County Commission - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everybody. I'd like to call the Ramsey County Commission meeting to order. Start off with the pledge of allegiance, please.

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.

First item is... First item is approval of the minutes. So moved. Second. A motion, we got a second. All those in favor by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Approval of bills.

Move to approve.

Second. We have a motion, we have a second. Roll call, please.

Otis. Aye. Frith. Aye. Brown. Aye. Wilhelmy.

Aye.

Frith. Oh, you're here. I'm sorry.

Approval of treasure checks. Move to approve.

Second.

We have a motion. We have a second. Roll call, please.

Otis.

Aye.

Frith. Aye. Brown.

Aye.

Will Homme.

Aye.

Volk.

Aye. Approval of the agenda. I'd like to add under unfinished business, VSO position.

Move to approve the agenda as amended. Second.

We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign.

next thing is jason well good morning everyone morning um we'll jump into we'll just take care of some regular business and then we'll get into all the other ongoing events Lindstrom invoice. He got the ceiling completed and the insulation there. So asking for $35,000 to pay that part of the construction project on the building.

I move to approve. Second. We have a motion. We have a second. Roll call, please, to pay.

Otis. All right. Britt.

All right.

Brown.

All right.

Will Helmy.

Aye. Volk. Aye. The next one there was just an FYI for you guys. We had a couple other things that we had to get done along the way with that building. They fall under the criteria, but I wanted you guys to know. The next one is, we'll talk about is the washable culvert on the Ramsey County County line and We're going to talk more about that later, but I would like to request a study done with that. That's partially by Cavalier County as well. So we want to make sure that we're putting the right thing back in that one, as it's washed out three or four times over the last nine or 10 years. That's the question.

How many studies are we going to do? That one, I don't think we've ever done. Since 97. I have a real tough time looking at...

some of the stuff up there we've done hydraulic studies why haven't why didn't we start doing hydraulic studies at the bottom end working our way to the top it seems like we're doing this stuff backwards and well because the ones at the top end are the ones that are washing out when they wash out or rust out then that's when they need to be replaced we're not just we're not just randomly picking sites when we do them it's because there's a problem there So this culvert is now, we're rusted. We can see that. It's washed out of the hole. So now we want to make sure we size it appropriately so we meet North Dakota Century Code.

So this hasn't been done before?

Not that I'm aware of, no. I mean, no, I would say no. I think... I think one of the commissioners even told me that that was a used culvert or something purchased from Benson County years ago and put in there. So that's why.

You see my concern. I don't want to be doing a whole bunch of hydraulic studies two, three times.

Well, if we're going to change the crossing by law at all in any way, we have to.

Even if it was done prior?

Well, then it should be sized appropriately. Then we would use that study. Okay. But there isn't anything on record. me ask you this question how big is the culvert that got washed it's 10 foot round by 80 feet long but that's part of the reason i wanted and 10 or 10 around so the part of the reason i want to have it looked at is that only leaves about a foot and a half of cover over the pipe so what's the approximate cost of this of the hydraulic study no of the culvert $54,000 for that one for the culvert. So that's why I was explaining that the misquote on the news was about the county line, not about the entire disaster.

So that culvert at that size, is that one of the culverts that we could be looking at putting box culverts in instead of a culvert since it is so big?

If we could find funding for that, we could certainly look at that.

Is that a site that we should probably look at that? Like you said, it's already 10 foot round and we're not covering it very much.

No, I think what we need to do, honestly, what I feel was, and I don't know because I'm not an engineer, I don't know how to work the numbers, but tube pipe that'll handle the flow. I've actually checked into putting in 372 inch pipe in there, but that's not enough flow. That just is equal to the 10 foot. So we had to make sure, see if we don't put in what's required by Century Code, we can be sued upstream or downstream. As long as we follow the stream crossing standards that's set forth by an engineering firm, then that takes the liability out of us for legal action against us. So that's what calls for the study. Unless we just wanna wing it.

We have no choice but to have the study. They protect their own back.

Exactly. Right.

I guess all I was looking at is we have a study done. Is that study good from here on forever?

No. Because if the channels change or the... Why would the channels change? Well, they might add more to the north. It goes by the profile of the channeling. There's a lot of factors that figure into it.

So if we've got to follow these laws, how can they change?

Well, because if the inlet or the water coming into it increases, we have to meet a 25-year flood event on a county system. Townships only have to meet a 10-year. So if there's more channeling done or more digging in Cavalier County or north and it feeds into that system or natural waterways come into there, then it could change the crossing again.

Basically, if they drain more water, what is it supposed to eat?

or we go through another severe wet cycle and it continues to collect more water, yes. But if there's not a problem there, we won't have, there isn't this issue. See, I try to explain to the township people too when they call. It's not that we go out and just pick this site and say, we're going to do a study here and change this culvert. Ideally, yes, I'd love these to rust out on the south end and blow out of the road on the south end, and then we could back build this thing to size, right? But it's happening up north where the flows are. As it comes to Devil's Lake, it all lays, so you're not seeing that pressure behind it. You don't need 10 foot culverts down here because as it gets down here, there's 20 some feet of drop and five, six miles up there in elevation. So that's why you see the problem. It just basically backs up and just lays in the base and we're up there. It's coming with so much velocity and force that that's, and then if there's rust or separations and culverts, they just, they can't take it. And then that's when it's time to make sure that we are meeting the standards. So we are not liable for backing water up. and holding water at our roadway track.

Do we need something more than a culvert in this area?

I don't know. That's what the study will tell us. And if we get a FEMA event in here and we've got federal aid money on some of these roads, then that will help pay for some of these washouts we're seeing. But as of right now, we are just, we want to get moving on that road so we can get it open. So any of this stuff that we go through at this point would be eligible for reimbursement at the rate, if we get the disaster to come through and funding. I reached out to Fisher. I haven't been able to get a hold of them. I reached out to Paul and they just didn't have the time right now to send a crew up here from West Fargo. He said they would if a push comes to shove. So I was going to try to get Fisher and work with him since it's in Cavalier County line. He wasn't in the office and he was going to call me yesterday and he hasn't gotten back to me yet, but I wouldn't move forward with it until I'm just making sure it's okay to move forward with it and I'll get a price for the next meeting.

For my clarity, Jason, you're talking about liability, but the reason that this statute is set up to give us liability is because the point of the study is to show us what the highest water 25-year flood event will be so that we're building according to that. We're doing as much as we can to prepare for future flooding events with this study.

But that being said, in my office, in my desk, it's to keep us from those phone calls where I'm going to sue you every day. Sure. You're flooding me out or you're holding water back. I go through that 50 times a day. But the immunity part is because we are doing everything we possibly can. Exactly. Yes. Thank you for clarifying that. That is the right. That is the. So are we good moving forward with contacting Fisher and seeing what we need to do there? Are we okay with that? All right. We had some property next to the old MDU, Anytime Fitness. We had some trees taken out. We had that done. They were in the power lines. I got to get together with Daniel and maybe Candy after this meeting when we get a minute. I was going to before the meeting and see what we can do with that strip of property there.

If we want to try to sell that to the adjacent homeowner or whatever, we don't need little... Well, I think it's been on that foreclosure list, hasn't it? Nobody's bid on it.

Okay. And the major problem there is that there's so many leads against the property.

Well, I think it's too small to put a structure on.

But haven't we been selling it for what the leads on the property have been or attempting to sell it for the leads on the property?

