Wright County Board Minutes

May 10, 2005

The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Heeter, Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek and Eichelberg present.

The County Board extended thanks to Craig Hayes, Purchasing Agent, for making a new gavel for the Board Room. It was discovered recently that the gavel was missing and Hayes made a new one to replace it.

Eichelberg moved to approve the minutes of 5-03-05, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.

Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Consent Item A5, “Authorize Signatures On Memorandum Of Understanding With LELS For Donation Of Vacation Time To An Employee” (Norman); Item For Consid. #2, “Letter From Sherburne County RE: RC&D” (Mattson). Russek moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.

The Consent Agenda was discussed. Mattson requested that Item D1, “Highway, Award Overlay Contract #0502 Including Alternates To Buffalo Bituminous, $2,048,573.71” be moved to the Highway Engineer’s items for discussion. Sawatzke referenced Item A4, “Claim, EPA Audio Visual, $42,864.70” and inquired whether the County was satisfied with the recent upgrade to the Board Room camera/sound system. Mattson said the audio was good, but he understood that the background behind the Board does cause focusing problems. Mattson’s concern was that before the product was purchased, issues such as the background and lighting were not brought forth. Heeter felt that EPA would stand behind the product if there were any outstanding issues. Heeter moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the addition of Item A5 and moving Item D1 to the Highway Engineer’s Agenda Items. The motion was seconded by Eichelberg. Sawatzke questioned the camera/sound system warranty and felt the County should not pay for the claim without a warranty. Mattson indicated that he wanted to also pull for discussion Item C1, “Extension, Request Approval To Hire A New Full-Time Office Assistant Position As Budgeted, Eff. 7-01-05.” Heeter and Eichelberg amended the motion to include removal of Item C1. It was clarified that the motion included approving Consent Item A4, “Claim, EPA Audio Visual, $42,864.70” only if there is a warranty. The motion carried 5-0:

A. ADMINISTRATION

1. Performance Appraisals: K. Becker, T. Frazier, Atty.; T. Veld, K. Green, Aud./Treas.; L. Anderson, Bldg. Maint.; R. Klocke, Hwy.; R. Vaa, Parks; K. Jopp, P&Z.

2. Transfer $1,035,134 From Budget 820, Personal Services, To The Various Departments In The General Fund.

3. Approve 5-03-05 Deferred Compensation Committee Minutes.

4. Claim, EPA Audio Visual, $42,864.70.

5. Authorize Signatures On Memorandum Of Understanding WithLELS For Donation Of Vacation Time To An Employee.

B. AUDITOR

1. Approve Tobacco License For “Olson’s Truck Stop” (Silver Creek Twp.).

E. PLANNING & ZONING

1. Accept The Findings & Recommendations Of The Planning Commission For The Following Rezonings:

A. David & Ruth Neske (Chatham Twp.). Planning Commission unanimously recommend approval of the establishment of a Rural Planned Unit Development District.

B. John Perry (Corinna Twp.). Planning Commission unanimously recommend approval of the request to rezone 80 acres from AG to A/R.

The Board discussed Item C1, “Extension, Request Approval To Hire A New Full-Time Office Assistant Position As Budgeted, Eff. 7-01-05.” Norman said the request would authorize the advertising and recruitment process to commence. Mattson felt the Board should address what they will do if additional departments ask to move forward with advertising for positions that start 7-01-05. The Legislature is due to adjourn in two weeks but it was felt that this date may be extended. On a motion by Sawatzke, seconded by Eichelberg, all voted to lay this issue over for two weeks.

Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, said a meeting was held on 5-06-05 to look at the proposal by the City of Monticello for drainage of the Carlisle Village development into County Ditch 33. The meeting was attended by Hiivala, Sawatzke, Monticello City Engineers and a property owner from Ditch 33. Sawatzke said a formal petition is expected and a public hearing would follow. Sawatzke will meet with Brad Thompson, STS, on 5-11-05 to review possible work for STS crews on Ditch 33 in last year’s project area. There are tile pieces in a field which need to be cleaned up. Rock will be placed around the inlet/out areas as erosion has occurred. A load of firewood dumped in the Ditch will be removed and given away or brought to the Compost Facility. Russek inquired whether Carlisle Village was always part of Ditch 33. Sawatzke said they were not and the County can deny the request. It this were the case, the developer would expend funds to design a lift station and run the water elsewhere. However if the request were approved, those funds would be expended to upgrade the area. Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, said the Board recently authorized the continued involvement of Kurt Deter, Rinke-Noonan, on this issue. Asleson plans to contact Deter and then respond back to the City of Monticello Engineers with regard to their petition to outlet the storm water from the development to the Ditch and also to move a portion of the ditch from County to City jurisdiction. This was provided as an informational item.

