05/19/2025 BOCC minutes

The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Idaho, does hereby meet this 19th day of May 2025.

IN THE MATTER OF ROLL CALL)

Brenda Lee, Deputy Clerk, called roll call: Gordon Wilkerson, present; Jim Harberd, present; and Nate Marvin, present.

Jim Harberd opened the meeting and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Gordon Wilkerson gave the invocation.

IN THE MATTER OF CORRESPONDENCE/MEETINGS AND REPORTS)

Correspondence received by the Board was reviewed and disseminated as required. Nate Marvin stated that the Area 3 Agency on Aging Meeting was cancelled.

Gordon Wilkerson advised that he had met with Payette Forrest Coalition out of McCall last week. At the meeting there were discussions concerning the Roadless Rule, the restrictions of the rule and how it affects the State of Idaho. Wilkerson noted that the face of Cuddy Mountain in Washington County (Johnson/Goodrich Country) was directly affected by this rule.

Wilkerson also attended an Agriculture Protection Area (APA) meeting that was held in Homedale, Idaho.

Jim Harberd attended the Idaho County Officials Spring Training in Nampa, Idaho. At the meeting they discussed some matters that were before or that were passed by legislation and discussed budgeting practices. Harberd also attended a meeting with the Boys & Girls Club in Weiser.

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve PCO #026 from Beniton Construction for troubleshooting lighting issues in the new Annex Building for a total cost of $942.82. Motion carried

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve a demand warrant payable to Ridley’s in the amount of $175.79 Motion carried.

Sam Edwards, Deputy Sheriff with the Washington County Sheriff’s Office appeared before the Board to discuss the Department of Parks & Recreation Off-Highway Vehicle Agreement. He advised that this program would be similar to the Washington County Waterways Program. The goal would be to provide safety courses specifically for 4- wheelers and side-by-sides. Edwards stated he and Johnny Biddinger had just completed the academy.  Edwards presented the Agreement Between Idaho Department of Parks

and Recreation and Washington County for review and signature. He advised that the agreement must be signed before they can proceed.

Jim Harberd reviewed the Agreement and noted that $2,572.76 would be allocated from the legislatively designated Off-Highway Vehicle Fund and $3,282.65 from the IDPR OHV Law Enforcement Fund.

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve the Agreement Between Idaho Department of Recreation and Washington County. Motion carried.

IN THE MATTER OF ROAD & BRIDGE/SOLID WASTE)

Jerod Odoms with the Washington County Road & Bridge Department met with the Board and provided an update. He stated that they have been doing a lot of crack-seal, blade work and pulling more barrow ditches. He stated that the Pipe Crew has been working on installation of pipe. Odoms acknowledged the work done by both the Road Crew and the Pipe Crew.

Odoms stated that some of the equipment is requiring service. Specifically, there are road graders that require maintenance.

Odoms further reported that the #15 Water Truck is now available and ready to be put back in service on the roads. He noted that there were some mechanical issues with the surplus engine that was purchased. With some fabrication, the issues were resolved.

Odoms stated that they were currently working at the Pound Pit where they will begin removal of the stockpile of chips for delivery to the Sweet Pit for the chip seal project scheduled for this upcoming fall. Seubert will be doing prep work for drilling so that the Road & Bridge Department can commence with blasting. Once the blast is cleared and the clean-up of the crusher is complete, they will then move to the Fox Pit and then proceed to the Pound Pit. Odoms stated that they must wait until after June 30th before they can move into BLM Pits (3 total). They would like to move into the BLM Pits with the new cone to make some ¾ for the stockpile.

Odoms stated that the Crack-Seal Crew has been busy and had been working very hard.

Odoms stated that he is currently working on finalizing his 2026 Budget. He stated that there were a few items that might affect next year’s budget. Odoms stated that he has discussed the matter with Donna White and has made her aware of alternate plans concerning the budget.

Jerod Odoms stated that he did receive notice regarding the final design for the Beaver Creek Bridge. Odoms noted that the construction plans for the bridge included a concrete floor. The design of the bridge should be able to accommodate wider equipment.

Odoms stated that he was invited to Central Republican Committee Meeting where he was asked to inform those present of upcoming projects and advise of ways in which they can save the taxpayers money. Odoms noted that Senator Shippy was also present at this meeting.

