00:00:09,530	We’ll go ahead and call the September board meeting of the Burleigh County Water Resource District meeting to order. Wendy do you take a roll call? Please? Manager Mager. , present. Manager Mischel here. Manager Reid here. Manager Smith here. Chairman Landenberger here. We have a quorum.

00:00:28,800	We will continue with the agenda this morning to item two. Approval of last month’s meeting minutes. Any changes or. Additions. Move to approve. Second. Okay. Got a motion by Manager Smith and a second by Manager Mischel. All those in favor say aye. Aye aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Minutes are approved. Moving on to number three this morning.

00:01:00,800	Amendments and approval of the agenda. I want to add one thing. Oh, yeah? Mr. chairman, um, under item eight, I’d like to add them. I add item D, we’ll just have a brief, um, informational. Um, information, a set of information Titus gets in from Rivera Bank. Okay. We’ll add that under financial reports. Item D for that.

00:01:26,400	Anything else? Chairman, I don’t know if I have the latest copy of the minutes, but I’d like to add the grass lake. Uh, noone complaint to nine. Uh, I guess it would be nine F if it’s not there. And then, um. Well, Kent complained for nine. Okay. Yeah, we they were at it. Yep yep yep. My bad.

00:01:49,130	I know you’re good. Yep. F ING around there. Yep. Okay. All right. Thanks, Brian. Okay. Anything else? If not, we’ll entertain a motion. I’ll move to approve, as amended. Second. Move ahead. Okay. Got a motion by Manager Reep and a second by Manager Mager to amend and approve the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Aye, aye.

00:02:13,900	Opposed.. Agenda is approved. Moving on to item four. Comments. Members of the public not associated with the project, but still part of business for Burleigh County Water Resource District. Not seeing any this morning. We can move on to item five this morning. McDowell dam.

00:02:35,330	Chuck or Michael want to give an update on the supplemental water supply this morning? Okay. Thank you. Um, yeah. Currently working through the design. Travis is looking at a number of things, obviously. And if there’s details you want to know, we can have him come up and speak to it.

00:03:00,930	Um, from that perspective, I think that the, um, DWR grant submittal for pre-construction funding has been approved that’s out there. So we’re moving through that process as well. Um, the aerator proposals, I’m not going to touch on that real quick for Chuck. And Chuck and, and uh, we had a meeting with, uh, DEQ as well as North Dakota game and fish. James and Chuck were both at that meeting.

00:03:18,530	Um, we got some background information which we’ve shared with the board. I was in the process of putting together some minutes so we can have an understanding between the agencies as far as what’s going on.

00:03:35,730	Um, kind of the quick summary of it is that, uh, the aerators have their place and their value. And as we if we’re going to install them, we need to make sure that we’re monitoring certain water quality relative to the, um, um, the egg. I can’t speak it now.

00:03:57,030	The, the two zones and the hypomanic, um, turnover and stuff and making sure that they’re put in at an area that would actually, you know, prevent that and actually do the value for the algae bloom scenario. So there are some design issues that have to go in place.

00:04:15,670	One of the items, DEQ did point out that we would not need a, um, water quality permit for the pumping operations from Apple Creek because Apple Creek has better quality water than the receiving water body, which is obviously Lake.

00:04:33,430	Uh, they did have some questions about if we were going to be putting, um, water from Apple Creek into the lake and actually doing an exchange process to discharge, if you want to call it poorer quality water into, um, Apple Creek itself. And that’s not the intent that could happen depending upon the amount of water and where things were at. Uh, we talked about with game and fish relative to the, the treatment aspect, both the screening and the treatment for. Um. Smaller fish that might get through the system.

00:04:54,130	Obviously, they would go into the filter and be taken out that way. So there’s a number of things. I thought it was a really good discussion. Um, the end scenario here will be a recommendation to the board. It seems like the most prudent pathway at this point.

00:05:13,800	You have a comparison of the the costs in your, in your packet or some of the information that was sent out was that probably go with the lease to see whether or not it would actually accomplish the objective in that first, first year of the lease period. And then after that, make the decision from there going forward.

00:05:29,270	The one thing that we did not have, which I was kind of surprised it was provided in verbal, but not in their technical references. The actual capacity of the system. So how many gallons a minute that they’re turning over, etc.. So from that, I think it was a good discussion. Moves it forward.

00:05:45,930	Uh, obviously. And Chuck, you might want to add here that, you know, it’s probably another, you know, a couple of months before a formal determination comes forward as far as what direction to go.

00:06:05,130	Um, the important item, based on discussion with Game and Fish and EAC was that, uh, put it in soon enough in the spring to make sure that you’re not getting that lake turnover occurring and that you’re actually preventing that. So yeah, there was a lot of talk about, you know, breaking of the thermocline and the timing of that. And you can actually do more damage than good. That to me then. So would it prevent the spring turnover.

00:06:26,430	Yes. Yeah. We could or at least the. The discussions. Would. Be was rather interesting because I hadn’t thought about it this way. They said in that turnover period the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus get liberated from the base sediments.

00:06:48,400	And if they get liberated from the base sediments because of that turnover, because it gets warm, they do shift. So actually what you’re doing is trying to prevent that from occurring and keeping those nutrients basically in the bottom of the lake.

00:07:05,270	And by doing that, you prevent the algae bloom or the extent of the algae bloom, even though you’re giving dissolved oxygen to facilitate the growth of the algae and and prevent other items, you can prevent that liberation to occur. Um, it also goes to the standpoint of how we operate, that low level drawdown, in order to make sure that we have cleaner quality of water. Uh, they did point out and you’ll see it in the handout.

00:07:22,530	You’ve got that sulfates is kind of a restrictive item within McDowell Dam. In other words, sulfates are relatively high. Um, that probably originates from a number of things, but also could be part of the groundwater scenario and that it’s affected by groundwater.

00:07:39,600	And we do not have a lot of natural exchange because of inflows, because the size of the watershed. So, yeah, to your point. Roger that. Actually prevent that turnover from occurring is the would be the objective. Michael. Wouldn’t that Allen blanket kind of help with that too as well or minimize it in some capacity.

00:07:59,930	The alum treatment that was put in basically stripped the water column of nitrogen and phosphorus, and all that material is on the bottom of the lake. So if and that was our concern is if you have that drawdown, part of the, um, aeration system, get too close to the bottom, it could actually stir that up and liberate those materials.

00:08:15,930	So yeah, you’d want to hold those in place. It does um, hold in place what it, what it’s stripped. But obviously we’ve had a lot of inflows since that time. So there’s additional nutrients in the system that, uh, that are in there. Yeah. And I think you’re right there with the timing as well.

00:08:30,000	And the depth of the, of the intakes of those of those units is going to be crucial. I think overall. So so it’d be nice to see that summary in, in that discussion. Did they talk about other options? I mean would another alum treatment be just as appropriate. And and um, or more appropriate at this time.

00:08:47,900	We didn’t really step into the alum treatment. That’s a good question. Um, obviously it’s a it’s a it has a life or half life, if you want to call it down. Um, I think get pretty good, pretty good life out of the system already. So as we continue to discussions, we certainly put that on the table. Yeah.

00:09:07,100	When did we do that? That was. 14 for my time. Yeah, that. Was a. Long time. It was a long time. Ago. 20 years. Yeah. Dave and Dave, do you recall? No. Okay. Yeah. It could have been 15 years ago. I’m thinking it was 20, 20, two, 2005, 2006, 2006. Somewhere in that neighborhood.

00:09:32,500	Yeah. Yeah, yeah. I would add that there was a little bit of, I would say, a level of skepticism on this. And I think there was also some talk about, you know, an option being if you leased one of these for a year, or even two years, you

00:09:48,330	know, to gather some data and to figure out a testing plan of, you know, what you want to test for and when and when you want to install these and how deep you want to go.

00:10:03,300	And so I think that was kind of the the discussion that day was what’s gathered a little bit more information and continuing to kind of investigate this. And we could in the end term as well, investigate a different or an additional alum treatment as an option to see if we can, um, see what that might cost and kind of compare that to what these would cost.

00:10:19,730	But, um, but at the end of the day, I think they, they thought there’s, there’s definitely some benefit there. It’s just what are we after as a board and, you know, working with Parks and Rec, what are the what are the goals of doing, you know, this aerator.

00:10:34,730	And I think there was some additional information to that DEQ was going to get for us regarding kind of some water quality numbers and some past, you know. I actually called Brian yesterday, okay, from the deck and, and mentioned that to him and stuff.

00:10:50,330	And since we had the long holiday and or the, you know, the long weekend and everything, everybody was playing catch up and said he would mail something, email something to us, and then I’ll get it out to everybody. Unless he does email it to everybody. So, right.

00:11:05,130	One of the things I think important to understand in the discussion, they have data that they’ve gathered that obviously this hasn’t necessarily shared with the board. It’s just what they do. Game and fish is the same way. So they were going to put together the information. And Tate mentioned that he could probably actually put some graphs together that would show what they have and where things are.

00:11:22,670	And um, so again, um, from that perspective, as you pointed out, you know, if you’re putting something in, what are your goals and objectives? What are you planning to achieve? You put in the the lease system and then do you achieve that objective? Uh, from a treatment perspective, or shall we say from a sampling perspective?

00:11:37,200	And I’ve got this in my summary that I’ll share. Um, they’re talking about obviously getting the samples from Apple Creek. Uh, there are USGS water quality data, but obviously we’d probably want to supplement them with some real sampling.

00:11:55,330	Obviously, at the end of the treatment system, when that’s put in, what’s the water quality, what’s the changeover? Um, that’s actually going in the lake. And then inflows to the lake and lake system itself. It sounds like DEQ has got some information on the lake already over the years. So um, from that overall, uh, sampling program, you get a little bit of an idea where things are going to go.

00:12:12,930	Uh, Tate also mentioned the update of, uh, or possibly updating the, the TDM or MDL work that was done. Um, back in, can’t remember when that was 2016 or 18. Yeah. So, uh, but again, um, what’s your objective and where are you going? And I think we’ve got a, uh, a pathway to look into all that.

00:12:33,300	So I think, you know, continue to gather some data and information and we can provide back to the board, maybe even next month. Um, one thing, Michael we did talk about, too, was to your earlier point of understanding how much flow these things can move and at what levels, and really get

00:12:49,200	into the numbers. And maybe we could have some conversations with a couple of these area providers to see how many do we need to have that turnover. Because you were going to look at maybe the area capacity table and just try to understand what that volume really is.

00:13:03,100	And right. If we’re taking a look at the if you want to call it the, um, the layered system of the water and the, the water column, what volume of water that we need to move to actually break that chain. Right. And again, we have area capacity.

