Washington County Board Meeting

You're fine. Good morning. We have a full house today. I'm going to go ahead and call the June 2nd Washington County Board of Commissioners meeting to order. The clerk will take the role. Commissioner Miron. Here. Commissioner Karwoski. Here. Commissioner Cox. Here. Commissioner Bigham. Here. Commissioner Clausen. Here. Roll call taken, all present. Thank you. Please join us for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance 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, we are on to the comments from the public, and we have quite a few speakers today. And we have quite a large, long agenda. And so I'm going to probably be a little bit more narrative or whatever, to let people know what's coming up. So these are my thoughts, is that we have a state legislator here, then we have a land and legacy comment, and then we have a bunch of folks that want to speak on the watershed appointments. I'm going to take them in that order, and I want to remind folks if we could keep it to three to five minutes, and that we do not want to be repetitive if possible. We want to give everybody time to speak. And, the final thing is the board does not respond or comment during open forum. So with that, we will have State Representative Wayne Johnson. If you want to state your name and city for the record.

Thank you, Chair. Wayne Johnson, Cottage Grove. So Chair, board members, thank you for the opportunity to come speak with you today. As you know, the legislative session has finished, and it's been two years, a very historical situation. I have found out that in my time of serving in the city and the county and at the state, it's either been a crisis or a unique challenge that we have faced. What I have found out, though, is that in those situations, things get done that you normally would not have gotten done and things you never even thought about getting done. We did that even at the county during COVID. And what we did is, because of the situation, the tide, we had a lot of people wanting to get things done, and it provided us an opportunity to get things done that the county has wanted to have done for many, many years and decades, including the IT improvement.

And that spending is something that has been needed desperately. We finally were able to get that done. Thank you to those who came down and spoke. You were loud. You got heard over and over again, and that's something that was never able to get across the finish line, and we were able to do that. The other thing that was a very good bonding project this year that brought some great value to Washington County, including my area, the Chair's area, $9.6 million for infrastructure that I remember started working on when I was, and actually it was just as they thought in a situation back when I was on the county and we started talking about it, and we were able to get it done much faster. That is an example of how working together as a county gets projects done for you. That something done, as you know, anywhere in the county is a win for the whole county. And this project's going to bring in so much money for the state, for the county, for the cities in a project like that. So thank you for coming down, and that was one of my purposes of coming down here today, or coming over here today, was just thank you for your advocacy.

You were down there many, many times. I know, Chair, you were down there many times. I think you said you testified more times than when you actually served down there. Right. And so we heard you. I'm proud to be a former county commissioner that was able to go down there and get that voice and made them hear you over and over again, and we were able to achieve that. We even received funding for the study for the R&E so we can start dealing with the medical waste issues. So that's something that we were able to get done. We didn't get exactly what we wanted, but if you've been around long enough, you know you don't always get what you want, but you get what you need. Yes. So thank you for that. So I just look forward to working with you again next year as we continue to bring things together and see what kind of a unique situation we get in next year. So thank you.

Thank you, Representative. Thank you for joining us. All right. The next speaker is Cork Wicker.

Thank you, Chair, Commissioners. My name is Cork Wicker. I'm from Woodbury, and I chair the Parks and Open Space Committee. And so the only thing, I bring a couple things that I think should be known, at least as I represent Woodbury also, is that you have some major cities as the Land and Legacy Fund potentially goes through, is how is that going to be equally distributed through those cities that are more dense versus the ones that are not? And that's my largest comment as well as we have an impact, I don't know if the decision's been made on your levy for next year, but how is the whole impact from the levy and the Land and Legacy Fund if that goes through? And very short, simple, but I wanted to make sure that there was some type of view as to how the dense populations like Oakdale and Cottage Grove and Woodbury are going to be dealt with in that. And so I go back to... my group as to what is going to be the plan. And that's it.

Thank you. Mm-hmm. All right. The next speaker is Jeff Dahlberg. If you would come up and state your name and community.

Morning. My name is Jeff Dahlberg. I live in Scandia, Minnesota. I've been on Big Marine Lake for 40 years. I'm also part of the board there for the Lake Association, and also part of the Scandia Wastewater Committee Board. I'm here to speak regarding Anne Warner being reappointed to a manager position on the Watershed District. Anne basically has a really good background in budgets and in financial information that she can bring to the board, and she has done in the past. She also challenges the board with many questions regarding the watershed's staff and what's going. I believe that she would be a very good positive influence on the rest of the board, and also with adding possibly another woman to the board would give diversity keeping in the board. You have any questions? Okay. Well, thanks, commissioners and Chair, for your time. Thank you. The next person I have is Kristen- Tenge... Tun- Tunghi? Tenge.

Tunge. That's close. It's Tenge. Thank you. Thank you. My apologies. If you want to come up and state your name and community, please. I hope my voice holds out here. I'm Kristen Tenge, and I live at 20595 Quinnell Avenue North in Scandia, Minnesota. And I'm here to advocate for a healthy, well-functioning watershed board and a healthy watershed, and a healthy, efficient, effective, respectful board, as well as the staff of that watershed, because they are absolutely excellent. So, that's why I'm here. I'm a former board member. I care a lot about the watershed and the watershed staff, and I just think the watershed needs a very highly functioning board. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Robert Benischk. Well, you're in the ballpark. All right. Thank you. And if you want to come up, state your name and community. Yes. My name is Robert Benischk. I live in Marine on St. Croix, and I'm here because I care deeply about the Marine on St. Croix Water District and its future, as well as the integrity of the process.

I want to address something that was said at the May 19th County Board meeting that I believe deserves a direct response. May Township supervisor, Julie Andrich, described the Water District as having an unlimited taxing authority. As commissioners who set county levies, you know how government taxing authority actually works, and this description simply does not hold up. Minnesota law constrains water district levies at every level. There's a cap on the general fund levies at.096% of market value. There's a separate cap on bond levies at.0798% of market value. There's a requirement that budgets be publicly presented before any levy is set, ensuring that fiscal need drives the spending, not the other way around. County auditors and treasurers have oversight, including the authority to recommend changes to maintenance levies. In practice, the Water District came to you this year with a flat budget, no increase at all. This is not runaway taxing authority. This is an example of an extremely disciplined public stewardship.

I've seen this stewardship up close. I've partnered with Water District staff on multiple projects in Marine, watched them do excellent and careful work. I've also sat in on the Water District monthly manager meetings, observed a coordinated effort by a small group to obstruct ordinary business, wear down district employees. Good people should not be driven out of public service by that kind of pressure. You conducted a thorough interview process. You selected managers to lead the district constructively. I'm asking you to honor your process. The residents of this watershed, all of them, not just the loudest voices, deserve managers who will move the district work forward. Thank you sincerely for your time, and most importantly, your service. Thank you. The next person I have is Charlie Borden. And if you'd state your name and community for the record. Good morning, commissioners. My name is Charlie Borden, and I live in Marine on St. Croix. I'm here to ask you to support the Carnelian-Marine Watershed District in their important work by appointing only board managers who are clearly aligned with its vital mission of preserving watershed quality.

Commissioners, you're in a tough spot. You do have to balance political considerations along with the ultimate good of the watershedI thought that you did a good job with your original slate of 2026 appointees. Nobody got everything that they wanted. Your decision did provide fair representation of board members across the district, and just as importantly, your selections resulted in a balanced board, one that would be able to function well. At your last full board meeting, some leaders from May Township created a stir, making me wonder if they actually might have it in for our watershed district. First, I do have sympathy for lake owners in May Township who were ill-served by previous leaders of the Carnelian Marine Watershed District years ago. Previous district management allowed shore owners to use non-natural shoreline stabilization techniques like riprap. Then, predictably, over time, the amount of natural shoreline on the Big Carnelian was denuded to the point where the lake's biome started to collapse.

The first warnings of this ecological decline on Big Carnelian came in a fish and wildlife, excuse me, a fish and aquatic invertebrate study released in 2022 by the Minnesota DNR, which showed that lake diversity, biodiversity was severely dropping. Populations of game fish, including walleye, northern pike, bass, and sensitive shallow water species like darters were in drastic decline. Biologists found that the primary driver of this biome decline was lifeless shoreline property development and the loss of natural shoreline habitat. State officials now consider Big Carnelian to be nearly impaired. This is part of a broader trend in Minnesota, which is losing 2% of its natural shorelines every decade. It was right at this time that the leadership changed at the Watershed District and it started doing what was necessary, actively working with lakeshore owners to restore critical native vegetation. So this understandably upset some property owners who had made large, unnatural stabilization techniques and were facing large expenses in changing them.

But the Watershed District got creative and found new grants that dramatically increased their ability to offer cost-sharing grants to facilitate restoration. Many lakeshore owners understood the call and joined the effort to make effective and necessary switches back to natural habitat. District staff assisted landowners on Big Car and Big Marine who voluntarily installed three in-lake woody structures on Big Car and four on Big Marine. But a smaller group of lakeshore owners and May Township leaders decided to go in the opposite direction. They didn't want to make the changes and decided to put their energy into attacking the people who were merely the bearers of the bad tidings. So since then, most members of our Watershed District Board of Managers have been courageously persisting in the work of restoration in the face of baseless, and I believe dishonest, attacks. I've got a lot of emotions about this, but the main one I have is still surprise at anyone whose primary reaction to all this is having it in for the Watershed District.

Their initial strategy was to place a fox in charge of the henhouse by advocating the appointment of Watershed District board managers who are clearly opposed to the vital mission of the Watershed District. But their goals and strategies have become increasingly radicalized. At the May Township meetings, they've been talking about trying to disband our Watershed District. At the last county board meeting, their counsel, their legal counsel, issued a thinly veiled threat that they might sue the county if they do not get the board appointments that they seek. And for those who had the privilege of sitting in last Friday's hastily called May Township supervisors meeting, they also seriously discussed attempting to withdraw from the Watershed District itself. But the arguments and rhetoric that they brought forward don't stand up to examination, because in fact, the Watershed District has been stellar in its performance, and in fact, winning Watershed District of the Year award last year. Watershed District budgets have been increasing at the same or less than all of the townships that they serve.

And they are operating well inside of their authority by state statute to protect our waters. And when upset, members of May Township complained last year about their enforcement of the code. The Watershed District responded by diligently collaborating with the township, resulting in making code compliance process even more friendly, consistent, and transparent. It must be said also that the anti-enforcement, people who are doing this is not a representative sample. The last two meetings that May Township called were at short notice so that only a few people from the township showed up. A huge number of citizens in May Township have instead consistently raised complaints about dense developments threatening their rural character and about unpermitted shoreline alterations. Commissioners, because they are appointed, Watershed District managers are responsible to you, who represent their constituent views. However, their state charter makes their primary responsibility being the protective representative of the water itself. Given the nature of us human beings, I'm glad that's the case, and I hope that you agree that the current leadership of the Marine Carnelian Watershed District is doing an amazing job of balancing those responsibilities.

I'm totally happy with paying the tiny portion of my taxes which go towards the Watershed District. Deeply grateful for the work that they do to stringently enforce the high standards that it takes to restore and protect the waters in our watershed. And looking ahead, I expect that all the Watershed District's work, including in compliance, will become more important, not less. So when you make your appointments, the single most important criteria must be that they're aligned with the Watershed District's vision. I feel incredibly lucky- You're over five minutes. Okay So if you could wrap it up, please. I feel incredibly lucky- Yep... to have such principled, hardworking, well-trained, and experienced personnel, not just in the watershed district, but you, county commissioners. Thank you. Thank you, sir. The next speaker we have is Greg Glenn, if I'm guessing on the second letter there. If you want to come up to the dais or speaker's rostrum and state your name and community for the record.

My name's Greg Glenn, and I live in Stillwater, Minnesota. And I just want to take this opportunity to express my support for the slate of managers that was presented at the May meeting and that I would hope that we would move forward with that. And I'd also like to express my thanks to Commissioner Miron and Commissioner Cox for their involvement and their leadership and their thoughtfulness. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, the next one I have is Wally, and I'm going to be honest, I don't know the last name based on the handwriting. Sorry. Do you want to come up? Nelson. Nelson? Yep, Nelson. Wow. All right, I don't know. My mom yelled at me many times when I was growing up. Hello, Chair Bingham and commissioners. My name's Wally Nelson. I've been a lifelong Washington County resident, and I've owned a property in May Township for over 30 years. It's been our home for eight.

I've lived in all your districts. I've had business in some of your districts. I've always trusted your decisions that you've made over the time that I've been a Washington County resident, which is 60-plus years. I'm here today because May Township has a problem that I cannot solve. Only you as county commissioners can address it. May Township needs fair representation on the watershed board. I'd like to share a couple of concerns that have contributed to a growing lack of trust among residents. First, at last Friday's special May Township board meeting regarding the watershed board appointments, two residents stated before they got up to speak that they feared retribution from the watershed if they voiced their opinions. Regardless of where one stands on issues, no citizen should feel intimidated about participating in public discourse. I'd also like to share several concerns that have contributed to a growing lack of trust among residents in the watershed.

In 2023, May Township supervisor, Steve Magner, disagreed with the watershed regarding the Panorama Road project. Shortly afterward, in fact, on December 26, 2023, he received a violation letter on his property. Many residents viewed that action as a retaliation rather than impartial enforcement.

Next, Ann Warner, who still serves on the May Township... on the watershed board and is a May Township representative and voice on the watershed board, received a violation notice last year. From my understanding, Washington County and the DNR have put that to bed, but it's still outstanding on the watershed. I don't understand that. We also, last week, two weeks ago at this meeting, you heard about the Jodi Kramer circumstance. After watershed learned she might be selling her home, a violation letter was issued. Again, residents perceived that as targeting. Lastly, and finally, which is crazy, Lillian Duthman passed away in April 2025. The following month, a violation letter was sent regarding her property. To many residents, this reflected a troubling lack of judgment and sensitivity. Taken individually, these incidents raise questions. Collectively, they create a perception among many May Township residents that those who disagree with the watershed are treated differently. That perception is damaging to public trust.

As we all know, government works best when citizens believe decisions are fair, transparent, and free from retaliation. Residents should feel comfortable expressing their views without fear of consequences. That's a fundamental American principle. Last June, residents packed May Town Hall to express their dispatch to action with the direction of the watershed board, standing room only. Commissioner Miron, you were there, and you witnessed firsthand the passion and concern of May Township residents. Throughout her service, Ann Warner has listened to our community. She's worked hard to understand residents' concern and to represent them on the watershed board. With her very strong financial background, she has been a strong advocate for keeping our taxes low. Whether everyone agrees with her or not, there's no question that she's been an active and dedicated advocate for May Township and the watershedMy request is simple, commissioners. Please reconsider your thoughts and appoint Ann Warner to the Watershed Board. May Township deserves representation that's fair and reflects the voices of its residents.

Restoring that representation would be an important step toward rebuilding trust between the watershed and the community it serves. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you. Next up is Wendy Ward. You want to approach the rostrum, and then state your name and community for the record, please.

Good morning, commissioners. My name is Wendy Ward, Wilkie Street, Marine on St. Croix, conservation biology graduate student. For context, Marine on St. Croix is downstream of the lake system within May Township. As a resident of Marine on St. Croix, my home and property sit within an extensive seep spring system whose water volume far exceeds the static volume from May Township lakes. It is a system producing millions of gallons of water running west to east, ultimately into the St. Croix River. It takes both surface and aquifer waters through a series of wetlands to sandstone steps. It is an incredible and rare system. With this known, I care deeply about water quality, water stewardship, and the agencies in charge of managing that care. As a scientist, I heard a term I'm not familiar with, random surveillance. This is a contortion and maligning of an incredible program called Score the Shore, a volunteer mutual program between watershed and homeowner to monitor the progress of a shoreline.

This is a standard and proven field practice to establish baseline phenology, that being the documenting of plant and animal systems over time. This is called monitoring. We can ask, "Is this healthy, is this progressing, or what is happening in this area we have worked with?" It is not random surveillance. Looking at the mission and appointment process for watershed or any Minnesota watershed, nominees are chosen to represent areas, natural ecological areas. Natural areas, unlike city districting or gerrymandering, cannot be redrawn or manipulated. These areas were not meant to represent a specific human population. A nominee ideally comes from Marine, Scandia, May, and Stillwater, representing the breadth and scope of this natural ecological watershed, not the human population as currently being expressed through the legal term fair representation. This watershed district staff is incredibly experienced and helpful to all of the Washington County jurisdictions they serve. They have proven that with good fiscal management and good projects.

Everything to protect our extensive water systems, whether they be lakes, streams, seeps, or rivers. I urge you to sustain the previously submitted watershed board candidate list for the appointments. Those names were vetted, considered, and put forth in a manner similar, if not identical, to past manager candidate appointment processes. Those names are DeVita, Howe, and Deneau. Thank you very much, commissioners. Thank you. The final speaker card is Julie Andrich from May Township. If you want to come to the speaker rostrum and state your name and community for the record.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Julie Andrich, and I represent May Township. I'll keep this very brief because you've given me two other opportunities to speak. I appreciate the passion of the group, and I think where we all stand united is in our love for our environment, our water quality, our natural resources that we are blessed with in May Township. So, encouraging that we're all in alignment in what we love and what we're all here for passionately. I don't think today's vote is about the functionality or expertise of our watershed staff. Today's vote is to appoint managers who hold that staff accountable, not just advance the mission, but they ask good questions, they remain curious, they remain self-educated, and they advance not only the watershed initiatives, but they listen to the people who you've appointed them to represent. I was clear a month ago that I am seeking the reappointment of Ann Warner, not only for those qualities, but as well as her representation, keeping May Township to two representatives and not just three.

So, thank you for all of your consideration in the last month and all of the conversation we've had. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. I do not have any additional speaker cards. So is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak during public comment? Seeing none, public comment is closed, and we will move on to approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve today's agenda? So moved. Second. Move by Commissioner Clausen, seconded by Commissioner Cox. Discussion? Seeing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries. Next item is the consent calendar. Are there any items that commissioners would like to- Chair, I'd like to pull item H. Okay. Is there a motion to approve the remaining part of the consent calendar? Madam Chair, did I understand item B? H. H, that- Yeah... wanted to be pulled? I will move the consent calendar, all items with the exception of item H then.

