##VIDEO ID:M9QLTEJLmMs## good morning everyone I'd like to welcome you to the C County Board of Commissioners regular meeting today Tuesday November 26 and if we could all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge aliance 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 so are there any additions or changes to today's agenda any adjustments or changes uh Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to approve the agenda thank you commissioner Mills is there support support thank you commissioner Starley we have a motion and support to approve our agenda as written any further discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries unanimously now we have our public comment period this at this time the public is welcome to address the County Board on any matter of County concern are there any members of the public that wish to speak this morning any members of the public that wish to speak have Commissioners received any information to share all right we will close our public comment period and move on to our consent agenda items are there any items that a commissioner would like to pull seeing or hearing none is the commission white I would just like to make certain because it we did not do it last time but after we I will make a motion to approve this but before I do this I want to make certain we verbally say what's on this what we are approving right and I was intending to do that because you brought that up before okay so these agenda items include our claims minutes the superior fall Trail race event permit another permit for the Gunflint mail run coming up in January the approval of um the hire of Paul Olen as our deputy sheriff the resignation of trist long who is our Public Safety telecommunicator and Jailer and the reappointment of su mlin to the Grand marray Library so we have a motion by commissioner white is there support support thank you commissioner Mills any further discussion all in favor I I oppose motion carries we'll move on at this point to our review and discussion of the arc memo and we'll turn it over to commissioner Johnson thank you um so I was able to reach out to Becky the new director at ARC Kathy linberger who's um in charge of nerk has on leave right now so I didn't connect with her but she's been copied on all the emails going back and forth um so this is a new something they want to Institute at ner for those with opio addictions it only applies to the men at nerk it does not apply to um people at probation because there's a different funding mechanism for anybody who is on probation um the other thing is in this 2024 we we've had had no minut at nerk in 2023 we had two and 2022 we had five 2021 we had two in 2020 we had one we've had zero on medically assisted treatments in that time frame and this is what um Becky wrote to me um at noted there were none on matte drugs they use a lot of acronyms there medically assisted treatment yes if history is an indicator Cook County should not see too many requests for payment of suid for nerk men though it could happen we would not think more than one every couple years so that's the background they are asking since we did receive opioid funds that we would say we would cover those costs if we have a resident at nerk and I this will be voted on at our December 15th at believe meeting so I just need to get um consensus from the board of how you want me to vote I would I would really support this um it in has been indicated that the medication although the cost is high per dose is very effective and i would support that if needed other Commission yeah my my concern was um just a matter if it was just a matter of convenience but it sounds like as a much more effective treatment and also considering the you know cost um you know I wanted to know more about that so I really appreciate the further information and I I I I agree with commissioner Sullivan that it would be a good a better way to go okay commissioner white and so could you maybe you couldn't could you and your Layman turns or someone here explain what this drug treatment is how it is most effective I am not an expert on this I if I attorney hicken knows more I would defer to her uh Madam chair uh and commissioner white I'm happy to pontificate I I believe that this is a drug um that will it works to reduce cravings for um the drug of addiction um and um it may also work to reduce the high once it's taken and um you know this is a injectable rather than a daily dose um and some see that as an improvement um because it doesn't require the daily decision to you know reduce that high effect um and the and the daily decision to stay sober that day um I can also see administrative um efficiencies by not having to daily administer that drug so that's that's what I believe I know about it thank you and this is an FDA approved drug oh I'm assuming so if not yeah I agree that we should I agree that we should do this commissioner stle I agree we need to support you on that thank you all right so that will be approved at the December meeting correct all right thank you so much we'll move on at this point then to our highway department and engineer Hass is here to talk about the national seaw byway program a Grant application and potenti potential letter of support coming from the cup County Board good morning good morning um and thank you for keeping our roads clean and safe we're we're trying it's something that's at least we all know what to do go plow got it excuse me I'd like to interject no one's plowed our roads I asked them not to we'll get there um yeah so there there's a a program out it's called the national Scenic byway program um and as you can probably guess from the title funding for that goes towards infrastructure on National Scenic byways uh so for us specifically uh the Gunflint Trail is that um there's a section of that road in particular I've been particularly troubled finding funding for you know the end 10 miles of the Gunflint we all know rather bumpy rather awful um it's actually some of the worst Pavement in the county um I think we are able to find the last time it was resurfaced oh I might put my foot in my mouth early 2000s I think um late '90s somewhere in there so it's been a while it's very very due uh and so this program is kind of neat um and so I'll just if you don't mind I'll just read the abstract real quick uh just so everybody knows so preserving accessibility to The Boundary Waters canoe area Wilderness on the Gunflint Trail Scenic byway aims to pres preserve an enhanced accessibility to the bwcaw by improving key infrastructure along the Gunflint Trail Scenic byway a critical access route for visitors and residents the scope includes replacing aging and deteriorated culverts to ensure proper drainage Wetland connectivity and prevent roadway flooding which has been exacerbated by extreme weather events Additionally the project will resurface the end 10 miles of the byway to improve driving conditions extend the lifespan of the roadway and enhance safety for all users National Scenic byway program monies will direct fund directly fund these improvements that will m maintain the integrity and intrinsic qualities of the Gunflint Trail is a gateway to one of the Minnesota's most treasured natural resources ensuring continued access for recreation tourism and local communities while minimizing environmental impact through proactive infrastructure maintenance the project will safeguard the area's economic vitality and preserve the Region's natural beauty for future Generations uh and so I am here to ask for a letter of support uh to submit this application so i' like to make just a couple of comments um this stretch of road has been discussed at length by um the Gunflint Trail Scenic byway group The Rainy River Vermillion River one Watershed one plan um it has been brought up at Lake Association meetings um at sag seagull Gunflint kind of the whole end of the trail and I think this would be of great benefit to all the Outfitters as well that are down there so from a business perspective um so I would strongly encourage us as a board to consider this letter of support I would be happy to write it and um would be able to provide a lot of information based on the groups that I'm in just because it being in District 4 other commissioner comments or remarks I don't see any reason why we would not write a letter of support so I'd like to make a motion to to write a letter of supp for the Grant application all right thank you commission thank you commissioner white we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I opposed motion carries unanimously what date would you like that letter by um it's due I believe December 16th and so preferably I don't know after Thanksgiving maybe we can connect or something if you want to see I have the application finished and so now I'm just rounding up letters of report all right very good I'll connect with you thank you so much thank you all right we move on right now to item six our human resources section and we have our director Allison plumber coming forward to talk about an appointment for a county [Music] attorney good morning good morning all right first topic uh um my first item is uh the appointment to fill the soon Tobe vacated County attorney position uh so following the resignation of our current County attorney Molly hickin um insert sad face emoji um uh it was determined uh following State Statute to uh post the position to fill the vacancy so statute allows the board to appoint someone to fill the remainder of the vacancy um currently uh uh filled and appointed to with County attorney hickin um that term will end on December 31st 2026 um so following our recruitment selection policy as listed in our County handbook um going through that process uh we had one applicant um of which we interviewed and that applicant was uh our current assistant County attorney to uh Jean Peterson uh so I have uh before we get to what I'm requesting with approving her appointment we invited Jean here today to speak in front of you all um and to allow her to speak as to why she is uniquely qualified to fill this role so Jean up here good morning Jean good morning board um Madam chair and Commissioners good morning I appear before you today with appreciation ation for and in support of the recommendation to approve my appointment as County attorney to fill the remainder of the term of Cook County attorney Molly hickin upon her resignation date of January 2nd 2025 in the interview for this position I was asked why the County Board should select me as the next County attorney and I respectfully offer my reworded response to the board um as a whole today I am uniquely qualified for this position I held the assistant County attorney position proem or full-time from 2013 to 2017 and I made a joyful and committed return to the position in 2021 my time away from the office offered me insight into social social services and the probation Fields And while this made me a more well-rounded employee this time made me realize how much I missed the contributions I can offer individuals and the public specifically from the county attorney's office I have prosecuted criminal cases here from charging decision to jury conviction to appeal I have partnered with other agencies to work for the benefit of adult care and child protection I have advised I have worked with other jurisdictions toward efficient Global resolution of cases were appropriate I have advised other departments on a temporary basis during vacation or absence by the County Attorney I have attended trainings with a receptive mind and applied that knowledge to new best practices in the office I have the experience to Be an Effective and proficient public servant in this position yet I am also humble enough to be excited to grow into this role my predecessor served in this office for over 17 years and was on the Forefront of the substance use recovery court and use of the restorative justice model for qualified offenses in addition to her civil advising and her criminal and delinquency case load I am eager to Learn to Earn the trust of the board and the community I serve with compassion integrity and transparency and in my mind just as importantly I have a passion for this community I grew up here I chose to come back to this community and raise my children here and I find service in I find meaning in service to this community thank you for this opportunity thank you so much and I'd just like to add a a couple of comments um having served on the interview committee um your education your private and public sector experiences um the variety of roles adult service social worker probation officer paralal crime victim witness um coordinator the assistant County attorney all of those give you a variety of perspectives and I really really do agree with you it makes you uniquely qualified I've also personally observed her very hard work in the attorney's office and Sheriff Eliason um mentioned that as well in the interview process so I'd just like to share that with the rest of the board any other questions or comments commissioner Starland thank you madam chair welcome um are you addressed as jeie or Jean um it's funny so my mother intended for me to be named Jean but because I grew up here and you don't call a little girl Jean everyone who I grew up with calls me Genie and I don't hear a difference so okay either way there thank you so then we need to fill a position to assist her so that's the next step right that would be correct if um Jean is appointed today to the county attorney position we would need to post the assistant County position and uh just so you are aware we should not hold our breath um there are currently 11 assistant County attorney positions posted on AMC some of them have not had applications since last June so um we know that that could potentially be some additional workload for our current um staff in the county attorney's office but um we wouldn't need to then post that position any other questions or remarks if not I would entertain a motion Madam chair I'd like to make a motion to appoint Jean Peterson as County attorney thank you commissioner mels is there a support I support thank you commissioner Starley we have a motion and support and Allison um just something uh if you could add this to the motion um Jean reminded me this morning um similar to the appointment that we did with Leaf Lundy um to the chief Deputy position is following Minnesota statute 3.88 um that Jean would also like to request of leave of absence from her current position into the appointed position um and she would be able then to request a return to her former position or a similarly um situated position um at the end of the two years term in which she's being appointed um depending on the outcome of an election and and um whatnot going into 2027 thank you so would we like to amend the motion yeah I'm very comfortable amending that I like the idea of consistency and thank you for bringing that to our attention thank you madam chair and commissioner storle are you fine with that all right all right so with that Amendment we have a motion to request reest the appointment of Jee Peterson as our County attorney till December 31st of 2026 um and then that would include a leave of absence that she could return to her position in two years commissioner Johnson yes I have a question about that I understand the intent but if we are we just talked about hiring an assistant County M so how does that process work then if she chooses not to continue in a running an election and gets her old job back what happens to that person that was hired for that job do we are we going to come up with a plan now for that or um are we going to just increase our staffing in the attorney's office how is that handled yeah so it would be similar to the situation um that leaf Lundy was requesting his leave of absence from two um Leaf was filling the chief dep or the deputy