Wright County Board Minutes
WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD MINUTES
JULY 24, 2007
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Heeter, Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek and Eichelberg present.
Eichelberg moved to approve the minutes of 7-17-07, seconded by Mattson, carried 5-0.
Heeter moved to approve the Agenda as presented, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.
The Consent Agenda was discussed. Russek referenced Item C1, Highway, “Distribution of 2006 Annual Report” and questioned whether the Report had been received. All Commissioners stated that they had not received a copy. Sawatzke moved to approve the Consent Agenda with removal of Item C1, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0.
1. Performance Appraisals: L. Dixon, K. Tilbury, E. Welch, L. Winterhalter, Atty.; A. Bixby, Aud/Treas.; T. Decker, R. Erickson, T. Hackenmueller, L. Huber, J. Russell, J. Sturges, Hwy.;
C. Nelson, IT; B. Cramb, D. Johnson, K. Kangas, Sheriff/Corr.
2. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Amended Law Enforcement Agreement, City Of Hanover.
3. Approve Charitable Gambling Application Form LG220, Delano Ducks Unlimited, Rockford Township Hall, 3039 Dague Ave. SE, Buffalo MN 55313 (Rockford Twp.) & Waive Waiting Period.
1. Approve Abatement, PID#216-100-201200, Ronald Skelton (Silver Creek Twp.).
2. Approve Agreement With Cities Of Albertville & Otsego For Improvements To CSAH 37.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, presented a request to hold a Forfeited Tax Sales Committee Meeting on 7-30-07. The Agenda request references reconvening the meeting, but the request would actually be to set a meeting. The meeting would include a site visit and be attended by two Commissioners, the Assessor, and the Auditor/Treasurer. Mattson and Russek serve on this Committee. Mattson moved to establish a Forfeited Tax Sales Committee Meeting on 7-30-07 at 9:30 A.M., seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0. The meeting will convene in the Auditor/Treasurer’s Conference Room.
On a motion by Mattson, second by Heeter, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit.
A Committee Of The Whole Meeting was held on 7-10-07. At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke said the Commissioners had received an email relating to establishing a date to meet with the other Counties on the Joint Powers Agreement. Possible dates for the meeting were included in the email. After discussion, Heeter was directed to contact Anoka County with the dates of 7-25-07 @ 1:30 P.M. or 8-01-07 @ 1:30 P.M. Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes and recommendations and to appoint Sawatzke and Russek (Mattson as the alternate) to meet with the other two Counties to discuss the Joint Powers Agreement. The motion was seconded by Mattson and carried unanimously.
Joint Powers Agreement For Regional Crime Laboratory. The proposal is for a Joint Powers Agreement between the Counties of Anoka, Sherburne and Wright for the operation of a Regional Crime Laboratory. Anoka County would design, construct, furnish, staff and equip the facility. They would also serve as the fiscal agent. Representatives of the Counties involved met and decided that State funding should be pursued for constructing and equipping the lab prior to the concept being presented for approval by each of the Counties. This was completed last Fall. They succeeded in the passage of an emergency bonding bill but it was vetoed by Governor Pawlenty as he did not support the size of the overall bonding bill. Sheriff Miller was reasonably certain the bill would pass next year as support has been received from both parties in both houses and the BCA. He felt support has been received from the Governor’s Office as well. Sheriff Miller stated that the expectations of crime victims and defense attorneys have changed to where they now believe forensic evidence should be processed in every crime. It is the perception that the Sheriff Office is not doing their job otherwise. The BCA provides crime lab processing for 600 law enforcement agencies and are backlogged. They have recommended that 50 scientists be hired this year to keep up with the work load. Kelly stated that there is not a week that goes by where prosecutors don’t ask for trial continuances because they are awaiting results from the BCA. If the Regional Crime Laboratory is constructed, counties may realize savings through the faster turnaround of evidence which would result in less time associated with incarcerations and through more thorough investigations being completed. Sheriff Miller said the time has come where something needs to be done. The options would be to partner and Regional Crime Laboratory; for Wright County to do something alone which would not be as cost effective; or to do nothing. If nothing is done, the expectations on crime solving would need to be lowered. Sheriff Miller said their partnership with Anoka County over the past ten years has been positive. Anoka County has trained their entire Crime Scene Investigative Team. Anoka County has more expertise as they dealt with growth ten years ago. When Wright County has needed to process crime scenes, they have looked to Anoka County for assistance. The Sheriff is mandated by Statute to investigate all felonies. Cities