[Call Board of Commissioners Meeting to Order: Chair]
[00:00:02]
REGULAR MEETING, NICOLLET COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO ORDER, STARTING WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.>> JACK, BEFORE WE TURN TO APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA, WAS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT TODAY YOU WANTED TO NOTE?
>> WELL, IT'S RARE, BUT CHRISTIE HAS A BIRTHDAY TODAY.
>> WELL, OUR HUMAN RESOURCES PERSON,.
I FORGOT TO GET A CAKE OR A PIE IN THE FACE FOR HER.
>> WELL, THERE'S STILL A LOT OF TIME IN THERE.
>> THERE IS TIME FOR THE PIE IN THE FACE.
>> YEAH, HAPPY BIRTHDAY. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MR. CHAIR, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE IT'S THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S, SO WE HAVE SISTER BIRTHDAYS.
WE'LL TURN TO APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.
[Approval of Agenda]
MANDY, DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA?>> NO, THERE ARE NO PROPOSED CHANGES.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE THE AGENDAS PRESENTED.
>> OPPOSED? TURNING TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, DOES ANY MEMBER WISH TO REMOVE ANY ITEM IN THE CONSENT AGENDA?
[Approval of Consent Agenda:]
IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA?>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> OPPOSED? WE'LL NOW TURN TO PUBLIC APPEARANCES.
IF THERE'S ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO'D LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK TO THE BOARD, THIS IS NOW THE TIME TO DO IT.
PLEASE COME FORWARD AND WE'LL RECOGNIZE YOU.
[Health and Human Services]
WE'LL TURN TO HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.WE ALL LOST. THERE WE GO. [LAUGHTER] COUNTY BURIAL CREMATION POLICY, AND YOU MEMBERS, I'LL NOTE THAT IN THE GREEN FOLDER WE HAVE SUPPORTING INFORMATION. MS. ASLE.
>> GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
FOR OUR FIRST, WE'RE LOOKING AT AN UPDATE TO THE COUNTY BURIAL AND CREMATION POLICY.
PER MINNESOTA STATUTE 261.035, NICOLLET COUNTY PROVIDES ASSISTANCE WHEN A RESIDENT PASSES AWAY AND THEY OR THEIR FAMILY ARE UNABLE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN CREMATION OR BURIAL.
THE ATTACHED POLICY PROVIDES THE COUNTY'S FRAMEWORK FOR DECISION MAKING AND PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING FUNDING REQUESTS.
REVISIONS TO THE POLICY INCLUDE THE CLARIFICATION OF ASSET LIMITS, CHANGE TO ASSET LIMITS TO BE IN LINE WITH OTHER COUNTIES, REFLECTION OF A PROCESS CHANGE IN WHICH THE COUNTY WILL COLLECT BALANCES FROM THE DECADENT'S BANK ACCOUNT OR FROM THE FAMILY AS OPPOSED TO REQUIRING THE FUNERAL HOME TO DO SO, AND LANGUAGE CHANGES WITH THE GOAL OF PROVIDING CLEARER INFORMATION TO OUR RESIDENTS.
THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS THAT YOU HAVE THIS MORNING ARE A FEW MINOR CHANGES TO THE POLICY SINCE THE BOARD WORKSHOP.
THE FIRST NOTED UNDER THE PURPOSE ON PAGE 1 THAT THE COUNTY WILL HONOR NON PREFERENCES OR PRACTICES OF THE DECADENT', THE DECADENT'S SPOUSE, OR THE DECADENT'S NEXT OF KIN TO THE BEST OF IT'S ABILITY.
ON PAGE 2, WE HAD A CHANGE TO THE ASSET LIMIT FOR MARRIED INDIVIDUALS WITH NO MINOR CHILDREN.
WE HAD A COUPLE OF SITUATIONS ACTUALLY WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS THAT MADE US TO MAKE THIS CHANGE.
THE INTENT HAD BEEN FOR THE FAMILY TO BE ABLE TO KEEP $3,000 IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, SO IT PREVIOUSLY SAID $3,000 BUT WITH THE COST OF $2,500, THAT LEFT PEOPLE WITH $500, SO THE LIMIT WAS CHANGED TO BE $5,500.
UNDER B2, THERE WAS CLARIFICATION JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CLEARLY READ THAT IF MARRIED COUPLE HAD TWO VEHICLES, ONE VEHICLE WOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM ASSETS, SO THIS MORNING, I AM ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED COUNTY BURIAL CREMATION POLICY.
>> BARBRA, WE DID HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THIS WORKSHOP AS WELL.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDED COUNTY BURIAL COMMISSION POLICY OR WE'LL ASK IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE POLICY FOR MS. HASENBERG.
IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDED POLICY?
>> MR. CHAIR, I WOULD MOVE THE AMENDED POLICY.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDED COUNTY BURIAL CREATION POLICY? WELL, THANK YOU, ABE.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO BRING IT UP TO DATE AND I APPRECIATE OUR CONVERSATION DURING THE WORKSHOP AS WELL.
I THINK WE'RE ALL PRETTY CLEAR ON WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE TODAY,
[00:05:03]
SO I WILL ASK ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.>> AND THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
WE'LL TURN TO MODEL JAIL SERVICES GRANT.
>> IN THE DECEMBER BOARD WORKSHOP, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE DISCUSSED HOW WE HAD BEEN WORKING TOGETHER TO DEVELOP STRATEGIES TO OFFER ADDITIONAL SERVICES WITHIN NICOLLET COUNTY'S JAIL.
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES APPLIED FOR AND WAS AWARDED $130,000 FOR TWO YEARS THROUGH A MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH MODEL JAIL SERVICES GRANT TO OFFER THE PARENTING INSIDE OUT PROGRAM WITHIN OUR JAIL.
THE PROGRAM IS AN EVIDENCE BASED SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM DEVELOPED FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE INVOLVED PARENTS.
STAFF FROM BOTH HEALTH AND HUMAN HEALTH SERVICES AND FROM THE JAIL WOULD BE TRAINED TO OFFER SERVICES TO MOTHERS OR FATHERS CURRENTLY INCARCERATED AS WELL AS TO OFFER COMMUNITY BASED SERVICES FOR PARENTS WHO DISCHARGE TO THE COMMUNITY.
THIS GRANT WOULD FUND STAFF TIME FOR TRAINING AND SERVICE PROVISION TRAVEL AND PROGRAM PURCHASES.