Mattson said that as part of the Joint Ditch 15 tour scheduled for 5-18-05, he would like to review a beaver dam problem on County Ditch 10 at the intersection of CR 6 and CR 30. Meeker County has been invited to the tour.

The claims listing was reviewed. Mike MacMillan, Court Services Director, was present to address questions relating to a claim on page 13, New York Marriott Marquis, $507.87, for lodging. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, said that the Personnel Policy Manual states any out-of-state travel must have prior Board approval and should be placed onto the Agenda. The claim is to prepay for a hotel room. Normally the room would be paid for after attendance at the conference. MacMillan said he and one staff member will attend the American Probation and Parole Conference. The rate is $140/night. MacMillan said he has not attended this type of conference since 1997 and received approval from the Judges to attend. His intent was to also obtain approval from the County Board. He confirmed his hotel reservation through his personal credit card. The claim being discussed today was for the staff member’s hotel stay. It was the consensus that approval for attendance should be placed on the next County Board Consent Agenda to be consistent with other departments’ requests. It was also felt that the normal procedure was not to prepay hotel reservations but to submit a claim for payment upon return. A credit card number is usually provided to guarantee the registration. Mattson referenced claims on page 11, 2nd Wind, $5,020.94, Sheriff-Furniture & Equipment line item, and page 28, 2nd Wind, $5,020.95, Non-Departmental-Program Expenses line item. The purchases were for two treadmills for the Sheriff’s Department. Mattson said the payment for one treadmill will be out of seizure funds. His concern is that when the Drug Task Force meets, they are generally short of funding. It was thought that expenditures from the seizure fund may be overseen by the Sheriff and/or Todd Hoffman. Tom Kelly, Attorney, said the Attorney’s Office expends seizure funds for computers, equipment, seminars, etc. He was unsure how the Sheriff Department utilized drug enforcement funds. Norman said the treadmills were commercial grade and may have been installed already. Sawatzke questioned the criteria for use of the treadmills, whether deputies are required to have an exercise regimen, and whether other employees are authorized to use the equipment. He also wanted to know whether the exercise area was appropriate for this type of use, the quantity and type of equipment located there, and how often it was used. Norman said use of the equipment has been by word of mouth. It has not been advertised to all employees that the equipment exists and is available for use. The collective bargaining agreement with LELS does not stipulate an exercise or fitness program for the deputies. Norman said the Sheriff has control of expenditures within the budget as an elected department head and the County Board has control over the budget. Sawatzke asked that the Sheriff provide a report on what equipment is located in the room and how the room works (when it is open, who it is available to, etc.). Hiivala said Chief Deputy Don Lindell indicated the equipment is used by deputies and several other County employees on their own time (before or after work hours). Russek moved to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit. The motion includes the Sheriff providing an explanation of the purchase of the treadmills and the removal of the claim for New York Marriott Marquis. The motion was seconded by Sawatzke and carried 5-0.

Tom Kelly, Attorney, introduced Ryan C. Schmidt. Schmidt was hired as Assistant County Attorney and will work with children in need of protective services, termination of parental rights, JPO’s, juvenile delinquencies, and other duties within the office. Kelly recently attended a County-wide meth workshop. Last year 148 children were removed from homes and 67 of those were meth related. Schmidt was welcomed.