who provide their own law enforcement would utilize the services of the Sheriff Department. Letters of support have been received from police departments in the Counties involved. Sheriff Miller viewed this as a way to deal with the problem on a collaborative effort, saving money for all involved. The volume of evidence collected makes those involved have more expertise. Drug analysis can take months and plea agreements result. The five-year plan is to include DNA analysis. The law now requires DNA swabs from all felons and the data is entered into a database. Sheriff Miller felt additional crimes could be solved through DNA processing; however, the BCA does not have time to process the evidence. Statistics provided reflect that if one person is caught through the processing of this evidence, it may prevent seven crimes. The long-term vision is a full-service lab. The proposal reflects a cost of $6.5 million to construct the Lab ($2.5 million initially for bricks/mortar startup & $4 million for equipment and furnishings). Bonds cannot be issued for something in process. Sawatzke questioned whether Wright County should wait until the State comes forward with a bonding bill. He referenced a previous conversation he had with Sheriff Miller discussing the pros and cons with the expense of such a facility. Sawatzke felt it would be more advantageous to ask for assistance from the State and then make a decision versus to proceed and then ask for the money. Sheriff Miller said that would be the best case scenario. The proposal is for a partnership with Anoka and Sherburne Counties and Hamline University. Anoka County is moving forward to enhance their ability to process evidence. Sawatzke questioned how the $4 million in equipment would be paid for if the State does not approve the bonding bill. Sheriff Miller said a Joint Powers Board would be formed (comparable to the Juvenile Detention Facility) where County Boards involved would make decisions. Sawatzke said the Juvenile Detention Facility Board is merely advisory and they advise on very few things. If there is a year-end surplus the Detention Facility Board advises Anoka County on the budget, but Anoka County has the authority for decision making. About 90% of the money relates to staffing and Anoka County makes the decision on increases. Sheriff Miller said Anoka County is building a Law Enforcement Center and the Lab will be the second phase of the project. They will wait on the Lab until the Legislature acts as they cannot bond for an ongoing project. Wright County needs to make a decision at this time on whether to partner, otherwise Anoka and Sherburne Counties will move forward with the Lab. Anoka County has not given a date as to when the decision must be made. The State has proposed that the Regional Crime Lab become a model. As urban counties increase, more regional labs would develop and would be better able to service rural counties. The scientists would be paid for by those counties involved. Sawatzke did not feel it was fair for counties to fund Regional Crime Labs, while others in the State use the BCA for free. Sheriff Miller said the State would not partner to that degree, that they will only process certain types of evidence. Wright County could still elect to utilize the services of the BCA. Kelly fully supported the Sheriff and County to proceed with the Regional Crime Lab. Although there are funding issues to be considered, the Lab would provide a benefit to the criminal justice system. Kelly said the BCA does an excellent job with testimony on cases. Norman asked whether the primary problem was that the State has not properly funded the BCA. Sheriff Miller stated that the dynamics have changed and the volume of evidence has dramatically increased. Norman responded that the State could have identified the need for regional labs and built them. He viewed this as a similar situation to transportation funding. It is not passed at the State level, so counties are picking up the costs at the local level (paid for by local tax dollars). Sheriff Miller felt the locally based labs would be much more effective and efficient. Miller said the processing of evidence is a problem, especially in outer ring suburbs. The system is not working and they are recognizing it. He reiterated the good working relationship they have with Sherburne and Anoka Counties. Hamline University has a good forensics program. Hamline’s partnership in the Lab is something that has not happened anywhere in the Country. He felt the Lab will be a model for future jurisdictions. Norman stated that if approved, the State would need to provide assurance that operating costs which counties face would be outside of levy limits. Sawatzke felt that would require special legislation. Sheriff Miller provided information on the processing of evidence. He estimated 9000 pieces of evidence are being generated by the Sheriff’s Office. Of that amount, about 400-450 is being sent to the BCA. From there the evidence is triaged, and only a third to a half of that is being processed. He felt that they could probably support one full-time forensic scientist at the BCA. To alleviate the pressure on the BCA and process the evidence at the Lab would help to remove criminals from the street in a timely fashion. The County would still have the ability to send other cases to the BCA.
