Wright County Board Minutes

WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD MINUTES
JULY 16, 2013
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Husom, Sawatzke, Daleiden, Potter and Borrell present.
Daleiden moved to approve the 7-09-13 County Board Minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Husom and carried 5-0.
The following items were petitioned to the Agenda: Chief Deputy Attorney Item 2, “Discussion On Paint Issues Relative To Jail Showers” (Daleiden); Item For Consid. #5, “Predatory Offender, Silver Creek Twp.” (Todd Hoffman). Potter moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Daleiden, carried unanimously.
The Consent Agenda was discussed. Borrell asked that Item B1a, “Human Services Position Replacement, Social Worker-Family Assessment Unit (Laid over from 7-09-13 Board Meeting)” be removed for discussion. Potter moved to approve remainder of the Consent Agenda, seconded by Husom, carried 5-0:
A. ADMINISTRATION
1. Performance Appraisals: T. Praska, Assr.; T. Vaith, Aud./Treas.; R. Erickson, Hwy.
2. County Auction Report.
3. 1st Quarter Training Reports.
4. Approve/Authorize Signatures On Labor Agreement With AFSCME, Human Services.
5. Approve Law Enforcement Contract With Cities Of Cokato & St. Michael.
6. Budget 100 Transfers To The Various Departments In The General Revenue Budget.
7. O/T Report, Period Ending 7-06-13.
B. AUDITOR/TREASURER
1. Approve Renewal Of Annual 3.2 On Sale Malt Liquor License For “Albion Ridges Golf Course” (Albion Twp.).
C. HUMAN SERVICES
1. Position Replacements:
b. Financial Assistance Supervisor
c. Social Worker-Intake & Resource
Unit
D. PLANNING & ZONING
1. Accept The Findings & Recommendations Of The Planning Commission For The Following Rezoning:
a. Matt Johnson (Southside Twp.). Planning Commission unanimously recommends rezoning of an area of approximately 6-8 acres (exact acreage to be determined by preliminary plat design) From AG & S-2 To R-1 & S-2.
Borrell moved to lay over Item C1a, “Social Worker-Family Assessment Unit (laid over from 7-09-13 Board Meeting)” to a future Board Agenda. The item will be submitted as determined by the Human Services Director. The motion was seconded by Husom and carried 5-0.
Commissioners Mark Daleiden and Christine Husom organized the Best Ideas Contest for employees. Daleiden said there were many great ideas submitted, some of which they hope to implement. Three ideas were selected as part of the Contest. The gifts were personally funded by the County Board:
• Lori Achman was presented with $200 for an innovative idea method she suggested for structural training and orientation for new hires. She works in Human Services. If implemented some of the advantages may be a reduction in the amount of time spent with new staff, more competent staff, more consistency with policies and procedures, and increased morale.
• Five employees came up with the same idea relating to lighting sensors for areas that do not need to be constantly lit. The five employees include Nadine Aarvig, Blake Baynes, Lukas Husom, Mary Jo Faulhaber, and Bill Biros. These employees will split $250 for the cost saving idea.
• Tarah Huston, Extension Office, submitted the idea of departments sharing equipment that could be placed in a centralized location. This shared equipment will be listed on Sharepoint. The Extension Office will receive a lunch served by the County Board.
A Technology Committee Of The Whole Meeting was held on 7-09-13. At today’s County Board Meeting, Borrell asked for the following correction to the minutes: Page 1, Members Present, remove Borrell from those attending. Potter moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Daleiden, carried 5-0:
I. Current Environment
Swing stated the departments rely more on technology today than they did ten years ago and if the network goes down, then the operations of the County will stop. The Information Technology (I.T.) Department needs enough time and resources to devote not only to the server, but to repairs and projects. Swing stated that the I.T. Department is currently struggling to keep up. C. Nelson referred to a PowerPoint Presentation slide regarding open work orders verses the number of overdue open work orders. C. Nelson also stated she is not pleased with the response time for work orders. Swing stated he typically does not like to report on the bad news from I.T. but believes the Committee should know what is going on. C. Nelson referred to a PowerPoint Presentation slide which showed all the open projects I.T. currently has. She stated that some of the projects have been open for years because there has not been enough time or resources to complete them. Kieft, Hiivala and T. Kelly addressed the Committee stating they believed more support for I.T. was necessary because their departments depend on Swing and his employees tremendously.
II. Key Initiatives
Swing stated he would like to not only look at next years plan but also the plan for 2015. One big project that he would like complete is the Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) Paperless Project, which started in 2010. Swing also mentioned the Wright County Website and stated that I.T. is planning on redesigning the County website. Another project Swing would like to complete is the voice upgrade. He stated this has not been done in over ten years and that it is a two part process that would be completed by 2015. Swing referred to Attachment A of his handout (See Attached). Hiivala stated that a lot of these initiatives are not levy funds but they wanted to let the Board know that they will be presented during each Departments Budget Reviews.
III. Proposed Key Strategies
Swing proposed a Technology Fund to help I.T. track projects and project funds. Swing stated there was a Court Services project that was budgeted for but I.T. was not able to complete this project within the budget year. He would like to make sure funds would still be available to complete the project. Swing referenced Attachment A in his handout (See Attached). He stated that a common view will help put a spotlight on the projects and the funding behind them so they can get completed.
Swing stated there are several open projects for the Human Services Center. He referenced the process outline in Attachment B in his handout. Swing stated an issue he sees is that departments get new software and the County does not have a formal training area for employees. This makes it difficult to train employees to utilize the software to its full potential.
Swing referenced Attached C in his handout and discussed the Law Legal project that is currently not finished. This project will allow Court Services and the Attorney’s office to share electronic documents instead of hard copy paperwork. Sawatzke questioned if a grant was received for that project. L. Kelly stated that there was a grant received in 2009/2010 but it was not enough to finish the project.
Swing stated that the Department Heads wanted to come together as a team to let the Committee know what they feel the top technology projects are.
Recommendation: No recommendation at this time.
(End of 7-09-13 Technology Committee Of The Whole Minutes)
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, provided information on the 2012 population estimates as prepared by the MN State Demographic Center. He also distributed a handout reflecting where population changes are occurring. Wright County’s population is 127,131 which is an increase of 1,095 compared to 2011 estimates. This population estimate information was not released by the State until today to allow municipalities the opportunity to review or approve the figures in the report. Hiivala said this is the official release of the State Demographers estimate of Wright County’s population.