SL investigator position um so that came up too in terms of will that position even be available when and if he does request a uh return to his former position um that leave of absence from that position so similarly if a position is no longer available it's been filled or the position has been abolished that the statute allows that individual if we have um a similar position of like seniority status pay uh that potentially that individual so Gene in this case at at the end of 2026 um if she doesn't move or stay in that county attorney position we would have to look and see what is available at that time it doesn't guarantee placement but we would try to um put her back into a position of again similar seniority similar pay or potentially there's another position available um that we would look at the recruitment selection process for commissioner white so what positions do we have that are are at a similar pay level as the Assistant Attorney not many that's be a sheriff and she couldn't you know uh so I believe we need to have serious discussion or thought about that being consistent is one thing but I can see where in law enforcement we often seem to have a shortage of deputies or they they move or we have or crime but but it's but I don't believe we should make this I understand what if she doesn't really like Genie and I'll call her Genie because your mom used to always call you Genie and I knew you when I was in so you're Genie I'm sorry um the um I can understand so it'll be a two-year trial if you like being like being the County Attorney which I I believe you probably would I mean just based on your seemingly sincere desire to be a public servant and this is your community and this is a wonderful thing to hear it doesn't often happen so um we need to give it some thought I would approve this today but we need to have not wait for two years to come up with what are we going to do unless Pat Eliason decides he's not going to be a sheriff in two years and then we'll slide you over there so we can't slide anybody into an elected position so I just want to make sure that that's clear that's right commissioner M so I'm sorry my my interpretation of what um Allison said was that um there's no guarantee and that if there 's no position available it's kind of that's that and similarly if an elected official doesn't get elected we don't just move into a similarly right you know if there's no you know it's and um I don't foresee that happening but it's a possibility and um and also considering the demand for assistant County attorneys is maybe a good likelihood who knows um but but um but it's just it's just a um as much insurance as we can provide okay I would agree with that may I respond briefly um so I just spoke about transparency and in the interest of transparency it is my intent to run in the election this is what I see as a statutory Safeguard or like a protection to say um thank you for your investment in this community and that that the legislature has allowed thank you for your investment in this um community and thank you for your investment in continued public service if things don't go your way um we will see what we can do to hold a position for you all right we have a motion and a second any additional discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries congratulations thank you board I just want to take the opportunity to say thank you for coming before the board and sharing this information with the entire board at once I think it's very important especially for such an important position so thank you for that opportunity thank you chair pres all right Allison we'll move on to Item B which is our paytable structure okay uh so this item is on the agenda now now uh requesting action this is coming off of the conversation that we had at the committee of the whole meeting last week on November 19th in which Rowan and I um also joined uh by Tessa from DDA to talk about our current uh pay table uh structure um the limitations currently that we are experiencing uh encountering with our job description review process uh primarily with focus on our leadership positions as most of those are now coming up in the review queue um that we are encountering more compression and uh leadership positions follow following below our desired pay philosophy in which we set out to correct with this job description review process um we're really experiencing issues in that 240 to 260 grade range um so just again a little back information is that we are looking at options of amending the pay table and adding a grade 270 so our job description was riew process the the classification system that we use is the Keystone uh the Keystone oh my gosh I'm totally blanking a keystone Matrix the factoring system Keystone factoring system too many words in my head um and that Matrix um that we are utilizing goes from uh a grade 100 up to a grade 270 um and I think when there was discussion at the cow that the last time that we were um talking about implementing the changes in the pay table and adding that 270 I think it was determined at that time with the County Administrator to not add that 270 and to leave his grade as a 260 but now we are encountering issues with that position the County Administrator position of which we will also be actively recruiting for um and the other leadership positions that fall of right below and right near that um that we're coming into issues being able to see movement again with the job description review process and getting the positions where are scoring on The Matrix which then aligns with pay uh Market pay and bringing them um in accordance with our pay philosophy again that we set out to to implement and correct so one thing I'd like to comment on is in the um packet that we the Commissioners were given this morning and we also got this electronically in advance that on page one which is really page two of the packet um that it does say that 7 to 10% is kind of the range between those upper grades and so um even if we were to go to a 7% that's kind of on the low end of things um so that was something that I really noted when I looked at the information provided by Tessa and I can clarify to um the information that's in your board packet so from the committee of the whole meeting it was requested to uh get get some figures some calculations on budgetary impacts of what these upper level uh grade changes could be for the various options um that we have in front of you today um let me just clarify the different options so option one would be to add and create that grade 270 but then modify the current spread at the top and then with the addition of the 270 to change um that top tier spread uh from a 4% where it's current L at to 7% so it would be modifying the spread currently between a 250 and a 260 changing that from a 4 to a 7% and then the spread adding the 270 between the 260 would also be a 7% so the 7% would really be consistent throughout our pay grades option two would be to create and add that grade to 70 but leave the spread between the 260 and the 270 similar to what the spread is between a 250 and a 2 60 I know lots of numbers so just ask questions if you need something clarified um leave that spread at a 4% option three would be to not add the 270 so again we would stay uh the top grade would be at 260 but to increase the spread between uh the top two grades a 250 and a 260 change that from 4% to 7% or option four would be to do nothing and leave as is um so then Tessa had provided the report which is pages of the report Pages 1 through six providing information that you had requested in terms of some initial budgetary figures and impacts uh there's the pay table showing the different options and then you had also asked about the number of employees sitting within each uh classification or grade so that table is listed um but in talking with our leadership uh committee prior to this meeting um there were still some questions about the budgetary impact figures that Tessa had provided on page three um so yesterday I worked on creating the spreadsheets that are attached um as supplemental information uh which include pay tables for 2024 so you have that visual because there's probably going to be some impact just at the tail end of this year and then all of 2025 and then I laid out different spreadsheets for the different options showing the initial positions that we are foreseeing being impacted by these decisions whether we add the 270 or not uh what they're currently graded at and then given the option what they would move to given how we move our positions that decision with if uh an employee goes through a gr increase the practice is and this is to be fair with all of the other positions that we've reviewed that they go up the grade to whatever his point uh is directed to and then they go back in steps and will fall at the pay that's right above their current pay so there'd be movement in that so those um again those figures that I included for the grade step given those different options reflect that practice um and I also do want to note that the County Attorney position because we are going to see turnover in that starting with 2025 um Molly excuse me County attorney hickin right now now is at the top end of the scale plus she's also receiving 7 7% longevity so taking into account the impacts for 2025 of what Gan will get paid we're actually going to see a decrease we're going to be paying less in payroll to the county attorney so those are the figures that you'll see in each of those options at the very end um if printed in color they'd be red um but it's a it's actually going to be a saving so that actually counteracts the um additional salary we could potentially pay with those options thank you you answered a question that I had so Wonder appreciate that other questions for Allison mam chair um thank you um I don't have a question just a comment because um we're at a point in the county where uh we need to um look at hiring an administrator and um I think if we can be more than fair in the wage we probably will attract uh more people so does that mean then we're looking at um a 270 uh option one or I would we be looking at uh 270 option two there's you know a few dollars difference between the wages there and um we don't have a feel yet for what's out out there but uh besides the attraction of Cook County and besides the attraction of what we've been doing as a board um I don't want to have the pay look minimum to folks too I guess I would agree with you commissioner storley and I know that we will likely have some competition for our County Administrator position as I understand the city of duth is Seeking a city administrator so if somebody is attracted to this area um that will be competition for us clearly other questions um commissioner John yeah I have a couple I guess so I'm concerned that this feels rushed that we just learned about this last week really and this was we've been going through this whole process for quite a while and this is the first time that we've really discussed this so I have concerns with that I also want to ask there's that Labor Management board that was meeting about negotiations and I'm really wondering has it gone before that group is there a recommendation from our labor groups has it been discussed at all no um the LM the LMC probably wouldn't be the place to have this discussion it would probably be more at Personnel um but that's just my knee-jerk um what the LMC is more for is to bring up issues that um the different unions are seeing or having um uh regarding um just wondering if there's been discussion about the pay scale the structure and this compression issue that we're experience if it's been discussed at the employee level that's what I was wondering no it has not I mean pay is a right of administration so um we have not brought this to any of the non-administrative level employees this time and that's I wanted that background my other concern about this just feeling rushed is we don't even know what we want in an administrator yet we just had our interviews yesterday I was told um this is going to be a process and we won't have that information right away and I just feel like we're actually thought of this yesterday you know that uh story about 10 Blind Men feeling an elephant and each thinking it was something else and that's how I feel we're dealing with this process is that we're peac mealing things together and we don't have an overall vision of what we want and where we want to go and I think that's where we need to start is what do we want in an administrator is it necessary to um are we going to change this job description are we going to have different things it makes no sense to me to score this with DDA if it really isn't what we're even looking for commissioner Mills um so my understanding from the interviews yesterday is that won't affect the job description the job description is is what we it are are the duties and responsibilities of of the administrator yesterday was more of what kind of qualities do we want in an administrator and and different aspects of either their personality their experience or their skills um but what we need is what's in the the job description and and my again my understanding is that uh the recommendation from DDA is to create the 270 based on the job description um as well as just um the limitations having it at a 26 and and that was the recommendation before as well is just that at that time our administrator uh decided not to recommend doing that um uh because of the significant cost through the other adjustments in our in our pay um for the rest of the organization and employees um but also because uh the the limitation that the 260 currently puts on the other staff when those job descriptions are going through the process and should be up to that 260 they're not allowed because of pay equity and the administrator being there so um separate from a job description the interviews like I see that and this is really a structural it's do we want to follow the structure that we've had in place or are we going to Cowboy it or I mean that's kind of that's kind of how I see things and I do think we want to be competitive I know it's a competitive market out there and I want to be consistent um with our Pace structure um both for the fairness to uh other employees department heads but also to um the incoming administrator like I think it would be a disservice to that person to have uh an exception to our our structure um I also was very concerned about cost um I'm thinking something might be switched around here though um option one and option two look like they might be flipped around or am I they're not how could it be the number yeah the numbers the Rowan and I were talking about that yesterday too yeah so so tell me more yeah I'm thinking about the County Attorney how could it be that the 260 step oh I see yeah 260 step8 MH in option one would be different than 260 step 8 in option two uh because option one represents the four or excuse me 7% spread so there's a higher increase between the 260 and the 270 and then you have the step [Music] changes it's it's how the math works out on the table but so the one the the County Attorney pos position for example looking at the oh wait are you looking at the 25 rate 22 2 yeah I was looking at the 25 they're kind of so they appear to be backwards Rowan and I were looking at these yesterday okay it's but they're not we've D we've triple checked um because you would anticipate sorry my words were backwards you would anticipate that the 7% would equate to a higher pay rate versus the 4% but it's we've checked the math on the tables and that's I still haven't wrapped my head around it yes so the because of the policy the the spreadsheet that we're looking at here the policy that we've had moves you up in a grade but takes you back to the closest step of your existing pay when you do those 4% spreads it's a different step