Wright County Board Minutes

WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD MINUTES
AUGUST 6, 2013
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Sawatzke, Daleiden, Husom, Potter, and Borrell present.
The following changes were made to the 7-23-13 County Board Minutes: Page 1, last paragraph, 1st sentence should read, “Jeanie Bryant, Buffalo resident, said she was in contact with Veolia Landfill (Advanced Disposal) this morning (Potter).“ Sawatzke asked Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy County Attorney, whether the Minutes should record what was actually said or what should have been said. Asleson responded that the minutes should be a recitation of what took place. Sawatzke directed the Minutes to place Advanced Disposal in parentheses after the name Veolia as that is the new name of the business. Potter agreed to the change. Daleiden moved to approve the County Board Minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Potter and carried 5-0.
Potter requested adding Item For Consideration #3: “Announcement Regarding Human Services Annual Report Online.” Husom moved to approve the County Board Minutes as amended, seconded by Daleiden. The motion passed 5-0.
Daleiden asked to remove Consent Agenda Item A2) under Administration: “Position Replacement: Administrative Specialist.” Potter moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded by Daleiden. The motion carried 5-0.
A. ADMINISTRATION
1. Performance Appraisals: W. Peterson, C. Philippi, Assr.; J. Edmonson, G. Gooler, W. Marschel, Aud./Treas.; J. Brown, I.T.; W. Stephens, P&Z; A. Fashant, C. Mazer, A. Sturm, Sher./Corr.
3. Approve Law Enforcement Contracts For The Cities Of Delano, Otsego and Rockford.
4. Claim, Madden, Galanter & Hansen, LLP, $3,432.27 (Service For June, 2013).
B. HUMAN SERVICES
1. Position Replacements:
A. Approve Four Financial Worker Positions.
C. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
1. Refer To Building Committee Discussion RE: Board Room Coordinator’s Console.
2. Approve Three-Year Contract Renewal With AGC Networks, Inc. For Support And Maintenance Of County Voice (Phone) System At Annual Cost Of $32,822. Contract Term Is 8-05-13 Through 8-04-16.
Daleiden stated he wished to pull consideration of the Administrative Specialist position for a few weeks until the County Coordinator position has been filled to allow that person to decide whether to reclassify the position or reorganize the Department. The matter can be addressed in another few weeks. Husom agreed with the premise. Borrell said Kelly could utilize a temporary employee for the time being. Kelly said the Department has a Temporary Line Item in the budget. Sawatzke said there was no need to take action on this item since it was removed from the Agenda. It can be brought back by the Administration Department later. The Department can bring in a temporary without coming to the Board for approval. Sawatzke asked Kelly to clarify the closing date of the Coordinator position posting. Kelly responded the position closes 8-14-13.
Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, said the first item is a request regarding acquisition of a software program entitled Drainage DB. He said Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy County Attorney, reviewed and revised the contract. Hiivala said the program would provide a new way for the County to administrate ditch documents and create a work flow of County Ditch systems. There are 29 active County Ditch systems, 6 active Joint Ditch systems and 2,291 impacted parcels prior to redetermination. Hiivala said that equates to $8.72 per parcel if the Board approves the Drainage DB program.
Sawatzke asked if the software program was being funded by grant money. Hiivala said the County received a $50,000 Ditch Modernization Grant. The Auditor/Treasurer Department is transferring County Ditch records into a compatible format for the Drainage DB program. Hiivala said some of the $50,000 in grant funding is being utilized to have professional services prove County Geographic Information Systems (GIS) layers. The acquisition of the Drainage DB program could go toward a matching grant. Hiivala said the County does not have grant funding specifically for the Drainage DB software program. Borrell moved to approve the contract with Houston Engineering for the Drainage DB program. Potter seconded the motion.
Sawatzke asked if Hiivala intended to bill property owners for the acquisition cost of the Drainage DB program, or whether he considered this a County expenditure since it is not a parcel-specific expense or repair. Hiivala said the County is changing the way ditch records are managed. He suggested a per-parcel assessment as an option since the County will be providing ditch records as an enhanced benefit to the public. The cost could be divided between the County and parcel owners or the 35 County Ditch systems. Hiivala said other counties charge the cost back against the system. Sawatzke said if a ditch does not require frequent repairs, citizens may question the merits of the assessment. Hiivala said the Drainage DB program will enable the public to see the history of their ditch system. Once redetermination is completed and public notices are published, residents will become aware of the program and its purpose.