I'll second that. All right. 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. Commissioner Clausen to item H. Yes. I would like to ask staff if they're able to come up and give us a brief understanding of what the process was for the recruitment, selection, and recommendation of the five that are currently being recommended. And also, if you could briefly tell us why the others decided to leave. Yeah. Good morning, Madam Chair, commissioners. My name is Ruan Devera, Senior Program Manager of Correctional Health at Washington County Public Health and Environment, and the Opioid Settlement Response. Thank you for pulling this agenda item. Happy to speak to it. The process was very similar, if not identical to what it was last time. What we did was do an all-community call-out for applicants to apply for the Opioid Settlement Council. We had a rather large and comprehensive communication strategy to get that call out, and so people had approximately 12 weeks to apply for this.

We received the applications. Per the consultation and communications that we had with the board leading up to the first recruitment process of Washington County Public Health and Environment, did the initial vetting. And then per that initial vetting, we had certain criteria. First and foremost, Washington County resident was a priority. Secondly, a professional expert within the field. And then most importantly, a diverse representation of people with lived experience. So, that can mean anything. That can mean anything from someone in long-term recovery, someone who has lost a child to opioid use or something like that. So those were the priority categories that we were picking from. In this round, we identified five members. And per the previous compositions that we've shown the board, we're really proud to say that every single last one of them is a community member and also straddles that line as a professional expert. We are very fortunate in this county to have an engaged population who wants to be part of this, is working in the field, and has the time to be part of this Opioid Settlement Council for Washington County.

So along with that, each one of those peoples identify as someone with lived experience, either in long-term recovery or supporting someone who is experiencing current use right now. This turnover is routine and part of the bylaws written into the Opioid Settlement Council as approved and appointed by this board. Every council member sits for a two-year term, and this is the first cohort's removal and new cohort coming in. So it was a planned turnover. There was nothing untoward about it or unexpected. And again, we're hopeful that there's an approval of this, and we can get these new members on board. Happy to answer any more questions. Commissioner Clausen? Yes. We have also shifted in the organizations that are getting the grants at the same time, and there seems to be a lot of changes going on with the settlement, and I'm just not sure if we're getting enough engagement. When you say all community call-out, when I ask for analytics for certain pages for the website, certain pages are low. They're pretty low in views, which indicates to us that we're not getting it out there enough.

Because the challenges really are, it's communication and social media no longer allows a lot of our connection to residents anymore. Very rarely do I see anything in my social media for Washington County, and I'm a county commissioner. So I don't know if the all-community call-out is working in this way. And that's not just to your program, it's to all programs. It's not strong enough, and I do feel like we need to do more to get this, especially this settlement, to be engaged more, and that is in the way of videos, storytelling. Constituents need to know about this program. It's really important. This money came from a lawsuit. So this is from a lawsuit that was from, I don't want to say this wrong, but the Striker family, who we all say that's the people who created the opioid dependency. And so this is the money for that. And so I do feel like we just need to-Promote it more.

And I agree with, I'm not saying that the people that we didn't pick aren't great. I'm just seeing such changes, and I'm also seeing changes in the actual grants and where that money is going to. And it's changing so much that I'm not... And the last time you came up here, I also had concerns. So I'm just continuing on with the same concerns that I'm seeing as I'm not seeing this information out there. And I just really want our next effort in the next, I guess it will be two years then from today. I want there to be a better communication strategy regarding specifically this program. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Madam Chair, Commissioner Clausen, if I may just comment real quick on that. One thing I neglected to state was one of the things that we did achieve the first time that we also achieved the second time was consistent commissioner district representation. And so thank you for that feedback on the communication strategies.

Certainly taking that back with us, and I'll engage my team around that. But I hope that the consistent representation across all areas in the county demonstrate that we are getting to the edges and everywhere in between so that we have really qualified people coming in and stepping in to consult and advise us on where this money goes. But again, thank you for the comments, ma'am. I just don't want to make this a district issue. It's not a district issue. There is a lot of people in Woodbury. Mm-hmm. 88,000 people. And so to have one person from Woodbury would be nice to have on the opioid settlement, but I'm not saying it has to. But I do think that it's more about fair representation that we heard earlier today, and that's really what it comes down to. Yes, ma'am. Thanks. Thank you. Commissioner Cox. Madam Chair, I move that we adopt the removal of existing appointees and appointment of new members to the Washington County Opioid Settlement.

I second it. And this is going to be a roll call because it's from consent. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? Aye. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Item passes 5-0. Thank you, Commissioners. All right. Thank you. The next item are the resolutions for the watershed appointments. I'm going to go to Administrator Corbett. Madam Chair and Commissioners, good morning. Under state law, the County Board of Commissioners is tasked with appointing managers to the watershed districts within the county. Today, we are considering appointments to the Carnelian Marine Watershed, excuse me, Carnelian Marine St. Croix Watershed District. This watershed contains land within the communities of Scandia, Marine on St. Croix, May Township, and Stillwater Township, and I believe by the maps, very, very small parts of Hugo, Grant, and the city of Stillwater. The Carnelian Marine Watershed Board of Managers consists of seven members. There are three managers whose terms expire on June 21st. The three managers whose terms are expiring are Michael White, a resident of Scandia, Anne Warner, a resident of May Township, and Victoria Dupree, also a resident of May Township.

Managers Warner and Dupree requested reappointment and submitted applications. In addition to Managers Warner and Dupree, eight other individuals submitted applications. Of those eight, five are residents of Scandia, two are residents of May Township, and one is a resident of Stillwater Township. Each of the 10 applicants received a letter of nomination from a municipality, making them eligible for consideration for appointment. The Townships of May and Stillwater submitted a letter of nomination, as did the Cities of Scandia and Marine on St. Croix. At your desk this morning, you have a copy of each of those nomination letters along with a map of the watershed that shows the candidates that are being considered for appointment. That map also shows the current members of the Watershed Board of Managers. The County Board conducted interviews on two days, one in late April and the other in early May. All 10 candidates were invited to interview. Nine of the applicants chose to interview. One candidate withdrew from consideration on the second day of interviews.

The interviews were open to the public, and one member of the public attended the first day of interviews. Following the interviews, the County Board discussed the applicants and reached consensus on forwarding three names to the County Board for consideration. The board members discussed each candidate's experience and qualifications as were provided on the application form, the information that each provided during their interviews, considered the issue of sub-watershed representation and municipality representation, the nominations provided by the municipalities, and considered the feedback each commissioner had received from residents within the watershed district. The applicants forwarded for consideration are Mark Donay, a resident of Stillwater Township, Kimberly Haug, a resident of Scandia, and Sam DeVita, also a resident of Scandia. This board item was originally scheduled for the board's May 19th meeting. Late in the afternoon of Monday, May 18th, I received a letter from the May Township attorney related to the manager appointment process. A copy of that letter was provided to all the board members just prior to the May 19th board meeting.

At the May 19th board meeting, several members of the public spoke related to the manager appointment item during public comment. Upon consideration of the board item, a motion was made to postpone action to the next county board meeting, and that motion prevailed, and which is why it's back on the agenda todayThe board item before you today is in the exact same form as it was on the May 19th agenda. The county attorney's office has reviewed the May 18th letter from the May Township attorney and provided a response. A copy of that letter is at your desk this morning, and that letter was from Assistant County Attorney Jachala to May Township Attorney Snyder. I was just made aware this morning, while the board meeting was occurring, that the May Township attorney has responded to Attorney Jachala's letter. It was received at 1:41 yesterday. Attorney Jachala was not in the office yesterday afternoon. I just got it via email. Here's a copy for you, and I'll have Stephanie pass out to each of you.

So at this time, I will turn it back over to the board chair for the next steps and can take any questions the board may have. So thank you, Administrator Corbid. So before I turn it over to Commissioner Miron, who asked to be recognized, we in the board of commissioners here follow Robert's Rules, and because of that, if there is a motion and a second, then we have to stick to just that topic. So if the first resolution was moved and seconded, we could only talk about that. So I'm hoping that the board is okay with having informal discussion first, so we can have a discussion in context of all the applicants prior to a motion being made and seconded. So, without any objection, Commissioner Miron. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate your discretion in allowing some comments here to be made prior to having motions on the resolutions that are before us. I've gotten a lot of feedback, and I know, in many cases, the emails we received were sent to all members of the board. This is a significantly important issue. It ranks among some of the top ones that I've dealt with in my 13 years here on the county board.

And the feedback was very mixed, with strong opinions related to the candidates we had to choose from. Whatever we do here today, it's not likely to make everyone happy, and maybe more likely that everyone will be a bit unhappy with our decision here today. But because of that interest, the county board has taken a very robust process in this, which is typical of the county board. But I think the county board recognized the importance of this decision to the communities we serve. We ended up, as Kevin pointed out, we interviewed all the candidates that had nominations, with the exception of the one individual that withdrew. So we were not able to interview him. We delayed our vote and decision as well, as Kevin pointed out, to provide more time to review the May Township attorney's letter. I've attended a number of meetings to discuss our process and the nominations from the cities and the towns, most recently, a special meeting that the May Town board held on Friday morning.

I've taken quite a number of phone calls and text messages from people. I've read the emails and tried to respond to most of them. Some of the more recent ones I have not responded to yet. We've got feedback from our county attorney's office related to the process, and Kevin had also mentioned that, and we should be thinking about how our appointments were raised by May Township. I do support the process we've gone through. The county attorney's letter, I think, validates that process was in accord with our statutes and our responsibilities. And we considered all of the factors that May Township laid out in its letter. And I do think the township has a point about the number of individuals that reside in May Township if we approve the current recommendations. I don't know if it's a legal issue or not, but more of a question about representation. And I will say this, I've not had a real strong opportunity to review the most recent letter that Mr. Snyder provided in response to our county attorney's letter.

I believe that all of our appointments in the watershed district should care about, think about, and be concerned with all the issues and projects that occur within the entire watershed, much as we represent districts here on the county board, but, for the most part, we look at and view the impact of the entire county. So I'm going to stop there and share some additional comments, maybe during our resolution process. Okay. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Similar to Commissioner Miron, I appreciate the process that we went through. I think it was the right approach, and it was what we needed to do to get the nine candidates in front of us for interviews. I think that the board really, throughout the interview process that the four of us undertook, was really informative, right? What was shared there really guided a lot of the decisions that we're making. I think that the group that we brought forward two weeks ago on May 19th really reflects the collective discussion of who will be best able to represent the entire watershed.

I hear May Township, and I appreciate all the thoughts and the comments. This is an entire watershed, similar to what Commissioner Miron said. We represent districts from the seats that we have right here, and I feel like the watershed managers also represent the entire district. And so while some may live on a certain lake or in a certain community, I really feel that the three that we're bringing forward on the agenda today have that whole watershed view. And I feel that they all understand the role of the watershed and can listen to those resident concerns that people may have. I feel like the three that we're bringing forward are independent thinkers. I think that they're curious. And watershed issues are complicated, and I think the ability for these three to think on their own and have good discussion with the entire board is going to be a really good thing for this watershed. So I am comfortable bringing forward the three that we have on the agenda today.

Commissioner Clausen. Yeah. Thank you. As a commissioner, I have asked staff and the board for written processes. Written processes are important to government and in business. Processes hold the key to legal compliance, fairness, and equity, allows for continuous improvements, and holds staff and elected officials accountable. In Washington County, how we appoint committee and advisory boards is not in a written process. Because of that, the process has changed every time. According to the testimony of May 19th, Commissioner Cox said that only commissioners of the district get to determine the appointment, so no one needed to speak to other commissioners. Contrary to that, as a commissioner of District Five, I was told by the county board that the last commission appointment in December, that I didn't get to select a representation from my district, and I was forced by the board to reappoint a commissioner that had already been appointed in the past. We had five qualified candidates who wanted a chance to represent their community in housing and economic development.

We need written processes. I was a city clerk, and a primary of my job was to manage the appointments of city commissions and boards through an election process for over 12 years. Fondly, I remember City Attorney Tim Kunz would have the appointments be televised and elections public. Questions of candidates were vetted, all candidates were treated the same, and scoring was open to the public. All potential candidates would watch the process and voting in real-time, and the names were not disclosed. But the process was fair. The appointment process was written down, so even if staff left the city, staff could come back, and the process would be followed. I have never seen an issue like this one, so I'm a little surprised. That's why it's hard for me not to say that this is political. It is well documented that I have asked repeatedly to Kevin Corbid and Jennifer Wagenius for written processes for these types of weighted decisions, such as watershed appointments, community development authority appointments, road projects, coordinate, corridor, can't say corridor, corridor studies, and park planning.

A long time St. Croix Valley and Hugo City Attorney Dave Schneider came to us on May 19th representing May Township. He was before us on our last meeting and wrote commissioners a series of pages, what I would call threatening the county board with potential legal action and quoting case law warning against lack of equal representation on the watershed. In just receiving this response from Dave Schneider in front of me, what I see is that our county attorney is relying on a 1971 case. The case that Dave Schneider is talking about is from 2022. I took time to research and review his findings. Before working for city government, I worked as a paralegal in tort law, and I believe he's accurate in his legal opinion and that this will make our county have legal risk. I don't know what that means for these appointments today, but I recognize that this process is political, so I will not be voting in favor of these appointments today.

Instead, I ask the board to commit to a written appointment process, not because I question anyone's intentions, but because a written process protects everyone, including the board itself. Good governance isn't just about making the right decision. It's about being able to show how you got there. It's being transparent. That's all I have. Thank you. Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, I want to thank all the residents of the watershed district that have shown up not only today but in two weeks prior, and all your emails. I don't represent that watershed district, but watersheds know no boundaries, and we all represent different watersheds. The process, like all our advisory boards, were an application, and perhaps citizens didn't see those, and then also the interview. Commissioner Miron, Commissioner Cox, Commissioner Bigham, and myself, we spent probablySix hours of interviews and deliberation time of these nine candidates, and they all have strengths. But really that's a big part of the decision, is that interview and that application.

Really, along with my colleagues, we've given careful consideration to the candidates, and I'm glad there's interest in your community, in your water, and as Commissioner Miron pointed out, probably not everybody's going to be happy, but really being in those interviews, it really made clarity on the decision. So I'm fully here to support the three candidates which we have resolutions for. Thank you. All right. So I can give my thoughts, and then we can continue to have discussion or motion. I too appreciate that the applicants took the time to go to the website, fill out the application that has the process on there that says you'll interview, and I really appreciate the time they spent with us. It was over two days, and really, the three that have been moved forward have done a lot of work in learning the role and learning the expectations. And so I just think that that is important, especially in these watershed areas.

There's so many partnerships that come along with these watersheds. So, I too appreciate the three that have been moved forward. I support the process, and I think that it just shows how much communities care about their watersheds or quality of the lakes, and it just really does show how engaged people are in these issues. Commissioner Miron. Yeah, I just want to reemphasize that we do have a process that we follow here, and one of the things that hasn't been mentioned yet that I think should be is the fact that when we became aware or we knew that these appointments were coming up, letters were sent out. Our staff made contacts with the existing managers to determine whether or not they wanted to seek reappointment or not. Hence, we ended up with two that indicated a desire to be reappointed and one that chose not to. And then notices were sent out to the cities about the vacancies, the townships, and we received letters.

We've been following a process all along, so I'm really confident that we have a good process here. And obviously, there's been a tremendous amount of notice, recognition of the decision that we're about to make here today and that type of thing, and I think that's evident just by the public participation we've had at the last couple of meetings. So we do have, I think, a very sound process. I don't know how we might change it to make it better. I'm always open to those kinds of suggestions, but I think we've been following the process that we followed in the past. And more recently, I think the changes in the process, based on some case law that was created here a number of years ago with a challenge of a manager appointment in another watershed that we weren't involved with. But certainly, our process reflects changes in law as well. Now, Commissioner Clausen I think raised a good point about our attorney's review of case law and the fact that Mr. Snyder raised a recognition of a case law that occurred in 2021. So there's, I think, an important consideration there to make as we move forward with our decisions.

Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to be clear too, as Commissioner Clausen brought forward suggestions, and staff will review them. I am totally open to considering if there's things that we can look at that improve the process, I'm open to that. So hopefully the staff will review those, work with Commissioner Clausen, and if there's anything we can evaluate to improve the process. But for now, up till now, I've been comfortable with moving forward with the process. It's a process we've used with our advisory boards for years, and I think our staff does do a good job in general of looking at improving the process each and every year as we go through, as we learn, and our society changes, our community changes. But yet, I'm open to looking at anything that could be considered for change. Commissioner- Chair. Oh, Commissioner Clausen. Thank you so much. When I refer to processes, I'm referring to the interviewing process. We don't have that in writing.

So selection, recruitment, how we're doing that, that's not written. Commissioner Cox had discussed that she thought curiosity was a heavy-weighted criteriaof the interview. Okay, well let's put that a part of the process. There is a scorecard that could be done, and that is how other cities and local governments do this. And I ask that Washington County see what Ramsey County and Anoka County are doing. Being that Anoka County did get sued in 2022, I guarantee they changed the way they do this process. So we don't have written processes. It's frustrating to hear that from you guys because there isn't. So I would like to just state that there is not a written process on how we conduct interviews, how the interview questions are decided.

And like I said, it's changed every single time that we've had an appointment. So I would love to have it written, and this isn't my first time talking to the board about it, or staff. Administrator Corrid. Madam Chair and Commissioners, just a couple of thoughts to add. The county does have a policy, 6006, around boards, commissions, and advisory committees. That policy deals with roughly 10 to 12 different types of citizen advisory committees. When it comes to a watershed appointment, that process is mostly provided for in state law and statute, and so we're following it. The most recent change we made to our processes, and it's led by Megan and Holly and Jen Ohotski in our support staff group. After the court case in Anoka County, we went through and redid all of our step-by-step procedures on how we notify, what the timelines are, what the dates are. And actually, we've made great progress in making sure these appointments are being made more timely than they used to be.

Because the statute asks us to make appointments 30 days prior to the terms expiring of the current managers. So those process changes were made following that court case, and we do follow those. I recall that we have been using a set of interview questions. A couple years ago, there was a request to reconsider what those interview questions included. That was talked about amongst the county board members, and we've changed our watershed manager interview questions based on that feedback we got from the board. So is there a written process that would take every board committee, advisory committee, and have the exact same process followed? No. There is some difference based on the types of committees and advisory boards we're appointing to. Some are more or less identified in statute. We've got more discretion on others. The other thing that we should think about is that it's oftentimes difficult for the board to find candidates for some of these positions.

