Wright County Board Minutes

WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD MINUTES
DECEMBER 16, 2008
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Heeter, Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek and Eichelberg present.
Russek moved to approve the minutes of 12-02-08 as presented, seconded by Mattson. Mattson said that at the last meeting, discussion occurred on the MOU with Mn/DOT for an existing piece of TH 24 relating to the I94/TH 10 Interregional Connection. Mattson said he voted against the MOU at that time as he wanted the funding source identified. Since then, he received information from Jim Povich, Mn/DOT District 3. The information reflects that due to a lack of funding, there will be no work completed on this project until funding has been identified. The motion to approve the 12-02-08 County Board Minutes carried 5-0.
Heeter moved to approve the Agenda as presented, seconded by Sawatzke. The following items were petitioned onto the Agenda: Item For Consid. #5, “SWCD Award” (Sawatzke); Item For Consid. #6, “AMC Conference” (Mattson). Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, requested revisions to the Consent Agenda as follows: Aud./Treas. Item #1, “Approve Correction’s Change Fund, $200”; Aud./Treas. Item #2, “Approve Road and Bridge Change Fund, $100.00”; Aud./Treas. Item #3, “Approve Road and Bridge Petty Cash Fund, $50.00”. Heeter and Sawatzke agreed to amend the motion to include these items. The motion carried 5-0.
The Consent Agenda was discussed. Sawatzke referenced Consent Item A3, “Claim, Willen Inc., $7,480 (Jail/LEC Commissioning) and inquired whether the payment is associated with the request for expansion of the Commissioning Agent’s Contract, which will be discussed at the Owner’s Committee Meeting today. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, stated that the payment request relates to the existing contract. Russek moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0:
A. ADMINISTRATION
1. Performance Appraisals: L. Donabauer, Admin; E. Kloss, R. DesMarais, Assessor’s; J. Wells, Bldg. Maint.; K. Eich, Parks; M. Gardner, L. Westphal, Rec.; J. Ashley, C. Burton, P. Heitland, B. Johnson, A. Lutgens, K. Perkins, M. Sturm, Sher./Corr.
2. Claim, KKE Architects, Inc., $21,974.72 (Service for Oct., 2008, Jail/LEC Project).
3. Claim, Willen Inc., $7,480. (Jail/LEC Commissioning).
4. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Agreement With Ag Enterprises, LLC, For 2009; $12,957 (Ag Inspector Services).
5. Set Mileage Reimbursement Rate At $.55/Mile, Eff. 1-01-09.
B. ASSESSOR’S
1. Approve Abatement, PID# 205-000-141404, Jayne Hembre (Cokato Twp.).
2. Approve Abatement, PID# 155-179-004010, 004020, & 004030, Preferred Property & Mgmt. LLC. (City of Monticello).
C. AUDITOR/TREASURER
1. Approve Correction’s Change Fund, $200.00.
2. Approve Road and Bridge Change Fund, $100.00.
3. Approve Road and Bridge Petty Cash Fund, $50.00.
D. COURT ADMINISTRATION
1. Refer Request To Building Committee To Revisit Security Measures In Light Of Decision To Eliminate The Current Alarm-To-Dispatch System.
A. Alternative To The Alarm System That Is Being Removed.
B. Keycarding Additional Doors Within The Judicial Corridor.
C. Keycarding Internal Access To The Garage.
E. HIGHWAY
1. Approve Memo Of Understanding With The City of Cokato, The City of Albertville, The City of Waverly, And French Lake Township For The Storage And/Or Purchase Of Sand/Salt And/Or Salt For The 2008/2009 Snow/Ice Control Season.
F. PARKS
1. Authorize Attendance Meeting Of Wright County Legislative Delegation For 12-19-08 @ 9:00 A.M. In The Wright County Board Room.
G. SHERIFF’S OFFICE
1. Refer To The Building Committee The Request To Grant The Use Of The Current Sheriff’s Office Property Evidence Room For Criminal History Storage Upon Move To New LEC.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, said the sale of the County’s General Obligation Capital Notes, Series 2008A, to be issued in the aggregate principal amount of $8,050,000, occurred on 12-15-08. Four bids were received:
Bidder: UMB Bank, N.A
Interest Rates; Net Price; True Interest Cost; Interest Rate
2.00% 2009; $8,010,152.50; 634,987.64; 2.8182%
2.35% 2010
2.60% 2011
2.85% 2012
Bidder: BMO Capital Markets GKST Inc.
Interest Rates; Net Price; True Interest Cost; Interest Rate
3.25% 2009-2011; $8,144,082.50; $663,372.71; 2.9119%
3.50% 2012
Bidder: Cronin & Company, Inc. Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC
Interest Rates; Net Price; True Interest Cost; Interest Rate
3.50% 2009-2012; $8,146,119.75; $692,673.31; 3.0410%
Bidder: Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated
Interest Rates; Net Price; True Interest Cost; Interest Rate
3.50% 2009-2012; $8,117,106.50; $721,686.56; 3.1758%
Bidder: Piper Jaffray & Co.
Interest Rates; Net Price; True Interest Cost; Interest Rate
4.00% 2009-2012; $8,191,923.50; $759,554.28; 3.3209%
Hiivala said the recommendation is to award the bid to UMB Bank, N.A. Russek moved to adopt Resolution #08-47 awarding the sale of General Obligation Capital Notes, Series 2008A, in the Aggregate Principal amount of $8,050,000. The motion was seconded by Mattson and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.
Hiivala introduced Mayor Lee Monk of Clearwater. Monk’s request is that the County consider beginning the foreclosure process for the Circle C/Short Stop building in Clearwater. The Mayor explained the property has not been used in the past four years and is in disarray. The City has extended efforts to clean up the property. The cost of the clean up was billed to the property and mailed to the name on the tax roles. The mail was returned. Mayor Monk was unsure as to the location of the property owner. Hiivala said that with the Board’s direction, he will place the property on the next tax forfeiture property sale. Proper notice and an appraisal are required. Heeter said the property has $119,000 in back taxes, with 2003 being the first year of delinquency. She felt it might be in the County’s best interest to expedite the process given the economic environment. Mattson said the City of Cokato has used this process for some of their unsightly properties. Mattson made a motion to proceed with the tax forfeiture process, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.
Hiivala said two bids were received for the 2009 Official County Newspaper. Russek moved to lay the bids over for one week to allow for tabulation, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0:
Herald Journal
Line length in picas 10.5
Lines per inch in legals 10
Length in lower case alphabet 84
Cost per column inch for legals 0.01
Dassel-Cokato Enterprise Dispatch
Line length in picas 10.5
Lines per inch in legals 10
Length in lower case alphabet 84
Cost per column inch for legals 2.99
Hiivala provided an update on the U.S. Senate Ballot Recount. The State Canvassing Board has indicated that review of the challenged ballots will start today. Hiivala wanted to inform the County’s Canvassing Board (Eichelberg and Sawatzke) that it may reconvene to review rejected absentee ballots. Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, stated that there was a four page order issued by the Supreme Court. Oral arguments will be heard on 12-17-08. A decision will not be issued until late in the day on 12-17-08 or on 12-18-08. County Attorney Tom Kelly has received information from other county attorneys who have analyzed the information. Many are waiting to receive direction from the State Supreme Court before the State Canvassing Board is reconvened. Asleson said it is unclear whether this meeting is subject to the open meeting law. Normally, the County provides 3-day notices of meetings. A campaign notice requires 24 hours. Discussion led to designating an alternate to the Canvassing Board as it is unclear when they will reconvene and they will want to have a quorum. The consensus was that reconvening of the Canvassing Board would be better set for 12-22-08 (anytime) or 12-23-08 (late morning/early afternoon). This was provided as an informational item.
The claims listing was discussed. Mattson referenced a claim on Page 7, Alama Trucking ($2,411.10). Asleson responded that this relates to the cleanup of the Harrison property. They are calculating a total amount spent with the goal of it being applied to next year’s taxes. Heeter moved to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit. The motion was seconded by Russek. Mattson asked whether all departments thoroughly review claims prior to them being sent for approval by the County Board. Hiivala stated that each department is responsible to sign claims for their department. He assumes that with a signature, they have been reviewed. The Auditor/Treasurer’s Office reviews the accuracy of the coding. The motion carried 5-0.
Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, requested that a Public Hearing date be established for the 2009 Solid Waste Debt Service Charge. This charge relates to the debt service on the County’s Compost Facility and a Hearing has historically been held in December. As long as the Hearing is scheduled for 1-06-09 or 1-13-09, it can be applied to the 2009 tax statement. Sawatzke moved to schedule the Public Hearing for 1-06-09 at 9:30 A.M., seconded by Russek, carried 5-0.
Asleson said the Lake Region Coop in Cokato failed a tobacco compliance check by selling tobacco to a minor on 6-10-08. This is the third violation in a 24-month period at that location (previous violations occurred on 6-28-06 and 6-13-07). The Wright County Tobacco Ordinance calls for a $250 civil fine to be paid by the retailer, and for a 7-day suspension of the tobacco license. Because of a mistake on the County’s end, the Notice of Violation sent on 7-01-08 failed to mention the 7-day license suspension. This was discovered in November and notice was then sent to the Coop. Asleson said in fairness, they are providing an opportunity for the Coop to contest the violation or penalty per the Ordinance. Lake Region paid the $250 fine and when notified of the pending suspension, Mike Murray, General Manager, requested an opportunity to address the Board regarding the proposed penalty. The Coop is not contesting that the violation occurred but they are contesting the penalty. A summary of steps taken by the Coop was submitted in response to the Tobacco Ordinance violations. At today’s Meeting, Murray provided background about some reorganization at the Coop. There is a new Board President and Murray was hired 30 days prior to the violation in 2008. Both facility managers in Buffalo and Cokato are new. Murray said the Buffalo location had a violation as well. He subsequently met with the Buffalo City Council and implemented the steps outlined. He felt the Coop has done as much as they can. One thing they have done is to install an ID scanner which makes it impossible to sell tobacco products unless an identification card is scanned. This removes the human factor from the equation. Employees must also pass a test prior to working on registers. He felt they had fixed the problem as much as humanly possible. He felt it was unfair to impose a penalty six months after the violation, especially since they have taken all of the steps. Murray also thought it would be confusing to customers and may reflect that the Coop has received another violation.