The Sheriff distributed a handout on the 5-Year Budget Projections for the Regional Crime Lab. The figures are based upon population. If Anoka County commences with operation the second half of 2007, Anoka County’s contribution toward operating costs would be $350,000 and Wright County’s would be $75,000. This would be to fund personnel and equipment to run a drug lab. The projected costs in 2011 (drug, fingerprint & DNA) would be $1,242,054 with Wright County’s share being $266,296. The DNA lab will not be in operation the first couple of years. Sheriff Miller said Anoka County would build the Lab on their property and employees of the Lab would be Anoka County employees. He said there would be plenty of evidence processing between the three Counties involved, but felt the Lab would be very marketable to other counties as well. The three Counties would receive first priority in evidence processing. Miller stated that the figures presented in the handout do not include the $6.5 million of potential State assistance. If assistance is not received from the State, Miller felt the budget would be reduced to one-third and the crime lab will not be as envisioned. If the State only funds a portion, the decision would need to be made on how to proceed and whether other partners would be added. Further discussion occurred on the Joint Powers Agreement. Sawatzke said the County is a member of the East Central Joint Powers Board. He viewed that Board as a different arrangement as the factors remain stable (34-36 bed facility). With the proposed Joint Powers Agreement for the Lab, the potential for variance is great depending on what is done. He felt that decisions made would need to be made by all three Counties involved and not just Anoka County. Sheriff Miller said the Joint Powers Agreement was drafted by Anoka County some time ago for review. He suggested that Wright County rewrite the Agreement as desired. Discussion followed on the upcoming Budget sessions and the prioritization of requests. Sawatzke referenced the Jail/LEC project and the Medical Examiner contract, and asked whether the Sheriff would reduce requests for staff in 2008. Sheriff Miller provided some examples of cost savings through the scaling back of the Jail/LEC facility, anticipation of less evidence processing, and the reduction in per diem costs for prisoner boarding due to the partnership with Anoka and Sherburne Counties. Another project on the horizon is the Public Safety Radio System. He did not feel he could hold hostage the operational end of the Sheriff Department because of boarding of prisoners. The Jail/LEC project comes at a cost but that does not drive whether people are arrested and placed there. He must make sure that the day-to-day operational needs are adequately met. He would be making additional requests to the Budget Committee Of The Whole. Sawatzke said the County has been growing at an astronomical rate for years so new staff was needed. He felt there would be a reduction in those requests as the County is not growing as fast. Sheriff Miller said they only requested one deputy last year outside of City Law Enforcement Contracts. Sawatzke suggested prioritization of budget requests based upon the limitations of the County. Sheriff Miller said that is what they have tried to do in the past. The Sheriff Department has turned back unexpended dollars and this not just because of staff not being hired. It also has to do with the department presenting funding requests for only those things that are considered necessary. Sheriff Miller will consider this request as well in order to prioritize the Sheriff Department budget requests. Mattson suggested that a meeting be held with representatives of each County (two Commissioners, the Sheriff and County Attorney from each County) to review the draft of the Joint Powers Agreement. The revised draft could then come back to the Committee Of The Whole for further review. In that way, all Counties involved would have the same understanding of the Agreement. Heeter supported the Regional Lab but said the issue is how to fund it in addition to the Jail/LEC and 800 Mhz System. Russek said a true Joint Powers provides decision making authority to all three Counties. Anoka could still serve as the fiscal agent. Norman stated that under §471, there can be a joint powers agreement without having a joint powers board. He cautioned that with a true joint powers board, liability is assumed. The building will be owned and employees hired by Anoka County. Anoka County is self insured but Wright County is not. He was unsure how workers compensation claims and errors and omissions would be handled. He felt it may be easier if Anoka County owns the building, hires the employees, and assumes responsibility for workers compensation, liability insurance, and errors and omissions. Norman will ask MCIT to review the draft document. The advisory committee could be expanded to include two commissioners and the sheriff from each County to be advisors to the Anoka County Board. Sawatzke felt there needed to be more authority than what occurs with the Joint Powers Agreement held with the East Central Regional Juvenile Center. He felt Wright County would need a stronger voice in the decision making. Sheriff Miller asked that the concept of the Regional Crime Laboratory be agreed upon. A meeting could be held as suggested with the other Counties to review the draft Joint Powers Agreement. Sawatzke referenced the cost being based on per capita. His concern was even if two counties had the same population and were charged equally, one county could be more aggressive and have double the evidence processed. Miller said the Board could set criteria on what is acceptable. That is the way the BCA is structured. Entities outside of the three jurisdictions would pay by the piece. Sawatzke felt methods of funding would be a good discussion point. Another issue brought forth by Sawatzke was the idea that crime increases at a greater percentage in more populated areas. Sheriff Miller said the more densely populated, the more calls for service. Crime is driven by many things. They have recognized that there is a close connection with other counties. Many criminals are transients and could have committed crimes in neighboring counties. Although Anoka County may have more crime, they also have more expertise to work on cases. This expertise flows through to solve crimes in Wright County as well. Recommendation: The Committee recommendation is to approve the concept of the Regional Crime Laboratory and to move forward with review of the draft Joint Powers Agreement. A meeting will be held as suggested with representatives of the three Counties involved. It will also need to be determined how this will fit into the budget. (End of Committee Of The Whole Minutes)
A Technology Committee Of The Whole Meeting was held on 7-11-07. At today’s County Board Meeting, the following corrections were made: Page 1, last paragraph, 4th line, change from “The costs of $200-$300 per radio…” to “The costs of $2,000-$3,000 per radio…” (Heeter); Page 2, 4th paragraph, 1st line, change from “…his 800 MHz system…” to “…his VHF system…” (Mattson). Heeter moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0.
