Wright County Board Minutes

November 22, 2005

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

The following corrections were made to the minutes of 11-15-05: Page 2, 1st paragraph, change from “John Hanz” to “John Kanz” in all instances. Russek moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.

Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Aud./Treas. #7, “Set Public Hearing Date, Solid Waste Service Fee” (Hiivala); Hwy. Engineer Item #3, “Renewal of Land Rental Contracts” (Asleson); Item For Consid. #3, “Authorize Signatures On Homeland Security Grant, $48,378, Buffer Zone Protection Program (7-01-05 to 3-31-06)” (Norman). Sawatzke moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0.

On a motion by Russek, second by Eichelberg, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda:

A. ADMINISTRATION

1. Performance Appraisals: K. Becker, B. Schlimme, R. Schmidt, Atty.; P. Thompson, Aud./Treas.; B. Peterson, Ct. Svcs.; D. Demarais, D. Kotila, Hwy.; C. Elness, C. Grew, K. Perkins, Sher./Corr.

2. O/T Report, Period Ending 11-04-05.

3. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Law Enforcement Contract, City of Albertville.

4. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Law Enforcement Contract, City of Maple Lake.

5. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Law Enforcement Contract, City of Monticello.

6. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Law Enforcement Contract, City of Otsego.

7. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Law Enforcement Contract, City of St. Michael.

8. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Law Enforcement Contract, City of Waverly.

9. 3rd Quarter Training Reports.

10. Acknowledge Receipt Of MCIT Dividend Payment, $224,456.

B. AUDITOR/TREASURER

1. Approve Tobacco License For Super America Store #4267 (St. Michael) For Remainder of 2005 & 2006.

2. Approve Tobacco License Renewal For 2006: Flintstones Lounge (Clearwater City).

Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, requested that the Clearwater Tax Abatement Request be referred to the next County Board Meeting to allow adequate time for review by the Assessor. On a motion by Heeter, second by Sawatzke, all voted to continue this issue to such time as the Assessor is prepared to bring it forth for review.

Hiivala received a request from Rodney Marquardt to remove a beaver dam on County Ditch 10. Eichelberg moved to authorize Mattson, Russek, and Hiivala to review the request at 8:00 A.M., 11-25-05. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.

An update was provided on Ditch 13. Eichelberg, Russek, Hiivala and Steve Meyer (Highway) reviewed the request for repair to a culvert as requested by the property owner, JoAnn Wren. Russek said the culvert is in disrepair but the County can only grant approval for repair. The cost would be borne by the property owner as it is a private driveway which crosses the Ditch. Eichelberg moved to direct Hiivala to notify the property owners that the County cannot fund the request but will grant permission for repair as long as they contact Kerry Saxton, SWCD, to determine elevation levels. Any culverts replaced must remain the same size. The motion was seconded by Russek and carried 5-0.

The October Revenue/Expenditure Guidelines were reviewed. Eichelberg said a notice was received from the Parks Department indicating that fuel costs will exceed budget. The usage is comparable but the price has increased. Eichelberg moved to accept the Guidelines, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.

As recommended by Hiivala, Russek moved to set the cutoff date for final approval of claims for 2005 for 12-20-05 at 4:30 P.M. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried unanimously.

Heeter moved to set the Solid Waste Service Charge Public Hearing for 12-13-05 at 9:30 A.M., seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.

On a motion by Russek, second by Eichelberg, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit.

Steve Berg, Consultant, presented the Wright County Emergency Operations Plan for approval. Mattson voiced concern as he felt review of the document should have been presented to a Committee Of The Whole prior to it being presented for Board approval. Sawatzke and Heeter, who are Civil Defense Committee members, said this document had not come to Committee for review. The Committee was briefed that the updates were being made to the Plan and it would be presented for Board approval. Sawatzke noted that what was being reviewed today only includes the 48 pages reflecting amendments to the Plan. Berg said “MINWALK” is the State’s recommended changes for the Plan. Those items which include an asterisk are required by the State. When the plan was rewritten last year, those items were included. The State’s requirement this year is that “MINWALK” still be in force. The Board packet material distributed reflects these changes. It is also required that an inventory be completed for all emergency response equipment in the County. The State will enter this information into a database. The entire Plan is 770 pages and includes 13 annexes besides the hazards basic plan. The plan reflects who is responsible and in control for various situations. It also reflects who is involved and in charge of operations. Heeter said the updates are required by the State. The deadline to meet these updates was late September, 2005. The County received an extension but is two weeks past that date. Berg was hired on a 10-month consulting basis and will be done as of 11-30-05. One of the requirements was to finish updates to the Plan. Berg explained that four reviews are completed (one annually) and alternate between the State, County Board, Peer Group, and again by the State. This year is the County Board review of the plan. Heeter moved to approve the changes to the Emergency Operations Plan knowing the Plan is reviewed every year and is a work in progress. The motion was seconded by Russek. Mattson was uncomfortable with approval as they were only seeing a portion of the document. The motion carried 4-1 with Mattson casting the nay vote.