Sawatzke felt the Coop has done an outstanding job in responding to the violation and that the situation sounds similar to the Broadway Quik Shop in Monticello (who previously received a violation). The steps taken by the Coop were very close to those taken by the Quik Shop. In that situation, the County Board decided not to rescind the 7-day license suspension but did provide the opportunity for the business to select the 7-day suspension period. Mattson questioned why the County erred on sending notice of the license suspension. Asleson did not have an explanation but stated four offices are involved in compliance checks. The Auditor’s Office generally completes the paperwork, the Sheriff and Public Health conduct the compliance checks, and the Attorney’s Office becomes involved if needed. It was discovered during the Fall that the notice was sent out incorrectly. Asleson felt the difference in the Coop case versus the Quik Shop case is that the Coop did not receive notice for about six months. Murray said that is part of the issue. If the suspension notice had been provided at the time of the incidence, they would have served the suspension and moved on. Now the Coop has taken all steps necessary to prevent this from occurring, and it will appear as though they have made the mistake again. He did not feel serving a suspension at this late date will do any good. Eichelberg asked how long the id scanners have been in the Coop. Murray said they have been there since June. Murray dealt with the City of Buffalo on that violation right away and served the suspension. He did not feel it would be right to serve the suspension so long after the violation. Mattson felt that government should also be penalized for mistakes and that the Coop had done a great job of implementing steps in response to the violations. Asleson said there are merchants that by the time the suspension is served, it is six months after the fact. This situation relates to a delay on the end of the County. That is the difference. Asleson said the Board has the authority, as the final decision maker, to model the penalties as they see fit. The Ordinance reflects a $250 fine for a violation of sale in 24 months with a minimum 7-day suspension. Asleson understood the Board can go over and above that amount, such as in the case where there are four violations. Russek appreciated what the Coop has done to correct the situation. Russek attended the Buffalo City Council Meeting where the Coop met on their violation. He thought it may have been June or July and that they did serve their suspension. Russek had mixed feelings. With regard to a past violation for the Quik Shop in Delano, that business was served notice right way. Heeter agreed with Sawatzke. She said she has taken the hardest line on this law and that it is easy not to sell to minors if it is done correctly. She would consider, if it is within the law, a lesser suspension (possibly 3-day) as the County’s way of taking responsibility for not sending notice in a timely manner. She understands how it would look to customers. Asleson said the Ordinance reflects the suspension should not be less than 7 days. However, the Board can waive that requirement if they feel the facts fit the scenario. Another option would be some sort of probation for one year with the imposing of a 7-day or 14-day suspension after the fact if another violation occurs. Eichelberg did not favor going below the 7-day suspension. However, he agreed with Mattson that the County was at fault for not providing notice for 6 months. Asleson said the Ordinance reflects that the ultimate decision maker for fining and setting a penalty is the County Board. The Ordinance reflects no less than a 7-day suspension for the 3rd violation. However, there are always circumstances that could change the way it is looked at. Russek said for the effort taken to correct the situation, he would support a lesser penalty. Heeter made a motion to let the fine stand as is and to reduce the license suspension from 7 to 3 days because of the County not expediting the process and as a reward to the Coop for implementing processes. It was clarified that the tobacco products are removed from the premises during a suspension for enforcement purposes. The motion was seconded by Sawatzke. Sawatzke asked for the motion to include the penalty being served prior to 1-31-09, allowing the store to choose three consecutive days with the latest being 1-31-09. The motion also stipulates that if another violation occurs in the next 12 months, the four days waived from this suspension will be imposed in addition to whatever the next penalty will be. Heeter approved of the amendment to the motion. Sawatzke felt the Coop has done a good job in rectifying the situation but noted that the County has to be consistent with what is imposed to others. The motion carried 5-0.
Wayne Fingalson, Highway Engineer, said a Transportation Committee Meeting was held on 12-15-08 for the purpose of opening quotes received for the CSAH 8 Bridge Removal Project. The following are the quotes received:
Bidder; Bid Bond; Amount
Jake’s Excavating, Inc. (Buffalo); $; $16,900.00
Veit & Co. (Rogers); B; $17,500.00
Don Rachel Contracting (Maple Grove); B; $22,890.00
Hickman Excavating (Clearwater); $; $24,444.00
Sunblad Construction (Cokato); B; $24,990.00
Midwest Contracting, LLC (Marshall); B; $39,950.00
Landwehr Construction, Inc. (St. Cloud); B; $49,039.69
Mathiowetz Construction (Sleepy Eye); B ;$52,750.00
Redstone Construction (Mora); B; $68,500.00
Schroeder Construction (Glenwood); B; $89,035.00
Paumen Excavating & Septic (Maple Lake); $; $89,300.00
Park Construction (Minneapolis); B; $94,700.00
The recommendation is to accept the low quote of $16,900.00 from Jake’s Excavating, Inc. Russek moved to approve the recommendation, seconded by Mattson, carried 5-0. The project will be funded from the Road & Bridge budget. On a motion by Sawatzke, second by Mattson, all voted to approve the 12-15-08 Transportation Committee Minutes. The Committee Minutes follow:
Eichelberg called the meeting to order at 10:37 a.m. and introductions were made. He directed Fingalson to proceed with the opening of quotes submitted for the old CSAH 8 Bridge Removal Project, Contract #0810.
Results of quotes received are attached. The low quote received was from Jake’s Excavating, Inc., in the amount of $16,900.00. It was learned that Jason Carlson, president of Jake’s, has worked for Veit Construction and has experience in bridge removal. After reviewing the quotes with Fingalson, the Transportation Committee recommended that the Wright County Board accept the low quote of Jake’s Excavating, Inc., at the Wright County Board meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 16, 2008. (End Of Transportation Committee Minutes)
Russek moved to schedule a Transportation Committee Of The Whole Meeting for 1-12-09 at 10:00 A.M., seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0. The Agenda will include: Federal Funding Projects, Economic Stimulus Status, Attendance at Washington Fly-In, Discuss Option for Former Chouinard Property, and Status of Construction Projects.
Mark Mattice, Parks Administrator, requested the Board authorize signatures on several documents related to the Bertram Chain of Lakes Project, First Phase of acquisition, between Wright County, City of Monticello, and the YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis. Brian Kirk of the YMCA was present for discussion.
Memorandum of Understanding Addendum. The addendum outlines the standards of what will be accomplished and addresses the City’s terms relating to the ball field and how it will be handled. The Addendum was drafted by the attorneys for the City, County, and YMCA. The Addendum will be attached to the original MOU along with the Ground Lease. Sawatzke said the Ground Lease will not be signed at this time. Changes may be made prior to it being presented for signatures at a future date. One area that is referenced in the document is a YMCA Summer MiniBike Program. Sawatzke said that the feasibility of whether this Program will fit in with the Parks will be determined by the City and County. This will be given consideration in the future. Sawatzke moved to approve the MOU Addendum, with the Ground Lease attached. He restated the Ground Lease is not being signed at this time and further work will be completed on it. Mattice said the Ground Lease cannot be executed until the property is owned. The motion was seconded by Heeter. Mattson asked whether the County was stepping into a $20.5 million project. Sawatzke said the County is committing $1.2 million today. Mattson referenced Sections 1.02 and 1.03 of the Ground Lease document that relate to Bankruptcy Law and Proceedings and questioned who the language is protecting. Asleson said the information may appear in the Purchase Agreement as well but Asleson felt this is standard language with accurate definitions. Mattson said that Section 15.01(c) on Page 15 reflects language on bankruptcy and insolvency. Asleson said the language reflects remedies that the County has as landlord. The actual lease document contains many things that are general in nature.
At 10:30 A.M., the bid process was closed for the Roof Replacement bids.
Discussion continued on the Bertram Chain of Lakes Project:
Memorandum of Understanding Addendum (cont.): Mattson said he would support this as he feels it is a good project. He did have concern with the number of businesses closing, layoffs, and the uncertainty of State funding. Sawatzke understood the concern. However, the state of the economy has helped as the property is being obtained at an affordable price versus what land sold for a few years ago. Russek said they learned at the AMC Conference that the State is $5.2 billion in debt. It is unknown whether State funding will be received or whether the debt will fall on the City and the County. He questioned in that situation whether the County and City will be liable for the entire purchase. Sawatzke said the purchase includes $1.2 million each from the City, County and State. There is nothing in the documentation that will require purchase of any more property. The document does set prices in place, and there will be approximately a five-year period to complete the transaction. They will continue to seek State funding. Sawatzke agreed that the State probably does not have funding available through the bonding bill. However, this project will be eligible for sales tax funding that is divided out to counties to purchase regional park property. If Wright County does not request the funding, it will be given to other counties. Mattson asked for an update from the Auditor/Treasurer on the state of the County. Hiivala reported that the County is doing well. There are several line items, related to real estate, where revenues are under budget. However, there are other line items that are making up ground. The County is in good shape but the future is uncertain. Heeter said this project has been worked on for over three years. The YMCA has been incredible to work with and the project has received the support of the Legislators. Heeter said that once the money becomes available in the fund, this project is first in line. Although these are tough economic times, this project is a win/win for everyone. Heeter felt this project is one of the highlights of what has been accomplished in her role as Commissioner. Mattson referenced the Jail/LEC project and said if the County had known what would happen with the economy, the Jail wouldn’t have been constructed. At this time, the County has not committed to the Bertram Chain of Lakes Project and could step back. He said he can support the project but is nervous about it. The motion carried 5-0.
Purchase Agreement.