00:13:18,200	And then of course, where do you locate them. Right within within the lake system. And the one has a, you know, much larger movement capacity for water than the other. So again, it becomes a little bit of a math equation as to which one moves enough water to actually get the objective that you have. Yeah.

00:13:35,170	And we don’t fully know our objective. Right. That’s one thing that we need some help with, right? Is are we is it all about recreation, swimming or fishery or what’s the bottom. Line combination. Yeah. Yeah. So. Yeah there was some discussion obviously about the dissolved oxygen scenario.

00:13:59,870	If we have a drought scenario and really low water levels, obviously the dissolved nitrogen and the upper level gets less and we have a fisheries issue. Um, to your point, Roger. And then later on, if, you know, just putting dissolved oxygen in the system doesn’t necessarily serve circumvent the pure algae issue.

00:14:18,430	So again, it all works together. And DK and game and fish were more than willing to assist and provide their technical backgrounds to to the program. Yeah. Oh that’s good. And then there was one more thing we talked about, Michael, which I think Travis was going to probably work with Paul with Game and Fish on our o. Um, yeah.

00:14:38,170	Um, Paul Bailey noted, um, and that it’s been reported to the board before. the flash boards that are out there were put in many years ago and intended to hold an extra foot of water because of the drought scenario.

00:14:56,870	Now that you have an inflow, uh, system, are they necessary as a question? Um, the district has tried to permit those for a water permit, but, um, DWR has not been, um, necessarily very forthcoming of that because they’ve got issues with the, um, dam safety site, which we don’t believe are issues, but we’ve never proven it to them. So therefore it’s out there.

00:15:15,530	To your point, though, um, Paul Bailey was saying from a structural standpoint, what’s out there today is more of an active system rather than a passive system. And there’s a lot of good water going out with a bad water.

00:15:31,070	So there may be a way of modifying the existing system out there to make sure that we get the best result from the hypo drawdown. Yeah, I only add that because of to our earlier point. Are there things we can do to improve the quality of this lake without having to do an aerator? Because we’re doing these things? Maybe we do an alum treatment or whatever, and at the end of the day, that still accomplishes our goals.

00:15:48,670	But yeah, so I think, yeah, Travis and Paul can get together. Maybe, Chuck, you’d be a part of that process too. Absolutely. And basically that’s a minor structural solution. If you will.

00:16:05,400	Right? I don’t think it’s complicated, but it’s a matter, you know, what do you do to make it work? Um, there were discussions with the two years ago that they wanted some fresh water flow to go out with the bad water flow, so that the downstream wasn’t. Is all the. Important, if you will. But then again, you know, it’s it doesn’t necessarily serve the purpose. So that’s the that’s the background conversation that we’d be.

00:16:20,730	Having. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions. Okay. Thank you. Uh. Chuck, do you want to maybe update on the there was an inspection completed. Yep, yep. Uh, they had the federal government came in on August 21st, 26 here and did their final inspection.

00:16:45,700	Actually, this is the 50 50th year that they’ve that they’ve had the McDowell Dam and, uh, it was myself, Travis Johnson. Uh, David Robinson and David Mayor. were there and they looked everything over. Think they were there about an hour, hour and a half or so and came back and said, they will send out our the report and they will send it to David Robinson.

00:17:04,400	And as of now, I don’t think he’s received that report yet. Okay. So when he does, we’ll make that make that available for everybody. But nothing really outstanding. Okay. You know, that needs to be addressed. So everything was really good.. Good okay. Thank you. Chuck. Any questions for Chuck on that.

00:17:22,030	And I would just point out as Chuck mentioned, this is the 50th year. So this is the last year that NRC will be doing that. And I suspect that you’ll be the board will be receiving a letter from NRCS saying, we have now completed our 50th year.

00:17:38,130	We’ve now completed, pursuant to the original agreement that was signed, not unlike what happened with Burnt Creek Floodway. It’s going to be passed off to the board, and it’s all in your hands from this time going forward. Because how often does the state Department of Resources do their inspections? They’ve got a cycle. I think they have like 3 to 5 year cycles.

00:17:55,770	And yeah, depending on the hazard class is kind of sets their timeline for repeatability. So as a board we’d maybe just have to have a discussion if we think that’s adequate or. I think. So okay. I think so, yeah. Do you guys remember when they said the last inspection.

00:18:11,270	Was it three years ago that they mentioned it? Okay. For EWR. For the when the federal government inspected the last time and that’s what they said. They just kind of have to hop around and everything’s on the schedule for each each year designated lakes. Yeah I’m sure it’s a 3 or 4 year cycle.

00:18:31,500	Maybe five on on McDowell Dam for the state. So. Okay. All right. Before we go away from McDowell, anything from Parks and Rec this morning. Okay. All right. Chuck, anything else? I think that’s about it. Okay, okay. We can move on to item six this morning. The South Bismarck flood control project, a couple items there.

00:18:54,970	Um, I don’t know, Michael, if there’s any updates. Yeah, just a quick update on the flood advisory information that was sent out. Um, Nick had a conversation because Nick deals with the, uh, the FEMA side of the equation for us.

00:19:14,400	Um, there were a number of discussions with DWR as to, why the timing, why that memo came out. Now, um, part of it was just the South Bismarck flood control project. Obviously, it was an opportunity to put it together. Uh, they did question the, if you want to call it the use of the term BFD, because it’s just a change in water surface elevation.

00:19:31,400	Um, the context of using BFE in that case is that at some point in time when the river is remodeled, that will be the new BFE. So that was the intent of it. Um, after I got through their questions, they were very receptive to what was what was provided and background information. So okay, just kind of discussion on that.

00:19:48,830	So okay. Thank you. Any questions for Michael on that. If now we can move on to item B there. Senator Hoeven held a roundtable discussion here recently. And I think, Dennis, you were there. And Michael and anybody else. Chuck was there. I was there, Chuck was there too. Yep, yep. Yeah. No, it was it was good.

00:20:06,470	It was, um, the primary purpose was for theirs, um, building resilient infrastructure for communities. Brick grants that have been recently awarded. And so there was kind of a summary discussion of those local projects that have received, um, FEMA funding, either through brick or through FMA.

00:20:32,300	So Bismarck, South, um, so flood control project was kind of the main item on the agenda, but they talked about some other ones. Washburn. Didn’t you? Mary lagoon system with Lower Hart.. Lincoln. Uh, Lincoln. Was on there. It was that there? Yep, yep. And so it was all good. Um, you know, positive because it was people that had received grants.

00:20:55,600	And so it was, um, just making sure we’re getting treated fairly by FEMA. And I think we are I think FEMA was pretty well represented there. They they presented well, um, it followed a, a day of tours in the area.

00:21:20,600	So the FEMA staff, there was probably half a dozen of them, a dozen of them, uh, there, uh, toured the, the South Bismarck flood control project, uh, the Lower Hart Project and, um, Mary projects. So it was all good. Um, good. Uh, you know, our our board, I guess, didn’t necessarily get any, any face time, but it was it was good. Well attended. Well attended. Yeah.

00:21:42,030	And I believe and I believe I when I talked to or emailed Mary Singer, I asked her about that, getting a video version of it or anything too, and she sent me the link of it. So I think I was there videoing. So okay, I can send that out if anybody wants it.

00:21:59,200	The, the the news report. Yeah, yeah I did see that. It was, you know, a in a minute and a half, something like that. That’s it. Yeah. It focused on the South Bismarck project. Okay. Any questions. Okay. If not we can move on to item seven this morning. Misty Waters.

00:22:23,130	Um, we had some, uh, kind of a summary from our last meeting in your packet there on pages, uh, when I was 13 through 40. But a lot of that is repeat information that was provided in previous meeting packets. But as you can see there, there’s kind of a summary there.

00:22:37,700	I know, Mitch, is there any sort of updates this morning on that. This is the the Scott Sterling discussion from last month. And we had a pretty robust discussion with Scott here last month and, and provided kind of some feedback and happy next steps. And uh. Well, I think he’s got directions correct.

00:22:53,370	And what he needs to do with this work is going to be below the ordinary high water mark. So he’s got to have 404 permits. DWR review, uh, wetlands delineation in here, too. So there’s even talk about changing of the PUD, right? Yes. And having to maybe go back and you know, look at ordinance changes for the development.

00:23:12,770	Yeah. That would mean that all the landowners in that subdivision would have to sign off. Yeah. And that would be removing the ordinary high water mark setback completely. Or at least adjusting it. Or is he going for complete removal? There’s no build room left. If he doesn’t remove it.

00:23:29,300	Yeah, I think the whole process and I did talk to Scott briefly after the meeting. Um, they’re looking to pursue the bank stabilization of the entire area and with the other landowners, which is prudent given the standpoint that that’s really what needs to be done.

00:23:46,070	And then the question is modifying the PUD. So, you know, as mentioned, everybody talked about this last meeting. They got a lot of work to do before they really come back. Right.

00:24:03,530	Uh, I think the important part, what I did just as a documentation piece, I put together kind of a, um, an informal position statement that the, the board could consider if that comes back before you. Um, it’s not approved. It’s just documentation is a summary based on the conversation. So, um, and I think that was portrayed to them. So they’re, they’re well aware of, uh, the direction they need to take. Yep. And it’s going to take some time for them to.

00:24:20,930	Get there. Yeah I think that was mentioned a few times during the meeting last month that this is going to take some time to work through all this. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well certainly make sure things come up. Let us know. Yeah. I haven’t heard from, uh, Scott or anybody else.

00:24:33,430	Okay. Okay. Any questions for Mitch? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Nothing more on that. We can move on to item eight this morning. Financial reports, Manager Reep. Yeah. Mr. chairman, board members balance sheet is shown on pages 41 through 43 on your packet.

00:24:57,630	I’ll just summarize activity in August, we started a balance with 575,000 and checking paid bills in the amount of 126,000. Um had income in the amount of $39,250, which included, um, minor amount of real estate tax, disabled veteran credit was fairly significant.

00:25:24,270	Um state aid, homestead credit was also about, uh, just over $19,000 and then a minor amount of special assessment collections for that income total. And balance. Uh, August 31st of, uh, slightly over $488,000 in our checking, uh, the Bavaria Wealth um, fund is started with, uh, 4,038,500, had a net interest of 11,700. Uh, so far in ending balance of the Bavaria wealth count and $4,050,200. Uh, reserve fund balance remained the same. Total current assets are $5,252,000, roughly.

