Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

So, portion that to the next meeting. Blakesburg Library. Somebody, yep, there she is.

I'm here. Can you hear me okay? I'm Cheryl Talbert. I'm the director at the Blakesburg Public Library, and I'm speaking on behalf of the Friends of the Library organization. We came two weeks ago and presented some information. We were asking the supervisors for some funding to help finish with the renovation of our Blakesburg Public Library. This has been an ongoing project. with our first grant from the supervisors back in 2019. And we have raised over 300 and some thousand dollars. We've got about 50,000 left to go on our total project. We signed a contract last week, the friends did, with the contractor to begin work on the additional demolition, and then running the electrical wiring, asking the supervisors to help us with a fund of $16,000, or we would appreciate anything we can get because every little bit helps us. As we said at the beginning of our presentation, we all get by with a little help from our friends, and our friends at the library has been absolutely amazing. This group of volunteers have donated time, money. They've donated over $100,000. Let's see. 170 some thousand i believe toward the project and then the rest has come from grants um and so i was just wondering i you all had time hopefully to look through the packet that i gave you do you have questions

I have one question for you. If we would do this after July 1st, would that delay your project significantly?

No, it won't. They're hoping to start work in June on the demolition and running the electrical. So it would not delay us. With your funding, we will get all of the work done through the drywall, and then all we will have left will be the ceiling, suspended ceiling, and the carpeting on the floor. So with our contractor, no, it's not going to delay it if we wait until after July 1. And that's why we weren't sure when we made the proposal whether it should come out of this fiscal year or wait until the next fiscal year, because we know money is tight everywhere.

And I looked at our budget for the supervisor budget that we usually use for that, and we're overspent already this year.

Okay.

And maybe that doesn't matter, but from that standpoint, I would think it'd be maybe wise to do it after July 1st, but that would be up to the rest of the board.

Okay. Thank you. I believe we can take this out of law still, too.

And I was going to double check on that, but I didn't get the numbers on the loss. I'm assuming we have balances there to contribute.

Yeah, we're still good there. On new construction.

I'm going to make a motion to approve the $16,000.

And if that's the case on the loss, thanks for the update on that. I'll second that motion. All right. All those in favor? Aye. Aye.

Thank you so very much. And we will be having an open house. We will invite you all and we will definitely recognize the supervisors. We're planning on putting up a giving tree art thing installation in the library that lists all of our donors and you will definitely be included there. We appreciate the support.

And I also like to see you do something with the Genealogy Society at some point.

They didn't hold a meeting in May because I had contacted Sean about that because we want to get together and see what we can do with possibly the Genealogy Society's collection moving into our library when they move out of the Wapolo building. And as of right now, I'm planning to attend their June meeting.

Thank you. All right. Thank you so much. Just FYI, probably gonna have about two years to get them out, so.

Oh, okay, good.

Well, hopefully- It's not a rush, rush, so.

Hopefully we're gonna get our project finished and long before then.

All right, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next up is audit agreement with Anderson Marketing Company, PC, for fiscal year 25-26. They do our state-mandated audits. went and talked with them and we can do a more in-depth audit if we so require and I'm pretty sure we're looking at that.

I'm going to request that we get a new agreement with them for a more in-depth audit. This is the original agreement sent back in March.

Yeah, he said all we have to do is add to it.

I'd like to see an updated one.

Updated as to what we want. We have to determine exactly what we wanted to do. Okay. So any ideas you have, get them emailed out, Brian, if you want. He said they only do the state requirement. They don't dig into it a lot. When we have time, is that correct, to get back to this? Yeah, we need to sign here by June if we can. Okay, I'm fine with that. All right. Next up is 2627 Wapala County City Rotunda Law Enforcement Center Maintenance Budget. John, is this anything different than it's been?

No, it isn't.

