00:00:11,630	We’ll go ahead and call the April board meeting. The Burley County Water Resource District to order. Wendy, take roll call, please. Manager Baker. Manager. Mitchell here. Manager. Reid here. Manager. Smith here. Chairman. Landon. Burger. Here. We have a call. We will continue moving on to item number two this morning.

00:00:30,430	Approval of last month’s meeting. Minutes. A chance to review those. If there are any comments. If not. To approve. Got a motion by Manager Smith. I’ll second. Second by manager. Manager to approve last month’s meeting minutes. All those in favor say aye. Aye, aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Minutes are approved. On to item three.

00:00:55,630	The agenda this this month. Um, Dennis, I think you had one item or maybe two items you wanted to add. Uh, Mr. Chairman, board, I just one item under item five, McDonald dam. I was going to talk a little bit about the financial agreement between Burlington or Bismarck Parks and Rec and Burleigh County Water Resource District. Okay.

00:01:17,300	We have that item. Anything else? Okay. Is there a motion to approve? Um. Do we approve, as amended? Okay. Got a motion by Manager Smith. Second. Second by Manager Major to approve the agenda, as amended. All those in favor say aye. Aye aye aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Agenda is approved.

00:01:44,570	Moving on to item four. Comments from members of the public not associated with the project or on the agenda, but still part of Burley County business. Not seeing any this morning. We can move on to McDowell. Dan this morning. Uh, first item up there, uh, these on the supplemental water supply. So good news.

00:02:04,230	We following our meeting last month, we did, uh, sit down and meet with Mr. Anderson and came to an agreement on the easement. So, um, a lot of lot of effort, a lot of time. But, uh, I think in the end, it was, uh, it was a good discussion.

00:02:20,300	I think he understood when we were coming from and we kind of covered some other bases with him. And, and so we got that last easement signed so we can start moving forward with the project. So did you let Randy know vinegar? No, I haven’t yet. I probably should reach out and text him. He’s watching. Yeah, right.

00:02:36,000	Yeah I’m sure he’s watching every month. Yeah. So but no, I appreciate all the efforts and hard work. Um, there. David and Houston and Travis. It was. It was a process, but we got there. So yeah. Appreciate it. I mean, he approved it. Uh, at the lake. So basically, the offer that we essentially made them. Yes.

00:02:56,230	We did not have to finalize or work our way through that condemnation process. He did the the width of that. He stated for your. Uh, for his down to 2020. Yeah, yeah. Oh, we have. A full. What is it, uh, 40 foot access easement. Correct. Travis. Yep. So you have a access agreement that’s separate? Yep.

00:03:19,670	Yeah. It’s 60ft because it comes from the quarter. Quarter. Access during construction. Yeah. Yep. So now that that has been filed, Travis, that easement. Yes. Okay. And then so we need to work on a payment to get to Mr. Anderson. So I was just asking about that.

00:03:38,270	So we can work with one day after the meeting today to make sure we get that. I don’t know if we need a I don’t know if we need a motion for that today. We’ll have to approve it in the bills. Yeah. We’ll have to add that to.

00:03:50,570	Okay. Yeah. Do we have that dollar amount? I’ll Travis, if you’ve got that handy. I don’t have that on it. I don’t want to quote it and end up being wrong on that. So that’s a great I thought it was 29,700. Yeah. Okay. Make sure what was in there.

00:04:15,270	Did you send these one out after the sign. Did you send that to. We haven’t received them back yet from the lawyer’s office. Yeah. I was going to say once it’s formally recorded, we’ll get copy back for the file. And that’s technically the time that you can actually issue the check.

00:04:33,270	Okay. So we can we can just wait till next month. Yeah. You can authorize the payment based on what it was supposed to be in the check and be issued as soon as the recording comes. In, as soon as recorded that we can get that submitted for next month. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay.

00:04:48,770	Anything else on that? Michael Travis on that. So, um, but at this point, I think, uh, next steps then, um, we talked about, uh, the grant submittal for DWR. Um, the next step would be kind of working through final design.

00:05:10,270	So I think as a board, we just we decided to go ahead and move forward with Houston having that the design completed. So I don’t know, Michael, if there’s any updates on that or what the kind of next steps are, but no.

00:05:27,330	Well, Travis and I have been visiting and basically the next step he’s going through to validate what the, um, final design cost will be based on some of the changes that have occurred, and then submit the web grant application for that to DWR. Um, also along with that will be the submittal to DWR to be on the planning document. Uh, we I think we have until April 30th to do that.

00:05:46,270	So those will be kind of done concurrently. Okay. Yep. The other ones for the planning document have already been submitted for the bank stabilization on that. So so likely for next month. We’ll have probably something from Houston kind of showing what those updated costs are. And correct okay. All right. Any other questions on the supplemental water supply. Okay.

00:06:13,630	Uh, Dennis, you want to talk about the. Oh yeah. 5%. Mr. chairman, board members. Um, uh, as I was going through the itemized bills in review for this, today’s meeting, um, you’ll see a pretty large bill from, uh, Bismarck Parks and Rec. Um, bought a tractor.

00:06:37,630	Um, as per the agreement, there’s a 5% surcharge that Bismarck puts on capital expenditures. And, um, and I just, I be in me. Me being me, I thought, well, that seems kind of excessive in this instance. So I just emailed Kathy Feist, I think, and Dave and Kathy was nice enough to respond. She shared the agreement with me.

00:06:56,900	Um, and she, you know, explained, you know, the rationale behind it in that email. She also did say, you know, in this instance, is it $95,000 expenditure, which about $4,800 and five is that surcharge. And so she said, maybe we could split this one. Um, so that’s can be discussed here today.

00:07:21,600	But then also she said maybe we could also consider revisiting the the financial agreement between the two entities. Not any not anything detrimental about their, their management and and service they provide. I mean, it’s very, very valuable. So I don’t want to burn any bridges here, but it might be worth just visiting. And so, um, I’m not the portfolio holder.

00:07:39,730	I just, I, I mean, in the short time I just thought I should email. So Chuck is in the alternate and so, um, just wondering if that would be something that we could do. Um, as a board here just to revisit that. Yeah. No, it makes sense to me.

00:07:55,770	Um, I know we kind of talked about this in the past to on some of these larger items and some of the projects they had out there and some of those fees. So if there’s a alternative way we can look at, you know, assessing those fees and.

00:08:09,600	Yeah, and my, my initial thoughts are there’s certainly rationale capital expenditures can include, you know, repairs to a roof or whatever. And there’s a lot of legwork that goes into it that staff does to get those things prepared and and to manage that. And so there’s definitely some legitimacy there.

00:08:24,600	But, um, I thought maybe in this instance, there was this a little less, uh, rationale. So, um, with that, like I said, um, she did email an offer to split that particular capital expenditure. That amount or that surcharge on that.

00:08:47,900	Um, I would say that if we are accepting of it, which is very nice and I think we, you know, maybe could and should accept that is that we would just pay the full bill this month and then try to get a credit in a, in a following in the next cycle. I don’t know that that’d be easiest for us. I guess. Yeah, maybe David or Dave.

00:09:07,570	I well said, Dennis. Um, the I think one of the other options if we want to go this way is just to knock half of that 5% off and then just pay that portion, and then we and our financial Kathy could just update what the expense or what

00:09:24,800	the actual bill is to the Park district. And we can email it over to, to Wendy. So you have records of it. Sure. Yeah. I think the issue is was so late in the game that we already have a check written in. Oh, okay. So we can do it that way too. Yeah, I wasn’t sure. Yep. Yeah.

00:09:37,730	If that if that works better for you guys and keeping things straight we can I can just let Kathy know that. And it’s. Anticipate that. Yeah we can knock that that 2.5% off for the for that portion for next year or next month. I shouldn’t say next year.

00:09:52,530	Okay. Question. So not not to be critical at all. I’m just kind of curious to the rationale of that have to do with staff. Time to get things started. And you procure that capital expense. That’s what it is. So generally.

00:10:17,030	what what is billed to Burley County Water Resource District for our management of the property, is our staffs time that are there. My time for anything that has to do with anything with the water resource district is not on the bills. So that covers some of my time with putting the specifications together, the bidding process, the conversations with contractors, as well as my managers in between myself and Dave.

00:10:35,230	Mike he doesn’t he’s not on the salary out there either, so it covers some of his time having to do some of the legwork for that as well. So it, it it adjusts and it evens out with, with that uh, that fee. Yeah. Yeah.

00:10:52,830	That is a standard thing that we have done when we did have the really county parks agreement that that was the same process we had in that as well. So just just for full clarification, I mean, there’s a 25% management fee, administrative fee that goes on top of every invoice absent of capital costs.

00:11:13,100	Right? And so all the other costs that that they provide are there’s a 25% overhead cost, basically that we pay. Just everybody knows that. And and just, you know, on that 5% management fee for capital, it does refer to construction costs. So it kind of hints that it’s maybe more for construction type capital improvements versus, uh, acquisitions of property.

00:11:34,470	But um, again, nothing not critical of any of the service we’re getting. I just might me nice to clarify that a little more and maybe refine it a little more. And as Kathy said, I think in that email we’d be open to having a conversation about that. I don’t think that’s just to get things clarified. It’s always good to make sure everybody’s on the same page. Okay, good. Okay.

00:11:50,470	Any questions? Thanks, Dave. Okay. Uh, we need a motion for that. Probably. Dennis. Then the we’ll get reducing that. Um, or. We’re. just at this point we could just have it in the, in the, in the record that next month we’ll take care of that 5% or half of that as a credit.

00:12:13,470	Okay. I’m not I’m not sure. Yeah. I don’t I don’t know if we need a motion or not. Just I think we had consensus that everybody is good with that kind of discussion point of reducing that 5% and a half and giving the credit to next month. Okay, okay. All right.

00:12:33,200	Thanks, Dennis. And then, yeah, I don’t know if you want to work with Dave and then either myself or Chuck, you know we can. Yeah I’ll share the I’ll, I think you were included on the email response, but I’ll forward that to Chuck and I’ll forward the agreement as well.

00:12:52,970	And since your portfolio will let you guys take. Yep. Carry forward okay. That’ll work. Sounds good. Okay. Uh, in addition, on page six through 13 are the lease agreements for some of the property out at McDowell dam? Um, I think at this point, Dave, everything’s been signed and provided. Correct. Right. Okay.

00:13:18,000	Has from from time to. No, I don’t think they. Have. Elvin has not. Oh, Alvin, he still has not signed his yet. No, I, I talked to him last week and kind of brought it to his attention and, and he was well aware of it and said he would follow up with it here soon. Okay.

00:13:35,700	And I will follow up with him again. Okay. Um, you know, we can always offer to meet him somewhere if that would help too. Or was going to be my next, uh, my next step. I was going to say, you know, what do we need to do on our side? Okay.

00:13:50,230	You know, to, to get this deal done. So. Okay. Sounds good. Thanks, Chuck. Yep. Okay. Uh, I don’t know, Dave. Was there anything else as far as updates go this morning? Okay. Yeah. We had a interesting spring.

00:14:23,830	Um, I had, uh, Manager Mitchell out yesterday to discuss a little bit of an issue that’s popped up in the parking lots. It’s listening. Had some overhead images to share. Um, it’s come to our attention that the the parking lot for the shop and access to the boat ramp really isn’t a full on pavement section. Um, there’s about an inch of asphalt, and then it’s gravel underneath.

00:14:54,200	Um, we have four blowouts in that parking lot. Um, and it’s starting to alligator and, and really start to fall apart. It leads me to think that the other two auxiliary, if you if you can envision that property, there’s the big parking lot in front of the, the bathhouse and the beach that I think is a

00:15:12,700	safe, that parking lot safe. And the loop around out by by the the new playground and the bathroom out there. I think that’s safe as well. There’s two auxiliary playground or parking lots, um, on that access that goes up. Here we go.

00:15:27,370	Uh, that I believe are the same condition. I wanted to verify that, but, um, this is a map of the areas that we’re having blowouts. Um, this is completely out of left field for us because we thought everything was in good condition. Um, it just this spring started falling apart.

00:15:45,670	I think it has a lot to do with the fact that the garbage, the dumpster is right there. So the garbage truck movement is really wearing on that. Um, so we had we had a contractor come out and look at it, and he gave us an estimate on it.

00:16:01,970	Um, the four areas is roughly $20,000 to patch, and they would patch it back with a four inch, a true asphalt section, four inch asphalt section. Um, I think that would get us by. But then I think we also have to talk about the rest of the parking lot in the future.

00:16:16,530	Um, I would like to have a conversation. I can show you some. That’s what we’re looking at in that area. Two, three. It’s it’s really. And it really shocked me. I mean, there’s maybe an inch to an inch and a half of asphalt there.

00:16:41,500	So I think maybe what it was was a gravel parking lot with asphalt impregnation on the top, or maybe a really thin coat. Uh, and it just got built up over time to try and keep it stable. And then when you start to look closer, you can see in the foreground of the picture, you can really start to see that alligator ring, of the asphalt starting to fall apart.

00:16:55,370	And it’s been cracked, sealed to, I think pretty much the whole thing is crack sealing. So I’ve been trying to keep it up, but I think and we just, you know, we just went through the whole capital improvement plan and things change.