Hiivala requested approval of the Consulting Services Contract with MAXIMUS Consulting for the Indirect Cost Allocation Plan. Wright County has contracted with MAXIMUS for many years. The cost will remain the same as for plan years 2009-2011 ($6,175/year). Hiivala stated MAXIMUS is willing to meet with the Board to review the 2011 Indirect Cost Allocation Plan. The Plan runs about one year behind. Hiivala will bring back some suggested dates to meet with MAXIMUS. Daleiden moved to approve the consulting services contract with MAXIMUS Consulting for the Indirect Cost allocation Plan for 2012-2014 at a cost of $6,175/year. The motion was seconded by Borrell. Potter said the Contract reflects 48 months. After review, it was determined that MAXIMUS has 48 months to finish the work but they are hired for 36 months (2012-2014). The motion carried 5-0.
Bruce Kimmel, Ehlers, was invited to provide information on the County’s current indebtedness. A summary was given to the County Board by Hiivala on the annual requirements to retire outstanding bonded debt for General Obligation Bonds. The County has seven outstanding bonds. Two of the bonds are backed with sewer revenues. Even though they are general obligations, they are not paid from the property tax levy. The information reflects bonds maturing in 2003, 2007, 2009, and 2012. The 2012 bond was a refunding of most of the 2003 bond issue. Those brought together result in a debt service levy that is relatively constant for the foreseeable future at $4.4 million. Kimmel said the largest issue relates to the 2007A Jail Bonds used to finance the Jail expansion project. The outstanding debt is $48.8 million. Although Kimmel and Hiivala discussed an opportunity to refinance a few months ago that refunding is no longer viable. It was not presented to the Board because the call date is 2017 and there are inefficiencies involved with doing this so far in advance of that date. The 2009 CIP Refunding Bonds are not callable so those will be paid through final maturity in 2018. The 2012 Bonds, Refunding 2003A CIP Bonds, are not callable until 2020. Kimmel said they do not foresee locking in better rates, as the County already has good rates on the existing bonds.
Potter asked if the County is at 18% of bonding capacity. Kimmel said that relates to the statutory capacity. Potter asked how this compares to other counties. Kimmel responded that they don’t look closely at bonding capacity as it is an arbitrary number. The State indicates that for bonds paid back fully with property taxes, a statutory limit of 3% of the taxable market value is set as the debt capacity. The bond capacity for Wright County is figured at 3% of the total taxable market value. Kimmel said that is an imperfect measure as most county bond issues are paid back with property taxes. Many city bond issues are paid back with special assessments, utility revenues, and other financing streams. The State indicates that if something other than property tax is used to pay back bonds, it is not counted in the debt limit. Sewer bonds are not part of the debt limit. Kimmel said he is unprepared to answer today how Wright County compares to other counties in terms of debt limit. The County’s affordability is what needs to be looked at with long-term financial planning. Statute provides a definition but it comes down to the impact on taxpayers and how bonding affects the County’s ability to complete other priorities. Kimmel said the focus is more on the true dollar impact and how it affects other long-term plans. Standard & Poors and other rating agencies do not look at statutory debt capacity. They look at where debt falls compared to market value and per capita amount. Kimmel stated the rating agencies take a very positive view of Wright County’s finances and debt levels. Kimmel said the County’s credit rating is AA+ which is one notch below the best rating of AAA. This is an indication that credit rating agencies see the County’s finances, fund balances, financial practices, and debt levels as being very manageable. The State is also AA+ but many counties in the State have an AA- or A+ rating. To move to a AAA rating would require the County becoming larger and having more development.
Potter said the County could potentially bond in the future. He said it is important to know where the County stands with bonding and the maximums. He met previously with Hiivala to look at the outstanding bonds. He understands that two are not callable and one is callable in 2017. Potter said the bond for the Jail is actually 2029 and not 2020. Kimmel said the Standard & Poors report on the 2012 bond issue reflects they take a very positive approach toward the County’s finances, including the debt burden. They feel the debt burden is moderate and affordable. It means the County has the debt capacity that could be utilized before it is challenged or stressed. He said what would need to be looked at is whether it is affordable for taxpayers and whether it would affect the County’s strong credit rating.
Kimmel provided information on the market. If the County were to issue a 10-year bond, the average interest rate would be about 2%. Based on an interest rate of 2.25% to finance a $5 million project, the bond issuance would be about $5.1 million as a total principal amount. That includes an underwriters discount, bond counsel fee, a rating fee, and other issuance costs. If the County paid back a level debt service over 10 years that would equate to about $575,000 per year and approximately $650,000 in interest. Kimmel’s presentation was provided as an informational item.
Hiivala requested approval of the June Revenue/Expenditure Guideline Report. Daleiden moved to approve the Report, seconded by Husom, carried 5-0.
Commissioner Borrell provided an update on County Ditches 31 and 22. A site visit was made on 7-10-13 and attended by Borrell, Kerry Saxton (SWCD), Janice Edmonson (Auditor’s Office), Josh Engelmann (property owner), and Ed Claessen. Borrell said the land in Woodland Township is flat and there is very little slope in the ditches, so silting is occurring. Ditch 22 has areas with trees on both sides of the ditches. Some of the farmers have kept portions of the ditch in good shape so maintenance in those areas will be relatively easy. Borrell said most would like to see repairs made to ditches start at the outlet and work back.
Borrell brought up the benefit rolls on Ditches 31 and 22. On Ditch 31, a cleanout was performed last year by a farmer at their own expense (1-1.5 miles). Borrell spoke with Engelmann and his neighbor yesterday about the section from CR 30 to Dempsey Avenue (approx. 1000’). The neighbor indicated this area was cleaned a couple of years ago. The Township road washed out since and a sand bar has developed. There is no tree obstruction in that area so the cleanout will be relatively easy. The contractor that performed the cleanout was contacted. Their opinion is that the culvert on Dempsey is lower than downstream. Daleiden asked about the potential for the road washing out again. Borrell said the idea would be to install a different style culvert and one that is properly sized. The Township has performed a temporary repair, as they are waiting for the water level to go down before working on the culvert. This is the culvert that was approved a few weeks ago.
Borrell asked if there is a way to change benefit rolls without a redetermination. Hiivala said the question is whether the Ditch Authority can reassess benefit rolls. His initial position is no. There needs to be some sort of basis on why a property would have a reduction in benefit. It takes a lot of work to remove a property from a ditch system and it needs to be proven there is no public purpose of the drainage system. Hiivala said Kurt Deter would need to be involved.
Borrell said there is no benefit to landowners near the beginning of Ditch 31. He referenced another culvert on Fillmore Ave. SW near CR 30 in Woodland Township. About 30 years ago, there was a bridge and the Township made it into a culvert. He believes the culvert level was raised quite a bit from the bottom of the Ditch. That, in effect, created wetlands upstream which are now DNR protected. Borrell spoke with Deter, who informed him that drainage laws conflict with DNR wetland law. Deter said something can possibly be worked out with the DNR. Borrell outlined this area on the map. He showed how a hobby farmer will have an assessment of 20% for any repairs made with the current benefit rolls. Others are tiling into a field and they are not included on the ditch benefit rolls.
