WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 2, 2008
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Heeter, Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek and Eichelberg present.
The minutes of 8-26-08 were corrected as follows: Page 3, 12th line, remove the following sentence, “He stated that the other two members that were in attendance that day were vague in their reasoning for denying the Friends request to joint the GRRL.” (Sawatzke). Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Heeter, carried 4-0-1 with Russek abstaining as he was not present at the last Board Meeting.
Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Aud./Treas. Item #2, “County Ditch 34 Update” (Hiivala); Aud./Treas. Item #3, “County Ditch 10 Update” (Hiivala); Aud./Treas. Item #4, “Joint Ditch 14 Repair Request From Meeker County” (Hiivala); Item For Consid. #3, “Conservation Award” (Russek). Heeter moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.
On a motion by Russek, second by Heeter, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda:
1. Performance Appraisals: N. Aarvig, E. Adams, C. Flemming, Sher./Corr.
2. Claim, Willen Inc., $5,057.50 (Jail/LEC Project, Service Thru 8-24-08).
Russek provided an update on County Ditch 34. He recently met with the City of Delano on their request from last year to outlet storm water from the Industrial Park to County Ditch 34. When the original request was presented to the Board, Russek requested that the City come up with a better solution. Colleen Allen, and Kerry Saxton, SWCD, have reviewed the area. The Army Corp of Engineers has not indicated yet what can be done. The tile may be removed to create an open ditch. The Corp would require the top to be controlled so there is no more run off than before. The City has planned to engineer the project to pre-settlement rates. Russek said the project is in its early stages. If something is done, a meeting will be held with property owners on the ditch to keep them informed. This was presented as an informational item.
Mattson was contacted by Dennis Glessing on possible repairs to County Ditch 10. Mattson reviewed the Ditch with Glessing and found extensive cleanout may be needed on a County Ditch 10 lateral. The cleanout involves about a 1/4 mile section. Trees are located on the north, but Mattson did not feel they were holding back the water as much as the flat area. Bids may have to be received for two sections. Mattson suggested the first step will be to meet with contractors and view the area. Hiivala will contact the contractors to set up a meeting. Russek moved to authorize solicitation of quotes for repairs to County Ditch 10, seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, was contacted by the Meeker County Highway Engineer on Joint Ditch 14. Meeker County is reconstructing CSAH 15 which is one mile from Wright County. Upon review of the Ditch, they found that repairs are needed and are estimating the cost to be under $10,000. Wright County holds three votes and serves as the host county for Joint Ditch 14. Meeker and McLeod Counties each have one vote. With an estimated cost of $10,000, approximately $6,500 will be the responsibility of Wright County ($856 would be the highest individual assessment based on these costs). Mattson moved to authorize a meeting with Meeker and McLeod Counties on Joint Ditch 14. Russek, Mattson and Heeter will attend on behalf of Wright County. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.
The claims listing was discussed. Hiivala referenced a claim on Page 14, Motorola Inc. ($282,884.33) for a console for the LEC. The payment will be out of bond proceeds instead of Department 150 (Roll-Over From Prior Years). Russek referenced a claim on Page 2, SEH ($10,471.66) for Professional Services for August. He inquired as to what services SEH is providing. Sawatzke thought it was for the Planning & Zoning study. On a motion by Russek, second by Heeter, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract subject to audit, including the one change as noted by Hiivala.
Wayne Fingalson, Highway Engineer, presented the 8-22-08 Transportation Committee Of The Whole (TCOTW) Minutes. The following corrections were made to the minutes: Page 4, 6th line, sentence should read, “He doesn’t think that it would be right to go into motion without the knowledge of the affected property owners.” (Sawatzke); Page 4, 8th line, sentence should read, “Fingalson suggested that the application could be made, and then if money is awarded, the property owners should be contacted.” (Sawatzke); Page 6, 1st line, sentence should read, “Fingalson said that he had already done some research at the Mn/DOT library, but there are no written reports to be found on this subject.” (Fingalson). Discussion at today’s County Board Meeting is reflected in italics.