The purchase price is $3.6 million for 319 acres of property. The closing will be either 12-29-08 or 12-30-08. Reimbursement paperwork will be submitted to the State with about a two week turnaround once the documents are submitted. Heeter moved to authorize signatures on the Purchase Agreement, seconded by Sawatzke. Mattson questioned the first right of refusal. Mattice explained that the MOU reflects the County and City have until 2013 to come up with the funds. If this does not happen, they can petition to extend the MOU. Sawatzke said the reason action is being taken now is that there are two different grants from the State involved ($1 million and $200,000). The County has until 12-31-08 to utilize the $200,000 grant funding. The purchase must be closed prior to 12-31-08. Mattson questioned what will happen if the State does not come forward with the $1 million. Mattice said he is positive the County will receive this as there is a signed grant agreement. Sawatzke explained further that the grant funding is through lottery proceeds which are earmarked specifically for these types of purchases. If the funds are not designated for a Wright County project, they will be given to a project in another area of the State. Mattice said the City of Monticello authorized signatures on the Purchase Agreement. Mattice has the signed Purchase Agreements. Once signed by the County, they will be given to the YMCA to have their Executive Officers sign. The motion carried 5-0.
Athletic Field Lease Agreement.
This Agreement is between the YMCA and the City and reflects that the YMCA will leave some land to the City to develop a ball field prior to acquisition. As this is a joint partnership and the County is listed in one area of the Agreement, the attorneys felt the County should sign the Lease Agreement. The County is listed in the Agreement, Item #15, Option to Purchase, which states, in part, “In recognition of and in consideration for the improvements to be made to the property by the City, the YMCA hereby grants the City and Wright County an Option to Purchase the property closing on or before April 1, 2014. This option shall be exercised by the execution and delivery by the City and/or the County …”. Sawatzke said this will give the County an option to acquire property but does not commit the County to anything. Asleson said the obligations under the lease are with the City as they will expend the dollars for the athletic fields. It is appropriate for the County to sign as the County is mentioned in the document. Sawatzke moved to authorize signatures on the Athletic Field Lease Agreement, seconded by Heeter. Mattson asked whether the City is buying a portion of the land separately from the County. Mattice stated the City is leasing a portion of the land separate from the Plan as they want to move forward prior to the acquisition. Monticello is taking the responsibility for leasing and building the athletic fields. The motion carried 5-0.
Mattice said as part of the Metro Greenways Grant Program, the County needs to submit an approved Natural Resource Management Plan for the Bertram Chain of Lakes. The Plan has been approved by the DNR. Heeter moved to adopt the Natural Resource Management Plan, seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0.
Heeter moved to refer the NACO Rx Discount Drug Program to a Board Meeting in January, 2009. The motion was seconded by Mattson and carried 5-0.
The Bid Opening was held for the Roof Replacement of the Government Center. Craig Hayes, Purchasing Agent, said the County is receiving bids to replace the roof membrane on the Government Center building (including the Annex). Five bidders attended the mandatory pre-bid meeting held on 12-01-08. The County contracted with Roof Spec. Inc. as the consultant. The bid requires a 5% bid bond and a performance bond for the total amount of the bid. Two addendums were issued. The bid includes three amounts to cover extra work that may be required. Ryan Kohl, Roof Spec. Inc., was present at the meeting to assist with the bid opening. Sawatzke inquired on the likelihood of deck replacement. Kohl said the work will probably include insulation replacement and possibly the metal deck as there is a history of leaks. However, they have not found any leaks during their investigations. Sawatzke moved to lay the bids over to a future meeting, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0. The bids follow:
B&B Sheet Metal (Buffalo):
Addendum Received: Yes
Base Bid: $764,000
Replace Metal Deck ($/S.F.): $6.50
Replace Concrete Deck ($/S.F.): $85
Replace Insulation ($/S.F.): $1.75
Bid Bond: Yes
Palmer West Construction (Rogers):
Addendum Received: Yes
Base Bid: $614,900
Replace Metal Deck ($/S.F.): $7.00
Replace Concrete Deck ($/S.F.): $25
Replace Insulation ($/S.F.): $2.00
Bid Bond: Yes
McDowall Co. (St. Cloud):
Addendum Received: Yes
Base Bid: $663,700
Replace Metal Deck ($/S.F.): $5.00
Replace Concrete Deck ($/S.F.): $150
Replace Insulation ($/S.F.): $1.50
Bid Bond: Yes
All Weather Roof (Minneapolis):
Addendum Received: Yes
Base Bid: $568,320
Replace Metal Deck ($/S.F.): $6.00
Replace Concrete Deck ($/S.F.): $20
Replace Insulation ($/S.F.): $3.50
Bid Bond: Yes
Verizon Roofing (Waite Park):
Addendum Received: Yes
Base Bid: $523,100
Replace Metal Deck ($/S.F.): $12.00
Replace Concrete Deck ($/S.F.): $150
Replace Insulation ($/S.F.): $3.50
Bid Bond: Yes
Further discussion occurred on the sale of the County’s General Obligation Capital Notes, Series 2008A, issued in the aggregate principal amount of $8,050,000 (discussed earlier in today’s meeting). Hiivala introduced Barry Fick, Springsted Financial Advisors. Fick explained that the bids received were 15 basis points or 1.5% lower than anticipated. This is because the bonds were bank qualified and the favorable bid came from UMB Bank. The signature pages for the sale were presented to the Board.
The meeting recessed at 10:38 A.M. and reconvened at 10:46 A.M.
An Owner’s Committee Meeting was held on 12-02-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Russek moved to approve the minutes and recommendations. The motion was seconded by Mattson. Mattson referenced the purchase of property storage bins for inmate property in the amount of $2,343.25. He asked whether the current bins can be utilized. Russek said the new bins differ from what they currently use and fit into the shelving units. The motion carried 5-0:
A&P.
I. PROJECT UPDATE.
Streich provided a project update (see attached “Schedule Look-A-Head 2 Week”, dated 12-02-08). He noted that punch lists and commissioning are ongoing in Areas A & B. The offices are almost 100% cleaned. The elevator pretest will occur on 12-10-08. An inspection of the elevator will occur the following week. Start-ups of the kitchen equipment began in Area C today. They are also grinding and polishing the concrete floors, installing the security grid, and installing light fixtures. They are installing the gym equipment, floor finishes, and security ceiling tiles in Area F. The cleaners started cleaning Area E over the past weekend. The mechanical and electrical fixtures are being installed. The punch list is in progress in Area E. Light fixtures, mechanical finishes, and devices in Area D are being installed. The epoxy finish in the showers has begun in Area D. The security ceiling grid is being installed. The punch list will be started in Area D within the next couple of weeks. Russek asked if the geo-thermal system has been fired up. Streich stated that they are having problems with the system and two temporary BTU heaters are heating the building. He commented that the building is able to hold its own heat via a make-up air system in the kitchen, heaters in the garage, and the temporary heaters. Sawatzke asked how much cheaper the geo-thermal system would be in comparison to using the BTU heaters. Blotske stated that right now, it is probably cheaper to use the BTU heaters since the entire facility is not being heated. Sawatzke asked when Streich estimated that the geo-thermal system would become functional. Streich stated that he is not sure. Plumbing contractors and the installers are working on filtering the system. Sand keeps working its way into the system and clogging the filters. Saathoff, Inc. is paying out of its contingency for the additional contractors to clean the system. Streich explained that this geo-thermal system is larger than most. There are 10” lines coming into the building which are special order items. There was a three week delay to wait for the delivery of replacement elbow parts. Sawatzke asked what Willen’s, (the commissioning agent), role was in the geo-thermal project. Streich stated that the geo-thermal system is outside of his scope of work. Torfin explained that Willen is delayed as well due to the problems with the geo-thermal system. He cannot move forward with his commissioning and testing until the geo-thermal system is operational. Sawatzke asked if this would delay building occupancy. Streich stated that A&P does not know the answer to his question. Russek asked how the sand got into the geo-thermal system. Streich stated that it could have occurred during installation. The jobsite was extremely dirty and dusty. The larger rocks have been removed from the system. The sand continues to clog the filters and stop the motors. Blotske stated that the contractor commented that these types of problems typically occur on 20% of their projects. Streich stated there are few projects that are as large as the Jail/LEC. Hayes asked if the filters are difficult to get to and if changing the filters would become a regular maintenance item. Streich stated that the filters could become a regular maintenance item. He explained that Hatfield has been involved in the process of checking the gages and shutting down the system to clean out the system. There are six filters.
II. PCO’S APPROVED BY CAPTAIN TORFIN.
Torfin approved the following:
A. PCO #078– BP#3 Beam Pocket Infill - $2.688.00.
Torfin explained that beam pockets (located within the gym) needed to be filled. Streich stated that there were approximately 16 pockets: each were approximately 1’ x 3’. Streich stated that it required a lot of concrete and plywood.
B. PCO #130– BP#3 PR 064 Controlling Flush Valve In Chase J1235 From Booking - $1,341.00.
Torfin stated that the design called for a remote flush valve. The remote valve was included in the plumbing specification, but not in the electrical specification.
C. PCO #131– BP#3 Additional Fire Extinguishers Per Elevator Inspection Requirement - $249.00.
Torfin stated that the Fire Marshal required additional fire extinguishers.
D. PCO#132 – BP#3 Install Iron Covers Over Exposed Plumbing Pipe - $4,705.00.
Torfin explained that plumbing pipes were installed per specifications, yet left exposed. A steel cover was created to fit over the exposed plumbing pipes. Sawatzke questioned the comment within the PCO that read “Cost Share With Contractor”. Blotske stated that the contractor paid for the material. The County is paying for the labor and installation. Blotske explained that the pipe was installed per the drawings at an elevation of 11 feet in a dayroom. The elevation of the pipes could allow the pipes to be tampered with. The covers are slanted which will prevent anybody from hiding contraband on top of the pipes.