LEC RADIO DESIGN AND WRIGHT-SHERBURNE RADIO DESIGN. Swing stated that today’s Committee Meeting is simply informational, an open forum for discussion and a review will be provided of the ARMER (Allied Radio Matrix for Emergency Response) System. An attempt will be made to explain the County’s interoperability duties to prepare for the 800 MHz System. Swing introduced Tom Hannon, Independent Consultant to the State ARMER Project, Commissioner Heeter as a member of the Regional Radio Board, Commissioner Eichelberg as Heeter’s alternate, Mike Mazzitello who is a principal of GeoComm, and Jay Hruby, Project Engineer, Engineering Design Initiative (EDI). EDI also serves as the County’s Technology Coordinator for the LEC. Introductions were made of the others in the room. Swing stated that Wright County is part of the Joint Powers Agreement. There are two concerns that need to be addressed by Wright County: the 800 MHz and the LEC Radio System that goes into the future 911 Dispatch Center. GeoComm has been contracted with the State of Minnesota to do a study of the region. Swing stated that there is a benefit of having GeoComm as a consultant for Wright County, as well as for the State of Minnesota, as it will provide for plan continuity. Swing stated that a Technology Committee of the Whole Meeting is scheduled for 7-25-07. At that time, Swing will be soliciting the approval of the local enhancement study that would put Wright County in place for seeking grant funding. Hannon stated that there is a $9.5 million grant available for infrastructure costs from the State for interested counties. Swing informed the Committee that Wright County will not be eligible for the grant money unless the County joins forces with the Regional Radio Board. Hannon stated that the main component the members of the State Radio Board have learned is that it is imperative that the County has a realistic plan that defines the needs (and provides solutions) of the County’s communications crisis. The demand for communications service has stripped the County’s available services. Hannon alerted the Committee that snow plow operators are going out on the road with sparse communication services and Deputies are not able to communicate with Dispatch. Hannon emphasized that those counties that have a plan in place will have a better chance of acquiring the available grant monies. Hannon stated that the ARMER plan was originally planned to meet the State’s needs. Local branches of government were to bear their portion of the infrastructure costs. Hannon stated that the out-state regions are wrestling with acquiring the funding for an adequate communications system. The costs of $2000-3000 per radio unit far exceeded the funding available for the counties. The Central MN Region sought the legislation which resulted in the State creating a bill to pick up some costs. The State has also authorized funding for the backbone maintenance costs. Hannon explained that instead of bearing the entire cost, the County would only need to pick up the costs over and above the operational and backbone maintenance costs. The $9.5 million grant from the State is available to Wright, Sherburne, Stearns and Benton. Benton does not need any funding for infrastructure, Stearns has already acquired their portion of the State grant, leaving Wright and Sherburne to compete for their portion of the $9.5 million grant. There are also grants available from Homeland Security and the Commerce Department that will need to be used prior to the end of the fiscal year. Hannon explained that the building and infrastructure costs account for approximately 65% of the total estimated project cost; a large investment from local government. Infrastructure costs include towers, redundance links, etc. Mattson stated that his bus company had a Motorola System in the 1970s and 1980s. At that time, the channels were getting crowded and asked if the County would be guaranteed that the proposed 800 MHz won’t suffer the same demise. Hannon stated that the Trunked Radio Systems work better with 800 MHz because the VHF and UHF channels are a lot more crowded. There was interference with other cities. Licensing controls have become better and the problems aren’t as significant as they once were. With the newer technology, there were initial concerns with interference. However, a lot more money has been allocated towards research. Russek asked Hannon if this system will provide the County with a guarantee of 100% communication coverage. Russek itemized specific regions of the County that have dead spots. Hannon stated that the system was built to have 95% coverage, however, the coverage has been better than 95%. The original State plan for coverage called for a standard of 95% across the State of Minnesota. However, this did not provide adequate coverage for all counties. The Radio Board is looking to change the standard to 95% coverage, county to county. Swing distributed the Wright County Minnesota Public Safety Radio ommunications Project Draft, dated 7-11-07. The Draft discusses the design aspects of the project. Hannon stated that the Draft addresses the technological specifics of the ARMER System that will blanket the entire State’s communication needs. Hannon stated that more tower sites that are properly placed will amply provide the State with its public safety radio communication needs. Hannon explained that in some instances