At 9:46 A.M., the regular meeting was recessed to a Public Hearing for a variance request to the Feedlot Ordinance as requested by George and Kay Bakeberg. Tracy Janikula, Feedlot Administrator, said the Ordinance calls for a 100’ setback for a building from the property line. The Bakeberg’s would like to add onto an existing building with a 50’ setback from the property line. The neighbor to the north has no objection and is a dairy farmer. No comment was received from the DNR or other neighbors. Janikula recommended approval of the variance request. The Bakebergs have resided on this property for many years. This is an open feedlot but within the established setbacks of what is considered a feedlot. The SWCD designed a filter for rainwater drainage. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:50 A.M. and the regular Board meeting was reconvened. Russek moved to approve the request for a variance to the Feedlot Ordinance as requested by George and Kay Bakeberg, seconded by Sawatzke. Sawatzke said approval is based upon the fact that the barn was historically located on the property and the building will be a part of a series of environmental improvements. The motion carried 5-0.

Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, said the County recently approved of a purchase agreement for a parcel located to the west of the Fairgrounds in Howard Lake. At that time, a line was added to the original purchase agreement that the seller shall plow back the property at the conclusion of the 2005 growing season. This was initialed by both the seller and Wright County. Subsequently, a proposed addendum was received from Dave Perry, the realtor representing the sellers. The addendum relates to the County accessing the property for the purpose of completing a survey. It also states, “Seller agrees to plow back subject property (at the end of ‘05) on the condition that they will be given the right to negotiate to lease the property prior to the lease going out for bids. Buyer agrees to reimburse seller for cost to plow back if seller does not obtain lease.” Asleson said past County practice has been to accept bids for rental of farm land. However, if the amount gained through the lease is less than $15,000 in a year, the County can find someone to lease the property. In the addendum the seller asks for right of first refusal. Asleson said there is not a legal problem with doing that but thought the Board should determine the value of rental per acre. If the seller does not meet this, the County could put rental of the land out for bid. Russek has been involved in farming all of his life and said it is common practice for the land to be left in the condition it is received in. He did not support reimbursing the seller to plow back the property in the Fall. Eichelberg stated that during negotiations, the sellers did not discuss lease of the land but now want it to be part of the agreement. This was Heeter’s concern as well. During the negotiation process, part of one of the counter offers was for land rental at a lower rate per acre. The sellers did not appear to be interested in making that part of the agreement. Mattson indicated that in the Fall, land condition is always returned to what it was in the Spring. Asleson said the closing date is 10-31-05 and there is the chance that plow back could occur after that date. Heeter felt the County had given a fair price for the property and that it was not a saleable piece to anyone else at that price. Eichelberg moved to authorize Asleson to cross out the second paragraph of the addendum dealing with plow back of the land and to authorize signatures. The addendum will then be sent back to the seller to make a decision. The motion was seconded by Russek and carried 5-0.

Asleson brought forth discussion on a proposed agreement with the City of Howard Lake regarding the water tower on the Fairgrounds property. A diagram was submitted by the City Attorney representing what the City proposes. One of the conditions is for the County to install water meters. The meters would be removed in the Fall and reinstalled in the Spring. Asleson contacted the Fair Board and they felt this could be accomplished during maintenance activities. The agreement also calls for the County to pay water service in excess of 185,000 gallons/year. The current diagram shows three water locations, but Asleson said there were no restrooms at location A. Therefore, meters would be installed at two locations at the County’s expense. The purpose of the meters would be to determine what amount of water is run into the City’s sewer system. Sawatzke said the original verbal agreement with the City was for the County to receive free water. Since that time, the figure of 185,000 was arrived at because there was concern by the City that water was being wasted at the Fairgrounds. Asleson understood the City had voted to approve the Memorandum of Understanding language including the items in the attachment. If approved by the County Board, Asleson would incorporate the language in the attachment into the Memo of Understanding. Russek said the original agreement did not include sewer nor the charge for water usage in excess of 185,000, but he thought the remainder was basically the same. Sawatzke felt the rate of sewer and water should be also be in the agreement. This would not be the exact figure but rather whether the fee is charged at the commercial or residential rate. Shared revenues for placement of antennae or other communications equipment on the water tower is also part of the agreement. Asleson said the City did receive some type of free service by the company that placed the antennae on the tower but it was not something that could be easily divided. Eichelberg said the water from the hydrant is used for fire department demonstrations and the tractor pull. He felt these activities should be metered as well. Thanks was extended to the new City Council in Howard Lake for their desire to resolve this issue and to Asleson for all of his work. Sawatzke moved to request the Attorney’s Office to redraft and bring forth a document for signatures, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.