E. PCO #133 – BP#3 Relocate Exhaust Drop - $484.00.
Torfin stated that in the sallyport, there was an exhaust drop from the ceiling that interfered with a sliding door entry. There was a difference in the drawings from one bid package to another. The ductwork had to be moved over.
F. PCO #134 – BP#3 Curb At Curtainwall - $1,267.00.
Torfin stated that a concrete curb was installed at a curtain wall that shouldn’t have been there. This PCO is to modify the curtain wall frame. Blotske explained that the curb was poured as shown in bid package #2. Blotske stated that the curtain wall contractor’s drawings did not show the curb in bid package #3. Streich stated that the curb was already poured when the curtain wall contractor arrived on the jobsite.
G. PCO #135 – BP#3 PR 065 Dispatch Equipment Room Pan At Expansion Tanks - $218.00.
Torfin explained that this PCO is to protect the main electronic/data room in the Dispatch Equipment Room. This PCO will allow for an air fitting to the automatic air vent at the top of two expansion tanks. It is going to be vented through a pipe into a drain so that there aren’t any issues of moisture getting into the Dispatch equipment.
H. PCO #136 – BP#3 PR 066 UPS 20 Amp Receptacle In Room S2504 - $449.68.
Torfin stated that this is to furnish an additional outlet required for the Positron server.
I. PCO #137 – BP#3 Additional Stucco Required At S1413 - $760.00
Torfin explained that this PCO is related to PCO #125 – BP#3 as discussed at the 11-04-08 Owner’s Committee Meeting A precast wall did not have a finished reveal in the Evidence Return Area. This PCO is to finish the wall. Russek asked if this was a spray finish. Blotske stated yes.
III. PCO’S REQUESTED FOR OWNER APPROVAL.
A. PCO #198 – BP#3 Revisions To Data Cabinets - $8,540.10.
Blotske explained that she understood the data cabinets that were installed were converted to fit a piece of server equipment. The cabinets were not large or strong enough to fit necessary server equipment. Blotske stated that she was not sure if there was a miscommunication between I.T. and Arnold & Sheridan regarding the type of equipment that was needed for the project resulting in the wrong sized data cabinets. Torfin stated that it was his understanding that the cabinets were specified and built before the equipment was ordered. Russek proposed waiting to approve the PCO until the Committee had a chance to see the cabinets at the proposed 12-16-08 tour of the Jail/LEC. Torfin stated that the cabinets were already modified and in place. The contractor is now seeking payment. Sawatzke questioned whether All State Communications was already given the authorization to proceed with the change. Blotske stated that Bill Swing gave them the authorization to proceed. She stated that she thought Bill Swing has a good working relationship with All State. Sawatzke stated that there is a risk in proceeding with change orders prior to Committee or County Board approval. Sawatzke stated that if somebody needs approval or authorization to proceed with an item, they should call for a special Owner’s Committee Meeting. He stated that the members of the Owner’s Committee have guidelines. He explained that Torfin has the authorization to approve change orders up to $5,000, and the Committee has authorization to approve change orders up to $25,000. The County Board is to approve any other change orders exceeding that amount. Russek forewarned A&P and KKE that the $40,000 change order for the roof should be presented to the Committee in advance so that there is time to present it to the County Board. Hayes commented that the work has been completed. The contractor is applying for the payment. Sawatzke reminded the Committee again of the guidelines. RECOMMENDATION: Approve payment to All State Communications in the amount of $8,540.10 for revisions to data cabinets.
IV. PROJECT CONTINGENCY $1,110,370.00
Blotske stated that the current contingency amount (including Torfin’s approved PCOs) is $528,464.64. With the Committee’s authorization of PCO #198 (as discussed above), the contingency amount will be $519,924.54.
V. PROJECT FF&E BUDGET $1,879,314.00.
Blotske stated that the current FF&E Budget is $1,194,284.67. Her numbers reflect all of the purchase orders she received. Norman asked if this number reflects the items that were approved for purchase Building Care and Maintenance. Blotske stated that if a purchase order has been written, and she has a copy of it, it would be reflected in the current FF&E amount. Hayes commented that they have written purchase orders for approximately a third of the needed equipment.
A. Horizontal Blinds In Area E; Quote From Kustom Blinds & Draperies $1,553.83.
Torfin stated that this item is to provide horizontal blinds from Hunter Douglas along the lower level of the officer station. The blinds allow the Correction Officers to peer through the covered window. The blinds are .008 gauge, 1” blinds. His department has used them in the current facility and they are good quality. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize purchase of horizontal blinds from Kustom Blinds & Draperies in the amount of $1,553.83.
B. NSF Reach-In Refrigerator For Work-Release Lunches; Quote From Strategic Equipment, Inc., $2,329.47.
Torfin stated that we are required to provide an NSF approved refrigerator for food storage for work release. We are currently using a 1970s avocado-colored unit that the Health Department grandfathered for use until it is to be replaced. Torfin stated that the new refrigerator is from Strategic Restaurant Supply. It is an in-stock item. The current refrigerator will remain in the Government Center for juveniles. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize purchase of an NSF reach-in refrigerator from Strategic Equipment, Inc. in the amount of $2,329.47.
C. Property Storage Bins – Inmate Property; Walter F. Stevens Co., $2,343.25.
Torfin stated that this request is to purchase 280 20-gallon totes/plastic tubs that specifically fit the shelves located in the property storage room. They will be used to store inmate property. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize purchase of property storage bins from Walter F. Stevens Co. in the amount of $2,343.25.
KKE ARCHITECTS.
I. PROJECT UPDATE.
Mattox stated he has nothing to share at this time. Sawatzke asked if a tour of the Jail/LEC on 12-16-08 is still of interest. He stated that a few members of the Historical Society would like to come out again. He asked A&P if that was acceptable. Blotske stated yes. A&P would like a headcount for hardhats and safety glasses. The Committee will meet at 1:00 p.m. in the Squad Room for a regularly scheduled meeting, and the tour will begin at 1:30 p.m. Blotske asked if the County is thinking of holding an open house event. Sawatzke and Russek stated yes. Sheriff staff would already occupy the building and the open house would take place prior to the Jail opening. Blotske stated that A&P would assist the County in planning for the open house. Sawatzke requested that the Committee discuss the planning for the open house at the Owner’s Committee Meeting of 1-06-09. Blotske presented a few ideas regarding guided tours, or staffed stations in each of the pods to answer questions and provide supervision.
(End of Owner’s Committee Minutes and discussion)
A Personnel Committee Of The Whole Meeting was held on 12-02-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke made the following change to the minutes: Page 3, last paragraph, 9th line, sentence should read, “Sawatzke said he would support giving Hiivala the $3,500 step increase.” Russek moved to approve the minutes as corrected and the recommendations, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0:
DISCUSS 2009 SALARIES OF ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEADS.
A. 10:00 A.M. Gary Miller, Sheriff.
To meet his Statutory obligations, Miller distributed a copy of the “Responsibilities and duties of the office of Wright County Sheriff 2009” including information that was distributed in 2008 when his salary was addressed by the Committee. Miller requested a 2009 salary of $112,000, which is less than requested in 2008. Last year, a settlement was reached compensating Miller for a base salary of $104,803 plus $3,197 in compensation for recognition of administering the twenty law enforcement contracts with municipalities and school districts. He said the compensation he received in 2008 equated to about .072% of the revenues generated through the contracts. Law enforcement contract rates will increase by $2/hour in 2009 and the revenue will total about $4.6 million. Miller’s position was that the increase requested will not be funded through levy dollars due to the increase in contract rates. Miller said about 70% of his duties are directly tied to the law enforcement contracts. He felt $112,000 was low in comparison to salaries of other county sheriffs. Although Miller feels that advances must be made in compensation, he also structured his request given the current state of the economy. Miller felt the request was reasonable given the extra duties and responsibilities and the compensation from last year. Norman said State Statute reflects that the “County Board sets the salary after considering the extent of the responsibilities and duties of the office, and the elected official’s experience, qualifications, and performance.” Miller said this was taken into consideration when he made his request and he is not interested in a legal battle. Last year, they came to a common ground on the decision making factors. He felt the job of Sheriff is a unique one. He noted that he did take into account the economy and that his request is less than last year. Sawatzke noted that some cities may want to cut contracts. Miller said part of his job with municipal entities will be to explain the importance of keeping an adequate level of service during a time when more law enforcement may be needed.
Heeter supported Miller’s salary request of $112,000. She felt the role of Sheriff is 24/7 and is a unique position. She is proud of the service provided by the Sheriff Department. Sawatzke felt a 3.75% increase was a little high given the economic situation. Many people are losing jobs and having a hard time meeting their mortgage payments. Russek felt the salary request presented was reasonable. He did not feel that the County received complaints on the Sheriff Department. Mattson said the River Rider Administrator recently agreed to settle on a 2.5% increase. Mattson said Sherburne County is talking about layoffs, and he was concerned with what was happening around the area. He suggested settling somewhere between 2.5% and 3.5%. Miller understood the concern and restated the economic situation was considered when he formed his request. He felt that the salary issue will be different at the end of 2009 as the impacts of the economy will be known. He stated that the disparity in pay for his position versus salaries in comparable counties was not addressed during good economic times. He referenced discussions which occurred last year during salary negotiations for the Sheriff position. At that time, it was the consensus that the County was to look at the duties of the Sheriff and not compare it to other positions. Miller stated that law enforcement contract hour increases in 2009 will bring in $202,000 more in revenues. He is requesting about $1,500 from that amount for a salary adjustment. Sawatzke said the law enforcement contracts are not covering costs for both the Sheriff Department and prosecution. He felt it may cover the deputies’ costs but a portion of the contract is for prosecution services. Miller said the contracts fully pay for the deputies. The Department turns back $300,000-$600,000 annually. He thought the $200,000 in additional revenues provided room for both the deputies and Sheriff wages.