And so sometimes if we get a single candidate for a position, not likely on a watershed, but on a other committee, we will go ahead and make that appointment just through the recommendation of the board, and there's not a formal process. So I think that's the difficulty in creating a single process for every appointment that you provide as county board members at your level. All right. Commissioner Clausen? I would love to see the written process that you discussed today, and I do think that you're referring to a state statute, and a state statute is not a process. And so I would ask to, if you do have written processes, to please, Kevin, please show that to me. Thank you, Mr. Corrid. Any other comments? Okay. Commissioner Cox. Madam Chair, I would move to adopt a resolution to appoint Mr. Mark Donay, Stillwater Township, to a first term beginning June 22nd, 2026, and expiring June 21st, 2029 as manager on the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District.

Second. Moved and seconded. Discussion on Mr. Donay. Commissioner Muir. Well, I think reflecting back on our interview process, Mr. Donay interviewed extremely well. He obviously has been involved, based on his background information, in watershed management in the past. I think he brings some significant skill sets to this watershed board that are going to be extremely helpful. I think as we heard from May Township about reflecting on the challenging, the thinking of the managers, and where they might direct their efforts and their work, and how they might implement that work. Mr. Donay certainly has expertise in that area, and I think that he will follow through. I also want to talk a little bit about our process and how it's improved here in the last few years, because we really are providing, I think, better and improved resources to assist our managers as they are appointed to the watershed. And following up with those managers to make sure that they're effective.

And I quite frankly think that we can even do more. I think we need to make a stronger effort to try to connect these appointees to the communities that they serve across the watershed, not just the community that they live in. And I'm pleased, Commissioner Cox and I met, I think, three times with the last appointee to this watershed district. And we specifically asked him to reach out to the communities and become more engaged. And I was pleased to hear recently that even though he's a Scandia resident, he reached out to May Township, attended their meeting. And so I think some of that is improving as well, and I'm certainly committed to working with our appointees today to make sure that we help them build the relationships necessary to be successful as watershed managers. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll just say, in regards to Mr. Donay, I've been able to serve with him on the county's, I always want to read this, Board of Adjustment and Appeal committee, and I found him, coming to that committee incredibly prepared, asking questions of staff ahead of time, and very fair in the process. So I look forward to his appointment.

Any other com-- Commissioner Clausen. I do want to point out that this is putting us in legal concerns and risk by making these decisions today. So I do want you to understand that as a board. Okay. All right. Seeing no further comment, the clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? Nay. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Resolution passes four-one. All right. The next resolution is regarding Kimberly Haug. Madam Chair. Commissioner Miron. I would like to move to adopt a resolution to appoint Kimberly Haug from the city of Scandia to a first term beginning June 22nd, 2026 and expiring June 21st, 2029 as manager on the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District. Second. Commissioner Miron. Yeah. Again, the application process, the interview, and I see Kim is in the audience here today as well. That's one of the nice things about the job that we have here and the opportunity to interview so many candidates.

We get to know people a little better and understand their background. But I think she certainly impressed me in the interview process, and actually her application as well, that she's a hard worker. She wants to learn. She understands watershed law and stuff, at least to a limited extent. But really significant when you consider that she hasn't served on the watershed. But she's been attending meetings. She's taken a strong interest in the watershed. She also lives on the west side of Big Marine Lake, and I've heard from my constituency in that area. And certainly, as we talk about shoreline management and that type of thing, there are some unique circumstances that people deal with depending on where they are on the shorelines of these lakes, and I think she's going to bring that perspective to play here. And I'm also going to throw out encouragement for people to go online, look at, and register for the Water Consortium meeting that's coming up tomorrow.

Because as we talk about science-based decisions here, one of the presentations tomorrow in that meeting is some research that was done through the University of Minnesota on wake boats and the impact to lakes. And I'm hearing more and more from people that the way we manage shoreline has to match the potential impacts that are being created that affect our shoreline and certainly wake boats are one of those things. And I think Kim is going to bring that perspective to the board of managers and serve us well. Again, though, she lives in Scandia, which is fairly well represented on the watershed board, but I think she's in a unique position to bring some new perspectives to that board. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. In Ms. Haug's interview, I actually had to quit writing down all the certifications and training she's been to. There are so many. So she has truly taken it on herself to learn ahead of time before even applying to the watershed as a manager for all of the concern that she has.

So I am confident that she sees the watershed not just from where she lives on Big Marine, but as an overall district. And then also that I just wanted to make note too that even though Ms. Haug does live in Scandia, she was recommended by May Township as one of their slate of candidates. So, thank you. Any additional comment? Clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? Nay. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Resolution passes four-one. Next is adopting a resolution to appoint Sam DeVita. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move to adopt a resolution to appoint Mr. Sam DeVita, City of Scandia, to a first term beginning June 22nd, 2026 and expiring June 21st, 2029 as manager of the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District. I will second. Any discussion? Commissioner Cox. Again, I will just share, Mr. DeVita is an educator, and I think that one of the things that I've heard from both sides of constituents from this watershed district as they were emailing and calling, was that communication needs to be improved within the watershed. And I think that Mr.

DeVita, as an educator who works actually as an ESL educator, is going to be incredible in this role with some of the other appointees that are already on the watershed district, as well as these new ones coming today as well. Any... Commissioner Miron? Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate Commissioner Cox's summary there because that really was the discussion we had during our interview process. But I would like to move to amend the resolution to strike Sam DeVita and insert Ann Warner, and that would be from the Town of MayAnd that would be to, instead of a first term, a reappointment to her position. Motion? I'll approve. So that's a second? I'm sorry. I'll second that. Okay. Moved and seconded. Commissioner Miron. Thank you. So I'm going to follow up with the comments I made earlier, but more specifically to this appointment, because I am interested in adding an additional member that resides within May Township.

Mr. DeVita also lives in Scandia, and especially with the appointment of Ms. Haug now, we have significant representation in Scandia on that board, or we will have once she is seated. I think the best option is for us to reappoint Manager Warner. I certainly supported the appointments of Mark Donough and Kim Haug. And I recognize that Manager Warner and Mr. Donat are in the same watershed, and that there's already another manager, Mr. Gleason, from that sub-watershed. The alternative would be to reappoint Manager Dupree, and I'm not going to support that because she was not included on the township's list of nominees, even though she lived within the township. So, I think Manager Warner has brought a different perspective to the board. She asks tough questions. I agree with her that some of the processes and practices of the watershed may need to change or be re-looked at. Specific to that, I just want to mention a couple of things.

We all received an email from one of the seated managers that challenged some of the comments that Supervisor Andrich made at our last meeting. And he indicated in that email that the watershed district held the levy flat in both 2025 and '26, but he adds, "While continuing to effectively accomplish our mission." And I was pleased that he added that in there because it recognizes that the township has expressed concerns about the levy and the spending.

Obviously it was kept flat, and certainly, as he points out in his email, the levy over a five-year period was similar to the other taxing jurisdictions. But had it not been for a flat levy in 2025 and 2026, it would not have been. And I look at the impact Manager Warner had in the levy and the budget during those two years she was seated. She had a direct impact on that, and I would like to give her some credit for the fact that that levy was held flat. But to the point that was made here, the watershed continued its mission and effectively worked on that. In this email, there's also a discussion about some changes in policy that the water took on. A photo use policy to address concerns about how shoreline photographs were being handled. The policy was approved by the full board. So Manager Warner certainly was instrumental in improving and helping make that change within the watershed. And those photos are utilized for monitoring lakeshore health and as part of their assessment, and not necessarily for enforcement screening.

He also goes on to talk about some of the standard practices that have changed, specifically in response to concerns from May Township and the residents that the compliance process was unclear, too staff-driven, and difficult to understand. The practices changed. They provided courtesy notifications, landowner communication, board decision points, and opportunities for voluntary correction before any formal action was taken. They were discussed at multiple meetings, and again, unanimously approved. So, I look at that and I see how effective Manager Warner has been in carrying May Township's position, and so I understand the merit in Attorney Snyder's comment about having representation from those communities.

The watershed, I think, has diligently responded to the township's concerns, and they've had changes in board action, policy clarification, and public discussion. So I'm pleased about that. And I believe that some of the processes and practices have changed, and there may be additional change necessary. And I think Manager Warner, along with the other two appointees that we just made, could certainly help deliver those. I know there's been concern in the past about watershed spending, but obviously the last couple of years, that levy has been obviously kept in control, and I just so much appreciate how the watershed has addressed that and continued on with its mission. Because they need to do the work, and quite honestly, as I've listened to both sides of this argument, people are concerned about the resources out there. I have not talked to anyone that says anything differently about protection of those resources. I've had a number of conversations with the administrator of the watershed. No matter what happens today, I think both Commissioner Cox and I are going to be committed to helping in whatever ways we can to ensure effective operation of the watershed. And those are some of the reasons why I'm going to support the reappointment of Manager Warner, and I really ask for your support in that reappointment.

Commissioner Clausen, to the amendment? I motion to approve. Yeah. Yeah. So you don't have any comments on the amendment? No comments. Okay. Any other comments on the amendment? Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Miron, for your comments. I do appreciate it, and I hear, again, both sides. I think Commissioner Miron and I have heard a lot. I have also connected with Administrator Isensee here recently, and I do think some really good changes have happened with the current board that sits there around transparency and around the process and around the clarification of what Score the Shore is and what it's meant to be. And I am grateful that as a watershed district, they are moving forward their 10-year plan and checking things off of that. I think that that's really commendable. And all the managers that are there have been a part of that, and I hear you with your votes on that.

I also appreciate that the primary focus is on the resource, and I think that we have that with everyone that has applied for these positions as well. I am going to hold strong to Mr. DeVita, and I will ask Ms. Warner and May Township, next year there are three vacancies again in this watershed district, and to reapply at that time. Any other comments? Commissioner Clausen. I do believe that this is what May Township was asking for, and so this would prevent the potential case from being filed against us. And so that is why I am supporting Ann Warner. Thank you. To the amendment. Seeing no further discussion to the amendment, all in favor say... Yeah, I don't need a roll call on that. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Nay. Nay. Amendment fails. To the original motion, any further discussion? I just want to state out- Commissioner Karwoski... this is a great example of how difficult the decision and how good the candidates are. So I'll leave it at that.

Yeah. And I would echo what Commissioner Cox said, that there's going to be, we're already in June, additional vacancies next year. Chair, can I ask for a break? We've been in for an hour and a half, and I would like to take a five-minute break. We're in the middle of a vote, so after the vote. Oh, okay. Thank you. To the original resolution- Original... which is to appoint Sam DeVita, the clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? I'm sorry, what is the motion in front of us right now? To appoint Sam DeVita. Nay. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Resolution passes four-one. Okay, motion carries. So, Commissioner Clausen is asking for a recess. To the chair's discretion, I'm going to say about five minutes. Is there a second? Second. You can't move and second it, Commissioner Clausen. I'll second that. Sounds good. Any discussion? All right, we're in recess.

Call us back to order. Thank you, everybody. We're going to reconvene. So due to being just a titch behind, we have had to adjust the schedule, and we are going to move item 9A, which was a report on the 2026 Minnesota legislative session, to the June- 16th... 16th meeting for an update, and Micah will be also at that meeting. And so, I think it would be in order for someone to move to postpone to a time certain of June 16th. Second. Moved and seconded. Is there any discussion on June 16th, or the reason why I just gave? Okay. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. That is postponed. All right. So now we're going to revert back to item 5D, which is an adoption of a resolution to recognize June 2026 as Pride Month, and we have Lizzie Grover and Carrie Generoux, both from Community Services. Good morning, Madam Chair and Washington County Board of Commissioners.

I'm Lizzie Grover. I use she/her pronouns, and it is my great honor to stand here before you this morning and present this year's resolution declaring June as Pride Month in Washington County. As co-chair of the Pride Employee Resource Group, I have the joy and the privilege of working alongside other staff to support our LGBTQIA2S+ community, both inside and outside of these walls. Thank you for your dedication to our community and the opportunity to read this resolution. Now I'm going to pass it over to Pride's other co-chair. Thank you. My name is Carrie Generoux, and I use she/they pronouns, and I'm also very excited to be here today to read this again. I have had the privilege of reading this before, and I appreciated every opportunity that we've had to be invited back here. So the 2026 Pride Month resolution. Whereas the month of June is designated as Pride Month in recognition of the Stonewall Uprising of June of 1969, which is recognized as the start of the LGBTQIA2S+ rights movement, and numerous events have been organized around the country to commemorate this event. And whereas the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, q***r, intersex, asexual, two-spirit plus communities are important and vital parts of Washington County. And whereas Washington County is a welcoming community that recognizes the importance of inclusion, equality, and freedom.

And whereas the United States was founded upon the written principles that every person is created equal, that each has rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that each shall receive full recognition and protection of the law and full civic engagement, principles we are still striving to reach. And whereas Washington County is dedicated to fostering acceptance of all community members and eliminating discrimination based on sexual orientation, physical characteristics, gender identity, and gender expression. And whereas Washington County's Pride Employee Resource Group works to create a safe, welcoming, and supportive workplace at the county where people of all identities and orientations can be their authentic selves. And whereas Washington County is strengthened by and thrives upon the rich diversity of ethnic, cultural, racial, gender, and sexual identities of its community members, all of whom contribute to a vibrant community. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Washington County Board of Commissioners do hereby proclaim June 2026 as Pride Month in Washington County- And be it further resolved that the Washington County Board of Commissioners encourage our communities and our organizations to celebrate the achievements of LGBTQIA2S+ community members, and renew our commitment to protecting and strengthening the rights of everyone.

Thank you. I would like to move the resolution- Commissioner Clausen I would like to move the resolution of the 2026 Pride Month. I'll second that. Moved and seconded. Commissioner Clausen. Happy Pride Month. Happy Pride Month. It's June, yay. I just wanted to take a moment to speak personally today. I identify as LGBTQ woman, and I am your county commissioner. That is something I do not take lightly. When I was younger, seeing someone like me in elected office wasn't common. Representation matters. It's not just symbolic, it's practical. It means that people make decisions about your parks, your roads, your county budget, and your quality of life that reflects a full community that they serve. And I think because I'm neurodivergent, I'm often the differing voice on the county board, but it doesn't mean that my opinion doesn't matter, and it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be respected. Washington County is a home to LGBTQ residents, families, young people, and seniors, many of whom have spent years feeling unseen by their local government. I want them to know that the case is not true here.

There is room for you. Pride started as a protest. It became a celebration, and I'm so excited to celebrate with you. And it continues to be a declaration of what we exist, how we exist, how we belong, and how we go to the next part of this world. And really, where we are right now, we have a lot of room for improvement, but we have so many places that we have seen that we can make strides in, really accomplish great things. And so I really am happy that you brought this forward. Thank you so much, and it's so nice seeing you guys again. Yeah. Thanks. Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you both for presenting. Very supportive of this resolution. Want to thank the employee resource group. I know there's an event on Thursday. I have a direct conflict that's across town. I can't be there. Not only this event, but other employee resource group events, I think as a county board, we all enjoy mingling with employees.

The key is we want to make sure we treat everyone equal, for they can excel at Washington County. So thank you for your leadership on this matter. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Co-chairs Grover and Generoux, thank you so much for being here and for reading this proclamation. I think one of the pieces that catches me is that where everyone can be their authentic selves. We don't leave who we are at the door when we walk into work, and I think as a county we're better because we have so many different people sitting around the table. So, your ERG, all the ERGs, I think, allow us to show that diversity and allow us to be our authentic selves inside the buildings of work as well. And so I appreciate you bringing this here and for sharing this with us again this year. Thank you. Thank you very much for bringing this forward every year. I think the idea of recognizing the accurate history of LGBTQ and making sure that we have an employee group that continues to foster that safe and welcoming environment just strengthens our county as a whole, not only from an employer perspective, employee perspective, but generally as a community, because that goes into our businesses, goes into our schools.

And so just really appreciate the efforts that are done on behalf of the employee resource group. I will be in Red Wing for a county-related committee meeting, unfortunately, on Thursday. So, I am super bummed. Last year was very fun to talk with and see all the displays from the employees in the groups. So, appreciate the efforts of that activity so that employees can come and see what the ERG's about and celebrate Pride. So, with no further discussion, all in favor... Oh, resolution. Clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? Aye. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Resolution passes five zero. Thank you. Thank you. All right. The next item is E, and this is regarding a resolution authorizing the Washington County Board to hold an election to request voter approval to issue and sell its general obligation bonds to fund the Washington County Land and Water Legacy Program. And we have Emily Jorgensen here from planning to give a presentation.

All right. Good morning, Madam Chair and Commissioners. I'm Emily Jorgensen, the planning manager in the Office of Administration. I appreciate the opportunity to present on the Land and Water Legacy Program today. As you may be aware, 2026 marks the 20th anniversary of the program, and so before I begin, I want to acknowledge the leadership of the county board. The commitment of past and present commissioners has been central to the development and continuity of the Land and Water Legacy Program. The long-term support over the past 20 years has made this work possible. I'm here on behalf of many county staff, past and present, who have shaped this program from its earliest days. For nearly two decades, staff have worked with landowners, evaluated properties, managed projects, and upheld the values that the voters passed in 2006Finally, the success of the Land and Water Legacy program reflects the strength of its partnerships. Private landowners, nonprofit contributions, local and state agencies have all contributed in many significant ways.

This collaboration has allowed us to protect important places in the community and achieve outcomes that would not have been possible for the county alone. I want to acknowledge that we have our friends from the Minnesota Land Trust and the Trust for Public Land in the audience here today as well, including, in addition, a few members from our Parks and Open Space commission.

All right. Just to give you a little overview of our presentation today, with the purpose, we'll explain why we're here today and what the county aims to accomplish. We'll give you an overview of the Land and Water Legacy program and its funding. We will review the bond referendum process for renewal and also get to our ultimate requested action. So to start, the purpose of today's presentation is to review the Land and Water Legacy program, and we'll outline that bond referendum process. We'll review the proposed ballot language and seek referral from the county board to place this measure on the November 2026 ballot. So let's get into it. What is the Land and Water Legacy program? The Land and Water Legacy program was established in 2006 when Washington County voters approved a $20 million referendum to protect the county's natural resources. That vote didn't just create a funding source, it also set out a clear set of principles that define what the program can do.

Those principles reflect the community's priorities at the time, safeguarding water resources, preserving natural areas, expanding parkland, and protecting the landscapes that make Washington County unique. Before we move on, it's important to note that at this time, the original bond for the Land and Water Legacy program has been almost completely spent and is entirely allocated.