00:17:14,500	Uh, we might want to consider putting a parking lot rehabilitation and replacements on the capital improvement plan. And I can certainly work towards that and come back with a new plan. Um, next month, see how we might work that into that, that long range plan that we had worked up. Uh, I believe next year’s plan was to do that bathroom replacement. Yep, yep.

00:17:32,230	So I don’t know if we want to add that on top of the bathroom replacement or if we want to push the bathroom replacement another year. Uh, I can put some numbers together for the parking lot replacement. Maybe we can talk again next month. Yeah. Um. I know our budget process. I may have to put a placeholder.

00:17:53,570	I generally have to have the Park district budget in, uh, for review in early May, so hopefully I can pivot really quick timing wise if I, if we can have our meeting early May, which we will, we always do.

00:18:09,730	Um, and it might work out timing wise to, to make an adjustment if I need to say no, it’s not going to be this project, it’s going to be that project. So, uh, we can also look at phasing some things, uh, in, in this instance. Kind of get back to the task at hand.

00:18:28,070	Um, we think that we can cover area one with just some cold patch and get by. It’s a lot smaller than what that rectangle is. It’s maybe a pothole about that. You know, maybe four inch diameter pothole. We think we can get by with that.

00:18:44,700	Um, in the meantime, with area three, where it’s completely blown out from that previous picture, we can get in there and probably put some gravel down and pack it down to try and get by. It’s going to keep eroding as the garbage truck comes in and does their their maneuver area for is down by the boat ramp. Um.

00:19:06,370	You can see there at the the transition between the concrete and the asphalt, the asphalt, it’s almost like it’s pushing down the road. I don’t know if it’s sloughing down the hill a little bit and it’s starting to buckle right there. Um, but that that one’s going to go eventually. It’s already starting to unravel. Right in the middle of that picture.

00:19:19,270	You can see it there. Um, I think we can possibly get by with this one this year. We don’t see a ton of boat traffic, and it’s lighter traffic, lighter equipment. I mean, the worst thing for it right now is going to be the pickups. Trailers aren’t going to be an issue because they’re smaller boats.

00:19:36,600	So, um, my main concern is that area for the, uh, for the garbage truck. Two things we could move forward with just patching it with asphalt. Um, like we saw with the quote. , is that 20,000 for all four of us? Yeah, yeah. Um, areas two and three, area three was about 10,000. Little over 10,000.

00:20:00,000	Okay. About half of it for that one. One thing, ideally when you put down a dumpster, you put it on concrete. Yeah. It then you can have this one’s picked up by, um, from the back side of the, the dump truck. I’m sorry. Garbage truck.

00:20:17,830	Um, so ideally those back tires are sitting on concrete when they do that, because that’s transferring the weight to the back of the truck, too. So you, in the best case scenario, you’ve got that set up. We could look at poor and a large slab, which is going to cost more than ten grand.

00:20:34,970	I can tell you that, um, don’t have the square foot. I mean, based off of area three is about 1300 square feet and maybe 12 to $15 a square foot for two foot on center. Number four rebar, six inches thick on concrete. I mean, you do the math. That’s that’s not it’s not going to be cheap to do concrete.

00:20:56,330	But ultimately that’s you know, when we look at replacing this parking lot, that’s how it should be. All right. Um, so, uh, things to consider. Do we want to just patch the area and, and maybe do a smaller patch on area three just to get by for the year.

00:21:10,530	And then next year, we plan the whole parking lot work. So why did bring all that around and have a conversation with you guys today? I was just looking at the capital improvement for 2026, 188,000 was a budget number that I have here on my list for 820, 26, which included sand for the beach and then the

00:21:32,870	shower building. Um, but it also had that tractor and it had listed at 120,000. That’s what we put in there. So I mean, we just purchased the tractor with 25,000 less than that. Basically.

00:21:51,030	I mean, so there’s some savings there that, you know, I guess in this instance, it certainly would be logical, to rectify things. I mean, that being said, it’s always nice to fix them, not just patch them. Right, right. Right right. Yeah. No that’s a good, good point, manager. Um, you know, we had talked about getting a few because of how well that tractor came in, how low it came in.

00:22:09,170	We talked about getting a couple of those accessories this year. Um, at this point, we’re sure I want to see we’re at $6,000 for the accessories that we. It was an auger attachment, a forklift attachment, and then, um, a rake to pull on the back for grooming the beach.

00:22:31,830	Um, I think between the auger and the forklift, they were below $5,000, like $4,500. And then the rake was maybe 800 to $1000. Yeah, $1,000. So like I said, we’re right at that $6,000 range for the additional equipment. And we should be pretty good. Um, we had talked about pushing off the, the sand until next year.

00:22:55,430	Um, I don’t know that we have the, the correct amount in the budget for it. Um, one of the estimates that we got back was over $77,000 for, for just the I think it was an inch or an inch and a half on the whole beach area.

00:23:07,600	Of course, we push it towards the bottom, but, um, to make it thicker down there, but we thought maybe we would push that to next year. We are in the process with that shower building of contract, or the architect is pretty much done. They’re wrapping up the specification, so that should go out to bid here shortly.

00:23:26,170	Their estimate, knock on wood, their estimate was that it was below what our budget number was. Um, but we’ll see how that comes in for bid. And that project, we would have that construction done after the season. So we’re not disrupting any, any beach goers for the year.

00:23:47,000	So so there is an opportunity there if, if, you know, if we want to do some patching or if we want to take care of all four of these areas. Um, or just two of the areas. So are the four areas. The, the third one is the, the one that has the most concern. That’s the one with the garbage dumpster. Yeah.

00:24:04,500	That one right there. Yeah. Yes. Because I too am thinking just longer term, if there was a bigger fix here and if we had to look at a, you know, larger repair for the entire parking lot and maybe look at concrete, you know, how much do we want to put into this now versus

00:24:20,030	putting in more robust option? Maybe next year? Um, so I wonder, maybe we could go back and visit with him to see what we could maybe do to a couple of these spots this year to get us by for potentially a a bigger, you know, more robust replacement next year. Brian, yeah.

00:24:41,400	If I may, um, I’m assuming some of this is just that’s the way it historically always been. Uh, if you were to redesign this from the beginning, would you put the dumpster in the same spot? I’m just thinking if we did larger concrete area, would we want to move anything around or. It’s a good question.

00:25:00,070	That’s a good question. Yeah. Time to think about it. I just envision. That it’s just always been there. So we replaced it in kind. But from the from the standpoint of the shop, I think it’s in a good spot from the standpoint of somebody randomly coming out and just starting to dump all their stuff in the

00:25:17,370	dumpster. I think it’s in a good spot as well. Uh, our staff still just have to go around and empty out all the garbage cans that are in the park. I think it’s okay, but, you know, would we move it off the parking lot because we need more parking stalls, right? That’s why I was wondering.

00:25:30,530	I don’t think so. We don’t. We don’t see that much traffic out there to where we, you know, one stall is going to make that big of a difference. Um, so I short answer right off the top of my head, I’d say that it’s probably in a pretty good spot.

00:25:43,400	Um, I just scribbled on there, if we want, we could try and reduce that patch area to the critical area, um, where it’s blowing out. It’s pretty much where the back tires from the truck are.

00:25:59,900	So we could we could put in a, you know, a decent chunk of asphalt there and, and see how it goes and get us by, uh, for the year. Uh, and then make a plan to, to do some, some replacement. Yeah. Consensus there. Yeah. Go ahead.

00:26:23,500	Well, I was going to say, I think when I talk to you and David yesterday too, you talked about a, uh, getting a discount if we would go for with all of it. I want that one shot. Yes. Uh, one of the one of the quotes that we received, they basically said, you know, it’s this much per area, but if you do all of them, we’ll give you a, you know, a 10% off.

00:26:38,830	So, um, that 20 grand would go down to eight, you know, 18 grand roughly. So. Um. But you know, like I said, I think if we want to be if we’re going to end up ripping this stuff out that we just repaired in a year, do we really want to put all that asphalt out? Um,

00:26:56,500	and I think we can manage with some, some cold patch that’s not a large amount per bag. And we can we can fill in some of those potholes with that, uh, and make. It work. You guys do? Yes. Yeah. We buy cold patch.

00:27:12,700	It comes in a bag from the asphalt plants, and we just set it out in the sun and let it warm up, and then we cut the bag open and pack it in so it it holds reasonably well. Yeah. Um, get hit by for those years. Yeah. Essentially it helps us with potholes and things like that in the short term.

00:27:27,400	Okay. Any other thoughts? Is there a consensus there. We look at making some repairs this year just to get us by. And we can look to get something into the CIP for next year as a be a larger project.

00:27:47,770	How much cold patch you think we would be looking at how many bags and stuff for all of that? Yeah, I don’t think it would be a large amount. I can’t remember what a bag of cold patch runs, but it’s not. It’s not a lot. Yeah. Um, the pothole in that area, one, I don’t even think it’s completely.

00:28:05,070	Yeah, there is a little bit of gravel showing in that pothole, but it’s not huge. Yeah. Um, and that’s the one that I was thinking we’d do that with was area one.

00:28:18,170	We would put some cold patch in that one and add a bag here or there if we need to, but if we catch it on the catching on, decent weather when it’s nice and warm, that cold patch heats up and we can really get it packed in there pretty good. So. Okay. And then do we do anything with the boat ramp? Or we can limit that by until we. Do a larger.

00:28:34,670	I think just kind of looking back at David, um, I think we can get by and I don’t know that we really have to do anything if it blows and blows out and continues to blow out and get worse, we can cold patch that area as well.

00:28:49,770	Um, we can even go in there and break it off. So it’s a nice clean edge and pack some in there. Um, try and get something so it’ll, uh, stay a little bit longer for us. Yeah. But right now, there’s a pretty decent little lip on there where it’s coming to the concrete right there. Yeah. There is.

00:29:06,230	We’re looking at it. So. Yeah. Okay. Sounds like we got a plan. Okay, okay. Thank you. No. That’s it, I appreciate it. Yeah. You bet. Okay. Nothing else on McDowell. Dan, this morning, we can move on to financial reports. Mr.

00:29:35,500	chairman, board members on pages 14 through 16 are the balance sheets. And I’ll just run through the activity in March. And. Um, we started the month with the balance of $2,041,258.40 in our checking savings, we paid bills in the amount 152,747 $0.60. Um, we did have income in the amount of $337,095.97. Um, majority of that was real estate tax income.

00:30:04,530	About 263,000. Some state aid, about 6000. Um, special assessment collections for various projects were 68,000 um that that made up that total. So we ended the month in a balance of $2,225,606.77. Um, bravura wealth. Um started the month with 2,496,000 to 41, and $0.89. Um had interest, net interest in the amount of slightly over 7000.

00:30:39,800	So we’re ending balance is $2,503,437.80. Um designated reserve funds amount of 700,000. That’s unchanged. Um, other assets and receivables. So that total current assets is $5,446,113.77. Um, on page 16 is the, um the designated funds breakdown as as they exist? Um, we’re going through we’re catching up.

00:31:12,170	We had some missing reports, and so Wendy’s catching up with those. And so I didn’t rectify those this month, but we’ll do so in the next month or so. So, um, with that I would move for approval of the balance sheet as presented. Okay. Thanks, Dennis. We have a motion manager read for the approval of the balance sheet this month.

00:31:33,000	I’ll second. That second by, uh, Manager Mitchell. Any discussion? When do you take roll call? Vote, please. Manager Maher.. Yes. Manager. Mitchell. Yes. Manager. Yes. Manager. Smith. Yes. Chairman. Langenberg. Yes. Motion passes. Um, before I forget, the, uh, just an update on the Bravo, Bravo wealth, interest rate.

00:31:58,630	Um, it’s currently at 3.64%. It went down the first last half of last month, but it went up again slightly the first half of this month. So, that results in a net earnings of 3.39% on that on those funds.

00:32:17,270	So again, I think they’re going to just be on par with whatever else is out there on the CD market. So we recommend staying the course. Um, on page 1718 of the profit loss and year to date budget analysis. And look through those, those look good. I’d move for approval as presented. Okay.

00:32:37,100	And I manage a motion by manager to approve this profit and loss this month. Second and second by manager maker. Any discussion questions? Hearing none. We need to take roll call. Vote please. Manager. Manager. Yes. Manager. Mitchell. Yes. Manager. Yes. Manager. Smith. Yes. Chairman. Lundberg. Yes. Motion passes. Profit loss is approved this month. Hey. Anything else? Dennis? This morning? Nope. Okay. Yeah.

00:33:05,400	I think overall agreement with those. That was the funds that we have. I mean it’s at this point the CDs are probably in that same ballpark. Three and a half, 4%. So, um, still still getting some decent interest on that. So yeah. Good. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Move on to drainage permits and complaints this morning.

00:33:25,100	Um, I assume I don’t know, Michael anything. Any updates on the Keelboat Park this morning? No. Nothing on. That one. Yeah. Okay. Um, the hawk tree. Um, I was visiting a little bit with Casey this morning. It sounds like he just received some information and provided it over to Houston to review. Right. These received the stormwater. Management plan amendment.

00:33:45,400	Okay, so. we’ll be taking. A look at. That and. Document and going through that. Okay. So some additional maybe for next month we’ll have some update okay. All right. We can move on to item C this morning. The Knudsen complaint to the township on O’Brien. Chuck I know you guys have been talking.

