Washington County Board Meeting

Good morning. I will call the May 19th Washington County Board of Commissioners meeting to order. Clerk, please take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Here. Commissioner Karwoski? Here. Commissioner Cox? Here. Commissioner Bigham? Here. Commissioner Clausen? Here. Roll call taken, all present. Please join us for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Next item are comments from the public. And, I do have a few speaker cards, and just going to say that if we can keep the comments to about three to five minutes, and try not to repeat each other and previous speakers. But all are welcome. And so I have a couple variety of topics. And so if people do not mind, I think I'm going to do the non-watershed speakers second. And I'm going to do the first two that are not related to that. So we will start with Lynn Pritchett from Lake St. Croix Beach.

If you want to please come up to the speaker's rostrum, state your name and community for the record.

Good morning. My name is Lynn Pritchett, and I'm from Lake St. Croix Beach. Good morning, members of the Board of Commissioners. I'm here to express some serious concerns regarding ongoing governing issues on equal enforcement practices and procedural actions that are occurring within our city of Lake St. Croix Beach. These matters have significantly undermined the public trust and raised questions regarding the compliances with the Minnesota statute, our city ordinances, and proper governmental procedures. One of the primary concerns that we are having involves the apparent selective use and approval of building permits within our city. It has become increasingly evident that certain individuals appear to receive approval and accommodations for construction projects, while other residents face inconsistency treatments and obstacles. Therefore, there are concerns that the state statute and applicable building codes have not been being followed within our city officials. Of even greater concern is the fact that residents have reportedly been informed by city representatives that certain projects approvals were wrong from the beginning, yet no meaningful corrective action has been taken to address the violations or the remedies of these situations.

Allowing known violations and improper approval to remain unresolved creates unequal treatment among residents and exposes the cities to serious legal and ethical concerns. I wish to address a concern regarding actions taken by the mayor involving appointments of a city council member. It is my understanding that the mayor directed or encouraged the city council to approve a new council member without proper public notice and without providing residents the opportunity for a special election or adequate public participation. Such actions arise serious concerns regarding the transparency due to the process, and in the adherence to the Minnesota laws governing municipal vacancies and for the public meetings. Furthermore, our growing concerns regarding the mayor's absence from the city for extended period of time, specifically that the mayor reportedly resides in Florida from late October through the end of May and participates only in meetings solely through a Zoom remote video attendance during that full period of time. Residents deserve the clarity regarding whether this arrangement complies with all the residency requirements, attendance obligations, and the statutes that are governing the elected municipal officials from the state of Minnesota.

Also, aside from the mayor, there are concerns regarding the interim city administrator. To public knowledge, there has been no oath taken for her when she switched from deputy clerk to the interim city administrator/deputy clerk, raising concern and questions about her authority to be conducting the business on behalf of the city, and the legitimacy of the city businesses that she has already conducted. She was appointed as an interim city administrator clerk in October of '25 via a motion with no resolution passed for the finalization of this appointment. The accumulative effect of these issues have created a significant erosion of public confidence in our city leadership and governing. Residents deserve fair treatment, transparent government, equal enforcement of laws and ordinances, and a leadership that acts in the best interest of our entire community rather than just a select few. My last concern is the delay in response to our data requests under the Minnesota Government Data Practice Act. I personally put in a request in November of 2025, have followed up and still have not gotten the requested into that I requested.

I received an email to me and that I owed money, so I answered with I wanted to inspect these documents prior to getting the copies. I have yet to have any kind of opportunity to review any of these documents. I think six months later is a long time to wait for a data request. Therefore, I respectfully am requesting or asking for a formal review and investigation into the handling and approval of our building permits and city codes, a review of the mayor's residency status, attendance practices, and the compliance with all applicable Minnesota statutes and municipal requirements. I think our city is entitled to the transparency and accountability in all of our city proceedings moving forward. I am also asking if there are any resources that would be available for us as a community to help to get some of these issues resolved within our community. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Pritchett. Just going to remind folks, too, that the commissioners don't respond during the open forum part, but there will be a response by staff, or you can follow up after the meeting. The next speaker I have is Kerry Mitchell from Scandia.

If you could please state your name and community, please.

I'm Kerry Mitchell, and I'm from Scandia. I'm here today to request your immediate assistance and intervention regarding ongoing water infrastructure issues related to my March 10th public comment here. This is to provide an update and more information. The shared community systems in my development were never cost-effective options and do not align with EPA guidance and local comprehensive planning goals for cost-effective, decentralized septic and water infrastructure. I'd like to give you a little more background, and I brought information with me. The development was approved to be built under certain developer agreement conditions, which were not met. The city included building permits in conflict with the city and developer agreements, which I will provide for you, exceeding the amount of bedrooms that the septic system was built for. This is in conflict with the approval of allowing the development, the community development homeowners were told would be built, the agreements homeowners signed at lot hold, and the shared utility agreement.

This has been a long ongoing problem that needs resolution. I don't want to belabor your time, and I have quite a bit of email documents that I will email so that you all have access to that. There's a city council meeting tonight that is rushed along with this on the topic. I'm concerned that homeowners do not have all the information that they need in how to obtain cost-effective, aligned-with-the-comprehensive-plan water infrastructure. I was here yesterday and met with your environmental staff. They were very helpful, and they're going to be reaching out to me again. It has reached, what I would call, all of a sudden, a crisis point. Because between an HOA meeting, where the city administrator and mayor attended last Wednesday, May 13th, for the first time, and now, we have pressure applied to apply for an MPCA bridge loan facilitated by the city to replace a system that we know has never worked out, and there are many problems with.

And if you do not sign this agreement by September 1st, you will be fined over $10,000. So I've reached out to contacts at the MPCA and other agencies. I just want to keep you updated and in the loop, provide this to you. If you can send a staff member to the meeting tonight in Scandia, I would really appreciate it. I think that homeowners deserve the correct information and to review all the options. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. The next three speakers I have are related to the CarMar Watershed appointments. I'm going to defer if the attorney wants to go first or last. It's kind of up to you. We also have Julie Andrich and Eric Ogren, so I don't know which order you guys would like to proceed in. I'd be pleased to be last. Okay. You can go first. Okay. Then why don't we go with Julie Andrich, manager from May Township.