there are some cities that have just as many towers as a County has due to a high density of buildings, road/bridge infrastructure and trees. The Draft identifies where the “weak” spots are within the County. Hannon stated Wright County will be partnering on a large scale with the towers that are already in place. There isn’t a tower in Buffalo yet, however the State is realizing that Buffalo has a need. A tower, possibly two, is being discussed to be built in Buffalo. Mattson stated that when he owned his bus company, his VHF system worked great for his needs. He stated that he could talk anywhere in Wright County. He stated that he had a better system in the 70s and 80s than what is currently in place at Wright County. Mazzitello stated that busses are taller than most emergency/public safety vehicles which have a higher antenna and runs on a higher frequency band. The higher the frequency, the higher the power outsource. Mazzitello stated that in the late 1970s and 80s, the VHF channels got very congested which resulted in a lot of radio ambient noise. This resulted in a push for the 800 MHz systems as almost every county, and each service, had their own unique frequency for their exclusive use. Russek asked how tall the proposed towers would be and whether GeoComm plans to partner with other agencies. Mazzitello stated that yes, in the ARMER System, there is a collaboration between the County and the State, as well as the County and the cities. Private parties that own towers do allow for tenants to lease towers. When a tower is contracted, an owner can sometimes award a special rate to local governments. Mazzitello stated that GeoComm will not have to buy or build new towers, as there are towers readily available. If GeoComm were to find that there is a tower with a weak signal, then that would be included in GeoComm’s proposal. Mazzitello explained to Russek that the State is conscious of visual aesthetics. The State does not like to place towers in the middle of residential areas and the towers must be self supporting, and no taller than 300’. Mazzitello referred to pages 2-23 and 2-24 of the Draft showing coverage expectations when all of the towers are working together. The plan would provide for 95% coverage, 95% of the time. Mazzitello explained that the current system was designed for 80% coverage. Solar flares, temperature inversions, building density are all factors in considering adequate tower placement and frequency strength. Mazzitello proposed that the system be designed for the portables as it is similar to the efficiency and mobilization of cell phone technology. Mazzitello stated that through the magic of the ARMER Network, the County would have a stand alone radio system that would plug into the County’s assigned frequency. Heeter asked how soon the County would be able to ask for grant monies. Hannon stated that the County Board will need to adopt the Plan, and then the Plan will need to be reviewed and adopted by the Regional Radio Board, and then the State Radio Board. This could take up to six weeks. Swing presented the Wright County 700/800 MHz & LEC Radio activity and cost estimates (dated 7-10-07). Swing stated that the proposed cost is high. Mazzitello stated that the proposed costs are non-refined as there are still variable components that have not been computed. Mazzitello reminded the Committee Members that the total cost for the project would be very expensive if the County were responsible for paying for the entire project. The final design will refine the pricing. The cost estimate includes 6 repeater sites; however GeoComm is looking at 5 sites which would reduce the project cost by approximately $500,000. The activity and cost estimate is divided into five parts: Activity/Service/Product, Description/Details, 700/800 MHz Radio without Partners (no State Aid or grants), 700/800 MHz Radio with Partners (Infrastructure aid from State and potential grant money), and LEC Radio. The LEC Radio proposal is for the items that the County will need to have in the new LEC/Jail. The new radio system will plug into the radio/dispatch system, new paging system and some connectivity between the old LEC and the new LEC buildings. Swing stated that Hruby will present the complete number for the LEC at the Technology Committee of the Whole Meeting on 7-25-07. Hannon stated that the most important public function is to have radios that communicate well. In Stearns County, the Board was successful in getting FEMA grant funds because they had a drafted plan and made a commitment to supply the minimum amount of radios outside of the grant funding. Hannon reminded the Committee that the County has a sufficient amount of time to go after grants to fund this project. There are multiple grants (i.e. educational, infrastructure) that the County can be eligible for that each have a different set of rules. Heeter asked who would coordinate the application process of the grants. Hannon stated that from a County perspective, the Emergency Management Director would be the most involved in the process. Hannon stressed that each of the County Agencies need to work together, as part of the safety plan, in order to build an infrastructure to provide safety. Russek asked if the old radio system would be obsolete as soon as the 800 MHz system is put into place. Hannon stated no, as there will be a transition plan. The State and Regional Radio Board are