Discuss Options for CSAH 36 Project.
Fingalson reviewed the needs of CSAH 36, which was included on the Commissioner’s road tour a few years ago. Immediate improvements were not made because of the high cost of the proposed project. A report was drawn up by a geo-technical expert and five options were outlined. [See Attached Summary.] This portion of CSAH 36 (east of TH 101, between TH 101 and CSAH 42) has had problems with water going over the roadway. It has been covered with water for up to a period of three weeks. Occasionally this shows up as a problem in both the spring and the summer. There is about 35-40 feet of poor soil beneath the road bed, which affects the options and the costs of improvements. The first option, at an estimated cost of $700,000, could not be completed within a reasonable time frame, so it was eliminated as a consideration. The second option, at an estimated cost of $750,000, would take up to three years to complete. The third option, at an estimated cost of $4,600,000, includes building a land bridge over a two-year time period, but was eliminated because of the prohibitive cost. The fourth option, at an estimated cost of $1,800,000, includes sheet piling along the river bank, but was eliminated also because of the high cost. Fingalson said that the fifth option is the one that the Highway Department is considering. The estimated cost is $450,000 and no permitting would be required, which would make it possible to begin the project as early as the fall of 2008. County forces could be used to build up the grade with some material, and some low areas would have to be cut out and filled in with foam. The City of Otsego might want to add utilities within five years, but they are not ready to do so yet. Russek asked how a rising river would affect this new roadway, and Hawkins said that it will still flood, but enough material would be put on top so that it won’t wash away. Fingalson said that shredded tires or wood chips are not allowed as lightweight fill because of the water level. The only feasible option is to go with geo-foam and geo-grid, which is like plastic netting sheets. This improvement would handle a 10-year flood. The road would stay at its current width and follow the current alignment. The guardrail is starting to pull away in areas and needs to be reinforced with riprap. Sawatzke commented that something needs to be done and asked how much was budgeted for this project. Fingalson said that originally $750,000 had been budgeted, but this improvement is estimated at $450,000. Another option would be to include a four-to-six foot shoulder, but since the City of Otsego is not interested in putting in utilities at this time, the shoulder will not be widened. Sawatzke asked if the road could be widened in some areas and not in others, but Fingalson and Hawkins both said that it would probably be best to follow state standards for the entire road, which would mean to widen the entire road or leave the entire width as is. This road is not on the County plan as a turnback candidate. Fingalson said that the advantage of this plan is that it could possibly be completed this year, short of the final lift of bituminous. CSAH 36 was recently overlaid, except for a 2,000-foot stretch. The actual work would include a 700-foot length, and if work were begun this fall, the 700 feet would be covered with pavement after the work was done, and the entire 2,000 stretch would be overlaid in the spring. Fingalson estimated that work with the consultant to put a geo-grid plan together would take about four weeks. Sawatzke commented that it’s the least expensive, and if widening the road would cause too many complications, it would be fine with him to leave the road narrow. RECOMMENDATION: It was the consensus of the TCOTW that Fingalson and his staff move forward on implementing Plan No. 5 for the improvement of CSAH 36.
At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke asked with the 3’ raised elevation whether the duration of flooding would be shorter and the occurrence less frequent. Fingalson confirmed this to be the case. Russek asked about breaking up of the road, whether this would only happen when there was extra weight added. Fingalson said extra weight is a concern. There have been problems with the guard rails breaking off. The plan is to do something to prevent that. It has been an ongoing problem. Rip rap has been installed to protect the shoreline. They are installing extra protection so that when flooding does occur, it protects the roadway (to 10 year flood standards). Mattson inquired about the road tonnage. Fingalson said the road was overlaid and is now a 9-ton road. Road restrictions are implemented in the Spring only. The idea is to minimize flooding. It is a fast growing area with a lot of development. In response to Sawatzke, Fingalson said the highest water level has been about 4’. Sawatzke asked about what guidelines are followed regarding road closure due to flooding. Fingalson said they typically wait to close a road until the water moves to the travel lane due to hydroplaning. The decision is based upon different factors such as the rate at which the water is rising.
