JULY 1, 2008
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Sawatzke, Heeter, Mattson, Russek and Eichelberg present.
On a motion by Russek, second by Heeter, all voted to approve the minutes of 6-24-08 as presented.
Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Items For Consid. #5 “Authorize Attendance, 7-14-08 Minnesota Statewide Transportation Planning Meeting” (Mattson); Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, #6, “Approve Plat, The Antil Addition, (Stockholm Twp.)” (Hiivala). Heeter moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.
On a motion by Mattson, second by Russek, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda as presented:
1. Performance Appraisals: K. Day, B. Gabrelcik, S. Guffey, A. Richardson, Recorder; J. Ashley, M. Fiske, P. O’Malley, Sher./Corr.
2. O/T Report, Period Ending 6-13-08.
3. Acknowledge Job Description Evaluation Results & Approve Recommendation.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, stated that Commissioner Russek would give an update on County Ditch No. 31. Russek provided a report on County Ditch #31 by stating that he received a call indicating that beavers were suspected of clogging the culvert located west of County Road # 8. Nearby landowners expressed concern because the water has reached a high level, preventing them from spraying their corn. Russek stated that due to the urgency, he contacted Swanson Brothers to look at the ditch. He has yet to hear from them and will provide an update to the Board.
Hiivala stated that his office received a Renewal Of Liquor, Wine, Or Club License from Boonedocks Saloon. Hiivala requested approval of the application contingent on Rockford Township’s approval. Russek moved to approve the renewal application contingent on Rockford Township’s approval. Sawatzke seconded the motion. Mattson stated that at the recent District 3 ATP Transportation Meeting, safety was a major topic of discussion. Mattson stated that he has concerns regarding safety by allowing a bar to operate until 2:00 a.m. on Highway 55. He stated that he would hope that the Township Board would consider this as part of its approval process. Discussion ensued on whether the County approved the extended 2:00 a.m. bar closing, or if it is under jurisdiction of State law. Sawatzke moved to table the item for later in today’s meeting to allow Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, to research the topic. Russek seconded the motion. Hiivala noted that the vendor paid the appropriate license fee which is an optional and additional license and fee. The motion carried 5-0.
Hiivala presented two Road & Bridge claims: MN Bd. AELSLGID, $120.00, and Astleford Int’l, $191,698.00. Due to a timing issue, these claims were paid by Auditor’s warrant last week. Hiivala is seeking Board approval of the claims this week. These claims were inadvertently eliminated from the signature copy. The Board previously approved the purchase of tandem trucks from Astleford. The $120.00 fee is a membership renewal that is normally approved annually. Eichelberg noted that the tandem trucks were approved under the 2008 budget process. Heeter moved to approve payment of the two Road & Bridge claims as presented, seconded by Mattson, and carried 5-0.
Hiivala introduced Tom Salkowski, P&Z Administrator, to discuss the approval of the Antil Addition plat in the Stockholm Township. Salkowski stated that Kevin and Maria Antil are not developers and have had a difficult, year-long process, dealing with their banks to obtain releases to file a plat. Salkowski stated that P&Z would not normally request authorization of signatures on a plat unless copies of the Consent to Plat have been issued from the bank. Salkowski stated that in this unique situation, the two mortgage banks, CityBank and Wilmington Finance, will not provide original Consents. Salkowski stated that his office has been assured that the banks consent to the plat, and have shown copies of the Consent. However, the banks will not provide originals. Salkowski informed the Board that if they approve the plat, it would be contingent on the County Recorder obtaining the two original documents. The Recorder would have to hold the plat until he receives the proper paperwork. Salkowski stated that today’s petition is to prevent the Antil’s from having to reschedule their closing on 7-03-08. Larry Unger, County Recorder, stated that his office worked yesterday with MERHS, a clearing house for mortgages, in an effort to push forward this project. He stated that there are still some outstanding issues and it is likely that the 7-03-08 closing will have to be postponed. Norman asked Hiivala if he would recommend signing the plat given the contingencies. Hiivala stated that he would not recommend signing the plat; however, an authorization for signatures could be granted contingent on receiving the appropriate paperwork. On a motion by Russek, second by Heeter, all voted to authorize signatures contingent on final receipt of the Consent to Plat.