there's a difference and so so we we're not going to pay them less but just the way that the math works out through the 4% steps when you make a 4% crease on the increase on the grade it in that scenario it just ends up that the person is is making more in a in a less of an increase than they are it's counterintuitive why we why we checked it out three four times yesterday but it's just the way that in the in the 7% one they land uh the County Attorney was the one you're looking at right MH yeah so they they land at 60 uh 173 whereas in the uh 4% spread increase and spread they they land at 62 because the one below that would be less than what they're currently making so it's just slightly more and it's just the way that the our process is that we put you at the step that's closest to your existing pay but not less okay yeah thank you that is very counterintuitive I'm following thanks for explaining that one thing I would like to point out is our Keystone Matrix um we haven't had a 270 but we should have correct and so I think it's really important that we correct the system that we don't deviate from that so um regardless of any other discussion four or 7% I think it behooves us to go to a 270 so we're making that correction I don't historically know why there wasn't a 270 I've tried to look back in board minutes um from previous years I can't find anything commissioner joh I think considering that our previous County attorney or County Administrator didn't want a 270 plays a factor here doesn't it I mean it it was Final said let's not do that it was purely Financial he said I'm getting paid enough that's what he said but okay so but that was a sacrifice for the org because otherwise it would just have you know been an additional cost so I'm still very hesitant about doing this during this transition period without an administrator without going through a process of talking about this whole thing and I'm not a fan of the Keystone pay scale and when you look at compared to our comparative counties too we're an outlier this is not a good system it doesn't make sense and it was put in by our previous administrator and it was not implemented in a good way so I would just think you may want to start all over I think it's really important that we come to a decision in a relatively short period of time because we need to post this position and know what we're going to pay that person we need to have a range a salary range well and uh reiterating what commissioner Mills said it's this is not just impacting the County Administrator position this is impacting our other leaders um and not implementing a 270 again will go against the um goal that we set out to do when we hired DDA to do our job description review process and then it will um put a cap an arbitrary cap on our higher level positions again the the handful of positions that are listed in here um as potentially seeing movement and then that is then treating them differently than we have allowed all of our other staff going through this review process and to be able to freely be graded and judged according to this process and they have all seen movement within their grades we've seen a lot of movement within grades and it's not our leader fault that the other positions have been reviewed and scored according to the Matrix and now they're going to pay for it by not being able to be adjusted um I I would just really highly consider it's not just the County Administrator um I I just I would not support condone unfair treatment that's that's that's just not right um in terms of the Keystone Matrix that wasn't created by Jeff Cadwell um that was the Keystone Matrix that s had used when he came in what was that 2017 um when we did kind of our first big job description review process it's one of a handful of grading systems as as tessla said during the cow meeting last week what is there like 20 systems that she utilizes they all have pros and cons I have I'm used to using the Keystone system I honestly I don't think it's flawed I think any system can be better but I don't I don't think it's a horrible system um and I would really hesitate to start over um that that would be that that would be a pretty substantial burden and impact on our whole organization to go through this process again absolutely commissioner white I'd like to uh agree with the commissioner uh Johnson the process is being pushed this was introduced I mean we talked about it at the committee of the whole we had no time to actually discuss it at the committee of the whole which would have been an ideal place to actually discuss this and and I get to look at the numbers here and anyone listening to this conversation if their eyes are not rolling in their head they don't I mean if they're trying to understand what's being said I think they would have had a hard time keeping up and so I understand the need to make it more fair Equitable for our for our leadership for our department heads for for those people but I do not see again the value in rushing something we discussed how will this impact hiring last last week we did have a chance to say will this interfere with posting for the news new leader or superintendent in that position and I believe the statement was that that in the conversation like what is the if James were here today what would what we what would his would we be would the amount that he is receiving per hour as it's on here would that be the same that we are going to be offering a new person or if we added the 270 position would it be a higher number does that entry level wage change because we're still at 260 but if we were at 270 would it be a higher number not necessarily so when James left he was a 260 Step n so he was at the highest wage um which would be 73 7370 so even by adding a 270 the figures that that I used on here um Tessa in her figures and then I subsequently used it for the County Administrator position was a 270 step 4 um so potentially and that base rate is for 2025 would be 6869 which is already about $5 less per hour than what James was paid so this and we don't even have to start at a step four I mean even if you add a 270 the pay rate can still be at the low end we could say we're starting at a step one and still reduce the budgetary impacts and that rate again will still be less than what James was paid when he left here so the point is when interviewing potential candidates or candidates for the position we will not be stymied by the fact that we have not at this moment in time going gone to the 270 without full full discussion and the ramifications we have the numbers written here but I believe the the board is five members elected by the public and we as a board should be able to have time to process this information and to absorb it uh we don't we don't even know how many I mean it's a shot in the dark is how many people might really want to come to Cook County and live here uh and be the count the the face of County government um we don't know that but if we will be able to offer them the same amount of money whether or not we have switched up to 270 another or not and I think the part of that is do we do 4% do we do 7% do we have more than one option to consider and that I believe our full board should discuss the pros and cons of that and it's not refuting what you say Allison it's not it's just we have a responsibility to to thoroughly understand and feel good about or not feel good but to have a discussion among all of us all five of us and your input is invaluable but we need to be able to do that so if we put this off put this off until the next meeting in December why don't we just disc next Tuesday why don't we just discuss it now like I don't understand what the what is not understood if if we post the job now as a 260 there's a range 1 to step 9 that's the range for the salary range if we post it as a 270 step one to step 9 that's a different salary range and is that what you just got in saying if if it's a 270 it's a different salary range it would be the minimum and maximum would be different but it um I mean it really depends on if it's a 4% or 7% that we would actually have more finite numbers um but posting it at a 260 with the current range I think there would be some overlap with the with the pay range that would um occur with a 270 just clarify to the question about if James were here that the rate that James was being paid is well above the low end of what a 270 at any option would be and so if we were to have a 270 with a 4% increase over 260 or a 7% over 260 we would within that pay range still have the ability to make an offer below what James was making correct the upper end would go above what James was making and and when we do the offer the offer it depends on what experience and skills the candidate brings to the table and that's a decision that is made by the hiring the group that actually reviews the candidates exactly so admin Ator Watkins do you feel there's 4% or 7% I mean right now right now we are at though we sat here not so long ago talking about the levy and like oh no we're going to get it down we'll get it down to seven we'll get it down five would be nice we set it at 9 point something we're now down to 8 point something we have how many things how many meetings to go to get the levy down I believe and this will impact the levy yes it will so I do think it's important for us to make a decision for a variety of reasons if I may mam chair the go ahead I would say um a couple things in relation to 270 7% or 4% I think some of the issues that we've had with the Keystone Matrix have been self-imposed we've we've had a lot of conversations about 170s and the transition that we saw after that and the need to do the corrections there I see this as a very similar situation uh 4% versus 7% uh as chair Sullivan stated the textbook information that we get from DDA shared is that 7 to 10 is the is the normal range 4% would be below that the other issue that I potentially see with that is amongst the grades that we have now 7% is pretty typical the vast majority of increases as you move up our 7% and so from that perspective the in an ideal situation from my point of view I think it should be standard across the whole Matrix I think we should have 7% increases and then based on those numbers the board would have a much easier system to look at and understand as well as talk about what those Target percent salaries are that that Allison referenced and and make changes that way but this kind of up and down of changes between grades I think is adds a level of complexity that I don't think is needed that's understandable commissioner storle on the end what's your input I'm at the end I'm at the end where you sit by choice I think it's important to move at least that step to 270 um in regards to you know a new uh hire in regards to the folks who are already here with the different steps and it isn't it's not going to be like horrendously expensive that's because we can vary all of that with a new hire it's not going to be you know something that um we're going to affect the levy by millions of dollars we aren't no and I guess it's not the cost of the thing I guess again it's back to the the uh this is comp complex and I understand I mean if you have consistency in 7% be between the steps and for those of the listening audience that can't see any of this um pretty much um I can't find that page um 7% is the norm for most of the the dis the distance between step one step two step three um or the the grades the grades and so that makes sense to me and since go ahead so yeah I want to hear more about the pros and cons of instead of going to a 270 going with option three then the only position that would uh potentially be impacted depending on what option if you wanted to do the option three which would change that spread between a 250 and a 260 from that 4% to 7% the only position that would impact would be the County Administrator position um I confirmed with Tessa that the other uh leadership positions will not move because you cannot create that compression at the very top uh against the County Administrator position so again we'd be creating an arbitrary cap on the other leader leadership positions if we choose option three or option four commissioner M um one of the things I appreciated in the analysis too was just um the other counties and the different grades they had and our the number of grades right now is the lowest from all of those counties if we created the 270 position um we'd still be the lowest but only by one uh we are a smaller organization than many counties um and so to me that follows ATT tracks um I think part of the intention of the system was the Simplicity too and if you have many more grades like say 28 that gets a lot more complex as well and so I don't see it as um a disadvantage or or a liability to have a fewer uh grades it's just kind of right size for the size of organization um doesn't doesn't mean it's a bad system just just what is smaller commissioner and you said there's currently job descriptions for department heads that are basically waiting on they're being helped yes yep yep including County engineer County attorney yeah I don't see this as a rush um it just seems like it follows the system and I mean I understand that it's complex and that it can take time to understand things but it's just following the same system um and you know one of my concerns was the financial implications and over time that will grow um right now it'll save us money um but I I also hope that the administrator we hire is not a step one I hope we get someone who has experience um that's that's something I'm rolling around my head too as far as the budget's concerned um but this is uh it just seems pretty straightforward to me despite its complexity the counterintuitive thing is what really threw me um and that's part of that complexity but it's just like okay follow the system and we only have to make it as hard as we want to commissioner Sterling thank you well it seems like everything is coming here at once it isn't Alison has been working all year in up upgrading all the steps so we understand that along the way now the only thing we're being asked is do we want to go to step 270 that's what we're being asked or go to a 7% spread and on 260 and I'm leaning that way I mean so I'm seeing that we can do nothing which probably is not a very good option I will admit but I'm torn between uh two and option two and three um or one and three one two or three okay okay but I'm leaning three because I think this is a bigger issue and I think it deserves more discussion and I really hope you find a County Administrator soon that understands this whole thing and we are not just making arbitrary decisions that we are having a thoughtful discussion about this whole Pace structure so that's where I'm leaning three can you explain why again I just think there's some issues that maybe need to be addressed and maybe we'll we had a County Administrator said no we should stop at 260 no he didn't he didn't say that um well he said I'm not going to it and it wasn't good for our organization then or maybe not I don't know it was just a dollar so I'm just saying that was the advice of the County Administrator and we are getting going to have a new County Administrator and I would just like to save that option saying hey what do you think we agree as a board you've had a chance to talk that over with I'm sorry I know we have an interim um but I'm hoping we get somebody to sit in that chair with much more experience like I agree with you on that um but I that's a conversation I think that should be happening next I'm willing to go up to for the advertisement part part of it but so that's why I'm leaning towards three and and then you realize it holds the other jobs back elected positions that they hired yeah no not elected positions well okay engineer he's only been in the job four years PHS director it's yeah it's just unfair I