population hub of Foster County.

Beach is the population hub of Golden Valley County. You have probably over half of the people live in Beach, so it made sense to split up. Carrington made sense to split up because you have a huge population base right in one little spot. But ORM isn't like a population hub, but the township itself fits that definition of plus minus 10% of 189. So that's, you know, there's ways to make it work, but, you know, that's why at first I chose to split the six-mile-a-quarter townships, because it was easy to know. Since the blocks are square, and so you pick them, and you know exactly where to put them. And you have to make sure that the boundaries are continuous to one another. So you couldn't split one door up three ways because there's no way to put three districts within one little piece of a door.

And they no longer have voting precincts in Medora, correct?

No, it's a split at the river for soil conservation, but that's the only split we have.

Yeah, there's no city on the other side of the river either. Yeah, so it would be. Well, I guess in order to get us to move forward, we're going to have to, I guess, possibly schedule another meeting and then get more scenarios or get them tweaked up so that they work a little bit better. I don't see why we aren't allowed to do that, are we, Jared?

To table it for another meeting one day? Yeah. Totally your discretion. The only... depending on the next question for the meeting today closing the courthouse obviously the courthouse would be open for county business so anybody that wishes to attend monday is absolutely welcome again my understanding of the purpose for the next question to be discussed is to prevent a lot of heavy traffic of Tourists through the courthouse. I've already seen it this morning personally yesterday a lot of people just coming in to look Which kind of creates a safety hazard because the sheriff's office is preoccupied for lack of a better term with everything else that's going on and so it's a safety issue and But if we have a meeting Monday The courthouse would be open for for this meeting. Yes, I The only suggestion I would have is if this does get tabled and moved to another meeting Monday, that there would be some finality brought just to avoid everyone having to come back and regather again after Monday. We should make a decision. You should make a decision. as to how to proceed if there's a map for voting and that will be addressed but just to come here to not have discussion the purpose of the meeting is you know the commissioners because of the three that currently exist can't can't meet together outside to discuss this so we need to have a public meeting so that their thoughts questions concerns can be voiced with all three commissioners together. But if we don't have any discussion or anything else to bring, it's kind of a moot issue to have these meetings if we're not gonna move forward and do something or have discussion amongst the current commissioners.

What do you think, Steve? Does another meeting seem the thing to do?

I guess I shared my thoughts. I tried to get a motion. I tried to get something done.

Do you think, Steve, this one here could be an option or tweaking it a little bit?

I just want the public comment. I want the days for everybody to be able to voice their, then potentially look at, combine the north and the south, and one from Medora.

And don't redistrict?

Well, we can redistrict, but then they look at combining those through the process.

Okay.

Because, you know, like you said before, where does this guy live? Where does this guy live? Oh, it's in this district. Oh, this one goes to just nice even line north and cuts off here. South is here. But that's most of the feedback I've gotten, and I guess I'm on board with that. Okay.

you know that's not the feedback that i got at all well the thing of it is it says we have to redistrict but yeah it was also said that we could then combine districts into redistricting if we can't reduce it right if we can't come up with a solution redistricting then we can go to plan b

the purpose for combining districts would be a lack of eligible commissioners in any particular district That is from attorney general opinions on the topic. If there are no commissioners in any certain district, they could be combined and then the total population would be split with two commissioners effectively living in the same township, if you will, but then covering a larger area if there are no interested or eligible or willing persons in the two newly created districts. Legally, I need to advise and tell the people that are here, there is a mechanism, okay. the law requires the commissioners have 10 days to redistrict and then they have the legal ability to appoint two new commissioners they would those two new commissioners would be seated until the election this fall or anybody that would be interested either running against the appointed commissioner could run against them or the appointed person could certainly run themselves with that said the only way that that the redistricting board can be called together is by a resolution of the board or a petition by 10 of the qualified voters of the county off the top of my head marsha do you have that number

based on which election?