And if you could just state your name for the record, that'd be great. Good morning, commissioners and staff. I was here last week, but for the record, my name is Julie Andrich, and I'm here today representing and speaking on behalf of May Township. Today, members of our town board and community, we've got a full house here, are present in support of the message I will give on their behalf. During public comments last Tuesday, I requested a meeting with all of you to have an opportunity to provide some background and context on why the upcoming appointments of the Carnelian Marine St. Croix Watershed District board managers are so important to the town of May. Among many things I've learned this past week, I've come to understand that standard practice for this board is to follow the recommendations for these appointments, as indicated by Commissioners Miron and Cox, as the activity resides in their district. And so this board found no material reason to meet with me.

Commissioners Cox and Miron did make time for me last Friday, along with Administrator Corbid, and I appreciated the hour we spent together. In that meeting, I requested reconsideration of the appointments to provide greater representation for May Township than what is being recommended today. Also in last Friday's meeting, I had the opportunity to meet Commissioner Cox in person for the first time and hear about the criteria she used in this selection process. She used a word that resonated with me as a business owner who has been hiring people my entire career, curiosity. She and Commissioner Miron shared that the candidates they are recommending demonstrated qualities and characteristics of curiosity during their interviews. They appear to be people who will ask good questions, and in some cases, are self-starters who will be a breath of fresh air on the board. I couldn't agree more with having the quality of curiosity. In fact, May Township endorsed five candidates who also exemplified that same characteristic, one of whom we endorsed outside of our township in Kim Huff of Scandia.

To have a well-rounded and effective board, we believe managers should have other diverse qualities as well, like experience in business or finance or accounting, as there are millions of dollars at stake annually on the watershed. Having other board experience in my own past, I understand the value of having people on a board with a wide variety of talents and schools of thought. If everyone thinks the same, there is no purpose in having a board in the first place. Having attended many watershed meetings personally over the last year, I've observed the need for more experience in asking probing questions about the budget, the annual audit, and other financial matters, with the confidence to push back when things don't seem right. That is, after all, the board's job, to question and to challenge, not to nod and say yes to everything the staff wants. With all watersheds having unlimited taxing authority, I believe that having managers who will challenge the administration is a big and very important responsibility on behalf of the taxpayers in the district.

May Township stands to lose that challenger by not reappointing Anne Warner. Geographically, May Township contains seven of the 10 subwatersheds in the district. Today's vote, as proposed, will reduce May Township's representation from three managers to one. Last year, there were two candidates for the only open board seat, one from Stillwater Township and one from Scandia. Many letters were written to Commissioners Miron and Cox in support of the candidate from Stillwater Township. When the Scandia candidate was chosen, we were told that our preferred candidate wasn't chosen because, quote, "He lived in a subwatershed that already had two managers representing it, and adding a third would be oversaturation." End quote. Your vote today, as proposed and recommended, will be in stark contrast to the criteria used last year. It will give Scandia four of the seven positions, three of those four in the same subwatershed. Marine will keep one, May Township is reduced to one, and Stillwater Township finally gets on the board with one.

May Township has done diligent work in understanding the criteria in selecting new board managers. It has also advocated for and given support to local government units outside of itself, to both Stillwater Township last year and Scandia this year. We aren't asking for anything more for ourselves than what we believe everyone should have, fair and balanced representation. While my involvement in local government is very new, the rest of May Township's board is seasoned. Both Chairman Pasler and Supervisor Rolfe have served our township for decades each. Supervisor Rolfe served on the Planning Commission for more than two decades and was recently reelected by a landslide to his second term on the board. Chairman Pasler served on the Planning Commission for his first two years and the last 27 on the Town Board. He was reelected, also by a landslide, in his second term as chair. It is clear that the citizens of May Township trust and value the job these guys are doing on their behalf year over year. I tell you this because, while I am newer to this discussion, May Township and its leadership are not.

In fact, the subject of our watershed has been a constant topic for the last 10 years, including under the leadership of longtime board chair Bill Votaw and longtime supervisor and chair, John Adams. The frustrations of May Township regarding the watershed spending and taxation were repeatedly addressed by these former leaders. While May Township runs a tight ship with a very frugal and responsible budget for its taxpayers, the watershed has not given an inch of concession, citing all of their projects are critical. And then they levy whatever they want, and the taxpayers are stuck with it. As the watershed continues to gain unchecked momentum, we can clearly see what's ahead of us. May Township represents the largest square acres, largest population, and largest tax base in the watershed. Without appropriate representation, our future is abysmal. The watershed has recently written its own standard practices to begin enforcement at the civil and criminal level. They want to continue random surveillance under the guise of a program called Score the Shore, in which annual photographs are taken of each shoreline, private property, to see what has changed from the previous year.

If there have been any changes, a violation letter is sent, and the wheels of standard practices are in motion. At our last township meeting, Chairman Pasler opined and asked, "If this regulator has no opposition, I shudder to think what this township will look like in 10 years." The control and the levies continue. As elected officials, we can be removed from our positions when voters are unhappy about how we represent them. In this case, the five of you are the voters who make these appointments for positions that can't be voted out. Before making these votes today, I'm going to ask you to be curious. I'm going to ask you to think about what topics or issues cause you the most noise in your districts, and put yourselves in the shoes of May Township and consider what it would look like to have no voice in your own backyard. I'm going to ask you to think about little May Town Hall, filled with over 100 voters and taxpayers last June, demanding change.

I'm asking you to consider reevaluating the list of candidates and consider giving May Township fair representation at the table. On behalf of May Township, thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you.

The next speaker is Eric Ogren. If you want to come to the speaker's restroom and state your name and community, please. Good morning. My name's Eric Ogren, and I live in May Township on Carnelian. Julie did a very good job spelling out all of our concerns in May Township. But as a resident, I felt that I wanted to get up here and just convey some of our thoughts as well. You sit here on the board, and you represent your constituents very well. And we're asking for that same thing from the watershed. The watershed has an issue with society. What I mean by that is it's a PR issue. No one wants to work with the watershed. Unfortunately, I worked with the watershed. I spent $50,000 redoing my shoreline under the direction of the watershed, and it failed. It failed this spring. I had no recourse, spent another $12,000 fixing it of my own money. And yet, as Julie said, the watershed goes around, takes pictures of shorelines.