currently working on a transition plan. Research will determine how to integrate the old system into the new system. This research could take a couple of years. Sawatzke questioned whether half of the $8,247,444 estimated project cost (listed as the estimate for 700/800 MHz Radio with Partners in the Draft) would be funded by the State. Hannon clarified that only the expenses that qualify as the infrastructure costs would be eligible. The cost of the radios is not an infrastructure cost. Hannon estimated that approximately $6-7 million of the $8,247,444 estimated project cost would be considered infrastructure costs. Sawatzke asked for clarification as to whether that meant that the County could expect to receive $3.5 million for infrastructure costs. Hannon clarified that the Statute allows for reimbursement, not to exceed 50%, of the infrastructure costs to any one agency. Sawatzke asked how GeoComm will be paid for its services. Mazzitello stated that there is $85,000 projected as consulting services, which is included in the estimated project cost. Sawatzke asked if the LEC radio portion (i.e. the 8 dispatch consoles) was included in the $40.5 million in construction costs for the new Jail/LEC. Torfin stated the only thing that is included in the Jail/LEC construction costs is the furniture that holds this equipment. Swing stated the number is considered FFE (Dispatch and furniture). Sawatzke asked if the LEC Radio System was included as part of the jail bond. Norman stated that the cost of the LEC Radio System will need to be added into the total project cost. Norman stated that there was talk of including the 800 MHz as part of the bond. There appears to be a lot of unanswered questions about the State’s commitment to funding, as well as what portion the County would fund. Mazzitello stated that the LEC Radio system is separate from the 700/800 MHz Radio Project. The equipment for the LEC Radio system will be installed separately. Swing stated that the County’s objective was to get bonding completed this Fall. The LEC (Voice/Data) will have its final proposed cost at the 7-25-07 Technology Committee of the Whole Meeting which will provide a firm number for the bonding. Norman reiterated that the 800 MHz project will probably be a separate bond issue. Hannon restated that he would recommend the County Board adopt the Plan. The Plan will list the County’s objective so that it can start the process allowing for application of potential grant monies. Mazzitello stated that it will take a lot of time to define what is under the County’s control in the LEC. Heeter asked Hannon if he thought there was funding available to pay for half of the radios that are needed in Wright County. Hannon stated yes, however it will take a coordinated effort to go after the grants. Heeter stated that Fire Departments will need financial aid for their radios. They have asked that the County make a commitment for the funding of the radios. Hannon stated that FEMA grants operate differently than the law enforcement grants. FEMA is sometimes more liberal than other agencies. Mazzitello stated that the mobiles and portables are sold at a contract price that is established with the State. This State contract price does not include the installation price. Heeter stated that some jurisdictions are setting aside monies to purchase the radios. Mazzitello stated that currently there isn’t a line item for training within the estimated project cost. Mazzitello explained that the Radio System will only work as well as its participants are trained. There are outside trainers that will provide training, and there are trainers that are willing to work in a classroom setting for Fire Departments. Mazzitello stressed that training is a large component of this entire Plan. Mattson asked if the amount the County receives in outside grants will affect the amount the State will reimburse the County for infrastructure costs. Mazzitello stated that he did not think that the State would penalize a County for receiving outside grants. Heeter stated that there appears to be a lot of moving targets in attempting to pull the entire Public Safety Radio Communications Project together. Heeter stated that she assumed that the County will move forward with the LEC. Russek asked if the new system will be in place at the time of occupying the new Jail/LEC. Mazzitello stated that he would not recommend making too many changes at once. He would propose that staff move into the new building first, and then over time, change over to the new radio system. Mazzitello stated that the Technology Committee of the Whole Meeting on 7-25-07 will be used to firm up the development plan, solicitation of seeking approval of the Plan, and to discuss hiring somebody for the procurement phase and testing. Swing stated that the numbers for the LEC Radio will also be presented. Eichelberg stated that the next Regional Radio Board Meeting will also take place on 7-25-07 and proposed holding the Technology Committee of the Whole Meeting early in the day so that the Plan can be brought to the Regional Radio Board at their 2:00 P.M. meeting. Mazzitello stated that GeoComm would be open to conducting an informational meeting providing common explanations of trunking and how the radios will communicate. (End of Technology Committee Of The Whole Minutes)
The Owner’s Committee Meeting will be held at 1:00 P.M. today as scheduled.