Odoms stated that the Solid Waste Department has also been very busy.

Odoms stated that they currently have several new road applications for access that he needs to inspect.

Cove Road acquisition of land is complete, and the deeds are in the County’s possession. It is currently out to bid. The bids will close on June 10, 2025. Utilities are currently getting moved and LHTAC is actively working. Odoms will notify the chairman when it is time to select an engineer.

Gordon Wilkerson questioned if Bill Lillabridge had completed the draft for the permit to remove rock from the Weiser River. Odoms stated he had not heard anything but was ready to remove the rock this fall. Wilkerson stated that he would follow up with Mr. Lillabridge.

Odoms stated that they would begin applying rock to the Weiser River Canyon. A layer of rock would be needed before they could proceed with the mag-chloride application. He noted that the road has a lot of maintenance issues that need to be addressed.

IN THE MATTER OF CODE REVIEW / MORATORIUM REQUEST)

Royce Schwenkfelder addressed the Board. He referred to the Agricultural Protection Area that is tasked with ways to preserve and protect agricultural ground in the County. Schwenkfelder also addressed the four splits on original parcels. Schwenkfelder stated that if the code is worded incorrectly to delineate the four splits, he requested that the Board please change it to reflect that intent accordingly. Schwenkfelder stated that planning our growth doesn’t automatically equate to the taking of property rights and violations of the Constitution. A full copy of his statement is available upon request.

Frank Schwartz addressed the Board. Schwartz stated that he had an interest in seeing the continuation of agriculture as the primary industry in our area and did not want to see the range, timber and farmland in the county divided for residential use.  He requested that the Board keep the long-standing intent and interpretation of the code and preserve agricultural land for agricultural production. Schwartz stated that if the Board suddenly changes a long-standing interpretation of code, it will only open the county up for more litigation. A full copy of his statement is available upon request.

Harry Soulen addressed the Board and stated his support for an Emergency Moratorium. Soulen suggested the Board take as much time as needed to get all the facts, information and views of the residents of Washington County, before making a hasty decision that could impact the county in years to come. Soulen noted the difference between the two

legal opinions obtained by the County and questioned what information was provided to the attorneys to which they based their opinions. A full copy of his statement is available upon request.

Ron Jaeger addressed the Board and made a statement in support of the Emergency Moratorium. He noted that many residents are concerned with the direction that the Board is heading concerning the division of land zoned for agriculture. He requested that the Board put an Emergency Moratorium on divisions in A1 Land until Planning & Zoning and the County Commissioners can evaluate and adopt the proposed changes. Jaeger referred to Idaho State Statute 67-6523 concerning Emergency Moratoriums (copy was provided to the Board for review). He believed an Emergency Moratorium would be beneficial in this matter due to the conflicting and confusing legal opinions that have been received. Jaeger stated that according to the Idaho Association of Counties, a public hearing was not required to put an Emergency Moratorium in place. Placing a Moratorium would halt production and allow them time to assess and get ordinances in place. Jaeger provided the Board with a petition with one-hundred and thirty signatures supporting the proposal for Moratorium. Jaeger advised that he had an attorney draft a proposed Moratorium Ordinance for them to consider. A full copy of his statement and supporting documentation is available upon request.

Wilkerson expressed concerns that Jaeger had gone outside of the county for legal guidance rather than to the Washington County Prosecuting Attorney.

Soulen responded, stating that the Washington County Prosecuting Attorney was only a advisory position to the Board and does not have the ultimate authority on the matter.

Wilkerson stated that the Board can only get legal advice and guidance from the Prosecuting Attorney. If they fail to follow the advice given, the Prosecutor would not be required to defend the Board in any litigation.

True Pearce was present but refused to make a statement to clarify the matter for the record.

Jim Harberd stated that he had previously requested a Moratorium but was told that it was not possible. He believed that they needed more time to allow them to do research and that a Moratorium was necessary in this matter.

Nate Marvin stated that he had also previously supported the Moratorium. However, after speaking with Canyon County and the Prosecuting Attorney, he has changed his position and does not believe that this matter meets the criteria for an Emergency Moratorium as it primarily deals with matters concerning infrastructure. Marvin stated that he does want to protect the farmland in Washington County, and he does believe that code changes are necessary. However, he was not comfortable with an Emergency Moratorium at this time.