Hiivala submitted the claims listing for approval. Hiivala stated that the Road & Bridge claims are included in the signature copy. Mattson noted that the $2,000.00 claim to Allina Health Systems (Page 10) was due to one prisoner that was moved to multiple medical centers. On a motion by Mattson, second by Sawatzke, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit.
Kerry Saxton, SWCD, provided an update on the Weed Grant applied for through the Board of Soil & Water Resources (BWSR) for the eradication of Wild Parsnip. He stated that the local SWCD applied for a $70,000 grant, with the County Board agreeing to fund $10,000 toward the effort. Due to the State budget shortfall, the County was first granted $25,000, but recently the grant was reduced to $20,000. Saxton stated that the $20,000 is a guaranteed amount now that they have received the Grant Agreement. Saxton explained how the Wild Parsnip has progressed and is reported to have been found in fields. When the Parsnip produces seed, it can germinate over four years. He stated that through public media, the public can be informed on what the weed looks like and how to work at getting rid of the weed. Saxton inquired as to whether the Board wishes to commit to its $10,000.00 contribution toward the eradication effort. Russek asked Saxton if there is a chance to completely eradicate the weed. Saxton stated that as a whole, we’ll have to remain vigilant in gaining control of the spreading of the Wild Parsnip. He stated that the weed can hamper the activity in an area. Four-wheeling, riding motorcycles and bikes, performing roadside cleanup through ditch areas are all a concern. He stated that there is a hope to educate the public on the effects and spread of Wild Parsnip. Mowing the Parsnip causes re-sprouting. He stated that he does not have the staff to spray for the weed, and there is a concern for the organic farmers. Russek asked if Wild Parsnip affects animals. Saxton stated that he would guess that the sap from the plant does cause problems for an animal. Heeter and Russek stated that the Board has already committed to the $10,000.00 and are in favor of supporting the eradication effort. The Board Members voiced their consensus.
A Personnel Committee Meeting was held on 6-25-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by Mattson and carried 5-0:
I. Discussion RE: Process Of Position Evaluations & Job Descriptions (Court Services).
The job descriptions for the Court Services clerical staff were consolidated and sent to HAY for evaluation. Upon review by HAY, the consolidated job description received a point assignment of 1333. This leaves the position in Class B of the Teamsters Local No. 320 Salary Schedule. MacMillan voiced concern on the point reduction and the inconsistency in points for positions in other classes. A handout was distributed outlining the concerns and points assigned to similar positions in other departments. It was noted that Page 3 of the attachment is not a current reflection of positions and point values. Brown explained that some of the non-union positions were moved in the salary schedule a few years ago to meet pay equity requirements. This resulted in some disparity with point values assigned to positions and salary range for the job classification. Norman said the process is to send revised job descriptions to HAY for review. Those results are forwarded to the County. For non-union positions, a recommendation is made to the County based on the point total assigned by HAY. For union positions, pay associated with the results is negotiated with the business agents representing the union. When a position description is forwarded to HAY, there are a number of components that are evaluated (i.e., work environment, physical requirements, supervisory, minimum qualifications, and level of responsibility). The evaluator looks at these components to determine if there has been a change from the previous description. The Administration Office did not support resending job descriptions back to HAY for additional evaluation just because the point value is not what was expected. The Committee discussed consolidating job descriptions for different classifications. The County is currently working with Rod Kelsey on this effort. Recommendation: The Committee acknowledged that the County may to complete an overall study in the future. The Committee recommends taking no action on the current request.