10% of the last governor's election. That would be like 65 or something. Yeah, 54. I don't know, 195 divided by three, essentially. So if the public wishes to, if the board decides not to redistrict or call the redistricting board together, there is a public element to it. That's the law. I have to advise on that. and so they there could be a petition circulated and it looks like 65 would likely be the number somewhere in that neighborhood you know then then it would uh task the redistricting board to be called together that would be an interim redistricting board That is unique because the main function of the redistricting board is to meet every 10 years to determine if there's any variances based upon the newest population data. And then if any individual district varies more than 10%, that triggers the redistricting board after every 10 year census to redistrict for purposes of voting equivalence in each particular district. So with that said, The public input is always welcome. It's necessary. The voters have a right to speak. the only way to get that public comment period though and would be to call the redistricting board together so there's two ways to do that the board the commission can ask for it to be brought together or a petition of approximately 65 people stating that don't we want public comment we want input we want to draw our own maps and present them then that's the option um The question left unanswered for clarity is if the commission can simply... My opinion is that the commission could select a map, choose the five districts, and that's the end of it. But for, again, redistricting, if there's enough population that want to have input on this, then the redistricting board would have to become involved. But my opinion is that the board under the law used to increase the number of commissioners, as long as the board takes into account all of the elements of the redistricting focus, which is to keep population equivalent, keep the boundaries meaningful, usually by township or reasonable split of townships, making sure that the districts are contiguous. We can't just pick certain numbers anywhere and to need population data. So they need to maintain compactness, regularity, and form and be equivalent in population. So any map needs to make sense and needs to be contiguous. And if none of that made sense, I can explain it individually. But for purposes of just my opinion is that there is going to be, I would say, I don't want to say significantly different numbers after 2030, but it is likely that certain population areas like Medora may increase. significantly so this will be once the numbers are finalized at the end of 2030 or into 2031 inevitably there will likely be some need to do this again but absent absent a clear need as long as the elements are followed And the purpose of the redistricting board is followed in terms of, again, compactness, regularity, contiguousness, and population. Unless I'm advised otherwise by the Attorney General's office, it would be legally applicable for the board to present a map that meets all of the requirements without automatically having to go to the redistricting board. but again i've already advised that if the people do not want that if the commission decides not to do that then the people could force the board to bring these pictures together or on monday we could just do it or today we could just do it or today

It ain't that I'm not against redistricting more. I'm not against it. I just think this is so close. I was just trying to save a little time. Go through the districts on this here one procedure here.

Do you want me to print plain maps with just the numbers on it so you guys could go through it?

So what do you mean?

I mean, if you're just looking at the numbers, because this then has everything kind of, you can't see what you're looking at for numbers. I could print some worksheets for you to work from, you know, just blank worksheets if you'd like to do that, or however you want to do it.

How long would the redistricting board have to accomplish what needs to be done, or is there a deadline?

There is no minimum or maximum amount of time that the redistricting board would need to complete its work. However, because the law requires individuals to be elected for if they're not appointed they must be elected and any individual interested in that would have until august 31st to submit their paperwork to be on the ballot that would require 195 signatures which is a large amount i would say that the redistricting board is going to be driven by Election deadlines, but there are no nothing that I can find that says the redistricting board must get this done within 90 days or otherwise.

There is.

Marcia did propose a timeline of important and applicable dates. in order to satisfy upcoming deadlines simply for purposes of following chapter 16.1 of the election and other requirements. So the only other deadline for the board to keep in mind, the commission that is, if the commission has identified candidates, are approached by individuals that would like to be considered for appointment that would have to be completed and those commissioners would need to be appointed on an interim basis no later than July 31st so conservatively July 31st is a very important deadline if an individual will be appointed if not if there is no appointment before July 31st the county will function as a three-member board through the time of of the election after November and then when the newly elected commissioners would take office so All of that said, I think if the redistricting board is going to present things, it all needs to be done prior to July 31st, but then that involves a whole bunch of additional deadlines because public comment needs to be identified. and then in 30 days before any map is presented to the auditor for publishing and final installment there needs to be a 30-day waiting period so July 31st is likely going to be a moot point at that point if it goes to redistricting and any individual looking to to be on the commission would then need to either write do a writing campaign or collect the requisite number of signatures the august 31st deadline i think would be reasonable yeah i think it would be you know be able to be accomplished by august 31st but it's um

You do have to publish it for 30 days and have that public comment period. The last time we did redistricting in 2021, we did two public hearings where people could come and speak their piece, present whatever it is they wanted to present. It was Todd Cornell from the city, Steve was on the redistricting board, and Julie Rice was on the redistricting board. You know, it was done fairly simply. We took all of the maps and everything and drew everything out, you know, put out the map for public comment so people could actually see what was being proposed and what was going to be done. And then you have the final public hearing where, you know, you adopt the map. But I'm a non-voting member on that board, but just there for advising.

so if the redistricting board was enacted today or Monday because that's basically we all know that's going to be our deadline and that would be the 30th or the 29th but if you want to have a 30-day window on public by July 31st, they'd have to have their paperwork in to us by July 1st.