Ron Jaeger disagreed with the infrastructure argument by Marvin. Ron Jaeger read aloud Idaho Code 67-6523 concerning Emergency Moratoriums for the record.

Jim Harberd referenced Ordinance 720 concerning an Emergency Moratorium from Bonner County. Harberd stated that he believed that the issues in Washington County were just as serious as those in Bonner County where a Moratorium was put in place.

Gordon Wilkerson stated the reasons why he could not support an Emergency Moratorium. He noted that there was an additional code for protection of development on agricultural land. Wilkerson believed that the Commissioners, along with the Washington County Residents, could work together to make the appropriate changes to code without entering an Emergency Moratorium.

Ron Jaeger made an additional argument.

Soulen questioned whether building permits will be granted to every person with twenty acres of land that applies.

Wilkerson responded to Soulen’s question and stated “No”.

Jim Harberd stated that without a Moratorium there may be an increase in permit applications. Having a Moratorium would ensure that they work on a resolution in a timely manner and avoid the possibility of additional lawsuits.

Soulen again questioned if building permits would be granted on twenty acre lots. He further advised the Board that the Planning & Zoning Department would need clear direction as to how to handle these applications until the matter is resolved.

Nate Marvin responded and read aloud the motion made at the May 12, 2025, meeting. Marvin stated that the motion was to direct Bonnie and the Planning & Zoning Department to honor the settlements that were negotiated by our current Prosecuting Attorney and further direct Bonnie in Planning & Zoning to follow the code as written and per the Memorandum of Opinion from our current Prosecuting Attorney. Planning and Zoning should direct any legal questions to the current Prosecuting Attorney. Marvin stated that all three Commissioners voted on the motion, and it was sent to Bonnie in Planning & Zoning. He stated that this would be the process until the code is changed/modified. Any person applying for a building permit would be required to provide all the correct documents including the building plans, Southwest District Health requirements, and proof that they had met with the road supervisor. Marvin stated that if a person wanted to divide one-hundred acres into five lots, that would be considered development and then may be subject to the subdivision rule. He stated that the way the code was currently written did not address development.

Royce Schwenkfelder questioned the difference between farm/ranch house versus residence. In his opinion a farm/ranch house implies some degree of production of agriculture.

Marvin was not certain if there was a description of a farm/ranch house in code and noted that this may need to be addressed.

Jaeger responded and stated that there was no difference between a farm/ranch house and a residence. He stated that an agricultural lot is entitled to one residence. Jaeger further advised the Board that the Planning & Zoning Commission is in place to write, interpret and apply code. It then goes to the County Commissioners to decide based on their recommendation. The Board is to ultimately make the decisions. However, if the county is “only going to take the advice of a lawyer, let’s all go home and leave the lawyer here and let him do it all”.

Marvin stated that he did not want to make a mistake that would get the County sued. A lawsuit against the County would only get passed down to the taxpayers of Washington County. That was the reason they need to make the best decisions they can. Marvin further stated that he would rather see that money be used towards roads, bridges and the fairgrounds instead of a lawsuit.

Jaeger stated that he did not want to see any lawsuits filed against the County. He stated that to protect both sides, the Commissioners should put a Moratorium in place.

Marvin stated he was all for a Moratorium if it is done legally. He would anticipate that if not done correctly it would be challenged.

Jaeger advised that the Board would be challenged whether the decision was right or wrong. Jaeger recommended that decisions not be made based on threats of lawsuits.

Wilkerson addressed the Planning & Zoning efforts to clarify codes. He stated that by the time the Commissioners had seen the revisions that Planning & Zoning had been working on, they knew that there was going to be a new Prosecuting Attorney, since Delton Walker was not running for re-election. The Commissioners at that point believed that they needed to wait to adopt the new codes. The intent was so that the new Prosecuting Attorney would not have to deal with something that the past Prosecuting Attorney had implemented. He further stated that since the election, the Commissioners have been dealing with some personnel and land issues that could possibly be litigated and there is one more potential litigation matter they could be facing. Wilkerson stated that in executive sessions to try and fight through legal litigation and some of it resulting from this current issue. He stated that the County is currently facing a twenty-million- dollar litigation that the County is going to pay for. He stated that he, Nate Marvin, Jerod Odoms, Matt Thomas, Lyndon Haines, Delton Walker are facing personal million-dollar lawsuits. Wilkerson stated that he understands that the code needs to be reviewed, and he stated that he has been contacted by several large landowners in the County to have a discussion.