THIS MORNING, I'M ASKING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT THE MODEL SERVICES GRANT AND TO ENTER INTO A TWO YEAR GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.
>> YOU WOULD BE SIGNING THE AGREEMENT, I IMAGINE?
>> OKAY. THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE MOTION AS WELL? IS THERE A MOTION TO PROVIDE AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT THE SERVICES?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
BEFORE WE GO TO DISCUSSION, I WOULD JUST TURN TO THE COUNT SHERIFF IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING OR WE'RE GOOD TO GO HERE?
>> NO. I THINK SHE PRETTY WELL COVERED THE MAJOR PLAYERS FOR MY OFFICE IS GOING TO BE MY GEO-PROGRAMMER AND [INAUDIBLE] WHICH IS I GUESS IS IN PLACE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER KOLARS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. HOW WILL WE DETERMINE IF THIS IS BEING USED IN A WAY THAT'S HELPFUL FOR THESE PEOPLE?
>> IT IS A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM SO I THINK A BIG PIECE OF THAT WILL BE PARTICIPATION.
I THINK WE'D LOVE TO SEE PEOPLE RECEIVE THE SERVICE IN THE JAIL BUT WE'D ALSO LOVE PEOPLE TO ACCEPT THE SERVICE WHEN THEY LEAVE SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO DEVELOP PARENTING SKILLS.
LONG TERM, THE GOAL IS OF COURSE TO REDUCE CHILD PROTECTION INVOLVEMENT OR OTHER NEEDS THAT OCCUR BECAUSE WE WOULD BE PROVIDING UPFRONT SERVICES TO PEOPLE, BUT THAT'LL TAKE TIME TO BE ABLE TO MEASURE.
>> MR. CHAIR, WOULD THE COUNTY ATTORNEY LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON THE CHILD PROTECTION BUSINESS?
>> MICHELLE, WOULD YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT ABOUT HOW THIS'LL WORK?
>> I THINK THE PROGRAM IS A WONDERFUL PROGRAM TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO PARENTS THAT ARE SYSTEM INVOLVED.
ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE WORK WITH AS ADULTS OR CHILDREN IS A BENEFICIAL PRACTICE. THANK YOU.
>> THAT'S PROBABLY A POINT TO BEAR IS EMPHASIZING THE IMPACT UPON CHILDREN, THE POSITIVE IMPACT THAT THIS WOULD OFFER.
>> RIGHT. IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW FOR CHILDREN TO VISIT THEIR PARENTS IN JAIL WHICH HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN UNABLE TO DO, AND IT WILL ALLOW FOR THINGS LIKE RECORDED BOOKS WITH PARENT VOICES FOR CHILDREN TO LISTEN TO AT NIGHT, SO IT NOT ONLY BRIDGES RELATIONSHIPS WHILE PEOPLE ARE INCARCERATED BUT HOPES TO BUILD UPON THEM AS PEOPLE DISCHARGE.
>> ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
[Public Services]
INFORMATION YOU WISH TO SHARE WITH THE BOARD TODAY?>> THANK YOU. WE WILL TURN TO PUBLIC SERVICES AND ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD. GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
TODAY, I'M BACK FOR ANOTHER ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD RESOLUTION.
WE HAVE ANOTHER ELECTION ON APRIL 9TH, SO WE JUST KEEP THE ELECTIONS ROLLING THIS YEAR,.
A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND ON IT.
MINNESOTA ELECTION LAW DIRECTS THE GOVERNING BODY, THE COUNTY, WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ACCEPT AND REJECT ABSENTEE BALLOTS AND TO ESTABLISH AN ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD.
THE BALLOT BOARD COMPLETES IMPORTANT WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE REVIEW, ACCEPTANCE, AND REJECTION OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS SUBMITTED BY VOTERS.
THE BALLOT BOARD CAN BE COMPRISED OF TRAINED ELECTION JUDGE, JUDGES, AND OR TRAINED DEPUTY COUNTY AUDITORS.
SIMILARLY, MINNESOTA ELECTION LAW DIRECTS THE COUNTY AUDITOR, THAT'S THE COUNTY ELECTIONS OFFICIALS, TO ESTABLISH A COUNTY [INAUDIBLE] WHICH IS THE UNIFORMED AND OVERSEAS CITIZEN AND ABSENTEE VOTING ACT.
THEY ALSO COMPLETE IMPORTANT WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE REVIEW, THE ACCEPTANCE, AND THE REJECTION OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS SUBMITTED BY VOTERS WHO LIVE OVERSEAS OR ARE IN ACTIVE MILITARY DUTIES STATUS.
THE BALLOT BOARD CAN BE COMPRISED OF
[00:10:01]
THE SAME TRAINED ELECTION JUDGES AND TRAINED DEPUTY COUNTY AUDITOR STAFF.PUBLIC SERVICES WORKS WITHIN THE ELECTION LAW TO APPROPRIATELY STAFF THESE BALLOT BOARDS WITH TRAINED, QUALIFIED, AND IMPARTIAL BALLOT BOARD MEMBERS TO COMPLETE THE WORK OF THE BALLOT BOARD.
I'M REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD ADOPTS THE RESOLUTION ATTACHED TO ESTABLISHING A BALLOT BOARD FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS AND [INAUDIBLE] BALLOTS, AND AUTHORIZE THE PPSD DIRECTOR, MYSELF, TO IMPLEMENT THE BOARDS AS PROVIDED IN MINNESOTA ELECTION LAW.
THIS IS FOR THE SPECIAL SCHOOL ELECTION ON APRIL 9TH.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
DISCUSSION ON THE RESOLUTION? IN A FORMER LIFE, I WOULD TRAVEL THE COUNTRY TALKING ABOUT [INAUDIBLE].
>> WHEN I WAS AT UNIFORM BLOCK COMMISSION.
>> YEAH, IS A GOOD RESOLUTION, MEMBERS.
I'M NOT GOING TO ASK FOR THE READING OF THE RESOLUTION UNLESS A MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A READING OF THE RESOLUTION BECAUSE IT'S A RESOLUTION.
CAN WE GO BY ROLL-CALL PLEASE?
>> THE RESOLUTION'S ADAPTED UNANIMOUSLY.
>> HOUSTON ENGINEERING ADDITIONAL SERVICE REQUEST.
WHAT ARE WE FOCUSING ON TODAY?
>> A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THIS REQUEST.
