Wright County Board Minutes

WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD MINUTES
MARCH 23, 2010
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek, Thelen, and Eichelberg present.
On a motion by Russek, second by Thelen, all voted to approve the 3-16-10 County Board Minutes as presented.
Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Item For Consid. #3, “Personnel Committee Recommendation From 3-22-10 Meeting” (Norman). On a motion by Thelen, second by Eichelberg, all voted to approve the Agenda as amended.
On a motion by Russek, second by Thelen, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda:
A. ADMINISTRATION
1. Performance Appraisals: J. Bresin, Assr.; K. Chrissis, S. Simonds, D. Snyder, Atty.; L. Davis, Aud./Treas.; B. Hendricks, C. Webb, Hwy.; S. Marquardt, P&Z; J. Gutnecht, Recorder, R. Howell, Sher./Corr.
2. Set Negotiation Committee Meeting For 4-9-10 at 9:00 A.M.
3. Approve & Authorize Signatures On Memo Of Understanding With I.U.O.E., Local No. 49, RE: Wright County Fair.
B. COURT SERVICES
1. Approve Phone Line In Mike MacMillan’s Office.
C. PLANNING & ZONING
1. Accept The Findings & Recommendations Of The Planning Commission For The Rezoning Of James N. Shadduck (Corinna Twp.) From AG General Agricultural And S-2 To R-1 Urban-Rural Transitional.
Sheriff Gary Miller and former Sheriff Don Hozempa presented a retirement plaque to Diane Lange in recognition of dedicated service from 1981-2010. Sheriff Miller spoke highly of her character and the support she provides to the Sheriff’s Office. Hozempa extended congratulations to Lange and thanks for her efforts while he served as Sheriff. He described her as one of the most even tempered people he knows. Lange said she worked for three wonderful Sheriffs. She extended sincere appreciation to her co-workers who she said have shared the best and worst moments of her life. She was appreciative of the opportunity to work for the citizens of Wright County. The County Board members extended thanks to Lange for her years of service and her positive personality.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, provided an update on Joint Ditch 3. A conference call was held last week with Meeker County on the variance request by MinnCam to cross Joint Ditch 3 at a shallower depth than what is required. During the conference call, Wright County agreed that the variance request should be approved. Hiivala has since learned that Meeker County would like to update their records and have requested that Wright County appoint two County Commissioners to the Joint Ditch Committee. Meeker County’s records have not been updated since 1992 when Wright County Commissioners from Districts 1 and 5 served on the Joint Ditch Committee. Russek moved to approve the following language, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0: “Since 1992, Wright County was redistricted, changing the boundaries of each commissioner’s district. Joint Ditch 3 used to cross Wright County in District 1 and District 5. Since the redistricting, the ditch crosses through District 5 only. Wright County requests that they retain the same percentage of representation on the Joint Ditch, and hereby request being able to appoint two commissioners. This would be consistent with past practice at Wright County. Our commissioners would be Mattson and Russek.”
Hiivala presented the February Revenue/Expenditure Guidelines for approval. A new format is being used for the report. One copy will be provided to the Commissioners a couple weeks prior to the request being placed on the County Board Agenda for approval. Russek moved to accept the February Revenue/Expenditure Guidelines, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.
The claims listing was reviewed. Hiivala referenced a claim on Page 34, Fund 34, Climate Air ($16,190). Hiivala explained that the expenditure relates to Energy Efficiency Grant Funding received and is the final payment on heat pumps. On a motion by Russek, second by Thelen, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit.
Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator, said a Parks Commission Meeting was held on 3-08-10. Mattice summarized the topics covered at that meeting:
Approve Implementation Of A Volunteer Park Education Program & Citizen Patrol. A person from Monticello attended the Parks Commission meeting to discuss ideas regarding a park-user education program. Mattice said the person is a technical writer and is interested in assisting the County in starting a park user education program. The idea would be to start the program in Montissippi Park as there are already volunteers in place. The purpose of the program would be to better inform the users of the Park by evaluating existing signage, making the signs easier to read and installed in prominent areas, offering alternatives, finding contact information, and eventually building community partnerships. Mattice asked that the County Board review and approve the concept. If approved, he will work with the County’s insurance carrier, the County Attorney, and the volunteer group to implement the program. The Parks Commission would review any literature designed. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, stated the concept should be run by MCIT as it involves citizen patrol in the parks. Mattice said if volunteers were used, it would take less time for the Sheriff’s Department to patrol. The consensus of the County Board was to move forward with the concept.