Jaeger reminded the Board that any ordinance changes begin with public hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission, and then they will make the recommendation before the Board. He believes that the Planning & Zoning Commission has been shut out of this discussion since the first of the year. If the Prosecuting Attorney had noticed a problem, he should have taken it up before the Planning & Zoning Commission. He advised the Board that the rule used to be that a public hearing needed to happen first at the P&Z level and then at the Commissioner level. That rule has since changed, and now it is one or the other. He stated that the County Planning & Zoning has already had these hearings. Therefore, the Commissioners could put those changes on the agenda and pass them as soon as next week. The Prosecuting Attorney should have notified the P&Z Commission as soon as he noticed the problem but instead things were done in private. Jaeger stated that he did understand the matter of attorney client privilege. However, the first stop should have been before the P&Z Commission to begin working on the issue.

Harberd stated that the whole issue requires additional time and therefore supports having a Moratorium. This will allow for extensive public hearings on the matter. Harberd noted the similarities to the Moratorium that was put in place in Bonner County.

Jim Harberd made a motion to vote on the ordinance placing Moratorium in Washington County. The motion died for lack of second.

Marvin stated that he would like more time to review the Moratorium that was placed in Bonner County. He would like to re-address at the next Commissioner meeting. Marvin stated that he would support the Moratorium if it could be done legally to avoid more litigation.

Wilkerson stated that he was previously supportive of the Moratorium. However, after looking into it further and understanding the legal threshold you must go through, his opinion has changed. He stated that he did not want to put the County at risk for something that they could fix in the time frame that the Moratorium would be in effect.

Schwartz believed that the decision/direction that the Commissioners gave last week, has already placed the County on the slippery slope of potential litigation. By putting the Moratorium in place, everything would be put on hold, and they would not be implementing a changed interpretation of a code that had been in place for more than forty years. The Moratorium would allow them to review the code and get it right.

Jaeger stated that placing a Moratorium would allow them time to review the code. If it gets done sooner, the Moratorium can be repealed.

Harberd stated that he believed that the matter could be resolved before the 182-day Moratorium deadline. This would allow them time to work towards a solution and put a hold on any new split applications.

Marvin stated he will review the ordinance from Bonner County before he makes any decision.

Jaeger thanked the Board for listening to them and encouraged the Board to contact them with any further questions.

The matter will be re-addressed at the Commissioner Meeting scheduled for May 27, 2025.

IN THE MATTER OF WASHINGTON COUNTY FAIR FY26 BUDGET REQUEST)

Mariah Johnson appeared before the Board to present the Washington County Fair Board Budget Request for fiscal year 2026.

Johnson stated that the funds would be used for maintenance of the grounds, payroll, utilities and the new barn addition. She stated that the addition to the Beef and Sheep barn they were requesting an additional 3% in additional funding. Johnson presented copies of their Balance Sheet, Budget Sheet and Profit & Loss Report. She stated that they are working on getting donors for the Beef Barn. Johnson advised the Board that the new fairgrounds caretaker is doing a fantastic job.

Nate Marvin complimented Mariah Johnson for all her efforts. IN THE MATTER OF AMBULANCE)

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to recess as the Board of Washington County Commissioners and convene as the Board of the Weiser Ambulance District. Motion carried unanimous.

Brenda Lee, Deputy Clerk, called roll call: Gordon Wilkerson, present; Jim Harberd, present; and Nate Marvin, present.

Alan Foster, Ambulance District Director, met with the Board. Order No. 25-31 for payroll expenses in the amount of $30,780.99 and Order No. 25-32 for general expenses in the amount of $16,630.17 was presented to the Board for review.

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve Order No. 25-31 for payroll expenses in the amount of $30,780.99. Motion carried.

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve Order No. 25-32 for general expenses in the amount of $16,630.17. Motion carried.