You add one rock, there's a cease and desist letter sent. Ozark Trail, I don't know if any of you've been on it, but it's a dirt road. These last two nights with the rains we've had, there are plumes in Carnelian. Never have we ever heard from the watershed what they're going to do about that dirt road. Right? They care about our shorelines, and we care deeply about the lake. And we'll do whatever we need to to work with the watershed to fix it. But they don't talk about the big items. And who's going to represent Carnelian Lake if the watershed doesn't? That's our problem. We need representation from May Township. As Julie said, we're the largest acreage. We have the most body of water. And you represent your constituents. May Township would want and should represent their constituents as well. And I ask you, I implore you to please reconsider the appointments. We need somebody that is a resident of May Township on that board that they can then work with the watershed to advocate for all of these bodies of water.

We're not questioning the other people. We're not questioning the people themselves. We're just asking representation. And I don't think that's a lot to ask, especially in our government system. Thank you. Those are my comments. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. The next speaker is, I think it's Dave Snyder. If you want to come up and state your name and community. Thank you. Dave Snyder. I'm the attorney for May Township. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. Yesterday afternoon, I sent in a lengthy multi-page letter with some supporting data attached to it. I understand if you haven't had a chance to take a look at that comprehensively. But it outlines some significant facts and law which we think bear very heavily on the decision that is before you. I understand that not all the commissioners may be as familiar with our geography as others. But essentially what you could imagine is a 36 square mile box that's May Township. It's bisected north and south at about its one-third point by Manning Avenue.

And then lying to the east is the balance, about three-quarters of May Township. If these nominations were to go forward, I'll illustrate what would occur. From the southern border of May Township to the northern border of May Township, on the west side of Manning, that's one-third of the township, there would be no representation. None of the residents, none of the land, none of the water bodies would have representation until you would get to approximately County Road 4, which is largely made up of the state wildlife management area. And then to the north from that, a handful of houses, and later the county park. At least on the west side of Manning Avenue, it is accurate to say that the state wildlife management area, which is not a tax-paying entity, will have better representation than any resident on the west side of Manning Avenue because there won't be a representative, resident or otherwise, for those districts.

Turning to the east side of May Township, that is to say, the east side of Manning Avenue, miles and acres of land, houses, people, water bodies exist until you encounter the first May Township resident representative. That would be Pat Gleason. Pat Gleason resides on Lake Carnelian. His district in May Township is about 1,600 acres. So for miles heading east from Manning, you do not encounter a resident representative or any representative until you get to Mr. Gleason's houseAnd even at that, Mr. Gleason is responsible for a mere 1,600 acres as against the 24,500 that are in the entire township. Beyond that, moving to the northeast, no representation occurs until you get to the far northeast corner of May Township, where a resident of Marine, currently serving well on the watershed district, has representation authority, but he is not a resident. Then, moving further to the north, there is simply no representation for these many sub-watershed districts.

Just by way of review, for 24,000 acres of land area in May Township, 22,000 of it is in the Carnelian Marine Watershed District. 1,600 acres of it, under these nominations, would be represented by a resident manager. And then if you factor in or assume that residents from Scandia and Stillwater Township can handle the representation, the represented area in May Township skyrockets to 6,816 acres as against 24,000 in total area. It is a very small fraction. And yet, May Township pays 37% of the watershed district budget. It is the largest landowner, land area in the watershed district. It has more lakes, more water bodies, more streams than any other. And when it says these things, does not say these things with the intention of minimizing the very important contributions and resources of its neighboring cities. But it instead does so to illustrate that this is a very disproportionate and non-representative proposal for representation in May Township.

If it were passed today, 92.4% of the district land in May Township would be without any representation. 62% of the district land in the township would be represented if you assume that the voting majority in Scandia, three of which are on one lake shore, and a new proposed addition in Stillwater Township could represent May Township. That is to say 62% would be without any representation if you made those favorable assumptions. These facts are contained in the letter, and as I indicated to you, I sent it at 3:30. I understand there's limited time, and I'm going to wrap up my remarks with a couple of things here. We have the benefit of some recent Supreme Court authority on this. It stems from 2002. It interprets a statute called Minnesota Statute 103D.311, and it makes it very clear, no less an authority than the Minnesota Supreme Court makes very clear, that when you are submitted with lists of candidates, as you have been here, your discretion is limited to choosing from that list. But the Supreme Court, using the clear language of the statute, made another point, and it was this.

You are still obliged to secure fair and reasonable representation for the sub-watershed districts in the area. The Supreme Court repeats that mandate at least twice in its order, and it says, "This is an obligation you have. Fair and reasonable representation for the sub-watershed districts within the district." And it addresses precisely that question when it deals with the omission of some lands in Hennepin County. It says in that case, those lands are too small to be worried about. Nobody seems to dispute that. You look on the map, it appears to be a small section of the Mississippi River. So the reality is, is for May Township, if it is proposed that 60 to 90% of its land mass and its residents are not going to be represented, it is objectively inconsistent with the mandate from the Circle Pines case. And I know you weren't all waiting around yesterday to have an academic inquiry into the Circle Pines case and found it really gratifying, but it is a ruling which completely excludes the possibility of an assignment like this.

Mr. Snyder, we- Yeah... it's been quite a while. I understand. Thank you. So if we could wrap up. Thank you. Yeah. Okay, let me just offer the following in closing if I could, Commissioner. If the goal here is to reduce May Township's representation, we cannot be of assistance. If the goal is to secure fair and reasonable representation for the residents of May Township that is proportionate, we pledge to be of further and continuing assistance. But as it stands right now, an effort to pass the resolutions before you without supporting data and documentation, would be inadvisable. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other individuals, members of the public, that would like to address the board at this time? Okay, seeing none, we will move on to approval of the agenda. Is there a motion? Madam Chair, to approve as printed. Moved. Is there a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries. The next item is consent calendar. Are there any items that commissioners wish to pull? Seeing none, is there a motion? Madam Chair, I move the consent calendar, all items. Is there a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? Aye. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Consent calendar passes five zero. Thank you. The next item is from Office of Administration and Administrator Corbid.