Daleiden said he did not think the County should incur the full cost of the Drainage DB program since it will benefit property owners. He favors a 50/50 split with property owners. That would reduce the cost to property owners to $4.36 per parcel. Hiivala said one person might have multiple parcels, and therefore would pay more. Every parcel will pay the fee. Sawatzke asked Asleson whether the charge should be assessed per parcel or by benefitted acres. Asleson responded that this is a record keeping expense, and all parcels will benefit regardless of the percentage. He said it is allowable to charge a per parcel fee. Asleson said another option would be to divide the expense by the 35 County Ditch systems, and then assess it according to benefits received by each.
Sawatzke said he did not have a problem assessing per parcel. Daleiden said it made sense as everyone will benefit equally. Husom asked whether the program will reduce staff time since people will be able to access their records online. Hiivala said that was a possibility, although with more records available, staff may receive more questions from the public. The Drainage DB program will allow counties to standardize ditch systems across all of Minnesota.
Sawatzke commented that the County has never charged for ditch administration before. He asked Asleson whether that was allowable. Asleson said it is permissible. Borrell asked Hiivala whether he thought it would be better for the County to pay the initial acquisition cost and split future costs with property owners as they occur. Hiivala said ongoing maintenance should be assessed against the system. The County is requiring the system for benefitted land owners. Daleiden said the annual subscription is $4,000, which amounts to less than $2 per parcel for ongoing maintenance. Borrell thought the County could pay the initial expense and assess benefitted parcel owners for the annual fee. Sawatzke said that was an option. Daleiden said benefitted property owners should pay the annual fee.
Hiivala said the funding source would be Professional Services Budget Line 100. Sawatzke asked the number of parcels. Hiivala said there are 2,291 parcels. Sawatzke asked whether a staff person would input the fees to parcel owners, or will the fees automatically be entered in the software program. Hiivala said the process is not complicated. Assessments are shown on property tax statements. Hiivala thought the charge could be entered into the system as a fixed per parcel amount or by owner’s share.
Sawatzke asked regarding the funding source for the acquisition cost of $15,000. Daleiden said that number is low, because once redetermination takes place; the number of parcels will increase. Borrell said redetermination could potentially yield 6,000 benefitted land owners. Redetermination generally averages an increase of 4 times the number of benefitted land owners. He said that could amount to 8,000 parcels.
Hiivala said if the Board approves the Drainage DB contract today, the cost would be charged to the current list of benefitted land owners. Sawatzke said he is referring to the initial $12,000 for Account Creation and Setup and $3,000 for enhancements. He added that the $4,000 annual fee can be determined at a later date. Borrell was amenable to either splitting the cost with benefitted property owners or the County paying the entire acquisition cost.
Hiivala said when he first broached the subject of the Drainage DB program, the proposed cost was as much as $20,000. The contract drafted by Houston Engineering is for $15,000, with an annual fee of $4,000. Sawatzke asked if Hiivala had funds budgeted for this expense. Hiivala did not. Sawatzke asked Kelly if there were sufficient funds in the Professional Services Budget Line Item 100 for this purchase. Kelly said there should be enough. Sawatzke suggested the first $15,000 of the Drainage DB cost could be funded through that Line Item. Husom asked Hiivala if he thought billing individual land owners for the ongoing maintenance will be cumbersome. Hiivala said it would not. The real work is development of the records system and inputting historical information.
Daleiden asked whether the work to implement the Drainage DB will be done by County staff, or would Hiivala present a future request to contract with Houston Engineering. Hiivala responded that staff is already working with Houston Engineering as part of the Ditch Modernization Grant. He does not foresee a lot of interaction with County staff once the project gets going. When the County contracts with a Ditch Inspector and if a mobile ap is launched, some training may be required. He will have to work with the Information Technology (IT) Department regarding storage space. Hiivala said IT is aware this project is imminent.
Borrell moved to approve the Drainage DB acquisition in the amount of $12,000 for Initial Account Creation and $3,000 for Enhancement, to be funded via the Professional Services Budget Line Item 100. Ongoing maintenance costs will be assessed to benefitted land owners. Potter seconded, and the motion carried 4-1, with Daleiden casting the nay vote.