Borrell said Engelmann is not on the Ditch 31 benefit rolls. Sawatzke is unsure whether a request for repair can be made by someone who is not a benefited property owner. Hiivala said those that have come forward with requests are not benefited property owners. Borrell said Engelmann is willing to share the cost for cleanout. He said possibly something could be worked out with the property owner who does own land on the Ditch, if it were done at no cost to them. Borrell estimated the cost of clean out to be under $2,000. Cleanout could wait until the culvert project is completed by the Township.
Josh Engelmann supports a redetermination of benefits for both Ditches, even if the process takes a couple of years and costs more in the end. He thought this would assure those who benefit are paying their share. He said the area that Borrell referenced on the map affects a small section of his land (5 acres). He said he can wait on that repair request for a while. If the County decides to proceed with a redetermination on Ditch 22, he would ask permission to clean his stretch at his cost. He would wait for the redetermination for the remainder of the Ditch. Borrell pointed out that Engelmann is a benefitted landowner on Ditch 22 (assessed at 6%). Engelmann said he feels that his benefit will increase with a redetermination. His neighbor has a much higher assessment (24%) probably does not own any more land on Ditch 22 than he does.
Borrell said with a redetermination, the land on either side of the ditch is purchased. Currently there is an easement which allows the Ditch Authority to make repairs. The entire cost, including new assessments, would be assessed against the benefited property owners. Those with land on the ditch would receive credit back for this. Those tiling into the ditch would have to share in the cost of buying that strip of land. Hiivala said open ditch systems require the purchase of one rod strip on each side of the ditch.
Borrell suggested a meeting with landowners on Ditches 22 and 31. A redetermination would require the vote of landowners. Hiivala said there may be some repair work that needs to be completed now. He said Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, is willing to assist with the contract language and who should pay for the repair. For any discussion on allocation of benefits or a redetermination, Hiivala said Kurt Deter needs to be involved as well as the ditch viewers. Right now, the ditch viewers schedule is about 18-24 months out. Sawatzke said they should move forward with the redetermination process. Borrell said as soon as the Township finishes the culvert work, he will contact the property owner near Engelmann on clean out. It was the consensus that the Township should work with the Highway Department to make sure the culvert is set at the proper level. Hiivala said that a redetermination would actually establish the elevation of the ditch. Borrell asked who orders the redetermination. Hiivala said that would involve both the landowners and the Ditch Authority.
On a motion by Potter, second by Daleiden, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit. The claims total is $2,299,783.80 with 168 vendors and 222 transactions.
Marion Larson, Regional EMS Coordinator for the Central MN EMS Region, provided an update. She said there are eight State Regions, and each Region is tasked with meeting the needs of the local EMS personnel. Funding is through the State’s General Fund grant dollars. Revenues from seat belt tickets are distributed by the State to the eight Regions. Since 2001, the Central MN EMS Region has served as a Joint Powers structure. Prior to that it was a 501-C3 structure. There was a sense by the 14 counties at that time that there needed to be some public oversight because public dollars are involved from the State’s General Fund. A grant application process is required every two years, and every four years it is competitive. In January, Chisago and Isanti withdrew so there are now twelve counties in the Region. Those Counties elected to align with the Metropolitan EMS Region. Wright County is represented by Commissioner Husom with Commissioner Borrell as the alternate. The Advisory Committee involves EMS experts. Wright County’s representative is Brian Nord with Steve Berg serving as the alternate. Stearns County is the fiscal agent for the grant and employer of staff. There is no cost to counties to be part of the Region. Stearns County does incur costs associated with being the financial and fiscal agent.
There are over 265 EMS agencies in the Central Region (law enforcement, fire/rescue, ambulance, and first response teams). There are three main programs. Training reimbursement is one of the largest. The goal is to have no EMS agencies cease operations. There is no funding for first responders or recertification of EMT’s. The Program allows those entities to recoup some of their costs. In 2012/2013, three agencies in Wright County applied for reimbursement dollars in the amount of $4,839.65. Since 2006, Wright County has had over $39,337 given back to County agencies to help defray the cost of first responder and EMT refreshers. There are also Equipment Grants. Winners are selected randomly but they make sure there is one winner per County. In 2012, in an effort to assist agencies become ARMOR compliant, the focus was communication equipment. The spring 2013 grant was open to all patient care equipment or communication equipment needs. Wright County received $2,158 of the $29,354.93 in 2012/2013. The agencies that received equipment are the Buffalo Fire Department, Hanover Fire Department, Howard Lake Ambulance, Monticello Fire Department, and Montrose Fire Department. Since 2006, they have given almost $16,000 back to Wright County agencies to purchase equipment. The EMS Region also runs the Critical Stress Incident Management Team for responders. The Team includes 30 volunteers who meet with EMS, Fire, and Law Enforcement groups after a critical incident to facilitate a debriefing. The goal is to reduce the impact of stress on the responders, their families, and the community. Wright County generally has between zero and four calls for the Team per year. 2012 was the highest year with 44 requests in the Region. That was, in part, due to the death of a Police Officer in Cold Spring.
There are several projects the Central MN EMS Region is looking towards for the future. These include reviewing recruitment and retention problems by regional agencies, providing current and relevant education opportunities for EMS providers, and continuing to cultivate and improve the website.
Discussion moved to approval of the Joint Powers Agreement. Primarily, Chisago and Isanti Counties were removed from the Agreement. Also removed were term limits. It was felt that the County Boards should decide if a limit should be placed on terms. There were a few new Statutes relating to accounting procedures that were changed. Because they did not have a procedure for counties who may want to join the Region, an article was instituted on that. MCIT also requested they include an indemnification and hold harmless clause in the Agreement.
Borrell moved to adopt Resolution #13-18 authorizing signatures on the Central MN EMS Region Joint Powers Agreement. The motion was seconded by Daleiden and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.
Greg Kramber, Assessor, provided an update and some history on the Green Acres/Rural Preserve Programs. The Auditor/Treasurer will be mailing out billings for the non-productive land that is not enrolled in the Rural Preserve Program on 7-19-13. There are approximately 27 parcels with billings ranging from approximately $86 to $2,602. The total billing of all parcels will be about $19,408. Kramber said the Assessor’s Office attempted to administer the Green Acres/Rural Preserve legislative changes over the years to the best of their ability. He commended staff and local assessors for their efforts in meeting with people to assist with filling out applications. He said they did a good job of meeting goals with only 27 parcels remaining out of 7000. Kramber personally testified three times at the Capital in support of change to the Programs. He hopes Green Acres will be reverted back to what it was previously in Wright County. The Assessor’s Office is prepared to assist anyone with questions regarding the changes made to these programs over the years. Borrell asked if any of the 27 parcels can sign up now for the Programs. Kramber said each parcel will need to be taken on an individual basis. The Statute was clear on the date of enrollment. Wright County and surrounding counties have been impacted the most with the changes to the Programs. The laws were changed in response to legislators in northern Minnesota because of land being purchased and enrolled in the Program with only a small percentage being tillable land. This was provided as an informational item.