just I think we can wait it doesn't need to be rushed yet so you wait two months you wait three months do you just not want to make a decision or what's I just think this is a big step and we need you need to have more time and not make it everything feel so rushed we need to do it today again I don't I don't think this is rushed it's just following the system I feel like you're dragging and I don't understand why well part of it is cuz I won't be sitting in this chair next month but you are now I am and this is where I'm leaning personally I have not spoken to it my successor about this issue but I do think I have to think about the longterm implications of every vote I cast and I'm concerned about the long-term implications when we've only had one week to even think about it and compare I've been looking up other counties and what is their Pace scale and I know we need to make some adjustments I admit that which is why I'm leaning three right now and we can always change it again you can add it later it doesn't have to be done today so given all the discussion I'm hearing and the information shared both by DDA and and Allison um I think it's important we stick to this key Stone system that we have in place but we added to70 that is the intent of this system I think we shouldn't be deviating and given that the range of other counties is that 7 to 10% I would like to make a motion to add grade 270 and increase the spread between 250 260 and 270 to 70% 7% support thank you we have a motion and support additional discussion all in favor I I I opposed motion carries 3 to two thank you Allison that was a difficult discussion but an important discussion that we had we'll move on with item seven which is our County attorney thank you um so Madam chair the first I have to give you uh an update as to timing uh because I have a um a hearing a commitment hearing at 10:00 and so it's possible that the close session item uh I won't be here for it unless it's rescheduled so um but Stephanie ball is expected to be here soon I think for that so if you if you wish to juggle things around I would recommend that we do that um because that is very very critical um so I'd like to recommend that we have a motion to go into close session for our attorney update on the RSN Airport runway extension well she's not here yet I don't believe so we can't okay uh what I'm suggesting is that oh no she says she's outside in the hall okay all right uh so moved thank you commissioner Mills is their support support thank you commissioner white we are going into closed session at this time thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e I'd like to welcome back everyone to our Cook County Board of commissioner's regular meeting um we had been in closed session according to 13d point 05 subdivision 3 for attorney client privilege to discuss a dispute between Cook County and RSN um we have taken no action and are returning now to our regular meeting and we're going to return to our County attorney to discuss the law enforcement center renovation and expansion architect contract thank you madam chair um so this is the contract with uh RSN to provide architectural services BK I'm sorry bkv bkv wow um to provide architectural services on the law enforcement center renovation and expansion um so they identify a cost of work uh at uh just short of $6 million now this is an estimate of the entire Project's um work including construction and it's the best estimate they can give now it is not a guaranteed estimate and this contract is limited to architectural services um you'll see um you know that there are a lot of kind of blanks to be filled in still on page three for example the all the design phase milestones and construction commencement date Etc are still to be determined that is uh we would expect that at this point in the project because the plans uh are not finalized that's what we're Contracting for is for them to finalize architectural plans um in preparation to finalize this document we also spoke with um bkv about um engaging with a construction manager uh for this project and we've identified um at the recommendation of our facilities director Brooke lard um we have prepared a contract for your approval next week with um Johnson Wilson um construction for our conru construction management um services so you can expect to see that agreement next week um so I stand ready for any questions hoping I can help answer them Mills can um how was Johnson Wilson do we how was how are they selected how did Brooke select them uh past experience that he has using Johnson Wilson um on uh projects up at the hospital that's my understanding also the construction manager at risk with Northshore waste in that project yes thank you other questions for attorney hickin uh one more no I'm just there are a lot of blanks and I'm just confused about this whole thing so we are approving bkv to do architectural planning for that number that was at the very end right right the last page not to exceed 40,000 correct Okay so so I'm just there I mean there was a lot in here that was over my head it's like cut to the chase yeah so I just want to make sure I know what I'm voting on yes so um the scope of the architect's basic Services you'll find in article three on page 8 um and and it's bre broken down and I I agreed with you these um AIA contracts are very technical um there's a lot of technical language that's being used but I mean the best description I can give you you know is is just just that we are hiring this architectural firm to run the project from the architectural services uh vantage point they're they're going to kind of be the umbrella um what was the name again cuz we've got Arch Advantage we had these other things and I didn't know who are who are we doing this with bkv which is also known as Bor Cru Vogal group so okay so they are okay that's why I'm confused like why is there all these different names and I only know bkv all right thank you y so uh it's the same group that uh Commissioners have heard from and um that's been working on okay uh the the two different projects on behalf of the county to date and then they've also named um the different like uh Engineers a land surveyor that they're going to use they've named our the construction manager um the associate architect the structural engineer you know I just needed clarification CU it was very confusing for me I'm just really slow at trying to do the chart of who's in who thank you who's on first commissioner Mills um thank you manager um and I know this can change that fi that that final total number not the 40,000 not to exceed that but the the five million almost six million um is that include the architectural services yes I assum still but okay just wanted to clarify thank you uh well I'd like to make a motion to um approve the contract between uh Cook County and bkv for architectural services so we have a motion is there support thank you commissioner stle we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries thank you attorney hickin thank you chair all right we'll move on right now to item eight auditor treasure Powers Madam chair could we uh move those two items around since we have guest here I think that would be very appropriate as we know our guests have been waiting for quite some time so let's move to Item B which is to renew the approval of the revolving Loan Fund to the Cook County real estate fund yeah so this is a request to approve a $250,000 loan to Cook County real estate fund for their development of a 36 unit multifam housing project uh conditional on Bank commitment other funding source Comm commitments interest at market rate matching the bank loan for a term of 10 years collateral a second position on real estate personal guarantees of the local General partners of the fund on condition of County TR uh attorney approval satisfactory completion of borrower documents personal guarantees promisory note and borrower agreements and you've heard not all of you but you've heard all of this back in February because we approved the same language back on February 27th um the project experienced some delays and they were not able to take the loan in the 180 days which is in our guidelines so that expired in in August so we met the committee met with them again on November 16th review the project and the major delay was the shift of the planned Underground uh parking didn't prove to be it was more expensive and not as easy to do so they moved that but that took a lot of time to make that move the change in plans the rebidding the soil testing etc etc so um it made a lot of sense to the committee um and they have 14 sources of funds um they were still working on that back in February and to get all of the approvals has taken longer than expected so it made sense uh we reviewed again at the committee their uh Financial projections and they look strong in fact they um you know cash to loan ratios are good I won't go into them but uh banks are happy they're uh they cashed alone in their projections and uh they are still planning to uh make 18 of the units to be offered at 80% of the area median income Ami to help with affordability and the other 18 units are at Market rates so it was a a unanimous vote not everyone was there at the committee but it was unanimous vote of those there who were able to vote which under a new guidelines not the county attorney or the uh commissioner representative Stacy Johnson but the other four of us there voted unanimously so um you've got Howard headstrom and Tim Kennedy here who are uh very familiar with the project and involved and uh if you have any other questions so any questions that Commissioners have in my mind this is just a renewal of a decision we already made it was just a timing issue so I would move to um renew the the thank you commissioner Mills is there support support thank you commissioner Johnson we have a motion and support any further discussion all in favor I I opposed motion carries you thank you so much now back to item a back back to item a again you've heard this because this was at the last meeting so um this is our state and local fiscal recovery refunds that we have to obligate by December 31st um one change in all this is uh another change that I wasn't even aware of at the last meeting you don't see any discussion here of Interest that's not required any longer that was one of the other changes they made they amended the program in 20121 so we've been calculating that but we don't need it um it's not required so can can you explain more or what do you mean oh we thought that we had to um originally to calculate the interest on money we hadn't spent because there's a long time period and that that money any interest goes into part of the project but it's not it's not part of it so you didn't have to calculate interest 2021 and we don't have yeah there that would not be part of the project so so we should wait till the 31st I don't think so but uh so anyway the numbers are a little bit different because I don't have they were inflated by the interest that we would have to spend so now we have 335,000 unspent instead of we thought it was a couple hundred thousand more um so the obligation again is either um a contract with someone or you could have a sub agreement like with the HRA and as long as those are in place by December 31st so uh everything else is the same as I described at the last meeting so you could uh put it towards the bkv contract for example because uh the allowance is Broad enough now for that type of use you could use it for the NorthShore waste transfer station architectural services uh the 200,000 because that is something I think they're prepared um since we've already agreed to it but to use our own funds right now and the third option was to obligate to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as a subrecipient and they've identified three areas that they could use help on we'd have to have an agreement and uh Jason is working on this uh with an attorney just to have an agreement ready so that uh you you'd have that at uh possibly the next meeting if you decided to obligate some funds with them so so you can have another meeting or two to think about it well I think we've had this on our um you know radar since November 12th and um have had time to think about it um in my mind um you know two priorities um that we have in our community are housing and then norshore waste because it's the waste for everything in the and um bonding is used for construction projects and that's um kind of what we had already thought about design costs for the LC being an owner bonding um the part with bonding I like is people that don't even live here yet will eventually have to pay for part of that project um they will move here and be paying taxes um so I think bonding supports a good project completion but preserves current budgets and minimizes um the burden on taxpayers um in an immediate sense and then for other people in the future to pick up um so my thought is we take 200,000 to cover the architectural services for the transfer station and the remaining which would be $135,500 thoughts from other Commissioners and the three excuse me Comm Sal the three areas of need identified are the noris skogan noris skogan noris skogan Housing Development the energy envelope and energy Improvement plan program and to ensure that rents at 11 units of the CL Gunflint View Apartments remain at 60% Ami which is the a average monthly income correct and I think the reason he added that is uh that that was covered under can't remember what it stands for S some State funding but that got changed right so there's reduced uh State funding that they initially thought they had for that and I know in the H Stacy and I have both commissioner Johnson and I have both um you know listened to the Commissioners on the HRA talk about the importance of and I think we would concur um continuing to provide that affordable housing at Gunflint view that that's a priority so we'll be subsidizing rents way I guess you could call it that yeah so though but it's an opportunity for us we don't know what it be but we're supporting it correct commissioner M um I don't have strong feelings about these options um my thoughts rationale are similar to yours that we can bond for the for the law enforcement center um it it it it um differs from yours your thoughts a little bit with Northshore waste I feel like those fees can pay for that as as we've seen I know there's some changes there um my um strongest thought and inkling is to support the 60% Ami um exclusively um I think that would have the biggest bang for the buck for um our community and and those at need in our community um though the energy envelope and energy Improvement program I think is also very advantageous um but but I do believe bang for buck is the the 60% Ami um but again don't have very strong feelings it's almost like a horse a piece um so um I'm just happy to have this F and we can designate those funds to the H and let Jason work on what that agreement would look like and the bonding uh explanation um we have already approved that right and for future people I mean this goes to people that don't live here fulltime also it's people with second homes that they also will be paying for that I'm uh really supporting the NorthShore waste to help them with that because I believe uh there might be more issues that appear that they are now unaware of and will need more financing for that and I felt that way as well commissioner white um I am the biggest proponent and champion of Housing and when I first looked at this I I thought oh I'd love to see that entire Mount go to the HRA and then as I looked at Northshore waste um the timeline that we're on and thinking about possibilities I started thinking a little bit differently about coming up with a B and and with our last conversation with Northshore waste with them thinking perhaps they could add a little