So how was the 2006 bond used to protect natural resources in Washington County? The Land and Water Legacy bond was expended as exactly outlined in state statute to protect land through acquisition. This happens in two ways. First, through parks acquisitions, where the county purchases full ownership of property and incorporates it into the regional park system, and also through conservation easements, where we purchase specific interest in land to ensure perpetual protection without owning the land outright. One important note, Land and Water Legacy funds cannot be spent on operations and maintenance. So this may often lead to, are there other funds involved in acquisitions for Land and Water Legacy purchases? And the answer to that is yes. As the board is aware, parks acquisitions typically leverage significant funding from the Metropolitan Council, and conservation easements often bring in additional partnerships, which is often organizations like the Minnesota DNR, the Minnesota Land Trust, Bell and Conservancy, our city partners, and others.

These partnerships always help stretch our county bond dollars further and make larger projects possible. As I stated, and as you're aware, this is the 20th anniversary of the program, so it's worth reflecting on what has been achieved to date. I'm proud to share that more than 1,900 acres have been permanently protected through the Land and Water Legacy program. Those acres span 53 projects, including 29 conservation easements and 24 parks acquisitions, all representing a broad range of landscapes and community priorities. Across these projects, over $53 million has been invested, $19 million in county funds and leverage with $34 million from our partners, demonstrating both strong local commitment and the power of collaboration to stretch our dollars further. So let's get into the details of how we've achieved these accomplishments. Starting with our regional parks. Since 2006, 860 acres have been added to Washington County's regional parks system through the Land and Water Legacy program. I'm not going to read each project to you here, but this gives you a sense of the scale of work that has been completed.

And how do we identify these opportunities for acquisition? Our program only works with willing sellers to purchase land for county parks. This process is guided by each park's master plan. When a master plan is developed, it establishes a boundary known as the master plan boundary, and parcels within that boundary become eligible for acquisition. This boundary is critical because the master plan is formally approved by both the Washington County Board and the Metropolitan Council. So then how are those acquisitions funded? The Land and Water Legacy bond is used to purchase those regional parks acquisitions, and the Metropolitan Council reimburses acquisition costs up to 75% for regional parks acquisitions.

Now we're going to shift from parks acquisitions to the other tool in our toolbox, conservation easements. Before we dig in, I do want to acknowledge there was an error on the slides in the original packet, so the correct number is reflected here on the screen, which is that across the county, 1,053 acres have been protected through Washington County conservation easements. About 200 of those were secured prior to 2006 under Land and Water Legacy program's predecessor, and more than 850 acres have been added into protection since 2006. So what is a conservation easement? It's a legal agreement between the landowner and the county that perpetually restricts how the land can be used to protect its natural features. And then how do we identify these projects? Similar to our parks projects, we only work with willing sellers, public or private, and landowners, whether they be private property owners, cities, or other participants, typically reach out to the county when they're interested in exploring an easement.

And how are these potential projects reviewed? To understand the specific conditions of each property, staff evaluate habitat quality using a ranking system developed in collaboration with the Washington Conservation District. This tool layers natural resource, hydrology, topography, and other environmental data to identify the most critical habitat across the county. Through this analysis, we've identified our top 10 priority areas, which are places with especially high conservation value. When a property is evaluated, it receives a ranking from low to very high, and while the top 10 areas highlight some of the most significant opportunities, there are many important natural resources outside of those areas as well. And the tool helps us recognize and compare those values across the county. This ranking system was most recently updated in 2023 and was adopted by the county board and refined into the map that you see here on the screenProjects are also reviewed for their importance to local communities. Properties in more developed areas may receive a lower ecological ranking, but are often moved forward because of their high community value.

This table shows Land and Water Legacy conservation easements by community and includes all easements purchased using county funds. The cost of each easement varies based on the location, property value, and whether there are additional funding partners involved. Again, in the packet, there was an error on the project, and Oakdale was not originally included in this table. So what we show here with 9.4 acres included in Oakdale is the actual correct number.

Now that I've described how the program works, I'm going to highlight a few examples. This won't be an exhaustive list of all the projects we've completed over 20 years but should help illustrate the range, scale, and impact of the work that we've been doing across the county. So we will start with parks. Looking at Big Marine Regional Park, the county acquired 320 acres of the area widely formerly known as Kelly Farms in May Township. This is part of a phased effort that will ultimately total 680 acres. These acres expand Big Marine Regional Park, which includes diverse natural resources and habitats. The park currently features a swimming beach, destination play area, motorized boat launch, and other amenities.

Scooting down to the southern part of the county, 102 acres in Denmark Township were incorporated into St. Croix Bluffs Regional Park in 2020. These acres expand the park, which includes nearly 4,000 feet of St. Croix River shoreline, along with prairie ravines and bluffs. Visitors currently enjoy a motorized boat launch, campgrounds, play structure, picnic areas, sports areas, and other amenities. And for our final parks example is the acquisition of 50 acres in Stillwater Township that was incorporated into Pine Point Regional Park. Pine Point features pine forests, lakes, marshes, along with five miles of multi-use trails for bikers, birders, skiers, and hikers. It's also well-loved as one of the major trailheads for the Gateway State Trail, making it a popular destination for year-round outdoor recreation.

Now we'll highlight a few conservation easement projects, starting with what is now known as Lumberjack Landing in the city of Stillwater. This project was a collaboration among the former property owners, the Eippel family, the county, the city of Stillwater, and the Legislative Citizens Commission on Minnesota Resources, or LCCMR. This property was placed into permanent protection in November 2014, includes 3,300 feet of St. Croix River shoreline, and supports noble species such as the kittentail, which is a rare Midwestern wildflower classified as threatened, and the peregrine falcon, which is currently classified as a special species of concern and a species in greatest conservation need.

Heading over to Woodbury, we've been lucky to do two projects around Law Lake in the city of Woodbury almost 11 years apart. Our first project protected 29 acres and was completed December 2014. Almost 11 years later, we are back to collaborate with the city, the South Washington Watershed District, and the Minnesota DNR to protect an additional three acres about a year ago in May 2025. I'm pleased to share that Law Lake has been recently removed from the DNR's impaired water list, and we look forward to additional partnership opportunities with the city of Woodbury on their vision for Law Lake if those opportunities arise.

And for our final conservation easement example, we have Arnold, which is 74 acres completed with a private landowner in the city of Scandia about a year ago. This project was completed in partnership with the Minnesota Land Trust. This property includes nearly 700 feet of stream corridor and flows directly to the St. Croix River, making it especially valuable for water protection. It also includes habitat for several species identified by the DNR as threatened or of special concern, including the cerulean warbler, the red-shouldered hawk, and the Blanding's turtle. So over the past 20 years, the county has invested the funds approved in 2006 and completed projects supported by that bond. With those dollars now fully allocated, our next step is determining how and if the Land and Water Legacy Program should continue. Conversations about future funding for the Land and Water Legacy Program began to take place in early 2023. In spring 2025, a workshop was held where the county board indicated support to move forward with the support of a consultant to explore the possibility of a referendum in 2026.

As part of exploring a potential 2026 bond referendum, the county partnered with the Trust for Public Land for independent analyses and recommendations. With support from county staff, TPL completed a full feasibility study, including an assessment of funding options and a public opinion survey to gauge voter support. Based on that analysis, TPL has recommended that the county place a bond referendum question on the November 2026 general election ballot. So we will now walk through what that recommendation looks like. That recommendation is to issue general obligation bonds. That is the same type of bonds that were voter-approved in 2006. In terms of amount, we are seeking a $40 million bond, because that amount addresses the identified needs and aligns with the scale of today's typical project costs and property values. We understand that $40 million can look like a lot, and it's been very important to this board to translate to voters what that means at an individual level.

Taxes can be complicated, but to give voters a ballpark figure, we use the median home value in Washington County, which is $420,900. A home at that value would pay about $25 a year for this referendum. We also included agricultural estimates since the county's property base is not limited to residential homesteads. For an agricultural homestead property, that cost is about $3 per $100,000 of taxable market value. And for agricultural non-homesteads, that cost is about $6 for $100,000 per taxable market value.

The purpose of the bond, as recommended, will be largely the same as the 2006 referendum, which focuses on protecting land and water in Washington County. The language is specific enough to guide the program and acquisitions while still giving the board flexibility on how to direct how the program prioritizes, evaluates, and approves projects. We will use the same accountability measures as 2006. The use of funds will be limited strictly to what is outlined in the ballot language itself, and we'll continue to provide full public disclosure. We will also continue to leverage the Parks and Open Space Commission, and the county undergoes an annual public audit every year. And election timing would be the 2026 general election, which this year is on November 3rd.

Commissioners, as you're all aware, both the county board and Parks and Open Space Commission has reviewed the process, the feasibility study, and the draft ballot language over the past few months. At your workshops a few weeks ago, you highlighted the value of adding language about long-term program benefits, appreciated the added specificity around the use of the phrases Mississippi River and St. Croix River, and expressed interest in seeing additional projects in more developed areas of the county. Likewise, the Parks and Open Space Commission reviewed the same materials during their May meeting. They described this as one of the most important actions we can take today and asked that we relay their enthusiastic consensus of support for moving this referendum forward. And so, commissioners, the moment you've all been waiting for, this is the ballot language as it would potentially appear on the ballot itself. It's largely unchanged from what was shown during the board workshop on May 19th.

There were some small adjustments made by the county's bond council, where the phrase aggregate amount was added, and the language is structured this way for a few different reasons. First, it mirrors the structure and intent of what we passed in 2006 and maintains that continuity for voters. It also meets legal standards for bond questions by remaining descriptive but not argumentative. It captures all of the core elements of the program. And finally, it does keep the text simple without any editorial narrative, so we try to avoid introducing any bias. And with that, I've approached our requested action, which is to adopt a resolution authorizing the county board to hold an election to request voter approval to issue and sell its general obligation bonds to fund the Washington County Land and Water Legacy Program. And with that, Madam Chair, I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Ms. Jorgenson. Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Emily, for the presentation.

To get this before us for discussion, I'll make the motion to adopt a resolution authorizing the Washington County Board to hold an election to request voter approval to issue and sell its general obligation bonds to fund the Washington County Land and Water Legacy Program. Second. Moved and seconded. Commissioner Karwoski. I'm going to make just some comments regarding the presentation, and then before the vote, I'll have some additional background I looked into on the matter. First of all, I want to state clearly what we're voting on today is to put this before the voters on the November ballot, and they will make the decision. What better way of democracy? It's a big decision. I just wanted to highlight some things on these slides that I think are highlights for me, that I think are important to the residents we represent. So, the $20 million that we've appropriated, it's really had the buying power of about $53 million.

So when we match that with other grants, city partners, non-profit partners, that buying power has been significant. It's amounted to 1,900 acres protected over 53 projects. 860 of those acres of the 1,900 were to expand our regional parks. Slide number 10, if you could show that one, because I represent District 2, which is heavily urban. I don't have slide numbers on here, Commissioner. Could you tell me what the header is? The one that shows who has gotten parcels, shows the chart of cities. I represent the northwest area of Woodbury. It's a rather large area. But Woodbury ranks second with, what? A little over 130, almost 140 acres protected. Their second-most protected land in Woodbury, which is heavily urban. I live in Oakdale. We've had a parcel there done. It just goes to show there is... And I looked into this. I'll give others a chance to speak, but there are opportunities in our urban areas moving forward with the new Land and Water Legacy funding.

Thank you for showing that slide. Lastly, well, another highlight is it's $25. The recommendation is $40 million, which in 2006 it was $20 million. I really think the $40 million gives us, in today's dollars with 20 years moving forward with inflation, gives us a similar amount of buying power, and I hope we can, if passed by the voters, I hope we can leverage that money to get probably close to $80 to $100 million of buying power. I think there's history to support that. It amounts to $25 a year per household on the average valued house, and that's as if you were to bond for $40 million on day one. What our past history is, we'll only bond borrow money as it's needed. So the dollar amount per year should be substantially less, because we'll only buy from willing sellers that are motivated to sell and also-Only bond as we need the money. So the $25 is a worst-case scenario.

I like to use the $3 per year to protect land. And that's really nice because that's based on $100,000 value. Each $100,000 of home value incrementally is $3. And I represent a lot of modest areas. So if you have, there are still homes for 2 or $300,000, that might be a $6 investment per year for a $200,000 home. And then lastly, I do think we have a responsibility as elected officials to be good stewards of our natural environment, and this would protect not only water resources. I represent District 2, living in Oakdale. We had some of the more concentrated and PFAS areas of water pollution. I really think this is an opportunity to do our part, not only to protect water. It's a resource that I think we have to protect. We cannot assume we have that resource forever. It's our duty, I think, to make sure we have that water as a resource for decades to come.

And I really think it's a responsibility, us as the elected, to be good stewards of our natural environment. I've got other comments to say, but I'll keep it at that for now, Madam Chair. Sounds good. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Jorgensen, thank you for the presentation. I think that was the most clear explanation I've ever gotten of what an easement is. So I appreciate that. It can be a really confusing topic. And I want to thank you to the folks in the audience. So our friends from TPL, so Trust for Public Land, and then Minnesota Land Trust as well, and then Cork from our Parks and Open Space Commission. Thank you for hanging around and being a part of this. I appreciate the chart being on the screen. I did notice, of a county of more than 30 communities, there's less than half of the communities listed there. So while this might not touch every community directly, I'm looking at some of these things and our family recreates at Big Marine. We recreate in Square Lake.

We recreate at Ravine in Cottage Grove. So we travel throughout the county to do our recreation. So this chart is just really helpful to show overall, every Washington County resident benefits. We just might not be able to walk to the closest park or to the closest easement because it's sometimes still on private land. And so I appreciate the presentation and fully supportive of what this program does for our county. Thank you. Commissioner Miron. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Karwoski, and I don't know, Emily, if you can bring back the slide where Commissioner Karwoski was talking about the $3 and the $6.

Yeah. I just want to make sure we're clear here, Commissioner Karwoski. The $3 applies to agricultural homesteaded land, okay? And the $6 is agricultural non-homesteaded land. So- Yep. Thank you for your clarification... in the workshop, I was asking questions as it related to agriculture because as our county administrator pointed out, in the last referendum, ag land was exempted from the referendum. The laws have changed since then, and ag land is no longer exempted. So this was, I think, a means of trying to respond to my question about how much this would cost based on ag land acres. And as opposed to identifying it on a per acre basis, staff identified it on a per 100,000 of value. So, the median value home is still at that close to $25 worst-case scenario as you identified. I will mention, though, that there's a lot of homes above that median value home. Mm-hmm. And so those people will be paying more for that, along with ag land. And in my particular case, I'll probably be paying about three times what the median value home will be paying based on these calculations for ag land.

Having said that, this program is called the Legacy Program, right? And those of us that own agricultural land are probably as concerned about legacy as most people are. And as I look at a legacy for my kids and grandkids, over the 20-year span to this program, based on calculations on my own property, it'll cost me about $2,000. And that seems like a very good bargain in creating a legacy that my family will enjoy, whether that's use of our parks, whether that's land that has easements that protects water and land and wildlife and that type of thing. So, I think the reason for my question in the workshop was I just want to be clear, as you point out, Commissioner Karwoski, we're moving this before the voters, and I want to be clear that when the voters vote on this, they actually understand and know the costs associated, at least with the property they currently own.

And so that we're clear. Emily and Serena have been doing a fabulous job managing this program, and their predecessors did a fabulous job of managing this program. I believe that personally, I'd like to see it continue. I'm happy to put it before the voters today. Commissioner Karwoski mentioned about the leveraging, and both Commissioner Karwoski and Cox mentioned how the various communities have participated and benefited, but there's a lot of areas that communities haven't been participating. And Commissioner Cox alluded to the easement. One of the things I like about the easement program is that the landowners retain ownership with just restrictions on how that land is used, and the ability of placing easements really helps a lot of people carry out their conservation mindedness on their own property, and so I really respect that. The other thing that hasn't been mentioned yet in the discussion is that we've utilized these funds with willing sellers, and that is a key component of this, in that we're looking for people that want to partner, and that's how this program is designed, and that's how it's functioned.

I think the real nice thing about this program is we've got 20 years under our belts in managing this program, and we've seen the results of that, and hopefully those results are what the voters will see and support when this comes before them. But obviously, all we can do is put it before them and allow the voters to decide whether or not a program is valuable and whether or not they can afford and continue to support the program. And I'm happy to support putting it before the voters. Any other comment? Commissioner Clausen. Thank you. Today we got the population estimates for Washington County. 291,448 people live with us. Over 150 constituents will not directly benefit from this 40 million special bond. Washington County's Land and Water Program is about land use. It is a conservation easement program that protects land from development. It has protected land from development as much as 53 properties. This effort is to concentrate only in the rural and undeveloped areas, which does not align with where the majority of the county's population lives.

Does Land and Water directly benefit the most populated areas? You heard from staff regarding 23 park acquisitions. Those lands are already conserved and protected. Also, when we purchase a park, the reimbursement comes from the regional Metro Park Fund. So when we acquire land, we have more need for park maintenance, and we have rising costs of our parks. We have received a lot of concern from staff and received presentations on how we're going to deal with the rising costs. This 40 million bond does not help support park maintenance and operations.

The program developed in 2006. The purpose was to protect undeveloped land in Washington County to be saved from development. Just a couple weeks ago, we had a city council member from Afton tell us that we didn't want to be like Woodbury. I'm the representative for Woodbury. The title of this program, Land and Water, infers that all land and water in Washington County will be considered in this legacy program, but that's not true. Proportionately, the core, the most populated cities in Washington County will not benefit. Out of the 2006 $20 million bond that was approved in Washington County, Woodbury received less than $2 million of that $20 million. A land grant separate from the Land and Water Legacy Fund was given to the county to clear tree debris and noxious weeds at Valley Creek Park and Prairie Ridge Park. Both are city parks. Why was this project given only to Woodbury? In the new proposed land and legacy map, Woodbury, Oakdale, Landfall, Mahtomedi, Birch Lake, White Bear Lake, and parts of Cottage Grove are likely ineligible.

Woodbury will receive zero of the $40 million proposed, although they make up now 30% of the population of Washington County. Oakdale is 14%, and Cottage Grove makes up 10%. A significant portion of the commissioner's work is making sure your districts benefit from the taxation. This is a taxation. Therefore, county commissioners should center on whether bond language could be amended to include developed land purchases or a separate memorandum that agrees that $10 million will be evenly given to the districts who are not directly benefiting from similar grants, similar to what the city of Woodbury only received. Staff has admitted to the under-representation of those developed areas, and that is why we got those grants in Woodbury. This is an attempt to try to even out an unbalanced system. Because the vote will be four to one today, this is my ask to the board. Will you support a memorandum and a separate agreement that states that staff will continue to help cities' parks in the same effort that was done to Prairie Ridge and Valley Creek Parks?