The meeting recessed at 10:28 A.M. and reconvened at 10:37 A.M.
The Board discussed the replacement of the County Coordinator position. As requested, the Board received job descriptions of the current Wright County Coordinator position, as well as job descriptions of County Administrator and Coordinator positions from other counties. Husom suggested a meeting to discuss the replacement. She has been contacted by several constituents requesting a public meeting. Sawatzke referenced the job description examples provided. He feels the main difference is an administrator is the supervisor of department heads; with a coordinator, a county board is the supervisor of department heads. Many of the other responsibilities and duties are the same. Husom said the job description samples all reflect that an administrator works with the county on final decisions, and what is included in the description is determined by the board. According to information from AMC, she stated that both positions serve at the pleasure of the board. Borrell responded that is not correct. He said Statute reflects the administrator has more protection and due process. Husom said the three Administrators who they met with were former Coordinators. One of them stated that language was included in their contract allowing them to request, after one year, written cause and a public hearing for termination. Husom said it is important that the right person is hired that fits in with the County’s philosophies. The County Board needs to research the people, their qualifications, and their performance in past positions. Borrell agreed with that. He said in reality, hiring an administrator removes the County Board from the equation and places an unelected official in charge of departments. Borrell said each department head could be made an administrator of their department. However, it does depend on the person. With a coordinator, the Board can delegate any authority to them.
Daleiden referenced the Primary Objective of the Wright County Coordinator’s job description which reads, in part, “The County Coordinator serves as administrator to the County Board of Commissioners and participates in the planning, development, recommendation, implementation and evaluation of County policies, procedures, contracts, and budgets.” Sawatzke said the duties reflect that the Coordinator is the administrator of that department and not other departments. There are other administrators in the County such as Planning & Zoning Administrator. To eliminate confusion, he stated that the position can be called coordinator or administrator. The difference is the coordinator would not have authority over unelected department heads and the administrator would. That is the choice the Board needs to make.
Sawatzke said he has worked with the current system of a Coordinator for 22 years in Wright County and will be voting to support that position being replaced. Beyond the fact that this system has worked well, he does not feel the County should bring in someone from the outside that they have no experience with and give them the authority to be in charge. The Board could make a change in two years to administrator if desired. He said counties that have moved from a coordinator to an administrator have done so with a sitting coordinator. Husom referred to the responsibilities other counties have given administrators, and said essentially the administrators are getting approval from their county boards when working with department heads. Having an administrator would streamline things. The County Board members are not in their offices during all normal business hours. The administrator could make a decision if needed depending on the level of responsibility given to them. Husom’s perspective (from reading Statute and other counties’ job descriptions) is that it would not shift the board’s responsibilities to an administrator. Borrell disagreed. Husom said the State has 51 administrators, 13 coordinators, 1 manager, 19 auditors or auditor/treasurers, 1 board executive assistant, and 1 human resources director, and an administration director.
Sawatzke said an administrator performs job evaluations for department heads. He referenced his contact with the Highway Engineer just recently on various issues. The Highway Engineer has been responding to things that he has asked. He said that if the administrator performs the performance evaluation and it is not completed by the Board any longer, the department head may move to trying to impress the administrator instead. He said this is a change from the way it is now. Today, if a department head has an issue, they do not have to go to the Administration Department with it. They are the administrator of their department and will take care of issues unless it requires Board authority. There are things that a department head needs to obtain approval from the Board for such as budget and policy matters. Husom said the administrator would oversee and keep things consistent through departments. An example would be enforcing policy with regard to break time. That doesn’t take away from the department head’s responsibility of running their department. Husom said it might be a good idea to obtain input from department heads on this subject. She viewed having an administrator as a method to streamline some of the processes. Husom said Board members do not have individual authority to make decisions; they do so as a full Board. The Board oversees the operation of the County, and that would not change with an administrator or coordinator. The position would be accountable to and work with the Board, coordinating activities and various operations of County departments and agencies as directed.
Borrell said the MET Council is accountable to someone as well. It is an unelected body with a lot of power. Borrell said an administrator is an unelected person that would wield a whole lot of power to those under them. He said the County Board is elected to wield a whole lot of power to those working for them. Borrell said he likes it that way because the Board represents the people and are held accountable. An administrator is not elected so the public does not have the opportunity to vote for that position. Potter said the MET Council has taxing authority where an administrator does not. He viewed this as a major difference between the two. Borrell said the MET Council, just like an administrator, are under someone’s authority but they wield a lot of power. Potter restated that the MET Council has taxing authority and an administrator would not. Borrell said that the MET Council is an unelected body, and an administrator would also be unelected.
Husom said that in the 1960’s, the move was toward having elected officials hold positions. Now the trend is more the other way. She cited the Recorder position which is now appointed and it used to be elected. She is unsure whether that has affected the public or not. She said all public employees are accountable to the public. A county board has the voting authority to make decisions based on input they receive from the public and other research they complete. She stated the former County Coordinator strongly recommended an administrator. It was suggested by the Administrators they met with that there may be a larger talent pool as a result. She said 13 of 87 counties in Minnesota have coordinators, and no county the size of Wright County has a coordinator. Borrell said he would match up Wright County with any other. He would not want to have their debt levels and levels of service. Sawatzke asked for three counties with a lower per capita tax rate that have administrators. Daleiden said Goodhue County is one. Sawatzke said their numbers may be skewed because of not having to provide services for college students.
Borrell said Wright County has been well served with the Coordinator position. Under that system, he can call a department head with concerns. Husom said all Board members are in contact with department heads on a regular basis but decisions are not being made by individual Board members. Husom spoke highly of the Leadership Team Meetings that are held monthly by department heads. The County Board attends those meetings quarterly. Sawatzke said that the level of cooperation that is seen in Wright County between department heads is outside the norm. When speaking with counterparts, it is not necessarily like that in other counties. He was unsure what impact the administrator/coordinator has, if any, on this.
Husom said the Board could elect to proceed with filling this as a coordinator with the understanding that they are considering moving to an administrator. Sawatzke said he would not make that promise to anyone. Husom stated it would be only that they were looking at that possibility.