B. 10:30 A.M. Tom Kelly, Attorney.
Kelly’s request is for an increase in compensation in 2009 to $119,500, which would equate to an increase of 3.464%. Kelly has been with the County for 25 years and was elected Attorney in 1998. He expressed appreciation for the increase received in 2008. The salary request is less than 2008 comparables for neighboring county attorney positions. He said the salary of $119,500 would still be substantially behind that paid to the Sherburne County Attorney. He provided different suggestions on how his compensation could be distributed between the salary schedule and additional salary for work associated with law enforcement contracts. He did not have a preference on how this is divided as long as the total compensation totaled $119,500. Kelly said he is more active on the criminal side of prosecution than many county attorneys. During the past year, he personally handled three homicide cases. He felt that his request was reasonable and fair. Norman stated that Kelly had a 2008 base salary of $110,918 and was compensated additionally $4,582 in recognition for his responsibilities to provide prosecution services for the contract cities. Sawatzke felt the request was a little high due to the economic status. He felt it may be hard to justify a $4,000 increase in salary. Kelly said the law enforcement contracts will generate an additional $160,000 and he felt that $2,000 of it could be used for the salary increase request. Sawatzke said the Committee heard the same argument from the Sheriff. He was unsure when it was decided that the law enforcement contracts belong to the Sheriff and Attorney. He said the revenues do not cover the costs for the deputies and attorneys. The revenues probably cover the Sheriff Department costs. He said the County is charging $55/hour and probably spending $58-$59/hour. Kelly said the Check Restitution Program alone would provide revenues to cover the requested increase in salary, as they have received over $45,000 through that program at no cost to residents. Kelly said the economy is what it is and he is not requesting a 7%-9% increase. He felt the request was reasonable. Discussion led to the public’s perception of the salary increases being considered. Sawatzke felt the public may have an issue with a $4,000 salary increase for some positions when people may be losing their homes. Kelly felt that the public would support the request due to his longevity with the County and the services provided to residents. He said if he were working in the private sector, his salary would be quite a bit more. Heeter stated that is Kelly’s choice. Kelly said he chose to do the job but is entitled to a fair compensation. He did not feel the public would have a great concern with the requested $4,000 increase. Mattson referenced the settlement reached with the River Rider Administrator of 2.5%, as suggested by Sherburne County. Mattson said he would support settling somewhere between 2.5% and 3.5%. Kelly responded that the salary lagged during times when there weren’t economic troubles. He felt it would all equal out. Heeter said she did not favor the salary increase last year but Kelly sued the County and received compensation. She said at that time it was felt that the County’s decision was arbitrary and capricious as it was based on what salary adjustments were given to others. Heeter said she bases her decision on work ethic and stated Kelly has many liberties that others don’t relative to the number of hours worked. Kelly felt Heeter had no concept of the hours he spends completing his work and that he was offended by her comment. For example, he referenced the Ruth Ouverson murder case that he tried last year and said the hours to complete the work required were not only during the 8:00 AM-4:30 PM work day.
C. 11:00 A.M. Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer.
Hiivala requested a salary increase from Step 9 ($101,259) to Step 10 ($104,803) of the salary schedule plus the COLA increase in 2009. Heeter stated that Hiivala was given a double step increase a couple of years ago. Mattson, Eichelberg and Russek supported the request. Russek commended Hiivala on his performance, stating he is well qualified for the position, but requested that he take less time off than he has in the past. At last year’s Committee Meeting, it was recommended that steps be taken to make the Auditor/Treasurer position appointed rather than elected. Hiivala supports this. Hiivala said Morrison County had a bill introduced. During their process, the Morrison County Coordinator suggested that the recommendation to make this an appointed position be brought forth at a public meeting. This is so the public is notified and can make comment if desired. Norman said that because the Committee Minutes on this recommendation were brought forth at a Board Meeting last year, he felt the public was notified of the intent. Norman was unaware of any phone calls from the public on this issue. Norman suggested that the County move forward with the request during the next Legislative Session. The County Attorney’s Office would be asked to bring forth a bill that would be introduced as soon as possible during the upcoming Session. The County would need to make sure someone from our Legislative Delegation, on both the House and Senate sides, carries the bill on behalf of the County. Norman suggested that the Committee recommend a resolution be drafted on behalf of the Sheriff and County Attorney salary increases, as has been done in the past. The resolution would establish a base salary plus additional compensation recognizing their work with contract cities. The resolution would also reflect moving Hiivala to the next step of the Salary Schedule. Sawatzke said he would only support a $3,000 increase for Miller and Kelly. He felt the public could be angry about a decision of any amount beyond that, and the amount would fall in line with the suggestion by Mattson to offer increases in the 2.5% to 3% range. Heeter said she would support Miller’s request but not Kelly’s. Further discussion transpired on potentially drafting a resolution. Norman reminded the Committee of the criteria needed in order to establish a salary, as outlined in a memorandum sent to them previously. Eichelberg noted that moving Hiivala to the next step of the Salary Schedule would increase his salary by $3,500, not including the COLA, and is above the $3,000 amount suggested by Sawatzke for Kelly and Miller. Sawatzke said he would support giving Hiivala the $3,500 step increase. Norman said the Auditor/Treasurer and Sheriff are on the Non-Union Salary Schedule so the COLA should be considered. He recommended coming forth with a resolution tying the base salary to the Salary Schedule. The resolution would reflect any extra compensation granted because of the work completed with the law enforcement contracts. Elected Department Head salaries must be set by the end of 2008. Norman said the Committee needs to make a recommendation on the requests by 12-23-08. Recommendation: Reaffirm the Committee’s position to move forward with making the Auditor/Treasurer position appointed rather than elected. Direct the County Attorney’s Office to pursue getting a bill sponsored and introduced in this regard. Recess the Personnel Committee Meeting to 12-16-08 at 10:30 A.M. to further discuss the 2009 salaries of Elected Department Heads. The Sheriff, County Attorney, and Auditor/Treasurer will be asked to supply (within the next two weeks) any additional information they have on the criteria to support the requested increases (the extent of the responsibilities and duties of the office, and the elected official’s experience, qualifications, and performance).
(End of 12-02-08 Personnel Committee Of The Whole Minutes and discussion)
A Ways & Means Committee Meeting was held on 11-26-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes and recommendations, seconded by Mattson, carried 5-0:
ARCHERY RANGE AGREEMENT.
Nolan stated that this agenda item was laid over from the 10-08-08 Ways & Means Meeting. The subject was laid over to permit time to research abatement, tax relief, and legalities of an exemption. Nolan stated that MCIT’s main concern is that in the event of a claim, the maximum limit MCIT would pay is the coverage limit of $400,000 per person/$1,200,000 per occurrence. The County would be responsible for any damages beyond the limit. MCIT still has concerns regarding the Hold Harmless clauses. MCIT is recommending that the County look at other options in lieu of entering into a contractual lease agreement. Nolan stated that essentially the Sportsman Club is looking for tax relief. The County was proposing to lease back their land in the amount of their property taxes. Thomas stated that the Club owns eleven acres. Nolan stated that he met with Greg Kramber, County Assessor, and Bob Hiivala, County Auditor/Treasurer, to discuss assessed value and tax relief. Kramber indicated that he met with Commissioner Heeter regarding this issue. He stated that the Club’s property tax is the lowest it can be. He stated that if he were to go to the State, they would probably question the current low tax value. The Committee discussed how to avoid liability via contract language, advertising, and involvement. Asleson stated that he looked into the tax abatement statute. The County Board adopted a resolution citing that they are not in favor of granting development abatements. However, he found a Minnesota Statute that could accommodate the County’s intent: Minnesota Statute 398.32; County Parks, Subd. 3, “Public use facilities, accommodations and services; public or private operation. The County Board of any County having a County park or parks may provide for the construction, installation, maintenance, and operation therein of suitable facilities, accommodations, and services for public use…” He stated that he interpreted the Statute to mean that if the County does not want to provide an archery range on its park property, they can contract with a private interest, as long as it is in the public interest. Asleson stated that the Statute would allow the County to provide the planning, labor, and tax relief, yet leave the Club with the responsibility/liability. He stated that perhaps this would take the County out of a lease situation. Pribyl stated that the Club is constantly fundraising in order to meet its annual budget of approximately $6,500 (half of which is to pay for the property tax). Sawatzke asked if the Hasty-Silver Creek property was open to the public. Pribyl stated that although the property does not have a public access landing, the dock and picnic grounds are open to the public. Pribyl stated that the Club only hosts event shooting. Members and non-members cannot shoot unless it is an authorized event. Sawatzke asked Pribyl if he is aware of any other club that provides the same services or operates in the same manner. Pribyl stated that he is not aware of what other clubs provide. Sawatzke stated that it is his observation that the Hasty-Silver Creek Sportsman Club provides a public service like no other (i.e. shooting range, picnic grounds, public use of a dock, etc.). Mattice stated that Parks did send out letters to other sports clubs soliciting their interest in hosting a public archery range. No other clubs expressed interest. Mattice stated that the Parks Commission expressed interest in holding annual archery training. Pribyl stated that the training could be tied into the Club’s Tuesday night open trap shooting. Mattice forewarned the Committee that the archery training would not be revenue generating. Nolan asked if it is the intent of the Parks Department to maintain the park. Mattice stated that Parks would only maintain the targets. Mattice stated that they would replace target cores. The Club is to provide the maintenance of the Club grounds. Sawatzke asked if the facility would remain open for public use. Thomas stated that their Charter indicates that they are to remain open for public use. Sawatzke stated that it sounds as if the Club is operating their facility as a public park. Pribyl stated that their only requirement is to close the grounds by 10:00 p.m. Sawatzke asked if vandalism occurs at the facility. Pribyl stated that vandalism occasionally occurs. A Club member lives near the facility and keeps an eye on the place. There are also occasional patrols performed by a County Deputy Sheriff. Nolan repeated the concern that if the Hasty-Silver Creek Sportsman Club is viewed as a County park, MCIT foresees this as an insurance liability. MCIT is not recommending entering into a contractual agreement with the Club. MCIT would rather see the County make a donation to the Club. Mattson stated that he does not see anything different with the type of arrangement MCIT is proposing than the arrangement that Human Services has arranged with Zion Lutheran Church to lease a room for meeting space. Discussion occurred regarding the Club’s insurance coverage. Thomas stated that the Club’s coverage limit is $1 million per person/$2 million per occurrence. Nolan repeated his comment that if an incident exceeded the Club’s insurance cap, the County could be held liable for any amount. Sawatzke stated that he understood. After much discussion, it was determined that a donation agreement would be more suitable in regard to the County’s interest in the archery range. Mattson asked Pribyl if he had any concerns, and Pribyl responded that most issues have been resolved over the past few years in generating this formal agreement. Thomas stated that most of their members would probably prefer a handshake contract. Pribyl stated that Club membership turns over every 5-6 years. It is the Club’s desire to get the archery range established in 2009. Sawatzke asked Asleson if the new agreement seems doable. Asleson stated that it is his opinion that a donation agreement would be more doable than a lease agreement. Asleson stated that within the bylaws of the Club’s constitution, the County would have the first right of refusal to purchase the property for fair market value in the event that the Club determines to sell its property. Mattice explained that the Club cannot sell off the property and receive dividends from the sale proceeds. They would have to sell to another non-profit. Norman proposed that Asleson and Nolan draft a new agreement and send it to MCIT for their review. Mattice added comment that the Club’s attorney would also have a chance to review the agreement. Nolan stated that MCIT would require a Hold Harmless clause within the agreement. Sawatzke proposed that the new agreement come forward at the first Ways and Means Committee Meeting in January. RECOMMENDATION: Discussion to be laid over until the 1-14-09 Ways & Means Committee Meeting. (End of 11-26-08 Ways & Means Committee Minutes and discussion).