At the 4-12-05 Meeting, the County Board approved a quote to remove manure from a property located in Franklin Township (north of Delano) which involves buffalo owned by Daniel Tapio (Parcel #208-200-024401). The manure would be removed and transported for stockpiling in Hennepin County. The landowner and her son failed to appear for the scheduled meeting last week to obtain the consent for cleanup. Staff is now seeking an Order from the Board for cleanup. If cleanup does not occur voluntarily, the County would have the work completed by the contractor and assessed back to the property as a lien. Asleson distributed a copy of the Order asking the Board to authorize the issuance of a summons and complaint. This Order directs the property owner and feedlot owner to clean up the property and would require a response to the complaint within 30 days of date of service. If cleanup is not performed within this time frame, the County would hire the cleanup. Cleanup was also ordered by the Court last Fall when the MPCA brought Tapio to court.

That Order states that the property must be cleaned or an administrative penalty of $7,300-$7,500 may be posed. If the MPCA chooses to enforce the Order, Tapio could be found in contempt and end up with jail time. However, this would not result in cleanup of the property. Asleson asked for authorization to have the Board Chair and Coordinator sign the Order. It would then be served upon the property owner and feedlot operator. Heeter moved to approve this action, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.

Item D1 from the Consent Agenda, “Highway, Award Overlay Contract #0502 Including Alternates To Buffalo Bituminous, $2,048,573.71” was moved to the Highway Engineer’s items for discussion. Mattson was concerned with the $25,000 shortfall from the budget amount to the bid amount. Wayne Fingalson, Highway Engineer, said the handouts reflecting the $1,028,402.85 budget do not include the 5% contingency fund. With the 5% contingency added to the subtotal, the total is $1,079,822.99 (local share). The overlay projects typically do not exceed what the bid amount is. He said that there is more than enough State Aid funding for this project, realizing the County is borrowing ahead. There is about $34,000 more in State Aid than what was bid, and $1,500 more in the local share. Norman referenced the local amount and questioned whether the $1,078,316.59 included the Annandale cost for curb replacement. Fingalson confirmed that it did and that Annandale is responsible for $25,562 of this amount. Russek moved to approve the request to award Overlay Contract #0502 including alternates to Buffalo Bituminous, $2,048,573.71. The motion was seconded by Eichelberg and carried 5-0.

A Transportation Committee Of The Whole Meeting (TCOTW) was held on 5-02-05. The minutes and discussion at today’s meeting (in italics) follows:

Discuss Request for Retail Sign in Albertville. The developer of the retail mall “Albertville Crossings” approached Russek asking that a sign directing traffic to this mall be installed in the right of way of CSAH 37 (near the intersection with CSAH 19) in the City of Albertville. This request had previously been denied by the Highway Department based on its policy. Signs for the outlet mall and for the Mn/ROAD sites are already in place, as are signs for Timothy’s of Riverwood. Cordell explained that signs are not put up for reasons of advertising, but that the outlet mall sign and the Mn/ROAD sign were put up to safely direct traffic to those destinations, both of which are significant distances from the interstate exit. The sign for Timothy’s was grandfathered in as a specific service sign, which was allowed for restaurants in a rural intersection. In 2001, two golf courses requested signs and received them because they are also eligible under this policy. Though Albertville Crossings is located away from the interstate, it primarily draws local traffic so the need for signs really does not exist. If a sign is granted for this request, it will be hard to turn down future requests from others. There is a full mast arm on the traffic signal at the intersection of CSAH’s 37 and 19, but it is at capacity now in terms of weight. Signs for the outlet mall and for the Mn/ROAD site will be removed when access to the interstate is granted at CSAH 19 or nearby, as it will then be unnecessary to direct traffic through the City of Albertville. Cordell distributed photos showing the intersection. He also presented the latest traffic counts in this area. Over 11,000 vehicles travel CSAH 19 daily, south of CSAH 37. RECOMMENDATION: The TCOTW recommended not to install a directional sign for the retail mall, Albertville Crossings, as it is not necessary for the purpose of safety or for directing traffic to this location. Furthermore, the directional signs now in place for purpose of safely directing traffic to locations (outlet mall and Mn/ROAD) located a distance from the interstate exit will be removed when an interchange is completed nearer these two sites.