Public comment was taken. Donald Mashak, Monticello Township, said that this is the first time he has been in front of the Board in three years and the reason is because there are four new Board members. He said residents were not happy with the previous Board. Mashak referenced Husom’s comment on positions changing from elected to appointed. Mashak said the country is on the brink of financial collapse and that is the answer. Mashak said the public votes for the County Board but they would not have that opportunity with an administrator. He stated that in 2009, he asked for financial records from the County and has not received them. He does not favor giving any appointed person more power. Daleiden said he wanted to correct a statement made by Mashak. The reason there are four new Commissioners is because of redistricting. Two ran against each another, two retired, and he now serves in a District that had no sitting Board member. It is not because those Commissioners were not doing a good job. Wright County would not be ranked #85 in spending per capita if they hadn’t been doing a good job. Mashak asked for the County financial information to be placed on the Internet. Daleiden said the Revenue and Expenditure Guidelines are posted on the website. Mashak said he wanted the actual check ledgers, not aggregate amounts. Sawatzke said Mashak can have his copy of the claims listing weekly after he has finished with it at the meeting.
Dean Mahlstedt, Cokato Township Chair and business owner, agreed with Daleiden that the past election is not a reflection of the voter’s distaste for the former Commissioners. The change in four new Commissioners was very clearly related to redistricting. Mahlstedt said Wright County has been very well run. He viewed a decision on changing from coordinator to administrator as a very dangerous thing. His business encompasses about a 100 mile radius, and they deal with many cities and counties. From his viewpoint as a business owner working with city administrators, he stated those positions can control and steer their council members, mayors, and departments in certain directions. His experience has been if something is not in line with the administrator’s position, no one else hears about it. With regard to his role as a Township Supervisor, he said the current method works where he can contact departments directly on issues. He said Statute allows for townships to detach from counties and attach to other counties. Cokato Township has discussed this and they line up more with what Meeker County. However, they have not pushed this forward because of Meeker County’s disorganization. With the position being discussed, the coordinator would have the power and influence without the actual authority. Mahlstedt said that belongs to the Commissioners.
Rob Kramer, Franklin Township, said if there are concerns over the duties, the County Attorney’s Office should explain them. Kramer said the coordinator position has worked thus far. He does not support another layer of management. He said it is costly to get rid of an employee, and they end up becoming a liability. Husom said that according to Statute, “The administrator shall exercise general supervision over all county institutions and agencies and, with the approval of the county board, coordinate the various activities of the county and unify the management of its affairs. If required by the county board, the administrator may act as the head of any department, the appointment of which is made by the county board, provided the administrator has the qualifications required by law.” Sawatzke said this would be the case except where licenses are required or when it involves an elected official.
Mahlsedt said if it is a matter of attracting the right person with more training and experience and it is a coordinator position, he suggested paying an administrator’s salary and not giving the position the authority. Mahlsedt feels other counties should be looking at how Wright County is doing things. He said this County is a leader and has been working well for many years.
Daleiden moved to refer this issue to Closed Session to decide whether to publish for the Coordinator position or whether the Board should appoint the individual serving as Interim Coordinator to the position, as long as they meet qualifications. Sawatzke said this cannot be discussed in a Closed Session. Sawatzke did not accept the motion as it is not within the parameters of Statute. Daleiden asked whether they should be discussing in public whether Lee Kelly, Interim County Coordinator, meets qualifications. Sawatzke said the incumbent will make application and compete with other candidates. They will select the best candidate, whether they are an internal or external candidate. Kelly recommended a job description be developed working with the Human Resources Department. He said to make sure that what is being presented is accurately reflected in the job description. Husom said Kelly makes a good point. The Board may want to examine the job duties and decide whether changes should be made. Daleiden clarified that he said coordinator and not administrator. Husom said the current range is $85,527-$112,861. Sawatzke feels that is a workable range to find qualified candidates. He is comfortable with the job description as the County just went through an extensive review process with the former Coordinator and outside counsel. Daleiden said the description reflects that the Coordinator position requires a minimum qualification of a Masters Degree. Borrell said the County may find a very qualified individual that does not have a Masters Degree. Sawatzke said for a job that has a salary range of up to $112,000, he did not feel a Masters Degree was too much to ask for. He said the description says it could be an equal combination of education and experience. Leander Wetter said at the Historical Society, they have indicated that a Masters Degree is suggested but not necessary. Sawatzke said that would come under the category of “or combination of education and experience.” Borrell said he is okay with that definition.
Borrell made a motion to keep the position as County Coordinator and to advertise for replacement with the current job description and using the entire salary range. Sawatzke said the entire salary range will be advertised. That way, a person can be hired more toward the top with more experience and lower on the schedule with less experience. He said the County Board will decide where to place them on the salary schedule. The motion was seconded by Daleiden. The motion carried 4-1 with Potter casting the nay vote.
Potter said the Wheelage Tax was granted to the County from the Legislature this year. The County Board voted on this earlier this year to give Wright County the option. Currently, 7 of 87 counties have this option. There is an implementation deadline of 8-01-13. Potter said there is a serious budget shortfall next year with County State Aid dollars. In the past, the County has borrowed ahead on State Aid dollars. The County will have $6 million less to work with on a Five-Year Plan that has already been implemented.
Virgil Hawkins, Highway Engineer, said the construction program in 2013 is $13 million. Funding includes $10 million in Federal and State Aid, which includes borrowing ahead from the next year’s allotment. That includes $3 million in local levy which they have in the budget. The construction plan in 2014 is about $11 million. Funding includes only $4.4 million in State and Federal Aid. The County will not be allowed to borrow ahead and there will be less Federal aid available. $6.6 million will need to be funded through the local levy or bonding. The Wheelage Tax could generate about $1.1 million toward this shortfall. He suggested scheduling a Budget Committee meeting to discuss this further.
Sawatzke said another option would be to prioritize projects because of limited resources. Sawatzke said that the Five-Year Plan has always included substantially more projects than funding, and projects get moved out at the end. Hawkins said that typically when they get to that point, they are not talking the large funding gap that will be experienced here. Potter said there are 511 miles of County roads of which 320 miles do not meet State specifications. At the rate that has been followed, the County will never be able to bring the roads up to standards. He said the County has been borrowing ahead on State Aid for a long time and now the County needs to pay it back. A way to combat that is to implement the Wheelage Tax, and it could sunset in 2020. Potter said Wright County is putting over $1 million less into roads than Sherburne County, who has a lot fewer roads. Sawatzke said the County will not have to pay the State back. The gas tax is split three ways with 62% being given to the State, 29% to counties, and 9% to cities. Sawatzke referenced the data provided by the State Auditor on Sherburne County. In 2013, Sherburne County has $6 million designated for streets and highways and a capital outlay of $9 million for a total of $16 million. Wright County’s numbers total $21 million. Stearns County is $23 million but Sawatzke said they may have a few hundred more miles of roads and a greater population.