bit more on and provide transfer station on the East and West End of the county for all waste from the households that's an additional cost that is that I think it's a really good Improvement to their original plan so M Johnson I just been looking back at my HRA notes about the the shortage of funds because of um the S ha um anyway it it looks like it I had written down that um he'd said it's anywhere from a 50 to a $75,000 Gap that is needed because they didn't get as much from the sa right A J as so that's where and I'm agree any of the things that Jason suggested would be fine but when you said only for that I'm just saying don't tie their don't tie their hands for that understood because they don't need it for that projects could be for other ones but I'm just heads up on that thank you that's very helpful for for my perspective commissioner sterley any thoughts same thoughts ask a clarifying question auditor Powers report the the interest that had been there What Becomes of that and what is that just in in fund balance fund balance yeah and did you say how much it was I don't recall it was last we didn't have this year's calculated yet so very good it wasn't thank you it was just a calculation to this date sure from 2021 all right so so go ahead should we consider adding those dollars to helping any of these entities or I think that's I would do that through this I mean you can do that at any time okay I'd say I should pay for the bkv yeah all right so I'm going to make a motion to allocate $200,000 to cover the architectural services for the transfer station and the remainder of our state and local fiscal recovery funds to the HRA which would be the amount of 135,00 $536 is there a second support thank you commissioner Johnson commissioner Mills so we just approved bkv architectural services not to exceed $40,000 no that was the reimbursable that's right the full cost of it was and this is the transfer station not the LEC right I was just wondering about the discrepancy between 200 ,000 and 40,000 maybe I thank you the receivables are different than the full architectural services thank you question other discussion or questions do we know what the full architectural services is then wasn't that isn't that the $600 and some thousand oh okay yeah thank you oh and I'm Sor that's on for the for the L yes okay thank you that's what we 655 thank you 321 right so just to clarify this is 200,000 for the transfer station and $135,500 next is uh budget discussion and I included in the packet the adjustments that uh that we've made since the preliminary was approved in September and there's one more adjustment I'll describe I guess I should describe the adjustments since some of them were uh 20,000 cut for professional service cost that's snow plowing Etc in the uh um maintenance department and the general fund we discussed that the uh aead Regional Corrections uh what they've allocated towards us for 2025 was a cut of 30, 882 the library expense for 202 25 adding 22,000 and uh some Human Service training expense 4783 and then the big one uh in the last week was the Land Services uh fee increases those that you approved after the public hearing um and then uh Human Services uh made some adjustments with grants Etc and so they current numbers are a slight decrease and so at this point we're at 8.38% uh over last year's Levy which is a mil 22,8 60 so a little bit less couple hundred thousand less than what we originally were but where the the Public Health and Human Services made adjustments to what we're seeing in in our board packet is that what you're saying I don't know what you're seeing in the board pack I got this um yesterday from [Music] Plowman okay the revenues and the expenses different from yeah slightly so the expenses in our board packet show 5,622 323 is that what you when you're say in the board pag yes what I sent correct those are their new numbers and the revenues is 2,68 67 okay so this when you said 8.38 and I saw 8.4 I just didn't know you're rounding and that's fine I get that I'm just trying to make sure I'm using the same number as you are yeah no okay so correction that does not include their adjustments it does not okay it does not okay so now yeah if you're keeping score right now they're at uh EX total expenses uh that's that is the same the revenues yeah yeah the expenses are 56597 44 revenues are 2648 607 same use of fund balance and the final Levy right now is 2,444 492 and that just brought it down from uh 8.40 to 8.3 create so I did some research over the last few days um and the Minnesota Department of Revenue has put out information on all of the different um taxes for schools townships counties Etc throughout the state of Minnesota the average County Levy right now this year for 2025 preliminary Levy is 6.4% the reasons for those increases really go right along with what we have discussed and talked about and experienced Rising costs and wages inflationary pressure hiring needs and that this is the last year of federal covid relief um so we have a target of 5% for our group Which is less than the average increase um just to give you an idea of ranges um finally they put in all the different um Levy amounts for other counties uh the lowest one I could find was 3% and then some of them you know are up by 20% there was a big article in the Minnesota Tribune on Sunday about metro area levies um Anoka County 16.9 Dakota County 9.9 um so I think we are in much better shapee than um many of the other counties in Minnesota so what we want to take a look then is how do we get from our 8.38% um down to five our goal and I had a discussion yesterday with people from St Louis County and Lake County about our boundary waterers appraisal if you'll recall in our um initial list of things that were being added we added um $18,900 to our budget for the purpose of reappraisal and because of some things that have happened um the Tyler decision mineral Estates and the big one is school trust lands that are being acquired by the US for service both St Louis County and Lake County are not putting in money for reappraisal until next year we decided we we would be a team in this um and I know commissioner Starley you heard a little bit about this from one of the Commissioners Ashley Grim from St Louis County maybe share what you heard at your meeting discussion had been with those folks that um they were not going to use that money this year they were going to put it back in their general fund or wherever they want to put it just because things are still tenuous so can look at it again in um 25 26 correct so um and the information that I got is it's not going into the budget this year that maybe potentially there could be bids um at the end of 2025 um but no work or anything would be done till 2026 when we find out what's happening with this school trust land money and other things that are in motion so um auditor Powers if we were to reduce that Boundary Waters new area Wilderness appraisal fund by $18,900 um what would that bring our Levy down to it doesn't matter I would also suggest we do the Sawtooth Bluffs that was another 29,500 uh reducing that 18,900 would reduce the levy to 8 2 3% okay and their our overage over last year's Levy would be a milion 3,958 okay thank you and commissioner Johnson if you could talk a little bit about rationale related to Sawtooth Bluffs um I just think that a whole project um is kind of far away from ever getting off the ground and I understand understand that the trail the parks and trails Trails committee you know was hoping to be moving forward faster but I think that is something in our community when we talk about housing and we talk about our lack of space here at the courthouse for our employees when we're talking about priorities I would say there are other things that um are a better investment for this year besides $29,500 for a plan that is not going to happen in 202 commissioner Mills do you want to just react to that based on your work with that committee um I think commissioner Johnson brings up a good point um it's just that it's never going to happen until we do the plan and as I'm sure you all have seen the grant and maray Park Board got the notification that they received the the Greater Minnesota regional parks and trails designation as uh Park of significance and that really opens up a huge amount of money um for them um there is a lot of work and visioning and Community engagement that needs to happen still with the Sawtooth Bluffs kind of kind of have to do it again basically but what the and so this has been put off since the committee was formed basically um um and so uh it it would it would open there are indicators that it would get uh designation of significance um which would open up the funding for us which is similar to both the city but then also I think about other departments such as the highway department and how the grant funding really can help projects and I agree it's hard to prioritize this over housing um but it is a quality of life issue that previously the community was very supportive of and so trying my darnest to um honor and respect that um past Vision it does need updating um what was communicated I think in the parks and trails commission is that to get the kind of expertise or or just the time requirement to assist um Mitch Travis on it would be would be money well spent um and um yeah if you pit it against housing clearly isn't uh it doesn't compete there but you know I I still believe that we've got 2157 million in pilt dollars that we've been sitting aside just in case and um now we know that we don't need to pay that back and we can spend that for anything including housing including our other capital projects which are which are Paramount um but I don't think we need to um scrape and pinch as much as um we don't need to make this difficult um and we don't need to spend all of that to reduce our Levy um we can do it um we can do a chunk of it just to get us down to our Target and then we could do it again and then we could do it again that's how much we have I don't want to do that that's not a good way to operate um and we will need that money for cap Capital but I would like to use it to cushion and and kind of offramp us um to be able to to keep our Levy at at that lower level um I think I would like to get below that average preliminary um I think 5% is a really good Target I'll be it kind of arbitrary but I think that's a really good way to keep things stable so um I also don't like the idea of us not budgeting for that re appraisal um I think that's again a lot of money potentially on the table and we need to plan for that and if we don't it's going to hit us harder later um so it's just something if we take little bits at a time I think it can be really helpful so I think the parks and trails commission is is um put a lot of faith uh in in in the board and the organization to to allow for for progress on projects and there have been some some wins and and um and and um good projects and coordination happening and building relationships with outside organizations but um this has kind of always been that Keystone piece and doesn't mean it's going to happen um and it certainly won't happen without the funding which comes from the designation but that designation won't happen unless we spend on the planning for it so yeah it's just kind of a circular thing um if it was me I would I would vote to keep it in I I understand why others would not want to commissioner white what would you recommend for another way to get the levy down then if we do not do that with the Salto if we do not eliminate this to Bluffs they're pilt dollars that's why I'm saying so so we talk about quality of life this all to so the pilt dollars are like a gift almost I mean it's welld deserved but we have um we need to get the levy down because this will be impacting many people in our community right now immediately next year when they have to pay their taxes so I just it I feel uneasy spending savings account money to do our operating expenses because you don't next year what what's going to happen next year like you like what happens next year so we just keep spending until the pil money's gone well that's what I saying the offering thing it's similar to what we did with tapering yeah similar what we did with the arpa dollars for the wage study the comp study um increases is we had these arpa dollars and we Ed that including Parts with the levy to try to incorporate that into the levy it just a kind of a smoother transition versus just using it all at once or or using none of it right so it's um it's almost like uh use some of it uh keep some of it and just keep taking so it with our off ramps so are we heading to a time where we can be pretty certain that we'll always be around 5% it's always the intention but certainty is I I will say this board has changed how we approach budgeting and because we've had some targets we've talked about that history of what we've had for a levy and that we know it's not healthy to to go to a zero I think we are on the right track I feel really good about the fact that we know we need to have funds that were utilizing so we can make progress and so we can plan for the future and so I feel comfortable um and I I'm not stating about Sawtooth plus necessarily but using some of our pilt dollars that's what they're for it's payment in lie of taxes of property taxes we would be getting if we didn't have the The Boundary Waters and so let's use some of those funds to offset our Levy commissioner story thank you well I like buckets so Brady in our bucket for the pilt what what do we have what's the amount we have in pilt yeah two 2.57 million 157 okay and general fund well that's in the general fund okay so that's all together yeah we had going on memory now we had in excess of our 75% of un um reserved funds we were in excess of 4 million above that 75% at the end of 2023 so we're that includes the 2.57 so okay that plus another you know 1.8 1.9 so we're in 2 2 almost almost one 2.1 it 4.27 is that what it was okay I'm not looking at it's always moving but that's what it was it's always moving last time yeah okay so we're at 8.23 what does it take to get us down out of pill what does it take to get us down to five $415,000 150 and re realize that if you use $415,000 today for this year yeah and these are ongoing expenses that increase you'll have less it's going to be a bigger amount next time and a bigger amount next time it just and this is where I kept saying I want to see the financial management plan and what if we decide we well we know we've agreed to build this5 to 7 million building and we have another one we're thinking about and we have not even factored that into our financial management plan that's what I'm nervous about that you're tying your hands because you don't you want to give everything and not say no when we we keep talking about our needs as a government agency for space well what is more important space or a Sawtooth Buffs plan or a bwci reappraisal I'm not saying they're not important but when you have to pick and choose we have to be the ones to be able to say not yet yeah good idea department head I'm not saying it's not a great idea a but I'm saying not right now we have to prioritize that's what why we are sitting at this table it's our duty to do that and I would agree so let's you know take a look at these items so one item brought up was The Boundary Waters appraisal of the Commissioners how many people would support and it's not eliminating a reappraisal I want to make that real really clear this is delaying it it's a strategy nothing else all right so how many people would support that I would support the delay and with Sawtooth Bluffs how would people feel delaying that I would support that Al so I suggested it so yeah are there other items that were requests for our additional resources that you would want to consider I have more but you know what I've already