That's if you're planning on appointing two people. I think, well, I don't know, but you had said they could, but they don't have to, or?

Correct. The county would be allowed to continue running on three, because due to statutory deadlines, the commission cannot appoint to a vacancy in office inside of I believe it's 95 days before the election which happens to cut off at July 31st so we get to July 31st and there is no districts and no appointed commissioners it will run the county will run on the three current commissioners until the new commissioners are seated after the November election

it's likely with the the signature requirements of the 195 signatures that nobody is likely to get that signature threshold met in two months anyway so i'm i'm assuming it's no matter how the districts are drawn or how this is done it's going to be a write-in campaign for the two commission seats so in i mean it it could be done but it's it's a high bar to It took a year for the petitioners to get the five minute report question petition, so I can't, I don't think it's likely that somebody's gonna get 195 signatures in that time frame. But if there's a bunch of weddings and a bunch of funerals, then yeah.

It's a lot of signatures.

It's a lot. Whereas a normal commissioner would be ten signatures, so.

And so then if we pick something today or Monday, we agreed to pick something, then we would appoint two commissioners within what?

As far as timeline? You can appoint until July 31st. If a map is chosen, you know, there could be maybe some interested people that may come forth and say, I would be interested. And then the commission votes to appoint those individuals on an interim basis through the November election. That may or may not give them I don't want to say an advantage by any means, but that might give them some recognition as I've been appointed in the interim. I'd like to run. They would have to run. They don't get to stay on. So that would just give those two appointed individuals a little advanced ability to go on and begin collecting signatures. Otherwise, their name will not automatically be on the ballot.

Even if they're appointed, it's just like you guys, when you rerun, you have to get the signatures to be on the ballot.

um

I hate calling another meeting, but I think that's what's going to happen. If we don't all agree here, then we're going to have to call another meeting to make sure that's what we're going to do. Because we're going to, I agree with the juror, and we're going to have to decide that date. It's either we pick one and we vote for it, or we go to redistricting and vote for that. All right?

We almost have to change a little bit.

We're going to have to get that line defined there on that map.

We're going to be willing to, you know, if this is going to work on this one here.

Which way are you leading? Come on. Steve and I have made our pitch. It's up to you.

And if we go hire a committee like now, that'll drag out probably for a while. We know it's going to. It's a good deal. I mean, if you want some feedback, I mean, but it's still going to boil down to the district lines, however, the committee, whoever's on the committee is still going to be picking the district lines.

We're not going to get to having half and half, I don't feel. because we have to do the districts and if we can't find somebody to run in that district then at that time that might be five years down the road we can't find somebody to run in let's say district four yeah we'll never know that we'll never know that until down the road so we have to get our five districts but in order to to find eligible individuals you know that's where the the five districts and outlining

exactly where those would be to allow those individuals to either submit their name or approach one of you and say i'm interested you know vote on me or discuss it so it's very difficult to get any input of two potential appointed commissioners without knowing what the districts may be but again the combining i'm Combining of districts is not the first step, unless I'm presented with something that suggests otherwise the five districts need to be formed if no commissioners come up, or it could just be a combination of either the north or the south. It doesn't have to be both. But the five districts need to be made regardless of any combination to allow for eligible commission candidates. And that's based upon the way the county is set up currently is voting on an at-large residency, having a residency within their own identified district. So having a combined district of the north half with both people living across the street from one another in Freiburg or whatever, That's not the spirit of the law as far as I see it and read it. Again, it is possible to combine them if that's what the commission ultimately then decides. But if there are others eligible and willing in their own district for residency purposes, then that's what needs to be done.

The county's gone all this time on three guys. There's no hurry to have to let the public get some comments, input. Whoever needs to get on the ballot can get on the ballot or write in for fall. Let's get some other ideas, perspective. Others, let them share their thoughts. Less scrutiny on us. We have public comment. I'll say the same thing on Monday if we come back here Monday. I'm not trying to... threaten or whatever. I'm just stating my opinion.

So basically you're saying you're not going to have any, you won't agree to any plan?

You know, we got one, two, I got about three or four of them here. You know, one's okay here, one's okay there, but this one might be better, that one might be better.