Safety Project Options
Fingalson said that safety funds were used in 2005 to improve the sight distance at the intersection of CSAH 37/CR 117. He has recently become aware of another opportunity to submit an application for safety funds, but the application is due no later than September 1. This State funding source is the Rural Road Safety Account of the Local Road Improvement Program. A resolution must first be approved by the County Board if an application is to be submitted. The project must be let for bid by May 1, 2009, have a capital improvement life of at least ten years, and must eliminate safety related deficiencies. Wright County would be eligible for $84,866, and more money might be available if it is not used up by other applicants. The intersection of CSAH 37/CR 119 was submitted for safety improvements at the same time that CSAH 37/CR 117 was submitted, and both were approved. However, the bid came in higher than desirable and one property owner near the CSAH 37/CR 119 intersection objected to the project, so improvements were made only at the CSAH 37/CR 117 intersection. Improvements suggested for the CSAH 37/CR 119 intersection include turning movements with left hand turns and a bypass lane on the north side. The majority of movements are westbound, and there is a sight distance problem going west. There was a fatality at this intersection a few years ago, which might have been prevented if there had been a bypass lane. The bid for improvements came in at a little over $65,000 in 2005, and it could be closer to $100,000 now. If this project is accepted, land will need to be acquired from two different land owners, and condemnation might be necessary. The right of way needed is estimated at a value of $3,000, but court costs could increase that by another $2,500. Permits would need to be acquired, but since they were already approved in 2005, that part is done. The biggest issue is the possibility of condemnation. Cordell said that it would probably be possible to install some street lighting at that intersection at the same time that improvements are made, which would help increase the safety there even more. About 20 more feet of right of way is needed from one property owner, and even less than that is needed from the property owner who objected to the project in 2005. Fingalson said that this project would be relatively uncomplicated because there would be no federal money and because Wright County would probably be responsible for only the right-of-way costs, since there is a good chance that the entire construction project would be funded. The application has to be submitted by September 1, 2008 and the bid letting has to take place by May 1, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: It was the consensus of the TCOTW that improvements at the intersection of CSAH 37/CR 119 are important and that Fingalson proceed with the application for safety funding for this project. If this project receives sufficient safety funding, improvements will be completed during the 2009 construction season.
• Fingalson said that there is another opportunity for funding for the TH 55 Corridor Coalition. There is a timeline in September to submit an application from Wright County so that it can be included in the reauthorization bill, which will be expiring next year. Wright County would be the county sponsor and would have to come up with 20% of the cost of a project. Two projects would be considered, including improvements at the intersection of CSAH 32/TH 55 near Rockford and at the intersection of CR 147/TH 55 in Buffalo. Fingalson said that funds would be used to improve the intersection at CSAH 32/TH 55 by moving the connection to the west where it would meet with Gabler Avenue, which would also be moved to the west from its current location. A portion of CSAH 32, which is proposed for connection to a development in Rockford, would become a city street. Wright County would be responsible for 20% of costs, which are estimated at just over $1,000,000, including right-of-way acquisition. Improvements at this intersection had been considered before and had been earmarked for funds; but when the developer to the north of TH 55 pulled out of the plans, the plans for these improvements were abandoned. Fingalson said that it would be nice to get this new intersection completed before TH 55 is widened. There is one house in the area that would probably have to be bought out.