APPROXIMATELY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WE WENT INTO A CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH HOUSTON ENGINEERING TO SCAN OUR HISTORIC DITCH RECORDS INTO OUR DRAINAGE DB PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE, AND THE GOAL IN THE END IS TO GET ALL OF OUR RECORDS AVAILABLE ONLINE, AND TO THE PUBLIC, AND FOR OUR STAFF AS WELL, THAT WAY THEY'RE NOT IN FOLDERS TO GO THROUGH ANYMORE.
THEY DID AN ESTIMATE AT THAT TIME, CONSIDERING THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY SCAN ABOUT 7,000 DOCUMENTS.
NOW THAT THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS, WE ARE AT A MUCH HIGHER RATE.
WE ARE AT ABOUT 13,000 DOCUMENTS, THEY UNDERESTIMATED IT.
WE GAVE THEM A COUPLE OF SAMPLE FILES TO SCAN.
TURNS OUT THERE WERE MORE LARGER DITCH SYSTEMS THAN ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED.
IN THE FILES WERE ALSO SEVERAL DITCH SYSTEMS THAT WERE EITHER ABANDONED OR NEVER CAME TO LIGHT.
BUT THAT WAS IMPORTANT THAT ALL THOSE RECORDS GOT SCANNED IN.
WE ORIGINALLY THOUGHT THERE WAS 81 DITCH SYSTEMS BUT THERE'S 104 DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND THAT INCLUDES ALL OF OUR ABANDONED OR INACTIVE DITCH SYSTEMS. WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, HOUSTON ENGINEERING HAS COME UP WITH ADDITIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR US BEFORE MOVING FORWARD AND WITH THE ANTICIPATION, THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT WILL BE $32,430.
THE INITIAL AMOUNT WAS PAID FOR BY THE ARPA FUNDS, AND SO IT WAS NOT A COST TO TAXPAYERS.
I'M STILL PROPOSING THAT THIS NOT BE A COST TO OUR LEVY OR ANY TAXPAYERS AS WE HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDS IN THE BUFFER REPAIRING ACT FUNDS TO COVER THIS COST, AND THIS WOULD BE A GOOD REFERENCE FOR THOSE FUNDS TO BE USED BECAUSE AS WE MOVE FORWARD, IF SOIL AND WATER NEEDS TO USE OUR RECORDS, THEY WILL ALL BE SCANNED IN AND RECORDS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR BUFFER ENFORCEMENTS AS WELL.
I'M REQUESTING THE APPROVAL OF THE ADDITIONAL SERVICE ACT FROM HOUSTON ENGINEERING AS WELL AS THE ABILITY TO PAY FOR THOSE FUNDS THROUGH THE BUFFER REPAIRING AID FUND.
>> JUST LOOKING AT THE AGREEMENT BEFORE WE HAVE A MOTION, AND WONDERING IF WE, AND IF I'M MISSING IT, I APOLOGIZE, WHETHER WE NEED TO NOTE THAT THIS WILL NOT EXCEED $32,430 I'M NOT SURE I SEE IT IN THE AGREEMENT.
THEY WILL NOT EXCEED THIS AMOUNT WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL.
>> THEY'RE USUALLY PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
>> YEAH. I KEPT LOOKING FOR 32,000 IN THE TEXT AS WELL OTHER THAN THE CHART.
IS THERE A MOTION TO PROVIDE AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT WITH HOUSTON ENGINEERING?
[00:15:01]
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? MR. FLIGI, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP STATE YOUR NAME.
>> YEAH, GIVEN AS AN ENGINEER, IS THAT FIGURE? [OVERLAPPING]
>> MR. FLIGI, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING OR WHO MAY WATCH THE RECORDING.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS JUST ABOUT HISTORIC RECORDS AND PUTTING THEM ONTO A DATABASE.
>> CORRECT. LIN FLIGI, 41460 551ST AVENUE.
NOW, DOES HOUSTON ENGINEERING REPORT FOR 32,000 DOES THAT INCLUDE THE REPORT FROM DITCH 86A?
>> NO. THIS IS ONLY ABOUT RECORDS THAT WE HAVE IN PRINT PHYSICAL COPY, RECORDING THEM DIGITALLY ONLINE IMPROVES THEIR SEARCHABILITY, IMPROVES ABILITY TO DO FUTURE DITCH PROJECTS.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DITCH 86A SPECIFICALLY.
>> WELL, THE $28,000 THAT THEY CHARGE US VERSUS 32,000, THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THAT FIGURE.
>> NO. THIS IS SIMPLY ABOUT MAKING A DIGITAL RECORD OF THINGS WE HAVE ON PAPER SO THAT WE HAVE A DATABASE, I FORGET THAT DATABASE IS NAMED HERE SOMEWHERE, NOT HERE, MS. KABE, IF YOU WANT TO EXPAND ON WHAT THIS PROJECT'S ABOUT.
WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT 86A IN THE NEXT MEETING.
>> IF I MAY, SO A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND ON THIS IS THAT WE HAVE PURCHASED A PROGRAM AND HAVE BEEN USING IT CALLED DRAINAGE DB.
IT'S ACTUALLY A PROGRAM THAT HOUSTON ENGINEERING ESTABLISHED AND WE PURCHASED IT MANY YEARS, AND WE WANT TO USE IT TO THE FULLEST OF IT'S ABILITY, AND WE HAVE SO MANY DRAINAGE RECORDS OUT THERE THAT THE TASK WAS SO LARGE FOR OUR OFFICE PLUS THEY ARE VERY LARGE DOCUMENTS, SOME ARE STILL THAT ONION SKIN PAPER, IS VERY HARD TO SCAN, AND SO THIS WAS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE WE HAD SOME FUNDS FROM THE ARPA FUNDS TO GET THAT PROJECT GOING AND OFF THE GROUND, AND USING THE PROGRAM LIKE WE SHOULD BE USING.
IT ONLY MADE SENSE THAT HOUSTON ENGINEERING, THEY ALSO OFFERED THEIR SERVICE.
THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROGRAM.
IT'S GOING TO BE VERY BENEFICIAL.
THIS IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM ANY DITCH PROJECT ALTHOUGH WE CAN ACCESS OUR RECORDS EASILY.
AS WELL AS THESE COSTS ARE GOING TO BE NOT INCURRED BY TAXPAYERS OR DRAINAGE LANDOWNERS.
THEY ARE BEING COST-INCURRED BY FUNDS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED EITHER BY GRANT OR THE ARPA FUNDS.
>> TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE A SIMILAR REMONUMENTATION PROJECT.