offered so I want to give the opportunity to somebody else to speak up ahead no are there others that people feel Str about commissioner M I just want to point out that uh two very large requests are new staff and those are items that we have identified as pretty vital to the organization when it comes to next year we will not be adding well presumably two more staff and so when we're talking about using pilt dollars the biggest chunk is going to be this year and then as I was trying to explain earlier we can use pilt dollars again but then include some of that or reduce the use of it by increasing Levy and incorporating it into the levy is is the strategy there and I really do think that is looking long term at trying to keep things level and and consistent um and I think planning just always goes so far um and so that's why I I think um you know commissioner Johnson has an excellent point about future buildings um that's going to require a lot of planning and right now we just it's just a a shot in the dark for for trying to plan for that but we'll get there and and we'll include that uh in future financial management plans but um any planning we can do now any budgeting we can do now say for the highway department and uh a new grader and another maintenance worker you know that's in the budget I think that's wonderful to start working towards that and that's how I feel about the appraisal of The Boundary Waters too is budgeting for that is working towards that so it's a it's a smaller burden in at once it's it's a just taking bites at a time and and really trying to work that way and because of the substantial um fund balance that we have over um I feel very comfortable um doing that especially with the pilt that pilt decision was intentional to put that aside just in case it wasn't just um you know random that we got that that was a part of that longer planning just in case and now that we found that we don't need to pay it back then we have that at our disposal so I feel very comfortable about that using that to to get our Levy down to whatever people are comfortable with um whatever is not going to hurt the taxpayer um and then just slowly you know weaning ourselves off of that um which won't I mean if we did it year after year after year it's almost maybe not five years but four years of it but I would like to get it down within a couple years that we're off of that so I think also we've talked about Federal pilt keep in mind our state pilt funds have increased by a dollar so by 30% per acre um and we lobbied very hard at the legislature to make that happen and this isn't about the 2025 budget but for our commissioners it's really important when we go to St Paul that we keep in mind what are these long-term things that we need for our County um and that we're focused on legislative issues um and that we're working together for the future of our County so let's get back to our current budget um so when you said that we were going to do the appraisal in conjunction with two other counties the point was to reduce the cost cost I that's reason enough at this moment in time even though it's not probably going to be tens of thousands of dollars but anything we can save on something that we're not going to be doing this year I mean if our other two partners in this have backed off for their reasons then maybe we just all hold to see what next year it brings and if next year we are in a better financial situation as far as needing to Levy um then we might decide we should go go forward on our own MH so I hope we keep the team approach because fighting the federal government Cook County versus federal government will be a challenge yes commissioner M I respect that um it's just that I believe Lake County doesn't have that foresight they're they're doing what I'm afraid we're going to do and just kind of kicking it down the road but if we budget for it now it's going to be less of a a pain in the future so um but you might be right that maybe that's the way to go I just uh I would rather incrementally you know save for it instead of I forget what the total the total cost was going to be and what our total contribution was going to be but if if it was over five years or whatever then if we we don't budget for it it's gonna be over four years it'll be $57,000 over two years okay and that was our share that would be our share instead of three years instead of three years so that's you know $27,000 next year instead of $18,000 this year and next year and the year after so that's kind of where I'm like I think it makes sense to to take little bites at a time and we do have the pilt to do it this doesn't have to be a a painful thing for taxpayers um we we can make this as hard or as difficult as we want and I'm just trying to make it as smooth as we can Madam chair so with my scribbles okay put let's say put 189 in there and then take out 255 where are we 295 29 yeah doing 295 keep 18 subtract 25 295 I'm going to turn to Brady take it take it it's a small move I know [Music] so that gets us to 8.14% taking out the 295 one four we're getting closer so do we take the rest out of pilt anything else on the list Highway we want agree with that what do you got I feel pretty strong about keeping all our other items I'll stumble through no it's I had asked about the HR position um as far as we're at 1 and a half and what if we did it to two what would we be missing is are there contracts out there I'm just looking for Alternatives here and I'm just am not the type of person that just doesn't try to evaluate things so I I had asked that question question before I haven't heard anything it's no disrespect to our HR dep department but I think when I'm asking what is it that isn't getting done and can we contract that out like we did with are other things that we needed help on I'm asking the question again publicly yeah I apologize I I did reach out to Brady uh he provided me some information and I I didn't pass that along to you yet so I apologize for that that's on me uh Brady did share that the the HR analysis is uh Complicated by a little bit by the fact that the it's a current half FTE does not get health insurance and so when you move from a halftime FTE to a full time or yeah a half FTE to a FTE uh there's you assume the the worst case costs with the insurance and the family plan exactly all information um anyway jump to the end uh there's a a savings if you went from a half time to just two FTE instead of two and a half uh a savings of 43,5 58 uh I would thank you you're welcome I I would add that uh Allison plumber our HR director has shared publicly in a meeting before that the current person sitting in that halftime role has expressed uh they have no desire to become a full-time person I understand that and so that just the whole board has that to consider and publicly as well and I want to respect that um but the UN alternative could be we hire another halftime person that also I'm just I mean it just because I just think we need to look at all options and choose the best one and that's why I want to make sure I have all the information of what those options might be so thank you for that number when you compare the size of our departments and that's what why I kind of needed more information talking to other Commissioners from other counties other HR departments and right sizing than our number of employees um this has come up on more than one group about talking about what do we need what do we have what do we need where do we want to go and I don't think that always just adding another person is the answer sometimes um we need to look at our structure and division of Duties and make sure that we are doing it in the most efficient and effective way I'm not going to be here so go ahead questioner Mills yeah I think I think we do that and I think our previous administrator did that and I think that was also done through our strategic planning group um and whenever there's a turnover we we look at our structure um one of the things I think we should keep in mind is the cost of turnover as well um losing a halftime position and and so what it was recommended to us was a full-time position um I don't know all the ins and outs of that recommendation but I know it is um uh something uh that is very strongly felt or was very strongly felt by a previous administrator as well as our HR Director we've had two HR directors leave due to burnout um and um and I want to prevent that um happening again um if we lost a halftime person and then hired a full-time person there is a cost associated with that just with onboarding efficiency training and institutional knowledge and so it's I see it as a really um helpful step to keep a halftime and then get that needed support because we retain that knowledge and and that experience and you know training capability basically um and I think that would be a savings um different than than turnover um but I don't know that I'm not an HR Specialist or or professional um but that's just my understanding of of how how it all fits together having that overlap I think is is pretty key looking at the cost of that change in HR um it's about the same as if we were to um eliminate The Boundary Waters reappraisal and Sawtooth Bluffs and so if I were saying staff or these two particular programs I would say I'd put my money on staff based in particular on this is HR we've lost two people um and it's been maybe it's stated been stated for years and years um that they are so overworked and they need another staff person the thing I just don't understand is why we're overlooking the the pilt as much as we are because it's we can do it all we don't have to make these hard decisions um we can try to make our long-term planning happen and realized instead of just wishing we could we're in a extremely good position um and uh our financial consultants say as much um and again to commer Johnson's point this is not including some large capital projects but they are aware of those um they haven't put them into the calculations necessarily but they give me confidence that we can do this and those um down the road which is again requires that planning it requires investment now and with no um hurt to to taxpayers on on the levy um and that's not sustainable but step by step incorporating that and and off- ramping I think is is been demonstrated to work pretty well and and if we keep keep doing that um it's just it seems uh it seems like we should we should take opportunities like this um to to get what we need to get done um I I really dislike just putting things off um because of principles I I think it's very practical to use this and get our Levy down to whatever number of people are comfortable with like basically cutting cutting the planning for Sawtooth Bluffs and cutting the budgeting for um the reappraisal more or less just doesn't spend the pilt it it delays spending the pil right and so it's like well we have the money from the pilt so and we really you know the money involved with that reap the potential is quite large um as far as the return um and and I would argue the same thing is true with that satu plus planning like the money for those those Legacy projects are quite substantial um that we can get from the state which the voters just approved again so um it's opportunities just if we're going to if we're going to take them if we're going to do it or um or we're going to delay and I people criticize government often times for not anything done or are being too slow and that's this is an opportunity for us to make forward progress and to get things done so commissioner white you had your hand up as far as the strategic planning um commissioner Johnson and I were on that committee and when we were going through this looking at uh transparency and and who's going to do what uh HR came up a lot having a lot of responsibilities and there were placeholders that were put in at that moment in time like how much do we think that'll this will take now administrator Rowan was in that uh in on that committee also and so those were like in my mind those were like guesstimates as what we would need now what former administrator York's thinking was how he he landed on a need for one full new so we'd have a department with two and a half employees we don't know what that is and I I question I don't have an it's not a criticism of our HR department but if and to your statement commissioner Mills about not losing the knowledge of an existing emplo employee our halftime employee with commissioner Johnson suggesting maybe we hire a halftime another halftime employee bringing that department total up to two and there might be people that people someone that would be interested in a halftime stressful job instead of a full-time stressful job we will not know that until but even commissioner Johnson St stating that in other counties I mean not just other count do we know that we are right sized in the number of employees in each of our departments for the amount number of people that require Services of our government how do we find that out should we find that out you know we we know how with law enforcement that seems like kind of you know it's a geographic thing and you can how many arrests and how many um problems there are and uh but as far as the other I mean does does the auditor's office have the right number of people are they should they have another person or I'm not suggesting that there should be fewer people but are they is burnout because they are overworked and why are some of our employees overworked because there aren't enough people to help do the work and how do we get a definitive answer on that is there a oh I don't know there's standards is there not like here we go I'll the phone will ring now how about an outside consultant who does this yeah I know 28275 9353 give me a call but someone had that actually is in the and they can look at what we do in this County with 5,000 people 600 are on the reservation and do not 602 people reside on uh in the uh Sovereign Nation of Grand Portage so and they are not part of the tax paying base for property taxes that's all though we are available and do work with Grand Portage and we provide services whenever requested needed however we can do that so it is all part of 5,6 you people that live in Cook County or whatever the number is these days so perhaps someone from the outside world who deals with all sorts of County siiz governments could tell us where are we going wrong or aren't we going wrong are we just are we just a a training ground for people to come here for a while and then quit after a year or two for them to then go to another area where they have movie theaters and shopping malls I mean I don't know or they have't they have more more specifically they have an opportunity for growth in their field which is a real problem I can see that in this community I feel like we do have opportunities and we have employees who have stayed here for a long time or have moved here recently who are committed to this community so I would disagree that we're a training ground um commissioner Mill um there are there are standards for for all the Departments and all the positions and you referenced the sheriff's department and that is you're right based on geography as well as uh population and arrests for Public Health Human Services it's often based on case load numbers and what the state standard is for how many cases there should be um I just did a simple search now and um the first thing that came up was the from the Society of human resource management which uh I guess was founded uh um in 1948 um and it says uh there should be 1.5 to uh uh uh 4.5 or there's another one that according to AI but according to uh the society for human resource management is 1.5 to 4.5 HR staff per 100 employees and this is something administrator yorki brought up I think with his recommendation um and so if you take the middle of that um because I wouldn't