A Deferred Compensation Committee Meeting was held on 11-15-05. Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0:

Discuss Fiduciary Responsibilities. Bob Hiivala invited Tom Jones to make a presentation to the Deferred Compensation Committee Of The Whole on fiduciary responsibilities for government sector defined contribution plans. For Wright County’s contribution plans the County Board is the fiduciary. Jones is the Minnesota and North Dakota State Program Director for Nationwide Retirement Solutions, which specializes in endorsed IRC 457 Deferred Compensation Plans and Educational Plans for plan sponsors. Jones presented an overview of who is a fiduciary, responsibilities and duties of a fiduciary, plan governance, guidelines for outsourcing, documentation, establishing a process and investment policy, and legislative and regulatory changes. Government plans are not subject to ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974), however, MCIT suggests following the ERISA process. Service providers and their investment policies should be reviewed at least annually. Jones made available several handouts and provided Hiivala with a detailed binder containing sample forms, minutes, etc. Following the presentation there was an opportunity for specific questions regarding Wright County. These questions addressed criteria for selecting providers, education vs investment advice, annual review and administrative agreements with service providers, and amendments to meet legislative compliance. Jones referenced the National Association of Government Defined Contribution Administrators (www.nagdca.org), International Foundation for Retirement Education (www.infre.org), and www.plansponsor.com as good resources. (End of Deferred Comp Minutes)

On a motion by Sawatzke, second by Russek, all voted to schedule a Personnel Committee Of The Whole Meeting for 12-13-05 at 1:30 P.M. to discuss Elected Department Head Salaries for 2006. Mattson noted that he may be unable to attend this meeting.

Richard Norman, County Coordinator, requested the Board authorize signatures on a Homeland Security Grant, $48,378, for the Buffer Zone Protection Program. Norman received the grant from the Sheriff Department yesterday. The grant was written by Sgt. Mike Laurent and is a one-time expenditure for communication equipment. The equipment will place the County on the same frequency as the Monticello Nuclear Security Team. No County match is required and the grant covers the entire cost of the equipment. Sawatzke moved to authorize signatures on the Homeland Security Grant, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0.

The meeting recessed at 9:34 A.M. and reconvened at 9:45 A.M.

At 9:45 A.M., the Public Hearing for Ditch 20 was reconvened. Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, said a meeting was held last week with the developer. Asleson distributed information relating to the request to outlet into County Ditch 20, including an Agenda for the Hearing, a letter from Kerry Saxton, SWCD, outlining his position on the request, findings on the petition by the City and landowners to outlet into the Ditch, and an Agreement between G.P. Land Corporation and Wright County Parks for improvements to Robert Ney Regional Park. The request was originally addressed by the Board on 10-04-05 and was continued to another meeting, where it was determined that additional hydrological modeling by the engineer was required. Asleson said the Board should focus on three action items including: 1) whether the County Board, as Ditch Authority, approves of the petition; 2) whether they will order an outlet fee to be paid by the City or developer; and 3) how to deal with future repairs and maintenance of the Ditch.