00:26:05,270	So, um, with that, I’d move for approval of the balance sheet as presented in your packet. Okay. Second. Got a motion by Manager Reep and a second by Manager Smith to approve the balance sheet for this month. Any discussion or questions? If not, when do you take roll call? Vote please. Manager Mager. Yes. Manager Mischel. Yes. Manager Reep.

00:26:29,430	Yes. Manager Smith. Yes. Chairman Landenberger. Yes. Motion passes. And in. Uh. Chairman Board members, the profit and loss statements, page 44 and 45 of your packet. Uh, everything looks okay. I would move for approval as presented. I’ll second. Okay.

00:26:54,930	Motion by Manager Reep and a second by Manager Mischel to approve this month’s profit and loss statement. Any discussion or questions this morning? Not here. Any. Wendy, take roll call. Vote, please. Manager Baker. Yes. Manager Mischel. Yes. Manager Reep. Yes. Manager Smith. Yes. Chairman Landenberger. Yes. Motion passes. Item. See there. I’m going to need some help from Wendy and or Michael. Um, the, uh, mark on m account balance. Um, yeah. Developing special.

00:27:23,700	Yeah. Here’s the scenario right now, based on the if you want to call it the audit. Um, Wendy and I came up with about $13,000 to the arrears that needs to be recovered. It’s more than that now. 16. 16, 16. Okay.

00:27:43,030	Anyway, bottom line on this, we have created a spreadsheet for the Special Assessment District to put on for this year and probably subsequent years would probably take several years to recover that amount.

00:28:02,000	Uh, what we came across, though, is that it’s been a number of years since we’ve looked at the properties out there, and there are several properties in that assessment area that do not have property values on them from the county and the county parcel list. So we have to go back to the county auditor and, um, rectify what those dollar values are. Uh, they appear to exist in the tax statements from prior years, but obviously we’ve got to use a current year.

00:28:20,130	So, um, you’ll have that before you at your next meeting as well, along with a recommendation to, uh, the county auditor to levy special assessments for O&M next next month. I was hoping to have it this month, but like I said, there’s just some missing pieces in the data, so. Okay, thanks.

00:28:36,700	So I don’t see I don’t know that there’s no action for us to take it, just. Not today, maybe next month. So to that. Point has to be next month because you have to have it before October 31st. So.

00:28:52,100	Uh, to that point, did we ever have a discussion on what level of this O&M account we want to get to? I mean, is it is there a number. We I will make a recommendation in the in the letter, um, or in the, in the documentation. Okay. Typically what is desired. Um, when we came out of the projects, there was money set aside to do this. Yep.

00:29:09,930	And generally speaking, that was kind of like a 3 to 5 year fund. Um, but you don’t necessarily have expenses every year. Right? Um, so you’re trying to have enough in there so that you’re not leveling special assessments every year. Right? So a five year window. Or something. Right? So that’s why I’m saying to recover the $16,000, it’s probably going to take several years.

00:29:27,900	We may want to put it on the docket for to do this for like four years in order to establish a reserve fund. Yep. Okay. Okay. Or next month then. Thank you. Thanks. Um, and then item D, um, Titus Gietzen is our, um, manager of our Bravera wealth fund from Bravera Wealth.

00:29:46,930	And so, uh, he showed up today and, uh, just chatting with him before the or the meeting. He might have some things of interest for us. So. Yeah. Warren. Titus. Morning. Uh, so last. Time I presented, uh, the yield curve on, uh, your time horizon, uh, was in reverse.

00:30:03,870	That was due to the fed, uh, projecting cuts throughout the year. Uh, over the last 8 or 9 months, the fed hasn’t done any cuts. So that’s caused a lot of the seed companies and a lot of, uh, projections to normalize. Uh, so right now, the the money market is earning 3.663.41 after realized fee.

00:30:28,470	Uh, if you get a three month CD right now, we can get around a 3.9. Uh, and if you go for six month, it’s around a four. And if you go up to a year, you can usually get around maybe a 4.2.

00:30:44,900	Uh, if you go up to a three year, you can get about a four and a half. Uh, and then if we get a 20 year treasury, uh, we can get about 5.2, uh, all of those within the wealth account can be traded at no additional cost.

00:31:01,300	It would only depend on what the secondary market deems their value would be at that time. If you needed to redeem early, uh, if the market, undervalues it, it doesn’t affect the yield on the product. It only if you hold it to maturity. There would be no loss on the on the asset as well.

00:31:22,870	Uh, so if you wanted me to, I could put together 3 or 4 examples of scenarios, uh, to have a net realized, uh, rate of return, uh, given a few different situations. But I wanted to come to the committee and see how much of a portion you would want to use, if any. Uh, and then I could come up with a few scenarios on that. Sure. Yeah. Thanks.

00:31:42,200	Could you just briefly discuss, um, you know, recommended limits of, of each of those instruments that you would put money into the monetary limits? Yeah. So, uh, with the CD, obviously you want to ensure that you have FDIC coverage. So if we bought a CD at a brokerage bank, uh, we’d only go to 250 per bank.

00:32:01,130	So if we went with $1 million worth of CDs, we do four different banks. US Treasury, uh, that’s backed by the US government. So as long as they’re in good standing, uh, the CD or that, uh, product shouldn’t have any issues.

00:32:21,330	Um, so I would recommend, uh, looking at your typical annual books, uh, to see what you could use, uh, throughout the year or what, uh, high mark could be used. Um, and then just make sure that you have that at least in cash and then, uh, have a, a CD ladder or a CD with, a treasury portion to increase overall yield. Okay. That’s questions.

00:32:46,730	I mean, it certainly seems like something that we could and maybe should do. Um, I would, I would, you know, be willing to, um, we could do it two ways. We could do it in the interim between our next meeting.

00:33:03,800	Or we could just have a plan set up and presented to you at the October meeting for final decision. Um. Titus, what’s your thoughts on, like with these interest rates now over the next month? Do you think they’re going to continue to kind of creep up, or is it.

00:33:22,470	So there’s, uh, debate between the president and the fed committee at the moment. The fed chair, uh, he wants to see a longer stretch of data before he wants to make any changes. So he’s more of a steady hold steady.

00:33:42,600	Uh, there are a few chair members that are, uh, committee members that would want to increase, uh, to what extent? Uh, isn’t known at this time. Maybe 1 to 2 increases, which would be a 0.2 5 or 0.5 increase. Uh, while the president wants it to go down, uh, I’m not sure how far we can actually put it down without affecting the economy. Uh, positive and negative at the same time. Right.

00:34:01,100	Um, so at the moment, I would bet, uh, not bet, but, uh, the consensus is that it’s more likely going to stay, uh, steady for the foreseeable future. Okay. All right. Thank you. Oh. That’s bad. Yeah, yeah. The market’s always better. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, I think what you’re saying, Dennis, is maybe have Titus come back with, you know, some scenarios for the next month.

00:34:23,800	And I mean, yeah, if that’s timely enough for the board. I guess. Yeah, I think so. I mean, we’re not we’re not just letting it sit there. We got 3.6 or 3.4 net, you know. So it’s not like we’re just. Doing nothing. Right.

00:34:39,900	And so if, if Titus would be able and willing to share something, a recommendation. Um, uh, you know, and we can maybe chat about monetary amounts, but just, you know, a, a general recommendation we could bring back to the board and have a final decision at our October meeting. Yeah. And then I’ll tell you this.

00:34:57,270	Dennis has talked to you kind of about, you know, with our with our money market and where we have that, it’s, you know, it’s it’s it’s fluid. Right. We can we have projects and sometimes things pop up that we’re not like.

00:35:06,170	You know, a couple of years ago we had a Hog Island product that we had to fund ahead of that. So maybe I don’t know how much Dennis is kind of walked you through, though. What we kind of need for budgets and what we maybe should be investing or not. And that sort of thing. We could. Sure. Yeah.

00:35:23,270	Whatever the the committee would like to keep in cash. Uh, again, with the CDs and the US Treasury, uh, as long as we have a day or two to liquidate that asset, we should be able to access the funds as well. Okay. Yeah. Fair enough. Good. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Good. Thanks. Titus. Anything else on that this morning? Dennis. I don’t have anything.

00:35:43,970	Okay. Any questions for Dennis? All right. We can move on to item nine this morning. Drainage permits and complaints. Uh, Michael, I’m guessing at this point, no updates on Showboat Park. Yeah, nothing on keelboat, nothing on Hawk Tree.

00:36:00,230	I don’t believe they’ve submitted their, uh, resubmit at this point. Okay. Um, I can touch briefly on the next IMC. Uh, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, we provided information. We’ve been kind of collaborating back and forth on details and information. They are planning to do a site visit at the end of September.

00:36:18,130	Um, I will not be around, but, uh, they can contact Roger if they want to do some field discussions out there. But, um, that’s when they’re going to be doing their work. They’ve been talking about bathymetry and a few other items.

00:36:34,900	Um, we did take a look at one of the bypass options, um, because of the topography that’s not going to work. But again, we’ve been collaborating with them. Outside of that, it’s basically in their hands to move that forward. So when you say they’re going to be on site, this is like other folks besides the ones that are already out there, right? They have, uh, two hydrologists from Denver. Okay, okay.

00:36:49,770	Both of them have like 30 plus years of experience, and they’re going to come out and take a look at the site and see how they can, uh, potentially re manage the system based on what’s physically there. Okay.

00:37:03,100	Since they have not been on site like any of us, we’ve seen plans, but getting on site and boots on the ground, that’s what they’re planning on doing to see the watersheds. I, I don’t know, Roger. I think if you if you are available, I think it’d be good to have Michael camp either it might have to. Have scheduled that. They haven’t scheduled it. They said down to September. Yeah.

00:37:17,400	As soon as they schedule, I’ll give them a heads up that, uh, you’d like to be out there. Kind of already have in a way, but that, uh, be nice to at least meet them and have a conversation as to what they’ve. I. Agree, what they’ve witnessed. Yep. Okay, okay. Any questions on item C? Uh, yeah.

00:37:35,570	No. Go ahead Brian. No. Oh, no. I thought Roger. Was. Okay. Michael. Okay, move on to item D okay. Item D, lot eight. That’s the Ponderosa village. Um, violation. Um, I’ve been pressing that, um, it’s a little bit, um. In your packet, there is some information to you.

00:37:57,170	I’ll kind of. I’ll kind of couch my words on on what I’m looking at there. Um, waiting on Dottie and. Excuse me, DWR to, uh, issue their notice in order for their administrative order that has not occurred. Um, been waiting for a letter from the corps.

00:38:18,800	The corps stated that they’re working with, uh, the 408 and the Bismarck regulatory office to issue a letter. Um, I guess I will express a little bit of disappointment that this major a violation and the wheels of government, if you will, are moving really, really slow. Um, and I apologize for Mitch.