Richard Norman, County Coordinator, presented a revised Budget Committee Of The Whole Schedule. The dates and starting times remain the same. What changed was that some departments were switched to different time periods. Heeter moved to approve the revised schedule, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.
Norman requested approval of a transfer of $1,570,417 from Budget 100 to various departments. These transfers are completed annually to various departments in the General Revenue budget to cover contract settlements, wage increases, etc. Eichelberg moved to approve the transfer, seconded by Mattson, carried 5-0.
Norman said the Planning & Zoning Administrator requested that a Committee Of The Whole Meeting be scheduled to discuss Compost Facility Operations. Mattson moved to schedule the Meeting for 8-01-07 @ 9:00 A.M., Commissioners’ Conference Room. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.
The meeting was recessed at 9:27 A.M. and reconvened at 9:30 A.M.
At 9:30 A.M., Russek closed the bid process for the Ney Park Trail Project, S.P. 86-090-01. Wayne Fingalson, Highway Engineer, said the bids are for the Maple Lake Trail Project and involve Federal funding. The County is opening bids on behalf of the City of Maple Lake. Jeremy Mathiasen, Boonestroo, serves as the City Engineer for Maple Lake and was present at today’s meeting. The Engineer’s estimate is $230,000 and there are no addendums for the project. The bids will be laid over to a future meeting to assure all State and Federal requirements are met. Heeter moved to acknowledge the bids and lay them over to a future date for award, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0:
Contractor’s Name; Bid Bond; Total Base Bid
Astech Surface Technologies; Yes; $243,556.95
Dennis Fehn Gravel & Excavating; Yes; $219,461.30
Hardrives Inc.-Rogers office; Yes; $224,644.14
Knife River Corporation-North Central; Yes; $235,767.75
Kotila Excavating; Yes; $213,808.50
Marson Contractors, Inc.; Yes; $260,709.90
Mid-Minnesota Hot Mix Inc.; Yes; $208,680.79
ODESA II; Yes; $315,900.45
Veit & Company, Inc.; Yes; $315,503.05
Fingalson distributed the 2006 Highway Department Annual Report. He stated this item was placed on the Consent Agenda in error. Approval of the report will be placed on the next County Board Agenda.
The meeting recessed at 9:41 A.M. and reconvened at 2:00 P.M.
Tara Martin, A&P, opened and read the bids for Phase II of the Jail/LEC Project:
Bid Category 3A Cast In Place Concrete. Engineer’s estimate of $1,974,318. Alternate 1-Deduct slab on grade.
Bidder; Bid Security; Acknowledge Addendums 1; 2; 3; Total Base Bid; Alternate 1
Arkay Construction; X; X; X; X; $1,719,000l $35,000 deduct
Gresser Companiesl X; X; X; X; $1,615,000; $15,000 deduct
Stellar Concrete & Masonry; X; X; X; X; $1,436,800; $27,400 deduct
Axel H. Ohman; X; X; X; X; $1,540,000; $20,000 deduct
Serice Construction; X; X; X; X; $2,155,000; $93,000 deduct
K. Johnson Construction Inc.; X; X; X; X; $1,723,455; $109,000 deduct
Northland Concrete & Masonry Co.; X; X; X; X; $1,563,750; $82,250 deduct
Eagle Construction Co. Inc.; X; X; X; X; $2,349,000; $51,000 deduct
Kremer & Davis Inc.; X; X; X; X; $13,500 (incomplete bid-only includes waterproofing)
Bid Category 3B Architectural & Structural Precast. Engineer’s estimate of $3,510,384.
Bidder; Bid Security; Acknowledge Addendums 1; 2; 3; Total Base Bid
Hanson Structural Precast Midwest; X; X; X; X; $4,071,582
Bid Category 5A Structural Steel. Engineer’s Estimate of $536,062.