WE ARE MAKING SURE WHERE ALL THE LINES ARE, ALL THE CORNERS ARE SO THAT FUTURE PLANNERS, BUILDERS, RESIDENTS, FARMERS, ANYONE CAN FIND OUT WHERE THE CORNERS ARE IT'S PRECISE, WE'RE ALSO GOING TO FIND THE PRECISE VERY SEARCHABLE ABOUT OUR DITCHES.
SIMILAR TO TYPE OF INFORMATION PROVIDING THAT INFRASTRUCTURE AND DATABASE SO THAT FOLKS CAN USE IT.
>> YOU AND I HAVE BOTH LOOKED THROUGH PHYSICAL RECORDS FROM DECADES BACK TRYING TO FIGURE THINGS OUT AND THAT CAN BE VERY TIME-CONSUMING, AND I THINK HOUSTON ENGINEERING, THEY HAD AN INITIAL PROPOSAL WHEN WE ALL THOUGHT THIS SCOPE OF WORK WAS X, NOT IT'S X PLUS Y BECAUSE WE FOUND MORE RECORDS.
WE FOUND MORE THINGS TO DO AND REASONABLY, AND I THINK HOUSTON'S BEING VERY REASONABLE, LET'S SAY, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE YOU THIS TO DO THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS, IS THAT FAIR?
ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION WAS THAT THERE IS PROBABLY ABOUT 80% MORE DOCUMENTS THAN THEY REALLY INITIALLY THOUGHT BUT THEY'RE ONLY CHARGING US A PORTION OF THAT WHICH IS, THERE'S 86% MORE AND THEY'RE LOOKING AT, I CAN'T CALCULATE THE PERCENTAGE RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THEY WANT TO HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH NICOLLET COUNTY, SO THEY'RE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE THAT PRICE TO A LOWER PRICE SO WE CAN GET THE PROJECT ON WITH GOOD FAITH ON BOTH SIDES.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM YOUR WORLDS?
[00:20:01]
WE WILL TURN TO COUNTY ATTORNEY UPDATE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AS I WAS CONTEMPLATING
[County Attorney Update]
WHAT TO TALK WITH THE BOARD ABOUT THIS MORNING, AN EMAIL POPPED INTO MY EMAIL BOX FROM TOWARDS ZERO DUST, AND IT IS AN EFFORT BY THE STATE TO TRAFFIC RELATED FATALITIES AND INJURIES, AND AS WE'VE BEEN EXPERIENCING THIS YOYO OF WINTER WEATHER, WE'RE NOTICING AN ALARMING TREND WITH RESPECT TO ROAD FATALITIES.GENERALLY SPEAKING, IN THE WINTER, THERE MAY BE MORE CRASHES BUT THE SEVERITY OF THOSE CRASHES ARE NOT AS SEVERE BECAUSE OF LOWER SPEEDS.
WITH THE NICER WEATHER THAT WE ARE HAVING, WE'RE SEEING PEOPLE ENGAGE IN SUMMER-LIKE WHICH IS AN INCREASED SPEED, AND I WOULD SHARE WITH THE BOARD THAT ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY TZD, AS OF FEBRUARY 26, A PRELIMINARY NUMBER SHOWS FATALITIES OF 50 TRAFFIC-RELATED FATALITIES AS COMPARED TO 29 THIS TIME LAST YEAR.
THAT IS AN ALARMING TREND AND I WOULD USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO URGE EVERYONE TO BUCKLE UP, TO SLOW DOWN, PUT DISTRACTIONS AWAY, AND PAY ATTENTION.
TO LOSE A LOVED ONE AS A RESULT OF A TRAFFIC FATALITY IS A HORRIBLE THING FOR ANY FAMILY TO GO THROUGH AND THERE ARE MANY STEPS THAT WE CAN ALL TAKE TO PROTECT OURSELVES AND OTHERS ON THE ROADS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT VERY TIMELY AND HELPFUL REMINDER.
[Commissioner Committee Reports, Meetings & Conferences]
WE'LL TURN TO COMMISSIONER REPORTS.>> ALONG WITH THE REST OF YOU, I ATTENDED THE DEPARTMENT HEAD MEETING IN OUR BOARD WORKSHOP MEETING AS WELL AS ALSO ATTENDED THE ONE WATER SHED POLICY MEETING YESTERDAY, AND ALSO HAD PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY BOARD LAST NIGHT AS WELL.
>> THAT'S THE ONE WATER SHED PROJECT THAT WE KNOW OF?
IT WAS JUST BASICALLY THE PRELIMINARY TO SET THE POLICY AND WE HAVE A CHAIR FROM OUR ESTEEMED BOARD HERE, CURRENTLY HAS BEEN ELECTED CHAIR OF THAT, I AM JUST THE ALTERNATE ON THAT SO I'M JUST GETTING STARTED WITH IT.
>> TERRIFIC POINT. COMMISSIONER DEHEN.
>> I ATTENDED THE AQUA MEETING.
THERE WAS A REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE MEETING.
I ATTENDED THE GMG MEETING, AND THEN I DID A PRESENTATION TO THE MONTERO SOTOMA GROUP AT A LUNCHEON SINCE LAST MEETING.
>> WHAT DID YOU GET TO SHARE WITH SOTOMA? JUST WHAT WAS GOING ON.
WHO CARES? TALKED ABOUT OTHER COUNTY ACTIVITIES.
>> I ATTENDED THE TREVOR SISU LIBRARY SYSTEM BOARD MEETING REMOTELY THE WEEK BEFORE.
BOARD WORKSHOP, DEPARTMENT HEAD, TRI-COUNTY SOLID WASTE MEETING LAST WEEK AND THE KICK-OFF MEETING FOR ONE WATER ONE PLAN YESTERDAY, AND WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO CHAIR IT. [LAUGHTER].
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I ATTENDED LAST WEEK'S WORKSHOP. THAT'S IT.
THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING THERE PARTICIPATING.
[Chair’s Report]
THANK YOU, MANDY AND ALL STAFF FOR THE HELP AND INSIGHTS DURING THE WORKSHOP LAST WEEK RECYCLING MEETING.WE HAD OUR FIRST MEETING ABOUT OUR 2023 AUDIT SO THAT PROCESS IS GOING ALONG SMOOTHLY, AND, YES, I'M HEADING UP TO THE CAPITAL THIS AFTERNOON TO SEE IF WE MIGHT MAKE SOME HELPFUL CHANGES TO OPEN MEETING LAW, SO I WILL REPORT BACK TO YOU ON THAT.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE PER DIEMS IN EXPENSES?