00:38:39,070	I kind of, um, jumped on him a little bit with the conversation on the floodplain development permit that, you know, everybody’s got to be working on the same page on this one.

00:38:56,670	Uh, because the landowner, um, probably is not going to be in a position to do anything on his own, even though he probably should just given the status of the other agencies. But my big concern is the other agencies have not stepped up, and we’re not seeing any documentation coming from them as far as enforcement.

00:39:13,200	Um, I have a concern with that jetty that’s out there or shall I say, the earthen levee with rock on it, and that the nose of that has been significantly damaged. And if we go into some ice floes and some other stuff, um, there’s some risk out there. Um, so and, but, you know, this board can’t step in on its own and just go do something out there. It needs to be collaborated with DWR.

00:39:32,470	So, uh, at this point, the activities are occurring in the background and we’re not privy to the details at this point. I rattle the cage last week and I’ll probably rattle it again. I did try to call Amy yesterday, and, uh, I didn’t get an answer, so let’s see where it goes. Okay. Uh.

00:39:47,030	Mr. Chairman, I might make a comment here, too. I’ve had a telephone call with Amy Winkelman at DWR, and that was, uh, several weeks ago. I think she’s been on vacation, but we really do need to see those administrative orders. The single or both orders, depending on how they draft it.

00:40:03,400	And that’ll tell us the water board. Um, exactly what the scope of our own jurisdiction is. Um, so, like Mike said, we’re just in a holding pattern here. Hopefully we’ll get something soon so that we can go from there. Okay. So she agreed that she would provide those to you? Yes.

00:40:23,670	Okay. And then you’ll provide them to the board? Yes. Okay. And at our meeting, uh, we did talk about having a just an email trail for everybody. So like Mike said, let’s be on the same page. Let’s get this information out, and then we can have our next meeting, hopefully as soon as possible. Okay. Sounds good.

00:40:40,370	Yeah. And we’ve got a couple of items out there. Um, and I’m going to be visiting with Mitch afterwards. Um, obviously you’ve got floodplain development permit, you’ve got the water resource district relative to the jetty, you’ve got sovereign lands issues, and you have, uh, Corps of Engineers issues.

00:41:02,830	So all four agencies have their own, you know, stake in the game, so to speak. And as they step forward, uh, everybody needs to be collaborating to get something accomplished. Uh, there is discussion, uh, at the meeting relative to having him restore that site. Uh, the question is, what does that mean? And that’s yet to be determined. Everybody who.

00:41:21,470	Does it, not only what that means, but how it gets accomplished, I guess, is the is a critical component. Um, from the county perspective, obviously, you’ve got the the levee or the jetty that has issues. You’ve got the floodplain development permit from a FEMA site that needs to be addressed.

00:41:45,730	Um, um, procedurally, I’m not going to make sure everybody’s on the right page knowing what’s going on. And if somebody’s expecting somebody, something else to happen, then we need to have that conversation too. So I will try and make a push to have another meeting with that group. I’ve got the email. Everybody got it.

00:42:01,200	So that I do have another meeting with that group. Um, but again, I will be gone for a period of about three weeks, so that may not happen until after I get back. Okay. Given the status of where things are at.

00:42:18,470	Michael, is it safe to assume that that work would not be restored this year? Um, given the context of that, I would say that’s probably true. Yeah. Because there’s a couple of components as to who can restore and who can assess for that restoration and those types of things, and all those things need to be worked out as part of the administrative order that the state is going to be doing so.

00:42:35,370	Which is too bad, actually, because we’re going to have fairly low water scenario coming up where you could get access out there and do the work right and get it done this fall. But the unfortunate part of that conversation is that we’re probably going to have fairly low water again next year. Yeah, but that’s not the point. So okay. All right.

00:42:55,870	Any questions for Michael on that one. Okay. All right. Here again we can move on to item E okay. On the. River road culvert. Um Travis was out and took a look at it. We visited with Casey. I sent some photos to the rest of the board to.

00:43:14,130	Yeah, and I think the context of this one, based on what’s out there, um, I was having a conversation with Casey before the meeting, is we really need to go out and kind of do a survey and find out where the water is actually going around that property.

00:43:29,100	There’s tall grass and some other things in there, and in order to get a good handle on if you want to call it a management plan, as far as you know, where do you go from here based on what’s out there? Okay. So with the board’s authorization or consensus, we would get a survey crew out and kind of tie some of those things down. We’ll look at our first. But then, um, validate and type.

00:43:44,470	Yeah. Grass isn’t going to. Be very pretty small area. I would think you just get somebody out there and shoot some shots pretty quickly. Okay. Can you coordinate with Brian though? Just, you know, I’d like to have Brian out there too and have Brian take a look and.

00:43:56,030	And and since I’m going to be probably gone for a while, Travis and Brian, if you want to touch base with Travis on getting stuff done. Okay, okay. I think there’s a solution there. In case you and I have talked about this before, and there’s obviously something we probably look at doing there.

00:44:10,270	And just I think with Burley County Highway Department, they just kind of wanted an independent review. So that’s kind of where we step in and take a look at this for them and offer some options or recommendations, and then they’ll take it from there. So sounds good. Okay.

00:44:26,570	Any questions on that item. If not we can move on to item F grass Lake. Brian, if you want. To briefly talk about that one. Uh, so initially we got kind of the word that Grass Lake has arrived again.

00:44:47,670	And uh, I know we addressed some issues in the past with it. The official complaint coming in was just for trespass. My understanding, um, individual came across property lines with excavating equipment and completed some work for, uh, lowering the lake. Um, so I don’t know if we formally fall under a drainage complaint or if this is a trespass complaint that goes to law enforcement.

00:45:16,330	I guess I’m not fully aware of how all that would play out. Good question. Brian. Mister, it is my understanding that he was dealing with law enforcement on it already. So I’m not sure. Yeah, I don’t know that the drainage complaint is the appropriate means. Um. There was talk about somebody planting some trees in that.

00:45:41,970	That drainage or waterway. Did that happen? And I would say that, yes, we’ve been down this path before. Yeah, yeah, yeah. In fact, I think this board has discussed Grass Lake multiple occasions, but, um. It’s the west side. Okay. But it’s not in side conversation with Casey. It’s not in the overflow channel.

00:46:08,600	Okay? Okay. It’s a different area where the trees are being planted. Okay? Okay. So. So Casey was just updating Michael that the trees that were had been notified about are not in the waterway. So there’s no drainage. And I mean, if there’s no physical drainage yet he is putting forth, I don’t know, he.

00:46:28,470	So when I talked to him on the phone, he made it sound like he felt this person trespassed onto here and did some modifications to lower the elevation of the lake, even though it’s been dry and it’s there’s probably been considerable evaporation occurring as well. I don’t know how we go about trying to prove what was.

00:46:48,100	I guess, from a. We had baseline survey. Yeah. Oh yeah. From two years ago. From that detail perspective, just to update the board in those listening, um, the board went out and actually based on the original complaint, because there was a cleanout that was done and we went out and actually surveyed it.

00:47:08,930	We had lighter information. We did field verifications with lidar and the survey information and found it. Basically all he had done is remove vegetation, if you will, on that cleanup and that there was nothing the board was, you know, jurisdictional he could do. So that was basically set.

00:47:29,730	We do have field survey to validate what those overflow elevations are. Um, I guess the thing that we could do now. Yeah. If you were agree to it, is just to have somebody like Travis go out and see if there’s been any actual physical activity within that channel, or maybe you and Brian can go out and take a look at that. Uh, from the background standpoint.

00:47:46,630	And if there isn’t, then there really isn’t anything here. When I read the complaint, I looked at it. And you’re right, Brian, it’s trespass. It really has nothing to do with drainage that this board would have jurisdiction.

00:48:01,370	But, uh, given the context of what was out there, you could go verify that there’s been no physical activity in the channel itself. And it gets convoluted because isn’t there a sliver of property there that’s owned by the township? Yes, they bought that right where there’s waterways at. Yeah. But it’s it’s probably you access that piece of property and it’s not on the section line. So it’s just.

00:48:18,300	The way back in the 40s or whatever it was. The section line went through the lake and the property owners donated or gave a portion of that, uh, access or new right of way to the township. So it’s the township, uh, right away that’s in there.

00:48:38,330	And that basically is the edge of the lake, if you will. So but yeah, with your consensus, maybe the thing is just to go look. I think that’d be good. Yeah. I think another make an inspection and Travis and head up there and take a look at it, take some photos and.

00:48:54,200	And didn’t read a term when the actual control they issued was different than the outlet channel. I mean, there’s right and build up and, uh, cattail build probably some shoreline deposits from wind action. Nice. Correct there. Yeah, there’s been a number of things, but we have a a full in-depth survey through that as to where it’s at.

00:49:15,470	There is some ice shovel, some sediments and gravel and stuff that occur that affect the overflow elevation. But the overflow elevation is basically dictated by how the channel was constructed. So if in fact, um, there’s been a limited amount of activity depending upon where it’s at, it’s probably again, just a clean out.

00:49:35,000	I don’t know, but that that could be determined by looking at it. Because the phone call I received was not from Donald Noone, it was from another individual. And. I forget what his name was, but. Was it caching? It wasn’t Gerald. Okay. No, it was.

00:49:58,770	But it was his brother, right? There was two brothers, I think, or John’s, I don’t remember. No, I can go back in my notes. No. Um, but either way, yeah, I think it’d be worthwhile for this board just to kind of be a little bit more information and find out what’s really going on out there and verify, um. Basically go out there and see what’s been done.

00:50:16,330	And if there has been work, take some GPS shots and see where we’re at compared to what was kind of agreed upon in the previous. Yeah. If you get out there and it looks like some work has been done, then maybe that would trigger. Maybe we’d get some survey shots again just to verify what we’re looking at.

00:50:30,130	But, um, it’s hard to kind of follow with this map that was provided. That’s in your packet on page 50, but that is that north end of that lake. And, um, where that outlet’s at.

00:50:49,000	So it’s like I said, there was a different individual who had called me and had a conversation because he had I think he had called you Wendy, and he was saying he was saying he was talking to the sheriff’s office about trespassing and wanting to know if he could fill out a drainage complaint. And certainly he can, but I don’t think we ever received one from him.

00:51:05,930	Um, And one of the ones that, uh, Wendy was able to do, I provided the background information in the memo, which had property ownerships and all that data and documentation, and that was shared fully. With the board. You guys should have that. Yeah. Share it with both parties. So yeah. Yeah, just looking at kind of the land ownership, the township has a little sliver.