I know that that grant was separate from the land and water, and that that land and trust opportunities still exist. These issues and conversations have actually been ongoing since 2024. This isn't the first time the bond referendum has come before the board. Four out of the five board members in 2024 voted against moving the referendum forward. None of these past county Land and Water Legacy meetings, where commissioners spoke about these concerns, were done in a public televised meeting like today. And so that is why I am going forward and speaking so much in detail, trying to cover everything that we've talked about. But unfortunately, there's no recordings from those meetings, and very little to go by when you look at the meeting minutes. Based on the many meetings that we've had, my research, outside discussions with DNR, outside discussions with other agencies, those people also have questions. How is the program showing that it's benefiting the most populated cities in the county?

The existing framework is a land and use program, pushing cities like Oakdale, Mahtomedi, Stillwater, and Cottage Grove to pay the majority of the future costs of development. Is it fair to just concentrate on conserving land that could be future developments when that means those areas may not contribute to our overall tax base? Is it fair to ignore cities that are as big as 36 square miles? When our levies are going to hit double digits next year, is it fair to ask more money from constituents knowing what's ahead of us? Major tax increases, special taxes, special bonds, community services. What are we going to do with the funding that is being limited by the federal government? Clean water benefits everybody. Yeah, but not all watersheds flow together. They don't. But permanent land protection is forever. Permanent land protection benefits the communities where those lands sit forever. Hugo, Scandia, they have opportunity. But Woodbury, Cottage Grove, you'll keep developing.

That's not a benefit. It's actually a permanent investment into communities, but not a permanent investment into others. It's about fair representation. I'm not against conservation. I'm not against conservation easements at all. I'm actually a huge climate action supporter, and I have been the commissioner who has pushed so much of these initiatives forward, including solar panels, EV chargers. However, this is frankly a comprehensive development plan to make sure Woodbury becomes the St. Paul of Washington County, and we're going to be taxed like it too. The permanent direct benefits of this bond is that certain communities will stay undeveloped forever. Hugo, Scandia, Marine on St. Croix, their land stays green. Their property values stay high. Their character stays rural, paid for by the most populated cities.

When will the other cities also get the same kind of protection? That has been my question, and that continues to be my question. So I will not be supporting this action today, which is to approve the Land and Water Legacy bond to go forward for $40 million. Thank you. Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. I did some additional research outside these presentation slides. I just wanted to mention some things. First of all, I serve as the representative from the board on the Park and Open Space Commission, and I want to thank Cork Wicker of Park and Open Space Board Chair for being here today. Also, I noticed Jim Kelly from Park and Open Space, if he's still here. Yep, he is, and I hope I haven't missed anybody else, if someone else is from Park and Open Space today. I was at last, a week beforeTwo Thursdays ago, Park and Open Space Commission meeting, and the Park and Open Space commissioners were enthusiastic about moving forward with the support. And that's a good thing about when we appoint advisory boards, they're another layer of citizens weighing in what they think their...

Cork Wicker represents District 5, but each one of them represent a district, and they kind of are out there, eyes and ears, and are another layer to what they think is best for their district. So thank you for being here. So I met with our county staff yesterday, and I had them, based on our meeting two weeks ago and our workshop, I had them create a map of District 2 and identify potential pockets of land that could be saved if there was a willing seller, if there was a city partner. And throughout District 2, there was, I feel, abundance of potential property. So for my taxpayers in District 2, I felt there's opportunities, and that's important. Wanted to point out that in 2006, when the referendum was passed, throughout the county, there's 87 precinct voting districts. 86 of the 87 supported the Land and Water Legacy program in 2006. I think if you follow news about water pollution and some of our... We've only developed more in our county. I think protecting land, habitat, and water has only become more important. I know I spend a lot of time in my district out amongst the community, and I hear nothing but that.

Granted, not everyone's going to want to vote for this, but yet I think there's strong support and there's strong evidence so that we move forward and give it to the voters, for they can make that decision on whether they want to pay for the investments. Through the 2025 County Community Survey, residents in District 2, and I represent Birchwood, Pine Springs, Willernie, a small section of White Bear Lake, half of Mahtomedi, all of Oakdale, and a rather large section of Woodbury, and Landfall. In that community survey by all our residents throughout the county... Actually, these are just District 2 results that I'm going to mention. Residents rated climate change 63 out of 100 scale, 66 on water quality. That's two-thirds of the residents value that as very high. They also supported conservation easement by 68%, again, 68 out of scale 100. A strong rating for regional parks, as I mentioned earlier. I think we're over almost 900 acres through the last referendum to expand our regional parks.

72% of residents supported expanding regional parks. And then trails and bikeways, where this gives us the opportunity to provide trails, 85% of the residents supported that, and that was just from the 2025 community survey that's only a year old. Additionally, now we've started a climate action plan, and some of the strongest community engagement was in improving air and water quality. They ranked highest on the climate benefit. Multiple comments emphasized the need to protect water resources. And again, I live in Oakdale. We addressed PFAS early on. PFAS has kind of grown throughout the county, and I think we have to really protect those areas where we have clean water moving forward, so it's a resource for our children and our children's children. In closing, I've proven with working with staff, doing research, identifying, looking at a detailed map of where there's potential in District 2, which is a very urban area of the county, there's still a lot of opportunities to make the investment in District 2 to protect habitat areas and water resources.

Wanted to point out there's also a major trail in our visioning, which Middle St. Croix to Fallen Keller, the regional east to west trail that has some additional opportunities to protect land and enhance that trail. Because my residents have valued trails probably as high as anything. Again, in closing, I really think we, as elected officials, have an obligation to be stewards of our county natural environment. I believe that based on getting out in the community and the data I've researched, there's a higher interest than ever to protect our natural resources. I will vote to put this on the ballot, and I trust the voters to do their research and make their informed decision. What better way is democracy to put it on the ballot? Thank you. All right. Commissioner Clausen. Yeah. I just wanted to reiterate that we would like the board to consider a memorandum of understanding right now that you will help other cities to get the type of grants that Woodbury received.

Oh, absolutely. I'll work with our cities- So you agree that we should do that separately from- You got to go through the chair. We're not going to have a conversation going back. So. No. I always- Any other discussion? I'm not allowed to respond to Commissioner Kowalski? Not unless you ask to seek to be recognized, then you can. Can I seek to be recognized so I can respond to Commissioner Kowalski? Yes, Commissioner Clausen. Thank you so much. Commissioner Kowalski, so you are in favor of doing a memorandum of understanding for other cities, your cities, that you represent? I'm not going to speak to that matter, but I- Commissioner Kowalski. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm not going to speak to that, and I'm not going to debate you here, but I have a great reputation of working regularly with my cities. I'll go to any of their meetings and pursue any of their interests to protect land and see if the county can be a partner.

Thank you. So, just some final comments here. First, thank you Emily and Serena for your work on this. From an employee perspective, what a neat project for employees to get to work on and collect all the information and go through all the data with this. This is a big day, and this is a huge opportunity for the residents to have a voice in whether or not, over the next 20 years, they want to invest over $40 million to continue to improve our water quality and protect our rivers. As somebody who represents the confluence of St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers, it's important because we all enjoy the rivers. We need to protect our drinking water, and we have wetlands, woodlands, that need to be protected as well for future generations. So this is giving the people a voice. This is not determining which projects are going to receive this money, because that will be up to the boards that are here at that time over the next 20 years to determine where that money goes and which project. Because you want the transparency, and you want the public discussion and the collaboration with our local communities, possibly watersheds.

So I, for one, am very excited to allow the voters here to have a voice in this. I am very pleased that the previous referendum in 2006, that Lod Lake Park in Woodbury had improvements to the point of it was removed off the impaired waters list. The Mississippi Dunes property in Cottage Grove is one of the largest conservation projects in that city. Denmark Township had Carpenter Nature Center, and as pointed out in the packet, St. Croix Bluffs Park. So I believe that these investments are well worth the deliberation of whether or not the public wants to continue projects like that. We do have two major expansions for our parks and open spaces coming up. One being the Gray Cloud Island Regional Park that is master planned through the Met Council, and also Kelley Properties up in the northern part of our county. So we have a lot of exciting opportunity, if the voters decide, to put these funds to use.

So with that, and seeing no further discussion, the clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron. Aye. Commissioner Karwoski. Aye. Commissioner Cox. Aye. Commissioner Clausen. Nay. Commissioner Bigham. Aye. Resolution passes four-one. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Emily, thank you, Serena, for your work on this. Next item, one of my favorite proclamations of the year to support, is adopting a resolution to proclaim June 1st through August 15th, 2026 as Summer at Your Library, and we have Director Kramer with us today. Good morning, Madam Chair and members of the board. My name is Jackie Kramer, and I'm the director of Washington County Library. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. Each year in June, the county board passes a resolution in support of Summer at Your Library, a tradition that helps inform the public about the importance of summer learning for kids, teens, and adults. These programs are designed to encourage reading, exploration, and connection for community members of all backgrounds.

As we've engaged with community members for the Park Grove and R. H. Stafford Library redesign projects, it's been gratifying to hear what community members value about their libraries and what they envision for the futureA common theme has been that libraries are community hubs, free and welcoming places where all people can learn and gather together. Summer is a wonderful time to visit the library, where there are abundant opportunities to create new memories through events and activities for all ages. Of course, none of this is possible without the contributions of everyone who works for the library. Library staff members are creative and compassionate, bringing energy and care as they serve all community members. I'm grateful for their work this season and throughout the year. We also appreciate the ongoing support from the county board, including Commissioner Bigham for her service on the library board, and Commissioner Clausen for her service on the Melissa Board of Trustees. And thank you to county administration and the other county departments that we partner with throughout the year.

Now, Madam Chair, with your permission, I will read the resolution. Go ahead. Summer at Your Library 2026 Proclamation. Whereas libraries are at the heart of their cities, counties, and communities, providing free and equitable access to books, technology, and programming that ensures all individuals, regardless of background, have the support they need to learn, connect, and thrive. Whereas libraries partner with schools, businesses, and local organizations to maximize resources and expand access to essential services, strengthening the entire community. And whereas Washington County Library branches are anchors in their neighborhoods, providing comfortable, flexible, and welcoming spaces for community members to freely gather and grow together. And whereas library staff regularly engage with the community outside the library, going to places where neighbors meet to build connections and provide free library tools and resources to all community members. And whereas from June 1st through August 15th, 2026, Washington County Library will celebrate its Summer at Your Library program with an array of events and activities to encourage community and lifelong learning.

And whereas engagement with summer library programs can neutralize summer learning loss and encourage participants of all ages to become lifelong readers and learners. And whereas Washington County Library staff will offer exciting programs that encourage community members to visit the library, connect with their neighbors, and learn something new. And whereas these programs and activities will provide opportunities for all members of the community to create new stories and memories at their local library this summer. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Washington County Board of Commissioners does hereby proclaim June 1st to August 15th, 2026, as Summer at Your Library. Thank you. Is there a motion for the resolution? So moved. I will second that. Commissioner Clausen. Thank you so much, Ms. Kramer, for coming to present to us about the summer schedule. We are very excited for all of the busyness that the library brings us when the kids are no longer in school, which is Thursday for mine.

So, yeah, I am very grateful that we have these programs. It's not only something to do with the kids when you just want them to get out of the house, but people really appreciate your library staff. I've heard so many compliments in the last two weeks about your library staff, because I'm particularly asking for library feedback on the expansion that is happening for Stafford Library. And overwhelmingly, people just love your staff. They look at your staff as their friends. People have told me that they just are looking forward to seeing the friendly face that they know so well, and I just wanted to tell you that our community in Woodbury feels you, feels staff, and it's just really amazing to see that they love the same people that I love and for the same reasons. And it is really just the extra smile that you guys provide, and you kind of are our community center over there.

And so, thank you for just making Woodbury residents feel welcomed in the library space, which to some people, it's new, some people, it's common that they go to it, but thank you. Any comments? Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Director Kramer, for your presentation. You wrote a community hub- Mm-hmm... is what our libraries are. And I think they're a safe place for some families that don't have a safe place in the summer, and so I just want to highlight that and the importance of that. And so I appreciate that in the summer months, we make things a little bit more fun. We add more programming. We do the extra pieces because we know that's what our community needs. And so I just want to thank you and your staff for taking those extra steps when the library is the busiest and our community needs us the most. So thank you. All right. Well, Director Kramer, thank you.

Like I said, I think the Summer at Your Library programming that is done throughout every library in our system is just so well done and well received, and want to thank your staff for all the work that they do in planning and executing all of our programming. And I believe that it's just important to kind of be that supplement, if you will, during school time, but with a different flair, if you will. So, I just appreciate that you all do that, and you get a few new library card memberships throughout the summer too because of it. So thank you to you and your staff. Seeing no further discussion, the clerk will take the roll Commissioner Miron. Aye. Commissioner Karwoski. Aye. Commissioner Cox. Aye. Commissioner Clausen. Aye. Commissioner Bigham. Aye. Resolution passes five zero. Thank you. Next up is something that has been long overdue and anticipated. And certainly appreciate Mr. Hauer, our division manager at Property Records and Taxpayer Services, to provide an update and consider approval of a resolution for Mapping Prejudice in Washington County.

Thank you, Madam Chair and commissioners. Like you said, my name is Tom Hauer. I'm the manager of the Property Records division within Property Records and Taxpayer Services. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I'm excited to present for my first time. Our duty here is to review an update on the Mapping Prejudice project and our involvement with Washington County. Mapping Prejudice is a University of Minnesota initiative which researches and maps racial covenants throughout the Twin Cities region and beyond. In 2021, Washington County partnered with the Mapping Prejudice project by providing access to historic property records from 1910 to 1968. The review and research of the property records is now complete, and we can take a look back at what racial covenants are. It's important to understand this to understand the impact it has on our residents and property owners. Racial covenants are clauses inserted into property deeds to prevent people who are not white from buying or occupying land.

Racial covenants served as legally enforceable contracts. They stipulated that property had to remain in the hands of white people, and they ran with the land. They could be enforced in perpetuity, and anyone who dared to challenge these covenants risked losing or forfeiting the land. It's important to understand the timeline of these racial covenants as well. Around the turn of the century, they started to be inserted into deeds. The United States Supreme Court ruled that these racial covenants are unconstitutional in 1948. The Minnesota legislature followed up in 1953, making racial covenants illegal. The Fair Housing Act in 1968 rendered the covenants legally unenforceable. In 2019, no doubt due to the work of Mapping Prejudice, legislation was passed allowing owners to discharge racial covenants on their property. And that brings us to where we are today in 2026. There are 741 properties found in Washington County that contain racial or are impacted by racial covenants. This is a heat map of Washington County, and these are some areas spotlighted where racial covenants are clustered in Washington County. And we can see it runs throughout the county.

Some of the observations or takeaways from the project are that racial covenants are generally found around bodies of water. Stillwater has relatively few racial covenants. Stillwater was founded in 1843 before racial covenants became common practice. Unfortunately, developers continued to insert racial covenants in Washington County even after the Minnesota banned racial covenants in 1953. An example of this is Bone Lake in Scandia. Fortunately, Washington County has relatively few racial covenants compared to other counties. This has to do with the development of Washington County and residential development after 1968 and the passage of the Fair Housing Act. How are we going to move forward from this? We're fortunate to partner with Mapping Prejudice and Michael Cory, the associate director of the program. We're going to work and have a presentation for all supervisors, where Michael Cory will address all supervisors and provide additional information and background, as well as a lunch and learn for all employees to have an opportunity to learn more.

How can residents and property owners address these covenants? They can file a discharge of restrictive covenants affecting protected classes. This is written into statute and is free of charge to file the document. We will send out a letter to residents impacted by racial covenants, along with a social media campaign and a dedicated county webpage to help facilitate the discharge of these covenants. And that brings us to today and a board action request to support the efforts to educate, disavow, and discharge racial covenants. And Madam Chair, with your approval, I'd like to read the resolution. Absolutely. Mapping Prejudice in Washington County. Whereas for generations, discriminatory racial covenants were written into property deeds across Washington County and throughout the United States. These covenants explicitly barred people of certain races, religions, and ethnic backgrounds from owning or occupying property, and their language still exists in many property land records today. And whereas these practices helped create and reinforce residential segregation, limiting access to homeownership, wealth building, lending opportunities, and investment in communities of color.

The impacts of these policies continue to shape disparities in property values, neighborhood investment, and generational wealth. And whereas throughout the work of the Mapping Prejudice initiative, more than 740 properties in Washington County have been identified as containing discriminatory covenants. In response, residents and policymakers have taken steps to acknowledge the history and provide legal pathways to remove or disavow these covenants from property titles. And whereas state and federal laws now prohibit housing discrimination, and Minnesota law allows property owners to formally discharge discriminatory covenants from their records at no cost. Recognizing this history is an important step towards addressing the lasting harm caused by these practices and affirming Washington County's commitment to equitable housing and equal opportunity for all residents. Now, therefore, be it resolved the Board of Washington County Commissioners of Washington CountyMinnesota disavows past practices of racial covenants and now therefore be it resolved that the Washington County Board of Commissioners recognizes, accepts, supports efforts being made to educate, disavow, and discharge racial covenants.

I'd like to thank you for the time here today, and if you have any questions, I'd like to answer them. Good. Yep, no problem. Good job, and appreciate the time and effort putting the presentation together. Really well done. Commissioner Miron. Madam Chair, I will move the resolution. All right. Second. Moved and seconded. Commissioner Miron. Yeah, thank you. Tom, appreciate you coming before us. Obviously, this has been something that the county has worked on now for some time. Appreciated the opportunity to partner with the University of Minnesota on this. And also appreciate the fact that as the law has changed in that timeline, I believe 2019 was the last change- Yeah... and then the county board addressed this as soon as 2021, which in my opinion, we moved forward with the work that has been done here very, very quickly. So I'm just pleased with the work that's gone on and certainly support the resolution.

Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the presentation, Mr. Hauer, and I really appreciate what we're going to do moving forward, right? That there's going to be some additional education for staff here within the county, and then there's going to be actually a letter sent to residents of these 740 homes. I just appreciate that extra touch just to make sure that those homeowners know that there's something that they can do to correct this wrong that has been in place for a very long time. So thank you. Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Hauer, again, thanks for presenting. I agree with my colleagues' comments. It's hard not to be redundant, but it is worth mentioning that we just can't accept the... We really need to eradicate this racial prejudice that's shown in our land records, I think in principle. Even though from what I understand looking at materials, by law, these things can occur, but to take them off the land records is the right thing to do. I appreciate the time and energy, and there's some cost involved to do this, but I think the principle, I think our residents expect that.