00:34:04,600	Yep. Uh, so I can start off here. Um, we got a strange complaint. Um, I guess it was dated March 25th. Uh, so just as everybody aware is aware, we have 120 days to act on this. Um, it’s maybe not so much a drainage.

00:34:19,130	Well, it is a drainage complaint. Um, but it may be also an inquiry of information. Uh, they didn’t actually name anyone culpable of of damages. Um, and so kind of what’s going on? Uh, the area sits right off the McKenzie exit south of, uh, 94 there and directly to the west.

00:34:46,000	Um, there’s a fish and wildlife easement on on parcels directly to the south is McKenzie Slough. Uh, the complaint entails that there’s been increased water, uh, looking through aerials throughout the teens into the 20s. I don’t see any noticeable, um, changes. I mean, obviously, last year was the sixth wettest, uh, summer on record for rainfall here.

00:35:04,970	Um, so I’m not surprised that the area is wet. Um, I haven’t been out to the site yet. Uh, just kind of looking for conversation from the board on how we want to proceed.

00:35:18,400	If we want to look at this as kind of an investigation, um, if we want to handle it as an actual complaint was filed under an to a drain or watercourse, if we want to go out there and formally say yes or no, if it was, if there is some type of obstruction, whether it be manmade or, uh, just lack of, of maintenance vegetation issue.

00:35:38,030	So, um, that’s kind of the background. Um, kind of looking from the board on how we want to proceed with this. Do we want to attack it as a drain complaint and then answer the question, or is this kind of a bigger question and kind of more of an investigation? Turn it over for discussion. Yeah, yeah. Mr. Chairman, I wouldn’t. Touch a.

00:35:56,770	Couple of. Things. Um, obviously. Uh, Josh. Lewis Moore has been. Out there. He’s been looking. At. A. Number of things for. The Long Lake Refuge. ET cetera. So he’s got an idea of what might be out there as far as an. Issue. Which. Obviously, you know, puts him in a position to. assist from that process.

00:36:13,800	Um, you might be aware that, uh, Barb had submitted a complaint earlier relative to the Dot crossing. At McKenzie Slough. We referred that back to Dot because it’s a Dot jurisdictional issue, and they came back and basically said, well, you know, it’s been there forever. There’s no changes. There’s no.

00:36:32,070	Issues with the interstate from that perspective. Uh, there may or may not be some items going on out there in the field. Uh, obviously, like I said, Josh has been out there and it may be an opportunity for you and Josh to go see what’s out there and see whether or not that’s actually influencing what’s

00:36:48,330	going on at her location. Um, Josh has been doing a lot of things relative to groundwater. We had a long discussion and say, okay, it’s a wet cycle. Is this a groundwater issue? Is this a surface water issue? Uh, Dave and I had a number of conversations.

00:37:05,100	Groundwater can become surface water. And then it could be an obstruction issue. So how that affects if it’s just groundwater, it’s just groundwater jurisdiction. There’s nobody’s going to do anything with it.

00:37:21,630	Um, so the end result is that I think this is one of those where investigated on site and see if there’s anything out there that’s actually creating the issue. If not, you know, you you basically, you know, dismiss it. And if there’s something out there that is that’s actionable relative to, um, jurisdiction, then you can do it at that point. So that’s kind of our summary.

00:37:37,470	I know Dave has talked to Barb as well. So relative to the jurisdiction, there are likely, um, given the if you want to call it, the rumblings of the long Lake issue and all kinds of things out there, there are likely other complaints where people are going, hey, there’s something going on out here, so we may see more of those.

00:37:52,630	But again, the first one, I think we just go take a look at it and see what’s out there. So along those lines, we’re exactly, I guess not exactly. But how does this relate to Long Lake? It’s outside of the law. It’s it’s downstream from the structure. So downstream of the structure.

00:38:08,070	It’s not part of the long lake system. Right. Okay. It’s in the Long Lake or Long Lake Creek watershed. Okay. Put it that way. So it’s downstream of the right, is it Mackenzie.

00:38:27,930	Smooth rising or is it a associated with McClintock? So it’s it’s it’s part of it’s along the edge of Mackenzie Slough and Mackenzie slew, as you know. Um, basically it’s a storage area for flooding from Long Lake Creek and Apple Creek. Both. Yeah. Um. It’s wet. It has been wet the last few years, as you pointed out. It, you know, it’s it’s been in a saturated state.

00:38:44,400	We know the groundwater is up over where it’s been historically, uh, from a number of investigations. But, um, so, yeah. Is there anything going on out there that’s actionable? Uh, you can find out, but it’s not associated with the Long Lake, uh, refuge issue itself. They’re independent. So, I mean, its outlet is the outlet to the.

00:39:05,670	It is part of Mackenzie Slew. Correct. And when you go on the interstate, you can see that that water is up and has been up for a long time. And it doesn’t look like it’s a vegetation issue. I mean, uh, I guess there’s some.

00:39:24,830	And at that point, even some vegetation in, uh, in the outlet. Would, you know, it’s probably not impacting, uh, the fluid that. Much when you look at the overall grading through there. Um, it’s basically flat. It’s sluggish. And the water gets water moves through there very slowly. I liken it to osmosis.

00:39:43,800	I mean, it just goes so once it’s in there, it takes a long time to get out. So every time you have an inflow, it sets there and you know, it takes and it’s got to go in either out the outlet by flow or it’s got to go in the groundwater. And if the groundwater is high, it’s it’s not it’s not going in. So but you.

00:40:00,830	Know, it’s a natural phenomena as our it is. It appears to me it’s a natural phenomenon. But like I said, Josh has been out there and saw a few things on the surface that warrant, you know, additional review by the board. So I think the investigation is prudent. Yeah. Yep.

00:40:15,600	And what I, what I also did for you gentlemen, uh, given the discussion on the Long Lake and we can probably go into that after a little bit. Uh, I gave you Josh’s rate structure. And the thought that I have is that you approve our rate structure.

00:40:29,500	Um, I’m going to be having Josh bill, anything that he does directly through us, not unlike we do with Braun. Braun is independent, but Braun’s geotechnical, this is engineering work.

00:40:44,970	Uh, since Josh is working with us on the Long Lake issue and knows the issues out there, it’s it’s less expensive to have him do some things for us than for us to do it for you. So I provided that to you as a reference. And he does Bill differently for in versus field work. Um, he does have some additional staff periodically that he works with as well. So.

00:41:04,730	Mr.. Back to you. I would agree. I would just say that a site visit isn’t warranted. My my suspicion on the on the drainage complaint is a natural phenomenon. And I don’t know if you’ve talked to Barbara yet. I have not. Talked to her.

00:41:19,430	I mean, that could go a long way, of course, to and just I would say this is absent of anything physical that we can point to. I think it’s, um. Yeah, well, you do the investigation, but I would agree that it’s kind of a natural phenomenon. I mean. In, in the area. Um. DWR in back in the 60s. 70s.

00:41:39,470	Um, had drilled some wells, but they’re. No, they’re not logged or anything for observation. And stuff. So. Okay, there is stuff out there, but there’s no data to them. I mean. within data. Yeah. Within that mile there’s I think 4 or 5 of them. Okay. So Dave, anything that you discussed with Barbara. Uh. Well. Mr. Chairman.

00:41:59,170	I talked to Barb, and I like Brian’s suggestion. I think that’s exactly the way I would would think it would work, Brian and and maybe Josh go out there and visit with her, get the lay of the land.

00:42:17,630	I think that also sort of blends into this whole Long Lake issue of that water, which may or may not be coming down. Is there an obstruction, you know, with Fish and Wildlife Service, which is also on the agenda, that the board can talk about, but that might give the the landowner, um, some understanding of how complex this issue is. And it may well be a natural phenomenon.

00:42:36,100	That said, where is this water coming from? Which I think was her issue? Um, she didn’t get into damages and I talked to her about that. I talked to her about a complaint because on the complaint itself, it says specifically who who is obstructing this water? Well, she didn’t know.

00:42:52,830	And I said, just put on own, like Brian had said, it’s more of an inquiry at this point, um, than anything. And maybe that investigation would dovetail into the Long Lake issue, right? Yep. Sounds good. Yeah.

00:43:10,430	I mean, she hasn’t her water is extremely high on my property, so I again, I wouldn’t like if she have any baseline or what is she stays at five feet higher. Is it right foot higher or what. What is that. So maybe yeah. Yeah. Go talk to yep yep. Warrenton is impacting structures. No to the best of my knowledge no. Yeah. It’s just just a rag property pasture etcetera.. Okay. Well that makes sense.

00:43:31,100	Any other thoughts this morning okay. That’s pretty clear Brian. Next steps. Yeah I’ll work with Josh okay. Thank you. All right. We can move on to item D this morning. Kind of kind of related. Uh, Michael, update on the on Lake refuge. Yeah, on the Long Lake refuge.

00:43:49,300	We had a meeting with a couple of managers and discussed the, uh, obstruction issue or potential obstruction issue with the Long Lake Refuge outlet structure. Um, and then how to approach that? We had a secondary meeting, and there will be some ongoing meetings after that. There’s a secondary meeting with the, uh, Kidder County Water Resource District.

00:44:08,570	Actually, it was the county commission. The water resource district members were there, and they had a meeting subsequent to that. Um, they’re in a position and agree that they would facilitate the complaint process of the landowners.

00:44:27,630	Uh, will prepare a form, basically, so that we gather the data that we need from the complaint process if, if and when it’s actually filed, I’m assuming it’s going to be filed because they’ve agreed to move forward. Uh, will prepare the complaint form.

00:44:44,470	Uh, they’ll get the landowners to sign and then, um, it sounded as though the Carter County Commission was going to hand it to the water resource District to do the formal submittal to Burleigh County, because understand, the whole Long Lake refuge is, uh, the structures in Burleigh County, but the refuge is in Carter County. Uh, it’s about half and half.

00:45:04,130	So they would facilitate the submittal of that complaint from their landowners and the Burleigh County landowners, if practical, uh, to the Burleigh County Water Resource District for consideration. Um, it looks as though there’s a number of things going on relative to the historic, uh, elevation of the structure. Uh, they it was at 17, 13.2. It’s now at 1716. The State Water Commission has permitted the water permit to 1716.

00:45:26,470	However, when they got their easements, their easements do not go above 1716, which means anytime there’s water and there, they’re actually floating property above their easements. So there’s an easement issue. Uh, there has been discussion with the refuge manager and others.

00:45:45,200	Uh, they’re basically saying, you know, we can’t do anything until we have something before us that says that we’re doing something wrong. In other words, how do they elevate it up to get assistance? And they’re more than willing to, uh, move forward once they can get something that they can actually act on.

00:46:04,430	So, uh, the scenario is we get the complaint filed, the district looks at the complaint, basically refers it back to Fish and Wildlife Service and says, hey, where are you guys going to go with this? Rather than doing a full out notice and order scenario? So that’s kind of where the process is at. Uh, we will be having a meeting of the Crystal Springs Watershed Initiative steering Committee.

00:46:23,500	Uh, steering committee is made up of Stutsman County, uh Commission, Stutsman County Water Resource District, Carter County Commission, and Water Resource District, as well as some local stakeholders. Uh, BNSF and Dot. Now, they’re not involved in the in the complaint issue, but because that project’s out there, they’re stakeholders in the whole process. We want to keep them informed as to what’s going on with the, uh, with the development.

00:46:43,270	So if there was something there at that project that would move more water into Long. Lake, that would move more water into Long Lake. Yes. Now, as far as the amount of water we’ve looked at it, we had a short presentation before the board. And, Brian, I can update you on that a little bit later.

00:46:57,700	Uh, it really doesn’t have a great impact on the Long Lake Refuge. I mean, as far as the flow through pattern, it’s probably an inch and a half into their structure as it’s going through. It’s 20 CFS, so it’s not a lot of water. We have noticed we’ve done some aerial flights.

00:47:13,170	Uh, we have noticed that there is additional watershed that will now be contributing to the Long Lake Refuge through the tributary that we’re talking about putting water in. So that’s another issue. In other words, as everything continues to go up there, groundwater, lakes and everything, they’re starting to overflow.

00:47:30,500	So we’re identifying those and we’ll be having discussion, um, with the Stutsman County project relative to Crystal Springs, as to what that means. So it’s an ongoing developing process. But the issue with the Long Lake Refuge is independent. That’s been around for a long time. The easements, the water permit. We’ve had discussions with DWR relative to what they have for construction permits.

00:47:50,600	ET cetera. Um, I need to get back to Karen Goff. She was going to provide me some of that stuff, and I have not seen it as yet, but so it’s a, um, it’s a complex process. Has there ever. Been any conversation to form some sort. Of a legal drain? Obviously, knowing there’s.

00:48:07,600	No nothing relative to a legal drain? There have been. And it goes back to what Dave was saying with Barb’s complaint. There are people that say, hey, you know, there’s a lot of water coming out of the refuge.

00:48:21,830	Well, yeah, because there’s a lot of water coming out of the refuge, whether it’s Long Lake Creek, which is contributing water goes all the way down towards the kind of the Napoleon area. There’s been a lot of water coming through from the north, which, uh, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service, they never analyzed that watershed coming down from the north relative to sizing their structure, which

00:48:39,800	is kind of another issue from a technical perspective. But now there’s even more water coming from the north, not from the Crystal Springs project, but just from natural drainage. So there’s a number of things out there that, uh, might need to be taken care of. Um, we have a federal nexus here.