Approval To Work With MN Purple Martin Working Group On Purple Martin Nesting Structures In The Park System. Mattice said the group would like to establish Purple Martin nesting structures within the Wright County Parks System. They would like to start in Schroeder Park. The Purple Martins have been included on the list of species of “special concerns.” East of the Rockies, the Purple Martins rely only on manmade structures for nesting habitat. The cost for one structure is $1,000. It was the consensus of the Parks Commission to work with the MN Purple Martin Working Group to provide a suitable location at Schroeder Park for a nesting structure and to allow the placement of a donation box in the Schroeder Park Office. If this venture is successful, the Parks Commission would consider looking at other areas within the parks system for suitable locations for nesting structures. Schutte will develop an informational flyer to request donations and explain their purpose, and Mattice will provide the donation box. It was the consensus of the County Board to support this concept.
Discuss Proposal By Annandale Area Community Team And The Installation Of Art Sculptures At Clearwater/Pleasant Park. Mattice stated the Annandale Area Community Team (ACT) is a group of volunteers who approached the Parks Commission with the idea of displaying public art in the form of Sculpture in Clearwater Park. The ACT would provide the Parks Commission with the designs. It was the consensus of the Parks Commission that they like the idea of collaborating with a community group, and that providing art in the park might bring in users that would not typically enjoy a trail or park setting, and increase park support, environmental awareness, and enjoyment by the users. Mattice said since the Planning Commission met, he has been in contact with the Highway Department. They do not have a problem with the request as long as the sculptures are placed beyond the clear zone (42’ from centerline) and they have a R/W permit. In addition, Mattice said the group would maintain the structures and replace sculptures that have been vandalized. Mattice said the group may bring users to the Park that may not necessarily come to the Park otherwise. Sawatzke questioned the type of art that will be used. Mattice said it will be nature oriented and the materials/designs must be approved by the Parks Commission. The County Board consensus was to support this concept.
Update On Freedom Farm, Lake Ida School House Lease Progress. The attorney representing Freedom Farm sent suggested changes to the Lease Agreement. The changes were reviewed by the County Attorney, County insurance carrier, Planning & Zoning, and Parks. Staff questioned one item relating to property improvements. The Agreement was redrafted by the County Attorney and the Planning & Zoning Office. These changes were reviewed by the Parks Commission. The Parks Commission voted on the changes provided by Freedom Farm with the exception of the Article dealing with “Improvements to the Subject Project”. Included in the motion was the decision to accept the changes recommended by the County Attorney for the Article dealing with “Improvements to the Subject Property.” Parks Commission Member Bergstrom abstained from the vote and the Parks Commission motion passed 3-0. Mattice explained that the Lease Agreement will be signed by Freedom Farm and then presented to the County Board for signatures. This was provided as an informational item.
Mike MacMillan, Court Services Director, introduced Carter Diers, Wright County Probation Agent, and LaRone Greer, Wright County Family Assessment/Child Protection Worker. They were present to update the Board on the Community U Knighted effort. The mission of Community U Knighted is to bring together the communities of St. Michael and Albertville for the purposes of eliminating institutional racism and fostering a welcoming, respectful, and vibrant community. The vision is to create a community that embraces cultural diversity by building strategic partnerships to raise greater awareness of and address issues related to cultural diversity, employment practices and academic achievement within the community, and become a model for other communities seeking to build stronger cross-cultural relationships. Diers said in 2007, the initiative was started due to racial tensions and racism issues brought up at a Safe Schools Committee Meeting. A cross section of people was brought together from the community to discuss the direction and to see whether the community could take on the effort. A seed group developed from the Safe Schools Committee. The community group of 50 people discussed strategic planning. A steering committee was formed from there to work on the issues. The group is now working on bylaws and seeking a non-profit status. Greer said as a social worker, he has the opportunity to do grassroots work. He said the community is a large part of their efforts. Discussion throughout the effort included input from the community on what activities are important. More importantly, Greer said that families and children guided the group on dialogue and focus. In 2009, a speaker from St. Cloud University presented information on dismantling racism. Those in attendance included members of Human Services, the Sheriff’s Department, children and families. At the end of April, the Hubert Humphrey Local Government Innovation Award for developing Community United was presented to the Safe Schools Committee, the Sheriff Department, and Corrections for their work in developing the program. Greer invited the County Board members to “The Color Of Fear” being held on 4-08-10 at 6:00 P.M., STMA High School Media Center. The event is being held by Community U Knighted Sponsors and the purpose is to continue dialogue on any concerns. Diers stated that there are larger group meetings that oversee the actions of the Steering Committee and Board. They provide direction on what the smaller groups should focus on. MacMillan stated this Board provides monthly reports at Safe Schools meetings. The exciting part is that Monticello and Buffalo are looking at similar projects, as other school districts are having some of the same issues. The business community has become involved which is important as they are the fabric of the community. Thelen asked how success is measured. Chief Deputy Joe Hagerty said the Department of Public Safety requires mandatory reporting for bias type crimes. Hagerty felt these crimes were vastly underreported, although they must use caution as they do not want to over report. He felt the communication between groups has been a positive outcome and results in quicker response to issues as they arise. This was provided as an informational item.