The claims listing was reviewed. Daleiden had a question regarding why the County is buying Microsoft Office 2010 from two different sources. Bill Swing, Information Technology Director, was not present. Daleiden said he will speak with Swing directly. Daleiden moved to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit, in the amount of $3,512,319.66, with 265 vendors and 447 transactions. Daleiden said the claims amount is high due to road construction expenses. The motion was seconded by Potter and carried 5-0.
Virgil Hawkins, Highway Engineer referred to the draft 2012 Wright County Highway Department Annual Report which he distributed at the 7-23-13 County Board meeting. He said it covers all details of Highway Department activities for the year 2012. Potter moved to accept the 2012 Wright County Highway Department Annual Report, seconded by Daleiden. The motion carried 5-0.
Sean Riley, Planning & Zoning Administrator, introduced a motion to amend the Wright County Zoning Ordinance.
Borrell moved to approve Ordinance Amendment 13-01 with language changes as noted, including adding “Rural Commercial Tourism” and “Township Halls” as Conditional Uses. Potter seconded with one correction, stating that the signature page should state “Interim County Coordinator” instead of County Coordinator. Asleson said he did not think anyone would question either title. Sawatzke directed staff to change the signature page to say “Interim County Coordinator.” The motion carried 5-0.
THE COUNTY BOARD OF WRIGHT COUNTY HEREBY ORDAINS:
The Wright County Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended as follows:
Amend Section 302 as follows:
Move Section “(25) Comprehensive Plan or Policies Plan” to follow Section “(27) Community Water and Sewer Systems.”
After Section (24) insert the following and renumber the remaining sections accordingly:
(25) Commercial Agricultural Tourism - Commercial Agricultural Tourism is a conditional use which is ancillary to a primary agricultural use on property with a land area at least ten (10) acres in size and has a residence or agricultural entitlement. Commercial Agricultural Tourism can allow for accessory structures to be constructed for events and other gatherings of people to be held inside. Food catering and preparation, along with limited retail, which is associated with the commercial agricultural tourism use may be allowed.
Amend Section 603.4 Conditional Uses as follows:
Kennels
Riding Stables
Home Occupations
Home Extended Business subject to provisions of in accordance with Section 741
Churches and Cemeteries
Commercial Outdoor Recreation
Bed and Breakfast units in Singlefamily dwellings
Town Township Halls
Mining, Sand and Gravel and Extraction subject to in accordance with Section 727
Subdivisions – with a 10 acre minimum lot size of ten (10) acres
Rural Planned Unit Development in accord accordance with Section 614
Retreat Center subject to the standards of in accordance with Section 742
Essential Services in accord accordance with Section 725
Large Animal Veterinary Clinics serving Agricultural Uses and Livestock
Commercial Agricultural Tourism
Amend Section 604.4 Conditional Uses as follows:
Land Reclamation and Alteration
Farm Equipment Sales
Livestock Feedlots in excess of five hundred (500) animal units
Kennels
Riding Academies
Home Occupations
Cemeteries
Wholesale Nursery, Landscape and Garden Sales with seasonal retail sales, not to include retail stores
Churches, not to include a school but may include a residence
Bed and Breakfast units in single-family dwellings
Township Halls
One Farm Accessory Mobile Home per farm operation
Commercial Outdoor Recreation
Mining, Sand and Gravel Extraction in accordance with Section 727
Sewage Treatment Plants
Non-commercial Contractors Yards
Essential Services in accord accordance with Section 725
Private Airstrip - subject to the following conditions:
(1) All applicable regulations of the State and Federal Government are properly satisfied.
(2) There are no existing residential subdivisions, and no areas designated for future residential growth within the Land Use Plan of the Wright County Comprehensive Plan, within a radius of one and a half (1.5) miles of the proposed airport.
(3) The airport shall be limited to use exclusively by the property owner.
Home Extended Business subject to the provisions of in accordance with Section 741
Retreat Center subject to the standards of in accordance with Section 742
Large Animal Veterinary Clinics serving Agricultural Uses and Livestock
Commercial Agricultural Tourism
Amend Section 605.4 Conditional Uses as follows:
After “Commercial Day Care Center” add “Township Halls”
Amend Section 606.4 Conditional Uses as follows:
After “Community Centers” add “Township Halls”
Amend Section 606.a4 Conditional Uses as follows:
After “Community Centers” add “Township Halls”
Enacting Clause:
This ordinance amendment is effective the day following publication. The enacting clause will not be incorporated into the final Wright County Zoning Ordinance.