00:48:57,800	Obviously, the feds aren’t going to do anything unless they have an actionable, actionable item. Um, I can think of a number of different ways. I’ll just talk about it from this perspective, is that I don’t think they have adequate easements. They’ve already been talking to landowners about getting additional easements.

00:49:13,370	However, the landowners are being say, hey, we’re already flooded. We don’t want to, you know, give up any more of our property. So, um, I can brief you on that too, Brian, because there’s it’s complicated, but we’ll get that, uh, complaint process started in the next month or so. Okay, so. Okay.

00:49:31,400	Just thinking out loud here, would it be appropriate to set up? I don’t want to say a formal training or some type of, uh, in your county or multiple county. Okay. That’s a good thought, Brian. Just. Because it is two different, you know, water resource districts and counties at some point.. Right? Yeah.

00:49:55,170	Let’s maybe let’s get this complaint submitted. Right. If that’s if that’s what they’re going to do. And then we’ll kind of step into the next steps. And that could be something that could come out of this would be some kind of a joint. Yeah.

00:50:10,100	It’s an interesting process relative to is there a project for a joint board or is it just coordination? I think the coordination, absolutely. Right. Um, and I’ll be honest, I think everybody knows this. The Carter County Water Resource District has not been very active. Um, they are becoming more active simply because things are in front of them.

00:50:27,170	Uh, Stutsman County, the only portion of Crystal Springs that comes to, um, is in Carter County is Crystal Springs itself. The rest is all Stutsman County. So I don’t see Stutsman County as being part of the process other than, you know, their their project that they’re looking at delivering water, which is we’ll switch from the feasibility study phase into preliminary

00:50:47,870	engineering. And that’s probably 18 months to 18 to 24 months before that preliminary engineering report would get done. But the landowners in Carter County have basically, you know, stuck their foot in the sand and said, hey, it’s not coming this way. And we continue to have discussions.

00:51:05,430	One of the reasons it wasn’t coming the way is because of the current issues they have, which are unrelated to the project. So if those get resolved or if those have a solution, project direction, um, obviously that opens the door for the Crystal Springs project to proceed with less,

00:51:22,930	um, less resistance. I’m not saying there won’t be any resistance, because obviously you’re putting water through. We’re starting at 20 CFS. When we get down to a normal operational, we’re probably down to five, but we have to get rid of the existing flood waters first. So quick summary. So, Mr.

00:51:46,000	Chairman, Mike, so you’re working on a complaint that will be served to who.? Burleigh County. Burleigh County water resource district that there’s an obstruction to the Long Lake outlet. Right. It’s which is owned and operated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Correct. Okay. Yeah.

00:52:00,900	And the reason it kind of falls out this way is about half of the refuge is in Burleigh County. Half of the refuge area is in Carter County. However, the structure itself is in Burleigh County. And so you provided a rate sheet for Josh. You said. , right.

00:52:19,300	Who’s Josh? Josh? He’s been a sub consultant on the Crystal Springs project, and he’s been out there talking to the refuge. He’s been talking to the individual landowners. Uh, we are not going to be the ones. Um. Handing the complaint forms to the individual landowners. They’re going to do that through Carter County. But, uh, given Josh’s background and his familiarity with the area and working with the refuge. Um.

00:52:43,230	Basically, it’s an economic advantage to utilize him to, uh, to continue to have those conversations. Okay. Yeah. Thanks, Michael. Certainly this is one of those situations that can continue to snowball and turn into a bigger you know, if we get into Fish and Wildlife Service discussion on their contributing areas and how they design that structure and how they operate that

00:53:03,000	structure, I mean, I could see this taking multiple years and studies and different groups and quick question then, okay, go ahead in a minute here. But what involvement or discussions that we have with Fish and Wildlife Service up to this point on this process. Okay. We’ve had several there’s two different aspects to it.

00:53:20,970	One is from the Crystal Springs Watershed Initiative. We’ve been having discussions with them relative to what they have out there, their structures, what they’re doing, the water going through.

00:53:39,170	Uh, we’ve we can show through the feasibility study that we’re actually sending higher quality water through the refuge than what they have, which is their primary issue. They said, we don’t we don’t mind passing water through as long as it’s higher quality because of how they’re managing their refuge. Uh, so we were going through those issues and they were pretty much accepting of that aspect happening.

00:53:54,430	And then Kidder County residents said, hey, we got all kinds of issues, they’re flooding us, etc. and we said, well, that’s not a Crystal Springs project. That’s a local project. You have that with or without the additional water. So that’s where it kind of got to the point to where Carter County was discussing it.

00:54:10,100	And Stutsman County, which doesn’t have anything to do with Carter County, was saying, hey, if we need to resolve this issue, we’ll look at it and we’ll give you some background information, but then you have to move on your own to take it to solution, which is kind of what got us to this phase.

00:54:24,970	So we’ve switched off from the discussions with the, uh, refuge relative to the Crystal Springs water. Now saying, hey, you’ve got easements, you’ve got other issues going on. And that’s where we kind of step back and said, okay, Stutsman County’s not paying for this. If it’s a complaint in Burleigh County, that complaint has to come to Burleigh County before Burleigh County can actually act on it.

00:54:43,400	That makes sense. But that’s. Been they’re aware of these sort of things. Are they are very aware of it. In fact, they’re I can’t speak for them second hand. They are looking for assistance to resolve their problem, but they can’t resolve the problem unless they have something.

00:55:00,900	They need somebody to start pushing the rock right a little bit. Right. They need to have somebody throw the stone in the water so that the higher ups recognize that there’s something going on. Okay. So they’re not adversarial to this particular. So that was kind of what I was wondering, like where they’re at with that. Okay.

00:55:17,400	So there’s certainly um, or at least interested in having more discussions. And that’s correct. This goes. Yeah. KC. Uh. Just an informational. I’ll have to email some plans over to Mike, but we have a project at the outlet of Long Lake this year that we’re working on.

00:55:40,070	There’s a bridge just east of the main outlet that, um, let’s say has many issues. So we’re going to remove the bridge and we’re actually going to replace it with an equalizer culvert, essentially on there. That’s on 102nd Avenue. It’s pretty straightforward plan to do that. So it’s just a little bit east of the outlet. But I’ll send that over.

00:55:57,130	I’m not sure it’ll really affect you much, but that way you at least know what we’re doing. We’re we haven’t gotten the construction schedule yet, but I’m would guess from the contractor we got, it’s probably going to be around September before they get to it. Okay.

00:56:11,900	That’s good to know, Casey, because if we are talking with landowners or, you know, they might there might be some discussion like, hey, what’s going on now? You guys are building putting other bridges out there. So that’s good to know. Yeah, yeah, it just informational. Yeah. Thank you Casey.. Appreciate it. Okay. Yeah.

00:56:26,470	Kind of like I said this could definitely snowball into something larger. So I like Brian’s suggestion. And maybe at some point we could think about, you know, depending on what happens here with this complaint. But there could be maybe at least a committee between us and Kidder County to some discussion.

00:56:40,930	One thing that David and I talked about, obviously, it’s Roger’s portfolio for the Long Lake Creek and Apple Creek scenario. So then Brian could be the second contact in that mix. And then it’s not like you’re having a board meeting, but you got two, two managers involved in the details and, uh, involved in the discussion, the meetings.

00:56:58,600	Um, we didn’t invite Burleigh County, quite honestly, to the Carter County meeting for a number of reasons, because we’re trying to. Um. Trying to build a foundation of trust out there. And I think we’re we’re getting very close to being able to do that.

00:57:14,770	But there will probably be some inter-district meetings with that group. Uh, the county commission at their meeting, uh, in the discussion again, um, it’s not meeting, um, they were looking at the county commission handing it to the water resource district to facilitate the process. Now, again, understand the water Resource District is the three member board has not been very active.

00:57:36,330	So a lot of this stuff is new to them. Um, so it’s a little bit of a learning curve. Be honest. Uh, but I think we can easily make something go forward and get some. Solution and probably. Just make a comment.

00:57:55,070	Uh, jurisdictional issues are equally as complex, and that’s something as as the board moves forward and we look at this much larger issue, we’re going to have to see, no pun intended, where the water’s edge is for Burley County. Uh, the Kidder County, you know, it sounds like sort of representing a Kidder County, excuse me, representing Burleigh County landowners in forming a complaint. That’s fine. That’s not a problem.

00:58:14,230	But when we get those complaints, then the board will have to look at this to see how it divides that whole landowner issue, when in fact it’s a larger water issue. We know that where everybody’s trying to do that.

00:58:31,900	But and I think a logical issue might be, is there going to be some kind of assessment district is that even reasonable? It’s a natural phenomenon. But whatever structure you set up through a joint board or whatever these joint boards are supposed to do, it’s going to hinge a little bit on those borders, you know, on Burleigh County.

00:58:50,100	So I think, I think the first thing one has to do is to define from an engineering perspective, what kind of an animal is out there. And we also have federal issues, and we have federal easements out there that really make it more difficult for our Burleigh County landowners to say, not only is this groundwater coming up on your land becoming surface water, so there’s no obstruction, but is your

00:59:09,330	easement large enough? Well, that’s federal question. That’s not a county question. It’s not a district question. So anyway, I, I’d like to be involved earlier on as, as we move forward on this to try to sort that stuff out as, as things become clearer. Yeah. That makes sense. Dave.

00:59:27,130	And I would add, Mr. Chairman, from the standpoint of the complaint form, you actually looking. at comparatives, you have a complaint form online relative to drainage issues already. So anybody can go in there and grab that complaint form and file it with you.

00:59:46,100	In this particular case, it’s a unique scenario because it has to do with obstruction. It has to do with easements. And you’re going to need certain information. And no offense to Barb, Barb says, hey, I got a problem out here. Look at it.

00:59:58,170	In this particular case, you’re going to need a little bit more detailed information on what’s going on. So I will develop the form. I’ll route it by Dave to make sure that, you know, it’s consistent with the form that the board should be seeing and information before it actually gets to the landowners for, for them to complete. So okay, okay. Do we anticipate a complaint form or complaint forms.

01:00:21,070	From forms. There’ll be multiple. And this was one. Many approximately. Um, I’m going to go back and do a landowner, but I’m thinking there’s probably in the neighborhood of 50 landowners involved. Um. And the scenario, this is why we kind of want to do the process.

01:00:38,500	Each landowner is going to have their own background information. Here’s my property, here’s my quarter. Um, and here’s how much land is actually impacted. Uh, so it’s got to be coordinated. It can’t be one complaint.

01:00:57,000	Uh, the Kidder County Commission said, well, how many landowners it’s going to take to actually act on the complaint? And it’s kind of no different than a petition process. If you only get three, if you can kind of look at it and say, well, wait a minute, that, you know, what does that mean? If there’s 50% of them, then you’ve got more leverage, if you will, with the Fish and Wildlife Service to for them to take action on it.

01:01:11,900	Yeah. So it’s going to be a little bit of an evolving process. And, um, firmly understand where you’re at. Dennis, I think what we’re going to want to do initially is to create we’ve got a GIS map of their current easements already that they’ve provided, uh, or they’re, they’ve got a multitude, obviously, they’ve got ownership.

01:01:33,400	They have easements, and they’ve got several different types of easements, whether it’s a waterfowl production area or whether it’s an actual easement for the structure. So some of that stuff is going to have to be feathered out.

01:01:51,500	I’m hoping that we could get the feds to actually do that for themselves, but I’m not exactly sure where that’s going to evolve to. So are they going to point to a particular obstruction? I maybe you said this already. Sorry if I missed it, but what is the obstruction? Okay. Two aspects. Number one, they do not have the easements as we see it. You know, maybe they can prove otherwise.

01:02:08,130	But I do not believe so because they actually provide us copies of their easements. They do not have the easements to allow them to store the water above the height of their structure. So they’ve raised their structure from 20 or 17, 13 to 1716. So the structure is the actual obstruction because it doesn’t have the proper easements.

01:02:30,400	Because the easements go to 1716. Easements go to 1716. Those rise above those. Those that we’ve seen. Yeah, yeah. Go to 1716. So so three. Oh sorry. So they’ve raised the structure right. They modified a structure. Correct. And they do have a water permit to go to 1716. Do you know what year approximately the structure was raised.

01:02:52,200	Yes, it was 2002 I think was in the early 2000. They did not go around and get additional because they said the easements to 1716 will be able to build this. The 1760s, their thought process. It’s interesting because they have some and they did provide some, but they didn’t provide all.

01:03:12,800	And I don’t know that it’s in this board’s prerogative to go search the county records to find out exactly what easements they have. I think you put that back on fish and wire services. They provide them. Yeah. For every landowner. So they didn’t account for the balance as what you’re saying? Absolutely. They did.. Not necessarily.

01:03:31,170	If I may, they’ve I mean, so where does the water Board authority come into play when you’re dealing with a federal entity? Um, do we have the power? I want to I want to cut to the chase before we do a bunch of busywork.

01:03:45,770	Is there do we have the power to, um, issue a remedy to the Fish and Wildlife Service? You know, receiving the complaint from Kidder County, right? I mean, that’s one of many questions. It’s, uh, you know, the federal government, there’s the Supremacy Clause.