740 properties, and that's a small problem relative to other counties in the metro. And we really got to thank our cooperative residents. I just got to believe they're going to be very cooperative and actually probably very appalled when they find out there's some prejudice in their records. Thank you again. Any further discussion? Director Hauer, thank you. I remember voting for this in 2019 to get rid of these discriminatory covenants, and I just want to give a shout-out to Director Stefanago, who was always timely in my responses when I would ask for an update on this. Because I believe this is really important work that we're doing today. Other counties, other cities have done this, and it's the right thing to do. But as it's been pointed out, nobody really reads their deed and so you don't know. And so to have that process was something that I really am proud that staff was able to develop because that was my biggest worry, is that people wouldn't know to go and do this because they're not going to knowingly do this. And so it's great that we're alerting residents of these discriminatory covenants.

My question is this: Sometimes it's not very easy for folks to determine who's in charge of what when it comes to government. Have we reached out to our city partners to let them know who to contact if they receive any questions at City Hall? I appreciate the question. We have not, but it is certainly something we can advance going forward, and I'd love to work with our communities to further this initiative. Yes, and I appreciate the social media aspect of it, too, and I'm sure there'll be a story in the Pioneer Press about it possibly. So appreciate that. If there's no further discussion, then the clerk will take the roll. Commissioner Miron? Aye. Commissioner Karwoski? Aye. Commissioner Cox? Aye. Commissioner Clausen? Aye. Commissioner Bigham? Aye. Resolution passes 5-0. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, and well done today. Thank you. So, the next three items are public works, and we are going to have Director Sandberg for the first item, which is recognizing Andrea Ream.

Long morning. Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners. Thank you. As was stated, my name is Wayne Sandberg. I serve as the Director of Public Works and the County Engineer. And one of the genuine privileges of this role is the opportunity to create an environment where staff who are early in their careers can learn, grow, and be mentored into future public works leaders. It is a special honor when one of those staff members is recognized by their peers for doing exactly that, and today I have that privilege. I am pleased to introduce you to Andrea Ream. She's a transportation planner in our public works planning division, and she has been honored with the Woman to Watch award from WTS Minnesota. Now for those of you who may not be familiar, WTS Minnesota is a group of transportation professionals committed to advancing women in the industry through professional development, networking, and each year, through recognition awardsLet's celebrate the people moving our profession forward.

The Women to Watch Award honors women who are early to mid-career and have already made a real and lasting impact. What makes today especially meaningful is that Andrea was nominated by her own team, the people who work alongside her every day and wanted her to be recognized for it. Andrea earned her undergraduate degree in urban studies and political science from the University of Minnesota, and her master's in international planning and sustainable development from the University of Westminster in London. That foundation shows up in how she approaches her work. Her portfolio spans corridor planning, regional trail plans, grant writing, legislative requests, fleet process improvements. Her grant work here and her advocacy when she traveled to Washington, DC with a few of us a few years ago has helped the county secure multiple congressional-directed spending requests and millions of dollars in federal transportation funding. In less than two years, Andrea has moved from a support role to leading complex regional planning efforts, building strong working relationships across civil design, traffic, safety, environmental, and accessibility disciplines.

She leads through clear thinking, intentional direction, and has a genuine gift for bringing the right people together. Beyond the county, she also serves as co-chair of the American Planning Association Minnesota Women in Planning committee, creating opportunities for connection and professional growth for women across the planning profession. The combination Andrea has of these technical skills, people skills, initiative, and intention is exactly what makes her stand out among young professionals in our profession. And it's why her team nominated her, and it's why WTS Minnesota saw what we are lucky to see every single day. So please join me in congratulating Andrea Rehm. This is a recognition that is well-deserved, and we are proud to have her with us.

Thank you, Wayne. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. It was an honor to be recognized by WTS Minnesota with the Women to Watch Award, and it felt incredibly special to be included amongst the other 2026 award winners, who are all such talented and passionate people and care so deeply about their work. I want to express my gratitude to Washington County leadership, including you all, Public Works leadership, Wayne Frank, and more generally, to be a part of an organization that offers me opportunities and supports my professional development, and for trusting me with a wide variety of projects under the Public Works umbrella. I also want to thank my supervisor, Lissa Lightner, and my colleagues in the Public Works department for their guidance, encouragement, and their part in creating a space for me to grow and take on new challenges with confidence. Thank you. Thank you. Any comment? Commissioner Miron. Just it's no surprise to me, Andrea, that you were recognized here.

I've had a chance to work with you on a number of corridor planning projects and that type of thing. She's a good listener. She's respective of the people she serves and works with. Just certainly, you are one of the women to watch here as we move forward. And just pleased how you've seen opportunities and been able to progress here in Washington County, and hope that you stay with us for a long, long time. Congratulations. Commissioner Karwoski and Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. Andrea, congratulations. Commissioner Miron words it well. Just don't go running off to another county now or city. It's really rewarding when you're elected, though, to see the department as Wayne Sandberg runs, to see people flourish and be successful. I know we take a lot of pride in just being part of it in a small way, but just to see our employees really excel, it's great to see. So congratulations again.

Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. You have to look at your colleagues in the audience. Their faces might actually burst. They are so happy that you are standing here and that you received this. So just share my congratulations. You are definitely someone that has been super helpful as I've tried to understand the very complicated Department of Public Works, and you've answered my questions and helped me understand trails. And I didn't know that you went to school overseas. I think that that experience really brings a different viewpoint on transportation to our county, and I'm grateful that you're here. So thank you, and congratulations. Any further comments? Just thank you, Andrea. I worked with you on numerous commissions and also corridor projects, and you are just so thorough and timely and respectful, and just really appreciate all the effort that you put in to each and every one of the projects. I, too, am not surprised that you are being honored today.

You have a lot of great role models that, as Commissioner Cox pointed out, that are here, and I believe may be previous winners that are here with smiles. And I just think, and I know not to conflate planner and engineer, I've been told that many times, but as a woman, it's great to be that example for future generations because it is an area of expertise that we need to continue to focus on. And I know that your supervisor is somebody that really focuses on that as well, and it's just greatThat as a department, that is an objective and goal. And so to see you recognized is fantastic. So congratulations. And my final question is, do we have an award or... Okay. Then why don't we join down front to get a photo? Public works.

All right. Two more items here. Next one is Mr. Klein for consideration of approval of contract number 18284.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners. My name is Mike Klein. I'm a project manager in the Public Works department. Today, Public Works will be recommending approval of a preliminary design contract for the County Highway 11 improvement project. During my presentation, I will provide an overview of the project, 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 action.

This project will take place along County Highway 11 from County Highway 96 to County Highway 11, and is located within the city of Stillwater and Stillwater Township. This county roadway is a two-mile north-south corridor where a combination of challenging grades, steep embankments, and erosion creates safety concerns and complicates stormwater management. The pavement condition index of this segment of highway is 44, which puts us in the yellow zone. At the intersection of Boone Road and County Highway 11, a tight radius curve on the steep slope adds to safety concerns. This project will look at improvements that address grade, drainage, and geometric challenges, which will enhance both safety and functionality. Additionally, pavement will be placed throughout the entire project corridor. Adjacent to County Highway 11, there is an active aggregate mine, and as a result of this, the highway sees increased truck traffic. The mine will be an important stakeholder on this project, as well as the neighbors adjacent to the mine.

They will be included in our engagement process, and we will gather feedback from them as we work towards proposed improvements along this corridor. And lastly, through this project, we have the opportunity to address multiple countywide objectives found in our strategic plan, including helping reduce the risk of serious injury crashes in this area while evaluating intersection improvements at County Highway 11 and Boone Road, maintaining a strong partnership with the city of Stillwater and Stillwater Township, pavement rehabilitation, which supports the county's objective to raise our pavement condition index, and improving water quality of natural water bodies in the area with the evaluation of stormwater BMPs as part of this project. With board approval of this contract, preliminary design, public outreach, and evaluation of possible alternatives would begin this year. In 2027, public outreach would continue as we move into the final design phase and begin the right-of-way acquisition process. By the end of 2027, final design and any necessary right-of-way acquisition would be completed. In early 2028, the project bid package will be advertised for bidding.

Construction is programmed for 2028. Consultant contract services for this design contract will include project coordination, comprehensive public engagement and outreach, which will include the aggregate mine and neighbors adjacent to the mine, collection of data, wetland delineation, utility coordination, drainage analysis and design, intersection analysis and design, concept development and evaluation of multiple alternatives, development of a project layout, and cost estimating. A request for proposals was posted on the county's website in February. This RFP was open to any firm to propose on and didn't require any pre-qualifications. Six firms submitted proposals, and these proposals were reviewed on how all the firms understood the project objectives, the consultant's work plan and project approach, qualifications of the project team, and the project team's experience in delivering similar projects. Stonebrook Engineering was selected as the best fit team to provide these design services for this project. The contract was negotiated in the amount of $446,583 for these services.

On this slide, you will see a contract funding overview. Funding for this design contract comes from state aid and local contributions. Remaining funds will be utilized in future phases of this project if additional funding is needed. So to close, Public Work is recommending board approval of contract number 18284 with Stonebrook Engineering Incorporated in the amount of $446,583. Madam Chair, commissioners, this concludes my prepared remarks, and I'm happy to stand for any questions. Thank you, Mr. Klein. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move we approve contract number 18284 with Stonebrook Engineering Incorporated in the amount of $446,583 to provide preliminary design services for the CSAH 11, Ferry Falls Road from CSAH 96, Dellwood Road to CSAH 5, Stonebridge Trail Improvement Project. Second. Moved and seconded. Commissioner Cox. Thank you again, Madam Chair. Mr. Klein, thank you for the presentation. I think you hit the high points. There's an aggregate mine, lots of heavy truck traffic. There's a really wild curve.

There's a national park that kind of abuts this as well. There's a lot going on here. You mentioned stormwater best management practices, and you also mentioned the pavement rating. So I'm just really curious to see what they come up with for a design. It's going to be tricky, I feel like, without my engineering or planner hat on. So I'm just grateful to see this moving forward. Commissioner Mira. Just happy to support this project, garnering the design services. We talked a lot today about water and water management. This project, partially within Stillwater Township, I can see the skill sets of Mark Danay really helping out as the design gets put together and how we address some of the water quality issues there. His skill sets, I think, are going to be very valuable in working through this type of a project. Thank you. Any further comment? Thank you, Mr. Klein, for doing the presentation, and Stonebrook has certainly proven to be a great company and delivers wonderful projects.

So, with that, Commissioner Cox renews her motion to approve contract number 18284. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Oh, wait. Sydney's up next, right? Or are you handling it... Okay, Sydney. All right. The next project is to approve amendment one to contract number 17152, and then part C2 is the budget amendment. And to present today is Sydney Arkel. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and commissioners. My name is Sydney Arkel, and I'm here on behalf of Public Works to recommend board approval for a budget amendment and amendment to contract number 17152 for final design services for County State Aid Highway 16, which is also known as Valley Creek Road Pavement Preservation Project.

Here you will see an overview of my presentation today. The map shows the project location, which is in Woodbury. Project overview. First, some background. This project consists of improvements to County State Aid Highway 16 from I-494 through Bielenberg Drive. The current pavement condition index is 37, which is in the red zone. This project was originally programmed as a typical pavement preservation program. However, throughout the preliminary design process, it was recommended that we do a more substantial pavement project. That, in combination with high traffic volumes and high amounts of construction in Woodbury over the last three years, it became clear that a more in-depth project was necessary. This project now includes signal system replacement, storm sewer restoration and replacements, and due to the scale of this work, we're recommending we break the project into two phases. Public Works will program phase two into the five-year CIP in coordination with Woodbury. We could do a band-aid fix to the pavement all in one phase, but we wouldn't be setting up the county or its residents for success in the future.

Phase one of the project will include resurfacing the roadway and trail pavement, full curb and gutter replacement, replacement of signals, restoration and replacement of storm sewer pipes and structures, and signing and striping.

Project schedule. Preliminary design has been completed in 2025. The final design and bidding will be completed this year, which will prepare us for construction in 2027. The services listed in this contract include project coordination, stakeholder engagement, signal design, storm sewer design, trail and pavement resurfacing, permitting, construction phasing, cost estimating, and final construction plans.

Washington County has placed priority on sustainability within our projects. Ways in which this project are sustainable consist of pavement recycling, bike and ped accommodations, stormwater permitting, and city utility infrastructure review and coordination. This project is consistent with many of the goals found in the county strategic plan, bike and ped plan, long-range transportation plan. These goals include enhancing and maintaining the environment, providing accessible services, public engagement, and transparency. This corridor is part of the Creek to Croix Regional Trail. Funding for final design comes from a combination of wheelage tax and TAA preservation funds.

With that, Madam Chair and commissioners, on behalf of Public Works, we recommend two board approvals for the CSAH 16 pavement preservation projects. Thank you, Mrs. Arkel. Commissioner Clausen. Yes, thank you. Before we get into motioning, I wanted to just ask questions on the location of the project. I didn't see a map. I can go back. Thanks Great. Can you tell me what is the ending and, or where does it end? I can't tell. It goes through Beilenberg, and it starts at I-494. Got it. So this particular road is interesting because it goes from asphalt to concrete. Mm-hmm. And when you go onto concrete, unfortunately, when it's settled, it still rip its like this every time you're on it, and so you think something's wrong with your car for probably about a half a mile. Mm-hmm. You know what I'm talking about, right? I've driven it. Yes, I've driven it, too, and people are ask all the time, why does this happen?

Yeah. And I actually had a consultant regarding concrete come in and present to me about what happened, and that it was something that should've gone back and fixed. Was how they explained it to me. Now, this was back in 2023, so my mind is a little less specific on the concrete. But does this preservation, and this work, is it concrete or is it asphalt? This is going to be asphalt. And then at Beilenberg, it adjoins the concrete, so we'll meet up to that concrete. But this project will be pavement. So with this change, we will have a smooth road, but then we will hit the concrete, and then the concrete will still ripple. This project will not deal with that concrete. This will just do the I-494 to Beilenberg as pavement. That's all this project is. Why concrete sometimes, and why asphalt sometimes? I do not know that. I can ask Public Works and get back to you.

Well, this is a road that is one of the busiest roads in the county, and I would like to have a better understanding of what long-term is best for this area. It seems as if we're growing. I could be full of it. I'm just kidding. We're growing, and I would like to go the extra effort and protect roads so that we don't come back and do this because this doesn't sound like it was a part of the budget, because it's an asphalt road. And it seems as if the traffic capacity is at a higher amount for concrete, so that it lasts longer. But that's not something that's being proposed today. No. So I'm not sure if I feel comfortable approving this project because I do feel like this project, we're going to have to come back to it and put concrete. Because this is between an interstate, right? You're coming from an interstate. And I just don't understand how we can continue with asphalt when we have concrete that comes up to a certain point. And I guess maybe we should talk with the city staff about it, too, because it's obviously going to have a lot to do with them too, as well.

But yeah. And is there a process, a written process on how we determine that? Mr. Klein? Madam Chair- Or Peterson... Commissioner Clausen. Sorry. My name's Kevin Peterson. Kevin Klein. I serve as a county design engineer based in the Public Works department. The decision to convert a roadway from bituminous or asphalt to concrete is not something we take lightly. As you noted, the portion to the east of the project Sydney is presenting today has provided maintenance challenges for us, frankly. That was an area that we prepared that concrete, I think four or five-ish years ago, and we're already preparing to address it again. Frankly, from our perspective, utilizing concrete, it can provide longer term benefits, but installing it is much harder because we have to keep motorists off of it for a week just for it to cure. So given the traffic concerns, the business impacts, the interchange, we really feel that asphalt rehabilitation is the best approach here.

Okay. Commissioner Clausen. Thank you so much for recognizing me. That scares me. It feels like we're not putting the type of money that we need into this project, and I'm not sure why. And I don't know if that answer doesn't make me feel like that we're not going to be doing this again. And so when you study the road, what part of the road indicated you needed concrete right before City Hall? And then what in your research have you come up with that says asphalt's okay from 494 to City Hall? Madam Chair, Commissioner Clausen, we're proposing asphalt from 494 to Beilenberg, where the concrete picks up. I'm happy to get some more detail on the decision to use concrete on that prior project. And we can come back with some more information for you on that. I think I'm confused. When you say Beilenberg, you mean Beilenberg Street or are you talking about... So Beilenberg Drive.

Because it's not- Madam Chair... Beilenberg Drive. Mm-hmm. But isn't the concrete start right where, I think the road isn't Beilenberg. I think it's right by the Washington County Community Development Authority. Because it's a distinct separation and it just starts for... All of a sudden we have concrete. But we don't have less vehicles that came off the road. Or do we? Is that what you're finding? And that's why you're presentingThe asphalt pavement, or is this just a quick fix because it wasn't in the budget, and now that in the termination it's so bad that we have to now spend more money on it? I don't understand. Okay. I'm confused. I'm just confused, and I guess I drive this road all the time. I'm a resident of Woodbury. I'm the only resident from Woodbury on this board, and we have five members with almost 300,000 people. What you're telling me today does not give me enough confidence for taxpayers that they're not going to have to put more money into the same thing, because we really need concrete.

Because can you tell me how many vehicles a day are on Valley Creek Road? Mr. Peterson, Sydney, I think one- Excuse me... one factor in this, I believe, is that the motion that will eventually be before us is that this is selecting a design engineer that has gone through an RFP process. So, I think some of these answers will be discovered during that process. So, Commissioner Clausen. Thank you for recognizing me. I didn't know you were going to interrupt, but that's okay. And, so moving forward, I see that we are today looking like we're approving an amendment to a contract 17152. I will not be going forward with that today. But as the Woodbury resident and county commissioner, I would like you to consider talking to city staff about this decision, because I do believe they would be supportive of concrete from 494 all the way through Valley Creek, so it's all connected. And if this is approved today, I will go in front of the city council and I will talk about this project particularly. So, thank you.

Commissioner Karwoski. Thank you, Madam Chair. To get this before us, I'll make a motion to approve amendment number one to contract number 17152 in the amount of $294,780 for final design services for the CASA 16, which is Valley Creek Pavement Preservation Project. And I will second. Commissioner Karwoski. It's a good project. I do respect and understand Commissioner Clausen about the section from Beilenberg moving east to Radio Drive. So, as a separate topic, I drive that frequently, and you do rumble. And I can only imagine, if you recall, going back only a few years ago, there were many natural gas line pipelines fixes, and if I recall, they happened during the summer and it'd be like 95-degree heat. Probably difficult to cure concrete. Could've added to that. But I do think on a separate project, if you could look into, Commissioner Clausen, about the rumbling. I think we've got a wonderful... I'm just going to speak briefly.