A Transportation Committee Meeting was held on 3-03-10. At today’s Meeting, Fingalson provided a summary of the minutes (discussion at today’s County Board Meeting reflected in italics):
Adopt-A-Highway Program
At a Transportation Committee of the Whole meeting held on January 6, 2010, the following recommendation was made: It was the recommendation of the TCOTW that Backes and Cordell research who has been participating in Adopt-A-Highway, how long they have been participating, and why some groups/individuals dropped out of the program. They will also research prices of split signs and high intensity prismatic materials. After this information is gathered, they will meet with the Transportation Committee to discuss options.
Backes said that there are currently nine active groups in the Wright County Adopt-A-Highway program. He went through records from the past 10 years and sent out 27 surveys and renewal forms to try and generate a response from former and current participants to see if they would be interested in a higher level of commitment if they were rewarded with a sign acknowledging this commitment. Backes received eight responses from the survey, and of those eight, only two expressed any interest in paying for a sign that would advertise their commitment to the program. Many of the groups he attempted to contact are no longer together, no longer in the county, or cannot be reached. The enclosure shows the information. Fingalson said that the cities of Albertville, St. Michael, and Otsego encouraged Wright County to expand its program to include posting of signs. The cities have a very high level of interest from their residents and it’s likely that more people would be interested in signing up for the program if more street/highway sections were available. Cordell said that if enough volunteers signed up to cover the northeastern third of Wright County, approximately 180 signs would be needed, and materials alone would cost over $25,000. This cost would not include the expense of any labor required to order, inventory, and install the signs. The signs themselves would have to be custom made and would cost just over $82/sign. A split combination could be considered whereby the top half of the sign is identical to all other signs but the bottom half (plate) of the sign would display the name of the volunteer group. This combination would cost just over $95/sign, but the advantage is that when the volunteer group changes, only the bottom half of the sign would need to be changed. However, the bottom panel would still cost, with freight, about $70/panel. Cordell said that his concern is that there is no money in the current budget for this; and if the program filled up in this area of the county, it would require four-and-a-half weeks of labor to get these signs ordered and installed. Mattson shared information from Dakota County’s program which he had obtained. Mattson commented that if a group were to make a commitment of three to four years, it would be more affordable to put a sign program into place than it would be if the commitment were made for only two years. The four-year commitment would help identify those groups that are willing to make the hard-core commitment to this program. Then the cost of the signs could then be absorbed over a four-year period of time. Cordell said that Washington County asks for a two-year commitment, and Backes said that his research indicates that most counties that put up signs do so for a two-year commitment. He said that he receives about 12 calls a year from people/groups about the program, but most lose interest once they find out that they don’t get a sign. Fingalson said that Wright County allows the volunteers leave the full bags along the side of the road and then the maintenance crew picks them up rather than requiring the volunteers to take them to the nearest outlying shop. Volunteers also receive vests, bags, and brochures explaining the program and recommendations on safety. He said that the City of Otsego makes their own signs in-house, and if they were to make signs for Wright County’s program, the signs would probably cost about $10 less than otherwise quoted. However, the signs would still have to be picked up there or shipped to Buffalo at an additional cost. Fingalson commented that it seems like a difficult time to consider new expenditures; however, Steve Meyer has told him that the ditches are becoming more and more cluttered with refuse. Currently, the maintenance crew picks up appliances and other large junk, but that would also be the case even if volunteers picked litter from that roadside. Commissioner Sawatzke had proposed that Wright County could require a group to fulfill a commitment for a certain time period and then reward them with a sign. Fingalson said that even if they paid for their own signs, there would still be a cost to the county for the installation. Mn/DOT currently uses signs for their program that measure 60” X 36,” and Washington County goes with a sign that measures 30” X 24.” A smaller sign would require only one post, but it would be harder to read from the highway. Mattson suggested that perhaps the people cleaning the ditch would enjoy seeing their group’s name on the sign, even if it is not easy to read from the highway. Fingalson expressed