I guess the only difference is the city and county are putting into this fund to fund maintenance at the building. It's over the last 25 years of the building. It was when they built the place, my understanding that there was a amount that was left over that came in under budget and they set up a maintenance fund and that money's looking to run out here this year. So we sat down with the city and came to an agreement on this budget here to fund the maintenance at it. So then, you know, that's the only difference is it changed a little bit, um still the same numbers that was used um when the when the original contract was set up in 1998. correct yeah we talked we've talked several times unfortunately everything went up didn't it yeah so everything's gone up and maybe it's one of those things you know we can revisit for next year you know i did have a piece put in there in case we go over for amendment to be done with the city and with us. It's a building that costs quite a bit to maintain.

Actually, your budget is lower this year, isn't it?

Yeah, it's lower than what it has been. But the other part we set up is the city and county, the police department and the sheriff's office pay into a capital improvement fund now. Unfortunately, this is just something that got started this last year. I don't know why we weren't. paying that money into that fund over the last 25 years, but we weren't. And reading that contract, we discovered that we could set up this fund, put that money in there for big capital projects. you know, for, you know, replacement of boilers, you know, which is one of the things that's come up. And the maintenance fund can just be strictly for the maintenance of the building and maintaining it. And then, so that's kind of how things are set up now. Okay.

Well, I will make a motion to approve it.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Thanks, Don. Next up is a resolution 17-2026, transfer of funds. Fund 8500. This is a general supplemental insurance health plan fund for 300,000.

Motion to approve.

I'll second. All those in favor? Aye. Solution is license agreement for July 21, 26 to June 30 at 27. Andy, are we still here? Are we getting anywhere on adjusting that?

I think.

Okay. And so you agree with what we're showing here?

Thank you.

I'll move to approve the resolution.

It's not a resolution. The agreement then.

I'll second. All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Set public hearing for June 2nd, 26, 930 a.m. for approval of final flat Rideau Acres subdivision. Miranda might be listening, but she's kind of pretty sick, so she's at home. Do you know any idea on this, Brad? Any comment, nothing you'd like to add?

All right. I'll make a motion to set the public hearing.

I'll second. All those in favor? Aye.

Set public hearing for June 2nd, 26 at 9.30 a.m. to review the 25-2045 Wapala County Comprehensive Plan with possible actions.

I'll make a motion to approve.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Cost advisory services for DHS for audit year fiscal 26 through 28.

We've always done this in the past. Is that correct? Correct.

State mandated thing with the DHS since we have to house them.

So we're paying them $6,500 to make sure we're getting our money back from the state. Is that correct? Correct. The way I read that.

Yep. We pay them all the time and then they eventually return a third of it, I believe. We have to pay for their phones, building materials. It's more of that state mandated unfunded stuff.

Okay. period in the future, I think we should investigate this a little more, but at this point, I'm in favor of it, and I'll make a motion to approve.

Yeah, there's seven other counties, I believe, have to pay part of that. They just reimbursed our department, so. All those in favor?

I'll second it.

Oh, I thought you most would.

No.

Okay, yes.

And I'll second.

All those in favor? Aye. Neapolitan Labs website hosting June 1st, 26th, May 31st, 2027. This is for our website page. How are they to work with, Andy?

Good.

Good?

Okay. Those are the most people. Price knew them. Yeah, they're good to work with.

Okay, I'll make a motion to approve.

I'll second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Questions for use from Wofford Building from Allie Salter. Looks like it's for a wedding.

I'll make a motion to approve.

I'll second. All those in favor? Aye. County attorney off a rough bed. Well, Chris got like four different quotes.

We know if Chris made a recommendation on which one.

Yeah. The second one there for almost 12, five.

We need a football car. Okay.

The roof barriers. I'm sure if the lady said shingles blowing off, we're going to be in trouble.

Was there something else that said 9,000?

That gutters were 1950. Okay.

I'm going to make a motion to authorize the triple star builders.

I'll second. All those in favor? Aye. I see Travis making his way down to the podium to give us the new tax law update. So any other business? We have Treasurer's Investment Report. Motion to approve that.

I'll make a motion to approve.

And second. All those in favor? Aye. All right, Travis. Tax man, floor is yours.