The corridor, a lot of other work going down Valley Creek, CASA 16 to the east. It's going to be a wonderful corridor, a major trail there. So, it's worth fixing that problem, but it can't be addressed today. But regarding this project, I do believe, I don't know why that other section was concrete, but I think by and large, from a cost standpoint, the asphalt has served us wonderful. And I noticed really this is listed as a pavement preservation project, but it's a pretty significant pavement preservation project with a lot of good improvements that I don't think should be delayed. If you could answer one question, though, because there's some significant work being done. Just describe how the staging would happen. Although it's probably part of the process. I believe there wouldn't be any road closure, but there'd probably be some lane restrictions, if you can touch on any of that. Mr. Arco. This is a design.

Madam Chair, Commissioner. Over the past two years of preliminary engineering, we've had significant discussions with the City of Woodbury and MnDOT, obviously as the owners of 494, on construction staging. I think I'm going off memory here, so I apologize, but we have seven different phases to build this project. So, we've already developed a really deliberate staging plan to maintain traffic as much as we can. Thank you. Good enough. That'll be all fleshed out in the design. Yeah. So, this is much needed. The pavement's in lousy shape. Fully support it. Look forward to the project being planned for. Thank you. All right. Any further-- Commissioner Clausen. Thank you. Traffic has been actually horrible, Commissioner Karwoski. And so, it actually isn't something that just gets worked out. It's been problematic. And I have a lot of evidence of waiting to just get through an easy intersection because of construction right now. So, I don't appreciate the dismissiveness of your comments today.

We actually need commissioners who are going to be for Valley Creek improvements, and what you minimized it today. So, thank you. All right. Commissioner Cox. If I may. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Arkell, thank you for the presentation. And I'm sure this has happened before from Public Works, but it's the first time I'm remembering it, but that this was planned to be a pavement preservation project. The design process actually showed that there was more work to be done, so the team pivoted and shifted to make it work to do the best possible road for the community, and I just think that that's incredible. Again, I'm sure it's happened before. I'm not remembering it. I'm really just grateful that the team is so thoughtful, and that we really look at all these pieces to make sure we are using taxpayer money in the best way possible. So thank you, and I look forward to supporting this.

Thank you. Commissioner Miron. Yeah, and I was just pleased to hear how engaged the Woodbury community is in this as well. Obviously, we work collaboratively with the cities within our county, and appreciate working with the Woodbury Mayor and City Council and their staff as we move forward with a project like this. I do have one question. Commissioner Clausen. Thank you. How much is the municipal state aid for the county? Because Woodbury is a large population, so what is the state aid funds? That's the next item. Madam Chair, Commissioner Clausen, I'm not sure I understand your question. I just wanted to know how much this year, every year, we're given money by the legislature to deal with municipal state aid streets, and we get a total. And each city, because of their population, gets a certain amount. Yeah. Madam Chair- So what is Woodbury's?... Commissioner Clausen, I don't know how much money Woodbury gets in gas tax. We could look that up.

We get county state aid highway funding through that same gas tax program, but we don't track other cities' revenues. Great. Yeah, and what is the total fund that we get? I'd have to look back. I think from a capital standpoint, project-wise, we're in the $14 million a year range. $14 million. And how much of that has been spent on Woodbury this year? Madam Chair, Commissioner Clausen, we are happy to dig into that back end. Thank you. I appreciate it. All right. Ms. Arkell, thank you for the presentation. This is a needed project, and I too am getting complaints from residents of Woodbury because of all the projects and all the road construction and different things that are going on in Woodbury, and throughout the construction season. But I think the design phase will-- The point of it is to also flesh out a lot of the questions that have been there today. So, with that, Commissioner Karwoski renews his motion to approve amendment number one to contract 17152, and all in favor say aye.

Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay. Motion carries four to one. The next item is to approve budget amendment to increase consultant costs and wheelage tax revenue by using the pavement preservation fund. Madam Chair. Yep. I'll make the motion to approve the budget amendment to increase the consultant cost and wheelage tax revenue by using the pavement preservation fund. Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed- Nay... nay. Motion carries four to one. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. The next item was moved to June 16th. Administrator Corbid, do you have anything else? Madam Chair, I think just maybe a question for the board about meeting management the rest of the day here. I know that the commissioner reports was scheduled to start about noon, so we're about a half hour behind that. I do not have any of the report. Would you like us to keep the three workshops on the agenda for today, starting with the two on the mandated services and core functions, followed by the service center update, or would you like to move any of them to next week? You want to continue ahead with the schedule?

I'm open to attending all three. I would respect any commissioner that has to be elsewhere. Commissioner Clausen, any? Usually it's fine. You guys don't usually listen to my comments anyway, so. Okay. Commissioner Miron? I'm fine either way. Okay. Well, I think it's keeping the three schedule. Sounds good. We're ready to present. Yep. Thank you. So we will move on to commissioner comments. Commissioner Clausen, want to start us off? I don't. Thank you. Okay. Commissioner Miron? Happy to. Community Development Agency met. We actually had several award announcements, both state and national awards that our staff received. So it's nice to see that recognition. And then we reviewed our budget assumptions for the upcoming budget discussion. I attended a Scandia City Council meeting. If you recall, we had a member of that community that was concerned about their community septic system, so I attended that just to listen in. I met with managers and administrator from Forest Lake/Comfort Lake Watershed, along with a manager from the Rice Creek Watershed District to talk about funding for the East Metro Water Resource Education programI attended our superintendent of schools, Dr. Steve Massey's retirement celebration. Obviously, schools are an important part of our Washington County community, and certainly wish him well. Metropolitan Mosquito Control District met.

We created a subcommittee on tire-related activities, and then we also had some preliminary budget discussions. Recycling and Energy Board met. We had approved the 2027 budget, which came from Finance Committee Chair Bigham with recommendation. We also had a Minnesota Green Corps agreement, and we approved a control systems maintenance and engineering contract. I was able to attend Joanne Helms' retirement celebration, 37 years with the county. Just a fabulous woman that's had a big impact on Washington County, and appreciated the opportunity to congratulate her. Attended a career launch event that has been supported by our community development agency. Our economic developer, Chris Ing, was there. Had a meeting with Jay Riggs with the Washington Conservation District, again to discuss the East Metro Water Resource Education Program. I attended the May township meeting on our watershed appointments, and then I was able to spend Sunday afternoon up in Forest Lake celebrating Hamilton Schirtz's Eagle Scout recognition, the third in his family to receive that Eagle Scout recognition.

That's all I have, Madam Chair. Commissioner Cox. Thank you, Madam Chair. I was able to attend the Lake Elmo Avenue and Highway 36 pre-construction open house. It was packed. You couldn't get a place at the table around the big map. So hopefully, there were a lot of questions answered. And I'm continuing to share information about that project, and we're starting to see some signs up on Highway 36, which is great to see. Attended the Met Council State of the Region 2026, which had a water focus. So that was really informative and great to be there. And Commissioner Bigham took every booklet home with her. It was her weightlifting plan for the day, I believe. And then I was able to attend another Stillwater Prison decommissioning work group with Anderson Corporation. So got to hear their input on what that community could look like with that planning. And I have to ask, Commissioner Miron, I'm assuming I got appointed then to the tire committee for mosquito control since I wasn't there.

So happy to serve there. Thank you. Commissioner Karwoski. Oh, it's hard to beat the tire committee, but I'm going to try to. Busy couple weeks since our last board meeting. The R. H. Stafford Library had two engagement meetings. One was with the community. Good feedback. The other was with the leadership in the area, visioning for what Stafford Library could be. I attended those with Commissioner Clausen and Commissioner Bigham. I had a transportation advisory board staff meeting. Both staff and then the board meeting. Just some good information items. One was, and I got to touch base with Wayne Sandberg in Public Works. It was a really good presentation on electronic speed sign use in preparing driver behavior prior to the construction happening. I just wanted to pass that on. Very interesting. Attended a couple National Association of County caucus meetings. One was the Rural Action Caucus, and also chaired some time to attend the Midsize County Caucus.

It's good to keep in touch with what people from across the nation are thinking. As mentioned earlier, we had, two Thursdays ago, the Park and Open Space Commission meeting. That was a good meeting. Attended the county sheriff's deputy's formal swearing-in ceremony. Chair Bigham did a good job recognizing the families and the new deputies. We had a Gold Line Joint Powers meeting, which I attended with Commissioner Clausen. Commissioner Clausen was appointed chair for 2026 of the Gold Line Joint Powers organization. Attended Independent School District 622, which I represent the total school district of 622 in my District 2 role. It's just good to be connected with our school districts. They're such a vital part of our county. It was the State of the School District. Superintendent Christine Osorio did a great job. Ramsey County Commissioner Kelly Miller was there because she represents the Ramsey County portion of the school district. And then a lot of constituent issues, but I wanted to bring up one, and actually two, regarding TAB, and it's on our request for federal fundingan interchange at 36 and 120. There was a serious crash there last week.

I don't believe there were fatalities, but it involved a semi and some serious car. I don't know the status of the injuries, but a very serious... I'm glad we've got one of our asks for the Transportation Advisory Federal Solicitation is for an interchange at 36 and 120. I also got an email following up on that. I heard the accident could be heard from two blocks away. So it's so important. I'm excited for the opportunity that you're doing at Lake Elmo Avenue and 36. Great addition. And then lastly, we handle so many constituent issues, but because we discussed our watershed districts today, I'm actually working with a resident on Lake Elmo, or on Tanners Lake, that I really connected with shoreline erosion. So I connected, it's the Ramsey Washington Watershed District, and also connected this resident not only with that watershed district, they work hand-in-hand with the Washington Conservation District, that the DNM are involved, and also our county sheriff does speed control.

So all those parties working together, see if we can't make some shoreline improvements. That's all I have, Madam Chair. All right. This last couple weeks, I've had multiple staff meetings about current and future road projects in District 4. I really appreciate Frank Tickner working through some of the construction projects on 65th and 80th both being shut down has really led to some congestion on 70th. I attended the Public Safety summer celebration with a variety of department heads and leads in Cottage Grove with the Cottage Grove Public Safety Department. I thought that was really well done. I participated in 4-H educator interviews and attended the RNE board meeting. We had an open house on the Jamaica Avenue improvements, and that was probably one of the most well-attended open houses that I've seen, and especially in quite a while. As was mentioned, I attended the deputy swearing-in and Stafford improvement workshops. I was able to, with a few other people, do a podcast with the RNE Center, making sure that we're getting communication out. Always a really somber and well-done event with the Cottage Grove memorial service. Yvonne Miller, who is the wife of Greg Miller, who works for us, was the keynote speaker, and she did a phenomenal job.

St. Paul Park had a ribbon cutting for Whiskey Creek Barbecue. I highly recommend going there at the American Legion. At the State of the Region for the Met Council, Shelley Buck was one of the panels, and just her expertise on water is incredible. I also had the DCYF Intergovernmental Advisory Council, where there was quite a bit of discussion about MAPA and the age of delinquency. And then was able to attend the Park High School senior awards for academic achievement. I was never invited to those in the '90s. But they're really well done, and just, man, the accomplishments. Over 300 and some thousand dollars worth of scholarships were awarded, so that's fantastic. And then we had finance committee, which were on today's agenda. So I didn't think you had a report. Commissioner Clausen. No, I just said I didn't want to go first because you always want me to go first for some reason. Thank you. Today, we had a vote on land use, which proves the county government can consider land and zoning use issues.

At today's meeting, we heard how much the board supports and advocates for environment conservation and protection, including protecting water, lakes, and rivers. Therefore, today, I am asking the board to consider to ask staff to draft an ordinance against data centers in Washington County. We already have two data centers in Woodbury. From what I am hearing from researchers looking into this data center, they have a large energy consumption at a much lower rate than other households. As we know, we have PFAS in our Washington County water. All 14 communities were found to have PFAS. Of the 14 communities, all those communities found PFAS were from Washington County. Therefore, our water sources must be protected against consumption. We are seeing counties everywhere being surveyed and scoped out for potential data centers. Washington County must have a strong opposition to data centers. So I ask that today for the board to consider. Thank you. Next on the agenda is board correspondence.

We did receive Met Council communication that was previously noted about the population household estimates, which over 291,000. So I believe every member up here received that communication. As stated, we have three workshops before us after a little break here. Oh, and we have personnel committee after the workshops. So seeing no further items on the agenda, we are adjourned.

All right. We are on air, so we will go ahead and get started with our first workshop. Oh, sorry. As Administrator Corbid hands out our workbooks that we forgot in our offices, Director Kramer. Thank you. All right. Good afternoon, Vice Chair and commissioners. My name is Jackie Kramer, and I'm the library director. Thank you for your time today to discuss mandates and core functions as they relate to the library.

The library is funded almost entirely by levy. The majority of non-levy revenue comes from the state and is administered by the Metropolitan Library Service Agency, or MLSA. The majority of the Law Library's funding comes from civil and criminal court fees. Levy funding covers the Law Library's internal rent costs.

As far as expenditures go, most of the library's expenditures go toward personnel, with our collection of materials, internal rent, software, equipment, and subscriptions making up most of the remaining costs. The table at the bottom of this slide shows the comparison of mandated services to core function funding amounts. I'll discuss mandated services first on the next slide.

State Statute 134.34, Regional Library Basic System Support Aid Requirements, requires a minimum level of county financial support to qualify for state library funding. This is often referred to as the maintenance of effort. This level of support is equal to 90% of the amounts required for 2011. For Washington County, this amount is $4,925,300.

The remaining mandated programs and functions total to just over $15,000.

This slide shows the funding breakdown for both the library and Law Library's provision of library services. Core public library services are funded almost entirely by levy, with a small percentage of funding coming from the state. As stated previously, the majority of the Law Library's funding comes from civil and criminal court fees.

As I shared earlier, the library's highest mandate is the maintenance of effort articulated in state statute. This is the minimum level of funding Washington County must allocate to the library. If this minimum level of funding is not met, Washington County Library's MLSA membership would cease. The effects of the library's removal from MLSA include elimination of Regional Library Basic System Support, I will refer to as RLBSS from this moment on, funding totaling $579,838.

Roughly 250,000 of this amount funds general library operations. 244,200 of the total RLBSS amount gives community members access to databases and the Twin Cities Metro eLibrary, or Libby, shared collection. The remaining RLBSS funding supports children and teen programming, excuse me, and services such as the Summer at Your Library funding program and other youth services resources, and the majority of the library's professional development funding as well. The largest expenditure, as we talked about previously for the library, is personnel. Results of reductions made in this category would range from decreased library hours of operation to library location closures. Library services included within the core function of providing library services include making a diverse collection of physical and digital materials available to county residents. Maintaining the collection of materials is the second largest expenditure for the library. The steady increased demand for e-books and e-audiobooks, and the fact that an e-book or e-audiobook can cost anywhere from three to eight times as much as its physical counterpart, has put significant stress on the library's collection budget.

Any reductions in this category would have a profound effect on an area of the library's budget that is already seeing significant pressure. Community engagement surveys and focus groups conducted during the most recent strategic planning effort showed that community members see the library's collection as extremely important. Within the past week, or couple of weeks, during an R. H. Stafford Library redesign project community engagement event, I heard directly from community members who voiced how important the library's collection of materials is to them. The library consistently ranks as number one or number two in approval rating in the Washington County Community Survey that is conducted every three years. In 2025, the library was number one at its performance with a 95% rating. This data demonstrates the high satisfaction level community members have for library services. The community survey also shows that of all library services, community members rate early literacy programs, such as story time, as the most important.

Community members also rank the safe space the libraries provide as a top priority. The services the library provides are vital components to accomplishing Washington County's mission to enhance quality of life and promote a safe, healthy, and welcoming community for all. I am happy to answer any questions that the board has. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Director Kramer. Any questions from the board?

Please, Administrator Forbin. Madam Chair, just a couple of comments. Might spur some discussion with the board, but the library is kind of a unique thing to look at with this department as you think about mandated services. We do have that mandate to spend as much money as was required under state statute, and she identified thatBut the county board has gone significantly above that each year. And so you've got this mix of a mandated service delivery and a decision by the county board to do more. And I think what Jackie has laid out to you is the idea that a lot of the things that we're doing more on are the things that the general public really demands and supports. And so it kind of lays out that whole question about if you're going to reduce any services in the non-mandated areas, oftentimes you're hitting those things that are most important to the people that you're serving.

And so I think part of the discussion when we talk about all the departments, you're going to hear that story replayed over and over again about why we're making certain decisions to do more as a board and as staff, are because there's a desire from the public to get that level of service, that level of collection available to them, the hours that are available to them, the locations that we currently do. And so I think it's just a unique kind of look here today at that dichotomy of decision-making around mandates and core functions and their spending.

Commissioner Karwoski has a question. Thank you. It's more of a comment, but I'd encourage if staff wants, either Kevin or Jackie, if you want to weigh in. It's to feed off the... I'm looking at slide three. I have it circled on mine. The mandated services are 45% of your budget. Then we say core functions, meaning that we really, as Administrator Corbid said, we just feel we have to do it. The voters are asking for it. And that's 55%, so that's over half. It's over $6 million. And I think because in the coming weeks we're going to be looking at our budget for '27, I think we have to look really carefully at the erosion of federal and state funding. We're going to have to look really carefully at all our expenditures across the board and look closely at the core, because we have other areas and other departments where it's core. And I just think we got to look at it a lot more carefully.

It's just the concern of our residents and their property tax bills. So all I'm saying is, so basically core and mandated on your chart here is 100% of your expenditures. I'm not questioning that. I'm just saying we just got to look at what's within the core and look where there's savings to be had. That's my outlook on this. Madam Vice Chair and Commissioner Karwoski, if I might just add one comment. The maintenance of effort amount, so that mandated amount, that $4 million, $4.9 million, is based off of 90% of the funding the library received in 2011. So it's based on a number that's 15 years old. Just it hasn't risen at all since that time where costs and needs have certainly risen as well. It further reflects is mandated related, you're talking about state funding perhaps? It's fallen behind because it's mandated services funding, the 45% you're talking about. The 45% that is the maintenance of effort amount is, it's just that $4 million number, almost $5 million number is based on what we had to work with in 2011.