II. Performance Appraisal Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator.
Based on five performance appraisals submitted, the Committee recommends an overall rating of “Exceptional.”
A Technology Committee Meeting was held on 6-25-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Norman requested that the Committee minutes be changed to reflect the date of the meeting as 6-25-08, not 3-12-08. Russek moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Mattson, and carried 5-0:
I. 2009 Technology Guidelines
Swing stated that the 2009 Technology Guidelines are posted on the intranet. The guideline approach has been in effect for approximately 7 years. The guidelines are complete with a cover letter outlining standard items with pricing, and advice on sharing printers. I.T. is continuously adding to the standard equipment list, which includes pricing and sales tax. The guidelines and cover letter are distributed to all Department Heads and assigned I.T. Coordinators. Swing stated that the next technological trend is in the County’s phone system. IP telephones incorporate voice with data. His Department is trying to encourage training, and training dollars have been included in the budget. The County will be moving from Microsoft Word 2007. Swing provided a brief timeline for the budget process. DeMars asked Swing what he thought the timeline is for rolling out Vista. Swing stated that the County’s standard system has been Microsoft XP. He stated that they‘d start bringing in Vista in the new laptops in the first half of 2009.
II. Strategic Planning Report.
Swing stated that I.T. is continuously trying to get better at planning. He announced that this was I.T.’s second year using something outside of their traditional approach. Before 2007, I.T.’s approach on planning has been talking. I.T. is assessing their needs so that the entire County benefits. He then introduced Loren Lovhaug who presented a PowerPoint presentation on the County’s planning process entitled, “2008 Information Technology Strategic Planning Update” (see attached). Lovhaug has been working with Wright County in its planning efforts during the LEC/Jail project.
Asleson approached the podium to update the Board on his findings regarding bar closing regulations. Sawatzke asked Asleson for clarification on whether the County acted to move bar closing times to 2:00 a.m. Asleson stated that the 2:00 a.m. closing time was passed by State law. He stated that the State changed the law in 2003/2004 granting a liquor licensee the decision to remain open until 2:00 a.m. To remain open until 2:00 a.m., the licensee must obtain an additional permit from the AGED Commissioner and pay a sliding fee based on gross receipts. The County cannot pick and choose closing times for individual businesses. Municipalities have the ability to be more restrictive than State law calls for, but it must be made across the entire municipality. Asleson stated that he does not recall the County setting restrictions on bar closing times. Asleson stated that Gloria Gooler, Admin. Confidential Secretary, indicated to him that Boonedocks paid the extra fee to extend their closing time. Russek moved to remove this discussion from the table, seconded by Sawatzke, and carried 5-0. Russek moved to approve the On Sale Liquor License Renewal for Bonnedock’s Saloon. Sawatzke seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-1 (Mattson).
A Ways And Means Committee Meeting was held on 6-25-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke read the minutes and commented that the County will face a dilemma on 7-08-08. On 7-08-08, Judges will continue to appoint attorneys to CHIPS and TPR cases, and the State funding for these representation services will cease. Sawatzke stated that the Board may need to take action today due to the timeliness of this matter. The minutes were corrected as follows: Page 1, 3rd paragraph, 4th line should read, “…become a County responsibility.” (Sawatzke); Page 2, 2nd paragraph, 1st line should read, “Norman asked if this type of expenditure will be outside of the levy limit.” (Sawatzke). The following reflects the minutes and discussion at today’s County Board Meeting (in italics):