I believe that the city had put... that large amount of the special because there was a house on there that needed to be torn down because of a fire or it was condemned or something. And that's why the price is so

high so um i think we need to start at the city side yeah because i mean because it's been on there since 2018. yeah do we spend a couple thousand dollars on property that we have no interest in is silly too so i'll talk with them and see if we can get that figured out Last summer, we had started looking at lawnmowers, and then life happened. So we finally got that done. I sent you guys the quotes. This is for mowing the cemeteries and the shopyards. Napa was the low quota on those, all the same size and all that. So asking for a motion for the $10,750 to move forward with the lawnmower purchase. So moved.

Second. We have a motion, we have a second to move forward for 10,750 on the onward purchase. All those in favor by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Motion carries.

The culverts up on that low water crossing. that we ordered earlier are here. They've been delivered. There's five 72 inch pipe that are going in there. And that was the recommendation we had when we had it looked at and studied last year. So that local was for 17,500 from DS construction. So asking for a motion to move ahead with that. So moved.

Second.

We have a motion, we have a second to move forward. with this crossing. Quotes? All in favor by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Same sign. Motion carries.

We're looking at purchasing a flatbed trailer so we can help haul some of these culverts. We've rented one a couple times from Ironhide here recently. We got digging around and in Carrington they have one. They were the low quarter at $18,600. So we would like to move forward on that and purchase that.

Move to approve. Second. We got a motion and a second to purchase. You want to get a roll call so we can pay for it?

Yeah, I suppose we'll have to.

Roll call, please. And that's for $18,600? Yes. Okay. Yeah. Otherwise, he'll just be coming back with it.

Hortus?

Aye.

Frith?

Aye.

Brown?

Aye.

Wilhelmy?

Aye.

Volk?

Aye. We'll jump ahead to the DS Construction and get their installs done for those Lillie Hofflot and Lyon culverts. I'd like to ask for the motion to pay for that. No, that was $5,000. Quote on that.

So moved. Second.

We got a motion. We got a second to pay the ES construction $5,000. Correct? Yep. Roll call, please. Otis. Aye.

Britt.

Aye.

Brown.

Aye.

Wilhelmy.

Aye. Bull. Aye. The North Dakota DOT sent the final progressive statement for the local share payment on the 2022 FEMA projects, and that's for $9,179.99. So we ask you for a motion to pay that as well to the North Dakota DOT. So moved.

Second. In a motion, we got a second to pay the $9,179.99 for the final progressive creation of statement. Roll call, please.

Otis. Aye. Brett.

Aye.

Brown.

Aye.

Wilhelmy.

Aye. Volk. Aye. And the last thing that I will talk on business, I'll go back to the flooding time. When I came in last meeting, I had asked for $14,650 for painting. That was inaccurate. I guess I was only doing half of the lane. I wasn't doing the other shoulder lane. So when I looked at that and talked with Dolman and I reached out to my portfolio holders and state's attorney to ask how to correct that. So it was recommended I bring it back. The actual amount for painting for both shoulder stripes in the center line will be $29,300. So I need to ask to amend that earlier motion or however I need to do that and get this as the amount.

And based on our conversations, Jason, I just want to be clear that this was budgeted for the cost.

It was, yeah. You just had done the numbers wrong last time. Right, exactly. I took the lane footage times the cost, but I needed to double it. And I caught it as I was reading the number here that day. I stumbled on the number. And then I got back to my office and I was like, there's no way it was that inexpensive. Well, yeah, it was because I only figured it at half.

So just a motion essentially withdrawing the previous resolution to pay the 14,650, is that correct? And then to pay the new amounts.

29,300.

Would be appropriate.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to amend

of the painting from the last quote to 29 300 all those favor by saying aye aye all the polls name sign motion carries yeah and that was the thin left overlay projects that we did this um which are completed so ramsey county four uh prairie road the mile by rocket and the woods rutting road are all done and As far as overlaying, they have some shoulder stuff here and there, some graveling, some approaches to fix and things like that. But overall, the projects are pretty well done. Now we can get into more of what's been going on the last week. I had a Fenster Slough update on here. I'll start with that. We got about a 14 or 15 inch hole on the west side, right on the asphalt edge. In diameter, I'm not sure, probably three feet deep or so. Pat Tronson and I don't know who else, if there's other local residents, they filled the hole with some rocks and some different things for riprap. The elevation of that road, we worked on that this morning, actually, trying to get some elevations there. I got a hold of Paul from KLJ. He said we're sitting at the asphalt top of 1498 there. Um, so that's the road elevation height, the, uh, trigger point and the overtopping just over 1498 or just under 1499. He said the trigger point there obviously would be that 1500 elevation. So I want to get that to you guys as well. But my update was the hole on the shoulder and then the ever encroaching water there, it's getting closer and closer. So. So I have to see if, I don't know, Commissioner Frith has heard anything back from the state on that yet, or? No.

The water elevation over there today is 1497.66. So less than a half a foot from the road. Yeah.

Yeah, and you can see it. And like I say, now we're starting to take holes above the riprap. That hole that you had called about is over top of the riprap and then next to the asphalt. But it has been filled. They filled it yesterday. So that was my fenced or slew update. I guess we don't have a whole lot of update there. Hopefully we get something figured out there very, very soon.

And then we'll go into this last week.

As everyone knows, they had the heavy rains up north. We touched on a little bit ago with the washed out culvert on the county line. Speaking of the county line, that stuff is, even though it's our part to maintain, that will be cost shared with Cavalier County. So the hydraulic study, the plates, all that. So we currently have, as of this morning, last night, we were able to get four miles back up and running. As far as we have known to us, and hopefully through the emergency services, we have 33 closures right now, affecting 47 miles of road. We're closing 47 miles off of road up in the Royal, all the way over to Fancher, down to Penn. And this morning I was just called as I was on my way here.

There's more spots in Hope on 53rd Street now that are taking water over.

So that's crept up into the driving surface there now. So we haven't been able to look at that. Jacob was going there as I was coming here to take a look at that. So we made a trip to Jamestown. We picked up extra barricades, extra signs. We got four big culverts washed. We have the county line. And we have three number nine that are on the county system. Number nine, as you guys know, is a federal aid road. So we'll be working with them. Yesterday in the meeting, I notified Brandon. We have daily debriefings through Chris, the emergency manager, and many different agencies to keep everybody up to date on what's going on. I'm sure they'll talk more on that later. But we are trying to start to fix the ones we can fix and get the miles open we can get. And obviously, we're documenting keeping material costs, labor, signage, culverts, all that stuff. We are currently working towards the goal of having everybody's damages. They've told us to get damages together from the townships and the county for the rain event and the flooding. So we're asking, as of right now, we're still asking that that stuff be turned in by Friday, July 10th at three o'clock to our office. That's all the townships as well, because our deadline for this was to have it in by the 15th. We have requested a little more time as myself and I think Mr. Jagger and Mr. Frith and everyone that's been involved in all the meetings. I don't know if that's enough time to see the impact of what it's going to have in Devils Lake. I mean, we're just seeing the water getting here now. So, you know, it's just getting through the Garski area. I think Commissioner Prith can talk a little bit about some of those flows there. We've seen a huge increase in stark weather.

That's what's here. It's not what's still to come.

Right. That's just all pushing its way into the system now. If you've been up to Webster, you can see the flooding going on across there. And that's probably going to get worse or magnify as this thing moves south. So hopefully, and it did sound like yesterday, there might be a possibility to get a little more time just to see. They want to just get these estimates. I mean, granted, these are estimates. They just need to get them in. But we need a little more time, hopefully, so we can see if there's any impact down here. Or at least leave the date open so we can add whichever way they want to, however they want to work it.