01:04:06,830	So, um, you know, we may or may not be able to do that, but that’s why I think we look at the extent of the authority that we do have. And then with these easements and that the whole water controversy there with regard to these easements and that flooding, can that be a water district issue, uh, simultaneously with a federal issue? It could be in these

01:04:23,500	that we end up in federal court, not that anybody suing anything, but that the federal court might be the more logical place to to resolve what is a federal issue, then? I mean, you’ve got the water in the state water, but those easements are federal.

01:04:39,700	Um, again, it kind of goes back to what these complainants are going to say, and then we can go forward to say, how broad is this? Are we looking at Kidder County and Stutsman? Are we, you know, do we need to do that or can we confine ourselves to the borders of Burleigh County Water District? I don’t think we can.

01:04:58,230	But then as we step forward in this, we want to make sure we know what what our jurisdiction is. I don’t know, I don’t have those answers at this point. To Dennis’s. Point, I was more into it. When we get those complaints. Here’s some of the background that we’ve already done.

01:05:13,170	Um, I looked at it because of the federal nexus. My first comment was to go to the water Department of Water Resources and said, okay, do they have permits for what they built? Because they actually said in their response to us, and it wasn’t a Freedom of Information Act, but they did give us the

01:05:29,430	information we asked for, uh, freely of their choice. And they said that, hey, we’re the federal government. We don’t need permits from anybody to build whatever we want on federal property.

01:05:45,930	Now, that being said, I talked to Karen Goff and Karen Goff says, well, they may think so, but we still require them to file permits, and they have permits and construction documents for all of what, at least in her context, all of what has been done on the refuge. So even though they weren’t required, they submitted as a courtesy. The information is there.

01:06:03,370	The other aspect of that is is okay from a construction permit standpoint, but now from a water permit standpoint is another context. And it didn’t really get a clear answer from the DWR on this one. Uh, from does the state have any supremacy over the federal government using water, that state water? From a water permit perspective? Um.

01:06:23,070	Their comment was, well, let’s let’s see where this goes first. As far as the complaints and easements before they, they step into that. Um, so I’ve been trying to work. I was hopefully trying to get DWR to actually step in because of the obstruction, because of the permit issue.

01:06:38,630	Did they have a permit to build a structure? But apparently they do. And they did file for that permit. But the state did not require the feds to secure any easements for that project, which may be the federal nexus. And they, you know, they can still do what they want.

01:07:02,100	Does this leave it in a quagmire to the chairman’s point quagmire as to a civil issue where the landowners have the ability to file a lawsuit against the federal government for adversely impacting their property, potentially, there’s a lot of different pathways out there, and I think the only way to find these is, you know, get the first investigation and

01:07:19,300	start outlining it and then make some decisions as as you go. Forward. But I have contacted DWR, I do need to get back to them. As to the status of this, I have not recently. So um, but we’ll get the permit documentation from Karen.

01:07:39,300	I do have the water permit documentation already that was provided by the Fish and Wildlife Service. So. Okay. Okay. I’m just trying to head off us. I want to make sure if if we need to be the flag bearer or one of the flag bearers. Great. But if we don’t or shouldn’t, then I don’t want to go down a road where we just ultimately say we don’t.

01:08:01,100	We can’t help you. And in the meantime spend a lot of time and effort on it. But that’s my that’s my point. I’m trying to. Yeah. Valid point. Read the tea leaves before we get there. I agree with you. Yeah.

01:08:14,730	The complaint process that we’re going to maybe get into here in a few months could be that first step, but after that it could be a different fight altogether. Yes, necessarily. It could be. Yeah, yeah. And I mean, I mean, just personal observation is that if we can get one drainage complaint with multiple landowners versus 50. Right. Um. the same thing.

01:08:34,000	I mean, there’s certainly efficiency there from our perspective. Um, you know, they each have a unique story, I guess maybe, you know, the. Right here’s the here’s the thought process, and maybe this will help.

01:08:53,170	Dennis, I am looking to try and get the Kidder County group, whether it’s the county commissioner, water resource district, to submit the complaint with all of the documentation. And it comes from that entity. In other words, on behalf of our residents and Burley County residents, it’s a single complaint. So we’re not dealing with individual complaints. It’s a it’s a complete process. We just had we just had one in a separate county from a neighboring county commission, a drainage complaint.

01:09:11,770	Right? Just fine. It was a single complaint. Yeah, yeah. We’ll try to keep this all under one umbrella. Yes. 111 actual complaint. Each individual has got their own issues, but it should be a single complaint filing. Michael, does, uh, elevation only a little. It 1816. 17. 17. 16, 16. Uh, that actually back up into Kidder County? Yes.

01:09:39,030	Okay. Yeah. They’ve they’ve got a number of elements out there and a number of, uh, dams and dikes that are permitted independently or from the state perspective.

01:09:59,300	And what happens right now with their structure based on size, when Long Lake Creek flows through, goes over their structure, it actually flows north and back, fills all the way into Carter County. Right. And then they have a structure which this board looked at back in 2015, that they rebuilt. It’s a stop log structure where they can hold water north of one of the roadways. If in fact the water from downstream gets too low.

01:10:17,970	In other words, they can maintain a water level higher in the north part of the refuge than the south part of the refuge. If, in fact there is a drought scenario going on, uh, my concern is, and I have not looked at this in detail, is that technically they could buy that structure, hold water to

01:10:33,500	17, 17 or 1718 north of that area, which is in complete violation of their water permit, as well as, um, their other permit. Again, there there’s some things here to. Um. Fetter through and sift out.

01:10:59,170	I do remember when they when they did that, I, uh, was involved with some, uh, a long lake projects when I was working. Uh, and their main issue was botulism. And so that’s why they want to be able to back that up. And float over there. They can lose, uh, I. don’t know what kind of numbers a lot of birds in any given year would be botulism. And it’s always way back there in the back whenever they get it.

01:11:19,570	The stagnant water. Yeah, yeah. And so they need to, uh, uh, if there’s inflows, they need to be able to bump that up. And that helps alleviate or shorten that, that botulism time period. So that’s that’s what they’re doing. Yeah.

01:11:41,500	And we we can see from what they have facility wise we don’t know exactly what they’re doing or how they’re managing their system. But being the engineer that hey, what are you doing with your bounce? What are you doing with all the other stuff? Um, they do not have a formal management plan or document.

01:11:58,970	They just kind of do what they think is right, which, you know, if if I were operating the system, I would not do it that way. But and but again, this is not the district’s issue. It’s their issue. So I think that’s where they’re looking for assistance is what can we do to manage our system better.

01:12:16,700	And the thing is, um, the uppers HQ, if you will, from their perspective, needs to advise them or give them dollars to actually do that. And I think this process may spur that, um, again, one can say, in a perfect world, a complaint comes out and all of a sudden they realize they have an issue. And then we sit back and watch them fix it.

01:12:34,300	Uh, no different than the, um, hawk tree scenario, you know, we know it’s there. We’ve identified it. But now the entities that are involved in it, you know, look at it and say, hey, let’s let’s figure out how we can solve this on our own. The federal nexus makes it complicated. Okay, good. Robust discussion this morning.

01:12:58,700	Complicated topic for sure. Any other thoughts or questions? I was just curious. Michael, do they they have a gauge obviously. Right. Is it is it a recording gauge. Is it something that there’s no. How are they getting these elevations. Are they. A couple things on this. They have a stage. Yeah.

01:13:17,930	Basically on the structure itself, which is where they basically watch where their water is at. Um, Josh was going to check with them and see whether they got recording as to whether they recorded it here. Historically, we have already talked to, um, as part of the Crystal Springs effort. We’ve already talked to DWR about present stations.

01:13:36,630	Yeah, to have recording stations. Uh, I think what would be nice at that, uh, outlet structure is for them to get a cooperative agreement with the USGS and actually put in a recording station. There was one there during like 2011, but it was temporary. Uh, but we do have. Um.

01:13:55,270	In talking to DWR, they’re looking at several locations to put in a present station to monitor water levels on a regular basis. And of course, that’s all DWR. Um, that’ll come in the online. You can just go in and read it. So but they’ve agreed to install those. Okay.

01:14:12,870	So the state has uh, yeah. It’s just access, right? Yeah. They’re okay with the access point. Most of the access points we’re looking at are on private property. Okay. So we’re okay. They’re the only one that we don’t have that you know, to pursue is the one at the structure itself.

01:14:30,570	But there’s a there’s a stage grant. I mean, all you can do is go read is 17. And that is actually right at, uh, that one’s based on the overflow elevation. So 16 is 16, then it’s 17.

01:14:45,130	So if it’s a foot of water flowing over, you read 17. It’s just a matter of you know, who is reading it, are they recording it? And that we don’t know that yet. We’d like to set up a camera, but cameras on federal property might raise a question or two. So. Okay. Okay. Very good. In thoughts or questions, board. Okay.

01:15:08,700	We’ll see what shakes out next month okay Michael thank you everybody. Yeah. Okay. Uh, nothing on as far as closing of any drainage permits and complaints. We can move on to projects this morning. First up, a whole island. Uh, I think moving on to the second item there, the charter property.

01:15:29,830	Uh, that sort of update this morning on the Travis or Michael? Yeah. On that. I’ll just kind of go through it. And Travis, if I miss anything, let me know. Um, Brian in her tech has gone out and done their analysis, but they wanted the river bathymetry in order to do their stability analysis.

01:15:46,900	Now that the water is off, um, we’ll probably go out and get that river bathymetry to actually start monitoring some of that stuff. Um, the web grants application was actually submitted to DWR, and I believe you have in your packet the agreement, um, cost share agreement for that $38,000

01:16:05,070	budget. Uh, to do that at a 5050 cost share, uh, which is per year agreement with, uh, the State Water Commission way back when. Uh, so with that, I don’t know that there’s been any dramatic changes out there. Travis. It is what it is. Maybe you want to update as to what’s out there.

01:16:25,270	I assume the ice is completely out now. Uh, okay. Yeah, the ice is. Uh, is completely gone there. Uh, we’ve I’ve been kind of keeping. An eye on. The ice conditions on the river.

01:16:39,530	And I also actually did make a trip out there last week to take a look at the site and take some pictures of it. I didn’t get those. My apologies. I didn’t get anything submitted in or any discussion on. There hasn’t been any dramatic changes, but, uh, I compared it with photos that I took last fall. Uh, specifically, I think ones that I took in October.

01:16:52,570	And it does appear that it it’s hard to judge because of the, the grass growth. And so like I said, nothing dramatic, but it looks like it might have settled just a little bit more.

01:17:08,030	And so I’m kind of monitoring that and trying to take pictures from the same vantage points just to compare and do side by side comparisons on those. But right now we are working to get the surveyors out there to do the, the bathymetry and the water.

01:17:23,270	Uh, they’re not going to be able to get to it this week just due to staffing issues and also the weather conditions haven’t been the greatest because, uh, the windy conditions and waves and stuff out there and currents and such, it’s it’s a little bit difficult to conditions for the drone to, to do the measurements. So, uh, I talked to Todd and they’re looking at trying to get that on the schedule for next week to get that done.

01:17:38,230	And then once we get that surface on the bottom of the river, we can stitch that to the topo that we have on the ground and try to make one continuous surface so we can kind of see what that looks like. And then once we have that, uh, we’ll have. Um.

01:17:52,330	Uh, Wes with Braun and take a look at that and see if there’s anything that stands out to him. If there’s some kind of a, a lobe or a movement on there. But, uh, right now, uh, for my observations, the current is ripping past their pretty, pretty aggressively.

01:18:07,000	So I’ve got even took a couple of videos of that as well. And, uh, Michael, now that you’re back, I’ll probably sit down and go through that with you. You can take a look at it and see what you see. But, um, uh, we’re just, again, still monitoring it.

01:18:20,830	And, uh, trying to still collect some data. Now that the ice is off, we can pursue that survey. And then once we have that, then we’ll have a little bit more of a picture to see if we notice anything, you know, unusual happening under the water as well.

01:18:36,270	Uh, if there’s, you know, any kind of, uh, anomalies with the channel there, but the channel is definitely right in front of this site. And so, um, I think that I would think that anything that does push out there is immediately going to get scoured away. Um, the rocks is still there. All the rocks are in place.

01:18:51,500	There’s no major failures going into the water, but there’s definitely something happening below ground. And we do have the soil borings from Braun as well. And, uh, we can try to combine that with the surface and, and see if we get a bigger picture of what’s happening on that site. So we’re still in the data collection stage at this point.

01:19:07,770	Any questions for Travis? Thanks, Travis. Good update. Travis. Many of us want to stay. If we don’t know if you’re also going to be providing any updates on the other two locations in the state. Water plan submittal, but we had the Roger Conor’s Park. Yeah, the the Roger Jonas site.

01:19:24,100	Uh, I just received a call here a couple of days ago from Clay at the DWR. They’re looking at trying to go back out there and collect a little bit more aerial imagery of the site, especially also the adjoining properties to the north and the south there they’re watching that area and that little reach

01:19:40,200	of the river there, because they’re seeing some additional potential issues that they want to monitor and, and keep an eye on. And so they were seeking permissions to access those adjacent properties. And I didn’t have any information from those landowners to to be able to give them.

01:19:54,570	But I suggested that they contact Roger himself and see if he happens to have phone numbers for his neighbors, and, and we’ll be able to contact them and start the discussion of being able to access those properties, try to monitor those as well, because there’s a a windrow revetment just to

01:20:09,270	the south of the Jonas property that, uh, there’s a little bit there might be something happening there, just kind of on the upstream end of that right before it starts.