recommend that we are on the low end which we are currently and we have a little bit more than 100 employees so if you take the middle of that it's close to 2.5 so I think that's an appropriate number an appropriate ask and and that's an investment in our employees and and it really supports staff um so I think I think that's a good recommendation there's also standards for maintenance departments and uh as our square footage is changing and we're adding more space um we're already my understanding I think uh one of our staff members said that uh if we were up to standards we would have six uh um U maintenance people for for the buildings that are being proposed and so I think adding one more is very appropriate we all I think recognize the the demands of our maintenance department and how they've been um overburdened over the years so it's just our willingness and ability mind you to invest in these ways that I think is is um what's stopping us commissioner stle um I don't think you have to go outside to find out the different department heads and what their time frame is in handling things we already have heard from HR plumber that her time frame will be very limited in terms of what she can do if it's restricted and so we'd have to live with that too that we can't just say here do this study or here do this or do that I mean you can have a list but um you know I don't think that's fair to employees too especially heads of departments so I think we have to be fair in what we and how we treat them and one of the ways we treat them is to honor what they've asked and I don't think it's out of line at all so I'm going to say okay commissioner Johnson 415,000 out of our pilt roughly roughly he's he's the auditor Brady what's that how does that get us down to what we want I come up with a different number so I'm curious to hear from auditor Powers Yeah with the the 29,000 and another 415 you'd get down to 4.74 and is that the removal of Sawtooth Bluffs yes and and another 45 if we if we kept saw tooth Bluffs what would it be five little over five huh uh 4.98 is that reasonable to keep it in I hope so this year it's been right many years eight years yeah so it's been eight years and the community has been uh they've had input many years ago should the community again yes have input before something so that would be part of this yeah that's part of the whole cost of it is um getting that buy and getting that input and reaching out to you user groups and having events to to um ask the questions develop a plan Madam chair we do have truth or taxation on Monday night Tuesday or I mean Tuesday so people can come then mhm and we only have another meeting after next week right yeah yes so at the latest the 17th of December we me we need to make the decision correct well I feel like today's discussion has been really helpful um we've identified some values that we have on our staffing we've talked about um elimination of a couple areas um but I feel very confident that with the use of pilt regardless of what we decide in a final package about the Boundary Waters appraisal and Sawtooth Bluffs I think that using our Levy I would agree with you is an appropriate way to go um and we have several years that we can do that to taper It Off other thoughts commissioner white no just but the whole idea that I mean commissioner Mill says Kick the Can down the road well we're kicking kicking kicking because normally as the years go by with inflation costs always go up so to think that we're going to be able to come to a magic year where costs are um we can sustain what we're doing which we'll be doing more in 3 years 5 years whatever um without additional use of savings money is um that's not sens that doesn't make sense to me we will always need if we are going to try to keep the levy down for those taxpayers who don't they are on fixed incomes so um their fixed incomes are not going to rise as fast as inflation or as fast as our levies even at 5% it's it's gets harder every year for them and that's a big concern I have I share that concern 100% um and just for reference our new requests for resources this year were 683 th000 almost 68400 000 and so if you took out all of those new requests uh that drops our Levy down a lot and so pres that's what I'm saying presumably we won't have these new requests next year can I quote you on this year you can quote me as saying presumably we won't have new letter cuz you know we know how a presumption goes um and so how we get off of the dependency of spending the pilt is not having as many new requests and so yes there will be costs Cola will keep pushing things up right our our uh our our staffing is our number one expense um but uh it's not going to be at 8.4 and it's not going to be at five and so if we can get this down artificially to five then um we can slowly incorporate it into our operating budget and that's exactly what we did for the comp study and I think it went incredibly smoothly considering how big of an increase that that put on the levy um and and I think we can do the same thing here um we have about the same amount of resources and a smaller cost than the comp study was so again don't want to uh ignore the capital costs that are coming but I do believe that we can build towards that and and and accommodate it I don't want to see Levy's Skyrocket or or I mean of course I don't want to pay as much in taxes but I think the responsible thing to do is just to try to keep that that Levy um as level as as as we can um so that's my sense that's the sense that I'm having it's not that I I'm discrediting the the the unsustainability of it I'm just trying to wean ourselves off of of the pilt commissioner Johnson I have a question for commissioner Mills because I you said something and I'm trying to understand what you were saying apologize if I Mard so you said we have $600,000 in New requests for this nearly 684 and I can't find that piece of paper where that was all written down I just looked September 5th okay you I know I have it somewhere here but are we saying we won't continue the staff training are we saying we're not going to continue the future truck payments and the seasonal worker I mean the um here well so those won't be new requests they're in there and um like I said we're not going to be hiring new people but it's going to be in there and so we slowly uh wean off much like we did like when we upped the wages with the comp study it's not that we just did it for one year it's those went up and and then we had to adjust the levy but we were also able to use arpa to kind of subsidize that and kind of uh you know cushion the the cost and so there will be ongoing it's just not going to have that big of an increase because it's already in our budget and the other thing to think about is we're going to continue to get our pilt dollars both state and federal it's not like they're going away what we're doing right now is utilizing funds that Brady wisely held on to in the event that we would have to pay them back sorry I'm still confused because well I'm going to recommend I think we've had a really good discussion today I don't think we're at a point we're ready to make a decision today or vote on anything but um let's come back at this on Tuesday again and as you mentioned we have our TNT meeting on Tuesday um I'm sure we'll get feedback from the community between now and Tuesday and potentially Tuesday we could make a decision um but um good discussion I appreciate all the effort people have put into this commissioner Mills got my tax statement and I don't doubt we'll have community members um um there was there was good news and there was bad news um I think the bad news outweighed the good news um so I'm I'm expecting people to to be here expressing their concerns about for other Commissioners and I would like to the listening public or anybody that please contact Commissioners anyone you want to talk to because we all work for all of you and then also um since we are in a position at this point where we're going to be seeking new t uh leadership a super uh no an administrator someone who works for the board if anybody in the community would like to share this Impressions or their experiences with administrative with cook County's administrative form of government please let super or administrator Rowan Watkins know because he's the one that can disseminate that information right you said to let so regular people and his number is 218 387 3666 366 six and we hope to hear from you because this is if you don't speak up you don't have a right to complaint and you'll get no sympathy so that's it I'm done Comm m i I will still sympathize but I think it's important um that uh the people of their district contact their commissioner I think that is what our uh structure is intended for um and that's what I would recommend if someone uh that's it's what I do recommend if someone outside of my district contacts me of course I listen and and Converse but I always say you should really talk to your commissioner that's um the most appropriate in my mind but it is it is so call David Mills if you live in District what are you three missioner Mills if you're in District three all right any other discussion commissioner I would just like to point out because it sounded like maybe we'd be prepared at our next meeting to determine our Levy and I just want to say personally feel that's totally inappropriate that we would decide a levy amount before we have our TNT meeting which is that evening so um and I was I guess referring to decisions about line items okay but I just wanted to be clear that we are not making a decision before we hear from the public and good clarification we're technically not allowed to until after that meeting legally and I I assumed it was after at the end of the TNT is what I assumed you're refer so thank you we're all on the same page of what we're doing and what we're listening to yeah yeah and we'll kick it down the road until the next Comm until the next meeting on the 17 17th stay tuned let's turn it over to interim administrator Watkins to uh talk a little bit about some good news oh from mcit yeah thank you so on November 20th uh we received an email from the executive director of mcit Minnesota c's for intergovernmental trust uh congratulating Cook County as their County of the year and so Per mcit County of the Year sets the standard of Excellence in risk management and loss control during the year and they recognize this County us because of our outstanding commitment to loss control and risk management and our aggressive efforts to educate inform staff on techniques to mitigate exposure and its Superior assistance when claims arise so Safety Committee and and everyone else supervisors and everyone that's part of that uh loss control and risk management uh deserves a lot of credit and Cook County will receive that award at at AMC I've suggested that commissioner stor as our voting member uh be the one to receive the award on our behalf we can be together on it whoever's there yeah often times everyone goes up on stage together so perfect then yeah that's that's the information I have there is there questions on that I just remember years ago head from Lumber Company I mean it's really hard to not have accidents and to stay healthy it's a real concerted effort by everybody in the organization all the time and so congratulations everyone here in Cook County you guys have done an incredible job watch now we'll have dump truck go off the road in the snow or no it's you've you've all done a really it's it's the employees that have and the people that the supervisors that have done this we have not done that David I haven't gotten an accident right but we haven't we right well I haven't either yet I participated in the Safety Committee for a while but I am no longer on that so I can't take the credit for this past year Bravo other updates I yeah I would share that we've been working with uh facilities director Brook Bard uh as well as uh some other HR or our HR director and some other directors bhhs uh on Space needs uh we've had some kind of conversations and preliminary visits to some off-site locations that they're potential for as well as looking at potentially reconfiguring some spaces within this building kind of trying to find and Target potentially underutilize space within the courthouse and as Brooke is you know fresh set of eyes to the facility and and get his point of view and thoughts on that um and nothing definitive to to share today but just to know that it's something that we're working on and looking at it's come before the building committee and and I think by the time the building committee meets again we'll have more information to provide and share and then working with DDA on their our administrator hiring process as well as bkv and our LEC project continues to move forward with the timeline that they've laid out for us and the the meetings associated with that not much that you're not aware of other than that since we've been meeting every week um but yeah that's that's what I have I'd stand for any questions any questions all right well thank you we'll go on to commissioner our updates commissioner Johnson yeah sorry I'm looking for my notes was that one see Highway Department oh HRA we've talked about HRA yeah updating that um highway department and met on Thursday and um The Onion River Road in the winter is plowed by is privately funded through the visit Crook County that is no longer happening so so our highway department will probably get lots of phone calls about why isn't the Onion River Road plowed this winter and it is not a County Road it is a forest service road but there will be phone calls I'm sure it's a very busy road um so there was discussion about jurisdictions of The Onion River Road cuz the another one was the um grade mhm is another major it's a forest service road that we do plow with no reimbursement from the forest service um because we use it as a um emergency emergency rout even though that we can't use it right now because there's a bridge out but is another story I got the backstory on that one from there and then uh see oh yeah and then there's the North Pike Lake Road so there was discussion about jurisdiction of roads that um was a beginning discussion and um just for your awareness in the next coming year there will be more discussions on that topic and you might get a phone call about why the Onion River Road isn't being plowed just want to give you a heads up on that anything else that's all I have all right commissioner white why was visit Cook County plowing it or paying for the plow and now not paying for the plow that would be a question for visit Cook County I have not I don't know the answer to that okay um all right M um do do you does anyone happen to remember um how long this so we have in our in our new requests that budget to have another piece of equipment and another employee is that a 10 year is in 10 years we're going to be able to afford that or I can't remember the time frame it was more of a 10e but we talked about this or I talked about it with U on Thursday um so there's like I said this is a even though this idea has been floated since I've been on the highway advisor it's becoming um talking about more now the fact so because of some other issues with forest service and not having funding so this is a case where the forest service owns roads and it's not taking care of roads and so it falls on the county to do that and it's an unfunded mandate I mean I mean in a way that's way they should be taking care of the roads in our County but they're not and asking us to do it for them anyway so that way that's another piece of this puzzle but um so we saw very preliminary well to me it was preliminary um mapping and ideas from our Highway Department about roads that we can pick up and Roads that we can let go of cuz maybe we maybe there is no reason to have that Cony roads so when