Can you request to keep it open?

We have.

And I've made it clear, and I'm sure you guys have as well, too, that we just need a little more time if we can. But we don't know if they're going to be able to. They're not going to be able to do it. They're closing it off on the 15th.

Well, we'll have some in, you know, obviously.

We're not going to know what it's going to do. Yesterday, I think, I don't know if you were on it, if you were with the Sherpa team, he had said he was going to possibly extend that when he started talking.

So I'll let you check with him and get back to me on that. Yeah.

I think it might have been Darren.

It wasn't Darren. On Friday, Chris and myself, the National Guard, came up out of Bismarck. We had Lieutenant Russell here. We toured a lot of different flood spots. We were everywhere from Ontario to Royal to the county line, 66th and 67th Street. They walked through doing assessments, checking water depths. We got some pictures and things with them. Like they said, they can't really make the decisions on what's going to happen, but they were here doing a visual and physical assessment of the damages we're seeing and the flooding we're seeing. So that was nice just to get them up here. They were able to come right away. So that's what we did on Friday. Any questions around for me until we later? I'll stay, but I mean, if there's anything right now before we. Move to the next. Thanks Jason. Yeah, it's been a busy week. Thank you.

Hey, I believe. We can move on into. the 830 Ramsey County North Snag and Clear hearing. John, if you want to come up to the podium and talk about the Snag and Clear.

We had received a petition for a Snag and Clear for Ontario Township that was named Ramsey County Snag and Clear North. It basically goes from Rohrville up to right before the lot and fully converges with the ed horn. The petitioners came through. I don't have all the details on here. It is a viable project, so the board proceeded to take and push it to the public meeting. We actually had a meeting at a farmer's shop with landowners last Tuesday to explain the whole thing and did not hear any dissenting comment, but I'll let the public just talk about that. and it looks like it could be very well help the that roerville area and north so any questions any further explanation that you would like for me before you open up to public comment anybody have any questions for john And I'll just remind the commission that this is a snag and clear that, oh, we did talk to Fish and Wildlife, and as of right now, I'm not going to put any words in Chris's mouth, but I was not told of any concerns for this particular proposed project from the Fish and Wildlife.

And the snag and clear is according to this map, right?

I believe so. It should be the one that you were sent in your packet. Yep, yep. That's all I have on this. Anybody else has any other questions? What's the projected cost? Stacy? What was the payback time on it? Do we have that? Do you have that? About 13 years.

So looking at this map, John, so each one of these squares is a mile, correct me if I'm wrong. We're looking at one, two, three, four, five, about six and a half miles of snagging clear.

I believe so.

I just want to make sure that I'm tracking it correctly.

And Mr. Johnson from Johnson Excavating is here, I believe. So if you have any questions on the actual work to be done, you can ask him on that. Because I know he's been out there, done a pretty good job of looking at what needs to be done out there.

So with all the water that we do have sitting out there, I know you've been driving around looking at some of this in fall. Yes. I haven't had the time to run up there. How do you feel if we do this snag and clear, is it gonna affect, the reason I'm looking at this six miles, are we gonna affect pushing water so fast that we wash out more culverts or this will be a timeline where hopefully this water isn't like it is right now before this would be done?

I wouldn't, as far as washing out culverts, I don't believe so.

Like I don't want to create more problems than we already have.

Understood. There is that the private dike on woods has been, they are relieving pressure on that. And so this would help with that water to move through instead of spreading out along the way, just to clean the vegetation out. So it's not to drain it. It's to take it, just allow the water to move more freely instead of backing up, having to go through the vegetation. Correct.

Only a few come up to the microphone. Please and thank you.

So all the research, I went down after that hard rain up north and we're feeding a 36 inch culvert into the coulee and that was running full before the hard rain and after we still had about five feet of elevation change in that first thousand feet. So we were five feet above that. So we're not adding water. We're putting the water, getting the water into the ditch off of the land and off of the roads. But we won't, it'll be a longer flow through that 36, but we are changing the volume of the water going into the coulee. We're just pulling it. And that's what, I just don't want to change the volume. So there won't be any culvert changes on the, on the end of the project that increase the volume of water. It'll increase how long that water flows at that rate by putting it into a drain and off the land.

It would just basically make the flow go the full summer versus all at once.

Yeah. This culvert, the last culvert in the project stayed above the coulee elevation through all of that activity up north, you know, the hard rains of four foot. Yeah, so I monitored it many times after the, I looked at it right before those hard rains and then many times to see, because I expected it to back up. the coolie to come up and start forcing water backwards. And it never got to that point with that four and a quarter inches. So we don't foresee any negative effects besides the long-term flow rate and condensing the water on the farmland, so. Thank you. Thanks.

No.

Anybody else from the public have any comment? The only thing I ask is you come up to the podium when you speak, please. Go ahead.

Go ahead.

Snag and clear. The first page says the board should encourage all landowners to retain water on the land to the maximum extent possible and sell water management. Well, that sounds pretty respectful and considerate of your neighbor. But when that water gets into a stream and impacts somebody 25 miles away, that consideration kind of disappears. And, but Lake County has declared our area out there wasteland. So it's like a big dump reservoir. You go on second page, attorney, right? Givens, you still have him on retainer? On the second page, Givens. The law firm says, snagging and clearing can only be utilized for maintaining natural water courts and cannot be used for any grain construction project. Snagging and clearing projects do not involve construction and draining as it is limited to maintaining courts. Now, snagging and clearing definition Nagging and clearing means the removal and disposable fallen trees and associated drift along the channel. Well, I would imagine that the fallen tree and maybe some branches and leaves. If you go to the back page, two, three weeks ago, I went out to look at the That's your slew. And I continue driving north in number four until I come along the roadway. And I see there's a couple backhoes out there. And this is the Newbridge, snag and clear. Probably six miles, I don't know, five, six miles from the terminus. Okay, you look at that. top picture, you can see a back hole there. And off to the left, you see a tree. Now, if you look anyplace else on those pictures, I don't see any trees. It kind of reminds me of Durbin when he was cleaning out the toilet coolies to find out. And he went down 17 feet and he found a tree. It looks like that's what they're doing here. Well, if we dig deep enough, we'll find it. So I went back past this area about 10 days later. And that back hole in the upper photo was about a half a mile from a body of water. And that had finally connected. And that channel was running water. You've got to float a kayak on an inner tube. You're going all the way from there to Church's Ferry if you wanted to. Now that's not, in my opinion, that's not a snag and clear. Your attorney has defined pretty much what a snag and clear is. I think the state's attorney should look at it and see what He thinks about it. Putting you guys, you're not, you're not doing a snag and clear. You're breaking the law. And ignorance is not bliss. You know what the century code is? You know what the law is? You're an excavator. You know what the law is? That is not defined as a snag and clear. you got the state water commission coming up here in a couple days or wednesday i think it is there's a vegan approach them and see what their take is on take a tour out there and we'll take you out tour out west and see what uh my neighbor is trying to protect a couple hundred acres of crop and uh Cooley keeps, you know, not the Cooley, the reservoir keeps raging. We've got 2,500 CFS coming in, and they're pumping out around 100. That's 5,000 acre-feet a day. Anyway, that's my little point.

Thanks, Garland.