So... I just thought maybe I would go if others have comments about things and maybe if they have questions, they might be answered in some of this. But as far as the governor did sign the proposed bill yesterday, so I'll say that anything I say is the way that it's being understood at the moment and may not be what they actually intended from it um because we don't obviously have any guidance on it yet uh so to speak on the the windmill portion of things that was being discussed earlier um there is still valuation on them but the way that they've capped the budgeting process now at Um, for the counties, it's a little different for the assessor's office, but for the counties and other entities, they did 2% of the previous year's budget plus new construction. Um, however, the way it's being understood at the moment, windmills, solar, um, and anything on urban rebites and urban revitalization would not be able to be realized in that new construction portion. So there would still be value on it, but it would not do anything as far as increasing budgets, being able to increase your budget more than that 2%.

So not to interrupt you, but so urban revite, it's all gone. None of us, because like the city is using that to do AltaVista.

Yeah, so the city just changed their urban rebate from a three-year to a five-year, so they extended it. And basically anything on that that gets put on urban rebate will not be able to be realized in that three percent, or the new construction portion of what would allow your budget to go above 2%. So, you know, that would fall on things then that are built within the city that either aren't signed up for urban revise or that aren't large enough to qualify or anything built out in the county. There's no urban revitalization areas in the counties. or in the county portion. The assessor's budget, like I said, is a little different. They capped us at 2% and we don't even have the opportunity at the new construction growth. So not only are we capped at 67 and a half cents per thousand, we don't have the ability to, to go more than 2% every year. So, um, that's gonna make things interesting for a lot of places. You know, if they, if they wanted to do a project, I don't know how they're, how they're ever going to save for that. We're currently saving for a project. Um, so we're fortunate in the fact that we already have that going on. Uh, The carry over in this new bill, you're not allowed to carry over more than 35% on unassigned reserves, I believe is the way it's stated. So that's gonna be an important thing in the future when budgeting to make sure that we have things in the right areas so we don't lose those um and that's something i'm gonna have to to look at with my budget as well to make sure i have those savings for that project um in the right place so um homestead credit is going to be changing to an exemption it's going to go from $4,850 to anywhere between, well, it's going to be 10% with a minimum of 5,500 up to 20,000. And then there's some kind of inflational adjustment in that moving forward. And I don't know what that's going to look like. With that being changed from a credit to an exemption, Um, that will mean that the state does not have to backfill that, which they currently do. Uh, it's my understanding that they're going to go three, there's going to be a three year step off in reimbursing the counties for that. Uh, previously, if with it being a credits, if the state did not fund it, then the counties did not have to pass that along to the property owner. this will make it so it has to be passed along to the property owner, but the state just will not reimburse us for it. So the first year, I believe they're going to do a two thirds backfill and then a one third backfill and then no backfill from there. They are bringing back the multi-res classification that they got rid of while they started it. I believe from Senate file 295, which would have been back in 2013, 2015, somewhere in that timeframe. Then they got rid of it. Now they're bringing it back, which would be your apartment complexes or residential properties with more than three living units, I believe, is how they're classifying that. So they are going to still be on the residential rollback plus 3% the first year. And then the second year, it'll be the residential rollback plus 6% from them moving forward. One thing they've changed for just the assessor in general if properties increase more than 10% over the previous two-year span, the burden of proof used to be on the property owner to if they would protest that assessment. This now changes the burden of proof to the assessor, which I don't really know how that's going to work. It could end up Costing us a lot more and getting appraisals to try to defend those things. I really don't know how that that's gonna work but with my 2% budget cap, I yeah, I don't I haven't figured that out yet We will also have to send out if it goes up over 10% It states in there that we have to send out a notice to the property owner, which we do anyway and Uh, but we also have to send it States in there. We have to send any calculations used in coming to that assessment. I don't know what that means. I don't know how they intend for us to do that. Um, I do know that if, if it's kind of the way I'm thinking, it's going to be a lot more mailing. our postage is going to skyrocket with how much we're going to have to send everybody if that happens. Um, and again, with the 2% cap, that's not going to be real easy. Another thing that's changing with the homestead is it'd be the disabled veterans homestead credits. Um, it is only on the home and a half an acre now. Right now it's, it's, um, the property and up to a half an acre in town or up to 40 acres outside of town. That's going to be changing to where it's only the home and it doesn't include a pertinences. So, um, we're waiting on a definition of the pertinences from the state. So basically if you have a home and it sits on 40 acres and you have a, uh, a pole building. Our assumption is that that pole building will not be included in the disabled veterans homestead credit and the 39 and a half acres will not be included in it. I am assuming this is gonna be on new signups moving forward. I don't know if they're going to make us go back and do anything with that. I believe they also changed the percentage requirements on that. I'm not 100% sure on that, but I think they dropped it from 100 down to 60 or 70, I believe. That's something we're still waiting on as far as that goes. There's more reports that we have to submit to the states for whoever to look at. some of those reports are going to have to come we're going to have to figure out how to get a combination of information from the treasurer the auditor and the assessor system to do that we have been in communication with solutions on this the last meeting they had they basically told us they weren't even going to start looking into it until it was signed by the governor so now it's signed by the governor and Hopefully it goes better than the last time we had changes with them. I believe they're also removing the commercial and industrial. I don't really know what this is. I guess the commercial and industrial property tax replacement payments. I don't know if that's the two-tier system that we currently have, that they're going to stop backfilling the counties on that.