00:51:23,000	Yeah. On that north. So it just kind of convoluted at this. And. Because these gentlemen as I understand, are on the township board, sure. More than likely. Yeah. Yeah. So and. brothers and. So probably on the other boards together, you know. Okay. Okay.

00:51:44,670	I’ll take a look if there’s been some work, I’ll grab Travis and we can go up there and see what’s elevations. GG okay, from there. All right. Any questions on that one? The email I sent you, it was Gerald Cashin. That called. It was one of the ones that called I know there was another guy. Yep. There was another guy too. But he did call too. Okay.

00:52:05,700	And he was kind of having a reverse complaint. I think he was the one that was complaining about the trees being. Kind of the obstruction. Yeah. But yeah. So okay, good luck. Brian. Step one. To see what’s going on. Okay. Uh, we can move on to item G this morning. Um, the 110th Avenue.

00:52:27,030	Yep. Uh, so just kind of a summary in your packet, um, kind of the way it looks is this just came in here, um, the end of August. Um, essentially main channel kind of splits into two. And one of those channels has been filled in. Um, it was filed as an obstruction complaint.

00:52:47,970	Um, and so the conversation then will be is. How we go about, um, because I’m assuming the channel is has been obstructed. So on page 54, that map. Brian. Yep. There’s the channel that runs. There’s a kind of a smaller, you know, holding pond or something there that.

00:53:13,470	Yeah, you got two points of where it says filled in. So are they saying that the water is then backing up. My, my understanding water is moving up.

00:53:36,530	Um, this channel to the east, if you will, uh, behind the new house property has been filled in, which then I’m guessing restricts this leg of the channel and pushes the water on this side. Okay. And I’m guessing that there’s either some obstructions or some higher elevations that’s causing some water to impound. I haven’t looked into it yet. Okay. Um, we just got it. Um, yeah. So that was also. Yeah. So somebody drew blue lines on there.

00:54:02,170	It’s probably probably a, uh, layer of hydrology. So it certainly looks like it’s, uh, if it is filled in, it looks like it’s an obstruction. It seems like it’s pretty cut and dry, but. Yeah, get eyes on the ground and. Yeah. Did the individual with the new house make the complaint? No. Okay. My understanding is the property owner.

00:54:22,370	To them. And which way is the Water flowing. Is it? Do we know what that. Looks like? It’s flowing to. The south. South. Okay. Two tributaries coming into a main channel. Yeah. Yeah. It breaks off. It starts as one channel splits into the two at that site, and then comes back together in section 29 there.

00:54:41,200	To the south. Okay. So basically where that pond, that’s where it starts. The second channel. Yep. That northern pond. Yep. Yep. Okay. So I’ll go out and take a look and see if it is been filled in. Um, I guess we issue.

00:55:06,300	I think at that point come back to the board and basically update us on what your findings are, and then we can kind of decide. To go from. There actions from there. Yeah. Okay. Hey, Mitch. Mr. chair. I’ve been in contact with Kent Wells. He came to my office about a week ago. A week and a half ago. Okay.

00:55:21,630	And he showed me what was going on out there. And, uh, Mr. Nelson, Troy Nelson is moving dirt, actively moving dirt and creating a kind of a pond. And so I, I sent him a certified stop work order. I have not had a reply from him yet.

00:55:42,600	Um, this is in designated wetlands, you see. I, I don’t know if you have that on your on your parts of your. Well, that’s the area that he’s working in. It’s also in a floodplain. Uh, in the southeast corner of the property is in the floodway, too. So. Mhm. Um, we need a discussion.

00:56:03,330	I will I haven’t had a response from the stop work order, so I’ll most likely ask the sheriff to serve in papers and get the conversation going. Okay. Well maybe just, just keep Brian in the loop a little bit. Okay. I don’t know if I have your email. It’s on the email chain.

00:56:19,830	Yes, it should be. Yep. Thanks, Mitch. Yeah. Is that so? Is that Apple Creek that eventually flows into down there, or is that a different. Bird Creek? That’s the watershed. Yeah. And it flows down the water, flows south.

00:56:39,130	Kent Wells to the south is concerned that he may it may cause problems for him because the river ring continues down onto his property. So it’s a pretty big project that he’s got going there. Okay. All right. Sounds good. Any other questions for Mitch or Brian? I think it’s important here. And thanks, Mitch, for bringing it up. The conversation.

00:57:00,100	I was just going to point out, if he hadn’t already, that it’s in the floodplain. So obviously there’s a floodplain development permit that’s necessary here. And collaboration relative to the Phil that’s being taking place and what the impacts are on the floodway floodplain. There’s not a floodway there.

00:57:17,570	Excuse me, but the floodway and then relative to the obstruction itself, if this is a split in the channel and Mr. Wells has an issue with, hey, the water used to go this way and that way, now it’s all coming my way. That makes a significant difference in what the potential impacts are downstream.

00:57:33,000	So this is all relatively new and a little bit of speculation. So Brian, when we get out and take a look at it, if you want Travis or somebody or I to take a look at the watersheds or something, just let us know we can do that. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Mitch. Mitch. Okay.

00:57:50,130	Anything else on item nine? Not hearing any. Nothing under item ten. As far as well, we do have the Grassley complaint inquiry. That’s just the memorandum. So. Okay. All right. We can move on to item 11 this morning. Projects. Uh, maybe, Michael, an update on the Hog Island, the special authorization number 32.

00:58:15,170	Okay, first of all, we got the easement revisions. I provided the easement draft revisions to Dave. Uh, he and I and, uh, Roger will probably be taking a closer look at those. Um, so we got the draft together as to how those are written in the light certificates.

00:58:31,470	I didn’t provide them because they’re still pretty preliminary, but that’s out there. Uh, special authorization 32 is for the rehab project. Working with DWR on Dave Childers property. Uh, we’ve also included the the Jonas, I think, in that piece as far as the request, because they’re both section 32 projects.

00:58:50,730	Um, Travis and I went back and forth on the, uh, dollars associated with that budget. Um, we have been having a lot of time spent with the regulatory agencies, both the corps and, DWR. So I’d like to believe that those dollars are high. But then again, that’s what we’ve been experiencing right now.

00:59:10,800	And then this is the numbers that we provided to DWR relative to their web grants for cost share. Correct. Travis, to move this project forward. Um, have had some discussions. I have not personally, but have had a couple of calls of people who’ve talked with Mr. Snyder about this.

00:59:29,930	Um, and this scenario is it’s taking time, obviously. Step through the DWR process and section 32 with the Corps and everything else. Um, probably no construction will occur this year. The site is currently relatively stable, but it has moved and if not stabilized. Um, the next time the river does something, it probably will fail.

00:59:49,130	So that’s the whole aspect of moving forward with this process. Um, the DWR and Clay, uh, careful have been involved in the discussion. Uh, initially they were talking about available funds to do this. They basically have come to the conclusion that they do have funds available to do this.

01:00:04,070	So, uh, if we file a grant application that, uh, more than likely it will be approved under the standard process for the section 32, and then we can move forward. But obviously. The actual construction. The construction would be after this. This is final design.

01:00:21,270	But when you say they’re agreeing they have funds to do this, this is are you saying just this, this next step. What is I, 88,000? Or is that I don’t know that I’ve got a clarification on the actual construction side, but they do have funds to move forward with what’s in front of you. So their costs would be 50% of this, correct? Yeah. Okay.

01:00:37,700	And do we need to get that? I mean, do we have to submit that? Yes. And so we got to get that before we can start work. Right. Correct.

01:00:52,470	That all has to be and it’s it’s interesting because I, um, the bureaucratic nature of the beast, if you will. They want it all filed through the web grants program, which obviously takes more time and effort and dollars to do it. So this is the process that we’re saddled with. And you’re correct.

01:01:07,070	Uh, Dennis, in order to move this, we need to get this in front of them so they can approve so we can go to final, final design before we go to construct construction would be next year, given the status of where things are at. And I assume if they decided not to pay for this, we come back to this board and have a additional discussion on whether or not we want to move forward with it.

01:01:24,670	Right. Do you have to have your DWR grant approval received? You’ll get, uh, no different than the last time of doing the preliminary. You’ll have an agreement that will be sent to you for you to sign, so you’ll know before we get too far into the process.

01:01:39,100	Yeah, I guess I would just want to make sure we don’t put it at risk. Right. So we’re not going to really do any work until we get. That correct. The first phase is just getting that grant submitted. Yeah. Now as good.

01:01:50,470	Now the information is in front of you in front of say, 32. We’ll get that on the web. Grants and, uh, get their authorization before stepping into the next phase. So. Okay. All right. Uh, what are the wishes of the board here? We have a authorization in front of you to move forward with some additional next steps on this charter property. Um.

01:02:14,800	If we are in agreement, then we need to approve this authorization for Houston to move forward. So any discussion, questions, action. So we would submit to our request to the state. And this would go under director’s approval. Correct? Yes. Yep yep. And so they could turn around pretty quickly.

01:02:37,900	So I mean guess from Travis Michael I mean you need to approve today. Would you rather go through the get the state’s blessing first or is that. I just don’t want us to do work and put it at risk. I guess. Is my.

01:02:54,670	Answer right? Either way, from the amount of time that we’re going to spend, we’re going to put the time in to actually submit it. So if you authorize this now, we can move forward if you want us to submit it unsigned, if you will. And um, they’re probably going to ask for it to be signed. I don’t know, maybe not. I don’t think so.

01:03:07,700	Okay. But if you if you want, we can wait with this and just submit it and wait for the dollars. I’m okay with that as well. I mean. Oh. This is where it gets confusing because I do know part of the application process. They want to see minutes of approving of the expenditure of these funds.

01:03:21,570	Yeah that’s true. They want to see yeah. Minutes saying that we approve you submitting the request. Not not on the. Signing expense. Not a signing. Okay. So maybe at this point you’re saying we hold on this contract until that is submitted and approved. But the board today look at it authorizing Houston to go to submit. Yep.

01:03:42,430	Okay. And I’m okay with that. So but your action to date to your point is and and James, is that your authorizing us to submit this request. Yes. Yeah. I’d move I’d move that. We have Houston Engineering submit the request for this work. The tighter section 32 rehabilitation project to the State Water Commission. Okay. Got a motion.

01:04:03,230	Second. The motion by Manager Reep and the second by manager Mager to authorize Houston to submit the application for DWR grant for this, um, Missouri River revetment project on Charter’s property. We’ll hold for discussion. Travis. Yet? Yes. Just a quick point. I wanted to bring up the. Essay that’s in front of you is just for pre-construction work.