Go ahead. And I just want to address the comments made. The project he's talking about had nothing to do with Newbury State. That project was done last year. I do believe he is possibly referencing the temporary outlet we have for Fox Lake that was constructed this spring. No, but we finished our project for Newbury last year. This year, if you were out there and there was any work being done, that was a totally different project. That was not... Nope. I believe, based on where you're talking, I believe that was a temporary outlet put to Fox Lake that was all agreed to. It has a timeline, and it was done to save for earlier this month. I believe the project you are discussing here is a temporary drain to save that section of four. That's why you saw construction. The culverts were set at an elevation. That is a different project than a snake.

That was only to take the pressure off of four so that we didn't lose the road.

And that was... a drain that was an actual drain constructed temporarily for the road that was nothing to do with any snag and clear project for that yes so i believe you know i can't speak for exactly where you were but anything done this year was nothing to do with the snag and clear project in our area i know i'm pretty sure i know exactly where it is as soon as you went down through fox lake you came up the hill You saw him on the west side of the road. And that's that is a that is a drain. That's why it looks like a drain. It's a temporary done. It's done in conjunction with the county and all the approval to save the road right there. They have done. No, I do understand that. And we're just trying to keep the road above water. We're not draining any more than saving that road. But I do believe, I just wanted to clarify that that is not anything to do with the snag and clear. It's not a permanent structure. No, and what they're talking about here today is not going to have any work like that done.

Thank you.

Any other comments? Hearing none, John, how do you want to proceed with this or where are we at?

Go ahead. Hearing no other comments, I will call on the water board to take and either make a motion to approve the proposed snag and clear or to deny it. Is there a motion? We have a motion. Is there a second? We have a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. Stacey.

Hi.

Motion approved.

Thanks John.

That's a portion of the Ramsey County snake clear for Ontario, right? We need the commission. So we got the, we got the motion and the approval from water board. Now we move on to the county for a motion. to approve of what they voted on, correct? Correct.

Based on the conversation I've heard and the conversation from Water Board approving, I would make that motion to move forward with a snag in clarity.

We have a motion, do we have a second? I'll second. We have a motion, we have a second. All in favor by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. That concludes the portion for the snag and clear. Moving on to unfinished business. Thanks, everybody. First item on unfinished business is the 2027 budget.

but go ahead, might as well finish that. We had our regular meeting this morning at 7 a.m. and we, have another proposed mega that are coming up for going south from rotorville to highway 2. that public hearing there was no changes requested by the petitioners they are happy i will get make sure i bring the numbers to the next or to the public meeting which is scheduled for the 21st of july at 6 p.m i'll have those numbers for you the cost and the payback Also, we have another snag and clear in that same prairie area from Stevens Township, and they did a little talking. The petitioners talked to the engineer and have got their assessment area based and determined and the route. That was just approved today to come to a public meeting, so we will have that at a future date. We have had two proposals or proposals from two lending institutions to finance these projects, First United and Western. And the first one that was, or the one that we had to take and approve today was the Fancher one that was approved a month or two ago. And we are going with Western State Bank. We had one stream crossings. We had a request from a landowner on Cavanaugh Lake to take and reimburse him and install the culvert on Cavanaugh Lake, the Pills Cavanaugh Lake. So we are taking and actually getting some more numbers, or we're going to get that done, I should say. If anybody's not familiar, Jeff, help me out here. What was the project called? When they dug from Morrison to...

I think they called it Channel B. It's a Webster coulee. Comes out of Morrison Lake. And goes from Morrison Lake over to Dry Lake. And Kavanaugh was... There was a berm constructed there. And a culvert with a flap gate.

to allow fill into Kavanaugh lake and then to prevent an overflow from that and and that culvert has rusted out the flat gate is still usable so the landlord came in and asked the water board would take him reimburse him for the work done to clear that and then also to install the new culverts and he brought in the 19 whatever year plants that that showed it was part of that project so the water board is going to take and pay for that to fix that also we had a couple water complaints that we were dealing with and some comments about the fenster slew public meeting with the state water commission so other than that it was a really boring morning So, any questions from the commission, anybody have any questions.

So, with all these stinking players, John, I understand that they're a very important tool in your toolbox. But you see, what's the 1 that you're just recently. Approved it's a 13 year repayment plan correct? It would be a much better tool if we could go through the steps to get those things as assessment drains. And you and I both know that how much work those are. But it would be a different mechanism and a longer term project for the water boards to consider. Just my thoughts on it. It then brings that assessment or the funding to a greater level than 50 cents an acre, but it also puts it to a board of the people that are affected and instead it's just five of us or the five of you making those determinations.

Totally agree with you. And that conversation has been had on every single one of these snag and clears with petitioners. For example, the Clara Bartlett, that conversation was had with the Nelson County Water Board. Nelson County does not want to go down that road right now. Some of these, they are considering it. but the water board can also check in to see if we can initiate an assess grade. My only concern is if the water board initiates it. do we have the landowner's support? And we don't want to go down that road if we don't have the landowner's support. I would much rather not come to you guys for staying clear and have assessed drains so that we can just assess what needs to be done for maintenance. But if we don't have the landowner's support, we can't get it passed. So trust me, the conversations are being had and are being had, but until the landowners want to go that route, I think we're stuck with this snag and clear and renew at the end. But the one thing is, it is a tool that at least when these roads are flooding, that we can at least try to help them out with their roads. So just an FYI, but yes, that conversation is being had every single time now.

Thank you.

Yep. Anything else from the commission? All right. Thank you, John.

moving back into the talk of the 2027 budget yeah sorry about that Does anybody have anything they want to start looking at for the 2027 budget?

on budget, just for my budget specifically, since we're talking about it. The only changes that I see occurring are proposed step increases, just so everybody's clear. I'm down one assistant state's attorney and one paralegal at the moment. So my staff has had to step up to make sure that we continue to cover the caseload. and the work around the county. So I'm recommending all of my staff for a step increase with the cost of living increase as well. Otherwise, my budget is staying the same other than the State's Attorney's Association, which is part of my budget paying for myself and the assistants has increased their dues for the first time I believe it's almost two decades. It's been $400 for a state's attorney for that entire time. They voted to increase it at the February meeting to $1,000 for the state's attorney, and I believe $400 for each assistant. That's just to ensure that we not only can provide meaningful continuing legal education opportunities for state's attorneys across the state, but also have a better handle on advocacy at the legislature. Our major issues are often getting Century Code corrected, mostly in relation to the criminal title of the Century Code, but advocating for Uh, I think attorney general, uh, Wrigley's, uh, truth in sentencing initiative has had a large amount of support from the state's attorney's association. Um, essentially trying to ensure that the general public is being served by the criminal justice system. Uh, those who are unconvicted serving the entireties of their sentences, or at least having better understanding of what those sentences mean. And the State's Attorneys Association in the past has been behind the ball in relation to legislative action and trying to get things changed for the benefit of the people of North Dakota. If we're not advocating appropriately, nobody else will do it on our behalf because we're the ones with the expertise and previously I believe it's John Best, and I may be misquoting that, was our advocate with the legislature, and he's since retired, so we're having to find new advocacy. And without somebody who's been doing it for a long time, doing it for a much discounted rate, it's going to be more expensive moving forward, as all things are these days. So, my budget will not be increasing by leaps and bounds. I'm going to see where I can reduce in other places to keep my department close to that 3% increase. Since my budget is almost entirely, I think it's probably close to 85% of it is all salary. It's going to be hard for me to stay under that 3% without cutting into my very limited operations cost. So just to give you an update on where my budget is at, I don't have specific numbers, but those will be submitted by the next commission meeting.

Thank you, Daniel. Anybody else?