But it's 125 million statewide, I think is what they're kind of saying, is another thing that's not going to be backfilled by the state.

So, yeah. That is... kind of what I have at the moment for it. If you have any questions, I can try to answer them or I think it's going to be probably a rough go here for a while until certainly until we figure out what any of this actually means.

Chad, I see your wheels burn. No, I don't. No question? You read it? You like it? No, I don't like it. Well, from your guys' perspective, no. Yeah, the cities are going to get hit hard too. Any comment from anybody? Anybody have a question for Travis on the new tax law? All right. Thanks, Travis. Thank you. You sure can. Thank you. Yeah, just sit right there. He'll turn it back on for you.

I have about, thank you very much for accommodating me. I really appreciate it. Please pardon my appearance. I found out about this meeting about one hour in advance, and it's a critical enough subject that a lot of people may not be aware of. that I rush wrote a speech and got down here, forgot my glasses, ran back to the car to get my glasses. So I apologize for that. If I would have known a day sooner, I would have been much more prepared. I have about four minutes worth of material on automated license plate readers.

Can you state your name and start first here?

My name is Eric Sutterland. I am a resident of West St. Paul, Minnesota. I grew up in Ottumwa. I lived here for the first 18 years of my life and My dad still lives here up on Carter, and I go to his house periodically to visit him.

Okay.