Adopted by the Wright County Board of Commissioners this 6th day of August, 2013.
(End of Ordinance #13-01).
Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator, discussed recommendations made at the 7-08-13 Wright County Parks Commission meeting. The first request is to update the County Northeast Quadrant Regional Trail and Bikeway Plan (Plan) adopted in 2011. The City of Otsego plans to add an off-street trail on County Road 37/70th St. NE and would like to connect it to the Beebe Lake Trail through the City of Albertville. The Cities of Albertville, Otsego and St. Michael met a week ago with Mattice to review this request. The Parks Commission recommends making this modification upon stakeholder review and acceptance. The Cities of Otsego, St. Michael and Albertville concurred with the proposed addition to the Plan. Mattice asked the Board whether they wanted to approve the proposed update to the Plan today or have the updated plan brought back at a future date once maps are revised.
Borrell moved to update the Northeast Quadrant Regional Trail and Bikeway Plan as specified, seconded by Daleiden. Husom asked if the trail was funded by the City of Otsego, using a combination of Minnesota State Aid, Federal Transportation monies, park grants, and park dedication fees. Mattice said historically trails within city limits are funded as Husom stated. Cities may request County contributions, but the County has not funded trails within city limits in the past. The Northeast Quadrant Regional Trail and Bikeway Plan was developed when they received money from the Statewide Health Improvement Program for Active Living in Wright County. The regional emphasis on the Plan makes it more competitive in the grant process for the County and municipalities. Mattice said the Plan is dynamic, and there will likely be more modifications in the future.
Sawatzke said historically the County has not contributed any funds for city trails unless it falls within a County Park. Husom said not all cities that construct trails come to the County Board for approval. Mattice said only regional trails need County Board approval.
Sawatzke said the County does not contribute to city trails because 98 percent of the people who use a trail in a particular area are from that city. If a trail spans from one community to another, more people will use it. Sawatzke added that paved shoulders can also be used as trails. The latter may be a form of trail to which the County might contribute. Daleiden said the trails are separate from one another. One stretches from Otsego County Park to County Road 37, and another trail from Hanover to the Albertville Mall. Eventually the trail from the City of Hanover to Beebe Lake will be completed. By connecting these trails, people will be able to go from one County Park to another on one trail. This is why the Northeast Quadrant Trail is classified as a Regional Trail. Mattice added that it will connect with Hennepin County and Hassan Township in a loop across jurisdiction lines. The motion carried 5-0.
Mattice directed attention to the second item regarding an update on the proposed Deer Management/Special Hunt. He said this is an informational item only. He was approached by land owners with deer depredation concerns near County Park land to the west. In May, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) presented information to the Parks Commission on special use processes and an upcoming managed hunt. Last year harvest was limited to one deer per licensed hunter. This year the limit was raised to two deer per licensed hunter. The Parks Commission would like to see how the DNR management techniques work to thin the herd rather than opening up areas for special hunting within the County Park. No action was taken as this was an informational item only. Mattice said his recommendation is to continue as is, with no hunting in the park and no special hunting events. He clarified that licensed hunters may now harvest two deer on public and private land outside the park. The Parks Commission is assuming that will sufficiently thin the herd.
Mattice moved to the third item regarding a requested bus turn-around at Schroeder Park at Iresfeld Avenue Northwest. He explained that Corinna Township approached the Parks Department with this proposal. The location of the turn-around is within Park boundaries, but in an area not in use. The Parks Commission toured the site in July. Corinna Township will incur all costs to maintain and construct the turn-around. The County will have no expenses related to this request. The Township sent a letter to the Parks Department stating this commitment. Mattice said the Parks Commission will stipulate that the Township will restore the site to its original condition when/if the turn-around is no longer needed. Sawatzke asked Mattice to advise the Township in writing that their request for the turn-around was approved by the Board based on the Township’s commitment to remove aggregate materials and restore vegetation in like condition if the turn-around is no longer used.