Good morning, gentlemen. Speaking on budgets, just like Daniel, I read a pretty tight budget. Usually I'm in the red. But this flooding has really opened my eyes for any product. We need a common operating picture. I've spoke with Jeff a little bit. He's been on these meetings. We need a system where we can all see the same picture. The state's really been begging for mapping software. It shows where all these roads are closed. I brought up, there's a system called ATAC. It's an Android-based system. We can get other things on there as well. If we house the server locally, we can use it, and we kind of are the gatekeepers on that. Um, the military uses that program very well. Uh, that's where I've been working a lot with it and we know that we can get it from the top down, um, a very, um, unique operating picture without jumping through radios and through a whole bunch of technology restraints. So it's something I'm looking for. I don't have numbers. I'm super busy. So I just want to have that conversation out there. Onyx was really helpful too. I have the budget for that currently, but if we get into an ATAC server or something of the likes, it's going to be a little bit more increase on my budget. It shouldn't be a lot. Something I'm looking for. Thank you.

I have a question for you. That's something that would be.

I think getting out worksheets to different departments so they have an idea. I think as a cost of living or salaries are concerned, we need to come up with a number for departments to work with.

I think that would be a big step forward.

Whether or not we're going to go from a no percent to a 3% or anything like that for cost of living increases or salaries increases. I think we're in the day and age of, with the caps that were passed down, I don't know if that's gonna be necessarily attainable. So I think moving forward, I think we're gonna have some probably some pretty significant discussions. When you're looking at small budgets that we have, like Daniel said, 85%, 85, 90% of his budget is salaries and benefits. And so when we're looking at cap and things are not spending anymore, where do you find those reductions or those savings at? And I think in the past, they've either done away with raises and we've had our departments wear multiple hats. I don't think there's any more hats to be put on the heads of our departments. And so it's going to be a tough nut to crack moving forward. I'm glad Representative Fralick is here because she is something that she needs to take back to the legislature is that these caps have created a real burden for political subdivisions moving forward. And when there's a cost savings at the state, sometimes that burden gets placed back upon local political subdivisions. For instance, I think our tax director is going to come in and ask for some mailing services or mailing support moving forward because of all the different requirements that are put forth on their office on trying to get out various or notices to taxpayers within our jurisdiction that are something that wasn't necessarily done before. And so those costs have come back to counties and political subdivisions and departments within our counties that we have to incur additional costs moving forward. or additional responsibilities and duties that weren't necessarily there before. But I think setting those numbers up as far as wages and cost of living increases and then getting those worksheets out to the department heads would be a really good first step. Once again, we find ourselves with budget meetings. Jeff, when are the caps put in place? What year? Just this last session. This last session. Yep.

So we really haven't functioned a year without them?

No. This will be the first year that we'll see the pain of the 3%.

Co-association of counties, what do they say about them?

Are we supposed to manage them?

Yes, you can. They really did. They didn't have a direction. They came into the legislative session and had some testimony in opposition to them and the constraints that they would be placed upon local political subdivisions. But at the end of the day, it was get on board or face consequences kind of thing.

And this was in response to a very concerning

All together.

proposed by the general public, so. This was the Attorney General. Essentially, his. He had a lot of support for this bill to address the general public.

And certainly from the small rural counties, we had a significant concern of eliminating property taxes and going to having to go to Bismarck for a new motor grader or something that we're always in competition with the Burleys and the Castles and the Grand Forks and Warren counties of the world and the small rural communities. Yeah. So that's something that we vehemently opposed, were opposed to, but you know, nobody wants to see property taxes increase and you know that's something that we've tried really hard to prevent um having increases across the board on those so but i'm not sure where where we find those cuts at well i think we definitely need to know what the operating costs are and i know

Daniel, you said 85% of yours is wages, but the operating costs, we need to know what the base operating cost is before there's any step increases, before there's any pay increases, because that's what you go off of before you can do that. If I'm running a business, I need to know what my operating costs are first. If I come out here today and say, yep, go ahead, 3%, we're going to give a step increase. All we're going to do is cut other things out of the budget to not be able to operate. Because I guarantee you every manager sitting, listening to this today, are going to be looking at to give the 3% raise and to do a step increase, which increases the 3%. We'll do, we tell Candy, okay, Candy, we're going to give you a 3% raise. But by the way, you don't get two boxes of paper. We need to know the base before we can say anything on raises and step increases. I need to know what is the no shit to keep the doors open here at Ramsey County. If it's $1 million and no matter what, I have to have $1 million to keep the doors open. And then we need to, my opinion, and then that's when I need to come back and say, okay, Jeff,

We're at a million dollars right now.

I'm sorry, but the only thing we can give is a 1%. And I'm not suggesting that. I'm just saying we need to know what the base cost is going to be before we can decide of where we can go.

We also need employees to keep the door open.

And that's going to play a part. For years, people stopped. That part sits too short.

And you have employee... What services do you want to eliminate?

You're going to have employee burnout. Already are experiencing employee burnout. I'm just catching up here.

I would guess there's no guidelines coming from the state at all to set these college budgets up, is there? Because you can't... No paperwork that has come down. No. No. BECAUSE WE'VE CUT THE WHOLE COUNTY PEOPLE AND EVERYTHING AND TRY TO DECIDE HOW THE BUDGET WORKS.

RIGHT.

YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATORS, NOT TO PICK ON THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES SITTING HERE TODAY, BUT I MEAN, THEY KIND OF LET BISMARCK IN A HURRY AND SAID, HERE, COME ON. IT'S YOUR GODDAMN HITTING, YOU KNOW? SO... Employees are going to have to get behind the commission and help us in deciding what we need. We need a bottom, I guess. Hopefully we don't have to cut it. I haven't even looked at the budget. I should look at last year's budget and maybe possibly could take some cut.

I know I've had conversation. If we have outside entities that are getting money, and this is my opinion, there is no way I'm going to give an outside entity money before I take money away from our employees. And these outside entities need to realize that. This is not a joke. This is 3%. And before I come back and tell our employees at Ramsey County, oh, by the way, I'm going to give $100,000 across the street and tell my employees, I'm sorry, but we can't give you a raise because we're going to just donate this money. That is absolutely not going to get my vote because I'm with you, Jeff. We need to keep the doors open. We need to keep the people that we have. But then these other things that we're giving money to need to realize that that is probably what's going to have to get cut. You know, is it the right thing to do for our employees? Absolutely. Is someone going to feel the pain? Absolutely. And I don't think we're just seeing this in the counties. I think we're seeing this across the U.S. The money is not there. And the people, the public doesn't want to pay more. But they still want to have the same benefits. Well, you can't have both. There's got to be a breaking point. And sometimes if we don't have a service and people see that we don't have a service, maybe that opens people's eyes. And it's like, okay, I got to give a little to get them.

You know, you're seeing it across the state currently with counties having these budget meetings on what they're cutting and where they're cutting at. And that's the outside entities that are, they're going to feel that pain.

And we don't have a choice. Yep. I'm not, like you said, Jason, I'm not sitting here willing to say, I'm sorry, I got to let an employee go because I'm giving $100,000 across the street. I'm just not willing to do that. So I don't want our employees to think that we're sitting here and we're thinking about not giving a raise or cutting a position because I don't think that's what any of us here are thinking.

No.

We're just thinking of where we can take money so that we have the opportunity to still be able to give the raises and keep the people that we have.