• Fingalson said that the other improvement that could be considered for funding through the TH 55 Corridor Coalition is a new alignment for the intersection of CR 147/TH 55 in Buffalo. The current CR 147/TH 55 intersection has a poor, unsafe alignment, and the intersection would be eliminated at this location and moved to the north to align with CR 134 at TH 55. The eastern most end of the current CR 147 would then become a cul-de-sac. Abandonment of that railroad crossing, plus one that is in the “bank” from Buffalo Township’s former abandonment of another crossing, would allow for the construction of a railroad crossing at this new location. Fingalson showed a plan that included several options for a new alignment of CR 147 to TH 55. Portions of CR 147 are located in Rockford Township, Buffalo Township, and the City of Buffalo. The City of Buffalo is proceeding with plans to extend CSAH 34 to CR 147 as development occurs east of TH 55. Cost for a new alignment of CR 147 and a new intersection are in the range of $1,000,000 to $1,200,000, and Wright County would have to contribute 20% of the funding. If the TCOTW feels that this is a good plan, Fingalson will put in on the 10-year plan. If they are willing to commit to this project, it will be promoted to the TH 55 Corridor Coalition, which could put it into competition with the request for funds for the CSAH 32/TH 55 realignment project and other projects along the 40-mile TH 55 corridor. Fingalson said that requests were sent out to cities and townships in Hennepin and Wright Counties. These two appear to be good candidates to be included in the reauthorization bill. Russek commented that the CR 147/TH 55 realignment would be good because there will already be a stoplight at that intersection. Sawatzke asked if the affected property owners were aware of the suggested realignments of CR 147, and Fingalson said that no one had been contacted. He would like to pursue it at the Board level and submit it to the Corridor Coalition for funding to see if funds can be acquired before contact is made. Sawatzke said that he would like to see input from the property owners since this plan would drastically affect them. He doesn’t think that it would be right to go into motion without the knowledge of the affected property owners. Fingalson said that he didn’t know if the funding application deadline would allow for time to make contact. Fingalson suggested that the application could be made, and then if money is awarded, the property owners should be contacted. If CR 147 were to take a route going straight south from TH 55, fewer landowners would be drastically affected, but a right-angle turn would be necessary on CR 147. Eichelberg asked if property owners could be made aware that a new alignment could be a consideration in the future. Fingalson said that if this is included on the reauthorization bill, funding could be 6-10 years in the future. Eichelberg said that even if it were approved, Wright County doesn’t have to do the project, and Fingalson agreed that funds could be turned down and given to Hennepin County for another project. Sawatzke said that he would prefer if affected people had the opportunity to give input before applications are made for funds to go across their property. Russek suggested sending a letter to the property owners. Fingalson said that another option would be to just go with the improvement on CSAH 32. The submittal doesn’t have to include the exact alignment, just a new connection to TH 55, estimated at 1.3 million, without any specifics. Eichelberg said that he didn’t have any problem submitting the application for improvements at CR 147/TH 55; and if funds are awarded and opposition is high, Wright County doesn’t have to spend the money. Russek said that it would be a shame with the stoplight at CR 134/TH 55 and not fix the intersection. Eichelberg said that he would like to let the property owners know that the County is considering an improved intersection with CR 147 and TH 55. If the County Board discusses this at a regular meeting, the discussion will notify the public. Then, letters could be sent out to people affected by the proposed alignments. Fingalson said that since this is so far in the future, he would like to go for the money and then deal with the specifics. Fingalson said that next Tuesday’s County Board agenda will include only the Safety Program Resolution, and the specifics could be talked about at the Board meeting next week. He has until the end of September to submit the application for the TH 55 Corridor Coalition funding.
CSAH 12/TH 55 Project Status
Fingalson said that an agreement between Mn/DOT and Wright County will be on the upcoming County Board agenda allowing for Wright County to proceed with the installation of traffic signals at CSAH 12/TH 55, just west of Buffalo. The Board has already approved a resolution that authorized an agreement to be made, but Wright County is still waiting for the plans to be approved. The design has already been done by Mn/DOT, but because of a delay in action, Mn/DOT may require the work to wait until 2009. Because funds were not previously available, Wright County opted to wait until funds were released before moving ahead with this project. However, Mn/DOT does not want this project started if there is a chance that TH 55 would not be paved before winter. Even if the plan were approved by the State before Tuesday’s meeting, it would still be the second week of October, at the earliest, when work could begin. Eichelberg commented that it would create a hassle to do just part of the project and it would be better to wait until the whole thing could be completed at one time. Hawkins said that he had just received communication from Mn/DOT that the plans have not been signed, and it will be at least another week or two before that happens, which would bring the bid letting into late October. Everyone agreed that it would be best to wait until 2009 to begin this project.