[Approve Per Diems and Expenses]
>> ALL OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
[Adjourn Board of Commissioners Meeting]
FOLKS, WE'RE ONLY A COUPLE OF MINUTES AHEAD.IF WE'RE OKAY, CAN WE SWITCH TO THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY MEETING OR DO YOU NEED A LITTLE TIME? I WILL CALL THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27TH, 2024 TO ORDER.
[Call Drainage Authority Meeting to Order: Chair]
ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA? NO CHANGES TO THE AGENDA.IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.
>> OPPOSED? THEN ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE HAVE THE FEBRUARY 13TH MINUTES.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA?
[00:25:01]
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
NOW, TURNING TO PUBLIC APPEARANCES.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO COME UP, INTRODUCE YOURSELF, THEN WE'LL BE TURNING TO THE DITCH 86A IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
BUT FIRST, PUBLIC APPEARANCES.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY? SEEING NONE, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE COUNTY DITCH 86A IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO TURN FIRST OF ALL TO OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY.
>> I THINK THAT'D BE BEST. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
WE'RE BEFORE YOU TODAY TO ASK THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATIONS OF A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ACTIONS AS IT RELATES TO 86A.
WITH PERMISSION, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST TAKE US THROUGH A TIMELINE OF EVENTS AND THEN LAY OUT CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS BOARD.
>> AS THE BOARD'S AWARE, THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY ESTABLISHED AN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR COUNTY DITCH 86A ON NOVEMBER 13TH OF 2018.
AFTER ADVERTISING, THE CONTRACT WAS AWARDED TO LAMETTI AND SONS AND WORK COMMENCED ON THE PROJECT.
ONCE LAMETTI BELIEVED IT COMPLETED THE WORK, LAMETTI SUBMITTED DEMANDS FOR PAYMENT THAT THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY DISPUTED.
LAMETTI AND SONS AND THE COUNTY ENGAGED IN MEDIATION TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTED ITEMS BETWEEN LAMETTI AND THE COUNTY.
FOLLOWING MEDIATION AND RESOLUTION OF THE CLAIMS DISPUTED BETWEEN LAMETTI AND THE COUNTY, THE BOARD ACCEPTED THE LAMETTI CONTRACT AS COMPLETE EVEN THOUGH PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT HAD NOT BEEN COMPLETED CORRECTLY.
THOUGH THE CONTRACT WITH LATE WAS COMPLETE, THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY BELIEVED THAT THERE WAS STILL WORK THAT WAS OUTSTANDING TO CORRECT AND COMPLETE THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO ACHIEVE THE ANTICIPATED FUNCTIONING OF COUNTY DITCH 86A.
THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY, THROUGH COUNSEL, THEN DIRECTED HOUSTON ENGINEERING TO PREPARE A PRELIMINARY REPORT TO IDENTIFY DEFICIENCIES IN THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO ALTERNATIVES TO ACHIEVE THE ANTICIPATED FUNCTIONING OF THE SYSTEM.
HOUSTON ENGINEERING PREPARED A REPORT AND SUBMITTED THE REPORT TO THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY IN AUGUST OF 2023.
THE REPORT INCLUDED SEVERAL ALTERNATIVES TO ADDRESS FLOW RESTRICTIONS DUE TO DEBRIS ACCUMULATION, BACK FLOW OF WATER THROUGH THE 36 INCH GRAVITY OVERFLOW PIPE, CLOSURE ISSUES WITH THE SLIDE GATE ACROSS THE 84 INCH DRIVEWAY CULVERT, WATER LEAKING INTO THE PUMP BUILDING, AND SCOUR EROSION ISSUES UNDER THE PIPE OUTLETS.
THE HOUSTON ENGINEERING REPORT INCLUDED PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES FOR THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER AND MADE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO ADDITIONAL WORK TO CORRECT AND COMPLETE THE PROJECT.
SINCE THE PREPARATION OF THAT REPORT, QUESTIONS FROM LANDOWNERS AROSE REGARDING ADDITIONAL PROJECT WORK THAT WOULD HELP ACHIEVE THE SYSTEM OPERATION THAT WOULD MEET IMPROVEMENT EXPECTATIONS WHEN THE PROJECT WAS ORIGINALLY ORDERED.
THESE REQUESTS INCLUDE A GRATE CLEANER AND ON SITE CRANE MECHANISM TO LIFT THE PUMPS FOR MAINTENANCE AND WINTER STORAGE.
BASED UPON THIS PROCEDURAL HISTORY, THERE ARE DECISION POINTS NOW FOR THE BOARD TO PROCEED WITH AND MAKE.
THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY CAN CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS.
A DISCHARGE OF THE CURRENT ENGINEER, ISG, AND APPOINT A SUCCESSOR ENGINEER ON THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CHRIS OTTERNESS OF HOUSTON ENGINEERING IN LIGHT OF THE EVOLUTION OF THIS PROJECT AND RESCIND COMMUNICATION WITH ISG.
THE BOARD THEN CAN CONSIDER DIRECTING HOUSTON ENGINEERING TO PREPARE A REPORT THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ASSESSING THE NEEDS OF THE SYSTEM, EVALUATING THE ALTERNATIVES ON THEIR SYSTEM, PROVIDE COST ESTIMATES FOR THOSE ALTERNATIVES, AND PROVIDE A PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATION FOR THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
AS THE BOARD MAY RECALL, THE AUGUST OF 2023 REPORT PROVIDED JUST REALLY ROUGH ESTIMATES OF COST AND NOT ACTUAL COSTS FOR THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
IF THE BOARD ORDERS THE HOUSTON ENGINEERING TO PREPARE THAT REPORT, AFTER PREPARATION OF THE REPORT, IT WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE MATTER WOULD RETURN TO THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD TO ALLOW FOR INPUT FROM ALL LANDOWNERS ON THE SYSTEM TO DETERMINE WHAT, IF ANY, ADDITIONAL WORK WOULD BE COMPLETED TO FINISH THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, TO ENSURE THAT THE SYSTEM OPERATES AS INTENDED WHEN APPROVED BY THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY.