I just would like to have the comment period

because you came up with a different one over overnight we had those two it might be a couple more that oh that is great so if we do the redistricting board what happens today if you

If there is a renewed motion to call the redistricting board together today, I believe that would be fine. There could also be a motion for the board commission to nominate or appoint an individual to be on that board. the after refresh my memory on which which of these but the commission gets to appoint an individual then the chairman of the board of county commissioners would be the chairman of the redistricting board i would be a member the auditor is a non-voting member to advise on election districts freezing boundaries other election criterion but then anyways the four of them then vote for their own additional member plus a member from the governing body with the city having the largest population. So that would be, whether it be the mayor or another individual or a citizen from Medora directly, they would be on it. But anyways, so if you voted today, you could then nominate and vote on a citizen member chosen by the board today.

And then one from the mayor or whoever?

We would just present it to the mayor, which I already talked to him, and he said, fine, they want to be on something. So they'll pick their person, right?

We don't pick it. They pick it. They pick it. They pick it.

It's historically been the mayor. Mm-hmm.

so that would be the only other secondary issue if they if the commission votes to just go ahead and start the process on the new districting board you could vote on the citizen member chosen by the county commission and then if the mayor is interested then once all of those people get together which timing not being ideal it could be a meeting on monday then to get the redistricting board and together not the county commission but the redistricting board then to vote on that that fifth member um and then the process can get started and a loose timeline is the one that was suggested for july 31st august 31st deadlines that could get started but that would allow for public input in the month of august it's still doable if we come back here monday and but today or monday it doesn't matter i think we could still get that timeline accomplished to have a good idea by the end of august where this is going

Thank you.

Also, so right now if we made a motion for one of these today or Monday, does it have to be a three to zero vote? Or does it can be a two to one? Or redistricting?

I've asked for guidance on that issue. My opinion would be Because two new commissioners are not yet appointed. I believe a two to one would be sufficient. I reserve the right to change that if I can get some further input but. because we would still be within that 10-day window to a point. The county is currently governed by three individuals, not yet five, or the premise of five. But again, I reserve the right to change that opinion by Monday, if not sooner, if I get some guidance and direction from the attorney general that we are still a three-member commission and a two-to-one vote would be sufficient to vote on that. with other matters once we get beyond that appointment deadline as of July 31st there has been previous suggestion from the attorney general's office that the county again was repeating myself from earlier but the county can run on a quorum of three commissioners however all three would need to be appearing through august september through the end of november you know to conduct a meeting number one and any vote would need to be unanimous after that point

Jared, on Monday, what was the part that you said had to be unanimous on the voting? What part of the sequence was it, of the process?

Something I stated or something?

Yeah, I believe you read or you stated that at some point something along the line had to be unanimous vote.

he started today no it was on monday or something but had to be unanimous vote uh he was going through the process i think that was the redistricting board that had to have a unanimous vote well part you know the increase in number of commissioners is uh majority of votes cast uh the question to increase that that was the one thing i had stated um without you know again i i don't have anything that uh that is fully solidifying uh on a three to it has to be three to zero to pass this it's a gray area the law is not written clearly or plainly um but until the new commissioners are identified Within this first 10 days, I am going to say that a majority vote of the three-member board would be sufficient to conduct business currently. But again, I will, if there's anything to the contrary that says that is incorrect, I will let everyone know immediately. I'll try contacting them again at the conclusion of this meeting so that we have that answered by Monday, before Monday.

Stacey, was there something that had to... We have another option for you to consider if you want to take a look at it.

You mean of the maps?

The chief, the townships whole, and... The only area that would be the highest one would be what you could propose for the Medora area.

So that Medora and then just by itself.

The only thing, I really wasn't liking this east half over here. And so that would still be the same. And then this would be a new district. for these townships that be basically like six mile corner area and then district one or basically like old district one plus this township right here and then Fairfield another option I think there's a million ways to like but if you want to keep townships whole and contiguous yeah

and then it has like a north south division with the so basically three districts on the north end of the county and two on the south end and then you keep what do you think you want to do which way i mean he's very much that way i'm for waiting until monday but if something happens here that's I just would like to get it over and get it done if we can agree, but I understand the public input also, but it's going to make it very hard and difficult to get candidates out there by August 31st if we don't do it now. because of the 30-day comment or 30-day what do you call that review that you have to post