At today’s County Board Meeting, Fingalson said bids may be opened yet this year. This will be dependent on oil prices. Fingalson said the consensus of the Committee was to wait until 2009 to complete the work.
Rumble Stripes (Eichelberg)
Eichelberg said that he has received phone calls and communications from people who would like to have the rumble stripes removed in areas near their homes. The two areas (both on CSAH 35) in question are the big curve on the west side of St. Michael and an area just west of the Buffalo High School. Fingalson said that the main reason rumble stripes were put on was for the benefit of nighttime wet retro-reflectivity. Cordell said that with the addition of rumble stripes, the actual driving lane was expanded. He said that the standard width of the lane is 11’4”, but the inside of the new paving line with rumble stripes is actually 12’4”. He showed graphics to those present illustrating this. He also showed a map which identified the four routes where rumblestripes have been installed in Wright County. Hawkins said that the public needs to be educated that the stripe is actually meant to fall on the rumble strips (grooves) themselves, which helps with the nighttime retro-reflectivity because of the vertical groove and also helps avoid contact with snowplow blades. Some people mistakenly think that it should have been painted inside the rumble strip. Fingalson distributed a list of callers and the comments that have been received by the Highway Department since the rumblestripes were installed earlier this summer. He said that it would be hard to draw the line if they were to start removing the rumblestripes in certain areas. Safety money was received for the purpose of adding rumble stripes to portions of CSAHs 35 and 18, and there are no plans to add more rumblestripes at this time. Sawatzke asked if the noise level diminishes over time, but Fingalson said that it would take a long time for that to happen. Cordell said that it would be his hope that people who drive over them wouldn’t like the feel of it and would be more careful to avoid them next time. Fingalson asked if he should make an attempt to educate the public through a news release or an article for the paper. Sawatzke said that it would be interesting to have statistics to show that rumblestripes make the road safer and asked if these were available, but Fingalson said that they wouldn’t have any statistics available since the time the rumblestripes were put in. Sawatzke asked if the Highway Department could stop putting them out there for now and if an accident analysis could be done to see if they help improve safety. Fingalson agreed that it would be good to have a definitive record of accidents/crashes before and after rumblestripes. The current locations were chosen by looking at 10-year data through 2006. This is just one method employed which attempts to keep people on the road. The City of St. Michael liked them, so they requested that they be added to CSAH 36. Fingalson said that national statistics show that there can be up to a 70% reduction in crashes because of the nighttime retro-reflectivity that rumble stripes offer. Russek commented that he would like to see more time pass to allow for observation and results before any rumblestripes are either removed or added. Fingalson said that Mn/DOT has chosen to fill in a couple of areas, and Wright County could do the same. Sawatzke asked if anything could be done to make the stripes more visible so that people would try harder to avoid them, and Fingalson said that the Highway Department had added some cross hatching on the shoulder in one area on CSAH 8 as a reminder to the driver to stay off the shoulder. Eichelberg suggested that the winter season pass before anything is done. Fingalson wanted to know where the line would be drawn if they start removing the rumblestripes, and Eichelberg said that he would consider the inside of curves near housing as a good place to start. He said that he will talk to the people who contacted him and tell them that studies will be sought from other counties with this program. Fingalson said that he had already done some research at the Mn/DOT library, but there are no written reports to be found on this subject. He did indicate that he had heard from Carver County who installed edgeline and centerline rumblestrips. They are receiving numerous noise complains from residents. RECOMMENDATION: It was the consensus of the TCOTW that more time be allowed for observation and results before any rumblestripes are removed or added and that the Highway Department should continue to monitor these rumblestripes locally and to check with other counties that are experiencing this same kind of feedback.