DEPENDING ON THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE BOARD TODAY, I WOULD THEN RETURN THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH WITH
[00:30:02]
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND AN ORDER FOR THIS BOARD'S CONSIDERATION.>> AND BEFORE WE TURN TO ASK MR. HENRY IF HE HAS ANYTHING HE WISHES TO ADD, THAT TIMELINE OF NEEDING TO COME BACK AT THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH, WOULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN WHY WE WOULD NEED TO COME BACK TO HAVE THE FINDINGS.
>> AT THIS POINT, THE DISCUSSION THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE WOULD NOT BE KNOWN IN ORDER TO HAVE THOSE FINDINGS PREPARED TODAY, AND SO IN ORDER TO BEST PREPARE THOSE FINDINGS TO REFLECT THIS BOARD'S DECISION MAKING PROCESS, WE WOULD NEED TO COME BACK.
THAT IS OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. MR. HENRY, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, BUT I DO AT LEAST WANT TO INVITE YOU, AND IF SO, YEAH, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD JUST ADD THAT THE PUMPS WERE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF FEBRUARY, AND THEY WERE ALL TESTED, AND ARE FUNCTIONING WELL, AND CURRENTLY THE DITCH IS PUMPED DOWN TO A VERY LOW LEVEL, AND THEY'RE OPERATING IN THE AUTOMATIC MODE WHERE WHEN THE WATER RISES, THEY'LL AUTOMATICALLY PUMP OUT AND THE SHUT OFF WHEN IS LOW ENOUGH.
>> MR. HENRY, YOU AND JEANNIE SEEK CREATED A, I KEEP CALLING IT A BUBBLY TYPE MECHANISM, BUT YOU SAY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT HE'S SAYING WAS KEEPING THE WATER FROM FREEZING SOLID?
>> YEAH, I CAN COMMENT ON THAT.
WHAT WE ESSENTIALLY DID IS WE TOOK A SMALL PUMP THAT WOULD TRADITIONALLY BE USED IN A SEPTIC TANK AND AND PUT IT IN A CREATE STRUCTURE JUST TO KEEP WATER CIRCULATING OVER THE WINTER, AND THE EARLY WINTER, WE HAD THAT EARLY SNOW RAIN AND THE WATER CAME UP SO WE HAD TO EXTEND OUR DISCHARGE PIPE AND IT HAD PERFORMED ALL WINTER FOR US AND NO ICE BUILT UP IN THAT STRUCTURE, AND WE REMOVED THAT SMALL CIRCULATING PUMP LAST WEEK, SO THE THREE LARGE PUMPS ARE ALL IN AND FUNCTIONING, AND THE SMALL CIRCULATING PUMP IS REMOVED.
>> IS THAT HARD TO PUT THAT SMALL CIRCULATING PUMP BACK IN THERE IF TEMPERATURES CHANGE?
>> IT'S NOT BUT I WOULDN'T EXPECT SUCH A COLD TEMPERATURE BLAST OF AIR AT THIS TIME OF YEAR, SO I'M CONFIDENT WITH IT BEING REMOVED WILL BE SAFE FOR THE SEASON.
>> PERFECT. THANK YOU. IF I COULD TURN BACK TO OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE [NOISE] I'VE GOT OUR UNDERSTANDINGS CORRECTLY.
WE GOT A REPORT FROM HOUSTON THAT WE DON'T HAVE PRICES, SPECKS.
HOUSTON HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECEIVE INFORMATION ABOUT OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED OR THE LIKE.
WHAT WE ARE POTENTIALLY DOING TODAY IS, I'M GOING TO SEPARATE THIS IF I MAY.
>> NUMBER TWO, DID YOU SAY A SUBSTITUTE? I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE I GET THE WORDS RIGHT.
>> SUCCESSOR ENGINEER WOULD BE A SECOND STEP.
A THIRD STEP SHOULD THIS BOARD CHOOSE TO TAKE IT WOULD BE TO, I GUESS DIRECT HOUSTON TO PREPARE A REPORT?
>> I HAVE TO IMAGINE THERE WOULD BE AN AGREEMENT THAT WOULD COME ALONG WITH THAT WITH HOUSTON.
>> CORRECT. WE WOULD DO A CONTRACT SIMILAR THAN WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST.
WE WOULD ALSO NEED TO SEEK A BOND FROM THAT ENGINEER AS WELL.
>> SURE. THEN AFTER HOUSTON IS FINISHED, ASSUMING ALL THOSE THREE STEPS OCCUR, WE WOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT ANYONE OF THE LAND OWNERS WHO HAS ANY QUESTIONS, ANY COMMENTS, ANY IDEAS WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AT THAT HEARING.
I HAVE TO IMAGINE HOUSTON ENGINEERING WOULD ALSO BE AT THAT HEARING TO EXPLAIN.
>> CORRECT. AND THAT'S THE PIECE THAT WE THE BOARD WOULD NEED IS A PRESENTATION BY THE ENGINEER ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE BEING PUT FORTH AND WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS AS TO WHICH OF THOSE ALTERNATIVES IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ENTIRE DRAINAGE SYSTEM, AND THEN THE BOARD TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
>> WE FIND OURSELVES HERE TODAY AFTER CONSIDERABLE CONVERSATION, DISCUSSION AND RESEARCH INTO WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE.
THAT TIMELINE SEEMS AGGRESSIVE FOR THEM TO BE BACK HERE IN TWO WEEKS WITH OPTIONS AND COSTS.
>> WHAT I WOULD BRING BACK FORTH THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATIONS IS FINDINGS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS HERE TODAY AND A PROPOSED ORDER.
I DON'T HAVE A TIMELINE AT THIS POINT AS TO HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE HOUSTON TO PREPARE THAT REPORT.
>> IF POSSIBLE, AND I DON'T KNOW, I'M SPEAKING OF THE TOP OF MY HEAD SO I APOLOGIZE TO YOU.
[00:35:01]
IF THE PROPOSED FINDINGS WERE AVAILABLE BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING, WE COULD CONSIDER A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF APPROVING THOSE FINDINGS OR ACCEPTING THOSE FINDINGS.>> THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY BE WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD.
>> OKAY. WE'LL KEEP THAT OPTION OPEN THEN.
>> [INAUDIBLE] YOU WERE NOT IN THE ROOM WHEN WE HAD THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE PART, THAT'S NOT A COMMENT ON YOU THAT'S JUST A RECOGNITION OF TIME.