his concern for the safety element that might be compromised if reading smaller signs were more of a distraction than larger signs. He said that uniformity in signs is important as a safety factor. Cordell commented that dropping down in size is not a significant cost savings as the smaller signs cost almost as much as the larger signs. Perhaps $20 could be saved per sign if only one post is used instead of two posts. Eichelberg asked if it is even practical to add another sign to the roadway, especially in the more urban areas. Fingalson said that the desire to post signs is all about recognition for the people who volunteer their services for cleaning the ditches, and Eichelberg said that recognition is also given to these people through a certificate and an annual publication of names in the paper. Mattson commented that a family he knows is happy to remember their family member by what they contribute with their labor, not by the sign that might be posted. This family might be willing to purchase a sign. Eichelberg said that this would cause problems if some people can afford to purchase signs for themselves and some can’t. If signs are approved of and paid for by the county, then it is possible that a lot of interest would be shown in the program, which would lead to an even bigger financial commitment. If this program is offered to one area in the county, all areas would have to be eligible. Mattson likes the idea, but said that it is difficult to approve funds for this when all of the departments have been asked to cut back. Mattson said that he would like to commit with a smaller sign if any commitment is made to install signs. He personally doesn’t look at a lot of signs while he is driving, but he would like to go with the smaller signs just in case this program mushrooms. Fingalson asked if the smaller sign is agreed upon, should the group be charged for the signs and the labor to install them. Mattson asked if Wright County has charged groups for other things, and Fingalson said that no one has ever been charged for expenses connected to the Adopt-A-Highway program. Mattson again said that a larger sign and two posts would be a commitment to bigger expense, and he would prefer to go with the smaller sign. Hawkins suggested that a budget could be set for each year; and once that budget is expended, no more purchases would be permitted. There was some discussion as to whether this service is needed, and Eichelberg said that he hasn’t noticed that the roadsides look littered. Mattson said that he gets more comments about the thistles that need to be mowed. The mowers that are used by county maintenance mow right over any garbage that is in the ditches and do not stop to pick anything up. Mattson asked how many inquiries are received each year about adopting a highway, and Backes said that he signs up about four to five groups per year and about seven to eight decline when they find out there are no signs. There are not a lot of people calling now, but that might change if signs are offered. Mattson said that there doesn’t appear to be a strong interest in this program, and Backes said that according to his records the highest number of participants during one year’s time has been thirteen. Fingalson said that the opportunity to sign up for Adopt-A-Highway is posted on the Highway Department’s website, and every spring around Arbor Day a news release is published giving information about the program and recognition to the participants. He said that it is very likely that posting of signs would generate even more interest. Eichelberg said that he would like to go with the larger signs if any signs are approved. The smaller signs are harder to notice. He suggested putting $25,000 in next year’s Highway Department’s budget for this program and see if it survives the cuts. Fingalson said that he would rather not wait that long to decide whether this idea will be approved and would prefer to discuss it at an upcoming County Board meeting. Eichelberg read an article from a newspaper that had been printed some time ago stating that government shouldn’t have to spend money to pick up other people’s garbage. People should be responsible for taking care of their own mess. Mattson asked if a survey could be done to find out if the public thinks this would be a good expenditure of taxpayers’ dollars. This might be a “feel-good” deal, but it will cost a lot of dollars. If the cities want this program to expand, maybe they should contribute some money for this purpose. Eichelberg commented that he would like to see the garbage picked up, and organizations that do it take pride in their work, but the bottom line is still economics. Fingalson said that larger signs would be more in line with what the manual dictates, even though he understands that smaller signs would still give the participants a sense of pride. The main reason to post a sign is so that people can read it, but he will go with the smaller sign if that is what the Board wants to do. Cordell can present replicas on paper of actual sizes of signs and present these at a future Board meeting. That way, the commissioners can see the difference between the sizes. A questionnaire for posting on the County website could also be developed and presented to the commissioners at that time.
