Wright County Board Minutes

JUNE 16, 2009
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek, Eichelberg and Thelen present.
Russek moved to approve the 6-09-09 County Board Minutes, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.
Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Item For Consid. #3, “Upper Mississippi TMDL Meeting” (Russek); Item For Consid. #4, “Bertram Chain Of Lakes Family Event” (Sawatzke). Thelen moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Russek, carried unanimously.
On a motion by Eichelberg, second by Russek, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda:
1. Performance Appraisals: M. Janzen, Assr.; A. Harvey, Aud./Treas.; T. Decker, N. Ellis, R. Erickson, J. Russell, Hwy.; J. Ashley, E. Kunkel, Sher./Corr.
2. Claim, Frank Madden, $1,136.70.
3. Reappoint Connie Lounsbury To A Three-Year Term On The Wright County Personnel Board Of Appeals.
4. Budget 100 Transfers To The Various Departments In The General Revenue Budget.
1. Authorize Signatures On Revised MN Department Of Agriculture Cooperative Agreement For Waste Pesticide Collection.
1. Claim, W.L. Hall Co., $2,155.00, Jail/LEC Reception Glass Modification.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, presented the May Revenue/Expenditure Guidelines. He referenced Page 6, Auditor/Treasurer, reflecting Miscellaneous Revenues of $103,000. Hiivala stated that this amount relates to the power line credit. In June, this amount will be transferred to Fund 81. This is not a budgeted fund but tax collections are placed in this line item. Settlements will then be made with municipalities. Russek moved to approve the May Revenue/Expenditure Guidelines, seconded by Thelen, carried unanimously.
Hiivala presented a draft resolution which would authorize the sale of eligible tax forfeited parcels. At the last meeting, the County Board selected a sale date for the public sale parcels. Today, Sawatzke asked Tom Salkowski, Planning & Zoning Administrator, whether the sale of any of the tax forfeit parcels (in the cities) would result in the purchaser gaining a building entitlement. Salkowski said he was unfamiliar with the proposed action. Although he could not speak on behalf of any cities involved, he felt they probably had a process or system to review parcels on a case-by-case basis. Sawatzke asked whether the parcels within townships had been checked. Salkowski was unaware of this. Russek said there is only one landlocked parcel involved in a township and the purchaser will not gain a building entitlement. Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, said it is a 40-acre parcel which will be sold by private sale and offered to adjacent property owners as it is landlocked. The majority of the parcels located in the cities are not lots which can be built on and are being handled the same. Restrictions will be included in the sale documents reflecting that these are not lots that can be built upon. Asleson referenced Item #2 of the draft resolution which states, “That all sales shall be by full payment of the purchase price.” The Board has the option to approve of a sale by contract for deed with repayment over 10 years. To Asleson’s knowledge, the County has not ever done this. Discussion led to method of payment for properties purchased. Hiivala stated that personal checks are accepted. If a bad check is received, the property is taken back by the County. Sawatzke asked whether the prior owners of the property can bid. Asleson said this will depend on whether the property was classified as homestead. The prior owner has the right to repurchase up to the sale date. The repurchase price would include the total delinquent taxes, penalties, and interest. After that point, they may have the option to bid but this would have to be reviewed. The situation could create an inequity as the purchase price could be far less than the delinquent taxes. Asleson said many times tax forfeit parcels involve land that is orphaned as part of a development. Russek said the documentation should indicate that it is up to the buyer to verify prior to purchase whether the land can be built upon. Hiivala said that is what was done previously. It is the buyer who must verify what they are purchasing ahead of time. The draft resolution was corrected to reflect the public sale will be held on 8-28-09 at 9:00 A.M. at the Wright County Government Center. Mattson moved to adopt Resolution #09-27 setting the public sale of tax forfeited properties for 8-28-09 at 9:00 A.M., Wright County Government Center. The motion was seconded by Russek and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.
The claims listing was presented for approval. Mattson referenced a claim on Page 14, GCS Service Inc., $176.83, for steamer repairs. Mattson checked with Capt. Gary Torfin, Jail Administrator, prior to today’s meeting and learned that the repairs are for a used steamer in the new Jail. Mattson said it is not for repairs to a new steamer. Mattson moved to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit. The motion was seconded by Eichelberg and carried 5-0.
Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, presented a draft resolution relating to the litigation with the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DOLI) and Corinna Township. On 6-09-09, the County Board met in closed session with legal counsel to discuss the ongoing litigation between DOLI, Corinna Township, and Wright County. Outside counsel Scott Anderson has requested that the Board authorize further legal action as is necessary. The resolution memorializes the discussions that took place at the closed session and authorizes action by Anderson. Russek moved to adopt Resolution #09-28, seconded by Mattson. Commissioner Thelen indicated she would read a statement of her position on the issue. Sawatzke said he presumed that Thelen would not discuss the County’s strategies or strengths. Thelen said she consulted with the County Attorney’s Office and Planning & Zoning Administrator to discuss this prior to today’s meeting. Thelen read the following statement:
“I want to speak against this resolution, which will enable attorneys for Wright County to appeal a likely decision which will be soon be coming from the Department of Labor and Industry. This decision is the result of a contested case hearing that Wright county has been involved in with the Department of Labor and Industry, and more recently with Corinna Township. The decision will order Wright County Planning and Zoning to stop issuing building permits in Corinna Township. The ruling will also find that Corinna has met their legal obligations to do so, according to MN State Law, DOLI, the State’s Attorney General’s Office, which represents DOLI and most recently an administrative law judge whose job it was to hear both sides and then rule, either on the side of DOLI and Corinna Township or Wright County.
Wright County disputes Corinna’s township’s authority to issue building permits in the shorelands and also DOLI’s authority to order Wright County to stop. I am against keeping this adversarial legal battle going. After reading reams of documents, that have been issued in this case, attending Corinna Planning and Zoning meetings, reviewing the procedures that Corinna has set up, talking to experts on all sides, including experts in township law, and most recently after having talked to the DNR, who administers the shoreland rules, I am confident that Corinna has not only the legal authority to do so, but also the commitment and procedures in place to do the job right. All that remains is a workable relationship with Wright County. While I understand and respect the county’s concern about the future of one our most precious resource in wright county, our shorelands, this is a concern that can be addressed through methods less adversarial than litigation. Through negotiation, administrative agreements, protocols and or procedures between the county and the township, accountability, oversight, and best practices can be developed and implemented to assure that the shorelands are stewarded in the best possible way. In other parts of the state, townships have developed joint powers agreements, without lengthy court battles, so that the townships issue the building permits and the county administers shoreland management. Instead of going to court, the County should be spending their money on reaching agreement and developing a collaboration that could be used as a model, not just in our own county but elsewhere. The county will say, we’ve tried that. My response to that, is that if it failed, the County has more than half of the responsibility and greater power than the other side to make it work. It is the job of the county to muster the talent necessary to build effective partnerships, and not to fuel ongoing misunderstanding and squander talent and good will. If at first we didn’t succeed, we need to try harder. With all the resources we have at our disposal, including within our own extension office, we certainly can resolve the few differences that separate the county from the township relative to how we could work cooperatively. There are creative methods of mediation, dispute resolution, policy development. In both the DOLI case and the civil case with Corinna, alternative dispute resolution was offered to the parties to resolve their issues. Why is it that we failed to take advantage of this opportunity? I would be negligent not to urge my fellow commissioners to seek to negotiate our differences, through alternative means, outside of this adversarial legal battle. While we still have some room to negotiate. The important legal issues have been settled in this case. Perhaps there are a couple of miniscule legal questions that are of interest to the legal academic. Perhaps we can find a loophole that will declare us the victor. To me, we begin to split hairs, distracting us from the important work of cooperating to do effective land use planning for the future. At a time when budgets are being cut, we can not waste the time, money, and energy this ongoing battle will cost, not just to the county coffers, but also to the state’s and the citizens of Corinna township. Corinna Township residents who unfairly had to pay double for permits, CUP’s and variances during this period when we resisted the DOLI’s order, need to be compensated. In closing I would like to assert that there are no bad guys on either side of this issue. There are only people whose perspectives and history leads them to different conclusions. I firmly believe the two sides can be brought together. I think it is our job as commissioners to make that happen.”