I know I gave out a preliminary budget earlier. We had talked about graders, purchases in there. I've went back and visited with the current company we're working with, which is Caterpillar, Butler. With those, I'm going to extend two of the warranties on those instead of purchasing three. And I will try to get to a purchasing one plan with whoever's... We'll do bids still. Have a rotation. Right. And try to do one a year instead of three and then three because three now is over a million dollars to buy three, even with our trade values. And like I said at the last meeting, it's not just about grading roads, which it is, but in the winter, that's the snow removal for all these rural residents. So it's not something that we want to see go away, but we might have to run extra year or two but anyway they're going to get together we're going to get together a warranty option to cover the major components because that's all they can they can't do bumper to bumper like we have now but we can still cover engine transmission and most then get rid of the highest outward machine and then try to work on a plan of rotating that way but that would in my budget alone could look at potentially saving us about $600,000 this year that I had.

It's a plan. Great. It's an option. We got to think of it.

So just so you know, like from my department and obviously Daniel, Chris, we are, and I think there's quite a few people looking at ways to do things different and continue on, but just maybe do things a little different, stretch some things out and spread it out over years instead of three and three. That's a big, It's a big purchase. And I know I was set that way because of the road plan. I get all that, but it's probably time to change that. The cost is just getting so expensive.

And I think sitting in this position, I think that's what we're asking of the people that work for us. There's going to be some changes. There's going to be some painful changes that people aren't going to be happy. And I tell you what, run for this position and put yourself in this situation. It's not easy. I mean, just listening today, just listen and look at the crowd when you're having to vote on a snag and clear. It's affecting people and it's helping people. And how do you have the happy me? And I think that's where we're at with this 3%. It's going to be tough. It's not going to be easy to say, I'm sorry, but this is where we're

Jason and I had that kind of conversation a couple months ago. We talked about things to keep the change to do a savings like you just talked about.

And Jason did it last year with one of his employees. You were able to make two employees get a little bit more money and you got rid of an employee realistically. You didn't fire anybody or didn't let anyone go. It was just the position was open. And you made things work. You gave a little bit more money to the individuals that saved money. But is that things maybe we have to do? You know, I don't know. At that time, it worked, right? And it's working now.

Yeah.

And, you know, there might be some things that we try and they don't work. And we have to revert back to where we're at. Until we see numbers from the departments, I don't know if we're going to be able to really make that decision. Personally, I would say make a couple different budgets. Okay, this is what it will look like at this. This is what it looks like at this. And then that's when we're going to have to see where the big number comes in. Are we within that 3% tolerance? If we are, great. But if we're not, that's when the hard decisions are going to come.

Absolutely the most comfortable time for county governments is the next two months.

Just so that, you know, I'm sure all the money is thrilled of the flooding that we have ongoing into the picture. We don't even know there's going to be money available for that. Right. That comes out of the county. If we have to sit back and foot the bill for all this damage, we're really in trouble.

Yeah.

We only have so much reserve. You know, and I know Jeff and I have had this conversation several times. What is enough reserve? You know, I know some people get upset because we have some money in the bank. But what do you do for the situation that we're in now? You got to go out and you got to fix what we can because life still has to happen.

And you see we're just approving today, within our bills, 2022 FEMA funding. So it's a long process that drags out for years to come. When you have these type of natural disasters, they take forever to overcome.

So last slide, what do you think will happen in the month? No matter what, we're footing the bill until then.

We can't leave the roads untouched. There's no way. I mean, I always... tell the people that aren't affected by it you know because not everybody affected by it but what if if i went out here and i take a cut on highway two who's affected i bet we'd have a lot more screaming than we have on what you say 30 shut down let's just take cut out highway two for two months and say i'm sorry it's not going to be open because there's no money You know, these people got to look at there's livelihoods out there with the 33 roads that are closed right now.

What direction do we want to give departments today moving forward with 27 budget?

I think they put together, put together their budget. put a step increase in there, do a percent, a 2%, a 3%, and bring that so we can see the numbers. Then we can make that decision. Because what happens if we come back and we're at the base? Okay, now we gotta look at what do we cut so that we can give the raise or the step increase so that we have the numbers right there. I know it's a little bit more work. I know we're asking. spreadsheet does wonders once you have your base the one percent and the two percent three percent the computer does that work for

There's a couple things that we need in order to do that.

We need to have the step scale for the current year from HR in order to be able to put that in front of you. I've not received what the step scale is at the moment. I believe Candy is working with Ms. Backengard in order to get that done. And then additionally, I don't know that we have... the way the uh house bill was written imposing the three percent caps is we can carry forward uh whatever we don't use for a three-year period so i'm not sure if we used every bit of that three percent last year or uh where exactly we landed for the 2026 budget but that's certainly not that we need to use every single bit every year if we can uh, cut back and carry forward in case we need to increase for other things that that's an option that's available to the commission as well. Um, but there there's some variables that, um, That we don't have yet. Well, that's why I just am recommending my staff for step increases.

So when you're asking step increases, correct me if I'm wrong, the step increase hasn't changed from year to year to year. The only thing that would change is the 3% that gets added to that step increase. I mean, I'm not a genius, but I can take the 3% that you guys got last year and add it to the step increase, and that's going to be where you're at today. So hear me out. If we did that step increase last year, once the pay increases went out, how did that not get put forward and say, okay, this is our new pay table? You know what I'm saying, Candy?

Because when different people were hired,

And I get when someone leaves, they start back at the bottom scale. So that throws it off a little bit. But either way, we should have a pay table. You're telling me that everybody's on a different pay table that works in this courthouse? I thought that we voted on this like four years ago and recreated our pay tables. Shouldn't that be the standard? I mean, are we not following the standard of what we voted on? People are making their own. what the hell are we sitting here as a commission that people are making their own? We voted on it, I know for a fact, three years ago. And I can pull it up because I have it saved. I know we have a new HR since then.

Because I know yours hasn't changed.

You know, we voted on that, whatever that would have been. because you're maxed out in steps, right? No. I'm not. Last year, you would have got your step at what the model could be, plus your 3%.

When departments come in and request or demand or whatever the terminology that you want to use, and it doesn't fall within the That step, that pay step.

So that's what we're getting. I'll use this as an example. That's where we're getting into problems with the 3%.

Exactly.

That's where we're getting our budget out of line. So if we have, here's the line in the sand. I don't care what department you are, that's the line in the sand. There's no department that is different than the next. We have to follow that line in the sand. Someone can't come in here and demand more than the other department, because then it's going to cause fighting in our workplace. I guarantee you that will happen. We have to follow the guidelines that we put out. That's what you're looking at. So that's what the HR is fixing?

Well, we're trying. Because... Well, and part of the issue...

It's a mess. Part of the issue is that we have these step scales. I have it for my office from last year's budgetary cycle. And I... I'm not a math person. So part of my issue is I don't want to be doing my own calculations and presenting numbers to the commission. So the scale is not based on a cost of living. It doesn't factor in a cost of living increase year after year. That is done on a plus 3%. And so, again, it's just I... How does it not?

How does the step not include if I come up here and I vote 3%, if the government votes 3% on my wage where I work today, that gets tallied onto the steps for everyone. You take the 3% and you put it across the board. Why is it not? Why is it not? If the wage today is $20 an hour, and we do a 3%, and let's say it's $20.30, next year it's $20.30, and all your steps, let's say you got step one through 20, each step would have went up 3%. So the following year, let's say you do a 3%, you would add 3% to every one of those steps again.