At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke referenced TH 25 between Buffalo and Monticello. In that area, rumble strips are used (not stripes). With the rumble strips, the striping is painted on the roadway (not on the strips). With rumble stripes, paint is applied directly onto the stripes. Sawatzke presented the idea of moving the paint back into the roadway by 1’ (with rumble stripes). He felt that the traveling public may be drawn toward the stripe (using it as a guideline when driving at night). This could result in vehicles driving on the stripes more often. Fingalson explained the paint is placed on the rumble stripe for reflectivity purposes. Sawatzke suggested that prior to rumble stripes being filled in, the option of moving the paint striping should be explored. Fingalson said some residents that have called feel the paint striping is in the wrong place. Fingalson explained the benefit of placing the paint on the stripes for reflectivity at night and this has addressed their concerns. Also, due to defensive driving, drivers may have a tendency to drive on the road shoulder. He felt the noise concerns raised by those living near roads with rumble stripes were legitimate. Fingalson plans to discuss the issue with other counties. Eichelberg felt it was important to wait until spring to re-evaluate the situation. Fingalson can contact other counties who may be experiencing the same problem to discuss possible solutions. Sawatzke moved to approve the TCOTW Minutes and recommendations. The motion includes the three corrections as noted. Russek seconded the motion and it carried 5-0.
(End of TCOTW Minutes)
A Personnel Committee Meeting was held on 8-27-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Russek moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Mattson, carried 5-0:
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL, STEVE JOBE, SURVEYOR. Jobe was unavailable to attend the meeting. His performance appraisal will be rescheduled for 9-10-08.
(End of Personnel Committee Minutes)
A Ways & Means Committee Meeting was held on 8-27-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Mattson explained that the railroad is looking at raising the speed limit to 55 mph. The railroad would install the crossing at a 90/10 cost split (County responsibility for 10%). The train currently travels at a speed of 35-40 mph. The railroad wants to increase the speed due to the number of trains. Sawatzke felt that if the speed limit is raised, the land will be less desirable for town home development. Discussion followed on the Agenda item, “Use of the EOC.” Sawatzke said the intent of the Human Services Board was to include this on the Ways & Means Committee Agenda for 9-10-08, not 8-27-08. Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes and to schedule a Closed Session for 9-09-08 at 10:30 A.M. The motion was seconded by Mattson. Sawatzke said the Closed Session will not include Fair Board members as the County has already met with them on the issue and received their input. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, said the minutes reflect that the discussion relating to the EOC will be rescheduled for 9-10-08. Subsequent to the 8-27-08 Committee Meeting, he learned that Genell Reese is unable to attend the 9-10-08 meeting. Therefore, the EOC issue will be referred to the 9-24-08 Ways & Means Committee Meeting. The motion carried 5-0.
DISCUSS PROPERTY NEAR FAIR GROUNDS.
Beise introduced Peter Fisher as a neighboring land owner to the County Fair Grounds. Fisher stated that he has the desire to sell an outlot, plus additional acreage, to the County. The proposed property located north of the railroad tracks has been used in the past by the Fair Grounds for parking and road access via an informal maintenance agreement. Fisher explained that he originally purchased a quarter mile of land from the railroad and subdivided half of the land into four lots in order to build 18 townhomes or rental units. Since, he has found the rental income could not justify the cost of building. Fisher stated that his neighbor has also expressed interest in purchasing the two parcels. Beise stated that the land adjacent to the fairgrounds is 2.2 acres and is situated between the electrical substation to the west along the railroad tracks. Beise stated that it is his opinion that the east half is more valuable than the west half. The west half is lowland. The east half is more valuable because of the terrain. Mattson asked Fisher if the City approved his rezoning plan. Asleson confirmed that the City did approve the rezoning. Fisher stated that he never acquired a building permit. The City made four requirements: 1) place a fence along the back of the property between the railroad ROW and the house, 2) enter into good faith negotiation with the nearby home owner to purchase the old creamery office, 3) locate the property entrance on the north side of the road as far away from the underpass as possible, and 4) place hydrants on the property. Sawatzke asked Fisher how much he paid for the property and how much he is willing to sell the parcels. Fisher stated that he has put $50,000 into the entire parcel. He purchased the land for $40,000, put an additional 10% in for processing, paid another $4,000 to the City and County to get the plat approved, and paid property taxes. Otto & Associates did provide the surveyor work. The County Assessor has 4 parcels assessed at $22,000/lot. The outlot, which is equal in size to the 4 lots, is assessed at $22,000. He stated that he felt the Assessor is high in his assessment of the four lots, and low on the outlot. He stated that he would like $40,000-$45,000 for the outlot, and $40,000 for the parcels. He stated that the easterly platted lots have an obstructed view of Howard Lake and the westerly outlot faces the Fairgrounds. Sawatzke asked how wide the strip of land is. Fisher stated that it is approximately 125’ by 1,320’. Fisher stated that he understands that the Board will probably want an appraisal of the property. RECOMMENDATION: Set a closed Committee Of The Whole Committee to discuss property details and acquisition.