01:20:24,970	And we don’t want to see any scour get around and behind that and then start compromising the integrity of that, uh, armoring as well. And so the state is, is trying to keep an eye on that and do some active monitoring on there and also coordinate with their surveyors and, and their drone technicians to do periodic, uh, imagery of that area to, to monitor for any changes or, or any potential activity on that,

01:20:43,330	that they would need to act on and try to reinforce any areas that might be failing. So the state is really monitoring, looking at that reach as well. As any. Questions. On that.

01:21:06,070	And is there a grant submittal for that one that we’re looking into? If there is potentially a product on the road? Um, a couple of things. I think Travis submitted on the on the planning form, not not the actual DWR. Um, because we don’t know what the for that. So yeah, it just. When we get there. Yeah.

01:21:27,030	Until there’s an actual project in mind and something that we have a budget for, there’s not really anything to submit until you know what you’re submitting. Because I’ve talked to the state about the, you know, trying to get something in place so that we have funds available to be able to react to an issue.

01:21:40,530	And they say they can’t really approve anything until they have a budget with a description and a scope and an estimated cost in hand to to review. We can’t just kind of have it as a placeholder. So. Okay, sounds good. Any other questions? Okay. Let’s circle back up to the agreement then with DWR. So that’s in your packet.

01:22:04,130	Um, I think I just like a, like a motion to kind of move forward with the signing of this agreement. Um, we did have Dave review the agreement. Dave had some standard comments we think we’ve had in the past. Dave, regarding DWR agreements, correct? Yes. Mr. Chairman, I the conclusion first, I would advise the board may want to want to sign it. It’s $8,850. You can’t litigate it for that.

01:22:27,230	Right. Um, my little sermon, though is the same as it was before. What the what the state is doing here is acting as an insurance company would. And they’re in my view, they’re leaving the subcontractors out to dry.

01:22:44,900	The subcontractors are citizens to, um, the access to the courts is federally guaranteed. 14th amendment, First amendment. You get access to the court. What happens is when you when you do this idea of saying, well, you’re going to have to pay my attorney’s fees. If you lose, that has a chilling effect on people saying, well, I’m not going to go to court.

01:23:00,900	I got a good case, but I’m not going to do it. Well, here we have the state of North Dakota acting as an insurance company rather than representing all the, uh, our citizens. Not that I have an opinion, but I think it’s really important that everybody be represented and everybody have access to the court.

01:23:20,770	The board here is is acting as an inner mediator. They are the sponsor of getting this money. So they’re the kind of complicit in this whole idea of, of and the people who take it in the courts would be a subcontractor if they sue and lose, if they sue, and when they win, there’s nothing here that says the subcontractor

01:23:40,430	wins. Uh, you know, and gets his attorney’s fees. If I were the subcontractor, I’d ask for that. This whole idea. And forgive me, little sermon, no collection plate. But we operate under the American rule in North Dakota. The European rule says if you lose, you pay the other guys attorney’s fees.

01:23:58,500	The American rule says everybody gets to go to court. The attorney’s fees. Unless you specifically agree. And writing, um, you don’t get the other guy’s attorney’s fees. That gets everybody an equal chance here. We don’t have that. But for this amount of money, you can litigate it. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Dave. Yep.

01:24:20,400	So yeah, hearing that, I think, uh, we’ll need a motion. Dennis. Yeah. No problem signing up, Mr. Chairman. Board. Dave. There’s there has been a change in legal counsel, probably since this was discussed over at the state. Um. Really? Is Matt no longer there. Or the previous one? Yeah, Matt it is.

01:24:43,800	I think they got on staff, legal counsel. On House counsel now. Well, let me let me check with them. I’ll I know that the board would want to do that right away. I don’t want to hold up signing of this if it’s if it’s. Tiny wouldn’t hurt me. Maybe it wouldn’t hurt. And I can notify the board after my conversation.

01:25:01,000	It’s, uh, Jen Berlinger, you know. Jen. Okay. Yeah. Good. Let me contact him right away. Thank you. Jen. Jennifer. Jennifer Berlinger, we can send you the contact info. Yep. Okay. All right. I will entertain a motion to sign the agreement and move forward with the cost share reimbursement. So moved. Okay.

01:25:23,930	Second, got a motion by Manager Smith and the second by Manager Mayer to approve the agreement and have it signed and then submit for reimbursement. When do you take roll call? Vote, please. Manager maker. Yes. Manager. Mitchell. Yes. Manager. Reid. Yes. Andrew Smith. Yes. Chairman. Member. Yes. Motion passes. Okay. That will be signed. And submitted.

01:25:49,130	All right. Uh, we can move on if there’s anything else on hold Island, we can move on to the Apple Creek slide this morning. I know Manager Smith or Michael. Yeah. Just kind of give you some background. Um, obviously, I’ve been out for a while, so we have before you this morning.

01:26:07,900	Uh, specific authorization 30, amendment number one. Um, we’ve had a lot of discussions relative to the University of Mary stopping there. Um, evaluation and monitoring of the process because they feel that their while their grant process is done, they no longer have any funds to pursue that.

01:26:27,430	Uh, we’ve had very good cooperative efforts with, uh, bar to move forward. And we’ve gotten, um, in essence, brought into tech has taken over the monitoring wells. The, uh, the data has been consistent across the board relative to how to go in.

01:26:49,430	And they use a very similar equipment as far as their wires and stuff. So, uh, we were able to go in and set a baseline for our monitoring through Braun and BGC versus what bar had. Uh, we’re still noticing the similar movements that have been talked about before.

01:27:11,300	But in that process, um, obviously there’s an additional cost for, uh, Braun and BGC to, uh, complete that monitoring from now until August, which will be the endpoint of the Water Resource District’s grant with des.

01:27:31,930	Um, we have some additional costs on our side from Houston Engineering, where we will be going out, um, a little bit on the on the overall management side, you’ll see that in the documentation that I emailed, uh, a little bit more from the standpoint is that we want to do one light our collect. Um, as far as the transfer, be lidar collect this spring to document what the conditions are of the spring. And then one more this fall.

01:27:47,670	Um, I would like in the fall, one to be, uh, it’s necessary to see if there’s movement in the system between those two dates. Uh, if I would question the need for the second one only on the aspect of if everything seems to be stable and there’s no additional movements out there, uh, you

01:28:06,970	know, is it necessary? So we may may make that decision later on in the fall. But before you is the change order and the additional cost. Uh, des has informed us that they do not have any more money available to cost share.

01:28:26,730	Uh, if, in fact, it were available to cost share, it would be available to you. So somebody doesn’t spend all their money. Uh, there may be some more monies available. Um, the process that I have, uh, going forward, the quarterly report is due before the, I think, April 15th, which means I’ll probably finish that up today.

01:28:49,100	Uh, they also will be looking for a, uh, request for reimbursement. We’ve done one already on the project. We would do a second one now. Uh, we would not be at this point, based on the analysis requesting all of the funds that have been allocated from the Des at this point.

01:29:03,900	So, in other words, even though with the increase in cost, those increasing costs are actually occurring after this point going forward, mostly. Uh, so, uh, we have the increased costs in the two items. Uh, and uh, chairman pointed out and I did look, I do not have a breakdown of those costs in the email. So the BGC.

01:29:25,770	For the BGC, but I have asked for them from, uh, from Kaitlin. So I’ll get those and, and we’ll put those in the record. Uh, des is going to want to see them if in fact, they authorize any additional funds. So we need that for not only for the board but for DDS.

01:29:42,100	Uh, we will be submitting in the quarterly report or kind of outside the quarterly report form. The quarterly report is basically a FEMA documentation. But Des Lakes information in the background will be submitting this to them so they know exactly the extent of the work, the extent of the additional work that’s going to be accomplished. Um. From that, the total contract costs.

01:30:02,900	And I just did a quick balance here. I didn’t get everything on my spreadsheet. Uh, the original contract amount was 310,386. The eligible amount was 302, uh, or about 302,000. Uh, the eligible or the non eligible portion was the Emergency action plan that came out of there.

01:30:27,230	Um, I have been working with, uh, Mary Sanger on that. I had a conversation with her the other day on, on how we might be able to finish that up and make that available. Uh, the new cost of the total is 355,005.95, but that increases the water resource district’s share, obviously, because there’s not a cost share for the for the remaining amount. Right. So, um.

01:30:52,230	This is for the total for say, number 30. Right. Okay. Which includes Braun. Braun, BDC, Andy and AGI. It includes Houston as well. But I will get those breakdowns to put those in the contract amount.

01:31:13,730	And if you look it’s it’s about 365 with the um with all the phases involved. So.. I had to qualify some of those numbers. So but from that standpoint, uh, we continue to monitor there is a little bit of additional movement that continues to occur. Uh, the extent of that in the, um, the meaning, if you will, uh, remains to be determined.

01:31:35,730	Uh, we had a little bit of movement this spring. Obviously, the water came out of the ground. The movement across and everything else. Yeah. I was kind of wondering what this is.

01:31:50,630	You know, the recent snow pack two and just, you know, some of that melting going on, just the timing, because the, the ground had kind of thawed out a little bit and opened up. And then we got the snow. And so it was more water working its way down into that. One of the ones we’ve talked about there is out there, uh, they do have a drainage collection system. There is erosion on the surface, um, that’s occurring out there.

01:32:06,100	That should be maintained. Uh, the maintenance of that is the university’s responsibility. So at some point in time, as we go forward, we’ll have to have additional conversations with them relative to what they’re doing in the site.

01:32:26,770	Uh, I did notice one area this winter that had a, uh, significant ice damming effect, if you will. In other words, I think the, uh, removal system froze. Water came up out of the ground and started running down the hill again. Uh, but I have not been out there to to validate that claim.

01:32:43,270	And I’ll visit with Caitlin and Wes on on what, what that might be and what that might mean long term. I assume. Casey, your group has done some some recent drone. Yeah. They continue to do the drone flights. It’d be good to maybe if he gets some of those to send those. So we could maybe pass them along to the board to get some updated photos.

01:32:59,330	Typically when I get those, I do forward, but I’ve been out for a while, so I might have missed one in between here. So I will get that. Get those to you. Okay. All right. So in front of the board today would be this approval review and approval of this essay. Number 30 increase.

01:33:16,470	Um, with the additional um I don’t know. We’re calling it Michael, but you know, the additional. Basically it’s expanded services to continue the site monitoring. It’s not being done by the by university, Mary. And at this point, Barr has provided all the the information necessary. Yes. Barr’s completed their report.

01:33:38,000	We’ve got a copy of their report. We’ve read through it. Um, there’s some discussions about the content and, you know, uh, we’re looking at the additional data and does it change what they’ve done? But they’ve been very cooperative in providing all of the data and the equipment and stuff to, uh, to switch over the monitoring.

01:33:57,030	So we’ve established baselines for everything that they’ve done, and we’re comfortable with what, uh, what we’re finding. Okay. All right. And your questions on this.

01:34:20,200	We do have a lot of options, right? Well, I mean, yeah, I think at this point we want to get it to the finish point, which is what this is what this change order would do that would hopefully get us to this summer and get some additional monitoring and get this thing to we can put a little bit of a bow on it, right? Yeah. So I move, we cover the additional cost, the. Approval of the change order for SR. 30, change order. Okay. Second.

01:34:38,130	Okay. You got a motion by Manager Smith and the second by Manager Mitchell to approve the change order to say number 30 with Houston, which includes increased costs for Braun and BGC. When do you take any questions on that. Mr. Chairman? And AG right. Yep.

01:34:57,900	And so just to just to clarify the total amendment amount, I was just trying to figure that out is about 58,000. Is that right? That’s okay. And then I would just maybe ask the complete amount wasn’t in our packet. We received a separate email I. Think from. So just want to maybe I don’t know Wendy if you can put it in the packet after retroactively.

01:35:18,700	So we it’s in the record so it’s easier to track in the future. But um that’s my only question. So thanks. With that, Wendy, if you’ll wait until we get the distribution of the breakdown, the cost, which I should have shortly, I’ll get that to. Put all that in the.

01:35:31,970	Packet along with the, um, invoice that was passed out today. And that can all be placed in the record pertaining. Thanks again. Okay. We’ll let Wendy catch up on that. Any other questions on this? Your thoughts? Okay. When do you take roll call. Vote please. Manager Gregor. Yes. Manager. Mitchell. Yes. Manager. Reid. Yes. Manager. Smith. Yes. Chairman.

01:36:03,030	Lindberg. Yes. Motion passes. That all pretty clear, Wendy. Next steps. Okay, okay. Mr. chairman. One. Yep. No. What I want to put out here. Um. Part of. The reason I called the the emergency manager on the emergency action. Plan, um, Mary Sanger is obviously taking the county administrator position. She’ll be starting April 12th, so.

01:36:24,900	But from that, she’s going to continue to to duties relative to the, uh, the emergency management, um, scenario and including this emergency action plan until such time as they hire somebody to. Replace her position. To update, you know, congratulations on that move.

01:36:45,700	But again, we’ve not lost the context or continuity of what’s going on relative to this with her transition. Okay, okay. It’s Michael. Okay. Uh, a couple of those items. On the action plan okay. Anything else on Apple Creek Slide? Nope. Okay. We can move on to other old business this morning. Uh, regarding the Burley County Cres.