Where's the money starting? because you're making less and the guy who gets the one percent step at the end of his step scale but they kind of balance because of where he's at probably versus where he's at or she's at so it's not only it's not getting various steps but it's a taper it tapers off so it wasn't We didn't use simple math. We had to put a formula together so that we could sit here and argue about it. But to be on the step, they should have fell 14 cents low. Well, Brian left. Kevin had their tight, Brian tight. And Nicole wasn't here for the budget. And we wanted to get them $25. So that number 45 dollars an hour doesn't say that's where it's set. So my board has a party of 14 or 16 cents or whatever for that. So that might be adjusted to the next year to get them on to that step. But I will, now that I understand it, I will understand that when I get my budget, they'll be on a step, my own step. To get it corrected.

To get it corrected. And when we voted on that last year, we knew that was going to happen because you had taken a position away. And even after we did the four positions that we did, it still saved money in the long run.

And we all knew that.

Right, sir. But it messed up that scale.

It will put them back to the scale this year.

But what I'm saying, okay, so you have those four individuals, right? And you're saying cents.

Okay, last year you didn't use a cap.

3%. Can't go over.

Can't go over. I'll use a thousand dollars.

Yep.

You used a cap. His situation was different because... Then it should have fit into the budget fine. It does.

Okay. But they're looking at... Daniel's looking at where he moves on for the new budget.

Right.

I understand what you're saying. It's just frustrating that... The scale isn't just there. Like, I understand what you're saying, those four positions, but what they should have did, okay, these four positions went here. We should have fit them into that 14 cents or it will this year.

Yeah.

And when we revisit what the cost of living increase will be every year, you can't factor a one, two or 3%. If the commission wanted to just have the cost of living increase of 3%, that could be factored into the step scale. But at least last year to this year, the conversation has been, are we giving a cost of living increase and how much will that cost of living increase be? So we can't factor that into the step scale unless that's a standardized thing. It doesn't.

It is, though. I have $20 for step one. I have $22 for step two. I have $24 for step three. But not everyone is the same. You're not going to be. It doesn't matter. Because if I give a 3%, I'm going to give a 3% to Jeff. He's a $20 employee. He gets 3% on that $20. You're getting 3% because you're a step two employee at $22. You're at $24. You're getting a 3%. So as you move up in the scale, your 3% may be a little bit higher than the next individual. And what I'm saying is every year, those steps should have been fixed by that 3%. So the following year, now Jeff is still, now he's that, he was that $20 employee. Now he went from step one to step two. Now, his 3% should fall into that step.

And that's where it's right on the full market. That's 100%. I agree with you on that. The problem is, as the scale moves, it's not just a $50, $100, $75 increase. It's 3% of $20.08, and that's 2% of $2,500. For $26, it's 1.5% of $2,800. So I might get a four and a half. Yep.

I agree. Which that makes sense because that's the way it fell into the step. But there's no right.

Let's all see. Once you get out in whatever category, then that's a fabulous thing. It's going to be, it's not just, yeah, we need to know the price. So we know for sure.

And you're starting out $20, but if you're giving a 3% raise for cost of living on that $20, the bottom step of the first step is not $20 anymore. It's $20 plus the 3%. And that is going to increase every single year. 100%. My understanding is I'm recommending a 3% increase plus a step increase. And I think that gives everybody a decent idea of what those numbers are going to be. And until I have what those official numbers are going to be, I can do the math myself. I just, I would prefer to have a standardized list so that I can be working off with approved numbers. But I can certainly attempt to do that and present some numbers. I just worry that my numbers will be incorrect based on what is calculated by the numbers people. Again, that is not my realm of expertise. So we don't have the numbers now. It's being worked on. We can present preliminary budgets based on our operating costs and whatever we're recommending on step increases and cost of living increases. And once those numbers come out, we can do that when they do. But in the meantime, we can very easily submit our budgets without those step increase numbers because there's a lot of information already there and we can have a really really good and accurate idea within a two to three percent margin of error for our salaries of what our budget will be. And we don't need to wait on those step increases. Those are not a barrier to getting these preliminary budgets in. And that's why I wanted to bring that to your attention of what I'm recommending for my office with the operating costs already being upfront and not changing very much. departments still have the ability to get the majority of their budgets squared away. And it's just a matter of whether or not they're increasing or recommending step increases in cost of living.

And she is working on that.

Yeah. We have had quite a few things that have taken priority in order to get them fixed. And so it's not a complaint by any stretch of the imagination. It's just where we're at in the process.

Will we have that by the next meeting?

Okay. I think that's the best that we can hope for today. And let's continue moving forward.

Anything else on the budget?

Good discussion.

Hearing nothing else on the budget, the reason I wanted this VSO position to talk about where we are. I was going to ask you this earlier, Candy, and I know we talked about it a little bit. Have we got any applicants?

I believe that we got three applicants.

Qualified applicants? Nope. I know we had talked about this and I just want to be open that everybody here knows that.

Two are not qualified. One is, and I do not know as of today if HR has been able to get in contact with him.

Okay.

So that's where we're at with it.

So that you guys are all informed just as much as can be.

Yeah.

Not that it's just sitting out there and spinning and not doing anything with it.

Do we still have the position open? Yeah. No.

Not until they contact. They would have to contact the individual. And if the individual, if we would not hire the individual, then we would have to reopen.

Yeah.

Just so you guys know.

Yeah. Can't get a hold of them.

Okay. Thanks, Candy.

Yep.

Moving on to new business. Standing committees, North Dakota County Commission Association. Jeff, do you have information on this, of what we're looking for here?

Well, I think they're looking at filling those positions for the annual conference. Okay. And there's some deadlines that, and each committee is set up a little different, those standing committees.

I think they have a nominating committee, audit committee, legislative committee, all that.

kind of stuff. And what they have for a deadline of the 24th? July 24th. July 24th. So is that following our next meeting, correct?

And this is if we have any interest within our commission.

Right. Yep.

It's not saying that we have to take somebody out of the commission. It's just if we have interest. So basically the question here is, would anybody be interested in doing the audit committee? now have you have you done this before um this is your guys so if there's no i mean then we can just let them know if there's if there's no interest of the audit committee nominating committee resolution committee and legislative committee those are the four options I mean, if nobody is interested in being on these, then at least we can get back to them and say that we've got no interest in rhapsody at this time.

And I think that the two big ones that jump out are the resolutions and the legislative committees are the ones where we can actually make changes to what the North Dakota association of counties supports and doesn't support moving forward, especially in the legislative committee or legislative years coming up, you know, 27 is going to be a legislative year. So there's usually a little more that comes forward with the resolutions and legislative committees. So those are, And usually those be via teams or remotely prior to the convention coming up.

And there's time to take and read what what each one of them are. So

So everybody is sitting in here. If you could look at these committees and by next, excuse me, by next meeting, if we could decide on if someone wanted to be on these committees. So I guess we could just table that until next meeting. Dave, you guys agree to table that?

There's no deadline on it.

What, July 24th?

July 24th. By next week.

If you would, please.

We have a motion, do we have a second? Second. We have a motion and a second to table this until next meeting. All those in favor by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Approve disaster declaration resolution. I believe this was wrote up and you signed it. I was out of town and I asked Chris if he would have come to you and signed it. That's where we're at. Chris?

Yep. So the disaster declaration was done on the 1st of July. I'll ask to go in front of you guys to approve it wholeheartedly. So I'm just looking for a motion for the acceptance of the flood declaration. Move to approve. Second.

We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor of the flooding emergency disaster declaration?

Before you vote on it, has this declaration been read out and published and everything? It's been published to the DES. Okay. Just for clarity, how long is the declaration for? Is it for...

It's seven days prior to going in front of the commission. Once the commission approves, it's good to go. Okay. So just making sure that's clear for everybody.