Thank you. Public comment is limited to two minutes. Is four minutes okay? Yeah. Thank you. Very, very much appreciate it. Sorry to tell you that. I'm here to speak about automated license plate redars, ALPRs, commonly known as FLOP cameras. I'm autistic and sensitive. It's very challenging for me to speak in front of an audience. This is not something I made the decision to spend time on. Through a specific sequence of events, this issue chose me. This is the first time in my 45 years of existence that I've become involved in politics. When I enter Wapolo County and see the ALPR south of Eddyville, I always think about which blacktop or even gravel road I might take in the future to bypass it. With public awareness growing rapidly, I know I'm not the only one. And the Wapolo County Sheriff's Department themselves knowing is far from my primary concern. Wapolo County's audit logs indicate that you have opted in to Flock Safety's National LPR Network. This means that tens of thousands of law enforcement officers nationwide can find out everywhere in this network any vehicle has been for any reason without a warrant. The copy of Iowa's proposed ALPR law I was able to find is focused on traffic enforcement cameras, hardly mentions ALPRs, and the only thing it appears to do is ban the government from disclosing audit logs to the public. This makes things much worse instead of better because I'm told officer misuse is usually discovered by citizens reviewing audit logs. With Iowa, and it's not just the local sheriff's departments, tens of thousands of officers nationwide that have access. With Iowa's proposed ALPR law, misuse will go undetected. For example, Flood Safety's Vice President of Business Development appears to have recently posed as a law enforcement officer in order to gain access to a camera watching children practice gymnastics in a school. If concerned citizens did not have access, this would not have been discovered. And it gets worse. Flock Safety's terms and conditions are constantly changing. The Wapello County Sheriff's Department has no idea what they signed up for because it changed. Flock Safety will rest assure its law enforcement customers that their department owns their data. But this is a moot point because Flock Safety also states that it owns the raw footage. Flock can translate the raw footage into their own data in the exact same way they translate into your sheriff's department's data. In other words, a startup financed by $8 billion of venture capital knows the time every single vehicle passed every single one of your ALPRs. The public was rest assured that Flock ALPRs only take license plate and vehicle information, but now Flock is quietly offering its customers the ability to also take video from the same cameras for free. The public will eventually learn this and stop trusting you on what these cameras do and who has their data. And Flock has a poor track record of data security. It's possible that Iran, as an example, could eventually hack into their database if they haven't already. Watch videos by Ben Jordan to learn more about this. Motioning and voting to end Wapolo County's contract with flock safety is Wapolo County's opportunity to demonstrate to the public that you are proactively ahead of the curve as opposed to persistently, excuse me, persistently supporting something that is quickly becoming horribly unpopular. No worries. The word is still getting out. A lot of people in this room probably haven't heard about this yet. If you do continue to use it, you will likely be voted out eventually because your decision to stick with ALPRs is not the wishes of the informed public. An entire city council somewhere in the U.S. was voted out solely due to their persistent use of ALPRs when the informed public was demanding they end their contract. Please consider this. Thank you for your time. And again, I very, very, very much appreciate it that you accommodated a few minutes. No problem.

Thank you.

Who else would like to speak? No other new business for any. Motion to adjourn.

I'll make a motion.

I'm second. All those in favor? Aye. Willing, don't run off.

Excuse me. Are you adjourning the whole meeting? Yes.

Reopen the meeting for public comment.

We're going on it. Don't worry about it.

We need a motion to reopen the meeting for public comment.

I'll make a motion to open it back up.

I'll second. All those in favor? Nice.

My name is Craig Sylvester. I'm here about the windmills. I guess I'd like to think that everyone would have an open mind. I know it's kind of a hot topic, but have an open mind on the facts. I want to start with the pros of these windmills. And as far as I can see, all the pros is just plain money, which is kind of important. But I think there's a lot of other negatives against these things. And I'll just give you a few of them. They're unsightly. You have the flickering problems with people, constant noise, road damage, nausea, sleep disorientation, and not even being able to see the horizon in either direction once they get put up. And I know that affects most of us that lives in that area. But when the land has been signed up, which it looks to me like there's quite a bit of this land that couldn't be used no matter what limitations you put on distance. They're just way too close to cemeteries and some houses, but it looks good that Dusty Fox come up with a whole lot of acres. I think there's about 60,000 acres in Walpole County in this area. where they want to propose to put these things. If so, they've only got like 25% of the ground signed up. So three quarters of the people do not want it, which should be something you consider when you're voting. Why to install them? Are we installing because we're having blackouts here in Walpole County? I think that all it is, it's electricity that'll go to another place. It's a money making grab. to use our prime ground in Walpole County as I'm going to call it a junkyard. I think they're going to do just a lot of damage, and there's just hardly no benefit except the ones that signed up and want to take the money, which I've talked to a couple, and they weren't told the full story. They might have done something a little bit different. They know the full story, but I don't think they was told all of it. I'd like the board to vote. for larger setback restrictions, maybe like the ones that Mr. Batterson has right now. I think that's fair. If we go any less than that, do we know something that Walpole County, Keokuk County, Jefferson County, not Walpole County, Jefferson County, Keokuk County, Lee, there's a couple other ones right close to us, that they decided to keep the larger distances So what are we making a lot less for? It doesn't make sense to me. And these windmills will not pay for themselves. And when you've got our own tax money and other organizations put money in that covers almost 60% of the startup on these things, that makes no sense at all to me. And as far as their contract for 30 years or whatever, I was told by the guy that put on the very first meeting, that he was the guy, the manager, whatever, that put that on. He said they could get out of it 16 to 20. So if they get out of it 16 to 20, then where's all the money that's supposed to come to Walpole County, which doesn't really start for about seven years, the way I understand. And if there is $2 million to $3 million that the county could get down the line, is that written down? Are you guys automatically putting that in your budget for the next 15 or 20 years? You will get $2 million to $3 million? I wouldn't. And I think they're considering also if they could put in more windmills for that two to three million. That's not just these initial ones. I think that's for the whole dang bunch that they wanna get. And hopefully that doesn't happen at all. I guess that's it. Another thing for us farmers is putting up with it. How do we directly benefit unless we sign up for those? Is our property taxes going to go down a lot? Is our electricity going to go down a lot? I don't think so. So I think I need to look at it real strong because I think there's a lot of people that's against these things. A lot of them can't come to all these meetings. Thank you for your time, for my time.