A Truth In Local Taxation Public Hearing was held on 12-04-08. At today’s County Board Meeting, Russek moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0:
The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:00 P.M. The Commissioners and Department Heads introduced themselves. Eichelberg reminded the attendees of the Public Hearing Guidelines as it appears on the Agenda. The purpose of the hearing was to discuss and take public comment on the proposed Budget and Taxable Certified Levy for 2009. The Assessor’s Office was open to assist with questions regarding individual property tax statements. A Truth In Local Taxation handout was provided to those in attendance. Norman explained that an additional one-page handout, “2009 Budget Attachment C – 2009 Construction Projects”, should have been included in the packet as page 15a.
Kramber stated that the Assessor Department is required to look at sales that occurred between 10-01-06 through 9-30-07 to determine the property taxes payable in 2009. The time lag allows for the appeals process to take place. Property valuations are always one year behind. Kramber stated that the County is bound by State statute regarding its timeline for property valuations. The Assessor Department is cognizant of the downturn in the economy and the valuations that were taken between 10-01-07 and 9-30-08 will be reflected in the taxes payable 2010. State statute requires the assessed value to be 100% of the market value. Valuations have been conservative to allow property owners the benefit of the doubt.
Richard Norman, County Coordinator, explained that the Budget process commenced in April, 2008, with the Capital Improvements Finance Committee reviewing department capital improvement requests. The draft Budget was then compiled. The Budget Committee Of The Whole, comprised of County Board members, Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, and Norman, met in open sessions starting August 5th. The original Budget requests reflected a 19.4% increase over the 2008 Budget. Meetings were held with departments to review individual line items in an effort to reduce the Budget. The draft Budget and Certified Levy was set in September (required to be completed by September 15th). As part of the Truth In Local Taxation Hearing process, a resolution establishing the 2009 Budget and Certified Taxable Levy will be presented to the County Board at their 12-16-08 meeting.
Page 1 of the handout compares the proposed 2009 Budget figures to 2008 figures for the three major Budget areas including Human Services, General Revenue, and Road & Bridge. The Debt Service line item reflects principal and interest payments the County makes on bond issues. The two Lake Improvement Districts must be carried in the Budget per State Audit requirements. These are not part of the overall levy for tax purposes unless a person resides in one of these Districts.
Norman presented the 2009 draft Budget of $97,418,953 which reflects a 9.2% increase from 2008.
PERCENT
BUDGET AMOUNT CHANGE
General Revenue $48,041,090 12.3%
Road and Bridge $22,304,769 -1.9%
Human Services $21,863,600 3.6%
Debt Service $5,162,574 101.2%
Lake Pulaski LID $33,500 0.0%
Mike-Somers LID $13,420 0.0%
TOTAL PROPOSED BUDGET:
$97,418,953 9.2%
The debt service is due to two bond issues: Construction of the Jail/LEC for $50 million, and the initial payment of principal of an equipment note that the County will be selling on 12/16/08.
Norman highlighted some of the major impacts on the 2009 Budget, listed on page 2 of the handout:
Labor Costs. Counties are labor intensive organizations and employees are needed to deliver services and programs to citizens. There are about 675 full-time employees in Wright County, as well as volunteers, part-time employees, and temporary employees. The associated increase in labor costs for 2009 is $2,498,600 and includes such things as salary adjustments, labor contract settlements, health insurance, and other fringe benefits. This figure is exclusive of any new positions authorized for hire in 2009.
Corrections. The $1.6 million increase is a direct result of the operating costs associated with the opening of the Jail/LEC.
Court Administration. The County was informed mid-year that the State Public Defenders Office will not be providing representation for parents in CHIPS/TPR cases. These services are mandated and the County has budgeted $140,000 in 2009.
Building Care & Maintenance. The staff, utility services, fuel, and operating supplies are all costs directly resulting from the opening of the Jail/LEC.
Sheriff. Norman explained that the County has a relatively large Sheriff staff. The highlighted increase of $235,000 is for fuel and vehicle maintenance, and computerized equipment in the squad cars.
The Road & Bridge Construction Program will realize an $808,000 increase in 2009. The budget for diesel fuel is $278,000 and unleaded gasoline is $275,000. The budgeted line item for salt is $55,000. The County has a bond payment to the City of St. Michael in a joint project.
Human Services. Norman stated that Human Services would seek an increase of $756,500 due in part, to a loss of Intergovernmental Revenue of $300,000. Norman explained that the County’s Human Services Department acts as an administrative arm to the Federal and State Government. The State and Federal Government have decided not to support the HS programs to the level we anticipated. Because these services are mandated, the County still has to support the programs. An example is that $100,000 is budgeted for Court Ordered Services, and $750,000 for Out-Of-Home Placements for kids.
On page 3 of the handout, the 2009 General Revenue Budget is detailed by department showing a total Budget of $48,041,090 (reflected in the 2009-WORK-TWO column). This amount is reduced by rentals and leases charged to each department and revenues, for a net total of $30,815,338. The County receives Federal reimbursement for rent to the Human Services Department. Income received by departments totals $13,450,561 which is slightly higher than projected for the current Budget at $13,400,680. Norman stated that Court Administration, Attorney, Sheriff, Corrections, and Court Services make up approximately 60% of the total revenue budget. He stated that a large portion of the Sheriff’s budget is related to the Jail/LEC. He stated that rent is figured at $16/sq. foot for each Department. As mentioned earlier, the Federal government reimburses the County for a portion of the rent for the Human Services Department.
Page 4 of the handout outlines Budget 100, Non-Departmental costs totaling $6,476,118. Norman explained that 6100, Personal Services, appears to have taken a large jump from $145,044 to $1,700,000. The County is currently in negotiation with its bargaining units. Once settlements have been achieved, the $1.7 million will be spread throughout the departments to pay their staff. Professional Services also appears to have increased. The County is continuing to look at planning studies, labor law attorney, agricultural inspector, services, etc. These contracts are paid out of this line item. The County also funds the Wright County Fair, Weed Management, Economic Development Partnership, and the Great River Regional Library (GRRL). Norman explained that the County is a member of the GRRL district. A formula is set by the Board of Trustees to calculate the amount of funding that the County must pay. The County has input on the GRRL budget, however, when the funding formula is set, the County is required to submit its funding share. In 2009, the County’s share is $1,977,418.
Page 5 lists projected revenues for the General Revenue Budget. The County’s projected revenue is a three page listing of itemized anticipated revenues. The County has an estimated income of $13,450,561. Norman explained that the projected revenues from Mortgage Registry Tax and County Deed Tax, Auditor/Treasurer, are a direct result of what is going on today with the housing market. In 2008, Mortgage Registry Tax was anticipated at $120,000 and in 2009 is projected at $100,000. The County Deed Tax was projected at $80,000 in 2008, and is projected at $50,000 in 2009.
Page 8 reflects the 2009 Total Personnel Requests in the General Revenue Budget totaling $1,003,472.29. Staff additions are a result of the construction of the new Jail/Law Enforcement Center. The Building Care & Maintenance and Corrections line items are up significantly. The increases listed on this page were approved for the 2009 budget. The County Board set the tone by informing Departments that there would not be any staff additions unless they were related to the opening of the Jail/LEC. Building Care & Maintenance will bring on 5 custodians and a supervisor to care for over 170,000 sq. ft of space. The personnel increases for Sheriff and Corrections is a direct result of the Jail/LEC. The building will open in January, 2009, and prisoners will move into the Jail in April, 2009. The County Board is planning a public open house for the new Jail/LEC. Pages 9-12 of the report itemizes the personnel additions.
The Road & Bridge Budget information begins on page 13 of the handout. Norman highlighted the Budgeted Revenues at $14,158,255 with Budgeted Expenses at $22,304,769, a slight decrease from the 2008 budget. The middle column reflects the 2008 projected expenditures and revenues. This column includes projects from prior years. Revenue comes from State funds, Highway funds, and Local levy dollars.
Norman stated that Page 14 itemizes the equipment needs for the Highway Department. Highway tries to replace 2 trucks a year. The Department has a total of 22 tandem trucks. However, in 2009, they will only replace one truck.