01:37:13,470	I don’t know, Mitch. I see you’re here this morning. I don’t know if you’ve got an update for us, but. I think we received a non-compliance listing. Uh. Good morning. Members of the board, Mr. Chair. Uh, yeah. This is it’s been, uh, sporadic communication with FEMA.

01:37:38,630	They’ve been out of office, and kind of radio silence with them. I did get a letter, uh, basically a spreadsheet of compliance information. Um, of all the projects that I gave them, that has been through Burley County. And basically it’s a it’s an RFI. They’re asking for more information.

01:38:02,570	And if you send the problem is if you send in a FEMA, the wrong information, it’s automatically a violation. So it’s, um, would like some help if we if I can if I can ask this board for with Houston, um, to go over these documents and make sure that they’re correct before we send them to FEMA. The last time I talked to Matt Lafferty was in February.

01:38:24,570	I haven’t heard back from them. So okay. But I do want to I do want to respond. I don’t know if they’re even at work or, you know, if they’re even receiving emails, but, um, you know, I would like to get this off the table.

01:38:41,370	How much effort is there, do you think, Mitch? I mean, how many documents are we have you seen it? Like, with all the. Yeah, I haven’t I haven’t seen the actual documents. But I did visit with Mitch this morning and I’ll just pull a number. See you at on or documents a lot of them Mitch can handle in because it’s just information that needs to be transmitted.

01:38:57,600	That wasn’t submitted the first time around, if I’m correct. Yeah. I’m guessing I don’t know why they’re asking for it, because half of them that they’re at, well, they’re asking for a lot of the Dot projects. And I know we have the information for them because it’s dealing with the DWR and all that information.

01:39:15,130	And, uh, so it’s it’s kind of like I, I want to be careful what I send them to make sure that this is not going to come back as violations and more documents and back and forth.

01:39:32,770	And so, um, I can gather the information, but I if I could have somebody collaborate with that and make sure that they’re correct. And then there probably are a few in there that would require technical assistance and a little bit of additional review, not necessarily on the ground, but potentially, um, to step through those processes.

01:39:50,270	And I guess the scenario I mentioned, I talked about if the board would, you know, is okay with us being available to assist in that process. We would do that as needed. Not necessarily, you know, come up and do something that they can do, but just, uh, provide that additional assistance. Thank you.

01:40:07,500	Thoughts or questions or concerns or consensus. There. Hab-michael assist or Houston assistant Mitch on this process. I mean, hopefully getting us to the end goal of getting this approved. You know, getting the CRS in place or. Yeah, yeah. There, um, there are violations or in, uh, back in 2019 and 2020 when I first started.

01:40:29,670	So those are going to have to be addressed. Uh, it takes a long time. We’ve worked three years on the one violation in Apple Creek, and that hopefully is coming towards the correction by the end of this year. Okay. Uh, but the violations keep coming. I have one up on Hog Island. We built the building without a permit.

01:40:53,570	No, we see nothing. And, um, they should have stopped work order. He came and got a permit. I told him what we needed, and I said they needed EC, and he said, I’m not going to pay $2,500 for an EC for a 5000 for or $5,000 building or whatever he was

01:41:12,370	saying. So I actually went out and found him a surveyor for a five day charge. Only $500 for this EC, and he still hasn’t replied. It’s hard to describe some of these situations, but they just come up right out of nowhere and yeah, it’s just part of this job. Yep. And this application.

01:41:37,200	Right. So okay, consensus board okay. All right. How about it. Again I would like to bring up one other thing, Mr. Chair. The uh, currently we’re going over our ordinances, um, in Raleigh County, uh, because of the transfer area of the ETA, um, one of the big differences that we have is in the floodplain

01:42:03,030	administration in that area. They, um, they did not regulate the 500 year or the zone, the shaded zones. But we do. And there’s consideration of, uh, either adopting the 500 year for this area or not.

01:42:27,700	And so I would like to bring this to the board and make some presentations for this before I take it to the Planning Commission, because it’s this is a very highly technical question. Uh, it’s going to affect a lot of property owners. Not a lot, but quite a few. Um, and, you know, we’ve been regulating the 500 year in, uh, Verde County for years.

01:42:50,370	And so now that we’ve inherited this ETA area, um, what should we do here? Right. Uh, we administer that. I mean, the easy, easy way to figure that, to consider this is to say everything prior to 2026 is non-conforming. It’s it’s fine.

01:43:10,230	But anything going forward will be regulated to 500 year, which if you have a building that was not elevated in the 500 year and now you’re looking at these elevation requirements in 2026, these buildings are non-compliant. They want to do any work. They want to do any additions. They want to do all it’s all substantial improvements, substantial damage type situations.

01:43:36,830	So it is a big consideration for their houses, even if they build a single family home in the 500 year, there’s nothing required. Yeah, and here we come. Where all you be if you’re two feet below the BFE on this brand new house.

01:43:55,500	Yeah, I’m not sure what our jurisdiction would be for this board, but we could certainly kind of listen to your presentation and see if we can offer any. Yeah, okay. I just I’m. Guidance. I think the technical side of this needs to be considered more than what the Planning Commission can provide. Not any reflection on the planning commissioners. It’s, uh, they’re not familiar with what we’re talking about.

01:44:17,330	Sure. And I think, Mr. Chairman, I, I was involved in that process and the county commission through Chairman Bitner at the time specifically looked at regulating the development in the 500 years, because we’ve got a lot of areas where it’s a very small difference between the hundred year, the 500 year, and you

01:44:36,770	remember, Burleigh County does not allow basements below the BFE. The city of Bismarck does. So that’s going to be a change. If anybody bought a lot in one of these areas, it’s now over. They can no longer build a basement. Um, from a technical perspective, that’s prudent.

01:44:54,270	They’re not going to like it. I get that, uh, the other aspect of it is the regulatory issue, and the 500 year is tied back to the 100 year BFE. So all it is, is if you’re 500, you’re in, you’re really close. You’re still regulated.

01:45:08,330	You need to be two feet above the BFE. The regular 100 year BFE. So the base flood elevation. So I think there’s a context of, you know, you’re right, Mitch, and how do you present this to the Planning Commission so that the context can be understood and the purpose behind it? I think what the county did at the

01:45:24,630	time, working with the county commission at that time, and the planning commission that was prudent for um, regulating in the floodway or the floodplain, I should say, um, I think it’s beneficial in the CRS side of the equation. But the city of Bismarck did not adopt it.

01:45:41,230	So now you’ve got this difference between these new city areas that are, shall I say, city jurisdiction extraterritorial, that are now in the county. And those landowners need to, you know, they’re either going to have to comply with it or as Mitch said, do you grandfather, everything prior to this date? But anything beyond that, you have to do that.

01:46:02,170	So there’s some decisions to be made. And, um, I think it’s a prudent technical discussion to protect those residents. I’ll tell you where the county perspective was visiting with, uh, the commissioners back when in the emergency manager, we had 400 plus, and I used that number loosely because I don’t have the exact number, um, structures during 2011 that

01:46:24,000	were impacted. And a lot of them were, uh, basically their crawl spaces were full of water. They couldn’t get to their house. But not only did the crawl space is filled with water, they got moldy and everything else and all that can be avoided with new construction.

01:46:41,730	Following this rule. So, you know, when people are developing in the floodplain, the conversation was that time, okay, we had 400. Do we wait for the event to again? And then now we have 800 because we didn’t change the the ordinance. And I’m again, I’m just pulling numbers out of the sky for numbers.

01:46:58,630	But the context is there. So that was the purpose for the change. And it’s a prudent change. But how do you explain that to the the new residents that are now going to have to. administer it, administered to that? So a good example is up on Hogan Island.

01:47:15,700	That was all in in the 2014 maps. That was all 500 year. Now it’s all 100 years. But we elevated them. And so they’re very close to the current BFD. They’re a little hot, they’re a little low.

01:47:34,370	Because the BFE was raised up there, but imagine if we didn’t, they’d be 2 or 3ft below. Right? And so it’s, uh, I think that the consideration of these technical, um, responsibilities should be weighed out before we go to the Planning Commission, if we if we if I could bring it to the sport, consider. Yeah, yeah, bring it to us and we can discuss. Okay. Yeah.

01:47:54,730	And I think there’s opportunity to excuse me. I’m getting a cold. Um, there’s opportunity to create some, uh, graphic exhibits which should show that. Right? Because this is one of those. You almost need to see it to understand it.

01:48:12,830	I mean, I can explain it from a technical perspective, but the the layperson is going to say, well, what does that really mean to me? And I think we can we can assist you with that, Mitch, and put some of those drawings together. So or illustrations I should say. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Thanks, Mitch. Okay. Moving on to item B there.

01:48:34,700	Um, of course, the we had the notice of a hearing there in March with Garrison Conservancy District. Michael, you were there? Yes. Hearing if he updates her. Um, uh, interesting conversation between the various parties. I was there on my own recognizance.

01:48:55,670	I presented some background information where the Burley County Commission water resource district at the time, and myself with, uh, American Engineering was looking at providing the opportunity for water supply for irrigation. Um, the landowner residents at that point in time basically declined. So that’s bottom line information about what I presented. But the county presented its position. Um, the board listened to that position.

01:49:16,000	There were several others, um, that were in opposition and several others that were, um, in favor of keeping status quo, if you will. Um, my understanding, talking to the Conservancy district is, again, on my own recognizance, not representing the board in this case that, uh, they are tabulating the information and they have not put it on the C district agenda

01:49:36,200	for a decision yet. Okay, but it may be at their next one and maybe at the following one. But the the information from the county was presented. I think there was some discussion at the county commission meeting last night. I didn’t watch, but, uh, yeah. And it was one of those.

01:49:53,500	There were some technical audio issues which were kind of disappointing, but they happened. Um, but the scenario was, is that the, uh, the board has the information and they will consider and make their make their decisions. Okay. Curious who else was there in opposition, I guess, besides. Um, Curtis Gent was a landowner representative.

01:50:16,300	He was one who spoke before the city or the county commission. Um, I know Curtis personally. He’s an engineer, so he’s got some background. And then there was a landowner from Stutsman County. Um, I can’t think of his name right now, but he represents Flint Township from a number of perspectives.

01:50:33,230	And he was just there. He just made an observation. But that was really everybody who was opposed. Uh, I think, uh, Mark Koski, County auditor, got up and spoke as well. Uh, in opposition, based on the dollars and the funds that are, you know, being spent. Sure.

01:50:54,600	Um, on the proponent side, to maintain status quo and main stay in the district was myself, Ken Royce, Danny Quesnel or Kissel and, Kevin Clifford from the Bismarck Parks and Rec. I think that was the, um, the extent of that. The hearing was, uh, interesting in the fact that they took it almost as a legal hearing. They didn’t ask questions back and forth.

01:51:16,970	They just said, present your testimony. And, uh, and we’ll go from there. Okay. So, uh, there wasn’t, you know, an opportunity for, uh, open dialogue. Um, Ken Royce had called me and asked if he could mention during his testimony about Berkeley County’s passing of our resolution. And I said, yeah, that’s certainly public information. Did he? I believe he did that.

01:51:36,930	Okay. Yeah, I was doing some other things when he was speaking. So. Okay. But I believe he covered that, um, he also covered a number of things that I thought were interesting for this board’s perspective is that the conservancy district. And you got to realize where Ken’s background is.

01:51:53,830	Uh, Ken was a member of this or chairman of this board for years. He also was the Garrison diversion representative for Burleigh County. He was also chairman of the uh Conservancy District.

01:52:13,570	So he pointed out that a lot of things that are out there, um, the normal constituent isn’t aware of, and if you ask them about it, they wouldn’t have a clue, because that’s not something that’s a common knowledge, if you will, but that the Conservancy district handles those on behalf of all the residents of Berkeley County and all the other, um, 28 uh member counties, uh, one that I just

01:52:30,200	passed out or I sent it in an email, uh, there’s an amendment to the Dakota Water Resources Act that is up for consideration right now that specifically lists South Central. Okay. Um, there’s a lot of people that say, well, that money is going to come to you anyway.

01:52:46,300	And the fact of it is, is the only vehicle for that money to arrive to the state and be utilized for those projects is through the conservancy district. That’s the if you want to call it the federal nexus. Is it passed through money? It is.

01:53:04,770	Um, but that’s the process to where it gets to, um, the State Water Commission and others for distribution under the MRI funds. So that particular bill, which was um, submitted by Representative Frederick, I think it was the 19th of March, uh, is an extension of the Dakota Water Resources Act, and it includes money for South Central. So, um, it’s interesting to understand the larger picture.

01:53:26,870	And to that point, uh, as Ken pointed out, the, the, the normal constituent in Burleigh County would not even know or even understand or see that level of detail. But that’s what the, uh, Conservancy District offers to the, to the county. So thank you. Good. Okay.

01:53:46,370	Any questions for Michael? Any other thoughts on that topic? Okay. Hearing none, we can move on to item C, the agenda book scanning I don’t know Wendy. Any updates? I believe she has finished scanning. I just have to put it on the website. Okay okay. Very good. Thank you.

01:54:06,200	And then I know, Brian, any updates on the aerial photos for DWR? No updates. I think this agenda item was just kind of like decision point of what we’re going to do with them once they become our possession again. Yeah. And but yeah, no updates.