Borrell said there are two discussions before them. One is on the Wheelage Tax and the other is the need for highway funding. Borrell said he will hold open the discussion on highway funding for another time. He said he would be opposed to the Wheelage Tax either way. When a tax is imposed, he said it never goes away. Husom agreed. She feels that roads need to be maintained. She does not view the Wheelage Tax as fair. Some people may have 4-5 vehicles but may not drive very much. Another person may own one vehicle and is driving roads every day. Funding sources will need to be identified but she is not in favor of the Wheelage Tax. Part of providing for interstate commerce and economic development is keeping the roads maintained so people can do business. She supports more of these things coming back to the local level. Hawkins stated that the State previously allowed counties to borrow up to half of the next year’s State Aid allotment with no interest. Sawatzke thought that if people were asked about shortages in road funding, they would identify roads such as I-94. During the last campaign, he does not recall anyone saying they are not spending enough on County roads. Husom viewed what funding sources are used for road improvements as a separate issue from the Wheelage Tax.
Daleiden asked for costs associated with repaving or redoing a road. Hawkins said that to reconstruct a two-lane rural highway is about $1 million per mile. To overlay a road (pavement preservation) is about $200,000 per mile, depending on whether there are paved shoulders. Sealcoating should be done within 5 years of a road being built. They have not been able to follow this schedule due to funding cuts and are doing this every 10-12 years. Daleiden asked how much longer road life is realized with the 5 year sealcoat. Hawkins said there is about a 30% increase in road life if it is done at the right time. Potter made a motion to adopt the Wheelage Tax resolution. The motion failed for lack of a second.
Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, requested approval of a resolution in support of conveyance of a tax forfeited outlot to the City of Hanover. The matter was previously dealt with by the County Board on 9-11-12, when it adopted Resolution #12-50 in support of the City’s request for acquisition of PID #108-034-000040. Due to some inconsistencies in the two resolutions and the application for State Deed, the request was rejected by the Department of Revenue (DOR). The DOR has indicated the best fix is to submit a new application along with a new resolution from each elected body. Asleson said the parcel involves a storm water pond in the middle of a development. Ownership should be with the City as they maintain the pond as part of the stormwater control system. Potter moved to adopt Resolution #13-19 conveying the tax forfeited outlot, PID #108-034-000040, to the City of Hanover. The motion was seconded by Borrell and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.
Daleiden requested referring to the Building Committee discussion regarding Jail shower paint issues. Borrell moved to add it to the 7-17-13 Building Committee Agenda. The motion was seconded by Potter. The question arose on whether this can be added to the Agenda because of posting requirements. Asleson said the open meeting law requires a 3-day posting notice of the meeting but not the actual agenda. The Board can add this to the Agenda if so desired. The motion carried 5-0.
Virgil Hawkins, Highway Engineer, presented the 7-09-13 Transportation Committee Of The Whole Minutes. The following corrections were made to the minutes: Page 3, last paragraph, last sentence, change from “$16 million” to “$6 million” (Daleiden). Potter moved to approve the minutes, as corrected, and the recommendations. The motion was seconded by Daleiden and carried 5-0:
1) Discuss 70th /CSAH 37 Project with Otsego
Hawkins gave some datelined background information [as summarized in Attachment 2] about the plans to improve 70th Street and a portion of CSAH 37 in Otsego so that an improved 70th Street would eventually extend from TH 101 to CSAH 19, and in accordance with the Northeast Transportation Plan would be designated as CSAH 37 (after improvements to standards up to CSAH 19). The existing portion of CSAH 37 not aligned with 70th Street, after improvements, would be turned back to the appropriate cities of Otsego, Albertville, and St. Michael in accordance with the Northeast Transportation Plan. Otsego has money set aside to complete their portion of the project (from Oakwood to MacIver with a trail from Oakwood to Odean), and the county’s portion of the extended improvement (from Oakwood to Odean) will cost about $1 million, with plans to begin construction in 2014. Wright County had initially planned to make improvements to CSAH 37 (from Oakwood to TH 101) in 2017 with federal funds, but it was mutually agreed to improve that portion of CSAH 37 from Oakwood to Odean in conjunction with Otsego’s project, because of planned trail construction by Otsego. Improvements to CSAH 37 (from Odean to TH 101) have subsequently remained on the schedule for 2017 as a county project. There will still be a mile of 70th Street that won’t be brought up to state aid standards at this time, which is that portion from MacIver to CSAH 19. Wright County and Otsego will partner in preparing federal funding application for improvements to that stretch of roadway for the future, possible with 2018 federal funds.
Daleiden asked if consideration could be given to completing the entire project (from TH 101 to CSAH 19) at the same time, rather than completing it in three different phases. This would save on construction costs, inconvenience, and mobilization costs. Once 70th Street is built, it will take a lot of traffic off the dangerous curves remaining on CSAH 37, and development will get going by MacIver. He would like to see the county and the city work together to get this project done. It will also save on tearing up the road three times and redoing it again. Once improved, 70th Street would be designated as a County State Aid Highway, and the southern portion of the current CSAH 37 would eventually get turned over to three different communities, Otsego, Albertville, and St. Michael. Sawatzke asked if those communities are agreeable to getting this road turned back, and Daleiden said that they would be at some point. In order for the municipalities to take this over, the county will have to improve that portion to state aid standards. If Wright County were to agree to an earlier than planned construction date of 2017 (from Odean to TH 101), Otsego might still have to delay their project by a year or two. Wagner stated that the funds they have been holding for this project have a time line, so permission would have to be received from State Aid before the decision could be made to delay. Doing the project all at once would save on the overall costs. Sawatzke suggested that this be bid out with an option to find out what savings would result, and Daleiden reiterated that he would like to get it done now and not wait until 2017. Hawkins said that Wright County will have about half the usual state aid allotment next year because they have borrowed ahead, and MnDOT is no longer allowing this (Wright County to borrow ahead) to be done. Daleiden suggested taking money out of the general fund on a temporary basis and then refunding it in 2017 when the federal dollars become available. Otsego currently has a balance in its state aid funds and has been saving them for this project. Potter said that this project has been on the books since the 1990s in the 20-Year Plan, and this would be a good time to close the book on this project and get it done. Hausmann said that if 70th Street were designated as CSAH 37, Otsego would still be managing the snow/ice control on that portion from Oakwood to CSAH 19 (Until such time that the three cities take over the turnback segment of CSAH 37, per the Northeastern Study). The county might have to do some sealcoating and crackfilling. Hawkins said that the original idea was to turn back the old road (existing CSAH 37) when Wright County takes over the new road. The new CSAH 37 70th Street) has the same functional class as existing CSAH 37, but the ‘CSAH’ designation gives it a more regional use. Federal funds were allotted to the 70th Street portion because it is no longer a local collector. It would be good to get the two cities and the county to go together to get federal money for that last remaining portion (MacIver to CSAH 19), and Hawkins said that he thinks there is a good chance that the application would score high. Daleiden would like to see if Otsego can hold off another year on their proposed construction to give Wright County an opportunity to be ready in 2015, and that would give everyone a