All right. Madam Chair and commissioners, the next item on the agenda is item number five, which is a series of resolutions to make appointments to the Carnelian Marine Watershed District. Just as a way of background, I think you got a little bit of that background today from the speakers under public comment. But the board has a process in which it provides public notice of vacancies. It asks for nominations from the cities and townships that are part of the watershed district. It conducts interviews and then makes recommendations to the board for appointments. In this case, there were 10 individuals who applied for the three positions that were open or that had terms expiring for the watershed. Those terms expire on June 21st of 2026. Of those 10 applicants, all 10 received a nomination from a municipality within the watershed district. There was a little uniqueness in this process, in the nomination letters, in that we had a couple candidates who received nominations from communities in which they did not reside. So, that was unique.

We found that that's appropriate and allowed, and so all 10 were considered as potential candidates for the watershed district appointments. We scheduled interviews on two different days. Four of the five commissioners conducted interviews. One candidate chose not to interview, withdrew. That was a candidate that resided in May Township, Mr. Albertson. So, after the interviews were conducted over those two days with the nine candidates, the board has recommended these three individuals for appointment to the watershed district. So, with that, I would certainly answer any questions the board may have or proceed as you wish. Commissioner Miron. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to move to postpone action on these appointments until June 2nd of 2026. Second. Okay, so there is a motion and a second. What is debatable is the time. So, it's not a debatable motion except for the time of which you've requested. I believe a motion to postpone is debatable. A motion to table would not be.

Oh, okay. I thought it was not for time certain, which is what you're doing. So you're postponing to time certain. You can- I-... ask the attorney. I think he's the specialist in Robert's Rules. The table is for a same meeting. Motion to postpone with time certain is not debatable except for the timing of which you've asked for it to be postponed to. Madam Chair, that is my understanding. Okay. Okay. So, if it's not debatable, then we will vote unless somebody has a discussion on the time. Go ahead. Yeah, I will just mention with respect to the time, we don't meet next Tuesday, so June 2nd is the first meeting that we meet after this meeting. I think the following meeting is a workshop meeting, that's our late meeting for review of values or whatever. So anyway, June 2nd seems to be the time that we could deal with this issue, allowing us to take into consideration the comments that were made today.

Okay. Commissioner Clausen. Yes. I have a question on time. Yep. So, this looks like there are multiple other concerns that were brought up today. Are we going to have an opportunity to talk to staff about this and the board before it comes to a public meeting and a vote, or are we going to have an opportunity to talk? Because I do have some issues that came up today that I would like to be discussed with the board. Madam Chair and Commissioner, I was following you until that last portion. If a commissioner has questions they would like to ask to staff, they can always- And board... do that at any time. And board. That question, I think, goes to the board chair as far as process and- Yep, and the motion is to be for June 2nd. So this is- This will be brought back up on June 2nd. So, at this moment, you are stating that you would not like to hear my concerns and are stating that I have to only discuss this with questions on time.

That is the- Otherwise, the only other opportunity is June 2nd. Yes, because that's when the vote would take place. Sounds good. Thank you so much. Yeah, no problem. That's when the vote would be taking place. Any further discussion related to timing? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay. That carries, and it is postponed until June 2nd.

The next item on the agenda is from Public Works, and that is to discuss contract number 18258, and that is with Andrew Giesen Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners. My name is Andrew Giesen. I'm a project manager in the Public Works department, and today Public Works will be recommending approval of a design contract related to the County Road 50 Corridor Study. So during my presentation, I will provide an overview of the study, discuss the project schedule, run through services the consultant will provide under this contract, discuss the selection process and how this contract will be funded, and close with recommended board actions.

So this study is included in the county's capital improvement plan as RB26A2. It will take place along County Road 50 from Highway 61 to Manning Trail. This is located within the cities of Forest Lake and Scandia. This county roadway is a six-mile east-west corridor that in most areas does not include a paved shoulder or trail. Over time, the ditches along this roadway have began to fill in with settlements. This is leading to some localized drainage issues along the corridor. And as seen in this photo, the existing pavement is in poor condition and nearing the end of its full lifespan. Signing and pavement markings are out of date, and there are a number of sharp curves along this corridor. So this corridor study will analyze current and future needs along County Road 50 to provide a vision to help guide future improvement opportunities. The study aims to build public consensus on a recommended set of corridor improvements by combining community input with data on existing conditions, opportunities, and constraints.

It focuses on identifying pedestrian, bicycle, safety, drainage, and stormwater needs, evaluating right of way and potential property impacts, and assessing challenges tied to proposed upgrades. The work also includes developing an access management plan, exploring possible realignments near the sharp curves, and preparing cost estimates and funding strategies for the recommended improvements. And lastly, through this project, we have the opportunity to address multiple countywide objectives found in our strategic plan, including increasing the use of multimodal transportation, increasing the satisfaction level on transportation measures, improving the highway pavement condition, and increasing initiatives aimed at improving water quality. So reviewing the project schedule with board approval, the corridor study would begin this year and wrap up near the end of 2027. Based on the outcome and recommendations from the study, we anticipate there may be multiple construction phases for this six-mile corridor. And currently in the county's capital improvement plan, we do have a phase one construction project program for 2030.

And so final design and necessary right of way acquisition for the phase one project would begin in 2028. That would wrap up in 2029 to allow for construction in 2030. So consultant services for this design contract include project coordination, collection of data, comprehensive public engagement and outreach, drainage design, intersection and future access analysis, analysis to explore improvements for multimodal users, concept development in the evaluation of multiple alternatives, development of a project layout, cost estimating, and creation of a final study report. A request for proposals was posted on the county's website in February. Nine firms submitted proposals, and these proposals were reviewed on how well firms understood the study objectives, the qualifications of the project team and the project team's experience delivering similar studies, and the consultant's work plan and approach. So based on the county's evaluation of proposals, KLJ Engineering was determined to be the best fit team to provide design services for the study, and the contract was negotiated in the amount of $408,566.65 for these services.

Funding for this design contract comes from local transportation sales tax. And with the contract coming in slightly over the budgeted amount in the CIP, we are also recommending approval of an $8,600 budget amendment to allocate a portion of our road and bridge fund balance to this project. So to close, Public Works is recommending two board actions today. The first to improve a design contract with the KLJ Engineering for the County Road 50 Corridor Study, and the second to approve a budget amendment. So with that, I'm happy to stand for any questions. Commissioner Miron. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will move to approve contract number 18258 with KLJ Engineering in the amount of $408,566.65 to provide design services for County Road 50 Corridor Study within the cities of Forest Lake and Scandia. I'll second that. Commissioner Miron. Moved and second, Commissioner Miron. Yeah, Andrew, thank you for the presentation. One leg of this intersection is a city street with the city of Forest Lake.