Russek said it was clear that Thelen wasn’t present during the past efforts by the County to negotiate. He said the County Board passed a resolution to allow Corinna Township to do their own Planning & Zoning, except in Shoreland areas. Corinna Township did not support this and the issue was brought to court. The County felt they had been working diligently but Corinna Township said no to the deal. He restated this was prior to Commissioner Thelen’s time serving on the County Board. Sawatzke said assuming the resolution passes, and the resolution is consistent with discussion during the closed session, that it would not prohibit future dialogue. He felt the County may be in a better position to continue as opposed to giving up all rights and not appeal the case. He said the County did not initiate any of this. There were two actions, one initiated by DOLI and one by Corinna Township. Eichelberg hopes the outcome will be positive. Sawatzke agreed and said Thelen is right in that precious resources are involved. He said that the five Commissioners have the ultimate goal to have good planning and zoning. There may be different ideas on how that will be achieved. He did not feel the goals are inconsistent, but maybe there is a difference in the way the goals are arrived at. Sawatzke encouraged Thelen to speak to Corinna Township Officers to see if an agreement can be reached. He also encouraged her to look at what was offered previously. One Township Officer previously said that it was all or nothing, and Sawatzke felt it is hard to find a compromise during negotiations with this mindset. He said maybe the other two Township Officials feel differently. Thelen said she will continue to look into what can be done and hopes what was tried previously is not re-tried. She suggested possibly more creativity in who is involved in facilitating discussions. Sawatzke said it sometimes takes people a while to realize that what was originally presented wasn’t so bad after all. Mattson said his main concern is that if Corinna Township does their own Planning & Zoning, a person who resides in Corinna Township can sue Wright County if the desired outcome is not achieved. The motion to adopt Resolution #09-28 carried 4-1 on a roll call vote, with Thelen voting against the motion.
Regarding: The Matter of the Administrative Order Issued to Wright County
On this 16th day of June, 2009, it is hereby resolved:
Whereas, the Wright County Board held a closed litigation discussion with legal counsel on June 9, 2009; and,
Whereas, said discussions relate to on-going litigation issues between Wright County, Corinna Township, and the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DOLI);
Therefore in accord with said discussion this Board authorizes:
Its attorneys to act in all matters consistent with the litigation strategies discussed;
Its attorneys to pursue all appropriate administrative hearing “objections and exceptions” in the matter now before the administrative law judge and DOLI;
Its attorneys to pursue all appropriate post hearing and post order motions and procedures; and,
The Board authorizes any appropriate appeals in conformance with the County’s interests and positions on the issues.
(End of Resolution 09-28)
Wayne Fingalson, Highway Engineer, said a bid opening occurred at the last meeting for the 2009 Street Lighting Improvement project. The project includes seven different intersections on Wright County highways. Fingalson said safety grant money (HSIP) was awarded through a 90/10 program. Fingalson distributed information reflecting bids received and an analysis of the project as compared to budget. Mattson has received many positive comments from the public on the rural street lighting that has been completed. Upon recommendation from Fingalson, Mattson moved to award the 2009 Street Lighting Improvement Project to Granite Ledge Electrical Cont. Inc., $80,490.00 (low bid). The motion was seconded by Russek and carried unanimously.
Fingalson requested acceptance of the 2008 Highway Department Annual Report. Russek made the following correction to the Report: Page 20-22, Job 88, bottom of page, Source of Funds, change from “City of Cokato” to “City of Clearwater”. Russek moved to accept the Annual Report including the one correction, seconded by Thelen, carried 5-0.