Page 15 describes the activities planned as part of the 2008 Construction Program, as well as the funding sources. The County will be able to draw on the State Aid allotment. Page 15A describes the projects that the County anticipates to complete in 2009. The column marked “Local” itemizes the projects that will be funded by local property taxes. The projects are mainly bituminous overlay projects.
A summary of the Human Services Budget can be found on page 16. The levy for 2009 is $8,925,000 or $736,000 over 2008 (9.0% increase). Intergovernmental revenues are projected to increase slightly in 2009 (up 0.1%). Expenditures in 2009 total $21,863,600. Norman drew attention to the amounts reflected in the row titled “Reserve Change”. In 2007, the County used $595,990 in Reserves to balance the Human Services Budget. In 2008, the County did not anticipate using Reserves to balance the Human Services Budget but with how expenditures are running, we’re anticipating a negative balance in the 2008 budget. The year- end reserves went from a high in 2005 of $6.4 million to $4.6 million in 2007. Norman forewarned the public that the reserve could decrease by a significant amount by the end of 2009.
Hiivala introduced himself and discussed the calculation of the local levy. The 2009 net taxable local levy is $45,621, 962 which represents a 7.2% increase over the prior year. The local levy supports the three major Budgets (General Revenue, Road & Bridge, and Human Services). The total expenditures less revenues result in the amount needed in local levy in order to balance the Budget. Hiivala explained that County Program Aid is received from the State to assist in holding down property taxes. In 2008, the County received $3,629,640. The Corrections line item under Special Levies relates to costs associated with operating the Jail/LEC. The Lake Improvement tax is assessed only to property owners in those Districts. Hiivala announced that the levy meets the levy limit that is set by the Department of Revenue. Norman noted that there is a 101% increase in debt service. Hiivala explained that when the County issued the bonds, part of the issuance was capitalized interest. The first two years of the bond payments will be made using interest from bond proceeds. Hiivala presented the local levy as follows:
BUDGET AMOUNT
General Revenue $22,316,983
Road and Bridge $8,146,514
Human Services $8,518,400
TOTAL $38,981,897
Less: County Aid Program $4,268,057
NET TAXABLE LEVY $34,713,840
SPECIAL LEVIES:
Corrections $7,431,915
Debt Service $5,162,574
Less Capitalized Interest $-2,504,644
PERA Rate Increase $364,757
Matching Requirements $406,600
Lake Pulaski LID $33,500
Mink-Somers LID $13,420
TOTAL $45,621,962
Hiivala stated that page 18 represents a ten year trend in major budget areas, levies, State aids, and County Tax Rates. Page 19 reflects a 10-year trend of tax rates. The rate is calculated by taking the levy and dividing it by tax capacity for the entire County. The tax rate for 2009 is 32.656% which is up from the 2008 rate of 31.649%. Previous years showed a steady decline in this rate. This was a result of the growth in the County; which added tax capacity.
Eichelberg invited residents to come forward with questions or comments.
Dale Ronning, Waverly, asked if the County anticipates any revenue from renting jail cells. Sawatzke stated that the County can expect some income, however, there is not a lot of need for jail space. He stated that the County is not planning to staff the entire jail immediately. The area that won’t be staffed won’t have inmates. The County will rent out space as needed, and then staff it at that time. Sawatzke stated that at this time, it is not a sellers market for jail bed rental. Most counties have adequate jail space. Mattson stated that it was his understanding that McCloud County was considering building a new Jail, and held back because Wright County started their building process.
Larry Looft, Albion Township, stated that he remembered Hennepin County had rented out jail space from Wright County. Russek stated that the County collected approximately $400,000 from Hennepin County in jail rental in 1993-94. Hennepin County has since expanded their jail. Looft stated that he had questions concerning his property tax statement and its rate of increase. Eichelberg referred Looft to the Assessor’s Office to have his concerns addressed. Looft proposed that the statements clearly identify the tax rate per $1,000. Hiivala stated that Looft made a great suggestion, however, the tax statement is in a format sent by the State. Kramber stated that the Minnesota property tax system has several tiers and credits, and is a complicated system. He encouraged Looft and others to seek assistance from Assessor staff.
Dean Guida, Buffalo, stated that in reviewing the County budget, he did not see a lot of area where the Board looked for efficiencies to reduce the budget. He asked the Board if this is something that they’ve looked into or if they could itemize areas where they have built efficiencies. He asked the Board members what their plans were for next year’s budget process in an effort to reduce overhead costs (i.e. minimizing pay increases, encouraging Department Heads to reduce costs). Norman stated that the Leadership Team met this morning to discuss the impact of the State Budget shortfall. He stated that the Department Heads were cautioned to watch their spending during the first six months in case of potential cutbacks later in the year.
Sawatzke stated that when the Board was originally presented with the budget in late July, a net tax levy of $53,500,000 was proposed, which would have been a 25.8% net increase. After review and cuts, the budget was reduced $8 million to $45,621,000. Sawatzke stated that this is the effort the Board has made to be more efficient. He stated that the budget process is a lengthy process that takes a month to complete. Russek stated that the County is a service-oriented industry and a lot of the services the County provides are mandated by the State. He explained that even though the State makes its financial cuts, the County is still required to provide, and now pay, for these required services.
Gerry Kaminski, Buffalo, stated that his costs are going up as a homeowner and he has to personally figure out how to cut personal expenses. Income is not increasing or coinciding with the increased living expenses. He stated that if he is to give the County his tax dollars, he would like to ensure that the County is being fiscally prudent. He stated that in reviewing the budget, he did not see any detail on how the County is saving costs (i.e. re-bid office supplies, installing computerized thermostats). He stated that he would like to see some passion from the County Board regarding its cost-saving measures. He stated that it is his opinion that there needs to be accountability. Kaminski asked what the Board is proposing for the $220,000 in site improvements. He noted that this item is a 66% increase from last year. Russek stated that the Government Center will need a new roof next year. The current roof is twenty-two years old. Kaminski asked why there needs to be an Assistant Building Superintendent when the new Jail will be staffed with only five Custodians and a full time Building Superintendent. Norman explained that the Jail is a 24 hour/7 day a week operation. The Assistant Building Superintendent will be supervising the second shift. Kaminski stated that he is not trying to throw stones, however, he has been in business for forty years and knows that anything he can save in expenses goes toward his bottom line. He stated that it is his observation that when Government needs more money, they often opt to raise taxes, rather than cut expenses. Mattson stated that the County has made efforts to computerize the heating and cooling of the building. The overall maintenance costs have been reduced. Norman stated that he encourages the public to tour the new Jail/LEC to see firsthand the efficiency measures that were built into the new facility. Russek stated that the County installed geo-thermal heating at the Jail/LEC which is predicted to have a five-year payback.
Charlotte Quiggle, Corinna Township, stated that one of the purposes of the Truth & Taxation Public Hearing is to encourage the public to get involved in helping the County Board in setting priorities. Wright County’s budget report does not trumpet its efforts in making efficiencies. She stated that if the report were to fully explain the reasons behind the new roof on the Government Center, the public would understand. She stated that Stearns County published its 12-page budget report with clear explanations of how they are spending their money and what their concerns are regarding the upcoming economy. She stated that Stearns County advertised their Truth & Taxation Meeting on their website two months before the meeting. They also advertise that they are seeking public opinion. She stated that she asked at the 2008 Truth & Taxation Meeting that Wright County publish their budget report on the internet. She stated that the County does not even advertise this meeting on their website. She stated that it is her impression that Wright County does not want to trumpet its success in saving money, share its concerns, or wants the public involved in the budget process.
Greg Olson, Rockford Township, stated that the State contracted jail space with the City of Chicago in the 1980s. He stated that in the 1990s he learned that a study had been performed researching the background of inmates. He stated that a good percentage of the inmates came from an out-of-home placement program. He stated that although the study could be interpreted in several ways, his interpretation was that if more attention and funding was given to individuals at the front end via prevention services, versus later in life when they are in prison, it would result in less cost to the County overall.
Rob Kramer, Delano, asked the Board how many prisoners they expected to house in January, 2009. Russek responded that there would be approximately 130 inmates. The new Jail has the potential to bed 328 inmates. To accommodate future growth, the building was designed so that it could be expanded to 640 beds. Kramer referenced page 18 of the report. He noted that the County had a budget of $51,719,818 in 2000, which nearly doubled to $96,717,832 in 2009. He stated that this appears to be a large and fast jump in the budget. He stated that he would like to see the County make cuts in its budget where it can. He stated that he could not understand how the budget could keep rising so quickly.
Kramer asked how much the population has increased. Russek stated that the population has almost doubled. Kramer asked if Wright County’s neighboring counties are reflecting the same growth and levy amounts. Sawatzke stated that it is his opinion that Wright County’s per capita spending is among the lowest of the neighboring counties. He stated that the State Auditor had informed the Board several years ago that Wright County was within the lowest (5-10%) spending per capita. Mattson referenced a newspaper article indicating that Wright County’s population rose 23% over a five-year period from 2000-2005. He stated that the County is advancing so fast and it takes money to keep up with a County that doubles in size. Highway projects are continuous with a fast growing County. Bituminous costs have risen sharply.
Russek stated that the taxpayers’ dollars are his dollars too. Russek stated that the County has left out road construction projects from its priority listing because the County simply could not afford to do them. The County is capped in how much it is allowed to tax its taxpayers. He stated that if the public were to sit through the budget process, they would see how much the County Board scrutinizes its budget.
Kramer asked how the County’s budget would be affected by the increasing number of foreclosures. Sawatzke stated that the foreclosures do not affect the County budget. If the homeowner does not pay their associated property tax, the bank or next property owner will pay the tax. The tax does get collected.