Kerry Saxton, SWCD, said the request involves a very complex watershed. Saxton corrected an opinion portrayed in his letter dated 11-21-05. The letter says a slight decrease would occur in the amount of peak water flowing at Hwy. 8 and Lake Mary. Today, he stated a slight increase in the amount of water flow may be seen at Highway 8. He did not feel the model reflected changes downstream but Lake Mary will still have a problem. In the area where the development is proposed, about 150,000 acres flows there now. He said there will not be new water added and the capacity to hold water on the site will almost be doubled. In the low area where the Ditch is, they will increase the capacity about five-fold. The overall ponding area has significantly been increased which cuts the peak runoff off of the site by about half. The overall volume will increase. They have talked with the developer about applying for an LCMR Grant to use this pond as irrigation of yards. This would have to be managed by the City to periodically drop water levels. Possible grant funding could be used toward installation of pumps and pipes. As the City develops other area, significant ponding will be required or a large amount of water will be put into the system. Saxton felt that the system as designed will handle the water flow. He said the country has seen more intense rainfalls and if this continues or back to back storms are seen, the water would go higher than projected. With regard to Lake Mary, Saxton said the flap gate will not allow back flow into Lake Mary from the Park. The water will flow downstream. However, during periods of high water, more water will be held back in Lake Mary. Some increase will be seen in the water levels in the Park but for periods of less than two days. Saxton said if you look at the entire watershed, 10,000 acres affects Lake Mary. The request involves only a small portion of this land. Saxton said the sod farms to the west will basically operate the same. Mr. Carlson was directed to negotiate with the developer on increasing pipe size. As this would affect water flow downstream, the design engineer is looking at a possible increase in pond size. If the pipe size were increased, the models would need to be rerun. Saxton said the other concern is whether the sod field is considered a legal wetland. If it is not, he could increase drainage from it. He would have to pay for delineation to determine whether it is a wetland. Soil borings may be required in the Spring to determine this. Sawatzke inquired about the number of hours spent by the SWCD on this request. Saxton projected at least 100 hours. Upon checking further on water flows, they found that the water flows to the north to the large wetland and then flows back. It does not seem to overflow on a 100-year storm and that is one of the reasons they want that maintained, so they do not see increased flows from other sites. When development occurs in the future, significant ponding will be needed to control release rates. Mattson had concern with the effects of water. Although ponding may be okay for a development, it may not be good for sod fields, the Lake or the Park. Saxton said the model runs a certain storm through the system. If back to back rainfalls are experienced and there is no chance for water to flow, problems will occur. Some of what they are dealing with is the structures went in too low and they will always be a problem.

Kurt Deter, Rinke-Noonan, said the drainage authority follows Sections 401 and 411 of State Statutes. Section 401 addresses outletting into a County ditch system and Section 411 is used when a municipality is involved. The important language is in Subdivision 4, indicating that at the hearing the Board is to consider the capacity of the outlet drainage system. That is why Saxton’s report is important, reflecting little or no change and possibly an improvement in some situations. Some design criteria must be used. Under capacity issues, staff recommendation would be used. The Statute allows the Board to establish conditions which are listed in the order. The outlet fee and the assessment would need to be addressed. With regard to the capacity question, staff has indicated no change from what is currently there.

John Bogart, Bogart, Peterson & Associates, outlined proposed improvements near 65th Street and the Park. They originally discussed constructing a regular creek. Saxton had safety concerns with this plan. They wanted to make sure to regulate the water through that area so it did not drain any faster. The agreement would require the replacement of the storm sewer with a 24” pipe to bypass the ponds. The water directed there would already be considered treated. Then it would flow downstream from the outlet structure to the Lake. The requirement was that the release from this entire development and pond be no more than half of the existing rate. Under existing conditions the current CFS is 94 coming out of the Ditch to the north. The current proposal is for 38 CFS. Earlier today, they discussed what they could do to the sod fields to the west. If they tried to keep the flow rate at one half, they would be at 47 CFS or 9 more CFS than what is currently being released. To do that, they would have to increase the size of the pond. The Paumen property (future addition east of the sod fields) will be required to have a large pond. Water from the sod fields may be released to Paumen’s property as a solution.

Al Bruns questioned who would monitor the water flow and the work to make sure it is done correctly. Deter explained that the County, as ditch authority, will issue an order with conditions. As with any order, the County would have enforcement ability if a violation occurs. Saxton would be the drainage inspector. The County has the authority to make sure the correct size of culvert is installed. As-built drawings could be required.

Bogart said under the pre-conditions (current), Lake Mary gets to a 100-year elevation at 998.40 and under post conditions, 998.33. The pond to the north in Ney Park would get to existing conditions of 998.95 and under post conditions, 998.91. The release from Happy Knoll development is 94CFS. Under the proposed conditions, it is restricted to no more than 47 CFS. The flow from the pond in Ney Park to Silver Creek is currently177 CFS and proposed at 173 CFS. From Ney Park to Lake Mary is currently 25 CFS and under proposed conditions, there would be no flow to Lake Mary.