A Ways & Means Committee Meeting was held on 6-10-09. At today’s County Board Meeting, Russek said that he and Fair Board Member Dennis Beise met with the person who rents the land near the Fairgrounds. The renter was informed of the Fair Board’s plans and is in agreement. He was told not to plow the bean field. The Fair Board plans to have this area seeded this fall. Russek moved to approve the minutes and recommendations, seconded by Thelen. Mattson questioned whether the expense associated with road work will be reflected in next year’s budget. Sawatzke said the expense involved will be the crushing of gravel (which will be paid back by the Fair Board) and gas. Fingalson said associated costs will be tracked as is with any project, including labor (even though that is not being charged to the Fair Board). Sawatzke voiced appreciation on the Highway Department’s willingness to assist with the project. Russek extended thanks on behalf of the Fair Board. Fingalson said they are waiting for word from the Fair Board on how to proceed. The motion carried 5-0 to approve the minutes:
Norman stated that the Fair Board and Highway Department are meeting to discuss gravel options for road work to be completed at the Fair Grounds this year. Sawatzke provided background of the request and stated that the County Board agreed with the concept of initiating another entrance to the Fair Grounds. The Highway Department has agreed to provide the gravel. Schmidt stated that the Fair Board received three bids from contractors which included all the pre-grade work, materials, and packing. Meyer stated that the Highway Department would not be able to provide Class 3 gravel. He continued that Class 3 gravel is screened sand and would not be appropriate for packing a road-way. Meyer suggested that Class 5 gravel be used. Class 5 gravel may become greasy if it is raining, however water will run off. Sawatzke questioned what work would need to be done prior to the gravel being laid. Schmidt stated that three inches of sod and black dirt will be graded off the roadway. The Fair Board is suggesting that four inches of gravel be spread. Meyer stated that approximately 80 – 100 loads would need to be delivered to the Fair Grounds. Russek questioned if the Highway Department would be able to accommodate this amount. Meyer stated that this year 25,000 yards of gravel was crushed for usage and what is not used will be piled and used next year. He does not foresee any problems with providing 1,000 yards to the Fair Board. Sawatzke questioned how long the project would take to complete and when the Fair Board would like to start. Schmidt stated that the Fair Board would like the work completed by the third week in July. Meyer stated that the gravel is coming from the Public Works Building in Buffalo. His staff would be able to move 1,000 yards in approximately two days which would include spreading the gravel on the roadway. Sawatzke questioned if there was a cost associated with the gravel. Meyer stated that it cost $1.49/yard to crush the gravel. The Fair Board agreed to reimburse the Highway Department for this cost. It was agreed that no labor or gas charges would be charged to the Fair Board. Sawatzke questioned if anyone from the Fair Board has notified the current renter regarding the construction of the roadway. He also questioned if the construction is in violation with the current contract. Norman stated that the renter needs to be notified. Schmidt stated that Denise Beise has been in contact with the renter and will discuss options. Denn suggested that a letter of intent should be established with the renter so that he does not plow the road back at the end of the season. Sawatzke stated that the current renter is a valuable neighbor. The Fair Board will be reseeding and it would be nice for the current renter to harvest the hay. Norman stated that the agreement could be renewed with the current renter. RECOMMENDATION: The Highway Department will provide 1,000 yards of Class 5 gravel to the Fair Grounds. Prior to gravel placement the area will be graded and debris moved away. The gravel will be spread by the Highway Department. The Fair Board will contact the current renter and discuss options regarding land usage and maintenance. The Fair Board will pay $1.49/yard to cover the cost of crushing the gravel.
(End of 6-10-09 Ways & Means Committee Minutes)
A Personnel Committee Meeting was held on 6-10-09. At today’s County Board Meeting, Eichelberg moved to approve the minutes with recommendations. The motion was seconded by Thelen. Mattson questioned what the motion includes. Sawatzke clarified that the first item, Telecommuting Pilot Program, is being referred to the Human Services Board for a decision. The remainder of the minutes includes recommendations to act upon. Mattson referenced a Star Tribune article reflecting that Carver County is laying off 30 people and cutting the Fair Board budget in half. He thought Wright County had decided to be cautious on what would be approved. He referenced the filling of positions and the thought of holding back to prevent layoffs. Sawatzke said with regard to the recommendation to fill the two deputy positions, the Sheriff Department still will have five deputy positions open. The Sheriff Department can only be short so many deputies. There are approximately 15 positions in the County that have not been filled. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, referenced the Tribune article on Carver County. He said that Carver County operates its own library. The 30 layoffs include librarians, seasonal employees, and positions that have not been filled. Sawatzke said there are positions in Human Services that need to be filled, such as Social Workers. Eichelberg added that such positions may have more need to be filled as they assist the public. Russek said the Human Services Department is being hit double hard with the tough economy. The County is not adding any new positions but is backfilling those that are vacated. Norman said he appreciated Mattson forwarding the article on Carver County. Carver County looked to come up with budget cuts equal to $2.5 million. Wright County asked their departments to look at possible budget cuts and the result was a savings of over $3 million. Norman felt Wright County is doing well at this point but will know more when the Governor announces the unallotments and other cuts today. The motion carried 5-0 to approve the Personnel Committee Minutes:
Two handouts were provided (attached). The first is a memorandum to the Personnel Committee from Mleziva reflecting survey results of five counties that have telecommuting programs. The second is correspondence from Frank Madden providing information on clients of their firm (in the metro area) with telecommuting experience. The information provided by Madden was inconclusive, with various outcomes. Sawatzke felt the telecommuting request has grown from a mobile employee to working out of the home. He supported a pilot of the mobile employee rather than the home office. Mleziva said the intent, assuming the County proceeds with the pilot program, is to allow selected staff to work out of their home. Most of the work would be completed in the field. Work may be completed in the employee’s home (particularly data entry), providing information into the different systems they are connected to, and periodic telephone work. Most of the work in the office would be related to meetings and staying in touch with colleagues as necessary. Currently, staff (i.e., public health nurses, social workers, and case aides) is spending 50-60% of their time in the field. The balance of the employee’s time is spent in other agencies (meetings) or in the office (completing paperwork or attending meetings). Swing stated the goal is to become more efficient. In both private and public sectors, people have the ability to access systems anytime, anywhere. The way of doing business will continue to change. Swing said telecommuting could eliminate the need to travel to work for those employees whose jobs are in the field. The integrity of the employee needs to be high. The County has already provided efficiencies by allowing employees access to systems in the field. Swing felt it would be a large step to declare the home as the office space as opposed to a cubicle at the County. Sawatzke said with certain positions, there is value in having an employee leave from their home and travel directly to the destination in the field versus coming to the office first. He felt that was different than the home office environment where an employee walks from one room of their house to another to start work. With the home office, he did not see much value for the County but saw advantages for the employee. The home office scenario could be viewed differently if space was an issue, but it is not at this time. The County will incur expenses by setting up the home office (computer & lines, furniture, files, monitors, copier, ink, cell phone & annual use). Norman stated that an employee is covered by Workers’ Compensation insurance no matter where work is performed. Mleziva felt there would be time saved in travel with telecommuting. Although it may not be immediate, there is a space savings opportunity. At this time of recession, the County is not adding staff. However, normally 5-6 positions are added annually in Human Services. He did not foresee the County’s growth to change over time. The intent would be to implement telecommuting as a pilot program with the intent of realizing efficiencies in caseloads. Swing felt there were enough efficiencies and interest to run the pilot program for three staff, for a year. The County can then decide whether to continue. Sawatzke said he has no doubt that the three employees chosen will succeed, as they would be individuals who are currently succeeding. The question will be what will be accomplished. Norman said in order to measure the success, baseline data will need to be established and quantifiable measures of efficiency established. This data will be measured over time and evaluated. Sawatzke supported a mobile employee versus the setup of a home office. He felt if Eichelberg would agree with this, the recommendation to the Human Services Board could be to proceed with a pilot program in that fashion. However, if Eichelberg felt a home office should be included in the pilot, then the Human Services Board would need to discuss and make a decision. Eichelberg said he supported a pilot program which includes the home office scenario. Recommendation: Refer the telecommuting pilot program, including the home office environment, to the Human Services Board for discussion and a decision. The Human Services Board Agenda should include time for considerable discussion on this topic.