The road tour began at 1:40 p.m. and arrived at the current Wright County Highway shop in Albertville at 2:00. A drive was taken around the premises and a few pictures were taken.

View Potential Sites for the Albertville Truck Station. The first site visited was the Scharber Industrial Park, located in Otsego next to the Mn/ROAD site. Lots are available here in various sizes and run about $3/square foot, without water/sewer, which will be added later. It is already zoned as an industrial park, would need minimal site work, and has good access to a future CSAH and the nearby interstate highway. However, approximately $10,000 in SAC and WAC fees would be assessed and some road improvements may need to be made. The Kittridge Crossing site was visited, which is located northwest of the outlet mall. Cost of the property is not known. There are no immediate plans for water/sewer, so utilities would need to be extended to this site, in addition to the SAC and WAC fees of approximately $10,000. Future road improvements would also be necessary. However, similar to Scharber Industrial Park, minimal site work would be required and it is appropriate for industrial use with good access to the future CSAH 37 location. [The group then moved on to the City of Albertville office to pick up Larry Kruse.] Kruse joined the group, which arrived at the new Albertville Public Works building at 2:30 p.m. Kruse gave a tour of the new city facility, which houses both the Parks and Highway Departments. The cost of construction was about $2 million. The City is interested in acquiring the property on which the current Wright County Albertville shop is located and might consider a two for one exchange of property near their current, new site. The County would be allowed to sell/exchange directly to a City, but any other sale would have to be put out for bids. The Committee discussed the desirability of putting a minimum acceptable price on the property if it is put out for bids. Wright County’s site, together with the adjoining property, could be very valuable if joined together as one parcel. A current holding/sewer pond at the new site will be drained later this year and available as a building site for Wright County if they are interested. Another site just northeast of the new Albertville City site was also viewed as a potential property. City sewer and water would be available at both sites. Drawbacks to these sites are the location (not on a CSAH) and potential odors from the nearby holding ponds. However, this would be a good opportunity for a partnership with the City of Albertville, especially for a fuel station and salt/sand storage. [Kruse left the tour at this point.] A site just west of the current Otsego City Hall was visited, but was not favored because the location is too far east for efficient servicing of the entire district. Utilities are not available and access is unfavorable to county highways. Though the land cost would probably be low and partnership opportunities might be available with the City of Otsego, a more central location is desired for the sake of efficient truck routes. Heeter said that she likes the idea of working with the City of Albertville on a ‘two to one’ land swap, but wondered if the value of the County’s land might actually be higher on a comparison ratio. Sawatzke agreed that the county’s property is worth more than twice Albertville’s site. Eichelberg said that the Kittridge site is probably most appealing to him, in part because of the water and sewer availability and the future road improvement planned in that area. There was some discussion about putting the current property up for bids and whether a minimum bid should be required. A structure similar to the one at the Cokato shop, with one additional stall, will probably be installed on the new site. The Committee members expressed interest in having Fingalson find out from the City of Albertville what selling price they would put on the property next to their own shop and find out what a site at Kittridge Crossings would cost. The price for the Scharber property could also be a determining factor in which site to choose. There was discussion about locking into a lower price now and taking a year or so to vacate the current property. Fingalson said that he would like to have the decision on location made by mid-summer so that budget planning for 2006 can proceed. RECOMMENDATION: It was the consensus of the TCOTW that Fingalson find out the cost of purchasing property from the City of Albertville located next to the City’s current public works site. It was also the consensus that Wright County put its current site up for sale by bids with the understanding that Wright County could use the premises for a year after bids are accepted; and with the understanding that no bid less than $500,000 would be accepted; and with the understanding that any bidder submitting a bid of $500,000 or more would have the opportunity to take part in a verbal bidding at the County Board meeting that same day, following the opening of bids for the sale of this property. The sale of the County property would then be a separate transaction from the purchase of a new site.