In response to a question by Sawatzke on land ownership, Bogart explained that the Happy Knoll development is owned by Mr. Woolston. Mr. Paumen owns the land that Mr. Wilson is purchasing. There are additional properties included in the agreement which are beyond the Happy Knoll development which have not yet been developed. Sawatzke asked whether those parcels need to come and petition for this outlet. Deter said if they are not in the assessed area, they cannot outlet into the drainage system under Section 401.

Asleson said that is why the City signed off and also Paumen. There were two petitions filed, one was by the City signed by the Mayor and the other by GP Land and Bradley Paumen. Land with a 201 PID number prefix is in Albion Twp and owned by Bradley and Brian Paumen. Land with a 210 prefix is owned by the Mavencamps, who have also signed off on the petition for approval. Asleson said as this area will enter Ditch 20 through the same flow pattern, the request is for approval for all of the parcels listed. The difference between the parcels is that some are not currently slated for development. Sawatzke said the County does not have development plans for most of those parcels and questioned how the County could approve them to drain into the Ditch. Bogart said a Maple Lake City Ordinance requires all developments release rates to be no more than a 100-year storm under existing conditions. Any release would have to be ponded due to development. That condition was placed into the model run. Sawatzke said the City could lower their standards. He referenced a situation in the eastern portion of the County where a Ditch was taken over by a City. Five years later, the entire development was under water. Bogart understood the concern and suggested that Saxton oversee the situation to make sure this does not happen. Deter said a condition could be imposed to set a limit on drainage, regardless of what the City does. Asleson said the Findings reflect the parcels involved. Those with a 110 PID prefix in the middle column are already within City limits and make up the main portion of the development. The parcel in the third column 110-045-000010 is owned by GP Land and is already developed and flows into this pond. There are probably four parcels that are a part of this development. However all the land flows to the ditch. He suggested that if the Board wished to review the details of storm water planning for the other areas as they develop, that could be included as a condition set by the Board. Heeter was uncomfortable with including properties that are not involved due to the complex hydrology of the area.

Discussion led to the expense of development as it relates to storm water runoff. Bogart said the City of Maple Lake currently has no storm water runoff fee. Woolston, Mark & Brad Paumen, and Pete Mavencamp have an agreement to help fund this. The storm water runoff fee in Monticello was estimated at $6000/acre.

Joel Miller is a homeowner on Lake Mary. He referenced statistics cited for the models. He presented what he termed as factual figures. After a 2-3 inch rain, he has water within 20’ of his back door. Water remains in his yard from two to four weeks.

Heeter again voiced concern on a blanket approval for parcels not yet developed. With the unknowns associated with development (how many homes, impervious surfaces, etc.), she felt it was too complex of a watershed to include them. After some discussion, Asleson suggested the Board’s order would allow the City to outlet storm water into Ditch 20 and should deal with three parcels owned by Mavencamp and one parcel owned by GP Land. The three Paumen parcels and the other five parcels owned by Mavencamps could be listed as those where the storm water plans for construction, holding ponds, etc., need to come back to the Board for review and approval. Although this area has drained to the Ditch, there is concern with the impervious surfaces added through development. There is also concern with flow rates and volume. Discussion followed on requiring future developments to provide plans to the Board. Bogart said the modeling was drawn up under the assumption that there would be more residential development (in conformance with the comprehensive plan). If future developments would pave the land entirely, this would also pose a problem for the Happy Knoll development as they could not take that much water. Sawatzke felt the City would have the same concern, but he said the County needed to protect the benefitted landowners on the Ditch.

The last page of the draft Findings relates to reimbursement to the County for administrative, publication and legal fees relating to this petition. Asleson was unsure of the total legal fees but estimated $1200 based upon current and projected billings from Rinke-Noonan for Deter’s services. Staff time of the County Attorney’s Office would not be included as this was not done on Ditch 33. Although more time was expended on this request, information was provided at an earlier date. Sawatzke said the SWCD had expended more energy on this project than any other and although the County is not in the business of making a profit from these services, he felt taxpayers should not fund these costs. It was agreed by the developer that $6,000 was a fair compensation for the work completed by the SWCD. It was estimated that nearly 150 hours of work have been completed by the SWCD on this project.