Sawatzke asked how many children live on that road. Mattice replied that there are one or two houses with children. The children have to walk a half mile at this time. Husom commented that the location does not provide a safe way to turn around. Mattice said currently bus drivers would have to turn around on private property, but the bus company will not allow them to do so. The road easement is not big enough to construct a cul-de-sac. Sawatzke asked how long children have been walking the half mile to the bus stop. Mattice said the area used to be predominantly seasonal cabins, but are now being turned into permanent homes. Potter moved, seconded by Husom, to approve the request by Corinna Township to build and maintain a bus turn-around in Schroeder Park at Iresfeld Avenue NW. The motion carried 5-0.
Mattice said the fourth item, Preparing and Submitting Grant Applications, has two parts. The Parks Commission has reviewed several grant applications for which they would like to apply. The first request is for Board approval to prepare and submit a grant regarding Bertram Chain Of Lakes Phase 7 Acquisition, designated Parcel 4 on the map he provided. This grant would be contiguous to the last land acquisition approved by the County. It encompasses most of Mud Lake and the east side of First Lake, and is part of Phase 6. Typically grant applications are due at the end of September. The County match for this grant would be $185,000. The Parks Department would not know if they were awarded the grant until the end of 2013 or early 2014.
Acquisition would not have to take place in 2014.
Husom said the map indicates the area as Parcel 4. She asked how many acres were involved. Mattice said there were 156.71 acres. Husom asked about the acreage in the other six parcels. Mattice said approximately 700 acres. Husom said the total number of acres they are seeking is 900. Mattice said that is the number of land acres. With water acreage, Mattice said the number goes to about 1200. Daleiden moved to approve preparation and submission of a grant application for the Bertram Chain of Lakes Phase 7 Acquisition. Borrell seconded. Husom said her concern is this grant application is for a Federal grant in excess of a million dollars. Mattice said it is for a Parks and Trails Legacy Grant, with 3/8 cent sales tax money approved in 2008. They are looking at a 10 percent local match, with 5 percent from the County and 5 percent from the City of Monticello. Husom said her main concern is that although this is a wonderful property, the County has to maintain it. The property is off the tax rolls and is a large piece of land. How does that fit with the rest of the system? Does the Parks Commission view this as a necessary part of the Bertram Chain Of Lakes Regional Park? Sawatzke said the land is currently off the tax rolls already. Mattice said it is owned by a nonprofit and has not been on the tax rolls since 1968. This is part of the YMCA property.
Mattice pointed to an area on the map that is currently a tillable field and is designated Parcel 2. He said this area will generate the highest revenue from campground fees. While the Parcel 7 acquisition is expensive, revenue from other parts of the Park will help offset it. Husom asked Mattice if that revenue will pay for the maintenance of the grounds. Mattice said that is their goal. However, it would not pay for capital improvements, but would help cover ongoing operations of the Park. Husom asked what would happen if the County did not buy the land. Sawatzke said in theory the YMCA could sell the land to private property owners, at which time it would go back on the property tax rolls.
Borrell acknowledged that the grant is not free money. Taxpayers pay for it. He said if the County does not get this grant, another county will. He asked Mattice when the acquisition will be completed. Mattice replied that he hoped it would be done within the next four years. Potter asked the total number of acquisition phases. Mattice said that depends on the source of funding. The best plan estimates 9 total phases. The phase numbers could change depending on when funding comes up. The motion carried 3-2, with Husom and Potter casting the nay votes.
Mattice referenced the second grant application for CSAH 12 trail improvements and paving. It is an aggregate surface trail constructed a number of years ago. The trail needs a lot of maintenance and many land owners want it paved. Mattice showed a photograph of erosion problems on the trail. This typically occurs in areas where the trail is close to the road and there is no ditch. Mattice feels the trail would gain a lot of use with improvements. He and Chad Hausmann, Assistant Highway Engineer, will speak with land owners today regarding control issues. Undermining from the roadway is a maintenance headache and causes issues for users when heavy rains create gullies. In that instance, users prefer using the roadway versus negotiating the washed out trail.
The Parks Commission would like to apply for a local trails connection grant. Mattice said it is a 50/50 grant, and his estimate of the total project cost is $355,000. Half of that, or $177,500, would be the local match. The deadline is March 2014, and the Parks Commission would not likely be notified of an award until budget hearings in August 2014. This project is in the Parks Capital Improvement Plan.