We need to redistrict. You know, I'm with it. It's just, I know we can make this work. The public, you know, the input. It ain't an issue. It really is. You're going to hear it from all corners of a county. Good, bad, whatever. We've got to just use our heads and make something that's workable, and that'll work, and go with it. And I would hope we could all agree on it, because that's what we're here for. and then we don't commissioners you know i don't know if you don't get them the time frames it ain't a big deal better off taking it a little slower and do the right thing and move on and it is trying to rush it also it's just you look at all these maps you're going to find another map tomorrow that could be different that might somewhat She brought one up that I never really looked at that one, but I mean, it's word there. I mentioned the one, two, three districts. I'm talking to myself. I meant first district, second, and third. I would like to have kept them districts that way, the people that run it on the commissioners. But now we're adding two more, so that's why I'd like to tweak the areas of first, second, and third, you know, the lines so we can meet the requirements of this. That's what I kind of meant by the one, two, three with the numbers. And I don't think it's going to matter out there. I really don't. I think I'm just using my experience up in District 1, you know. The line runs here. The line runs here. People ain't going to say much. It's just going to come down to a matter of where that line is. If somebody comes, throws their name in a hat in due time, the people will know, and they'll understand it later. Somebody figured out what happened yet anyway, so you just work with it, and you move on.

okay well I think we better table it for and come back and make our decision I don't know if we have to make a motion to table it, though, do we, as long as we agree?

You don't have to just lay it on the table. You'll need to choose what meeting date you'd like.

Yeah.

So are you already tabling it?

It is done today. Whatever your decision is, two against one, it's been like that for a year and a half. Go ahead, make your motion, get it done.

We don't have to really make a motion to table, but I guess we can.

There hasn't been a single motion you guys have voted with me and split up your votes since you guys got together.

It was that way when you and Lester were there.

There was times I went against Lester, especially maybe by creek crossing. I didn't vote for that.

It don't matter. It just don't matter. Come on.

It don't matter. Can I talk? Yeah. I know you mentioned, Steve, about public input. Is that the only reason about this? Because you know we're going to whoever's on the board even ourselves will hear all different aspects of this and would it change anything at the end she just brought another another map to us so now we have five options we can wait till monday we'll come over and come back and see what you want to do with her up

well I guess I if we gotta have a motion here then I'm gonna make a motion that we table it till Monday if we just I mean what's your consensus You haven't said, I guess, yet if you're willing to table it or not.

I have to check on Robert's rules of order quickly. Yes. You do need a motion. Okay.

Well, I need a motion. Is there a second?

Second.

Then we order and suffer.

I ask for another second. Well, it looks like that dies for a lap, too, then. So we're going to...

The other option would be to adjourn today's meeting on this issue and then set up a meeting for Monday.

I'll make that motion. Do I have a motion on that? Yes. I'll make that motion.

to adjourn today well on this issue today yeah on this issue we've got one more deal well i'll second that is there any more discussion all those in favor say aye aye aye all those opposed say aye aye motion carries Okay, so we'll move to the second item of the day, which is, it's been brought to the attention of the courthouse being open on next week. And there's been, because of the influx of terrorism, whatever people in town, the courthouse would like to close the front door. with a sign on the door, correct me if I'm wrong here, but then you can call in and if you have some business to do, but that way the general public from everywhere just can't come through the door. Does that make sense what I said?

Yes, there was some discussion at the department head meeting on Wednesday, yesterday morning, for the commission to also consider and i guess anybody else correct me if i'm wrong but looking to basically close the courthouse in full on the first simply because of logistics and even getting employees here with what we don't fully comprehend at this point whether some individuals may want to attend the presidential visit on the first but in addition to closing the courthouse to the public keeping county business operational ask the commissioners to discuss closing the courthouse in full on the first next wednesday there would be a discussion about paid or unpaid closure etc um we can have a discussion on that at that point that would be back open again on the second and then it's closed on the third it goes on the third that's observed okay

the first was because they were going to close down the interstates i'm assuming for the motorcades and things like that so we don't know what the situation i think your kind of discussion was closed on the first period um monday tuesday and then those days just like you did code either appointment only or

just so the doors aren't open and so people are using it as a public restroom or they're coming in and asking where the ticket junction is i mean all day today it was the majority of the questions it's not effective for workflow for those that are here working to be interrupted and i was here yesterday when individuals came in and wanted to speak with people in the county government about how the government works here compared to their other states it's we're just it It's unprecedented, relatively normal by my understanding for this time of year anyway, but it's going to be unprecedented next week.

No, it's going to be presidented.

Well, I think it's a good idea that we shut it down. I mean, I do. Yeah, you'd never be able to afford a toilet paper. Yeah, I mean, why would we, yeah.