The Public Hearing on Ditch 20 closed at 10:43 A.M. and the regular meeting was reconvened. Discussion followed on whether to strike from approval the parcels not included in the Happy Knolls development. Deter said if the PID’s that the Board was considering striking were petitioned for, the Board must either approve or deny them for lack of capacity or information. Asleson said the original petition included a larger area and he misunderstood what was included. He suggested the document be revised to reflect those petitioners are denied at this time due to a lack of information (that they not be stricken). The document could then be brought back for approval. Asleson will circulate the revised document to the landowners involved prior to bringing it back for Board approval. Sawatzke moved to lay this item over until 12-13-05 at 9:35 A.M. The motion includes drafting a document granting approval for PID #’s 110-800-364300, 110-800-364200, 110-800-364100 and 110-045-000010. The balance of the PID #’s listed would be denied for lack of supporting information and the ability to be able to handle the capacity. Paragraph 5 of the document will include a $6,000 fee to the SWCD and $1,500 fee for legal services, along with publication and postage fees. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.

Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator, presented the 11-14-05 Parks Commission Minutes and recommendations. The 2006 grant cycle is upcoming and four possible grant applications were reviewed. The following items were reviewed by the County Board today:

Durst Property. Proposed purchase of a 181-acre parcel located east of the South unit of Stanley Eddy Park. The Parks Commission recommended the County Board grant approval to begin discussion with landowners on possible connections to the Park. One of the stipulations with this proposed purchase is that other parcels providing connections to the South Unit of Stanley Eddy park be found. A remediation grant could be applied for to protect and restore land near closed landfills. Funding for this grant may be unavailable within two years. This grant is up to $500,000 with the match being indicated by the County at the time of application. Mattice suggested a 40% match to be equal with the non-metro area. The process would be to discuss the acquisition with landowners and then apply for the grant. Appraisals and the public hearing would follow. Mattice said there is no tilled land on this property and thought a wildlife corridor could be built. Planning & Zoning informed Mattice there are six building entitlements with this land. Eichelberg moved to accept the recommendation of the Parks Commission to authorize Mattice to contact landowners on a possible connection to the l81-acre parcel of land for sale. The motion would include authorizing Mattice to apply for grant funding. The motion was seconded by Russek and carried 5-0.

CSAH 12 Trail. The final stage will be completed in 2007 (15th Street to the City limits of Buffalo). Mattice will need to reapply for funding for this portion of the project as it is unlikely another extension will be approved for the original grant. Eichelberg moved to authorize Mattice to reapply for grants for the final stage of the CSAH 12 Trail, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0. Mattson noted that this project will be more expensive than planned.

Property Near Ney Park. This is an 88-acre parcel. The goal is to provide a connection from Ney Park to Lake Maria State Park. Acquisition of this parcel may be beneficial in starting that connection. This parcel does not provide a direct route and is further west than desired. It was felt that it might be in the interest of other groups to protect this parcel and if secured, it could possibly be used as a connection or a wildlife corridor. The Parks Commission voted in favor of having Mattice contact other agencies that might have an interest in the property and report at the January meeting with any findings. At today’s Board Meeting, Eichelberg moved not to pursue purchase of the property at this time but rather to see if any other organization such as the State Fish & Wildlife Service would be interested. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.

Other. The Parks Commission received updates on other activities including the development of a CIP Plan, Ney Park Reclamation, Clearwater/Pleasant Regional Park grant project, Stanley Eddy land purchase, and the Ney Park land purchase.

Mattice informed the Board that the site work has been completed on the cold storage building and that construction should commence next Monday.

Margaret Donahoe, MN Transportation Alliance, provided information on a proposed constitutional amendment which would dedicate all motor vehicle sales tax revenue to highways and transit. This will be on next year’s ballot. The Transportation Alliance along with other groups formed a coalition to pass this amendment. The request is for organizations, counties and cities to endorse this amendment. A phased-in transfer of the remaining 46% in revenues would be placed in the States general fund (resulting in an additional $300 million annually after fully phased-in). Sawatzke questioned how the various organizations felt about the requirement of 40% of the funding being used toward mass transit. He said the way the language is written, there is no guarantee on how much will be used for mass transit vs. road and bridge funding. Donahoe said the language in the amendment was a result of it being a part of a much larger bill. It was one way to address the need for transit funding. The Governor’s proposal last December included 60% toward highway and 40% toward transit. Although the language does not assure this, this was the intent. She said there was a lot of risk involved with attempting a language change in the next session. It was the consensus that AMC’s position on this issue was needed. Donahoe said AMC’s platform has included the dedication of all motor vehicle sales tax for many years. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, said it would be harder to pass a constitutional amendment than perhaps approval through the regular legislative process. He said AMC’s position of the amendment would be favorable if the impact was neutral to counties. Sawatzke moved to lay this item over until after the AMC Annual Conference, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.