I. DISCUSSION RE: ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION FOR PARENTS IN CHILD PROTECTION MATTERS.
Nordeen introduced today’s topic by stating that budget cuts were made to the State Public Defender’s budget. The State of Minnesota Board of Public Defense approved an elimination of Non-Mandated Services, including the representation of parents in child protection and termination of parental rights (TPR) cases. Resources will not be available for representation in CHIPS cases (Child In Need Of Protective Service). This means that these expenses will be turned over to the County effective July 8, 2008. Nordeen provided copies of related Minnesota Statutes, County statistical information regarding filings by case type, and recommended prep and court times issued by CJI Best Practices (see attached). Bill Ward, Chief Tenth District Public Defender, gave a brief history of the Public Defender’s role in non-mandated services such as CHIPS/TPR cases. He stated that there has consistently been a lack of funding and due to the recent change, services to parents and children over ten years of age will become a County responsibility. He stated that his office relies on part-time lawyer staff to work on these cases. Sawatzke asked Nordeen how much the County pays for CHIPS/TPR services. Nordeen explained that the County has a unique court appointed fee: $100 per appearance unless the attorney specifically is granted an $85 hourly fee due to the complexity of a case. Ward stated that CHIPS/TPR cases are the most complicated files. Civil rules apply and many parties are involved in unifying the parents. He stated that only lawyers who specialize in these cases should represent these cases. Kevin Tierney, Manager of the Wright County Public Defender’s Office, stated that CHIPS/TPR cases have elevated complexity because they deal with the potential loss of a person’s parental rights for the rest of their lives. Thomera Karvel, Assistant County Attorney, stated that she has explored several options to address the immediate issue:
1) Ignore/not address the issue. CHIPS/TPR cases could be dismissed. Abused and neglected children within the Minnesota Public Court who are not paying private attorneys, could be brought back down to the district court level to start the process again. These cases are timely and could result in higher expenses if turned back down to the District Court Level.
2) Form a coalition with other counties. Ward stated that he has met with four counties and they have all chosen to pay for these services out of their county budget.
3) Hire private attorneys.
a) County contracts with one full-time and a part-time attorney.
b) County hires a panel of qualified attorneys to review custodial parents in CHIPS cases. Conflict checks would have to be performed to determine if these attorneys are handling a case similar to what is presented.
Karvel stated that State Law mandates that custodial parents receive representation in child protection cases. Karvel stated that she has discussed these options with Tom Kelly, County Attorney, and has cost estimates for options A and B based on the CHIPS/TPR Hours data that Ward provided to her. Ward provided data on the number of CHIPS/TPR Hours for eight counties, indicating that Wright County had 2,449 hours during the 2007 fiscal year. Karvel provided an estimate of $200,000 for 2,449 hours at $80/hour for contracting with private attorneys. Paying on a per-appearance basis, 100 new filings in the County, assuming ten appearances per case, would equal $100,000. She stated that she did not think an attorney would take a “per appearance” fee as these cases are time and document intensive. Norman asked that this type of expenditure will be outside of the levy limit. Norman asked Ward how much the public defendant’s office annually expends in these types of cases. Dan Sudowski, Tenth District Public Defender, stated that it was difficult to determine an exact cost because their office has public defenders that make between $55,000 and $102,000, with benefits. Norman responded that he is drafting the 2009 budget for July and asked if he could assume the budget at 2,449 hours for $80/hour. Sudowski stated that he did not feel this was an accurate calculation of the expense and hours involved in CHIPS/TPR cases. Tierney stated that three attorneys should be performing this type of work on a regular basis. Sawatzke asked for clarification on whether the County would pay a flat rate or an hourly rate for attorney representation on CHIPS/TPR cases. Sawatzke stated that the County will have a 3.9% levy limit, and this new expenditure will represent a half percent increase in the levy. Sawatzke stated that it was his understanding, per Statute 375.1691, Judicial Order After Budget Preparation, the County would not be responsible for paying for this service until after January 1st. Judge Stephen Halsey stated that this is an extremely unfortunate circumstance being forced upon the County. He stated that it is his personal opinion that the