So yeah, I'm just saying it's- Right... it's pretty dated, I guess. And Madam Chair and Commissioner Karwoski, I think in this case we have some services where the state promised to pay a certain level. In this case, the state's never really promised to pay for library service. This has always been kind of a local responsibility between a county or a city or a regional library system. It's just that they at one point said, "We didn't want those entities to reduce their spending." Yeah. So they were requiring us to continue spending. And I think that maintenance of effort change, as Jackie mentioned, happened kind of post-Great Recession, where counties were asking for some mandate relief, and this is one of the places that they looked and said they reduced it, so you could go 90% of what you were spending, and now it's frozen there, Jackie? Is that how they handle that maintenance of effort number, or does it move at all from year to year?

Madam Vice Chair, commissioners, and County Administrator- Kevin... Corbid. Yeah, Kevin. It has not changed since they made that initial change. Commissioner Bigham. Administrator Corbid answered it. I was just going to say to Commissioner Karwoski, just flip that. It's basically the minimum amount they'll allow us to spend, require us to spend. Good. Commissioner Clausen? Thank you. Thanks for presenting again. So what are the changes in library users from the beginning of that time when it first came out to now? It's got to be a lot more people that use it, right? Yeah, Madam Vice Chair, Commissioner Clausen, I don't have any data to point to or anything, but over the last 15 years, definitely, I would say that the e-books have gotten way more popular. That happened a lot after the pandemic or during the pandemic. So that's something that I think has changed quite a bit and like I said, it's a significant cost for us to try and maintain a collection and meet the demand of our patrons. So that's one thing I can think of, 2011. So yeah, I think, in general, just we are seeing probably more people use our buildings that are using it for space, to do things like study or do virtual meetings or interviews. Things have changed quite a bit in the last 15 years.

Yeah, I definitely have seen the population change at Stafford Library because of Central Park impacting that, but also we hear from library staff on how busy Oakdale is. So basically anywhere near the high schools or the middle schools, you're getting a lot of those kids coming over to utilize the space, really. Right. And that, I think is continuing to happen in a lot of libraries, not just Washington County. But what's interesting, because you and I are both on MELSA, the board that oversees the e-books, they are doing whatever they can to deal with the cost changes, and they will be making the program to have not extend to the outer states, but you can if they come into the libraries in the metro, and then they can utilize the services for e-books. So we may see less usage maybe, in the future, potentially with this change because it'll affect people in Wisconsin. There's 3%, I think was targeted in Washington County as outside of our metro area.

And so with that, all access exits and other opportunities to expand the entrances to allow for this is probably going to be best because we are going to have people who are outside the metro area wanting to utilize these services that they were able to use. I don't know when the deadline is because they're evaluating the program currently. But that is something that has been given the green light by the MELSA board to dig into. More importantly, important point to make is that legislatively, and maybe we can add this to our legislative platform in 2027, we would like there to be a statute that limits the extra cost that MELSA has to pay for the consumer side of this, which is an additional 60... I said it wrong last time, which is an additional how many more percentage than other people? 20% more of cost? Commissioner, the- In comparison to what is the... Yes, at MELSA's meeting, when the executive director went over the legislative request, how much are we as a government having to pay more than other consumers for these same products?

Oh, yes. Madam Vice Chair, Commissioner Clausen, it's anywhere from three to eight times the cost that a library will have to pay for an item compared to a consumer. And so legislatively, we, the library, MELSA staff, has tried to pursue it to try and get the legislature to help with these types of additional costs. But it didn't get as far as we would've hoped to this year. If counties take this on as a platform, I do think that we could get this done. And so I just wanted to bring that up today. Thanks. Madam Vice Chair, just to add to Jackie's comment, I think this is an area where I've seen some of the most change amongst county government and how we deliver services in the library and how it's being used from when I started 25 years ago to now. And issue of maker spaces, the issue of the collaborations between community services and public health with our library staff.

The food shelves that are in there now, offering food assistance in the libraries are way different than they were in 2011 even, and before. And so, that's also a thing to keep in mind, Commissioner Karwoski, is that if we've got a significant amount of money above the maintenance of effort, we're just different. We're doing more. It costs more to operate them. And I think if we didn't do some of those things in the library, we'd have to find other ways to do them, other spaces to do them, other ways to get those services out into the community. So it's really a lot of change in that library system. All right. I think I have two follow-up questions, and then we will be on time with 20 minutes for this one. First is, and maybe not a question for today, but maybe Director Kramer, we can touch base later, but my understanding of MELSA is similar to Mosquito Control or Metro Emergency Services Board, so it's all metro counties. So if they have their own legislative priorities like these other two do, do they have a legislative priority that is to change that mandated value from a 2011 number up to the, bring it 15 years forward and make it a 2026 number?

I'm just curious if that's a legislative priority that sits there or maybe we could talk. And then the other question that maybe I would like you to answer today is with the remodel of Park Grove and Stafford, I know extended access is a unique feature of a very quaint library in the St. Croix Valley. If some of these things were to shift, you talk about staff hours and opening hours for the libraries themselves. When those remodels are happening, is extended access, I'm sure I've heard this answer, but I'm not recalling it, part of that conversation? Yes, Madam Vice Chair. To answer your first question, there is no legislative action that I'm aware of right now around changing the maintenance of effort amount. There has been a little bit of talk about looking at it, but there's not been any kind of legislative action. And then to answer your second question, yes, we are, as we do our remodel projects considering extended access as a service that to potentially build into it, looking at factors like the community and the building itself and those circumstances.

Thank you. Commissioner Clausen. Yeah. Thank you for bringing that up, Commissioner Cox, because MESB does have a lobbying contract, but MELSA does not. So we currently don't have a lobbyist. I don't know if we could afford it, to be honest. I looked at the budget. There's no money. We have done some HR consulting, but overall, that isn't something that I see any money in the fund for. MESB does get that, and I think Metro Mosquito Control has a lobbying opportunity. So you could definitely take that back to the executive director. I know that she is moving next door to the Metro Mosquito Control Board, and so I'm hoping that they can have a similar framework in which they work from, because it helps legislators as well as commissioners to understand the difference between the two of them or three of them. But thanks. Sure. Madam Vice Chair, just to comment. Go ahead. I think you would likely not see a recommendation to change the maintenance of effort come out of MELSA because MELSA is a group that has county commissioners sitting on its board.

I think there'd be a lot of pull because you'd likely have AMC and other county organizations not supportive of that. So you might likely see it more often coming out of, and I don't know all the names of the groups that are more the library association groups that are representing users and people that are working within the industry rather than MELSA. Just my experience over time that that may not be the place you see it coming from. Yeah. Madam Vice Chair and Commissioners, the Minnesota Library Association does have a lobbyist, and they, I know have brought forth that e-book legislation, and MELSA has been supportive of it, but I don't believe that they do have their own lobbyists. But generally speaking, kind of focus the attention to the Minnesota Library Association to move things like that forward. Perfect. Well, thank you, Director Kramer. I believe we have Property Records and Taxpayer Services next, so Director Stenftenagel.

Good afternoon, Madam Vice Chair and Commissioners. My name is Amy Stenftenagel, and I am the Property Records and Taxpayer Services director. Today I'm here to talk about the 2026 mandates and core functions for the Property Records and Taxpayer Services department, also known as PRTS. All right. So department levy revenue in PRTS is about 30% of our total revenue, while non-levy revenue is about 70%. This non-levy revenue comes primarily from licenses and permits, fees for services, and other financing sources categories. Most of... Oh, it's okay. You were kind of hiding. Oh, let me hide. Thanks, Jan. As I was saying, so most of this non-levy revenue is from the recording fees that we receive in our recorder's office and also revenues that we receive at our service and license centers. Also, fees for services does include the funding we receive from the jurisdictions we have joint powers agreements with to administer their elections, and then also the assessment fees we receive from municipalities that our assessor's office provides appraisal services for.

Like other departments, PRTS's biggest expenditure by far is personnel services. And then you can also see at the bottom of this slide that the expenditure split between services that are mandated versus those that are core functions is a 70/30 split with the greatest portion of our expenditures for those mandated services, and then the remaining for the core functions. For the mandated services in PRTS, the services with the highest amount of levy funding include the top seven functions that are here on the screen. So it's from property appraisal to truth in taxation. And then those last three listed here, those are all funded with non-levy revenue. The mandated service that PRTS receives the most levy revenue from is the property appraisal. This is the work that our assessor's office completes each year to appraise the approximately 120,000 parcels that are in the county. This is also significantly funded with non-levy revenue that we receive from the communities that we do these assessments for.

Assessment maintenance and administration of special programs, these are special programs like the Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program, the Veterans with Disabilities Program, and others, are 100% levy funded, along with the tax collection services we provide and the administration we do of tax forfeited land is also 100% levy funded. Election administration, property tax calculation, and those truth in taxation notices that all property owners receive in mid-November of each year, these are all partially levy funded and partially non-levy funded. The non-levy funding we receive in these area are mostly for the fees the jurisdictions give us for the administration we do of these functions and programs. For core functions, there is one single core function in PRTS. These are the services we provide at our license and service centers. As you can see here, over 1.2 million in levy funding is required. A much greater portion is the non-levy revenue we receive from these services that we provide at our license and service centers at over 3.3 million. We'll be talking more about our license and service centers later today in our workshop.

I'll also remind you here that the county keeps just 10% of the fees that our license and service centers collect. The other 90% goes to the state. All right. This is a lot on this slide. I'll try to get through it as quickly as I can. So we have several examples in PRTS of ways that we use county discretionary spending to support our mandated programs. As you know, Washington County takes pride in providing high-quality customer service. Part of that commitment means having staff available to create and mail reminders, answer phones, staff service desks, and also help residents navigate complicated processes. Many of the programs and functions we provide in PRTS are driven by that commitment to customer service, while also creating operational and financial benefits for the county. So each year, we mail several reminders and notices to residents. These include notices for delinquent property taxes, if people are missing their homestead applications, and postcards notifying residents when our appraisers will be conducting quintile reviews in their neighborhoods.

While we are mandated to collect property taxes, process homestead applications, and complete these quintile reviews, we are not required to send the additional notifications that we do send. We do it because it's good customer service. These notices also provide important operational benefits. Tax reminders help residents avoid additional penalties. Homestead reminders increase timely applications and reduce the number of abatements that our staff must process later. Those blue postcard notices improve the likelihood that residents will actually allow appraisers into their homes because they're aware that they're coming. This also helps maintain our assessment quality because if you can get into their homes and see them, you're more able to do a better assessment, and this also improves safety for our staff who go door to door if residents know to expect them to come to their door. For the second item of this list, many of our staff spend their days answering phone calls and staffing our service desks.

If decisions are made to reduce those services, residents will wait longer for answers to their questions, and they may experience greater confusion about what they need to do to remain in good standing. For many residents, our staff are the first and only point of contact that they have with county government. We, as a department, see daily the high value that residents place on having a live person available to help them in person, over the phone, or online. We could also choose to reduce staffing or prioritize other work over the timely posting of property tax payments. There is no statutory deadline requiring us to post payments by a specific date. However, delays would likely increase calls from residents wondering why their payments have not been reflected yet in their accounts. It could also delay the distribution of tax revenues to cities, school districts, watersheds, and other taxing authorities. In addition, the longer payments remain unposted, the less interest revenue that the county earns on those payments. Another area that we've identified that we use county discretionary spending on is the outside appraiser that we hire for our Minnesota tax court cases. Several years ago, we began using this outside appraiser. This provides significant value to the county because the court views these professionals as independent and unbiased experts. Their advanced designations and specialized evaluation experience significantly strengthen our tax cases.

If we stopped using our outside appraisers, our staff would need to take on this work directly. Because county staff are not viewed as independent parties, we would likely be less successful in tax court. That could result in refunds of taxes already collected, a shift of tax burden to commercial instead of residential properties since much of what tax court sees is commercial, and then ultimately, a weakening of the county's tax base. Another mandated program supported with discretionary county funding is our tax forfeiture work. We currently have an employee dedicated to helping residents avoid tax forfeiture whenever possible. Without that work, more properties would forfeit, and residents would lose the support we currently provide during what is already a difficult situation for these residents. In addition, once a property forfeits, the county becomes responsible for the maintenance and upkeep. Investing in prevention benefits both our residents and the county financially. And finally, for our one example of a core function that relies on discretionary funding, our multiple license center locations.

If the county chose to close one or more of our license centers, the state could reassign that office to a city or appoint another deputy registrar if it determined that there was still a need in the area. So in that case, it'd be clear to the community that the county chose to step away from providing those services and that another entity could potentially step in and provide the services instead of us.

If the state determined a license center is in a location where we didn't really need one, residents would lose that convenient access to those services, including driver's exams and testing, which we offer at our Stillwater License Center. And with that, thank you for allowing me to present to you today. I hope this presentation has shown you that we take our responsibility to taxpayers very seriously. We thoughtfully consider every single discretionary expense we make, and we believe the investments we choose to make are worthwhile because they deliver benefits to both our residents and to the county as a whole. With that, I am happy to stand for any questions you have. Thank you, Director Stefenagel. Commissioner Bigham. Thank you, Director Stefenagel. Yes. So I appreciate all your department does, and a lot of it is also fee-based, required and-Every once in a while, the legislature will throw you a bone and adjust something. But my question has to do with more efficiency.

Yeah. I know through the last over seven years that I've asked about electronic notices for property tax statements. Other counties do provide them. I think one of our neighboring counties is almost at, I want to say about 15% that are receiving their property tax statements via email. Because if you escrow your taxes, you get to determine when you get that email, right? It just makes a little bit more economic sense. I'm wondering if we can do that, and if we've looked into that recently. I know there's been a lot of changes. Yeah. Madam Vice Chair, Commissioner Bigham. Yes, very good question. We have been looking into this in recent years. And I believe, I think Jody's here, we just heard a presentation, I think a couple of months ago, about this. So we are looking into it. So far, the issue we've had, the vendors that we've talked to, it would actually cost us more money because they want extra money to save all those PDFs.

So we're working through it, and I know Dakota County, they have said they save a significant amount of money, so we have been talking with them to figure out how are you doing that, because we're not seeing how that works at all. So we do hope that we can move to that in the near future, absolutely. Any other comments or questions? Commissioner Clausen. Thank you. We had a discussion with license service employees back in, what was it? February maybe? March? April? With employee recognition. Yeah. And they had commented about the wait times- Mm-hmm... with the extraordinary changes our federal government has made, and continues to make, in regards to passports, real ID, and potentially elections. Mm-hmm. During that conversation, I realized that sometimes the wait could be as long as two and a half hours- Mm-hmm... on a Friday. And during that discussion it seemed that only the central service center was affected by that wait time.

What has been done since then to alleviate some of those bottleneck scheduling issues that you have found, and what are some solutions that you're working on? Madam Vice Chair, Commissioner Clausen, we will discuss this in much more detail today at our workshop. But I will say, at the workshop today, we're going to talk a lot about what is really happening and how long those wait times really are for people and share with you the solutions that we've implemented so far and what that looks like. So- So we're just not wanted televised today? Could come. The workshops aren't televised, but I guess if you'd like me to, I can share some of that. Could you share some of the things- Yeah... while we're televised, please? Thanks. Sure, absolutely. So some of the things that... I guess the first thing I want to do is just be, I'll try to do an abbreviated version of the workshop, really clear that oftentimes the wait times that we see on your computer screen while you're on the website, or the wait times that show up inside at the license centers, those are just a snapshot in time. So those can change very quickly.

If you refresh your screen, you could see, "Oh my gosh, it's changed a lot." Those longer wait times that we're seeing, those are around the lunchtime hours, usually between 10:00, 11:00, and 2:00, because that's when, you'll see on the slides I share later, that's when a lot of people come in, we have a lot of arrivals, and then also we are giving staff their lunch breaks. Obviously, they need their lunch breaks. So that's when those wait times get a little bit longer than we would like them to be. You'll see in the slides I show you today, the majority of people are out of that license center less than 30 minutes to less than an hour. Absolutely. It's very few who do experience those really extended wait times. But like I said, we'll share some more with that. And some of the things that we're doing, we spread staff around. Whenever we can, we do that.

But some of our challenges of, we have a certain number of FTE, yes, but there are a lot of leaves that people are on at our license centers, and it really reduces the number of people we have available to staff our desks. And this is not just at Central Service and License Center. It is the worst there because it is our busiest location, but all of our centers are experiencing this. It's really hard also to staff, to find people who want to do this work as well. It's difficult, and it takes a long time to train people to do it as well. So these are just some of the things that we'll talk more about later that we're experiencing it. But I would like to say, I think what we hope to leave you with after the workshop today is that it's not as bad as you may think that it is or that you may have seen.

Because those wait times that are on that website, those are real time. Those aren't always accurate. So we'll share with you some of the actual wait times as well. Does that answer where you're looking for? Yeah. No, I appreciate it. Thank you. Yeah, of course. And I just bring it up because in this presentation- Yeah... you brought up what would it look like if we brought- Yeah... on a business who can do licensing services. Mm-hmm. I don't see that the challenges will be alleviated with that- Mm-hmm... based on what you're saying to me. Yeah. And so I just wanted to say that I'm against a contract to outsource election services at this time. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Karwoski Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Amy, thanks for presenting. And I guess most of my questions are for the next workshop on service, and we're going to get into details. My one observation, similar to the library, is from '25 to '26, the percent of expenditures went up 12.3%.

So as far as impacting the budget moving forward in '27, it'll be interesting to see what that-- We can't sustain those. I really appreciate Chair Bigham's point of view on an example, looking into the electronic billing of property taxes. We've somehow got to find savings to enhance, because I'm all for making sure we have good service at our service centers. I think our residents expect it, and I like what you've done during the course of the year, where you've been able to shift employees. We appreciate our employees when they can be flexible on what facility they're going to work on. And I know we work with our union contracts to provide some of that flexibility. So, especially with the new Central Service Center, I went there for two license tab renewals and reported back. On Monday, coincidentally, went there for passports, and it was less than an hour, and you can't beat that. Most of that I could blame myself on filling out the forms.

It's always been a pleasant experience. I think our residents appreciate that, but it's a cost somehow we've got to contain, because we have tough budgetary times, and I don't have the answer today, but I'm just putting it out there. We really need to look closer at our budgets for '27 than we ever have before. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Well, thank you again, Director, for the presentation. I am looking forward to the next workshop in the next room. So we'll head over to the workshop room. I do appreciate, just for the other directors that are sitting in the back of the room and other leaders, I really appreciate walking through these. Seeing the program, the function, and then what the service impact would be is really, really helpful to see as we move forward. So I appreciate this being a little bit of extra work, but I think it's going to be really helpful as we go into maybe a tricky budget this year.

So thank you. Thank you.

That could've been there.