chance to see if federal funding is available (for the portion of 70th Street from CSAH 19 to MacIver. Hawkins said that the deadline for application for 2018 federal funding is January of 2014, with notification of award in April 2014. Wagner said that he would have to talk to State Aid to see if they would allow Otsego to hold the state aid money longer than the initial deadline. Landowner Valerius was asked what he thought about the project timeline, and he stated that either way, traffic is going to go from CSAH 37 to 70th Street once Otsego makes the improvements. He had thought that this project was 10-15 years out, but now it appears that it will happen in a couple of years. The route has been drawn to try and minimize the impact to the residents, and the corner at 70th and Oakwood is rough in the wintertime. He suggested shifting the planned roundabout to open up more farm land, and that would be a safety factor too because of the business that is located in front of the proposed site. Building it south opens the road up from the business and helps diminish the danger if drivers are travelling too fast when they enter the roundabout. He said that the existing CSAH 37 intersection is lousy, and he has pulled a number of people out of the ditch every winter. Hawkins said that the application for funding for the portion of 70th Street from MacIver to CSAH 19 would likely score high with Region 7-W, but it will depend on what other projects are out there. If it scores high with a ‘one’ or ‘two,’ there would have to be very good reasons not to fund it, and being a smaller project, it might fit well for available funding. Sawatzke said that he doesn’t disagree that this project makes sense, but he asked if there is better value by getting bids for smaller projects. Do more contractors bid because they can handle the smaller projects better than the larger projects? Hawkins said that in highway construction the better bids usually come with the larger projects. There are lots of subs involved and not just the prime contractor. Wagner added that when using federal dollars, the bigger the project the better, as bigger contractors are better able to handle the process, which includes permits and payrolls, etc. Sawatzke asked about the timeline for giving a ‘county road’ back to a city (if the turnback portion of CSAH 37 were designated as ‘CR 137’), and Hawkins said that he wasn’t sure what the rules were (for cities vs. townships). Sawatzke said that he wouldn’t want to get stuck with the old CSAH 37 (projected CR 137) if the county takes over a newly designated CSAH 37, and Hawkins said that an agreement as to current and future arrangements would be figured out with the cities prior to construction. He added that the cities won’t want to take over jurisdiction until it is improved to state aid standards. Potter suggested that a deadline be set for turnback, and this deadline could be determined by a choice of different criteria. Hausmann said that if a sunset date can be agreed upon by all three cities and an agreement is drawn up and signed, then the county could take over the newly designated CSAH 37 (when the 70th Street improvements are completed). The year 2016 might be a more realistic time frame to complete the entire project, and Wagner would have to talk to State Aid to see if they would allow Otsego to hold over the state aid funds. Wagner stated that it would be possible to spend down the state aid money on past projects in order to not exceed the deadline for holding state aid funds. Sawatzke suggested that the application for federal funding be made and that the county consider doing the CSAH 37 project (planned for 2017) a year or two sooner so that the entire project on CSAH 37 could be completed at one time, as long as an agreement for turnback and maintenance is in place before construction begins. Daleiden suggested that this be handled at staff level among Otsego, St. Michael, Albertville, and Wright County.
RECOMMENDATION: It was the recommendation of the TCOTW that the City of Otsego and Wright County work together to make application for federal funding for improvements to that portion of 70th Street between MacIver and CSAH 19, that an agreement be drawn up to address conditions that must be met before a turnback of old CSAH 37 (projected CR 137 for a temporary time frame) is completed to Otsego, St. Michael, and Albertville, and that consideration be given to making improvements to CSAH 37/70th Street (from TH 101 to CSAH 19) as part of one complete project in 2015 or 2016. The application, agreement, and construction considerations will all be discussed at staff level by Wright County and all of the Cities of Otsego, St. Michael, and Albertville.
2) Discuss Highway Department Space Needs
Hawkins said that he wanted to provide information to the Board in advance of the budget meeting in August and handed out a summary [as provided in Attachment 3] of space needs of the Highway Department. Space needs have been identified since 1994, with more recent discussions of this at a TCOTW meeting in 2007. At that time, there were other major projects going on, such as construction of the new jail and implementation of the 800 MHZ system, and Wayne Fingalson, County Engineer at that time, was asked to wait until these projects were completed. Other space needs have risen since that time, and Hawkins wanted to get this information to board members so that they would have the opportunity review and give input at this time.
Hawkins said that an estimated $12-13 million would be needed to upgrade the main (Buffalo) maintenance shop. This would include some repurposing of the current space and adding more space that’s needed. He doesn’t know what it would look like, but he knows the needs. The current shop was built in 1975, and new office space was built in 1998. Needs have changed dramatically since 1975, such as now there are 25 tandem plow trucks, where back in 1975 all trucks were single axle, about 10-12 feet shorter than tandems. Potter said that he toured the Douglas County Highway shop, which was built in 2009, and that cost about $6 million. Douglas County got rid of four outshops and brought the plows to the main shop. Hawkins said that he is considering the advantage of eliminating one of the outshops over rebuilding it, and the plow drivers from that shop could move to other shops making some adjustments to routes necessary. Daleiden asked what is more cost effective, and Hawkins said that there is expense to moving equipment and hauling salt to outlying shops. All the mechanical work is done here, and he wants to keep it that way. It is cheaper storing fuel at the current PWB site than it is to have it sent to other shops. Meyer said that he encourages the drivers to get their fuel at the PWB whenever possible. Equipment for projects is usually parked overnight near the work site, but it’s brought back in on weekends because of the likelihood of vandalism. He said that he is open to making some changes with routes and staging with the trucks, but the biggest change that needs to be made here is to have enough room to maneuver the equipment in the building. Changes could be made to routes after the main shop has been enlarged/improved. Generally, routes in the rural areas are longer than routes in the more congested areas, but the congested areas have more four lane roads, turn lanes, and stop lanes. Hawkins said that one consideration included in the suggested changes would be the elimination of the Maple Lake and French Lake shops and the construction of a new shop in Annandale, and Sawatzke said that he thought the Maple Lake shop was still a fairly modern facility and didn’t think it should be given up. Hausmann said that these changes could be done in phases, and Potter said that they could be considered after the big project (maintenance shop in Buffalo) happens, like maybe several years later. Meyer said that the information provided in this handout was the result of a brainstorming session with suggestions for possible changes. Sawatzke said that he didn’t agree that Maple Lake should be closing down, and Meyer said that they were just looking to come up with ideas for the future, and the main shop is the main focus. He said that they were trying to suggest changes to be more efficient. Daleiden commented that he doesn’t like the idea of the welding area and the woodworking area for Parks being in the same area. The Parks and Highway work together and would like to stay in close vicinity. Sawatzke said that he prefers the suggestion that French Lake be closed and one driver sent to Maple Lake and one to Cokato. He doesn’t dispute that some space issue need to be resolved, but he doesn’t see the need to spend $12 million. Maintenance is a bigger issue than office space. If the price gets too high, nothing will get done.