Legislature has not been doing its job in funding its public defenders. The Public Defender’s Office has never had enough people on their staff, and they have never had the proper budget for their caseloads. He cautioned the Board that if they contract for services, they will receive many inquiries from inexperienced attorneys. He stated that the CHIPS/TPR cases are long and difficult cases. Hiring specifically experienced attorneys to represent these clients may help reduce the cost to the County. Sawatzke asked Ward if his Department would respect the budget limitations set by the County for its CHIPS/TPR services. Ward commented that his Department has put unaccounted hours into their work in order to provide a good service and to complete their work. He stated that his staff does not merely work eighty hours. His staff is salaried and works within their means. Mattson stated that due to another Committee Meeting obligation, today’s meeting would need to be recessed to a future date. Sawatzke stated that he and Mattson would advise the Board regarding this issue at the 07-01-08 County Board Meeting. He stated that they would give the Board a projected budget of $250,000. Sawatzke also requested that Norman obtain an opinion from Brian Asleson, Attorney Division Chief, on whether this expense would be paid in 2009. Karvel reminded the Committee that current funding for these services would cease on 7-08-08. Cathleen Gabriel, Assistant Benton County Attorney, presented a preliminary contract proposal (see attached) to provide private attorney representation in CHIPS/TPR cases. She stated that she would be interested in quitting her full-time work at Benton County to provide part-time attorney services to Wright County. She stated that she is presenting a six month contract, 520 hours, at $32,800. Her services would be from July, 2008, to December, 2008. RECOMMENDATION: Recess further discussion to the 07-09-08 Ways And Means Committee Meeting. Consider the contract proposal from Cathleen Gabriel as an interim solution.
At today’s County Board Meeting, the following discussion occurred. Sawatzke clarified that the State will cease its funding of non-mandated services to the Public Defenders Office. These services are mandated under County jurisdiction. The anticipated budget of $250,000 to provide representation to CHIPS/TPR cases will lower the 3.9% levy limit to approximately 3.4%. Sawatzke noted that a suggestion was made at the 6-25-08 W&M Committee Meeting that if the County pays more for a specifically trained attorney in these cases, the County will pay less in the long run. Sawatzke reiterated that he was concerned on whether the Public Defenders Office will work within the means of the County’s set budget for this type of service. Sawatzke questioned the meaning of Statute 375.1691, which hints that 2008 expenses “may” be paid in 2009 if the budget request item “was not submitted to the County Board prior to adoption of the budget in effect for the fiscal year.” Mattson commented that he was frustrated that the County Board was only recently notified of this change which does not allow much time for the County Board to explore options. Tom Kelly, County Attorney, stated that the Statute has always indicated that CHIPS and TPR cases are to be County funded. During the State funding of these non-mandated services, the Public Defenders office accepted the Court’s appointments. Now that the funding will cease, the Public Defenders office will no longer accept appointments. Kelly stated that it is his opinion that a contract arrangement would be more suitable for the County rather than a panel of attorneys charging $85/hour. Kelly added that there is less control over the number of hours that a paneled attorney puts into a case. His office recommends a contractual approach by hiring an independent contractor. Through a contractual agreement, a financial ceiling would be established, and it would be the discretion of the contracted attorney as to their level of service, and the County’s discretion to renew the contract. He stated that his opinion is consistent with the general opinion of the County Attorney’s Association. Sawatzke asked for Kelly’s opinion on the meaning of Statute 375.1691. Kelly stated that whether the County Board chooses to pay for the representation services today or at a later date, the issue will not go away. The County is financially responsible to provide these services. Asleson backed Kelly’s statement by saying that there is an underlying Statute, a judicial order, that assigns this responsibility to the County. He stated that arguably, the County can delay payment of these services; the County cannot avoid its obligation. Thomera Karvel, Assistant County Attorney I, stated that the difficulty lies in the cases where there are 4 kids, one mother, but 2-3 different dads. There will be a need to appoint multiple attorneys to represent multiple parties. In situations as mentioned, the court may need to appoint additional attorneys on a limited basis.