At today’s County Board Meeting, Fingalson said he had talked with Larry Kruse this morning. The Albertville City Council tentatively set the value of their property at approximately $3.00/sq. ft. The value of the County’s property is thought to be about $6.50/sq. ft. Sawatzke felt the City land may be priced high as it sits next to the sewer pond. Fingalson said Kruse expressed interest on behalf of the City to work with the County. The property located next to the County’s has a potential buyer, who may be interested in the County’s property as well. Asleson was less than comfortable with the verbal bidding process recommended by the TCOTW. The statute dealing with the County selling land says advertisement for bids must run three weeks. Contracts over $50,000 for sale or purchase must involve a sealed bid process. Asleson was unfamiliar with a sealed bid process with an open bidding process to follow. He recommended a sealed bid process whereby the County can reject any or all bids. The County must have good reason for rejecting a qualified bid. If a minimum bid price is established, the sale must be completed. He suggested the Assessor be contacted for the highest and best use of the property. Asleson was not aware of any authority to sell the property but by sealed bids. The only exception to this would be if the property were sold to another governmental entity. It was the consensus that the Board accepts the recommendation of the TCOTW with the exception of the following sentence, “and with the understanding that any bidder submitting a bid of $500,000 or more would have the opportunity to take part in a verbal bidding at the County Board meeting that same day, following the opening of bids for the sale of this property.” Norman clarified that the TCOTW minutes will not have that sentence removed, however, as that was what actually took place at that meeting. Discussion followed on potential sites for the Albertville Truck Station. With regard to the Scharber property, there is currently no sewer/water at this site. Sawatzke did not feel the County should create their own system to be used short term until sewer/water services are available. He also did not think that the County should expend the cost to run the sewer/water to the property prior to development in that area. Fingalson recommended the Board authorize preparation of an ad for selling the property. This information would be brought to the TCOTW for review. Concerns voiced by Sawatzke could also be discussed at that time. Sawatzke suggested the City condense their offer to writing. As there is a potential buyer for the County’s property, it was felt that this process should be expedited. Heeter moved to approve the TCOTW recommendation with the removal of the sentence, “and with the understanding that any bidder submitting a bid of $500,000 or more would have the opportunity to take part in a verbal bidding at the County Board meeting that same day, following the opening of bids for the sale of this property.” Sawatzke seconded the motion with the understanding that staff would prepare the paperwork for review but not actually publicize anything. As Heeter felt the process should move forth due to an interested buyer for the County property, Sawatzke withdrew his motion. Discussion followed on the economics of running sewer/water to the Scharber property. Fingalson suggested the County proceed with drafting the bid documents. This information would be placed on the County Board Agenda of 5-24-05 for review. The County would then proceed with advertising. Fingalson will contact the City of Otsego to obtain costs related to both the Kittridge and Scharber sites in 2006. That information will also be presented at the 5-24-05 Board Meeting. Sawatzke seconded the motion to include drafting of the documents and directing Fingalson to obtain costs from Otsego. This information will be placed on the 5-24-05 County Board Agenda. The motion carried 5-0.

The group stopped to view the project on CSAH 42, which repaired the gabion wall failure. They also discussed the recent complaint of one homeowner on CSAH 42 who said that traffic is so near and fast in front of her home that her house vibrates when large trucks pass by there.

View/Discuss CSAH 36 Options (East of TH 101). Concerns have been raised about the flooding potential of a certain low section of CSAH 36, just east of TH 101. A portion of this highway has flooded and been closed to traffic about four times in the past five years. Because of the deep peat that is present in the low area, it will take about $1.5 million to raise and rebuild the road. It might be better to consider a less expensive option that would prevent flooding in most but not all years. RECOMMENDATION: It was the consensus of the TCOTW that the Highway Department look into improving this section of CSAH 36 by choosing the “mid-solution,” which is estimated to cost about $600,000-650,000. This will require the raising and the widening of the grade for a 600-foot length by using light-weight fill. Extensive excavation or bridging may be needed, and timber piles and foam material will probably be used for the improvement, which will help prevent flooding. The cost of right of way is not included in this initial cost estimate, but State Aid money could be used for improvement of this highway, which could be scheduled to begin as early as next year.