Thank you.

Did you get his name?

Okay.

Anyone else? Yeah, I'd like to address just Maybe two things here. This is confusing to me because the ordinance that has been presented on the planning and zoning website appears to allow turbines. So I'm confused that you're against them, but the ordinance allows turbines. And so that's an issue that we need to kind of think through a little better before we proceed.

They're only allowed if certain restrictions happen.

But they are allowed.

Well, okay. All right.

That's what the attorney recommended. Yes, but that's what's interesting. Everybody's opposed to wind turbines, but you're allowing them.

They just need to have the larger setbacks.

So wind turbines are okay. That's interesting.

Thank you. I didn't say that.

That's the way I took it.

Well, you're, you're wrong there. I guarantee it.

The other issue that I've said this before is that, uh, I am a sincere advocate of property rights. I think we have to be very careful in local government when we begin to control property rights of our citizens.

That's why all of us are against them. That's exactly what we're doing, which is in the majority. We're against anything that could happen with them things. Setting on fire, which a month and a half ago, Montezuma had one, contaminates a bunch of ground by Mechanicsville. There's hundreds and hundreds of acres that cannot be used for grazing or for crop production because of them things getting set on fire just alone. They don't stop at the property line.

Yep, you're on.

My name is Marlis Breon Drish. I was born and raised on a 160-acre farm in Waplow County, three miles south of Hendrick. Farmland in the Breon name in that area dates back to the 1800s, beginning with my great-grandfather.

It is some of the best farmland in the county, and I have lived in a tumble for almost 50 years.

I won't go over all of the reasons I and others are against the wind turbines, as those have been well explained by Supervisor Madison. online and by other resources as well. I encourage everyone to read those if you haven't already. As a young girl, I looked up to farmers and always thought they did and would do the right thing for the land, the environment, and their neighbors, regardless of any personal gain for themselves. They may have owned the land, but knew it didn't really belong to them. It was and is our responsibility to be good stewards of our precious farmland and resources. At what cost are we willing to disallow this? The issue isn't just about the here and now and people and corporations making money. It's about the future of the land and the generations it will impact long after many of us here today, as well as the turbines, are long gone and forgotten. My father was against wind turbines when the issue was presented several years ago. He has since passed. My mother is in a nursing home in Ottumwa and she is against them. I am trustee for the farm, and even though I don't live on the farm, I am strongly against them. It all boils down to money and those who would benefit from it. You could wave a million dollars under my nose today, and I would not be the least bit tempted to change my mind on this issue. Please do not allow wind turbines in Waffle County, or at least in a prime area of farmland. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anybody else? Keep coming up. There's two sides, but it's one at a time.

I do want to make, Dennis Wilhite, excuse me. I do want to acknowledge that on your Facebook, Supervisor Batterson, you're begging people to reply against wind turbines. That indicates to me as someone who's not listening to the public, but only wants to hear one side of the story. I'm not sure that's an appropriate action for a county supervisor to take. And the other one is the posting of things on the website that does not have total supervisor support. And now you leave the public confused as to where the ordinance is. So I just like that to go on record. There's public concern about the lack of transparency in all of this process.