Alan Foster updated the Board concerning the Community Health Fair that they participated in. He advised that their Community Paramedic Program has received a lot of attention from surrounding communities and counties that are interested in doing the same type of program in their area.  The Program has been implemented for

approximately six months, and he stated that Ashley is doing a great job with the program.

Jim Harberd moved, seconded by Nate Marvin, to recess as the Board of the Weiser Ambulance District and reconvene as Board of Washington County Commissioners. Motion carried unanimous.

Brenda Lee, Deputy Clerk, roll call: Gordon Wilkerson, present; Jim Harberd, present; and Nate Marvin, present.

IN THE MATTER OF WICAP FY26 BUDGET REQUEST)

Jonathan Gonzalez, Community Services Director and Cindy Egan, Community Programs Coordinator, appeared before the Board to present the WICAP FY26 Budget Request.

Gonzalez thanked the Board for the donation last fiscal year in the amount of $17,500.00. Gonzalez reviewed with the Board how the funds were used.

Gonzalez stated that they are requesting the same amount in FY2026. However, Egan advised that they have already used up the funds from FY2025.

Gonalez further stated that they have been in contact with the Area 3 Agency of Aging. IN THE MATTER OF BUILDING COMPLIANCE PROCESS)

Danny Roark, Washington County Building Inspector, appeared before the Board to ask for direction on how to proceed regarding code compliance. He stated that since he has been in office, he has determined that Washington County has approximately two- hundred and twenty (220) open permits dating back to 2013. Roark stated that this number could go down once the previous inspectors paper copies were reviewed. He stated that there were approximately six (6) pending violations that need to be addressed. The Prosecuting Attorney, True Pearce, has advised them not to issue compliance letters on these violations.

Roark stated that he understood that the Building Official and the Administrator of Planning & Zoning are the governing bodies on zoning and building codes. It is his understanding that if their interpretation is not agreed with, there is an appeals process to address those issues.

Roark advised the Board that the Washington County Sheriff’s Office or the Prosecuting Attorney are the departments responsible for issuing fines for non-compliance on these matters. However, not being able to issue compliance letters greatly limits their ability to do their jobs, as described in code.

Roark specifically asked for guidance from the Commissioners concerning the non- compliance issues in order to remedy these outstanding non-compliance matters.

Harberd suggested that Roark review the paper records from the previous inspector. This may change the number of open permits.

Both Nate Marvin and Jim Harberd stated that after the review, the remaining permits should not be cancelled.

Marvin questioned why they are not issuing the red tags or stop work orders when they are found to not be in compliance.

Roark advised that it is the individual and/or the contractor’s responsibility to call for the inspections. He added that no permit is supposed to go over 180 days.

Roark questioned the Commissioners as to what they would like him to do with the permits that exceeded 180 days. In addition, he would also need direction on the six pending violations where they were advised not to issue compliance letters. He advised that once a compliance letter is sent, the party has thirty (30) days to respond. If there is no response or they fail to comply, it is then forwarded to the Sheriff’s Office for them to investigate further. If the Sheriff’s Office confirms non-compliance, it is then forwarded to the legal department for a potential fine. Roark stated that his job requirement is to make certain that the buildings are safe and that everyone is following the rules.

Marvin agreed and stated that he understood that the Building Inspectors’ job was to make sure that they were following the code and getting the correct permits.

Harberd questioned how temporary services, such as electrical, are handled when they switch to permanent service.

Roark stated that Washington County Code and IRC Code state that temporary services are supposed to be handled through the Building Department

Marvin suggested that Roark purse the matters of non-compliance, get them into compliance and complete.

Roark questioned how the Commissioners would like this to be done. Roark stated that he would prefer a form letter from the legal department that would fit both building and zoning requirements.

Marvin stated that he understood that the matter before the Board today was dealing with the building issues and not the zoning issues.

Roark stated that some of them go hand in hand. He stated that the Commissioners had placed him in the zoning office, and that he was asked at his interview if he would be willing to help in the zoning department in his free time.

Marvin stated that he would like Roark to begin working on the outstanding building permits that are non-compliant and let the other employees in the office handle P&Z matters, for the time being.

Marvin also stated that they are working on getting Roark an office.

Roark noted that Cindy Womack-Steele in Planning & Zoning is doing a fantastic job getting all the paper records scanned in. However, it may still take a few weeks to complete.