Daleiden asked if the trail is Class 5 or crushed granite. Mattice said the trail is limestone, the same surface as the Luce Line Trail. Sawatzke said the Luce Line is a very popular trail that is heavily used. Sawatzke asked why the CSAH 12 trail has been so unsuccessful. Mattice replied that was the information he hoped the Engineer will provide. The County was not able to condemn the Right-Of-Way for the trail. The sections of the trail where it sweeps away from the road are where the County was able to condemn the Right-Of-Way for a trail easement. The sections of the trail closer to the road are areas where the County was limited to laying the trail within the road easement. Mattice said locations such as the one photographed display how the water runs across the aggregate surface where there is no ditch. Areas of the trail adjacent to ditches do not experience this problem.
Mattice said the other option would be to inventory the roadway and see where the problems exist and pave those sections of trail. Sawatzke asked to see a trail map of that proposed solution. He said two-thirds of bikers and pedestrians use the shoulder of the road and not the trail. Potter added that it requires frequent maintenance from Parks staff. Borrell suggested building the trail sections that incur erosion on higher ground in the shoulder of the road. He asked if building the trail in the shoulder would be cheaper. Mattice replied the trail has to be aggregate or paved. It is heavily used, especially from Buffalo to County Road 108. Borrell said he gets positive comments about the trail as well as comments that it needs maintenance. Mattice said he receives comments that many people use the trail, except for the small section in the middle.
Sawatzke suggested not paving the entire trail. He said $177,500 is a lot of money. The trail is not that old. The Luce Line has been in place for decades with granite, and the original theory was this trail would not need to be paved. Mattice said the initial proposal did not have a line item for paving. The thought was the aggregate surface would be more multi-user oriented. Daleiden asked whether only the bad areas could be paved. Mattice said that was an option. The trail could be mapped with cost estimates to pave the eroding areas. Sawatzke said it did not make sense to checkerboard the trail, but after doing the inventory, perhaps sections could be paved that need it and other sections left as aggregate. Daleiden said the Engineer may have another solution as well. Borrell said even if the trail is paved, there will still be a need to prevent erosion that undermines the pavement. Mattice said the Engineer will evaluate the situation. Sawatzke suggested the Board put the recommendation on ice until they receive a report on the trail from Mattice. Husom said she would like information regarding the cost difference between a blacktop surface and pavers. She said pavers are easier to replace than blacktop. Sawatzke said that option would be more expensive. He directed Mattice to report back to the Board on the matter.
Donald Mashak, Monticello Township, spoke regarding three issues: 1) Posting of data on the Internet; 2) Evening meetings; and 3) Agenda posting notice. Regarding posting of data on the Internet, Mashak said he wishes to see employee payroll and benefit information available on the County web site so residents may see where money is being spent. He said he has had difficulty getting this information from the County. Mashak said the County retaliated by raising his property taxes. He would like the County budget revenue and expenditure data posted on the Internet in layperson’s terms in aggregates of $100 or less. Mashak would like the data posted in a downloadable format such as Excel.
He said basic administrative, support and custodial staff get 35 paid days off including holidays, sick pay and vacation after one year on the job. He asserted that was wasteful.
Daleiden responded saying the budget revenue and expenditure data is posted on the Internet. Mashak said the data uses big numbers. Daleiden said monthly and year-to-date data is posted monthly. He asked Mashak whether he wants to know what every employee earns. Mashak said he wants the information by position. Sawatzke asked Mashak to tell the Board exactly what information he seeks. The Board will document his request and will advise him what information he may be provided. He cautioned Mashak that if his requests take hours of staff time to fulfill, there will be a fee as there is a cost to taxpayers.
Borrell offered to work with Mashak. He explained that the County is developing a new web site to make County information more accessible. He invited Mashak to give him examples of information available on other county websites.
Regarding evening meetings, Borrell explained that the Board held an evening meeting this spring. It was unintentionally set on Holy Thursday, limiting attendance. No more evening meetings are scheduled at this time, but Borrell said the Board intends to plan more. Mashak suggested having Board meetings at high schools. Daleiden clarified that evening meetings entail paying employees overtime. Sawatzke added that there is no school in the summer. Husom said soon there will be live streaming of Board meetings on the Internet. Mashak said four of the Commissioners were not in office in recent years. He said there is an “old attitude” among County employees. Mashak reiterated that his property taxes were raised substantially from 2009 to 2012. Daleiden asked for Mashak’s address so he could research the matter. He will provide the information to Borrell, and Borrell will work with Mashak.