Wayne Fingalson, Highway Engineer, brought forth a revised agreement with the City of Albertville for the purchase of the current truck station. A conference call was held with the developer and City attorney to discuss concerns on the agreement, including that voiced by Sawatzke on the additional $1/sq. ft. being paid by the developer to the City if the property is not developed as a medical facility. Fingalson said the City will use this as an incentive for the property to be developed as a medical facility. It was indicated by both the City and a representative of the developer that this property is desired to be developed in this fashion. Sawatzke said in review of the draft agreement, the 12,000 sq. ft. building reflected in the last agreement has now been sized to a 9,000 sq. ft. building. It was explained that they wanted to construct a building that would fit properly on the site. He questioned why the City would be paid an additional $70,000 by the developer if the property is not developed as proposed. He felt the $70,000 should be given to the owner of the land, Wright County (i.e., citizens of the County) instead of Albertville. Asleson did not have an answer, but his response was that this was negotiated between the City and the developer. Once the County sells the land, it loses control over what happens with the parcel. Fingalson thought if something other than a medical facility were considered, there would be no agreement based on what was discussed as part of the conference call.

Eichelberg brought forth another perspective. If the County decided not to approve the agreement due to the $70,000 being paid to the City, they would possibly put the property out for bid. The County would have the chance of losing both money and the determination of what is placed on that corner. Eichelberg moved to approve the purchase agreement with the conditions that the County Attorney, Highway Engineer, and City work together. The motion was seconded by Russek. Russek noted that with pending assessments, the sale price is $638,000.

Sawatzke moved to amend the agreement reflecting the buyer shall pay the County an additional $1/sq. ft. if they don’t build a medical facility. He felt it was the same incentive to the developer as before, the City had the same power and control, but the additional funds would go to the County. Russek said that could be the deal breaker. Time is of the essence as the City may lose the buyer for the property. Asleson said this agreement is scheduled to go before the City Council on 12-05-05. The amendment failed for lack of a second.

Asleson highlighted the following changes to the purchase agreement from the last meeting:

Size of building. There were concerns the developer had on additional right of way the County is taking. The City encouraged that this number be reduced as an agreement that works is desired. They don’t want the developer to build something that doesn’t fit on the parcel.

Page 4. The time for the Phase II Environmental Study was changed from 60 to 45 days. Braun Intertech was consulted and this is not a problem. Closing will occur by the end of February if possible as the developer is involved with a 1031 land exchange.

Page 4, paragraph 9, was added in. While the County owns the property, the County would need to sign off on any approval the buyer seeks from the City of Albertville.

Page 6, paragraph 12. The buyer has the sole option of accelerating the closing so it occurs before the end of February.

Page 9, paragraph 20, was clarified. The original idea was that the County would demolish all buildings on the property.

Page 9, paragraph 21, the County’s threshold on contaminated materials was increased from $50,000 to $75,000. If the expense is greater, the County and City have the option to terminate the Agreement. Language was added indicating the buyer could elect to go through with the deal and pay anything in excess of $75,000, although this is not expected.

Page 9, paragraph 19. This paragraph relating to utility services was taken out and added back in. It requires the County to provide all utility services to the property line. Asleson said the County is unsure of what utilities are there and does not wish to bear this expense. Asleson’s suggestion is that if the County Board approves the agreement, it be contingent upon paragraph 19 being resolved satisfactorily as far as the County is concerned, making it clear that the County is not responsible for any utility services.

Page 10, paragraph 24. Asleson referenced the sentence added, “Buyer’s obligation to accept such right-of-way dedication is subject to Buyer’s right to review and approve title and survey.” Once the appropriate survey is completed, they could review at that time.

Mattson referenced page 9, paragraph 20 and costs of demolition. Fingalson plans to utilize the services of STS. Costs would be associated with the disposal of the salt shed. Mattson also referenced contaminated soils outlined in paragraph 20. The response is that they do not anticipate problems such as underground tanks. The paragraph was included as a safeguard. Fingalson said the cost of the Phase I Environmental Study is about $1500 and Phase II is around $5000-$6000.