Review List of Turnback Candidates. Fingalson distributed a list of turnback candidates for review by the TCOTW. He said that he would like the County Board to make a decision to eliminate many, if not all, of these highways from the current County State Aid system in order to present a newer transportation plan to the Screening Board. A newer plan showing many miles of projected new roadway will help generate millions of more dollars from State Aid, but only if roadways not meeting the CSAH definition are removed from the system. Studies done in 1992 and 1994, as well as the Northeastern Transportation study recently completed, identified roads not meeting the CSAH definition and recommended that they be removed from the county state aid system. Typically, the County upgrades roads before they are given to or back to cities and townships and agrees to up to two years of maintenance after they are given up. Many of the roads identified in these studies have already been given to cities or townships, but some still remain on the county system and need to be removed in order for Wright County to receive consideration for more State Aid funding. The City of Cokato is concerned about CSAH 53 and would like to have the County change their cost share policy for curb and gutter. Fingalson said that the City of Cokato will be meeting at the Wright County PWB at 8:00 a.m., Thursday, May 12, to discuss this issue. Sawatzke asked why there would be any objection to changing a CSAH to a County Road, especially if concessions were made to the Cities and Townships, and Fingalson said that once a road is designated as a County Road, the County can then turn it over to a City or Township without their permission. Meyer commented that the Cities’ and Townships’ refusal to accept these segments would hinder the ability of the County to receive more money for road upgrades for the entire county. The County could agree to maintain these roadways that are turned over so that the Cities and Townships would not feel the burden for a few more years. Fingalson said that he would like the help of the Commissioners in deciding which roads should be redesignated as County Roads or which should be given to Cities and Townships. Mattson suggested that this discussion be laid over until after Thursday’s discussion with Cokato. RECOMMENDATION: It was the consensus of the TCOTW that this issue of Turnback Candidates be discussed further after the meeting with the City of Cokato scheduled for May 12, at 8:00 a.m.

At today’s County Board Meeting, Fingalson said a meeting was held with the City of Cokato on 5-12-05 to discuss the County’s funding policy relating to curbing. The City agreed to the funding policy and to redesignate CSAH 53 as a County Road. An agreement will be brought forth at a future date. This project will not occur until 2006. Fingalson will also contact Howard Lake and Montrose to see if they would be willing to do the same. Eichelberg moved to approve the 5-02-05 TCOTW Minutes and recommendations, noting the change to the recommendation on the Albertville Truck Station which was acted upon by the previous motion. The motion was seconded by Russek and carried 5-0. (End of Transportation Committee Of The Whole Minutes)

Fingalson presented a draft resolution needed to transfer funds from the State Aid Regular Construction Account to the State Aid Municipal Construction Account. This will enable the County to pay Montrose and Waverly for the County’s share of projects. These projects include: SAP #86-609-13, CSAH #9, located from 8th St. to 2nd St. in Waverly and SAP #86-612-18, CSAH #12, located from 3rd St. in Montrose to 45th St. Russek moved to adopt Resolution #05-29, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.

Fingalson referenced a notice from AMC on the transportation funding bill being addressed at the Legislature (originally scheduled for 5-10-05 and changed to 5-11-05). The notice invited county boards and engineers to the Capitol to participate in debates on the House floor. There is the potential of losing all transportation funding plus having a turbo tax and a hard property freeze. Fingalson will attend the Safety Conference that day and inquired whether the Board would like him to attend. It was the consensus that Fingalson should attend if possible.

Heeter presented information from the Fairboard relating to a sound system upgrade request. The Fairboard authorized the expenditure of approximately $30,000 to purchase new sound equipment for the Fairgrounds. Currently, sound service is hired at a cost of $7,000 annually. It is the policy of the County Board to review and approve all expense requests over $10,000 by the Fairboard. Mattson attempted to contact a person who is involved with this type of work and was not able to reach him until yesterday. The person would like to visit with the Fairboard on options. Mattson said this person is very knowledgeable. After discussion, Russek moved to lay this issue over for one week to allow the Fairboard to discuss options with the person Mattson knows. The motion was seconded by Sawatzke and carried 5-0.