01:54:24,570	So maybe Brian, I’ll toss this out there from the perspective that we gave them to them, couldn’t they decide whether they want to archive and not give them back to us so that we have to, you know, this board has to do anything. It’s no different than any other photo that they have. I think they’re saying, do you want them back? Yeah.

01:54:38,400	I would say no, let them let them keep it and archive them on their own. Keep the process simple. From this board’s perspective. I think that’ll be on the website. Right. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, they’ll be digitally backed up and then they’ll also be available for download. So we could have a copy if we wanted.

01:54:56,970	And they will aerial rectify them for local, you know, for data. And I believe they’ve now hired somebody to replace Rob Basler because Rob has taken a new position as well. Just for background. Yeah, he’s still with DWR, but he’s he’s moved okay. Yeah. All right.

01:55:16,870	Consensus to have Brian reach out and let them know that they can keep him or do whatever they want with them. As long as we get our digital. Yep. Okay. Sounds good. Okay. Thank you. Okay. That’s it for old business. We can move on to new business this morning on your packet on page 28 through 34 is, um. Well, I guess first there’s the dredging permits for Briley Park District. I don’t know, Michael Travis.

01:55:40,730	Generally speaking, the request, if you remember, was that because of Burley County or because of the Bismarck Park district no longer assisting the Burley County Park District and Burley County needed those permits, and I. I believe those dredging permits have been submitted. Now, uh, Travis can touch on that.

01:56:00,500	They’re basically maintenance permits to come up every year. So it’s just a matter of getting the paperwork through. Yes. Those are pre-construction notice for the Corps of Engineers. Those have been submitted for both the nifL and the, uh, um, yeah. The Kimball Bottoms, boat ramps. Uh, we’ve got those in. I just been in correspondence with the Corps.

01:56:19,800	They had a question on one of them. Uh, just yesterday, in fact, and, uh, responded to that. So they’re in the in the process of reviewing those permits at this point point. And then, uh, once we hear back from them or they get approved, then we could move forward with the actual dredging project. So yeah.

01:56:36,800	Yeah, that’s they’re they’re in process right now. Okay. And and from that perspective, as far as assistance go, um, we’re probably going to be involved with a contractor selection and assisting on the contracting side. It doesn’t take an awful lot of work to get the contractor out there. But we get to have some other eyes on it.

01:56:53,970	Yeah, we’ll get the I’m sure we’ll get the same contractor that has done it before. Okay. In all reality. But we’ll work with that, work with them on that. Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Now we have the public notice that’s in your packet there on page 28 for a project.

01:57:12,730	Uh, on the kind of behind the North Walmart there, there’s a development looking to get, uh, constructed. So there’s some additional work that has to be done regarding, uh, the creek that runs through that property. And so, the chorus is reaching out for comments or so.

01:57:34,170	Certainly if you have if you review that information, if you got any concerns or comments, you know, you can reach out directly to the core, uh, through those documents and. Yeah, full disclosure on that. Houston Engineering put together the information for this submittal for this permit. And it’s also tied back to, um, there are actually two parts of this.

01:57:54,230	One is the developer piece and the other is for the county roadway improvement. So but they do go together. That’s the process. So okay. I did visit with Casey a little bit before the meeting.

01:58:07,730	Just kind of regarding the kind of what type of structures they were looking to put in that in the creek, and it sounds like they’re placing it a five 48 inch culverts. Yeah, yeah. Each location. So. Okay. No other comments on that one. Um, we do have something. The city of Bismarck is changing their pointed or adding an additional point of diversion for their intake.. I just adding the quantity. I think changing the. Quantity or change the quantity.

01:58:32,200	I think if I saw that correctly okay, that would be my thought. Okay. I was thinking maybe it had an additional. Point of diversion, but. I didn’t. I didn’t check though. So I do see that it says. But yeah, then the information the packet there talks about. Oh yeah.

01:59:01,030	Because the additional diversion located at the northeast corner of section six and the original head, that section 31, and then the southeast quarter, section six, but. I’m not aware of what they’re doing, but I don’t think it really pertains to us specifically.. I’m trying to think, no, it shouldn’t be a concern for our from Burleigh, County Waterford perspective. Yeah.

01:59:24,870	Okay. Uh, in Dourif is having their annual meeting. So if there’s information in your packet here regarding that, um, certainly a we’re members of vendor. So if anybody feels the need to want to attend, you certainly can. There’s a process in there.

01:59:42,030	You can fill out the the information and send it. I don’t think we’ve ever sent anybody that I’m aware of in the past, but, um, and then there is a proxy in here. Basically, we can vote, um, if you, if you feel so inclined, uh, for their board members, there’s a couple of. So we could there’s a strong feeling to want to vote.

02:00:03,130	We certainly can. Or we don’t have to either. So. Any thoughts on that? Okay. We’ll probably just pass on that then. Okay. It is in the packet for information if you are interested in reading that and and doing more, you certainly can. Uh, I don’t know Michael or anybody that may attend the AOP, the US Army Corps.

02:00:26,270	Yeah, I attended the AOP meeting was attended by roughly 30 plus people. Um, the general discussion, some of it came down to um, lake access up on Sky Kaweah. Uh, the flows are generally going to be, um, low this summer.

02:00:50,470	Um, they just in the last couple of days, lowered the elevation of Lake Sakakawea from 34. Uh, down to like, 30. It’s like four feet lower for mid-summer high flows or midsummer elevation. So that creates a number of issues. Obviously, that will potentially reduce the discharges through Bismarck. I do not have an update on what the discharges through Bismarck will be at this point.

02:01:11,370	But like I said that that change just came within the last couple of days. Yeah, I think I saw it’s less than 20,000, right. If you’re looking at maybe 19,000, that’s just a basic condition. Right. And so. If anything gets worse now you look at the snowpack right now and it’s not there. It’s like in the 60 percentile. Yeah.

02:01:30,930	It’s it’s the. Lower. Real close follows on your at. Yeah. Which at that point at that slips into the lower basic. Then we’re looking at flows of like 17 18,000 through those. Right. Usually what you see in August and September. Right now where that influences what’s going on.

02:01:49,630	It goes back to the boat ramp and the dredging in order to have access to the river. Uh, we’re working with a number of private clients that are going to be doing some dredging to make sure that they have access based on those produce flows.

02:02:04,200	So, uh, but other than that, yeah, they’re just, uh, lower than normal. There were a lot of good questions. There were a number of new people at the AOP meeting, which is good. Um, there are, uh, I don’t know the dates, but there is one virtual AOP meeting that is going to be offered as well here. That may have already occurred, but, uh. Yeah.

02:02:23,230	Did you get that? Did you? You didn’t grab the presentation? I’m still trying to find the presentation materials. Yeah, well, and it’s interesting. I almost grabbed one and then I didn’t. And then I looked up there and they were gone because others had picked them up.

02:02:36,170	Uh, what is disappointing, and I’m going to express this to a number of different people at the corps level, is that if you go on their site to their link and it’s the 2025 presentation. So, um, I don’t know that they don’t want us to know, but they were there to tell us about it. So, yeah, I’m going to rattle.

02:02:54,770	I think her name is Colleen, the information manager, and say, hey, um, you got to make it easy for people to actually get this or to be able to touch base with it. Uh, same presenters, um, new gal from, uh, um, the National Wildlife or National Weather Service. But, you know, we don’t have any snowpack.

02:03:16,600	Right? You drive around the country, a lot of the sleeves are full, but we don’t have any snowpack. There’s from a flood situation this spring. There shouldn’t be any issues at all. There’s very little flow. Yeah. Not looking too good in the Colorado Basin either. No. Yeah.

02:03:32,670	So I just grabbed I just went on to the site there. They as of Sunday they dropped it to 14,000. Discharge from garrison. Um, that’ll go up in May of course. but yeah, I don’t know. Uh. They’re they are in their water conservation mode right now. Sakakawea is at 1827. Yeah.

02:03:53,500	I mean, there’s only 15,000 coming in to Chicago. Yeah. That’s that’s yeah, that’s going to be the thing this spring. They just won’t see the the rise of the. Yeah. Unless we get. Yeah. Unless things change. But six inches of rain. Yep. It happened in 93. It can happen again. Happened 2011. Yep yep. Okay.

02:04:14,830	Thanks, Michael. Yeah, yeah. If you do get your hands on that presentation, maybe we could. I get the packet next month. If we do get that. Okay. Okay. All right. Item G there in your packet that you’ll see that there’s a temporary water permit for knife River. Pretty standard.

02:04:29,200	Um., Mr. Chairman, if I can just make a comment on that. This involves the East branch of Apple Creek and, um, actually, my family has a part of that. They’re are approximately eight landowners who are senior appropriators to knife River. Okay. Last year was very dry.

02:04:46,400	This year looks like it’s even drier. We came down to July. I worked with Boston and DWR to to say this is getting crucial now for the senior appropriators. And I see that DWR has come up with new language, uh, in this temporary water permit. Um, there is no definition of a minimum flow in Apple Creek yet.

02:05:10,370	And Boston is talking. We’re talking about options. The best one would be to establish the stream gauge somewhere there, so that they could get that information immediately and not have people come out.

02:05:30,400	I know in the past, the senior appropriators have self-reported with gauges installed by, um, the state engineer, so we could see what the water levels were, give it to them, and then they could decide on enforcement issues. So I’d just a heads up to the board. If we’re going to be drier this year. Then last year, I, I don’t know where this is going to go. Okay.

02:05:45,330	And they are looking at a maximum withdrawal rate for this one of 2000 gallons a minute. Dave, does that. Is that a concern then. It is for us I believe. Okay. Um, and something that bears monitoring. So you as a landowners, water permit holders, do you guys submit comments then to. Yes. Engineer. Yes.

02:06:03,400	For their consideration of approving this or not? Okay. Do they have a wash plant out there I’m assuming. Is that what. I believe. So yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you Dave. Thank you. Okay. That’s it for new business. Um, you do have available to you some additional, uh, correspondence and documents regarding plats and stormwater management plans, um, available upon request that Wendy does have.

02:06:40,130	Um, I’ll just read through the ones that are in here. Uh, Meadows and preliminary plat, the Arcadia Light Estate subdivision plat. The Midwest Business Park, second edition. The subdivision and the KB subdivision. So you would like to see additional information on any of those. Certainly reach out to Wendy and she can provide those. Okay.

02:07:06,770	Other questions on that. We can move on to approval of bills this month. Manager read. Now Mr. Chairman, board members, um page 48 is a summary of the bills. Um, a couple things to note. We already talked about the the Bismarck Parks and Rec invoice. That does include the purchase of that tractor. So it’s quite large. Um.

02:07:28,570	And there’ll be that credit next. Month and then. Yeah, it’ll be you get a credit for about $2,390 in the following one. And so, um, the other thing I was going to mention, well, there’s one for me, um, which is unusual, that’s, uh, I, as my position secretary treasurer, I use office

02:07:52,170	products. And so there’s an annual fee to use those. That’s how they do that anymore. And so that’s what that reflects. They just got it. And they asked Wendy to include it on this month. And so otherwise it went through my expenses. But that’s why that’s there.

02:08:08,870	Um, and then we do have two bills that came in since the packet were prepared that I think we should consider pain. Um, one is from Houston Engineering and it’s related to the, um, Apple Creek. Um, project. And so in approving it, we can get that submitted for reimbursement from DDS is my understanding. So we don’t have the check ready for them at this point.

02:08:28,800	But, um, we’ll, we’ll get that prepared and approved here. Hopefully that’s in the amount of $4,570.50. And then Bliss Law Firm didn’t get theirs in in time to get it at the packet. I would suggest we consider approving that at this meeting. And that’s for $3,629.60.

02:08:50,030	So that would bring the total to um, 176,088, $888.63. And I would move for approval of payment of that amount. Okay. You said 176 888.63. Yep. Okay. That’s correct. Okay. Second. Got a motion by Manager Reep and a second by Manager Smith to approve this month’s bills. And the amount $176,888.

02:09:22,930	63 as the additional two bills that we talked about. Any other questions or discussion? Hearing? None. Wendy, take roll call. Vote, please. Manager major. Yes. Senator Mitchell. Yes. Manager. Reeve. Yes. Manager. Smith. Yes. Chairman. Leonard. Yes. Motion passes. Bills will be paid. Mr. chairman. Quick note, um, we did have accounting update the invoice. So there’s actually invoice rather than just the project status report.

02:09:52,300	Wendy has that for the one that was submitted for Apple Creek. So she can put that in the record. And I just received the documentation for the BJC or BGC and Braun breakdown for costs. I’ll put that whole package together and submit it to Wendy so that it’s in a complete package.

02:10:09,600	She doesn’t have to sort it or anything. So but I do have that information now, so good. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. You do have additional information in your packet there from page 49 through 111 to some additional details on the billing. Our next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 13th at 8 a.m.

02:10:31,470	in this same room. Everybody can make that meeting. Okay. Um, one thing I did want to mention the board today. I am Looking at a vacation in in August. The week we have our meeting, we could maybe talk about potentially.

02:10:45,570	We don’t have to do it today, but maybe we can move the meeting. Or I could I could call in as well. Um, just something we could think about. We don’t have to discuss today, but I think it’s kind of for like August 12th or something like that.

02:11:01,800	So, um, so anyway, like I said, maybe bring it back up next month, but just something to think about. So between now and then, so. Okay.