Come on up.

Hi, Storford. I guess I didn't realize until lately that our taxpayer monies are going to assist in putting these things out. I think we as taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for something instead of ruining our ground, ruining our homes. Also, there's no more ground going to be made. When we get this all fused up, we're done. There's no more. So I think we have to protect what we've got here. And also, I've got a brother-in-law who lives down in California and southeast of LA. I don't know if anybody else has been down in that valley or not. There's a great big windmill farm there, and they don't use them anymore. They've turned them off for whatever reason. I don't know. But I think we need to look at this real close. see what we're doing to our future.

Thank you. Anyone else? Last call. Anybody else? Nope. Nope.

Okay.

I'm Don Settlefield. I live in North town. I've lived here my whole life. I moved across the road from where I grew up. I don't want to have to look at it, but I do have one couple of questions I wanted to ask Mr. Ziegler. And of course, Mr. Wilhoy keeps saying the citizens don't see all this. Well, what I read is, uh, I'm more concerned about paying taxes. Here a while back, an article in a paper, you worked over the budget, supposedly. You said, deficit's going to be $2 million. Is that for this current year? Or is that for you're bringing down the road? I know Craig brought it up too. But, uh, you guaranteed or thought you guaranteed the way it read that you'd get $3 million from the wind generators. Okay. And then another article the other day said that, well, if it went to capacity, you'd get $3 million. So, The reason why I wanted to get that $2 million deficit is this year, or how many years is it going to take to get $3 million out of these wind turbines companies? And not only that, but Dusty Fox, as far as I'm concerned, is a car salesman. They want to sell you this, and then down the road, they're going to sell out. And most companies I ever see, when another company sells out, They changed the contracts. So are you still going to be guaranteed that money down the road? And talk about having, well, like Dwayne said about California, there was an article on the internet this morning that Sweden, of course that's not here, said 80% of their wind turbines are all in the red. So what does that tell us? Are we to be beneficial down the road will we get that money and i won't sign up for it because they're going to come in and tell me that well the way that contract read they give me that they can go anywhere on my property well that's not going to happen so we've got enough people telling us what we do on our property now and i don't need any more people telling me what i have to do on my property so I had to hear a few years ago I wanted to put a machine shed out. Okay. I went down. I talked to the county, wrote down to the office. They go, oh, well, where's it at? Who's it going to bother? Everything else. I says, what difference does it make? It's my property. I'm just putting a shed out. Well, no, you can't do that. I said, oh, well, I'm sorry, but they just dropped the building on the ground and it's going up. Well, you have to get a permit. Well, I had the permit within three days. Otherwise, she says, well, it's got to be a week or two before I could do that. I said, well, they're putting the building up today. And I wasn't bothering anybody, but I'm still paying taxes on it. And I was miles away. Well, half a mile away from people. So who was I going to buy? So anyway, it still comes down to I should have the right to say what's on my property. And whether you guys agree on it, I can't do much about it. So, but I know it comes down to eventually, if I'll agree to it, we'll definitely run some opposition against when you come up with reelection. So, because we want, we try to hire people, elect people to take care of our property. I guess we want to turn you loose on hoping you'll do what we want because that's what elected officials are supposed to work for. They're supposed to work for the people. And if you guys want the wind generators that bad, okay, I don't have any problem with you all putting them in town. You can put them in town. I don't have to look at them. I can look over the hill. I won't see that. You can put them all along the riverside if people want them. especially if it's helping the city more than anything. And this city has driven more business out of town and the county than it's ever brought in. And they need to get their act together and try to bring more business in, which would help the population, which would help the business, which would help your taxes. So I don't know. That's just my opinion. But anyway.

Thanks, Gerald. Anyone else? All right. Yeah, we'll do a motion to the juror then.

I'll make it.

I'll second. Those in favor? Aye. Thank you, everybody. Thanks for everybody's comments. Nick, do you need a second?