01:04:29,070	This is for the permitting and the design, which we need to basically complete that design so that we can come up with an estimate for the cost of the project itself.

01:04:42,800	So right now, what I would like to submit to the state is just a request for the pre-construction funds, not for the construction funds, because we’re not sure exactly when those construction funds will be requested due to the length of the length of time needed to get all the permits in hand, and that could affect when that request for the construction funds would land.

01:04:59,130	And then also the timing would affect, you know, what funding is available from the DWR. So if, you know, likely this is going to be next year. And so then they might have some more funding available.

01:05:15,630	You know, stuff just depending on where their sources of income are, you know, are sitting at that time, that time between now and then could help, uh, you know, help with our time frame to that. And also we can submit within their planning for their system so that we we can get it on their docket and kind of on their radar for a request that will be coming. So for right now, uh, this current essay, like I said, is just for the pre-construction funds.

01:05:30,400	And then and that’ll help us dial in what our actual construction request would be. So for right now, uh, we would like to try to get this approved and then this can be what the current request would be consisting of, along with, as Michael stated, the minutes from this meeting showing that the board is

01:05:48,170	approving this and then moving this forward. And, uh, kind of a verbal that I’ve gotten from the DWR is for this initial permitting and design work. It would it’d be, you know, they’ve essentially said that this should be approved.

01:06:05,000	You know, that they concur with the need for this project and that that, you know, there is a definite, uh, obligation from them to help maintain these structures. And so there’s there’s a kind of a positive view on this one. And I don’t really see any issues with this.

01:06:20,600	And then once we can see what the actual construction cost would be, then that’ll be another conversation with them to see what their thoughts are on that. And then if once we get this design completed and we have an estimate on the cost is, then we can show that to them.

01:06:32,400	And then if they feel the need to make any changes or if they have any any thoughts on that, then we can address that. At that time. Yeah. No. Totally understood. I just I just don’t want to put it at risk by starting the work before we have a signed or signed agreement with the state.

01:06:47,730	And so if I mean, I guess the question is either way, I don’t think any work design work should start until we have an agreement with the state.

01:07:01,470	So, um, I guess there would just may be a lag where we get an agreement from the state two weeks in front of our next meeting, and you have to sit on it for two weeks before you get this particular Essar signed. That’s that that. Uh, sure. And given the context of the timeline that we’re in, it’s that’s not going to be. An issue. And we can make a contingent.

01:07:15,600	I mean, I would be in favor or we could say, give the chairman authorization to sign this. Once the agreement is signed with the State Water Commission, we could do that today, too. I mean, I don’t see any issue with it. I just don’t want to get. You want to amend your your motion to. Separate the. Motion for a separate motion. Yeah.

01:07:29,570	Okay. Yeah. And to address that I could submit the planning form to the state and see what kind of response I get from that as well. That would give us a really good, uh, temperature reading on, on their, their thoughts on things. So.

01:07:46,470	Yeah, given the process, um, it’s going to obviously we can submit we’re going to wait a little while before we actually get a copy of the minutes to submit, and then it’s going to be probably two weeks before they act. So you’re not going to probably even see it until your next meeting, right? Given the context of what’s going.

01:07:58,670	On, I’m fine. Just wait until the next meeting. I mean, we go ahead and I think we’re got a motion right now. We haven’t voted on it yet, but at that point, the motion would be to move forward with you having Houston, uh, submit the application to DWR for the grant.

01:08:15,730	And then by next meeting, we should hear back from that. And then we can approve this and move forward with the essay. Okay. At that time, but. Okay. Thanks, Travis. Yep. Okay. So we have a motion and a second. Everybody clear on the motion okay. When you take roll call, vote, please.

01:08:32,470	Are you clear on the motion? Okay. So the motion is is just having Houston. You know, Dennis, correct me if this is wrong, but I think at this point it’s just having Houston submit the application for DWR grant for the Missouri River project. Uh revetment on Charter’s property. So just an application for the grant, not the essay.

01:08:52,570	And the grant is just for the pre-construction costs. Okay. Which is that’s what’s laid out in our packet here this morning. It would be an essay from Houston to do those pre-construction engineering services. But they’re going to submit that.

01:09:11,400	Let’s see if we get their 50% cost share for that. If that gets approved and they’ll come back next month and then we’ll approve the contract. Got it. Okay. All right. So again everybody’s clear motion. And second Wendy’s clear Wendy take roll call. Vote please when you’re ready. Manager Mager. Yes. Manager Mischel. Yes, Manager Yes. Manager Smith. Yes. Chairman Landenberger.

01:09:32,070	Yes. Motion passes. Okay. We’ll see what happens next month. Okay. Thank you. Anything else on that, Michael? Anything on? I’m good. Trader or Jonas. Okay. If not, we can move on to the Apple Creek slide this morning. Okay. Background on that.

01:09:58,270	I provided, uh, Roger, some internal communications with BGC relative to the information that they’ve got. Um, there should have a kind of. The target was the end of August for the report. Right now, they’re doing some internal review of the document. Um, I have not seen it, so it’ll probably be another couple of weeks before that gets out.

01:10:15,000	Uh, we did finish up the second set of lidar information. Uh, so they’ve had the ability to compare the lighter the spring with the lighter that they’ve received. Now, um, there is some on the ground movement that’s visible. I didn’t necessarily show up in the lighter data. So they’re going back to, um, take a look at things and see where that’s at.

01:10:34,000	Uh, they have looked at, uh, a number of alternatives, and, uh, I’ll step over into the, um, there’s a little bit of cost overrun with the background communications and the things that we’ve run across relative to the upper slope moving and the alternatives that fall into the upper slope and the lower slope.

01:10:56,470	Um, I’ll be working with Braun and come back to you with a, um, probably a slight change order at the next meeting based on what those costs are. Um, the other one kind of rolls into the emergency action plan, which you have in front of you.

01:11:13,000	Uh, we run this by, uh, Mary Sanger, uh, county administrator. She’s okay with what’s here. So it’s draft in front of you. Basically, it can be completed and adopted. One of the items that we spent a little bit more time on, thinking about what’s going on out here, is we took a look at what the response time would be necessary based on an ongoing

01:11:30,200	event. In other words, if we have this thing and it instantly fails, boom. And it fails on the, uh, if you want to call it the wrong time. Um, and we have a ten year event flow in Apple Creek.

01:11:44,000	The response time is about four hours. So in other words, if we if it fails in the middle of the night, we need to know. So there’s probably going to need to be some sort of, um, alarm go off or however I want to say that.

01:11:57,870	And we’ve talked to Braun about the, uh, the long term monitoring scenario where that’s at. Um, but you’d have to get equipment out to start opening things up very quickly. Otherwise we would have, uh, backwaters into areas you wouldn’t want them to.

01:12:13,870	So even though we took time to do that, I thought it was prudent, after thinking about it and saying, hey, you know, if this goes, what do we do? So Emergency Action Plan is to notify everybody, but there’s got to be a mobilization of equipment at the same time. So that took a little bit of time. But it’s it’s in the process.

01:12:26,170	And all this is here. Uh, so within um the next like I said, a couple of weeks, hopefully by your next meeting, we’ll have a draft of what their findings are relative to the upper slope and the lower slope. And, uh, and consideration of next steps. Um, the one that’s on here as well. Um.

01:12:43,770	But so, Michael, before we jump into that one, let’s go back to the emergency action plan. So at this point, are we considering this kind of final do you want comments from us? Are you getting any other comments? I mean, has Casey reviewed this really. Good I can’t remember, I don’t think he’s had the opportunity.

01:13:00,330	So it’s in front of you for comments. Okay. It’ll be distributed to the, um, the players if you will, the ones that are on here for comments and then we’ll finalize it after their conference. Call back later. Okay.

01:13:12,600	So I guess I’ll ask the board members to take a take a look at this, review it if you have any thoughts or comments. Um, certainly forward those on to Michael. And then we’ll like I said, we can formalize this um, with Mary and stuff after the after all final comments have been received. Okay.

01:13:30,870	Part of this, I guess, would be the identification of all the landowners and their contact information and that would be added to this. And then. That that’s that’s in the mapping and that’s in the background information that Mary would have for the reverse 911 calls. Okay. We originally had three different zones here for calls.

01:13:48,930	And then after talking to her, we basically simplified it into two, just two. Um, and we will have and this goes there’s a little bit of extra time involved. Um, Mary’s kind of somewhat requested that we put together the language of the notice, usually somebody is going to get a phone call that’s going to be a 15 or 30 second scenario, said, hey, here’s what’s happening.

01:14:05,530	There’s whatever, and we’ll put that in the the transcript of those in the in the EP as well. Okay. So if there’s discussion about that, they need to be changed or don’t say it this way or something that we can have that.

01:14:23,600	So Michael that at this point is Mary setting this up for additional comments. Are you is that something. We’ll we’ll send it out to her and, and everybody that’s on this list okay. The contact list. Yep. And say hey, here’s the EP that’s been developed. You are on the contact list. If you have any questions, please comment.

01:14:40,770	I think we’ve sent this out, at least initially, to um, DWR and got some comments back that have been incorporated already, but we’ll do that again for the final. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Michael on that? I had a question on, uh, how they get contact information for all the potentially impacted.

01:15:06,330	I mean, if that is through actually contacting them to get their information, you know, that’s going to raise a lot of questions immediately, like, why do you need my information? What’s going on? Why would I might get a call at 3:00 in the morning? I mean, how. It’s it’s. How do we manage that? It’s all in the 911 system.

01:15:19,630	Right. But I mean, at 3:00 in the morning, I might think that’s a scam. We’ll go back to bed. No, no, no control over that. If I have had no idea. Right. That you know, that I’m in a potential hazard zone.

01:15:42,670	So to Roger’s point, would it be advantageous to share this with with all those constituents at some point? So I think. It’d be a problem. Problematic with a nine on one call. And it may actually raise more questions. If any of you have gotten the calls on your phone about the Silver Alerts, it’s basically the same thing. It’s a 911 callback system. Um, yeah.

01:16:01,970	You’re going to get people that are going to answer and people that are just going to ignore it. But, um, it’s it’s the only means of doing that. Um, to actually ask every one of those people whether they want to receive a call if something happens is. No, I’m not saying that. I’m just not.

01:16:15,700	Giving them notice, though, that this is what’s going on and maybe have a conversation with Mary to see what they’ve done. I assume they have similar action plans, right? Well, there’s. There’s no no. Threat, right? Yeah. Right. Okay. It’s extremely low. Yeah. Basically it’s property impact. Yeah. Okay. I’ll visit with Mary on that. It’s a valid question.