Eichelberg moved to amend the motion to include acceptance of the purchase agreement excluding paragraph 19 or for paragraph 19 to reflect no expense or obligation to the County. If the City wants to complete this at their expense, that is okay. The amendment to the motion was accepted by Russek. The vote on this amendment to the motion carried 5-0.

Sawatzke referenced page 9, paragraph 22, relating to the County/City termination right. After discussion, Sawatzke moved to amend the motion to change paragraph 22 giving the County sole right to terminate the agreement by 12-31-05. The amendment to the motion was seconded by Russek and carried 5-0.

Fingalson provided an update on finding a new location for the Albertville Truck Station. Fingalson learned that the 20 acres of Scharber property has been sold and there are only 4 acres available to purchase. However, this acreage is low wetland. They are in the process of review on use of wetland credits for this property, what fill would be required to make that property suitable, and negotiations on a reduced price.

Mattson called for a vote on the original motion for approval of the agreement. The motion carried 4-1 with Sawatzke casting the nay vote.

The meeting recessed at 11:45 A.M. and reconvened t 11:55 A.M.

Eichelberg moved to adopt Resolution #05-61 approving Traffic Signal Agreement No. 03-01 with Albertville, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0 on a roll call vote. The Agreement is for a traffic signal system at the junction of CSAH 37 and westbound I-94 ramp put in long ago. The Agreement, sent to the City in 2001, was just returned with City approval.

Fingalson said there is an agreement with Dale and Linda Gapinski to extend the crop rental for the Rasset and Stemper sites for 2006. The rental cost is $55/acre for the Rasset site and $65/acre for the Stemper site. Due to the uncertainty of the Jail construction project, it was noted that any damage which could occur to crops from soil borings could be deducted from the rental due at the end of the crop season. Asleson will add language to address this issue. Russek moved to approve the rental rates as presented, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.

Bills Approved

City Albertville. $3,446.20

All Safe Inc. 1,049.40

American Probation & Parole 250.00

AMI Imaging Systems, Inc. 3,667.67

City Annandale 1,177.20

Aramark Correctional Serv. 5,337.25

Tim Cameron 125.00

Cellular One 256.74

Climate Air 1,831.68

Cokato Township 557.50

Cub Pharmacy 2,214.56

Decorative Designs Inc. 184.31

Diversified Networks Inc. 5,568.89

DLR Group 151.82

Ecolab 155.42

Edens Group 160.00

Excel Systems LLC 5,440.11

Fastenal Company 173.87

First State Tire Recycling 827.35

Gateway Companies Inc. 6,802.00

Gould Bros.-Chev-Olds 110.00

Holiday 9,265.67

Wesley Holland 121.36

In Focus Corporation 299.00

Intoximeters Inc. 1,248.18

JR’s Appliance Disposal Inc. 849.00

KNR Communications Serv.. 287.87

LaPlant Demo Inc. 722.96

LexisNexis Matthew Bender 182.15

Marco Business Products 1,118.45

MASYS Corporation 2,628.87

Mid-America Business Sys. 694.81

MN Co. Attys. Association 105.00

MN Hwy. Safety/ Research 4,050.00

MN Office of Enterprise Tech. 370.00

MN West Community/Technical 179.00

Monticello-Big Lake Hospital 800.00

Montrose TIFS 706.40

Nat’l Instit. For Truth Verif 1,440.00

Office Depot 1,883.88

Photo I 526.08

Precision Prints of Wright Co. 211.51

Qwest 9,554.90

Residence Inn 544.80

Sherry Schliesing 594.89

Shell Fleet Plus 3,846.35

Software House Int’l 694.39

St. Cloud Stamp & Sign 162.69

State of MN-Info Tech Div. 575.27

Total Printing 131.10

Trans Union Corporation 221.58

Trimin Systems Inc. 608.47

City Waverly 399.20

West Payment Center 701.48

Wright Co. Planning/Zoning 1,614.00

Wright Excavating 500.00

Wright Hennepin Electric 219.43

29 Payments less than $100 1,245.01

Final total $88,790.77

The meeting adjourned at 12:00 P.M

Published in the Herald Journal Dec. 19, 2005.