Thank you. He had contacted them, but he hadn't talked off.

I'm sorry.

No, that's fine. We're here to do a public thing, so I want to make sure that what the flood emergency, the length and what it's for and everything is on the record for everybody. Cool. Thanks, Dan.

So with that, we have a motion. We have a second. All those in favor by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. Motion carries.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Thanks. The next item is a quote on Tyler Tech's training. As I read here, this would be training for the Treasury Department. Is that correct, Candy? Or can you explain a little bit?

This is prior to our last phone call with Tyler. to help us walk through, as we got very little help last year with the tax bill process. We were just kind of, I want to say kind of forgotten about. So this is to have someone, there to help us through to make sure that everything is, you know, good to go. I don't know that it's gonna take, I don't know.

I don't know that it's gonna take

My question is, did we not pay Tyler for training already? what did we get out of the training before? I know you've sat through training, Candy, but as far as other departments, have they sat through training with Tyler? Yep.

This isn't, I don't know that I want to call it training.

Yes. Additional training for the situation that we're in.

Well, yeah, to make sure that it doesn't happen.

Next year.

Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. The 60 hours seems pretty steep.

Is this up to 60 hours, or we're paying for 60 hours? Well, if you read the comments here, it says 20 hours for pre-work contestant documents are correct. So basically, they would be the documents that we would turn in, they would be looking them over, and then verify the documents are correct. And then basically, that's where they would dedicate the 40 hours to do the processing. of the paperwork that is turned into that yeah my question was just if it's in reality if they got the algorithms right are we still paying for 60. i understand this is to avoid the issues that we had this year right right and help correct what we are in right correct

I think they're just giving an estimate of what they think they're going to need.

So basically it's $145 an hour. I think reaching back to them, I would rather have them, let's say you take only 20 hours to do this. you in the tax, the tax and the treasurer.

No, it would be myself in the treasurer.

In the treasurer. Let's say that it only takes 20 hours to complete this. Would we only pay $145 an hour for the 20 hours that we receive? Or are we going to be paying 60 hours? I think that's the question that we need to ask. They're saying it could take up to 60 hours. But if it didn't take 60 hours, would we pay less?

Oh, sure.

That's what you were saying, right, Paul? Because if it would take less time, then we would just pay less. I think that's what we need to ask them.

This is what they want to get this right. Is that correct? I think we better just go ahead and pay it. It will be in the same dilemma we were in last year.

So what it says in the contract as provided specifically on page 2 under fees for services included in this quote. We have six months to use the services. If we don't use the services within six months, Tyler may remove the unused services or issue a new quote to provide a current rate. I would want to make sure that they understand that to be that they would pay back or prorate any future services based on that overpayment if it's not used. But they at least contemplate not using all of the services in the contract provided.

But when they've given us a quote in the past, we get billed. The whole thing? No, we get billed as we use the service. Okay. So. but I will double check with him.

Cause I agree with that. If, if it's a service that we need to have everything correct. Right. Definitely. We need to pay.

Yep.

So we're all good there on candy reaching out to make sure that it reads as the attorney says, or confirming everybody's understanding.

So we're on the same page.

And so that that would be candy confirming and she can move forward with it if it says it's understood you want to come back next meeting.

You guys want to make our let's all make motion to go ahead and. Sign the contract and get this thing moving forward.

So we have a motion. We have a second calls in the fair by saying aye. Motion carries. Moving on to visitors and delegations. Is there anybody in the audience? Hearing none, seeing none. Moving on to portfolios. Anybody have anything from their portfolios?

I think going back to this disaster declaration and the things that have taken place in the county in the last week to 10 days, You know, as Jason indicated that we have, what, 30 some closures out there, 50 miles of. Roads being closed certainly going to be impacting that county moving forward. We've been having meetings with. The state, on the last four days, every day at 1300 or 1 o'clock, we've been meeting with State Department of Emergency Services, Army National Guard, Civil Works, or Civil Air Patrol, Department of Health, Emergency Services, Department of Water Resources, They've all been a part of the disaster declaration, trying to get current numbers, damage assessments. And like Chris had mentioned, we need to be better. We've found some shortcomings in what our emergency response capabilities are, making sure that we're protecting the life of Ramsey County citizens and being able to respond to emergencies in a timely manner. You know, if we have roads that are underwater or impacted and we can't get fire rescue ambulance to those citizens, that's a big concern. I know Sheriff Lang and Chris have reached out and the company Sherp have brought in some high-wheel amphibious all-terrain vehicles for that assistance, for them to either demonstrate or utilize their services within our areas. And they brought those vehicles up yesterday, and Chris and Sheriff Lane were out looking at their capabilities yesterday. Yeah. We have a small area of the state that's been heavily impacted by these rains. It started June 27th that weekend and received anywhere from 4 to 10 inches of rain in a very short period of time. So it greatly impacted the area in the county. So certainly want to thank those people that have stepped up to the plate. I know Chris is gone, but yeah, it's been a big deal. Had all the townships or majority of the townships in the basement meeting room last Thursday, sent out notifications to all of them, tried to get everybody in. in agreement to come up with damage assessments to Jason by Friday at 3 p.m. And so we can get those submitted to the state by July 15th and see whether or not those damage levels will be elevated to a state or a federal disaster declaration. Yeah, so that's why this debt disaster from our standpoint is very important moving forward. Because it's far going to exceed what our capabilities to respond to this disaster. Will be. Locally. Yeah, and whether or not we reach those thresholds from the state or federal government is yet to be seen, but I think keeping those. everybody in motion on those would be very, very much appreciated. So thank you to Jason and Chris and everybody else that's been a part of that locally. It's been taking hold as Commissioner Wilhelm, we probably get better.

And from a personal standpoint. Yeah, no, it's, It's weird the way the water's moving around right now. Some roads have gone back above water, others kind of got worse. It's just kind of weird the way the water's moving around. I guess personally, I'm thankful that I only had to drive 12 miles the wrong direction for a couple of days. get to a highway but my room is back above water again so that's good for me but there's still a lot of roads underwater blown culverts it's a mess the amount of flows that we're seeing in the coolies is um springtime flooding

The type of flows, you know, we went from 20, 30 CFS in the Starkweather-Edmore coolies to just about 1,000 CFS in the Starkweather, 1,100 in the Edmore, 450 in the Mah Bay coolie. So it's some big areas of rain and it's happened in a short period of time. And so that's why we're seeing the impacts that we're seeing and creating a lot of devastation in the rural areas. So we want to make sure that everybody's aware of the situation and that we continue moving forward and responding to those disasters. So I think Jason and his crew and Chris and Sheriff Lang Although is that involved in that? I got one. I was going to do it right here.

besides all the people in this room and all the people that, Representative Freilich and everybody that's attending the meetings and Chris and everybody, but the Devils Lake Fire Department had us come down there after the meeting here on Thursday. We went over there and they actually, Chief Bennett actually took a huge chunk of Ramsey County and they're actually patrolling that for us. for water overtopping and things like that, road closure possibilities. So, I mean, a lot of people are doing a lot of things, but that really took the burden off since it was the 4th of July weekend and people were trying to do 4th of July things. A lot of us worked all weekend in meetings and stuff, but it gave our staff a little bit of a break from all the road closures and stuff that had been going on. So yeah, they take from Webster or Highway 20 to Webster, clean over to the number three and then down south and then back up on old two, monitoring that like Judy Lee Road, we call it the Lee Road and some of those things, 20 Bridge. So that was huge for them to step up and do that.

Anybody else have anything? Hearing none.