Bidder; Bid Security; Acknowledge Addendums 1; 2; 3; Total Base Bid
Standard Iron & Wireworks; X; X; X; X; $487,000
American Structural Metals; X; X; X; X; $625,000
Ben’s Tool & Iron Works; X; X; X; X; $548,150
Daka Corporation; X; X; X; X; $632,900
Premier Construction Systems; X; X; X; X; $559,712
Bid Category 5B Steel Installation. Engineer’s Estimate of $206,371.
Bidder; Bid Security; Acknowledge Addendums 1; 2; 3; Total Base Bid
KMH Erectors; X; X; X; X; $310,000
Eagle Construction; X; X; X; X; $414,000
Bid Categories 5A & 5B Combined.
Bidder; Bid Security; Acknowledge Addendums 1; 2; 3; Total Base Bid
Five Star Welding & Fabricating; X; X; X; X; $830,000
Premier Construction Systems; X; X; X; X; $770,705
Bid Category 13A Precast Modular Cells. Engineer’s Estimate of $4,600,189.
Bidder; Bid Security; Acknowledge Addendums 1; 2; 3; Total Base Bid
Old Castle Precast Modular Group; X; X; X; X; $4,799,500
Martin stated it would be the Board’s discretion as to whether to allow the bid from Five Star Welding & Fabricating as they only submitted a bid on 5A&5B Combined. Martin envisions bringing forth a recommendation on a couple of the bid categories at the next County Board Meeting.
Allina Hospitals & Clinics $1,112.64
Amerigas Cokato MN 582.03
Ameripride Linen & Apparel 130.38
Aramark Corr. Services 5,188.41
Arctic Glacier Inc. 439.34
Assn. of MN Emerg. Mngrs. 250.00
Assoc. of MN Counties 450.00
B & D Plumbing & Heating 500.00
Breezy Point Resort Inc. 1,050.00
Bristows Kawasaki & Polaris 215.58
Buffalo Clinic 1,422.84
Buffalo Hospital 193.31
Burdas Towing 113.96
Bureau of Crim. Apprehen. 250.00
Carver Co.-Finan. Serv. 8,527.95
Catco Parts Service 575.65
Central MN Mental Health 832.50
Climate Air 2,052.21
Collins Brothers Towing 173.06
Dakota Co. Sheriff 100.00
Dash Medical Gloves 154.70
Dental Care Assoc. Buffalo 150.00
Edens Group 405.00
Emerg. Physicians PA 351.00
Wayne Fingalson 148.04
General Pallet Inc. 403.00
Greenview Inc. 13,882.68
Hay Group 800.00
Hillyard Floor Care Supply 858.10
Knife River Corp. Nort 304.59
LaPlant Demo Inc. 965.63
Michael Laurent 203.14
Magnum Spike 515.30
Marco Inc. 256.67
Richard Mattson 127.07
Patrick Melvin 225.00
The Metro Group Inc. 5,151.62
Minneapolis Radiology 483.67
MN CLE Inc. 245.00
MN Counties Computer Coop 366.59
MN Dept. of Revenue 300.00
Morries Parts & Service Grp. 570.40
Nat’l Business Systems Inc. 784.85
Neopost Inc. 415.53
Office Depot 1,435.58
Phillips 66 Quick Shop-Delano 161.69
PMI Computer Supplies 677.90
Precision Dynamics Corp. 1,772.00
Precision Prints of Wright Co. 168.27
Prosource One 525.89
Roof Spec Inc. 600.00
Royal Tire Inc. 2,384.79
Saturn Systems, Inc 5,000.00
Sherburne Co. Sheriff 18,349.61
Software House Int’l 1,300.37
State of MN-Office Enterp 440.20
Stratus Tech Ireland 8,675.39
Sylva Corp ONC 2,108.70
Tech Depot 307.50
Truck Bodies & Equip Int’l 332.17
Verizon Wireless 895.90
Voss Lighting 328.02
West Payment Center 850.57
Wright Co. Highway Dept. 7,959.76
Wright Co. Sheriff 2,000.00
Wright Henn. Co-op Elec. 3,940.69
Wright Henn. Electric 437.00
Zep Manufacturing Co. 163.48
28 Payments less than $100 1,415.15
Final total $131,706.97
The meeting adjourned at 2:22 P.M
Published in the Herald Journal Aug. 13, 2007.