The Committee reviewed information provided by Swing who conducted a Cell Phone and Blackberries Survey of Departments. Swing said it is assumed that department heads are monitoring phone usage. Given the size of the organization, he felt the number of cell phones seemed reasonable. There are three issues: The justification of cell phones, the consolidation of carriers, and an employee stipend. There are currently three departments that are on Verizon plans, while the remaining departments are with Sprint/Nextel. Swing favored the consolidation to a single carrier (Sprint/Nextel) where cell phones would pull from one bank of minutes. He estimated a $1,000/month savings by doing so. The three departments currently on the Verizon plans will only be switched if a savings is realized. Hiivala said bills will be divided out to departments based on the number of cell phones. The Committee felt cell phones have been issued appropriately (to the top supervisory roles and to those in the field). Those departments represented at the Committee meeting indicated that employees are informed that cell phones issued by the County are to be used for business purposes. Sawatzke stated that with the purchase of a bank of minutes that all employees draw from, personal use could dramatically increase the number of minutes required. Swing said it is important that departments monitor the use of cell phones. Swing referenced the County Personnel Policy on use of computers and related equipment. He said the information relating to telephone use may need to be upgraded to reflect that use of these devices cannot result in a cost to the County. Swing and Hiivala have been working with Sprint/Nextel. The County can benefit by consolidation of plans on the voice side. Blackberries and connector cards (for squads) stand alone with individual pricing. Considerable discussion occurred on the potential of implementing a stipend. The stipend could be paid to an employee who purchases their own device and uses it personally, as well as for business. Another option would be for the employee to pay the County a stipend to allow for personal use of a County-owned device. Discussion led to public data and those situations where information on personal devices may be considered discoverable in a case. Swing said he would only be required to provide information that is backed up on the County’s server. Kelly initiated the discussion on a stipend for Attorney staff at a previous meeting. He indicated that he was okay to drop the stipend request at this time if the County chose to do so. Recommendation: The Committee recommends consolidation of cell phone carriers where appropriate. The Committee will take no action on a stipend at this time. Department heads will be instructed to remind employees that personal devices such as blackberries and cell phones are intended for business use, and that department heads and supervisors will receive copies of the bills and evaluate that the device is being used as intended and following County policy.
A. DEPUTY SHERIFF (5/25/09) (6/2/09).
Miller explained there are five positions in the Sheriff Department that are not filled. The two presented to Committee today will bring the total to seven. Recommendation: Authorize replacement of two vacant Deputy Sheriff positions.
B. SOCIAL WORKER (6/12/09)
Schmidt distributed material outlining the resignation of a full-time Social Worker position and justification for replacement (attached). The position covers a caseload of adult mental health-targeted case management clients. The position provides CADI waivered services and assists with commitments. This is a revenue generating position. On 3-23-09, the Human Services Board approved a motion that would allow filling this position with a Mental Health Professional/Social Worker III position. Schmidt requested that the position be filled as a Mental Health Professional/Social Worker III position. The County will discontinue contracting for clinical consultation for staff as required by statute. Recommendation: Authorize replacement of the Social Worker position with a Mental Health Professional/Social Worker III position.
Elkerton said the Child Foster Care Licensing Worker has accepted a transfer to the Developmental Disabilities Unit. She distributed material outlining the transfer and justification for replacement (attached). The position is part of the Licensing team and Intake and Resource team. The Social Worker position is responsible for recruitment, orientation, and licensure of non-relative foster parents and must comply with MN Rule and Statute in the licensing process. There are currently 41 non-relative licensed foster homes, with 6 homes involved in the licensing process. This position also serves as backup in Intake as needed. Elkerton said this position carries a large caseload and is a non-revenue generating position. Recommendation: Authorize replacement of Child Foster Care Licensor Social Worker position.
A memorandum was distributed outlining the request and justification to fill a Public Health Nurse position in the Health Care Management Unit (attached). The position provides Personal Care Assistant assessments and waiver case management for clients on the CADI, CAC and TBI waivers. The employee has resigned effective 6-12-09. This is a revenue generating position that funds more than the position. Schefers explained that the Public Health Unit is short a .5 FTE due to a union grievance. Recommendation: Authorize replacement of the full-time Public Health Nurse position.
(End of 6-10-09 Personnel Committee Minutes)
There will be no Owner’s Committee Meeting today.
Russek attended an Upper Mississippi TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) Meeting on 6-09-09. Russek serves on the Crow Joint Powers Board and was designated to attend. Discussion included water quality issues in the Mississippi River. There is concern about pollutants as the Minneapolis water supply comes from the Mississippi River. Russek said it is important to keep up with this issue. There could be restrictions on cities or farms. This was provided as an informational item.