RECOMMENDATION: It was the recommendation of the Transportation Committee that:
• A questionnaire be developed for possible posting on Wright County’s website, and that this questionnaire give members of the public an opportunity to state their opinion on whether expenditure of funds for the purpose of recognizing “Adopt-A-Highway” participants through the posting of signs along the County’s highways is a good idea; and that
• Cordell present paper replicas of “Adopt-A-Highway” signs for County Board review.
The County Board will then discuss at the March 23 meeting whether they wish to have a questionnaire posted on Wright County’s website and what size sign they prefer if the decision is made to install signs to recognize “Adopt-A-Highway” participants.
At today’s County Board Meeting, Cordell distributed an Adopt-A-Highway Sign Cost Handout that reflects detailed cost information on materials, miscellaneous expenses, labor/truck rental, and total cost per sign or pair of signs. The total cost of a 42 x 24 sign is $367.84 or $735.68 per pair of signs. The total cost of a 30 x 24 sign is $342.36 or $684.72 per pair of signs. The total cost to sign 266 mile sections throughout the County with 42 x 24 signs would be $195,690.88. The total cost to sign 266 mile sections throughout the County with 30 x 24 signs would be $182,135.52. Fingalson said when vehicles are traveling at 55 mph, the visibility of the sign may be reduced. Sawatzke noted that these signs may be located near intersections where reduced speeds may be realized. Cordell stated the labor cost of installing one post versus two posts is very minimal. He added that time to install these signs will be time taken away from doing other things. He felt the signs were important to the people who complete the cleanup but not to the motoring public. Thelen questioned how the County would determine the validity of the survey. She felt the cost to install signs was high considering other needs in the County. Thelen said she is not a large supporter of signs. Sawatzke agreed with Thelen on signs being unattractive but felt they may be advantageous versus two miles of litter. Mattson said groups are sincere about their clean up efforts but with the economy the way it is, he was unsure how to proceed. Sawatzke suggested that groups be required to commit to cleanup for a specified number of years prior to receiving a sign. The sign would then reflect what year the group started cleanup. He felt that only 2-3 families may meet the requirements at this time. If a group would like a sign prior to the commitment period, they would have to fund it. Mattson said there are people along CSAH 12 that do cleanup almost every day without any recognition. Sawatzke asked whether there was economy of scale with purchasing more signs at a time. Cordell explained that signs are typically cheaper when the quantity is increased. However, each sign has a different sponsor and that information must be placed individually. That is why the cost is more. Sawatzke moved to authorize purchase of the Adopt-A-Highway Signs, at a size of 30 x 24, to be installed by the Highway Department at the County’s expense for any organization that has maintained a road for a minimum of five years and would like a sign. The groups will be asked at 5 years whether they would like a sign. The sign will reflect the date the group started clean up efforts. Sawatzke felt this will show commitment from the group and felt only two of the current groups would qualify. The motion was seconded by Eichelberg. Eichelberg questioned whether there should be a limit on the maximum number of signs in a year in case there are many requests. Mattson asked where funding would be from. Sawatzke said the sign fund in the Highway Department budget. The install can be completed when sign trucks are in the area of the sign to be installed. He estimated this would only cost about $300 this year which is substantially less than the $25,000 reflected in the minutes for 180 signs. Russek said the handout distributed today reflects $182,000 for signs for the entire County. Sawatzke said he did not envision the entire roadway system would be signed with Adopt-A-Highway signs. Thelen felt this action was another example of piecing together expenditures and budget items. Sawatzke felt this was advantageous as there are limited up front costs. He said the goal is to get a commitment from volunteers prior to purchasing signs. Sawatzke said there are a couple of organizations that have been cleaning up for 8-9 years. Thelen said they have performed the clean up thus far without a sign. Eichelberg questioned whether the motion should include allowing groups to purchase a sign at their own expense prior to the five year requirement set forth by the County. Fingalson reminded Board members of discussion that took place on signs a number of years ago. One negative with allowing groups to purchase signs on their own is the potential for discrimination (some groups can afford to purchase signs while others cannot). Some larger companies my see it as a form of advertising. It was the consensus not to add this to the motion. The motion carried 4-1 with Thelen casting the nay vote. (End of 3-03-10 Transportation Committee Minutes & discussion)
A Personnel Committee Of The Whole Meeting was held on 3-16-10. At today’s County Board Meeting, Russek moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Thelen, carried 5-0:
I. REVIEW REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, CLASSIFICATION STUDY.
Proposals from eight firms were received to perform a Classification Study for the County. (See attached.) Committee members and Personnel staff individually ranked the proposals. Based on this analysis it is recommended that the following firms be scheduled for interviews with the Personnel Committee Of The Whole beginning at 9:00 a.m., April 19th: Bjorklund Compensation Consulting, Employers Association, Fox Lawson & Associates, and Springsted, Inc. Interviews will be scheduled for one hour each.