01:16:39,770	I’m just curious. I mean, I don’t you know, I put myself in their position. I’m kind of, you know, yeah, I have a lot of questions. If I had to contact, you know, why do you need my information? And then then if they’re never an instance whereby they understand that there’s a potential slide and a

01:17:01,130	potential negative impact of their property, it’s just I’m wondering how we kind of logically management and maybe we’re, you know, the process for us is fine, but just wanted to pause. And it’s I mean, it seems like it’s the emergency management process. Right. And so is it. It’s a reverse 911 call.

01:17:22,470	And maybe it’s a recorded message that they receive, which would probably be better received than a person. Right? I mean, so you’re getting this authoritative, authoritative recorded message that you’re not going to be able to chat with anyway. So you listen and react.

01:17:42,270	So and that’s why I said we’ll put the transcript together of that short snippet language said, um, whatever, whatever has happened, you’re hereby being notified that, um, the following.. I’d be curious. I’m sure it’s not under our purview, but I’d be curious to what the messenger would sound like. I mean, how you know, are people packing their bags or anything just going, okay, maybe my tires are wet in the morning. I mean, I don’t know.

01:18:04,300	Yeah. No, it’s going to be interesting. So we’ll have to create language that, um, doesn’t create fear. But no, it doesn’t strike fear into everybody. That right. That’s panicking. Yeah. Okay okay. Okay. Valid. Good questions. Roger. Yeah. No we’ll work with that. Work with Mary on those. Okay. Um, other questions on the EP.

01:18:34,300	Uh, Michael, you kind of you were going into the quarter report, and then I think the action item there. But yeah, I’ll get I’ll get the quarterly report together. I need, um, I didn’t get a final invoice together. I’ve got bronze invoices.

01:18:47,630	I’ve tallied them up, um, moving a little bit of time and hours to, uh, to balance some things out. Um, from a cost perspective. And then I will have the totals so I can give a percentage. Um, I was able to visit with Justin and Todd, both at Holden’s, uh, roundtable on the status of this.

01:19:07,070	I also talked briefly with Luke from the University of Mary on the on the status. So we’ll get that quarterly report out. I was thinking this would be the last quarterly report, but there’s probably going to need to be one more because the, um, final report won’t be issued probably for a little bit yet, but I’ll get those. Done. Okay.

01:19:25,700	Okay. Any questions on that? If not, I’ll jump into the last item. Let’s jump into that one. Okay. Um, in the original project, if you want to call it the original response to the slide, um, Richland County, Iowa Department went in and put in rock, and the rock got

01:19:44,470	placed in the floodway. And because of that rock placement and the floodway, um, it kind of jumps the scenario from an ordnance perspective that there’s a no rise certificate necessary. Um, the active movement of the slide itself did not trigger it.

01:20:00,530	It was the fact that, you know, we had to go put Rock and actually save the road. Uh, we got a nationwide 45 permit from the Corps of Engineers to do that. Um, the state obviously was involved to some extent and was notified of the slide and the discussion at that point in time was we need to do a no certificate because we put the

01:20:19,800	material in the floodway. That being said, um, the context was, hey, that hill is still moving. Uh, we don’t really want to send a surveyor out there because it’s moving.

01:20:37,400	And number two, if it’s still moving, we can go gather data today and gather data a week and a half from now or two weeks from now. And it’s going to be different. So to do a no rise certificate doesn’t make any sense until, um, things are actually in a stable condition. Um, that being said, um, things appear to have stabilized at this point.

01:21:00,300	Um, so, uh, both the discussions with DWR and Mitch, from the standpoint of the floodplain administrator, uh, FEMA region eight was also here with Cav. And of course, they were talking about different things and said, you know, this really needs to be done because right now, Burleigh County is out of compliance.

01:21:14,470	And, uh, the state kind of said, well, you know, you should have done this to start with, but I think it gave you the indications as to why it wasn’t done to start with. That being said, I directed staff to put together an essay. So, you know, what’s it going to cost to do this and, you know, put it in front of you and that’s SR 33.

01:21:29,730	Uh, there is the question as to, you know, the obligation of who’s responsible to accomplish this task. But the dollars there in the scope is there as far as what it gets accomplished.

01:21:46,730	Um, and I know Dennis is familiar with the, um, the currently effective model and the newly effective model and all that stuff and the potential need for a lot more. I will tell you that it’s our impression.

01:22:05,930	And Nick, who’s been working on this, is that there’s a good chance that we will not have to do the actual letter of map revision, because if the analysis indicates that there’s no map change, just because there’s no rise, if it happens to work out that way, which it certainly could, uh, that the lower portion of this would not be necessary. However, we put the budget in there so that, you know, what the what the connotation of that might actually be. And you need the hydraulic analysis ahead of that. Correct? Right.

01:22:23,130	Yeah. The hydraulic analysis will actually tell us whether or not the the Lamar is necessary. And if it isn’t, we just document it accordingly. Provide Mitch the background information with the no rise. And then the issue is resolved. But there’s a cost to get there.

01:22:38,770	And that’s what’s kind of before you today. And, um, Mitch, look for your insight on that. Appreciate it. Right. It’s yeah. The. Uh. The way FEMA was looking at it, it was a map will change to the flood source. And so it’s the water source.

01:22:54,000	And so if the if the H and H study a no rise can define that as not an effective change, then we wouldn’t need a claim or a little money. That’s what I’m reading. Yep. Correct. Okay. Yeah I have a question. At in 2024, we had a project that was a flood control project and also a bank stabilization.

01:23:15,470	Is this the same one or the separate separate one was to raise the the roadway and create levees. And the other one was to, to for bank stabilization. To try to. Remember which project it was, we did have the um we did. I’m going got sidetracked here.

01:23:37,800	But on the whole island one where we put the bank stabilization in the river and did that those permits, I think they’ve all been concluded and provided, but. No, the island, Sibley. Road, oh, Sibley Island. Oh, okay. That project. Yeah, that project basically failed because the landowners voted against it. Well, okay. Yeah. All right. Yeah.

01:23:56,470	You’re talking about the larger flood control project that we were looking at several years ago, right? Right. Yeah, yeah. The landowners voted that. They voted against it. They voted down. Yeah. All right. Good. That’s okay. So I don’t yeah I didn’t have nothing else there. We just waiting for the has studies and.

01:24:09,770	Right. And that’s where it kind of goes down to um I think the we provided the numbers as the scope of the work that needs to be done. The question is, is, you know, who’s obligated and responsible for that? We prepared it for the board.

01:24:25,270	Obviously, working with the, um, Apple Creek slide issue and it’s all intertwined. So. So yeah, I was I raised questions about, you know, where’s our responsibility, Butler County Water Resource Board responsibility. I mean, the actionable item that prompted this, the need for this was basically the placement, you know, the fixing of, uh, reinforcing of Sibley Drive embankment. Right.

01:24:52,000	And so, um, I don’t know, Casey, if you are interested in just sharing your perspective on, on, you know, why this shouldn’t go through the Burleigh County Highway Department, I guess, would be my question. Yep. No. Thank you. Uh, so looking at that, we knew this was a possibility.

01:25:10,470	In the future, I would just like to be able to see the say so we can see the actual dollars. We don’t have it in our budget this year.

01:25:22,030	Not saying we can’t try to work forward to it in the future and try and get through the the budget on that part, but I’d like to get that and take it back. Then we can kind of get our thoughts together, how we want to move forward, and then just let you know, okay, this is our plan and how we’re going to address it. From there. Okay.

01:25:35,430	So at this point, I think you’ll take this back. We can share this with you. And you can take this back to, you know, your organization and have a discussion and come back to us maybe next month. Yeah. And Dan and I talked about it this morning. It was just ours is more how do we get it in.

01:25:51,470	Get it within a budget when it’s not a non budgeted item. And it’s good. The final budget is not approved yet for next year. So okay. That means, uh. squeak it in. Uh, we have to cut something on a project to make it happen. But, you know, you gotta.

01:26:08,970	Once the preliminary budgets passed, you got to live within those dollars. So go from there. Okay? Any questions for Casey? Okay. You know, from our perspective, we just provided this for information. Looking at, um, wherever it gets done, it needs to get accomplished based on the compliance perspective. And, uh, you know, it’s in the, um, agenda book.

01:26:32,930	I can provide background information if you have specific questions on need, go ahead and visit with Nick. Since I may not be around. Yeah. If you want to just forward it, uh, email it to me, then, uh, we can just sit down and kind of read through it a little bit. We’ll make sure we understand it.

01:26:46,300	And like I said, so then no action is necessary at this point. Okay. Casey, may I guess just to further down the line, would would Burleigh County Highway Department just consider doing this? I mean, we would not be involved. Is that would that would be the plan? Uh, you know, the highway department, we’re always looking for dollars on there, so.

01:27:03,930	But no, that’s part of the the discussion we’d look at and just see what is that all us is or because really University Mary may be involved a little bit, but uh, the chances of me getting dollars out of them, let’s say maybe slim to none.

01:27:25,270	So it’s just that’s part of what Dan and I wanted to discuss, kind of sit down and go go through it a little bit. And but we’re not saying we didn’t place in the rip route. We we did. We had to protect the roadway. We know there’s always a, uh, consequence to doing those things. So, yeah. Okay. Any other questions? All right. Thank you. Thanks, Casey. Okay.

01:27:48,200	We will hold on that until maybe next month if we hear back from Burleigh County Highway Department. Okay. Any other discussion this morning on Apple Creek? Slide? Right here in any, uh, we move on to item 12, old business. I believe there’s no real update at this point on the CRS.

01:28:10,630	Unless I’m mistaken, but I’m guessing not. Um, and then I don’t see Commissioner Woodcox here, so I haven’t made anybody heard anything regarding the appeal to remove Burleigh County from the Garrison Conservancy District. Casey is coming back up again. Casey, we just gotta get you a desk right up here.

01:28:32,970	No, I’m good, I’m good. Uh, it was thrown out due to improper filing, so they’re going to discuss it at, uh, Thursday night’s county commission meeting on their next steps. Okay. All right. Thanks, Casey. Okay. All right, we can move on to new business this morning.

01:28:52,730	Um, in your packet on page 75, there was a letter that we received from the North Dakota Water resource Districts Association regarding managers receiving kind of recognition and an award for their years of service.

01:29:14,570	Um, starting at 20 years, which I think in all the years that I’ve remembered, we probably only had maybe one person that might have hit that 20 year level over these years. But what I did notice was that our names aren’t even listed there in that list. So I don’t know. I don’t think we submitted last time.

01:29:27,400	I think I was on my things list of things to do, and I think I just never got around to okay. Just with the understanding that, yeah, we aren’t even close to that. Any of us. Um. Well, I wasn’t sure if this was like a master list of all. It looks like it statewide. I was trying to see through it.