SO ON THE STEPS WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY, WE'RE CONSIDERING DISCHARGING ISG, WE'RE CONSIDERING RETAINING HOUSTON ENGINEERING CHRIS [INAUDIBLE] AS A SUCCESSOR ENGINEER IN THIS PROJECT.
WE MAY ALSO BE CONSIDERING DIRECTING HOUSTON TO PREPARE WHAT DO THEY THINK, WHAT SHOULD IT COST, WOULD IT COST, WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? IF ALL THOSE GO FORWARD, WERE CONSIDERING THEN, THERE WOULD BE A PUBLIC HEARING.
ON THOSE POINTS, I'LL START I'LL START FIRST WITH [INAUDIBLE] ONLY BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] WAS OUT OF THE ROOM.
IF YOU WANT TO SHARE THOUGHTS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SHARED DURING THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE I'M WILLING TO ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT NOW.
IF YOU ARE OKAY WITH US GOING FORWARD.
>> I CERTAINLY AM OKAY WITH GOING FORWARD AND ONE THING I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ASK YOU THEN TO COME UP.
I JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE IT'S ON THE RECORD.
>> THANK YOU, TIM [INAUDIBLE] AVENUE, CORTLAND.
THE ONE THING I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS, WHETHER ITS WITH THE APPROVAL WE CERTAINLY NEED FROM YOU GUYS, BUT I DON'T THINK ANY ENGINEERING FIRM IS THAT SHED TO GET THAT WITH WATER SEEPING IN WITH THAT ELECTRICAL SYSTEM.
I THINK THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION FOR WHOEVER GOES INTO THAT SHED WITH A DUMP ENVIRONMENT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I'M SORRY I CUT YOU OFF, I APOLOGIZE.
>> NO, NO. I'M DONE WITH THAT AND THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAVE, IF WE MOVE AWAY FROM ISG AND GO TO HOUSTON, THAT DOES NOT RELEASE ISG FROM ANY FURTHER LIABILITY.
IF IF THEY WOULD BE FOUND LIABLE ON CERTAIN PARTS OF WHAT WERE DONE THAT WERE NOT WHAT WE THOUGHT WE WERE GETTING.
>> AS AN ATTORNEY MYSELF I ALWAYS KNOW, DON'T GUESS IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER AND SO I'M NOT GOING TO GUESS.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS WHAT WERE TRYING TO DO TODAY IS REALLY ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT YOU AND SOME OTHERS HAVE RAISED ABOUT THE CONDITION OF THE PROJECT AS IT SITS TODAY, IT'S ESTIMATION THAT WE HAVE HEARD THAT IS NOT WHAT WE WANTED OR EXPECTED AND WE TAKE STEPS TO CORRECT IT.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON TODAY IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU.
I DO KNOW THAT BOTH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND [INAUDIBLE] BOTH HEARD YOU MENTIONED THE BUILDING.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHETHER WE GET THAT BECAUSE I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS THAT CONTINUE TO EXIST ABOUT THE WATER TIGHTNESS OF THAT BUILDING AND AS I MENTIONED, YOU RAISED A VERY FAIR POINT.
I SUPPOSE I'LL SAY WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT ONE BUT WE DID HEAR YOU.
>> [INAUDIBLE] AGAIN IF YOU'LL COME UP RE-INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND ON THE POINTS THAT WE'RE TALKING TODAY ABOUT ENGINEERS AND RETAINING SOMEONE TO PREPARE A CORRECTION COMPLETION REPORT.
[INAUDIBLE] MY ONLY QUESTION IS, IS ISG BASICALLY SAYING NO WERE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW? IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? ISG IS WASHING THEIR HANDS OF IT?
>> [INAUDIBLE] IS AS I SAID TO [INAUDIBLE], I AM NOT GOING TO GUESS AT WHAT ISG IS THINKING RIGHT NOW.
>> HAVE THEY PROPOSED ANYTHING?
>> IT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SAY THAT.
IN TERMS OF PROPOSED, I THINK WE HAVE REACHED AS THE BOARD, A DEEP INVESTED CONSIDERATION OF WHAT'S GOING ON HERE AND WHAT WE THINK IS THE BEST WAY TO GET THIS PROJECT IN THE SHAPE THAT EVERYONE EXPECTED IT SHOULD BE.
AGAIN, I THINK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY CORRECTLY USED VERY SPECIFIC WORDS.
CORRECT AND COMPLETE THIS PROJECT.
IF WE PASS THESE MOTIONS, WE'RE INDICATING TO ALL THE LANDOWNERS THAT WE BELIEVE THE BEST WAY TO CORRECT AND COMPLETE THIS PROJECT,
[00:40:04]
IS TO RETAIN HOUSTON AS THE ENGINEER TO FINISH THIS WORK.THAT'S WHY IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO TRY TO PREDICT WHAT SOMEBODY ELSE MIGHT SAY, THEY MAY SAY THEY DID SOMETHING THAT WE DISAGREE WITH, THEY MAY SAY THEY PROPOSED SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T THINK WAS PROPOSED BUT WE'LL SEE IN THE VOTE WHETHER WE ALL AGREE THAT THERE'S A GOOD WAY TO GET THIS PROJECT CORRECTED AND COMPLETED.
>> OKAY. I DO STILL HAVE A COMMUNICATION WITH CHUCK [INAUDIBLE].
I CAN TALK TO HIM IF YOU WANT ME TO, BECAUSE THE LAST TIME I TALKED TO HIM, HE SAYS, WELL, I SENT MY PROPOSAL TO THE BOARD THAT'S WHERE IT'S SITTING.
I'D BE HONORED TO HAVE YOU LET ME TALK TO HIM, BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT ME TO, THAT'S FINE TOO.
I'M GETTING VERY FRUSTRATED WITH ALL THIS.
WELL, ABSOLUTELY. MEMBERS, DON'T LET ME HOG THIS IF YOU WANT TO JUMP IN AS WELL.
WE, AS A BOARD, CANNOT DIRECT WHAT CONVERSATION SOMEONE HAS WITH SOMEONE ELSE, SO WE WOULD NEVER STEP IN AND TELL ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS YOU CAN'T OR CANNOT TALK TO SOMEBODY.
WHAT I CAN SAY IS AFTER A LOT OF DISCUSSION, REVIEW, CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, THIS DRAINAGE AUTHORITY IN ITS VOTE THEY MAY VERY WELL INDICATE WE BELIEVE THAT THE BEST WAY TO GO HERE IS TO PROCEED WITH A SUCCESSOR ENGINEER.