(End of 3-16-10 Personnel Committee Of The Whole Minutes & discussion)
Russek provided an update on a Pipeline Safety Meeting he attended recently. There are 2.5 million miles of pipeline in the United States. Each pipeline is manned by a control center 24 hours/day. There is a yellow sign at the pipeline location reflecting contact information. When Gopher One is asked to mark gas lines, the measurement includes 24” on either side of the gas line so the marker may not be right on top of the line. The 24” crude line located in the western part of the County will pump 24,000 gallons/minute and carry 1500 lbs. of pressure. It is important that the line is never ruptured and that the lines are placed deep enough in County ditches. Rupture of that line would require the evacuation of roughly 1700’ in all directions. Russek questioned whether there is a map reflecting all large pipelines in the County. Mattson felt the only map available would be the Minncam map.
Norman said the Personnel Committee met yesterday to discuss the Lead Clerk Supervisor position in the Sheriff’s Department. The minutes of the meeting will be presented at a future meeting for approval. The recommendation of the Committee was to authorize filling the Lead Clerk Supervisor position. Sawatzke moved to approve the recommendation, seconded by Eichelberg. Sawatzke noted this was a tedious process and extended appreciation to staff from Personnel and the Sheriff Department for the process and helping to resolve the issue. The motion carried 5-0.
Bills Approved
Aladdin Temp Rite LLC. $209.49
Albertville Body Shop Inc. 849.35
Allina Hospitals & Clinic 525.47
Allina Hospitals & Clinics 265.00
Allina OCC Med 397.00
American Traffic Safety Assoc. 410.00
Amerpride Linen and Apparel 200.41
Aramark Correctional Services 486.50
B & B Products - Rigs & Squa 13,089.45
Barker Co./Bob 1,651.08
Boyer Truck Parts 104.47
Brainstorm Inc. 630.00
Buffalo Floral & Landscaping 160.00
Burdas Towing 296.08
Center Point Energy 14,890.15
Climate Air 17,047.69
Cub Foods 358.84
Dell Marketing LP 9,915.03
Engel/Dale L. 1,275.00
Farm Plan 176.31
Federal Signal Corporation 300.48
Freshwater Society 250.00
Grossinger/Jane H. 1,980.00
H & L Mesabi 1,149.98
Halden/Harold B. 150.00
Hardings Towing Inc. 160.38
Highway 55 Trailer Sales 110.08
Hillyard Inc. - Minneapolis 712.75
Integrated Fire & Security 275.00
Interstate Battery Systems 319.13
Johnson Materials Inc. 8,352.60
Karels Towing 174.87
Little Dukes-Clearwater 405.00
Lund Industries Inc. 317.30
Menards - Buffalo 522.44
Midway Iron & Metal Co. Inc. 303.46
Midwest Safety Counselors 643.75
MN Alcohol Traffic Safety 125.00
MN Counties Computer Coop 426.39
MN Law Enforcement Explor 2,000.00
Monticello Auto Body Inc. 149.63
MTI Distributing Inc. 170.84
Office Depot 2,585.09
Positron Public Safety System 4,051.00
Qwest 6,705.37
Ramacciotti/Frank 200.00
RS Eden 9,617.50
Sawatzke/Pat 376.50
Sirchie Finger Print Lab 204.43
Sprint 7,846.33
Stumpf Accoustics 729.00
TDS Telecom 260.68
Total Printing 884.40
Uniforms Unlimited 422.49
Unlimited Supplies 107.19
Verizon Wireless 748.25
Voss Lighting 246.15
Walker Trucking/C 4,850.00
Waste Management - TC West 245.89
Waverly/City of 470.65
Wright CountyHighway Dept. 99,772.80
Wright Co. Planning & Zoning 100.00
Wright Hennepin Coop Electric 4,164.15
Wright Hennepin Electric 708.16
Xiotech 10,946.53
28 Payments less than $100 1,213.16
Final total $239,623.82
The meeting adjourned at 10:20 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal April 19, 2010.


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

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