Thelen provided an update on the Bertram Chain of Lakes Family Event held on 6-13-09. Thelen estimated about 900 people attended. It was a very well organized event with many volunteers including the Monticello Parks Department, Wright County Parks Department, Planning & Zoning Office, and Bertram Advisory Task Force. People who attended conveyed positive comments on the Park. Some felt with the economy, people are looking for options close to home for recreation. Surveys were completed on eventual use of the Regional Park, but the results have not yet been provided. Public Forums will be held on June 23 (Monticello City Hall) and June 25 (Ney Park). Both Forums will be held in the evening. More information can be found on the Wright County website. Sawatzke said many people were involved with the event including the Task Force, Planning & Zoning staff, Parks workers, the Parks Board, Mike Pooler, and others. The event was funded by donations from TDS Telecom, Cargill/Kitchen Solutions, and Excel Energy and did not involve any taxpayer dollars.
Bills Approved
Brian Abrahamson. $133.25
City Albertville 50,000.00
Allina Health Systems 500.00
American Institutional Supply 606.51
Ameripride Linen and Apparel 205.84
Annandale Rock Products 150.80
Aramark Correctional Serv. 13,507.96
Arctic Glacier Inc. 429.14
Kirk Asplin Travel Plaza 103.87
Auto Glass Center Inc. 574.53
B & B Products - Rigs and Squa 316.25
Bankers Advertising Co Inc 2,650.84
Beaudry Propane Inc. 981.79
Blaine Lock & Safe Inc. 898.37
Jim Borrett 117.70
Bunnett Consulting 2,100.00
Bureau of Crim Apprehension 900.00
Tim Cameron 150.00
Center Point Energy 2,930.57
City Cokato 930.23
Concept Financial Group 164.70
Corporate Payment Systems 924.98
Creative Forms & Concepts 1,062.97
Crop Productions Services 408.09
Crysteel Truck & Equipment 18,044.46
CVS Casemark 152.87
Dell Marketing LP 1,346.31
Randal Desmarais 126.50
DLT Solutions Inc. 1,380.00
Toni Duerr 119.35
Debbie Ernst 285.45
Maria Felger Ramos LLC 101.00
GCS Service Inc. 176.83
Alicia Gillham 114.95
Globalstar USA 113.59
Grainger 2,780.41
Granite Electronics 58,836.15
Habitat Forever LLC 2,846.00
Robert Hiivala 359.70
Holiday 10,243.72
Hometown Plumbing & Heating 940.00
HSBC Business Solutions 1,945.21
Neal Huemoeller 357.50
Interstate All Battery Center 245.05
Intoximeters Inc. 958.50
Brian Jans 125.00
Karns Services Inc. 4,060.00
L-3 Communications Mobile Vis 225.78
Lakedale Communications 520.19
LaPlant Demo Inc. 510.34
Martin Marietta Aggregate 880.90
Denise McCalla 474.71
Menards - Buffalo 346.93
Minnesota Dept. of Human 137.15
MN Chemical Company 403.93
MN CLE Inc. 247.50
MN Counties Ins. Trust 1,000.00
MN Safety Council 250.00
MN State Bar Association 213.00
Motorola Inc. 2,064,636.65
Office Depot 3,780.87
Omann Brothers Inc. 1,948.19
Photo 1 191.78
Qwest 7,954.81
Frank Ramaciotti 100.00
RS Eden 8,544.50
Russell Security Resource 8082.22
Scott Sandberg 711.47
Ron Smith & Associates Inc. 400.00
Software House International 1,581.53
St. Cloud State University 14,000.00
State of MN-Office Enterprise 259.43
State Supply Co. 119.34
Stericycle Inc. 1,752.00
Brian Stoll 281.05
Super Express 210.87
Truck Utilities Inc. 7,003.74
TW Vending Inc. 160.95
Uniforms Unlimited 676.39
Vance Brothers Inc. 2,350.08
Viking Coca Cola Bottling Co. 309.00
Watchguard Elect. Home Mon 378.00
Janelle Webb 106.70
Dawn Weed 120.80
West Payment Center 823.16
Wright Co. Auditor Treasurer 106.29
Wright Co. Highway Dept. 93,783.41
Wright County Journal Press 243.53
Wright Henn. Coop Elec. Assn. 2,957.64
Wright Hennepin Electric 734.85
30 Payments less than $100 1,647.54
Final total $2,417,574.16
The meeting adjourned at 9:58 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal July 6, 2009.

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

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