Sawatzke stated that perhaps the easiest and best approach now is to approve a temporary contract and discuss this topic more extensively at the 7-09-08 Ways And Means Committee Meeting. He stated that the Board has been given a lot of information quickly, and this issue may not be resolved today. Heeter asked if the Board has to make a decision today. Asleson stated that the contract presented at the 6-25-08 W&M Committee Meeting would be suitable for signing, with a few changes regarding municipal limits. Asleson stated that hiring a private attorney would be categorized as “professional services” and is not required to go out for bid. Asleson advised the Board that it would be appropriate for the Board to approve the attorney’s services. Karvel discussed the urgency in the Board taking immediate action. She stated that she just received a mass withdrawal from the Public Defenders Office, indicating that 34 of her cases will not have representation. She stated that the PD’s office would retain their current child protection cases. She cautioned the Board in making a decision toward the panel approach as the most qualified candidates might not be selected. She stated that this type of work is not taught in law school. She stated that an attorney must express an interest in this type of law and must actively stay abreast of the law. She stated that by hiring attorneys on a contractual basis, the County would be able to control who gets the contract and would not be financially responsible to educate the attorney on changes in the law.
Sawatzke stated that he is in favor of authorizing the contract proposal from Cathleen Gabriel, Assistant Benton County Attorney. He stated that he agrees that the children in these cases deserve good, experienced attorneys to represent them.
Norman questioned whether the meaning of Statute 260C.331, Costs of Care, Subd. 5, Attorneys Fees, allows the County to charge parents for the services related to court appointed representation. Karvel stated that she interprets the Statute to mean that the Court will inquire as to the parent’s ability to pay for counsel. Norman inquired whether the Statute precludes the County from establishing a sliding fee schedule for these services. Karvel stated that it was her understanding that there is a screening process through Court Administration on whether a parent is eligible to pay for legal representation.
Asleson stated that he could make the necessary changes to the contract proposal and return it to the Board for their authorization of signature. Eichelberg stated that it is clear that the Board has no option other than to pay for the cost of counsel for CHIPS/TPR cases. The County has an opportunity to hire an experienced attorney on a half-time basis. He stated that this is a sensible option, and could be reviewed at budget time.
Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes with changes and recommendations, noting that the contract proposal will come back for Board approval after Asleson has reviewed it. The Board will have an opportunity to act on 7-08-08, and then the Committee can continue discussions on 7-09-08 recognizing that the half-time contract will not be the cure-all for this situation. Mattson seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0.
Mattson provided a review of the recent Mn/DOT District 3 Meeting and its study results entitled “Construction Budget Balancing Act” (see attached). Mattson listed the major expansion projects which have been prioritized and will continue. Two of the projects are located within Wright County. Mattson also read through a list of projects that have been stopped due to lack of funds.
Russek moved to authorize attendance to the AMC Leadership Development Summit from 8-20-08 to 8-22-08 in Rochester, Minnesota. The motion was seconded by Sawatzke and carried 5-0.
The Highway Department submitted a request for approval of the Resolution of Final Acceptance for the County Road 148 (Braddock Avenue NE) Improvements, Contract #0712, with Final Touch Excavating, Inc., and to authorize final payment of $3,333.32. Russek moved to authorize final payment and adopt Resolution #08-23, seconded by Heeter. The motion carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.
Mattson stated that he’d like authorization to attend the 7-14-08 Minnesota Statewide Transportation Planning Meeting in lieu of attending the Human Services Board Meeting on the same date. Discussion and counsel from Asleson resulted in a consensus to move the Human Services Board Meeting to 9:00 a.m. on 7-14-08. Asleson advised the Board to provide proper notice of the time change. Heeter moved to reschedule the Human Services Board meeting for 9:00 a.m. on 7-14-08. Sawatzke requested that Mleziva post an Agenda noting the time change. Russek seconded the motion. Asleson also stated that another option is that the Human Services Board could call a special meeting to reschedule the afternoon meeting of 7-14-08. The motion carried unanimously. Russek moved to authorize attendance to the 7-14-08 Transportation Meeting, seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0.
