The most notable issue discussed was the introduction of a rifle zone for deer hunting. Residents from Rushford, including Richard Anderson and Zayn Jacobson, voiced their strong opposition to allowing high-powered rifles. Anderson cited safety concerns, noting that his property’s proximity to roads increased the risk of accidents with unfamiliar hunters in the area. “If I don’t know who’s in my woods and I can’t stop them, the bullets get closer,” Anderson warned, highlighting the danger of stray bullets. Jacobson supported this view, sharing his own experience of a shotgun slug damaging his property and expressing concern that rifles could exacerbate the issue, given their greater range compared to shotguns. He questioned the necessity of rifles when shotguns and muzzle loaders had traditionally sufficed for hunting in the area.

In contrast, John Hazelton from Winona advocated for the rifle zone, arguing that rifles are more accurate and would reduce the number of shots needed, potentially lowering the risk of stray bullets. Hazelton emphasized that the safety concerns were similar for both rifles and shotguns. He challenged the board to consider the underlying value of life, regardless of distance, urging them to reevaluate their stance on firearm safety.

As the board transitioned to internal matters, discussions shifted to overtime and compensatory time policies. Rising overtime costs, despite increased staffing, prompted concerns among commissioners. The dialogue focused on the challenges faced by departments like the dispatch center and jail, where vacancies and medical leaves necessitated overtime to maintain operations. Some commissioners advocated for hiring more staff, while others argued that overtime might be more cost-effective in some situations. The board approved an updated policy with an 80-hour cap on compensatory time, though questions remained about the implications of federal overtime law changes on county expenses.

Another topic was the future of the county’s law enforcement center. With an aging facility and an approved budget allocation of $750,000 (or possibly $1.5 million, pending clarification) for emergency funds, the board grappled with planning for necessary renovations or a new facility. Some commissioners expressed frustration over the lack of clear communication and updates on existing projects, emphasizing the need for a concrete plan moving forward. They discussed the potential for remodeling the current facility if the city of Winona decided to vacate, which would allow the county to optimize space utilization for its departments. Commissioners called for a formal request to the city for a decision on their plans.

In community development funding discussions, the board considered a significant request totaling $140,234, which included $70,000 for community development and $25,000 for the housing trust fund. This sparked debate over the financial burden on taxpayers, with some commissioners hesitant to approve a 14% increase in funding. Concerns were raised about the source of funds, clarifying that the housing trust fund request would come from local tax levies rather than state aid. Proponents argued that maintaining current funding levels could lead to higher future costs, citing the proactive nature of the agency in addressing community needs.

The board also touched on the city of Winona’s financial contribution to the county’s Section 8 housing program, which was deemed insufficient to cover costs. A commissioner called for the city to increase its funding to support the program adequately, highlighting perceived inequities in funding responsibilities.

Commissioners emphasized the importance of transparency and setting clear timelines to avoid further delays in decision-making, particularly concerning the law enforcement center and community development efforts. As the meeting concluded, one commissioner announced their intention not to run for the House in 2026.