Is part of the design services that are being provided, will they look at that leg as well? Yeah. Madam Chair, Commissioner, are you asking about County Road 50 and 61, or I guess what- Correct... Okay. Yeah, so there's a separate intersection improvement project planned at 50 and 61 that's currently under the preliminary design phase. And so that project's going to be constructed in 2028 under a separate project. Not part of this design work at all. Yep, that's correct. Okay. Thank you for that. Yep. Commissioner Karwoski Very supportive of the study. It just makes sense too, when you have a significant road, especially a road of a significant length like this one is. It just makes sense to study it before you start investing these significant dollars that you would in a road rebuild and things. Sounds good. Any other discussion? Andrew, thank you so much for the presentations, and it's very much needed. With no further discussion, then Commissioner Miron renews his motion to approve contract number 18258. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries. Next item is to approve a budget amendment. Commissioner Miron. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will move to approve a budget amendment for the use of road and bridge fund balance in the amount of $8,600. Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Commissioner Miron. Just funding for a county road, like County Road 50, becomes very, very difficult and certainly, the use of our funding source for what we just approved, and then the use of our road and bridge fund to balance out that funding provides us opportunities. So I just appreciate the flexibility of those two accounts and our ability to use them to move these projects forward. Absolutely. Any other comments? Seeing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries. Thank you, Andrew. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is general administration with Deputy Administrator Lucke for a legislative update.

Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners. As mentioned, Jan Lucke, deputy county administrator. And there was much legislative activity over the last few days as the 2026 legislature concluded. So we worked yesterday to capture some highlights in a PowerPoint presentation, which seems far better service than the tracker we've been handing out this session. Of course, there's much more to share than what you're going to see today. This presentation is focusing on Washington County's adopted legislative platform and the human services items we were supporting through the Association of Minnesota Counties, or AMC, and the Minnesota Inter County Association, or MICA. Larkin Hoffman, AMC, and MICA are working on detailed reports. You'll see those in June. Larkin Hoffman will be here before you on June 2nd, and MICA will be here before you on June 16th. But we'll start with some highlights today for what we've learned since the session wrapped up yesterday.

As you know, our advocacy work was largely focused in three areas this year, and that's acting as an outline for this presentation: human services, bonding or capital funding, and the legacy bill. We'll start with human services. The win in the human services space is in technology modernization, which received a 90 million total package spread over two bienniums with ongoing appropriations. Legislation also created a human services systems modernization fund that has both short and long-term focuses. It also created a human services advisory council and a legislative commission on modernization. Unfortunately, the remainder of activity in the human services space fell short. SNAP received 10.7 million in new one-time administrative funds to offset staff administrative requirements under HR 1. We're not sure how much of that is of the total need, but we're estimating it's probably about half or less. There's no benefit cost share funds and no additional policy to address new implementation requirements. There is talk of a plan to address these items in 2027, so perhaps there is more to come next year.

Minnesota African American Family Preservation Act received 15 million in new one-time funding to support implementation across 87 counties. This falls short of the full need in an ongoing commitment. However, legislation extended the statewide work group through December 31st, 2026, recognizing that there is more work to do in this space. Other items of note is the long-term support services contingent, which was that proposed county cost share shift if 175 million in savings was not found. That remains. It was not prevented or removed. And the local affordable housing aid and the statewide affordable housing aid, the request to make administration an eligible expense and extend the timeline was not included. You may recall this was an important item for the CDA. The bright spot in the 2026 session, particularly for Washington County, is the bonding bill. Five projects in Washington County were funded, totaling 16.8 million. We were the number one county recipient in the state. The next five slides will highlight each project that was funded.

This first one here, Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove received 9.6 million in state funds to construct the County Road 19A and Hunter Street Realignment project. Washington County received 2.9 million in state funds to construct a trailhead and trail connections from County State Aid Highway 5 to the Browns Creek Trail. It was finally the year for Browns CreekWashington County and the City of Forest Lake received 2.8 million in state funds to construct a roundabout and complete intersection improvements at Highway 61 and 11th Avenue, or County State Aid Highway 32. Washington County and the City of Forest Lake received 2.8 million in state funds to construct a roundabout and complete intersection improvements. Sorry, that's the wrong talking point. Washington County received one million in state funds for land acquisition, design, and construction to close a one-mile gap in the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail. And finally, Washington County received 500,000 in state funds for intersection improvements at Bailey Road and Woodbury Drive, or CSAH 18/CSAH 19.

And the Metropolitan Council received 10 million in state funds to support the regional parks and trails system.

We also wanted to share that several cities within Washington County were also successful in their state funding request. All of these are very exciting projects. Of particular note for us is the two million for the Law Lake Park Restoration and Infrastructure Project. You'll likely recall that Law Lake has been a feature project in the Washington County Land and Water Legacy Program. The county helped with land acquisition and conservation easements to protect the shoreline and improve water quality, so we're very excited to see that the City of Woodbury has received funding to continue that restoration and construct elements of the park. We had a few requests that were not funded. We'll keep these on the list as a starting point for next year. And last but certainly not least, the Legacy Bill made it over the finish line. Last week, I think we expressed some concern that it might not happen, and it did on Sunday.

The bill funds 53 projects through Minnesota's Outdoor Heritage Fund, protecting and restoring nearly 69,000 acres of prairie, forest, wetlands, and wildlife habitat, while leveraging millions of additional dollars in federal, local, and private conservation investments. So included in the bill is Washington County Phase 2 Habitat Protection and Enhancement Partnership Grant. This is awarded through the Outdoor Heritage Fund in the amount of 2.8 million. This provides critical matching funds for the county's Land and Water Legacy Program. It also provides $741,000 in direct funding to continue our restoration work in three city parks in Woodbury, and funding for additional staff person to steward the Washington County Regional Parks system. There are so many people to thank for their work this session. First and foremost, the senators and representatives of Washington County. We have an outstanding delegation, and we'll be working on thank you letters and other ways for you to express our gratitude. Your support and advocacy was critical this session.