Norman asked if the Board would entertain the idea of changing the Meeting time of the 7-14-08 Capital Improvement /Finance Committee Meeting to 10:30 a.m. Russek moved to change the Capital Improvement/Finance Committee Meeting time from 2:30 p.m. to 10:30 a.m. on 7-14-08. Heeter seconded the motion, and the motion carried 5-0.
Mattson requested that today’s Owner’s Committee add a discussion on weed control to its Agenda. He noted that it is important that the County be a good steward of its land.
AAA Striping Service Inc.. $139,411.20
City Albertville 50,000.00
Allied Graphics 1,027.37
Allina Health Systems 2,000.00
Ameripride Linen and Apparel 116.01
AMI Imaging Systems Inc. 242.10
Anoka Co. Juvenile Center 2,755.00
Anoka County Sheriff 4,287.33
Aramark Correctional Services 5,465.34
Automatic Garage Door & Firepla 143.96
Barnes Distribution 622.91
Lawrence Bauman 360.60
Betmar Languages Inc. 100.00
Black Moore Bumgardner Magnuss 200.00
Boyer Truck Parts 2,737.17
Bryan Rock Products 139.88
Buffalo Clinic 506.14
Buffalo Floral & Landscaping 160.00
Buffalo Township 1,644.92
Burdas Towing 441.98
Center Point Energy 2,819.22
Centra Sota Lake Region LLC 67,047.82
Climate Air 4,041.79
Cub Foods 278.78
Custom Manufacturing Inc. 14,495.00
Diamond Mowers Inc. 1,255.08
Elmer Eichelberg 278.76
Excel Systems LLC 594.31
Fair Hills Inc. 364.00
Final Touch Excavating Inc. 3,333.32
Wayne Fingalson 403.26
Franz Reprographics 263.48
Frontier Precision Inc. 6,338.05
Gateway Companies Inc., an 3,434.61
Janet Gholson 231.29
Hardrives, Inc. 1,970,368.13
Robert Hiivala 283.62
Hometown Plumbing & Heating 738.00
Hunerberg Construction Co. 56,564.00
Integrated Fire & Security 4,567.51
Intereum Inc. 4,917.57
Interstate Battery Systems of 150.19
Brian Jans 109.99
Junction Towing & Auto Repair 202.30
Bernard Kirscht 144.24
LaPlant Demo Inc. 820.66
William Lieb 375.50
Carol Lostetter 200.00
Michael MacMillan 849.41
Marco Inc. 4,607.41
Martin Maretta Aggregates 1,029.11
McKesson Medical-Surgical 2,083.89
Menards - Buffalo 310.01
MN Counties Ins. Trust 331.00
MN Co. Recorders Association 250.00
MN Elevator Inc. 9,245.26
Northern Tool & Equipment Co. 246.81
Office Depot 4,313.14
The Plumbery 302.03
Frank Ramacciotti 800.00
Rhodes Lock & Glass 759.03
Rockford Township 994.25
RS Eden 1,492.50
John Russek 153.52
Robert Schermann 426.25
Brian Severson 119.99
Shell Fleet Plus 608.08
Sherwin Williams 261.31
Software House International 717.83
Brian Stoll 203.51
STS Consultants LTD 2,337.97
Tech Depot 246.26
Total Printing 2,535.93
Verizon Wireless 223.53
Walmart Store 01-1577 667.86
Willen Inc. 4,250.00
Wolf Protective Agency Inc. 1,033.44
Wright Co. Auditor Treasurer 100.00
Wright County Highway Dept. 39,993.68
Wright Hennepin Coop Elec 571.87
Xcel Energy 484.08
Zep Sales & Services 286.84
27 Payments less than $100 1,257.33
Final total $2,441,294.56
The meeting adjourned at 10:32 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal July 28, 2008.