Correspondence was received from Sherburne County indicating that they will withdraw from the MMM RC&D Council effective 12-31-05. The letter reflects the action was not intended as a reflection of the overall working relationship among the counties involved. Due to limited resources and discussion of the merits, successes to date, and potential of the MMM RC&D Council, the Sherburne County Board took this action. Russek moved to direct Norman to add this as an agenda item for the next Quad County meeting. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.

Bills Approved

Albion Township $1,174.00

American Probation & Parole 315.00

Amer. Society for Public Ad 100.00

Ameripride Linen/Apparel 213.27

Ancom Communications Inc. 795.57

Ancom Technical Center 1,228.90

Aramark Correctional Serv. 5,161.96

Automatic Gar. Door/Firepl 390.00

B & B Prod.-Rigs/Squa 19,252.05

Joe Backes 200.85

BLM Technologies Inc. 1,258.11

BP Amoco 1,115.40

Buffalo Mini Mix Inc. 351.45

City Buffalo 25,060.93

Careertrack 129.00

Center Point Energy 7,300.21

Central MN Mental Health 240.00

Climate Air 1,270.00

Cokato Township 820.45

Collins Brothers Towing 144.04

CPS Technology Solutions 580.00

Dales Auto Service Inc. 167.00

Deerfield Seminars Inc. 169.00

Franklin Denn 398.36

Dental Care Assoc. of Buff. 460.00

Karen Determan 124.41

Eaton Power Quality Corp. 3,190.74

Elmer Eichelberg 218.40

Emergency Physicians PA 387.00

Dale Engel 157.56

Debbie Ernst 149.13

First Empire CD Mngemnt 297.27

Gateway Companies Inc. 110.00

Todd Gau 120.90

Going Under Dive Center 250.00

Gordy’s Foods 139.77

Granite City Ready Mix Co. 199.93

Greenview Inc. 283.96

H & H Sport Shop Inc. 112.00

Karla Heeter 161.46

Henn. Co. Treasurer 5,555.00

Hillyard Floor Care Supply 659.86

HTCIA-MN Chapter 180.00

Jerry’s Towing & Repair 749.30

Junction Towing & Auto Rep. 113.96

KNR Communications Serv. 706.50

Greg Kramber 197.73

Lab400Navigator 495.00

Lakedale Telephone Co. 355.74

LaPlant Demo Inc. 816.07

Donald Lindell 280.00

Maple Lake Lumber Co. 213.33

Maple Lake Twp. 1,618.00

Marco Business Products 1,168.91

MASYS Corporation 2,628.87

Richard Mattson 155.22

Mendota Heights Fairfield 239.64

The Metro Group Inc. 6,277.96

Midland Corp. Benefits SVC 750.00

MN Assn. of Assess. Ofcrs. 250.00

MN Counties Comp. Co-op 1,764.00

MN Counties Ins. Trust 260.00

MN West Comm. & Tech. 169.00

Mobile Vision 383.40

City Monticello 37,000.00

City Montrose 614.60

Neopost 383.40

New York Marriott Marquis 507.87

Office Depot 3,926.05

Lynn Peavey Company 400.25

Performance Office Papers 224.29

Photo I 503.80

PMI Computer Supplies 1,115.90

Henry Potter 1,218.00

Tom Praska 176.28

Precision Prints/Wright Co. 149.85

Prosource 485.00

Reichels Catering Service 258.73

Retrofit Recycling Inc. 4,805.23

City Rockford 2,649.10

Russell Security Resource 559.85

Ruttger’s Bay Lake Lodge 941.44

Seton Identification Products 936.07

City South Haven 338.20

Southside Township 330.60

Springsted Inc. 1,000.00

Sprint 155.16

SRF Consulting Grp. Inc. 7,696.62

St. Cloud Stamp & Sign 271.43

State of MN Intertech Grp. 1,054.88

State of MN-Adminis. Hea 278.80

T & M Towing and Snow Plow 133.13

Total Printing 1,417.47

Waste Mgmt. TC West 1,022.85

Janelle Webb 204.75

Bernard Williamson 360.87

Jerome Wittstock 143.91

Wright Co. Hwy. Dept. 26,660.90

Wright Co. Journal Press 307.12

2nd Wind 10,041.89

32 Payments less than $100 1,579.68

Final total $210,038.82

The meeting adjourned at 11:19 A.M.