All of you put time in, all of you were down at the Capitol advocating, and it really paid off, particularly in the bonding bill. And the platform nearly touched every department. So directors, deputy directors, managers, planners, support staff, communications staff. So many people worked on this that it would be impossible to name them all. But I would like to particularly lift up Director Jennifer Castillo and Director Wayne Sandberg, who were at the Capitol several times on a moment's notice and put in many, many countless hours through their respective associations. And then, as mentioned, Larkin Hoffman will be here on June 2nd. Micah will be here on June 16th. So we will be talking about this for several weeks to come. And Madam Chair, I am happy to pause there for questions, comments. I also have a brief federal update today, but I'll pivot to that when we're done with the state topic. Any comments about the legislative accomplishments? Commissioner Miron.

Yeah, I just appreciate the bipartisan support that we saw within our delegation for the funding that was provided to Washington County. We've worked hard on a lot of these things, in some cases many years, for funding. But we were very, very successful in our funding requests and just appreciate the leadership on both sides of the aisle for getting us over the hump on that. Certainly, as we look at human services and SNAP, there are some significant gaps there that are going to cost the county probably some significant money within our budget here in the coming years. And it's unfortunate that those issues weren't resolved more fully. Mm-hmm. Appreciate the work that was done, obviously. But I do have concerns about the budgetary impacts that those issues related to human services are going to have on our county budget going forward. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Ms. Lucke, for the presentation, and I want to echo the thanks to the staff.

I don't know that there was anyone in the county staff at any level that wasn't involved in this in some point. And so thank you for the hard work, the effort, the organization, and all the invitations for us to go and share the good work of Washington County with our legislators. And I just want to say, too, I appreciate Commissioner Miron's concerns. I have those as well. But I do want to say $16.8 million from the legislature for Washington County gives our property taxpayers some breathing space. We're not done. There's a lot more coming, but this is a huge help to property taxpayers here in Washington County. So a huge thank you to the legislature. Commissioner Karwoski Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. I echo the thoughts of Commissioner Cox and Commissioner Miron. Some of my comments are worth repeating, and thank you, Jan, for your leadership of coordinating with our staff. Staff has been outstanding in their effort.

Part of it is they really are proving the need. The $16.8 billion, as Commissioner Cox, really does help put a healthy contribution to these projects, which many were going to proceed ahead, and we would've had to pick that money up from our taxpayers. And they're regional-type projects that help people beyond our county. This 16.8 is largely the bonding money. It's largely road needs. As mentioned, they did help in other areas, too. Got to thank our delegation. We have 16 House and Senate representatives that represent all, or parts, of Washington County. Really, both Democrat and Republican, you've seen a lot of collaboration where they co-sponsored things and worked together. That's really refreshing. We don't hear that enough in the news. Our local legislators really do work together, and that made a difference. I've heard the $16.8 million, we've fared better than some of the other metro counties relative to mainly our population size. But in years past, we probably could've argued we deserve more. So I think things balance out, but it's nice that we've got really a good win this year as far as at least the bonding money, the $16.8 million. Got to thank Larkin Hoffman team. They really have a team down there.

I think their persistence to work on some of these capital improvement bonding needs year after year finally paid off. Because we were going to move forward with some of these. The 19A and 100, I believe, was going to move forward, but it would've been scaled back. That would've been a detriment of the county. The Browns Key, it'll be so refreshing not to hear about it more. I love that trail. Beautiful trail connection, but we've been pounding the gavel on that one for five years, and that goes back to the thanks of Commissioner Krezel. Commissioner Cox, you must've been the magic person there to help that went along. It's a small ask, but that's a big regional trail. I could go on with the other projects. And lastly, there wasn't anything in District 2, but the bottom end of the line, there'll be in other years where we've had projects that were needed, and we fulfilled them, and we moved on.

These represent a lot of projects throughout the county. They are the appropriate priorities, and I'm very happy with the results. You can always do better. I think we can always get more out of our state legislature, but I think I know our representative here locally, they put their best foot forward, so I think it was a good success. And thank you, Jan, again for the work you did leading staff. Any other comments? Jan, thank you. You put in a lot of time and effort, and blood, sweat, and tears in this too. So it's not an easy process. And Larkin Hoffman, just want to give a lot of gratitude to that group, Margaret and Andrew. And our whole delegation. It was a lot of bipartisan work, and that's important, and I think that they didn't give up on the projects, even the ones that have taken a long time, like 19A and 100. I appreciate Senator Seberger and Representative Johnson just bulldogging that and making sure that we didn't lose it. And I just think our delegation shows up, and I just appreciate both Chair Lee from the House and Chair Franzen from the House that have been specifically either met with members of my community or have been there, and I just appreciate that.

And oh, goodness, the legendary Senator Sandy Pappas, y'all should watch her retirement speech, and the joking that her and lead, Senator Karn Housley, the banter. But they delivered. They made sure the East Metro had their share. And so just appreciate the leadership and ability to work together to get such an incredible bill that will create jobs, create opportunity for our communities, and I also think just the safety and the improvement that our communities will have. A couple other things on the legislative session. The human service stuff and social service stuff, a lot of gratitude to Director Castillo for spending a lot of time there. I think we're going to have to unpack and really see how the African American Family Preservation Act and the fact that the age of delinquency was not clarified or delayed, and the pressure that's going to have on our child protection system, and on an already overwhelmed system. And so that's going to just really require, I think, some thought and consideration on how that's going to impact the levyAnd so that's going to keep me up at night on that one.

The modernization could not be more needed. There's just not enough to say about that. And the one thing, it wasn't county project, but it was R&E project, Recycling and Energy project, for those watching at home. We did get a study and 125,000 on infectious waste because we had medical waste body parts showing up on the tip floor. It was deemed the most disgusting bill of the session, and so we did receive 125,000 for a study on how to properly do that, and we're excited about that. So before we move on to federal, Commissioner Miron. Yeah, we did receive some funding for work on our flail mill at our recycling and energy facility as well, so- Forgot... those would otherwise be capital investment costs that- Right... R&E would carry, which is really Ramsey and Washington County, so- Right... appreciate that significant funding as well. Absolutely. All right. Federal update. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll refer you to another handout.