USE OF THE EOC (HUMAN SERVICES BOARD ITEM).
Agenda Item will be rescheduled for 9-10-08.
(End of Ways & Means Committee Minutes)
There will be an Owner’s Committee Meeting at 1:00 P.M. today.
Russek said the August MN County Newspaper contains an award application form for County conservation efforts. Russek felt the County should submit the County/DNR Pelican Lake project in recognition for the County’s efforts in preserving natural resources. Eichelberg questioned if this is the same award the SWCD is applying for. It was the consensus that the issue should be laid over for one week for clarification. Russek will contact Kerry Saxton.
Russek requested that the following item be added to the 9-30-08 Quad County Meeting Agenda, “Use Of Consultants By The Highway Department.” Norman will contact Stearns County to have the Agenda item added.
AAA Striping Service Inc.. $784.00
Albion Township 622.40
Allina Hospitals & Clinics 3,323.62
Ancom Technical Center 202.50
Earl Andersen Inc. 7,661.61
Anoka County Sheriff 5,157.19
Aramark Correctional Services 7,241.84
Assn. of MN Emergency Managers 125.00
B & B Products - Rigs and Squa 2,303.21
Barton Sand & Gravel 828.58
Blaine Lock & Safe Inc. 157.50
BP Amoco 3,084.52
Bristows Kawasaki & Polaris 332.67
Brown Traffic Products Inc. 3,851.04
Bryan Rock Products 221.71
EPA Audio Visual Inc. 113.19
Gateway Companies Inc. 3,244.94
Gould Towing 239.66
Granite Electronics 3,330.74
Hay Group 851.20
Helena Chemical Company 1,456.28
Amy Hertzog 483.15
Identix Incorporated 863.94
Tracy Janikula 191.76
Jerry’s Towing & Repair 263.13
Karels Towing 145.50
Knife River Corporation - Nort 332.29
LaPlant Demo Inc. 619.00
The Lodge at Brainerd Lakes 501.60
L3 Communications Inc. 292.26
M-R Sign Company Inc. 442.28
Major Appliance Repair 310.89
Marco Inc. 5,202.08
Menards - Buffalo 352.88
Midway USA 501.04
Nathan Miller 244.92
MN Corrections Association 180.00
MN Dept. of Labor & Indus 105.00
MN Wanner Company 162.01
Motorola Inc. 282,884.33
MPC Pro 12,851.66
Margaret Munson 180.18
North American Salt Co. 13,900.57
Office Depot 3,585.08
Lynn Peavey Company 677.50
Retrofit Companies Inc. 2,917.15
Shell Fleet Plus 650.18
Sherburne County Recorder 100.00
Software House International In 342.00
St. Cloud State University 375.00
STS Consultants Ltd 10,720.00
Suites at Waterfront Plaza 449.74
Tools Unlimited 751.37
Verizon Wireless 388.09
Jeremy Wirkkula 218.78
Wood Chip of Princeton Inc. 1,155.54
Wright County Auditor Treasurer 102.35
Wright Hennepin Coop Elec Assn 192.86
Xcel Energy 1,919.55
20 Payments less than $100 1,019.80
Final total $411,811.94
The meeting adjourned at 10:02 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal Oct. 6, 2008.