I CAN'T TELL YOU WHO TO TALK TO, WHO NOT TO TALK TO.
I'M GOING TO INVITE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND MR. HENRY TO RETURN TO THE FRONT.
MEMBERS, YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT WHAT I WOULD SET OUT AS 3-4 MOTIONS.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED THE FOURTH OR NOT.
I'M GOING TO ASK THAT MAYBE WE ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION BEFORE A MOTION JUST TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY GENERAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE PROCEED, OR COMMENTS.
[BACKGROUND] [NOISE] I'M GOING TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MOTION ABOUT DISCHARGING THE CURRENT ENGINEER.
>> MR. CHAIR, I THINK THE MOTION COULD JUST SIMPLY STATE THAT WITHIN THE AUTHORITY OF THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY, YOU ARE MOVING TO DISCHARGE THE CURRENT ENGINEER ISG, AND CHUCK BRANDEL, AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE TO APPOINT THE SUCCESSOR.
>> REGARDING COUNTY DITCH 86A PROJECT.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT?
>> IS THERE A DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> THAT MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
ON THE SUCCESSOR ENGINEER MOTION, WOULD YOU AGAIN ASSIST US BY CLOSING LANGUAGE FOR THAT MOTION?
>> THE SECOND MOTION WOULD BE TO APPOINT A SUCCESSOR ENGINEER, THAT BEING HOUSTON ENGINEERING AND CHRIS OTTERNESS, AS THE ENGINEER ON COUNTY DITCH 86A IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, AND DIRECT THE PREPARATION OF A BOND AND AN AGREEMENT RELATED TO HIS WORK AND HOUSTON ENGINEERING'S WORK ON THAT PROJECT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSE? THAT MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
THEN COUNTY ATTORNEY, I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFICS AT THIS POINT.
DO WE NEED A THIRD MOTION TO DIRECT HOUSTON OR HOW WOULD WE WORD THAT ONE?
>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT YOU CONSIDER A MOTION DIRECTING HOUSTON ENGINEERING TO PREPARE A REPORT THAT INCLUDES THE FOUR ITEMS THAT I LISTED.
I CERTAINLY CAN RELIST THOSE ITEMS, WHICH WOULD BE TO ASSESS THE NEEDS OF THE SYSTEM ITSELF, EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES, PROVIDE COST ESTIMATES FOR THOSE ALTERNATIVES, AND PROVIDE A PRIORITIZATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ALTERNATIVES. I'LL STOP THERE.
>> MADAM COUNTY ATTORNEY, WE HEARD FROM MR. WIBLE ABOUT THE SHED AND THE WATER LEAKAGE ISSUES.
MR. HENRY, YOU KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT THAN WE.
MAYBE I'LL ASK MR. HENRY, SHOULD WE INCLUDE THE BUILDING IN THIS OR SHOULD WE DEAL WITH THE BUILDING SEPARATELY?
[00:45:04]
DO YOU HAVE ANY INITIAL THOUGHTS, MR. HENRY?>> I BELIEVE THE BUILDING IS ENCOMPASSED WITHIN THE FOUR POINTS.
>> MR. WIBLE, AS YOU JUST HEARD, THE BUILDING IS PART OF THOSE FOUR POINTS.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT PROVISION REGARDING HOUSTON'S REPORT AND THE FOUR ITEMS? [OVERLAPPING]
>> IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> ANY NAYS? THE MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
SO MADAM COUNTY ATTORNEY, YOU NOW KNOW HOW TO PROCEED IN TERMS OF CONTACTING THE PARTIES INVOLVED.
>> CORRECT. I WILL PREPARE THE FINDINGS FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION THEN.
>> MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE GIVEN THE NATURE AND HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT, IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO TAKE SOME ACTION ON APPROVING THE FINDINGS BEFORE OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING, I AM GOING TO CONSIDER CALLING A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING THOSE FINDINGS.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER TODAY, [NOISE] EXCUSE ME, I'M SORRY.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT REMOTE PARTICIPATION IF THAT BECOMES NECESSARY FOR ANY MEMBER TO MAKE THAT REMOTE MEETING POSSIBLE.
WE WILL COORDINATE WITH YOU ON THAT.
WE APPRECIATE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS MANY, MANY THINGS TO DO.
MR. FLIGI, LET ME JUST FINISH THIS THOUGHT.
WE APPRECIATE YOU HAVE MANY THINGS TO DO.
YOUR OFFICE IS VERY BUSY AND AS ARE THE OTHER FOLKS WORKING.
BUT IF IT COMES THAT WE CAN DO SOMETHING BEFORE OUR NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULE MEETING, THAT WOULD BE DEEPLY APPRECIATED.
>> I WOULD MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO DO SO.
>> THANK YOU. FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S PERSPECTIVE, IS THERE ANYTHING TO ADD AT THIS POINT?
>> MR. HENRY, IS THERE ANYTHING TO ADD AT THIS POINT?
>> MR. FLIGI, I AM GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO COME UP AND ASK YOUR QUESTION.
I JUST NEED YOU TO BE ON THE RECORD. MR. HENRY, IF YOU'D ALLOW MR. FLIGI THERE TO COME UP.
>> LYNN FLEGGY, 41 460 551ST AVENUE.
YOU SAID FOUR POINTS. WHAT FOUR POINTS?
>> MR. FLEGGY, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, IF I MAY, AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY CAN SHOW YOU THE TEXT FROM WHICH YOU READ.
>> I'M WONDERING, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE FOUR MOTIONS USED TO POINT B?
>> NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FOUR POINTS ARE THE DITCH THAT HAS TO BE REPAIRED.
YOU SAID THERE IS FOUR POINTS THAT HAVE TO BE REPAIRED.
>> I CAN SHARE THOSE WITH THE MAP. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YES. MR. FLEGGY, WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE THOSE WITH YOU SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
HAPPY TO DO THAT. I THINK IT MAY BE EASIER THAN TO HAVE US READ THEM AGAIN, BUT RATHER GIVE YOU SOME TIME TO UNDERSTAND.
>> WELL, IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONS ON THERE, CAN WE ADD THAT?
>> I THINK IT WAS PRETTY BROAD, MR. FLIGI.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE PRETTY GOOD ON THIS, BUT I'LL ALLOW YOU TO LOOK AT IT.
MR. WIBLE, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL? WE RECEIVED THIS.
IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY? SEEING NONE, THE DRAINAGE AUTHORITY MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
[NOISE]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.