It's a table labeled item number seven. There has been a flurry of activity at the federal level related to congressionally directed spending. We received a round of emails from both Senate offices within the last week. So what you see here, as a reminder, we had submitted five projects through congressionally directed spending program, and in the second column, you'll see who we had submitted it to. If it was picked up by that Congress member, their name is bolded, and as you carry across through the table, you can see which Congress members submitted to which appropriations committee. So there is a long way to go, but the first step is having a Congress member pick up or sponsor a project. House members only are allowed to select 15 projects. There's a little more flexibility on the Senate side, but there's hundreds and hundreds of projects submitted to each Congress member. So the fact that all five of our projects were picked up by one or more Congress members is a significant accomplishment, and we'll be working with them as these projects make their way through the appropriations bills noted.

Specifically, the transportation-related projects are moving through or being considered under the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development appropriations bill, specifically the Highway Infrastructure Program, and then the two requests from the sheriff's office are moving through the Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Bill. So we still meet every other Wednesday with our federal government relations expert, Dahms Government Affairs, Tom Dahms and Mike Erlandson. So we'll keep you posted. Thank you. Any questions? Commissioner Miron. Yeah. Jan mentioned it and I just want to reiterate. There are hundreds of submittals that they review, and I think in a lot of cases, it's about 15 that get forwarded. And we are so fortunate, and it's the work of our staff here and also our lobbying team both at the federal and state level when we look at this, and the success that we've seen in recent years because of those lobbying efforts have been significant. And just appreciate, in this case, our lobbies at the federal level, but in the previous discussion, certainly our lobbying efforts at the state level as well.

Sounds good. Commissioner Clausen. Yeah. Thank you for your presentation. I'm excited to hear that Klobuchar and McCollum picked up the Casa 16 Valley Creek Road improvements for 7 million. I think that this shows not just about lobbying is great, but it talks about staff, but also the quality of projects that we're selecting here. I think what we're realizing is that these are in significant districts and areas that they also see as very important to their constituents. So I think it's really the need and the quality of the projects that we're bringing forward, and I just want to state that we didn't know where the money was going to come from for Valley Creek improvements, but we still need Manning Avenue traffic safety improvements as well. And I do believe if we put this forward, we would get money from that as well from probably everyone because they see the significance of Manning Avenue as the north and south road of Washington County. So I ask again that the board support the Manning Avenue project improvements. Thanks.

Anything else? Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Jan, good presentation on these federal asks. There's five of them here. Like you mentioned, bipartisan support on the ones that are appropriate to the congresspeople's districts. I just wanted to feed off Commissioner Clausen's point about the $7 million support by Smith, Klobuchar, and McCollum for the Valley Creek. Not only does it really help the taxpayer if we can get that money because it's such a major artery through both Clausen and my districts-I really think it helps. By having that pavement, I think it really helps with the infrastructure preparation for the Creek to Croix trail that is getting so much interest, which would then go up Manning and go through Bellone. But I think when we can get support and keep this on track and get it done in a robust, good way, it only, at the very least, helps keep the Creek to Croix vision and that in the proper priority in the capital improvement plan.

So, I think it's a good support of that also. All right. Anything else, deputy administrator? All right. That's all, Madam Chair. Administrator Corbid. Madam Chair, just to repeat the scheduling coming up for the county board. As mentioned earlier, there is no meeting next week. There'll be a meeting on June 2nd. The meeting on June 9th is a workshop-only meeting. And then the meeting on June 16th will start late in the afternoon and lead into the County Board of Appeal & Equalization that occurs that evening. So that's the next roughly month of board activity. And then just also a note that Cy and Trung, our budget analysts, have completed the budget book for 2026. It is now at your desks in your offices, and that document has also been submitted to the GFOA, the Government Finance Officers Association, for review as part of their award program. With that, I would certainly stand for any questions the board may have.

Any questions? Okay. Thank you, Administrator Corbid. Next, our commissioner reports and comments. Commissioner Clausen, you want to start us off? Oh. If Stan can do it, I'm not ready. Commissioner Miron. Just go this way. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Turn on my mic here. Commissioner Cox and I attended the Metropolitan Emergency Services Board meeting. Really nothing policy significant, other than routine business there. Had a number of meetings with constituency, including Supervisor Andrich from May Township, and discussion similar to what we had today during that public comment period. I met with staff in the City of Grant to talk about capital planning projects within the City of Grant. And then yesterday, I spent an entire day reviewing program proposals for the Clean Water Council. Ironically, and I see Ms. Mitchell is still here from Scandia, but one of the programs that has been funded in the past by the Clean Water Council and was presented yesterday is on these community septic systems.

In many cases, these small communities are burdened with significant costs. There certainly are environmental benefits to these systems, and there are environmental challenges if they're not functioning properly. And so there is funding through the Clean Water Council for those programs. I'm not sure that replacement costs, though, or upgrading... I think the upgrading, to some extent, is covered by Clean Water Council. But we are going to be continuing to have discussion on those program proposals and we ended up, through the Clean Water Council, making recommendations to the legislature and the governor on funding, and we appropriate or make recommendations on over $150 million a year for programs. So, that's something I'll advocate for, and certainly it may not meet the timelines here, but certainly continue to advocate for that type of program spending there. The other item that was presented yesterday for potential consideration for funding was Score the Shore, which came up in the discussion today with May Township.

And it was interesting because I took some notes during that presentation, and the funding that they were asking for and funding that's been appropriated in the past, they highlighted that they believe it strengthens relationships, it improves outreach, it provides enhanced funding, it increases contacts, and provides additional training, largely for contractors and that type of thing. And those aren't the things I was hearing about Score the Shore today here from our residents. So, it's just interesting to see and hear both sides of those programs and how they impact our communities. That's all I have, Madam Chair. Sounds good. Commissioner Clausen, do you want to go or should I go to Commissioner Cox? Great, yeah. Okay, I think that meant you. Okay. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. I was able to attend the Mental Health Resource Fair last week, and it was the first of its kind. I do hope that everyone can join next year. It was a room at St.