we're talking about um overall mileage there's a mixture there and like I said this is beginning discussion so I don't want to name those things out loud now but just wanted it to be on your radar that that's coming currently if because we already do the grade that doesn't require another pickup truck or or um driver and if we let go some of these old places that we plow that would free up time for maybe something else um so it doesn't necessarily mean we need that um even right a few years I'm I'm saying it's down the road that's not a necessary thing M what engineer has had said we've got the right amount of equipment and the right amount of employees for the roads that we have at this point in time and it's so that they're thinking about which ones can we cast off and there are some little tiny ones I know but uh that's the reason why because it's not just it's expensive the greater the truck the employee and then every year well not every year that you have to buy the equipment but the employee will be there so Madam chair um commissioner Johnson that is probably one of the most used roads in the West End it is and there had been a private plower so are you saying he's not doing it anymore he he is not a I was told at the highway advisory that visit Cook County paid that driver and Cook County is or visit Cook County is not making that payment this year so I have no clue okay if if maybe the resorts down there on the west end or if somebody else is picking it that up don't we didn't know yeah sgsd because it would be it could be yeah it'll be a detriment to the drivers to everybody that goes up and down that road now the forest service did send a message I don't see it here right now that they were going to improve the road with gravel and a few things like that but I don't I don't know if it's now well now it's winter in the future or whatever but you know there there is a business end of Cook County in the West End that maybe they'll have to kind of put their resources together well so it was mentioned that maybe it should be brought up at the township meetings that they want to take this over because it is a um well we don't have any roads in in luden so schroer I mean monetarily they could support it but yeah that'll be good I'll visit with visit C County on this yeah what do do we know what that cost was was roughly no I mean we didn't have anything to do with we didn't have might I did hear but I can't remember sure thank you right commissioner what your updat primarily um a lot of phone calls and random conversations with people who wanted to know what's happening with the cell tower on Highway 61 and it wasn't on our agenda it will be December 3rd and and the Planning Commission approved it unanimously to come back and I was aware of that but it was like a lot of people like what do you mean you didn't do H you know and it was fine it was fine and uh and then back I guess the primary primary concern in this last week were the roads from and that was it it was just like it's winter coming and there's a there's a grand plan and and I'll and actually for the engineer uh I passed along a a question and then I uh because of what he was involved with I answered essentially the same thing that we have been told that the 2025 in the East End the arrowhead Trail in the Old Chicago Bay Road are on the on the calendar for upgrades and repairs and then at that point other smaller projects can be like where you need tar where you need whatever you need those will be tacked on and they'll be able to do them all right well thank you it commissioner Mills um primary meetings were the Eda and then also I had mentioned previously I'd be attending the chb Personnel um meeting and um there was some good conversation and work at the chb Personnel really trying to make the the organization more professional and have stronger policies um there's often a lot of turnover both because Commissioners either leave their boards or they just get reassigned to different committees as well well as we had a new director I think that was in 202 that she came on um and um and so you know now it's it's gotten to the point we like hey it would be nice if we had some systems and structures in place regarding pay tables and that sort of thing um but so much of it is all Grant funded so that makes it really hard but a lot of it is regular grants coming in from the state um so there is some room there but um uh there is going to be um some turnover some significant turnover in the organization uh and um it was kind of a a quasi recent hire but still that level of experience losing that is is going to be difficult um and then as far as the Eda is concerned we have our new director Heidi krampitz and um that was her first meeting um I don't know if you all are aware but um I made a big boo boo um uh I've been saying it's probably the biggest of my career thus far um and I still have two more years for sure so I could make a bigger one yet but I'm I'm my my guard is way up now but um um I wanted us as a board to understand kind of the implications of our decision to not combine the boards and I felt that the past um director um I guess as well as Jason hail um uh their their Exodus um in that and so I received permission from Teresa VA to share redacted version of her exit interview and um and so I sent that out to be distributed to you all as well as the Eda board and it was my understanding shared with you all it was not shared with the Eda board and then I got a request from um media for um that redacted version which um was public because it was shared with you all um and could have been received through public information request but um me being practical uh thought like okay I can share this and um the the hook there is that that was published before the Eda board saw it and so that was a big mistake on my end I assumed because it had been shared with you that it had also been shared with them but it had not um and so there was um a a fair amount of frustration there and I had been warned um about that just to be very careful with it multiple times and I I thought I had but I should have double checked that the Eda board had received it before I sent it out to Media so um so that was kind of a hubub um but you know it's been talked through um the Eda board uh appreciates my apology and and my acknowledgement of the mistake um I talked with um director krampitz about it and and she understands as well I also let um Teresa baida know and she understands as well and so I've really tried my best to make amends on on all the fronts that I can and um just really excited to have Heidi um here she's wonderful and has the experience and it's just hitting the ground running she will be attending the uh energy trans uh energy transition advisory uh Council um in person and that is the council that um works with communities such as in Tac Harbor um to go through this process of what comes next after those shutdowns happen and so um going to be a very strong advocate for us and and a really really powerful player so and in her in her interviews too she she um had some great ideas regarding that and just a lot of interest a lot of excitement so um if you haven't had a chance to visit with her yet I I recommend it um and um she is of course uh in a transition phase um working back and forth um she'll be here for board meetings and um um but just figuring out housing and that that whole game again so um little little bit of challenge there but we've we've seen demonstrated both with with with uh Teresa and Jason that we we can get good good work done but we also uh good work done remotely but we also feel strongly that we need someone in the community in Cook County to have those face to-face meetings with business owners and community members so that's that's where we're working and that's where she's that's where she's aiming so that's probably all to report on today all right thank you commissioner stor thank you well unfortunately I did not receive your message so I don't know if that went through Rowan first and then cuz I have nothing oh so if you want to resend it so that I sure yeah it was over a month ago now um it was September 21st that it was sent out I believe okay or well I'll double check that but yeah I will send it to Rowan sure and then just open meeting law just so I can review what you absolutely yes yes okay thank you um just a little note about something exciting that um ardc is going to sponsor um they been able to get 1.85 million in a grant from Noah for climate challenge grants and uh it's going to uh affect the project area from St Louis County to Grand Portage uh Lake County Cook Carlton unfortunately the folks Inland not so much because it's a coastal program but they also have many grants that will all be looking at especially uh maybe uh getting a grant Todo um study of government buildings as to you know their efficiency and all of that um they've hired a a new gal so this is a four-year project Grant and uh so we met Dian ghold and um she's excited about coming to um St Louis County in General northern Minnesota because she's from Michigan and uh has lots of degrees behind her in in uh climate climatology so I'll report more later when and they uh progress with uh some specific programming that maybe we'd be able to U take advantage of so that was exciting that's it excellent thank you well I had a chance to go to the Gunflint ranger station open house um after the last time we met that evening and one of the primary areas of focus that they wanted to improve upon was communication and with the burn piles that were burned along the Flint Trail this fall it went much better than in previous years and they have even um better ideas for the future they're working with Cook County Coalition of Lake Associations to get the contact information for every Lake Association president and when a fire is going to occur near one of those um associations whether it be a road Association a Lake Association they will be contacted in addition to all our media information that goes out so that was great uh we had our Planning Commission meeting and there was unanimous support of uh the tower down uh near Schroeder off of Highway 61 and coming before us will also be information related to a Woodland Hills proposed plat that's an addition to mink Ranch I think that's the way that um we had best identify that area and then a rezoning um voran rezone was up for the Planning Commission but the schroer uh Town board suggested to re delay that until 2025 because they are writing a new land use plan um then for um Cook County Historical Society they didn't have a quorum unfortunately so they couldn't take any action at their last meeting but they had some issues with the new roof that got put on this shingles some of them blew off and our facilities manager Brook lard was down there right away and um things last Friday got replaced all those shingles um but they'll be further examination not only by Rono Roofing but looking at the company that made the shingle GF and potentially a new roof put on in the spring so they're just exploring whether it was a manufacturers defect or what exactly happened but um anyway it was really appreciative that Brooke as our facilities director got got down there right away and dealt with it and the Historical Society greatly appreciates that as well um we had an airport meeting last Thursday and got some feedback on the master plan from the FAA and um potential projects that occur could occur over the next 20 25 years and some additional wind cones on the north side of the runway additional hangers potentially for FedEx uh you know United Parcel um for package delivery it's becoming pretty common in remote areas that they're flying things in so they don't have so much truck traffic and we see all those trucks going up and down 61 and are aware of what that is so uh potential hanger um that could be coming in for that um we talked about the fact that there is um an increase in the use of drones and our area in particular is likely to see quite a substantial increase um they can deliver packages but for us it is about dropping off medical supplies in The Boundary Waters um transporting people moose surveys I mean there's all kinds of applications for remote areas so our master plan is going to include charging stations for drones and Advanced Air Mobility and um movement of a fuel Farm addition of some docks down on devil track Lake to support sea planes because of all the firefighting that is being done and so it was a a really good overview of feedback that the FAA gave um us on all of our ideas and what this will lead to is eventually in the spring time a community meeting kind of an open house probably um here in the Cook County Commissioner room to talk about what those plans are like and what that vision for the future is and then we had our security and safety committee meetings earlier this week um talked about just how much better our duress alarms and fire alarms are now that um things have been improved talked about increasing the frequency of um drills and that from staff there has been additional requests for training um so the possibility of a survey going out and looking at what types of training would you like what do you need and then um the last thing I want to bring up is from the HRA and this happened after commissioner Johnson and I attended our meeting on Thursday Friday Anna Hamilton um as a representative of Hamilton habitat met with the ITR and became aware that there are some funds that are available for infrastructure and so there's the potential for eight units in Cook County um specifically within the City of Grand marray a couple of those I'm sure you're familiar with we've talked about about them before down by the homestead building there's two lots with very expensive hookups for sewer and water but there's the potential for six others on some property that the county owns so could imagine um our Ballpark and our recycle center just to the north on the east side of Fourth Street is a parcel that we um own it's between the ball field and the Gunflint Trail there's a lot of water there that's not a surprise to any of us um but a wetland delineation has been done of that property and it is likely that the HR will be approaching the County Board about the disposition of that property to the HRA for potential housing use um so I'm giving you that information now hopefully next Tuesday when we meet we'll have more information and some maps for you um still no decision at that point but just informational but we will keep you informed uh December 5th Jason hail is meeting with the ITR to get further information about the Grant application and the opportunity to uh do this so little update and something to look forward to commissioner white I have a question about do you know if the Historical Society has they received a $700,000 grant they were going to do a um building uh climate control building for archives have they gone done anything with this at all because they must be running out of time for you to that is correct um you're you're when you um get property up there as they did you have a 2-year period in which to build and they have not met that twoyear goal so there is discussion about what they are going to do like I said there was no Quorum at the meeting they couldn't discuss or take any action but that will be coming in the future okay and with that we have a list of upcoming meetings um through December 17th which is our last business meeting of the year and with that is there a motion to adjourn so moved thank you commissioner Mills is there support support thank you commissioner Johnson we have a motion and a support to adjourn anything further all in favor I opposed sorry I was forgot to vote is that a yay or no I am a yay all right we have you nanis unanimously approved to adjourn our meeting thank you one more to go this ho who's counting who's counting