Sawatzke said the Agenda Posting Notice is to notify the public of issues that will be discussed at County Board meetings. Sometimes an item is allowed to be petitioned onto the Agenda, depending on whether or not it is controversial or involves spending money. Sawatzke thanked Mashak for his comments. Borrell will work with Mashak to answer his questions about the budget. Evening meetings will be an ongoing discussion regarding which meetings should be held after regular business hours. Sawatzke said the three day posting notice is a general rule, and whether an item may be petitioned onto the Agenda depends on the nature of the topic. The Board has allowed people to speak in the past.
A Personnel Committee Meeting was held on 7-17-13. Husom provided an overview of the minutes. There was a lengthy discussion regarding government security. One proposal was to close the back entrance and leave it as an employee entrance. Sawatzke said Recommendation #3 would read better if it said, “No person will be laid off but one position will be eliminated.”
Daleiden asked if the proposal is to move the metal detectors at the front door closer to the Court Administration area but on the same level. He asked whether the public will have to go through the metal detectors to get to Veterans Services and Extension, or instead go through the lobby and down the back hallway. Husom said that will be discussed at the Building Committee. The recommendation from the Personnel Committee focuses on staffing levels.
Sawatzke said in the past the Courts area was locked down without an adverse impact on other Government Center Departments. Borrell said the secured area Sawatzke referred to was on the Courts Administration level. He suggested not using the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) scanner. Husom said it has been purchased already. Borrell suggested placing it on the same level as Court Administration. Sawatzke asked what percentage of the people coming through the front entrance are going to Courts. Lt. Todd Hoffman said the vast majority of people coming into the Government Center in the morning and right after lunch are for the Courts. He said fifty percent of the persons entering the front entrance in the morning are going to the Courts. Sawatzke asked about the influx over the entire day. Hoffman did not have specifics, but stated it was a substantial number of people. Hoffman said the layout of the second floor Court Administration corridor is tight with the elevator, steps and the Court Administration windows. Traffic flow is heavier there than in the past with two more judges presiding. Hoffman said the Board Room is also used as “Courtroom 7” on Thursdays. Hoffman said they want the Building Committee to discuss the proposals regarding traffic flow and providing access to Veterans Services, Extension and the elevator.
Daleiden said the minutes state the back entrance to the Government Center will be left open. Sawatzke said that would also be true of the front entrance once the metal detector is moved. Daleiden asked about the side doors. Sawatzke said the west door by the employee parking lot would not be open as it is on the same side as the Courts. These issues may be discussed at the Building Committee meeting. Husom added that the exterior door by the License Bureau would also be open. Sawatzke explained that is due to its access to public parking.
Sawatzke said only about 20 percent of persons coming into the Courts would require use of the TSA scanner. There are other details related to the logistics of the machines, their location, and traffic flow that need to be worked out. Daleiden said it is the County’s duty to protect the Courts. That is the function performed by Bailiffs. He asked whether the County is obligated to provide security such as metal detectors. Sawatzke said the County does not have to provide that level of security. Daleiden said the County could save more money by removing the metal detectors completely. Husom said that is an option. The metal detectors function as a preventive measure. Sawatzke said some counties do not provide Courts with security such as metal detectors. Sawatzke said it is common to see security in County Courts areas, but uncommon outside them. Borrell agreed that metal detectors are not necessary for Courts security.
Sawatzke said if the Board approves the recommendations from the 7-17-13 Personnel Committee, one security position would be eliminated. There would be two people to handle busy times. Half of the time one person could patrol the Government Center and one would be stationed at the metal detector. Sawatzke said eliminating one position will save 1 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) plus the part time person who fills in during breaks for the regular employee. When the regular employee goes on vacation, staff time increases to as much as 1.25 FTE.
Husom said the Committee also gave performance appraisal ratings of Exceptional to Virgil Hawkins, Highway Engineer, and Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator. Borrell moved to approve the 7-17-13 Personnel Committee minutes and recommendations, seconded by Husom. The motion carried 5-0:
I. POSITION OPENINGS
A. Social Services Supervisor (HS BOARD)
B. Case Aide (HS BOARD)
II. GOVERNMENT CENTER SECURITY
Kelly provided background information. In 2006 the Board approved hiring three full time licensed deputies. The Courts added two judges. In May 2006 three deputies were hired to help with Court security. Later in 2006 the Board considered security upgrades. Metal detectors were added in the lobby and card readers on the Annex side of the Government Center. Howell said of the three deputies hired in May 2006, two were for the judges and one was assigned to the metal detectors. Sawatzke said a total of three employees were added.