Harberd recommended that Roark draft a letter and have the Prosecuting Attorney review it. In the alternative, he should have the Prosecuting Attorney draft the letter.

Roark stated that he would prefer that the Prosecuting Attorney draft the form letter. A draft letter for the Building Department would be sufficient at this time. The form would just need to include an area where they can list the violation of code.

Marvin recommended that Roark work on getting this form letter so that these matters can be cleaned up.

IN THE MATTER OF WASHINGTON COUNTY VETERAN’S ANNUAL REPORT)

Bob Barber, Steve Fenske, and Jana Hill appeared before the Board.

Steve Fenske, Chairman of the Washington County Veterans, provided an update to the Board. He stated that there were more than thirty (30) members in the program. They currently meet once per month. Fenske reviewed the Mission Statement to the Board. He also advised that there will be a Celebration of Life for John Duvall at the end of the month.

Jana Hill, Treasurer for the Washinton County Veterans, stated that they are currently working on getting set up as a non-profit with the IRS. She stated that they typically get

$2,000.00 each year from Washington County to assist with expenses. However, this year they are requesting the amount be increased to $3,000.00. This was due to the upgrades needed for the honor guard unit and she noted that the gas bill that they are responsible for is approximately $1,000.00 each year. The additional funds would be greatly appreciated.

Fenske thanked the Board for allowing them to add Ssgt. Thomas C. Booth to the Memorial Wall. They are working on getting this done.

IN THE MATTER OF BOARD OF EQUALIZATION)

No matters were brought before the Board.

IN THE MATTER OF SREDA GRANT APPROVAL)

Kristen Nieskens with the Snake River Economic Development Alliance (SREDA) appeared before the Board to discuss a grant approval request.

Nieskens stated that SREDA typically does grants through Idaho Commerce to supplement the income for SREDA. She stated that in the past the City of Fruitland has facilitated those grants for them. Unfortunately, the City of Fruitland is not able to assist them at this time. Therefore, they are asking Washington County to consider facilitating this grant. She noted that Washington County has assisted them on past grants as well.

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve the facilitation of a SREDA Grant Request. Motion carried.

IN THE MATTER OF PROSECUTING ATTORNEY)

True Pearce, Prosecutor Attorney, requested an Executive Session under Idaho Code 74- 206(1)(a)(b)(f) to discuss personnel matters and imminent legal issues.

Gordon Wilkerson moved, seconded by Nate Marvin, to go into executive session at 11:36 a.m. in accordance with I.C. 74-206(1) (a & b) to consider hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent. This paragraph does not apply to filling a vacancy in an elective office, (b) to consider the evaluation, dismissal or disciplining of, or to hear complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, or public school student; (c) to conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency; and (f) to communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated. The mere presence of legal counsel at an executive session does not satisfy this requirement. Motion carried unanimous. Gordon Wilkerson, Aye; Jim Harberd, Aye; Nate Marvin, Aye.

Jim Harberd stated they were out of executive session at 12:57 p.m.

Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to cure an open meeting law violation under Idaho Code 74-208, paragraph 7. Nate Marvin stated that he had made a phone call to Jim Harberd to get clarification on a letter that they were going to have True Pearce put together for them. This should have been done in open meetings. Motion carried.

Jim Harberd moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to cure an open meeting law violation. He stated that he had a meeting with Bonnie and put her on the agenda for a personnel matter which did not meet the requirements for the executive session, and it

violated the open meeting law.    This should have been handled in an open meeting. Motion carried.

Pearce instructed the Commissioners to add to the record that no final decisions were made, no letters were written, and anything at that meeting is null and void.

Harberd added to the record that no final decisions were made, no letters were written, and nothing was decided at that meeting, the meeting was null and void.

Pearce reminded the Commissioners, should any other serious matters come up during the agenda that they can add executive session to seek legal counsel.

Motion by Gordon Wilkerson, seconded by Nate Marvin, and unanimously carried to recess at 1:02 p.m. until May 27, 2025, at 8:45 a.m.

Chairman, Board of County Commissioners

ATTEST:

Clerk

A full audio recording of the Commissioner Meeting is available at the Clerk’s Office upon request.