Hawkins said that a study was done back in 1994, but it makes more sense to have a study done now to address current needs and projected future needs. For instance, back in 1975, Wright County had no traffic signals, and now they have 16, a number that could greatly increase in the next 20 years. There was some discussion about the projected size of the fleet, and it was agreed that the number of trucks would probably not increase by more than two or three in the next 20 years as there probably won’t be any additional county roads built. If there is the need for more plowing, it would be probably be more efficient to add staff to the night crew. More roadways could change to four lanes in the urban areas, but then the newer trucks are more efficient and can handle the changes with little or no loss of efficiency. Sawatzke said that he wasn’t sure how many outshops there should be, but he felt that Buffalo should be the headquarters. Husom said that she thought it would make sense to do a space study with experts in the field as she knows she’s not qualified to make that decision. They should try to map out space needs based on projections for the future. Meyer added that the Highway Department uses the compost facility for storage needs, and hauling equipment back and forth can use up a lot of time and fuel. Some of the equipment can’t be kept at the Buffalo shop because the space is limited, but it needs to be kept under cover because it is expensive and needs to be taken care of. The Surveyor’s Department has a small storage shed, but one of the four vehicles has to be permanently parked outside as is the trailer they use. Potter said that the space study should also take into consideration the space needs of the Parks Department, and Mattice said that improvements to Bertram Lakes shouldn’t impact their need for more storage space at the PWB as that will be handled the same as Schroeder and Collinwood Parks are handled with structures on site. That won’t create more of a space need here, except for equipment breakdowns that must be handled by the mechanic in the Parks shop. Daleiden said that the use of the same area for welding and woodworking in the winter are more of a concern for him. There should be a separate area for each. Hawkins said that he could have a Request for Proposals (RFP) put together and get quotes from a few firms and then come back to the TCOTW.
RECOMMENDATION: It was the recommendation of the TCOTW that Hawkins put together an RFP for a space study to be completed that will assess the space needs, current and future, of the departments located at the Public Works Building site. The RFP will then be distributed to firms in the industry who are qualified to give an accurate assessment of needs and a projected estimate of what addressing those needs will cost. Upon receipt of quotes to do the study, Hawkins will return to the TCOTW to discuss acceptance of the quotes and the appointment of a firm to complete the study.
(End of 7-09-13 Transportation Committee Of The Whole Minutes)
Potter moved to approve the Budget Committee Of The Whole Schedule as presented. The Schedule outlines the Budget sessions that will be held in August. The motion was seconded by Husom and carried 5-0.
Lt. Todd Hoffman said the Sheriff’s Office will be hosting a public meeting on 7-23-13 at 6:30 P.M. at the Silver Creek Township Hall on a level 3 predatory offender that is moving into Wright County. The information is also listed on the Wright County website, Sheriff’s Office, and the Wright County Sheriff’s facebook page.
Bills Approved
Abbott Northwestern Hospital $101.82
Abrahamson/Brian 363.50
Adams/Robert W 100.00
Advanced Disposal Services 778.03
American Tower Corporation 11,575.01
Ameripride Services 102.00
Aramark Services Inc 13,846.36
Arctic Glacier USA Inc 126.73
Buff N Glo Inc 200.00
Buffalo/City of 68,532.49
Bureau of Crim. Apprehen. 8,310.00
Bureau of Crim. Apprehen. 120.00
Centra Sota Coop. - Buffalo 27,375.34
Centracare Clinic 136.85
Central McGowan Inc 119.15
CenturyLink 493.78
CenturyLink 1,638.48
Climate Air 416.48
Community Lawn Care 116.72
Consulting Radiologists LTD 111.31
Corporate Payment Systems 2,965.73
Culligan of Buffalo 250.00
Dell Marketing LP 8,375.23
Farm-rite Equipment Inc 195.89
Feddema/Tom 332.00
Grainger 352.91
Hasty Silver Creek Sportmens 4,114.00
Hillyard Inc - Minneapolis 3,814.95
Holiday 22,064.14
Howard/Jolanta 200.00
Impact Proven Solutions 1,212.68
Intoximeters Inc 1,816.88
Jeddeloh & Snyder PA 600.00
Junction Towing & Auto Repair 138.40
Knife River 1,171,930.36
Lake Region Coop Oil-ML 623.69
Laplant Demo Inc 489.15
Magneto Power LLC 142.70
Marco 3,525.83
Martin-McAllisters Consulting 1,350.00
Mathiowetz Construction 719,976.71
Menards - Buffalo 151.26
Metro Group Inc/The 7,504.22
Midwest Protection Agency Inc 939.18
Mini Biff LLC 762.18
MN CLE Inc 264.00
MN Dept of Labor & Industry 1,142.10
MN Native Landscapes 150.00
Moore & Moore Advantage 259.23
Morries Parts & Service Grp 1,773.93
O’Ryans Conoco Marathon 175.00
Office Depot 1,459.61
Pearson Bros. Inc 4,500.00
Purick/Ryan 100.00
Retrofit Companies Inc 449.87
Rinke-Noonan 200.00
Rockford Township 935.25
Rons Appraisal Service 1,767.32
Ruttgers Bay Lake Lodge Inc 801.63
Safelite Fulfillment Inc 362.56
Safety Signs 177,862.80
Schwans Inc 130.88
Scuba Center 4,022.78
SHI International Corp 1,558.24
St Cloud Hospital 2,826.96
TASC 1,095.00
Towmaster 646.01
Tracker 2,340.00
Vang/Kelly 300.00
Voss Lighting 169.29
West Payment Center 1,016.72
Windstream 353.07
Word Systems Inc 2,550.00
Wright Hennepin Electric 215.77
Zacks Inc 289.67
Zep Sales & Services 224.58
30 Payments less than $100 1,449.30
Final total $2,299,783.80
The meeting adjourned at 11:57 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal Aug. 5, 2013.


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

Herald Journal
Stories | Columns | Obituaries | Classifieds
Guides | Sitemap | Dassel-Cokato Home | Delano Home | HJ Home