But again, I said earlier it's a safety issue because... the point of operation for the sheriff's department is going to be across the street there won't be likely sheriffs in the building you know if anything were to happen so just a sign on the door for monday tuesday thursday if anybody has county business it can be by appointment call but you're welcome to come in but otherwise the first I just think it makes the most sense to give the county employees in the courthouse the day off or to close the courthouse and pull from operations because we're out. Anybody who needs to be with the incident command is going to be fully on that matter.

But for clarification, is it considered a snow day when it comes to the pay of double time for everybody, basically? or is it going to be considered if you're in the courthouse, those are passed, whoever's working, it's just a normal day? I think I need clarification for everybody on that deal.

That's for the commissioners to discuss and make a determination on if there's any discussion from the department heads that are here. Certainly, this would be welcome, but I don't know on the pay structure.

And there's already going to be a holiday paid on Thursday and Friday. If the courthouse closes, that's one thing. But no matter what, there was going to be holiday pay paid out to road crew and whoever's working on Saturday. So it is going to be an expensive holiday week for the county. then it's likely to be overtime and holiday pay and you know depending on what people's schedules are and things like that so so if we close on the first which is a Wednesday right and

I guess if you what you call it a snow day or whatever because we are closing it then they get a They're eight hours. Is that what you're well flying mostly?

Yes, or no no because when what generally happens is is the courthouse employees who are here scheduled to work Monday through Friday 40 hours They would go home, but they would continue to receive their salary for the week. Then other employees who were not in the courthouse, say road crew or sheriff's department, whoever, EMS, they get an additional, historically what has been happening is they get an additional eight hours on top of their pay.

Because they're working, though. They have to be working.

So they get their salary, plus they get another eight hours.

Is there a, just spitballing, because I don't know the answer to this, could courthouse employees take either PTO or just unpaid day?

They could take a vacation day or, yeah.

Okay. That's what I'm discussing. Either flexing the time during the week or taking a vacation. Yeah.

And I don't think anybody would have a problem with that. You know, if you're saying the courthouse is closed, you absolutely cannot come to work. Yeah.

So I think would that leave me with an extra eight hours for? Yes, for the other employees.

If they didn't want to use their vacation, then they could take it unpaid. Yes.

It's just an adjustment that we have to do with people.

I like that idea. It's going to be expensive week the way it is with holiday pays and overtimes.

And very complicated for Colleen to calculate out when she gets her payroll. It is expensive.

Does there have to be a motion on this, too?

I think you would have to make a comment on this one.

So the way it's in the policy book now is... if if it's closed because of either a storm or whatever or the commission closes it and then you get your eight hours and then if somebody is working like the road crew and there's gonna be some people working then they get unless you guys make a motion to do it differently i mean it's a different kind of situation it's not a snow day it's not a yeah but

I know the courthouse will be closed on July 1. Employees use PTO vacation or comp or what?

Or an unpaid.

Unpaid day.

Vacation if they have it.

To meet their 40 hours?

And then if you are working, you get paid, right? Just a normal day. Yeah.

I'll second that, Steve. At least we don't agree on today. Okay.

So we have a motion and a second. Any more discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Motion carried.

And then just a general consensus, or do they need to make a motion on the closing of the doors for Monday, Thursday? Well, Monday during the meeting, whatever date you guys choose to have for Monday for the meeting. That wasn't chosen. Did you want to do 1 o'clock again?

Or 9 o'clock. Because we're going to have to open the doors. We can have the doors open during the meeting or before, during, and after.

The timing of the meeting is more important whether everyone can make it nine o'clock seems Prudent that way they can just close the doors after the meeting and be done I'll say that it's going to get very busy in the late afternoon, but not before five o'clock with Everybody who's going to be here for the remainder of the week from the outside assisting agencies are going to be in town throughout the afternoon. So even parking might become an issue then from the public. So a 9 a.m. meeting seemed to be a little better.

Are we all right with you? Yep. You?

I have a question. To get into town, are we still going to have to have our passes on Monday? Of course not.

I'm going to tell you that. I don't think on Monday.

You never need the passes if you're a citizen. The passes are intended to expedite your entry into town. But if you're a citizen that can show ID, the passes are just going to save you that step in. I am a citizen of the county. So if you have one...

So 9 a.m. And then a motion to close the doors to the public.

Yeah, a motion to close public traffic that is not county business on the remainder of Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

And we need a motion for that then.

I put closed courthouse doors to non-county business.

Okay, I'll make that motion. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any more discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Okay, motion to adjourn.

I'll make that one. Second. Meeting is adjourned.