Guida asked if all of the County employees are part of a bargaining unit. Norman stated that the County has seven unions. There are approximately 70 employees that are not affiliated with a union. Guida asked when the County negotiates these contracts. Sawatzke stated that he hopes the contracts will be settled by 12-31-08. Guida asked if the Sheriffs Department ever goes through arbitration. Sawatzke responded that they have gone to arbitration in the past. Guida asked if the County has a settlement amount in mind. Russek stated that the County cannot discuss the contracts as they are in the middle of negotiations.
Kramer asked if the State mandates the number of Jail/LEC staff, including maintenance staff. Sawatzke stated that the number of Correction Officers is mandated. Norman stated that due to the design efficiency of the new Jail/LEC, the Department of Corrections has determined that fewer Correction Officers are needed in a direct supervision facility, versus our current facility.
Guida stated that the Assistant Building Superintendent position requires a 2C class boiler’s license. With a 24 hour/7 day a week operation, there must be at least one person on staff at all times that has this license. He noted that if there was not an assistant, the Building Superintendent could never leave or go on vacation.
Russek asked if anyone had any suggestions on how to save money. Looft asked if the County contracts for fuel. Russek stated that the County does contract for fuel. Eichelberg thanked the public for attending tonight’s meeting.
(End of 12-04-08 Truth In Local Taxation Public Hearing Minutes)
Mattson moved to adopt Resolution #08-48, appointing Dr. Janis Amatuzio as the Wright County Medical Examiner for 2009. The motion was seconded by Sawatzke and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.
Russek moved to adopt Resolution #08-49, setting the 2009 Budget & Certified Taxable Levy. The motion was seconded by Sawatzke and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote:
RESOLUTION #08-49
BE IT RESOLVED that the Wright County Board of Commissioners hereby establishes the 2009 Budget as follows:
GENERAL REVENUE $48,041,090
ROAD & BRIDGE 22,304,769
HUMAN SERVICES 21,863,600
DEBT SERVICE 5,162,574
LAKE PULASKI L.I.D. 33,500
MINK-SOMERS L.I.D. 13,420
TOTAL BUDGET $97,418,953
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Wright County Board of Commissioners hereby establishes the 2009 Certified Taxable Levy as follows:
BUDGET AMOUNT
GENERAL REVENUE $22,316,983
ROAD AND BRIDGE $8,146,514
HUMAN SERVICES $8,518,400
SUB-TOTAL $38,981,897
LESS: COUNTY PROGRAM AID
$ 4,268,057
NET TAXABLE LEVY $34,713,840
PLUS SPECIAL LEVIES:
CORRECTIONS $7,431,915
DEBT SERVICE $5,162,574
Less Capitalized Interest -$2,504,644
PERA RATE INCREASE $364,757
MATCHING REQUIREMENTS
$406,600
LAKE PULASKI LID $33,500
MINK-SOMERS LID $13,420
TOTAL CERTIFIED TAXABLE LEVY
$45,621,962
(End of Resolution #08-49)
Sawatzke asked that the Conservationist Award be placed on the next County Board Agenda and that Kerry Saxton, SWCD, be notified.
Mattson provided a report on the AMC Conference held last week. At the Conference, he taped a Morrison County presentation. The presentation related to an incident in Morrison County where an individual held County officials at gunpoint. Mattson provided a copy of the tape to Norman, Morrison County, and AMC. He said this was a sad situation and that he hoped it never happens in Wright County.
Bills Approved
Brian Abrahamson. $181.93
Milo Alama Trucking 2,411.10
Allina Hospitals & Clinics 25,340.74
Allina Hospitals & Clinics SP 1,966.50
American Institutional Supply 254.28
American Messaging 968.26
Ameripride Linen and Apparel 337.31
AMI Imaging Systems, Inc 2,092.82
Annandale Rock Products 543.44
Anoka County Sheriff 7,772.96
APEC Industrial Sales & Ser 465.41
Aramark Correctional Ser 11,244.84
Kirk Asplin Travel Plaza 119.85
Assn. of Minnesota Counties 125.00
Auto Glass Center Inc. 301.01
B & B Products - Rigs and Sq 2,160.00
Joe Backes 257.40
Barthel’s Auto Body 995.80
Beaudry Propane Inc. 2,074.62
Joey Berg 100.00
Bogut Law Offices PA 292.00
James Brausen 2,000.00
Jean Bresin 203.58
Nicholas Bromiley 4,600.00
John Brown 13,300.00
Buffalo Hospital 11,303.34
City Buffalo 46,666.50
Tim Cameron 150.00
CDW Government Inc. 103.68
Center Point Energy 327.57
Centra Sota Lake Region 30,681.91
Central MN Mental Health 190.00
Chamberlain Oil Co. 2,722.38
CNH Capital 939.02
Contech Construction Prod 1,715.05
Corporate Payment Systems 154.58
Cottens’ Inc. 1,912.13
H.Cragg Co. 900.00
CRS Inc. 120.00
Cub Foods 300.01
Cub Pharmacy 4,237.21
Delano Sports Center Inc. 765.35
City Delano 1,784.31
Dell Marketing LP 18,535.16
Dental Care Assoc. Buffalo 234.00
Diamond Mowers Inc 236.38
Dingmann Marine & More Inc 240.00
Dustcoating Inc. 6,645.60
Embarq 163.78
EPA Audio Visual Inc. 701.84
Ernst General Construction 3,350.00
ESRI 8,690.40
John Farrell 150.00
Joyce Farrell 150.00
Tom Feddema 225.81
Federal Signal Corporation 1,395.00
Dennis Fehn Gravel & Exc. 534.118.56
John Floistad 3,600.00
Ronald Forsman 7,700.00
Randall Friedrich 25,979.00
General Office Products Co. 63,068.32
Geocomm Inc. 4,000.00
Raymond Glunz 120.00
Gould Towing 206.61
Grainger 349.32
Graphic & Printing Services 4,176.23
Green Lights Recycling Inc. 904.64
Greene Espel PLLP 2,566.10
Greenview Inc. 443.70
Adrian Gunnerson 5,100.00
Hillyard Floor Care Supply 5,204.00
HSBC Business Solutions 106.87
Indelco Plastics Corp. 176.51
Integrated Fire & Security 596.37
Intereum Inc. 1,937.77
International Personnel Man 799.25
Interstate Battery Systems 229.90
Chris Jahnke 212.94
JME Ellsworth Co. 267.10
Steven Jobe 130.00
Timothy Johnson 7,381.10
Alan Jude 3,100.00
Kaplan Professional Schools 1,192.50
Marlene Kittock 150.00
Klatt True Value Electric 193.45
Cheryl Klinger 100.00
Nancy Kopff 343.80
Kris Engineering Inc 105.02
Lakedale Communications 484.63
LaPlant Demo Inc. 1,228.84
Larson Allen LLP 3,950.00
Michael Laurent 217.35
Law Enforcement Training Serv 400.00
Sharon Lee 150.00
Little Dukes-Clearwater 235.00
Loberg Electric 204.11
M & M Express 669.14
Maney International Inc. 226.20
City of Maple Lake 3,952.57
Marco Inc. 2,085.48
Martin Marietta Aggregates 2,681.80
Mathiowetz Construction 888,891.39
Richard Mattson 162.63
Meeker County Sheriff 3,545.51
Menards - Buffalo 299.55
Mid-America Business Sys. 9,235.68
Midland Corporate Benefits 997.75
Mies Outland Inc. 119.55
MN Counties Comp. Co-op 2,821.47
MN Oncology Hematology 280.82
MN Society of Prof. Surveyors 866.00
MN Supreme Court 868.00
Monticello Times Inc. 175.80
City Monticello 14,505.81
City Montrose 872.76
Morrell Towing Inc. 145.00
Morries Parts & Service Grp. 2,138.62
Paul Motin 1,346.39
Motorola Inc. 1,049.71
Neopost Inc. 1,113.06
Nextel Communications 683.14
Jerry Niessen 150.00
Northland Business Systems 17,519.25
Nuss Truck & Equipment 337.99
Office Depot 4,102.97
City Otsego 150.00
Roy Owens 3,850.00
Photo 1 202.95
Pleasant Lake Improvement 1,000.00
Qwest 6,700.09
James Romslo 432.00
Roof Spec. Inc. 19,000.00
Royal Tire Inc. 472.73
Russell Security Resource 763.68
Savance 125.00
Pat Sawatzke 337.85
Sharon Schumm 150.00
Sirchie Finger Print Lab 157.53
Ron Smith & Associates 1,200.00
Steven Smith 3,800.00
Software House International 2,166.22
Spectrum Solutions 160.00
St. Cloud Stamp & Sign Inc. 209.45
St. Croix Recreation co. 1,576.20
Stamp Fulfillment Services 243.60
Star Tribune-Subscriptions 466.96
State of MN-Office Enterprise 370.00
Stearns County Treasurer 167.45
Brian Stoll 128.11
Stratus Technologies Ireland 3,061.73
Streichers 15,814.01
Super Express 134.19
Karen Swenson 150.00
Thomas Mfg. Co. Inc. 1,546.00
Janet Thompson 150.00
Leilani Thurman 100.00
Total Printing 194.58
Trimin Government Solutions 2,492.99
Truck Bodies & Equip. Int’l 190,177.06
Uniforms Unlimited 170.04
United Parcel Service 126.51
Unlimited Electric Inc. 3,867.22
Varitech Industries Inc. 195.15
Waste Management-TC West 227.26
City Waverly 2,077.93
West Payment Center 1,066.09
Westside Wholesale Tire 2,502.75
John Wisecarver 100.00
John Wolff 120.58
Wright Co. Highway Dept. 51,706.40
Wright Co. Journal Press 202.44
Wright Hennepin Electric 1,127.49
58 Payments less than $100 2,693.34
Final total $2,194,506.47
The meeting adjourned at 11:29 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal Jan. 12, 2008.


Return to Wright County Menu | Return to Government Table of Contents

Herald Journal
Stories | Columns | Obituaries | Classifieds
Guides | Sitemap | Search | Home Page