01:29:43,630	If there were other counties that weren’t represented or had folks listed, like, I don’t see Cass on here either. Do you guys see where like Morton. Castle broke up into four ones. So it’s Southeast Cass or Northern Cass or. Yeah. So I see North Cass. Okay, yeah. Southeast Cass.

01:30:04,200	Okay, so there’s several, but there is Morton County in here, too. There’s Morton. I also noticed that the, you know, data pointed in the years of service numbers don’t necessarily add up to that one. That’s 2009, and so is 12 years, which, you know, okay, it’s off by five years right now at least.

01:30:24,070	And yeah. And there’s some in here like Kent uh, from Towner. I don’t think he’s serving anymore. Yeah. Kent is not. So so obviously it’s a list of everybody even prior. Okay. Well. Oh, Dennis, maybe one thing to be just to check, make sure that we’re listed. I swear that.

01:30:46,100	What do they call that? The blue book that they put out every so many years. Yeah, yeah. The the directory. Yeah. That’s a live document on the web. I mean, I can certainly give it back with them and really just give them our list of, of current, um.

01:31:05,600	As long as they have our names already out there, I think that it’s in that blue book, I would think. I mean, Ken Royce is the only one that I thought maybe even hit that threshold. And I. Don’t know, I don’t know if he had 20, though. Yeah. 15, 15 or 17. You know, it’s interesting.

01:31:19,630	I just got a couple of names on this list and, um, whether it’s a master list or not, I will go back to the, uh, context. The State Water Commission likes to have the water resource districts report to them on a regular basis, as does a water resource districts association with Danny every year.

01:31:37,900	As far as who their members are and where they’re standing, etc.. Um, this list has got several people who are no longer with us, so that’s not that. Reporting on an annual basis probably just isn’t happening. Yeah. So, um, okay. But I’ll probably take this list and go back and make some comments to, to Danny that.

01:31:57,430	Yeah, there’s a lot of people on here. We’re just one, two, three years. Right. And again, if if the districts are reporting on a regular basis, then you know, your names are there in its current, but there are some that is just not current. So. Right.

01:32:12,930	And I think what they’re looking for is, is that there is somebody that has 20, 25, 30 years. Yeah, that they haven’t been recognized that they get recognized at the banquet in December. Yep. Our board doesn’t have any of those folks. Right. Yeah. I don’t know why. You might go back and forth like we need to do anything.

01:32:29,430	Is this where you say yet? Yeah. No. Just kidding. Along way to go for 20. But, um, kind of to this point, though, Dennis, I know we talked we had we had a meeting with Danny here and a few of us were at that meeting. We talked about memberships.

01:32:49,430	And, you know, I believe this board is a member, but our individual board members, are we also paying for that as well? Is that something we we could or should be doing? So North Dakota water resource districts, we are a member as a board. Um, North Dakota Water Users Association. I think we also contribute as a board. But there’s there’s opportunity. It’s beyond it’s bigger than water resource districts.

01:33:10,070	You know, Joe Public can be a member of the North Dakota water users on an individual basis. And it’s relatively inexpensive. And maybe that’s a discussion you’re calling. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. It’s $75 a year. Oh, yeah. At that summer meeting. Yep. That we had or. Yeah.

01:33:28,170	Anyway, um, so anybody can be a member of the North Dakota water users. I mean, the membership goes towards, um, you know, all activities associated with water is. But that wouldn’t be a board of paid expense. That’d be. No. Although we are our member of the Wendy, we send a check in to the water users each year. As a board.

01:33:46,370	Yep. Okay. So as a board, we have that individually though. That’s correct. Correct. Yep. Okay. All right. Thank you. And as you recall. Sorry microphone. So as you recall there were modifications to the membership dues this year because of some of the shortfalls and other stuff.

01:34:04,670	So there was a modification to that as far as each um, water board contributing to that. So but yeah, you’re a member of that. So yeah, it was I was given Mike Greif because he’s a member of the North Dakota Water Users Board.

01:34:19,530	The state board, and I didn’t see his name on the list of being an individual member. So I was given a brief, but he corrected me. It was actually on there. It was just buried somewhere. But, you know, there’s also the opportunity and I’ll throw this out, uh, the upper Missouri Joint Board, um, has opportunities for individual membership. I was just became aware of that recently. So.

01:34:37,630	Yeah. What is that, 50 as well? Upper Missouri Water Association. Yep. Yep. Oh, yeah. You can you can be. That’s all they needed your money. Yeah. Right. Okay. Um, but yeah if Mike wants to look at it and I’ll try to look at this too.

01:34:57,870	And at least we could get our names on the roster. And then I don’t think we have anybody that served in the past that would meet the 20 years.

01:35:09,070	So I don’t know if it’s a benefit to have those people that are no longer on the board be listed here, but at least our current members could be listed and we can get that in their roster. So I’ll try to do that. Okay. I do find it interesting. There’s one gentleman on here that’s got 45 years whom I know, but yeah, just to say something. Okay. All right.

01:35:34,270	Uh, we can move on to the next item, item B there. Um, there is an MPO document. Uh, Bismarck, Mandan, MPO, kind of the transportation plan. Um, document that’s out there. If you want to review that and provide any comments, we certainly can. And there’s also a public meeting, um, being scheduled.

01:35:56,700	I think it’s September 14th over in Mandan at the Mandan City Hall. Um, I don’t know if anybody’s interested in going on that. We’ve already sent people to this before, but. typically not at this point. I’m not aware of anything that would really cross over to what we’re doing. So kind of just more informational than anything.

01:36:14,200	Okay. And then there was I received an email from USGS, there was a slight increase in our, um, kind of our stream gauge agreement that we have with USGS for the Apple Creek gauge. Um, it wasn’t I can’t remember what the percentage was. No, it was an email.

01:36:37,970	We just we just received it here just like late last week. So, um, but yeah, he was he had reached out to me to kind of let me know if there would be that increase and if I had any questions.

01:36:50,600	And I said I’d bring it up to the board, but it’s basically just kind of inflation. And it wasn’t anything like it was like 50%. I want to say. It was 3% increase. 3%. Yeah. $190. Yeah. So in the day it seemed pretty reasonable. So I’ll just respond back that we brought it up and there was no concerns.

01:37:08,470	And then they’ll they’ll forward the new contract to us and we can review it. Okay. All right. Moving on then. We there is additional information there. Quite a few plots in the stormwater management plans there. Uh, certainly if you want to investigate those any further, the list is there.

01:37:30,200	Reach out to Wendy and she can provide that information if you if you want to review that, if there’s no questions on any of those, we can move on to item 15. Approval of the bills. Mr. chairman, board members, um, I think beginning on 80, page 83 is the bills.

01:37:50,570	I did have just one question, and it’s for Michael, uh, on that invoice that we do have from Houston. Um, it’s related to the cab visit. Is this all related to, um, all this work is related to that CRS community rating service, correct? Okay. Um, okay.

01:38:12,570	And then it’s one of those scenarios and I’ll just caveat this, um, starting out with the cab, it was a split kind of 5050 with the emergency management based on the dollars that are available. And then based on the review of region eight when they came in and some of the things that were identified, and then all of a sudden we kind of rolled over to the scenario where, um, the county inherited or for lack of

01:38:30,000	heroin, you know, call it a whole bunch of additional property. And so the whole kind of scope expanded and how to address that as part of that Cab process. So and I think Mitch has done a really good job.

01:38:47,130	You know, he’s been working with Nick in clarifying a number of issues that are out there. Um, both within the original area and the newly acquired properties. So I think that that’s all in process and under control. So I just wonder if, um, it can be a separate discussion.

01:39:11,400	Um, if, you know, Burleigh County Emergency Services, which should be approached again, because I think we, you know, originally it was like 20,000, I think 10,000 each. Right. And I know we paid the 10,000, and I don’t know if there’s more others beyond this that we’ve already paid. And it certainly sounds like there might be more coming. And I just wonder if if we at least ask the question.

01:39:29,030	I will I will double check with Mary what she did. Initially that was part of a grant that she had, and she needed to use that grant. Gotcha. But I will visit with her relative to the ongoing activities. I think. It’s worth the discussion. Dennis. Yep, yep. Okay. Um, with that, Mister Chairman, I’ll continue on.

01:39:45,070	Then the math adds up there. You have a list of bills there in the amount of $43,042.23, I would move for approval. Okay. Motion to approve. Second motion by manager Reep and a second by Manager Smith to approve and pay this month’s bills in the amount of $43,400.23.

01:40:09,970	Any discussion or questions this morning on that motion? Not hearing any. When do you take roll call? Vote please. Yes. Manager Mischel? Yes, Manager Yes. Manager Smith. Yes. Chairman Landenberger. Yes. Motion passes. Uh, do you have additional information on your packet there for on more detail on the bills for the month? Uh, next item.

01:40:31,600	Our next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 14th at 8 a.m. in this room, assume everybody can make it. Dennis. Um, I just I have one more thing. Just for informational purposes. Uh, upper Missouri Water Association. We just kind of chatted about them as their annual meeting in pier, South Dakota, September 21st, 22nd.

01:40:50,300	I’m on that board. I planned to attend. Um, I don’t know if anybody else, um, would care, do or plan to attend, but that’s I think we talked about it at a previous meeting. I think you saw the, uh. Yeah. I’m not planning to go, but Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Dennis. Casey.

01:41:08,400	Uh, just an informational part of, uh, September 21st is the projected start date to remove Apple Creek Bridge east of 80th Street, about half a mile. And so we’ll have to close the road. The USGS, uh, we’ve been working with them. They have their area marked off to help protect that.

01:41:27,530	We’ll take everything off the bridge, remove the bridge, then we’ll put it in a triple box culvert. Uh, get all that done, work with USGS to get everything reestablished from there. And the projected completions. October 23rd. And weather dependent on everything. But about a month. Or so. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

01:41:49,070	Last time they did a project like this, first they were done in three and a half weeks. So with the low flows right. Does help us. So hopefully it goes goes quick okay. Do they have to recalibrate that. Gauge it. Yep. After that. Yeah.

01:42:06,600	They just wanted their area protected that they don’t want touch so that they can keep everything to calibrate from that makes sense. And so we of course we’ll probably drive through it. The first day on my left. That’s the usual okay. Any questions. Okay. Thanks, Casey. Yep. Thank you for the update. Okay. Yeah. As we said, we got the next meeting is Wednesday, October 14th at 8 a.m. in this room.

01:42:28,470	So any other business? There’s no other business before the board. We are