Andrew's Church in Mahtomedi, packed with practitioners and people dealing in the mental health realm. It was an incredible resource. I actually left with a pile of information, and if you know me, I don't take flyers. But there was so much great information there. So, I'll recommend that we do it next year again. Attended the MESB meeting. Again, I will just share that there was a grant approved for Lakeview EMS, which covers a lot of the District 3 region and beyond, that they get to carry whole blood on their ambulances now. And so, in a massive accident where someone is losing blood, this will be a huge life-savingI don't know what the word is, source ability that they now have. So that's pretty great. Attended the Lake Elmo Library's Climate Action Plan popup event, and so hopefully they got a few more people in adding their stickers to the board. Attended with Commissioner Miron, the May Township supervisor meeting, where we talked about the Carnelian Marine on St. Croix Watershed.

And then Commissioner Miron did forget, but several of us attended the Law Enforcement Memorial Day event last Friday at the historic courthouse here in Stillwater. That was an incredible event. It always causes a tear or two in my eyes. So grateful that we pause on that day and remember the lives that have been lost and the families that continue after the loss of that loved one. So, a great event and Sheriff Starry's last, so it had some extra meaning there too. Attended yesterday, just a website update with our administrative staff. Great to see where that's going and how it looks. And then yesterday, attended the AMC legislative session in review, and probably need to watch it again because there was a lot that was talked about very, very quickly. So thankfully, we have more access. That's all I have, Madam Chair. Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Busy past week. The highlights were attended the TruLens ribbon cutting, which used to be referred to as South Washington County Cable.

Commissioner Bigham was there also. Sponsored by the Woodbury Chamber. Amazing studio. By relocating, it looked like, I'm sure their capabilities were only enhanced. A lot of good technology to provide good government information to citizens. It's kind of their primary. A lot of community events get filmed that really help our residents. Had a MICA board meeting, which is the Minnesota Inter-County Association, really highlighting what they thought the legislature would produce in their final days. A very interesting meeting. Had the annual monthly Oakdale luncheon, which I always give a county update. As mentioned by Commissioner Cox, many of us from the board got to the Law Enforcement Memorial Day ceremony. Beautiful day. Very meaningful ceremony. Can't thank our sheriff's office, police officers throughout the county and throughout the state, throughout the country that make that sacrifice, not only in service, but risk their life and their families, they're much appreciated also. Attended Oakdale sponsored annual spring planting.

It's named after Jane Klein, who passed away a few years back, who was a master gardener. Several master gardeners are there for this annual planting. They did a really nice prairie restoration. It was good to help out there in my citizen role. And then, what was nice, the county had a climate action plan pop up in the Oakdale Preserve part where the planting took place. Had an East Metro Strong meeting yesterday. And then lastly, unusual amount of constituent meetings and also a lot of staff meetings. Highlighted a couple where my transportation advisory briefing this morning. Another highlighted one, which was meeting with the Pine Springs and our staff to get a real advance notice of what Hilton Trail or Casa 29 would look like. So it's really getting that information out there in advance to work with our city partners. Thank you, Madam Chair. Those are my highlights. Sounds good. Commissioner Clausen. Yep. Thanks, Chair.

Okay. You always want me to go first, I guess. Last week was a busy week. As the commissioners already stated, we had our climate action popup event at the renovated Central Park. We continue to get more information on what concerns constituents have on the consequences of climate change and what we're going through as we even heard in presentations today, in regards to Cornelius Lake. There's a lot of changes that the environment creates, and so really important that we fill out the climate action and talk about the issues that are going on, that you're seeing in your backyard, your lake shore, your roads. That's really important. So I can't stress enough the importance of completing the climate action so that we're prepared for the future. We have the R. H. Stafford Library event. We are doing a community listening session to try and also get more information on what the needs are in Woodbury and surrounding areas for the library. The library is the fifth busiest of the state, and being that it's the fifth busiest, we definitely need to receive a certain amount of results for this survey.

If I don't feel like we have that, I feel like we're going to have to go about and get more information because this is absolutely imperative that we get feedback from people because this is the next 20 to 30 years. And so, whatever staff can do to continue to express the importance of completing the survey and for the library, that's going to be the best interest of our constituents. And so also wanted to talk about the comments that were made today at the At the dais in regards to the watershed. I heard from Dave Schneider, an attorney that I know from the city of Hugo when I worked there, and I do respect his position, and I don't want to put the county in any type of legal liability risk here. And that's what I heard today, and that's what I want to say firmly, that we do not, as board members, put ourselves in vulnerable legal, precarious situations.

And so I ask that the board consider that. Dave Schneider is a very well-known attorney in the East Metro. Thank you. Thank you. Last night, I attended the community garden for Meadow Grass, the opening season of that, and just what a turnout, and just really appreciate Alyssa Wolf from our office in public health, and Molly from the city of Cottage Grove, and also Master Gardener Ed, who's in charge of that community garden. But people were excited, to say the least. I attended the AMC legislative update, and their government relations team is just amazing and hardworking, and Julie Ring has just got a wonderful group of people that really support her and the organization. So just kudos to them. I also attended the Law Enforcement Memorial Day, and the weather could not have been more beautiful. And just the respect, the compassion that that event has done year after year with is incredible, and just really appreciate the opportunity that that's hosted here.

I did have a meeting with the MnDOT commissioner, with District 10 Chair Julie Jessen, about the implementation of the greenhouse gas offsets. I did attend the R&E Finance Committee meeting, which recommended to send to the board the budget, which has no changes. That was approved from last year. And then the True Lens ribbon cutting. I just think about dang time that they got the update and renovation for that place, and for what they do. It's just a wonderful opportunity and such a skilled team that they have there. Commissioner Miron. Thank you. I can't believe I forgot to mention the Law Enforcement Memorial in my report, because that was a highlight of my week, but I appreciate the other commissioners mentioning it. But I also was remiss in mentioning my attendance at a chamber meeting up in Forest Lake this morning. One of the things I shared in my report was our AAA bond rating that the county has, and that we're one of five counties in Minnesota- Mm-hmm... that has a AAA bond rating from both rating agencies, both S&P and Moody's.

Mm-hmm. And I was surprised to see kind of the awe from the group. I don't think people totally recognize that. And then we are among 87 counties nationally to receive that bond rating. So, I think it was something that I was surprised to see the amazement in the room when I mentioned that as part of my report to the chamber. So just wanted to share that. Thank you. Seeing nothing further. There is no board correspondence. We do have a board workshop after adjournment regarding the Land and Water Legacy Program referendum, and then there is a finance committee meeting. So, seeing no further items before us on the agenda, we are adjourned. 10 minutes? Yeah.