Sawatzke said there was a request to assign staff to patrol the Government Center in the event the metal detectors were moved to Court Administration. He asked whether it was fair to reduce staff from three to one. Hoffman said currently there are two Sheriff’s Office staff at the front entrance. Within the last six or seven years, the Sheriff’s Office has added staff due to an increase in Court cases. There is a need for two employees to staff the metal detector at the front door. Now that there are six judges, there are often two trials occurring simultaneously during the week. In those instances, they need two employees managing that station regardless of where it is located. The back main entrance would be gone. Without a third person, there is no guarantee one of them would have the time to patrol the building.
Sawatzke replied that there is no need for a Sheriff’s Office employee to patrol the Government Center eight hours per day. He said they could roam for 45 minutes, wait several hours and then roam for another 20 minutes, and do so sporadically throughout the day. He did not think the Commissioners expected an officer to patrol the Government Center eight hours per day. Rather, the goal was for law enforcement to be visible. Husom said if there are two deputies, perhaps one could roam. Sawatzke said if there are two deputies at the metal detector, one could patrol during the times when the front door is not busy.
Hoffman said traffic flow in the Courts is not consistent. There could be five or six trials scheduled on a given day, but often one or none occurs. He emphasized to the Committee that reducing the number of staff at the main entrances would prevent the Sheriff’s Office from designating an employee to patrol the Government Center, especially when there are two trials taking place. However, Hoffman said if the second metal detector by the back door is removed, but the employee who manned that station was retained, there would be a person available to patrol. Husom said currently the Sheriff’s Office would ask a licensed deputy or corrections officer who is stationed at the back lobby door to respond to a call. Hoffman said the Sheriff’s Office would make every reasonable effort to respond.
Husom said research she recently conducted revealed that the majority of government workers who have been shot were County Attorneys. Her concern is that the current Government Center security plan is piecemeal. Employees informed her that Court Services takes in 75 people per day. They told her the presence of security personnel makes them feel more secure. Husom said there are people who become violent, and such incidents are impossible to predict. She referred to a comment by Commissioner Mike Potter that the Board should leave the current metal detector system and Sheriff’s Office employees in place until all Courts-related staff are relocated to the Law Enforcement (LEC). She did not think employee perceptions will change if the metal detector is moved and a deputy patrols the Government Center.
Sawatzke asked Hoffman to clarify whether they added a part time employee to staff the metal detector, as well as two full time employees. Hoffman said there were three employees for the metal detectors. D. Miller said if the metal detector by the back door is removed, that could either eliminate one position or that person could be assigned as a roamer to respond to calls for help. There will be deputies around on a slow day if there is a trial.
Sawatzke asked who relieves for lunch breaks. Hoffman said the part time person fills in for lunch breaks. There are six judges with corresponding security personnel. Two employees are also stationed at the front lobby entrance and one in back. That brings the total number of security personnel to nine. With removal of a full time equivalent, he cannot staff all the stations. If the Sheriff’s Office terminates one position, that makes eight. Sick and vacation issues arise. If one position is eliminated, it will decrease the amount of staff available. Sawatzke said if there is a part time person to fill that position, there will be no need for another full time employee. Hoffman said that makes sense if your goal is to reduce personnel. The Board must decide. If the goal is to remove one bailiff, the Sheriff’s Office will work with that. He asked whether the goal of the Board is greater security or designating staff to patrol the Government Center.
Sawatzke said if the metal detector at the back door is eliminated, the need for the full time position is gone, as well as one hour of a part time person who fills in for vacation and sick days. That leaves 30 to 40 days per year that a part time person would need to substitute. Sawatzke said that is the equivalent of a .25 full time employee (FTE). Miller said the Sheriff’s Office is using four 67-day temporary employees who are filling in for full time employees. They are currently working the equivalent of one FTE.
Sawatzke said by eliminating the back door security position and one hour for the part time employee, the County nets 1.25 employees. If they move those two employees to Court Administration, one may be able to roam with a radio when there is little traffic. When the front entrance gets busy, the person patrolling would return to the metal detector. When the Courts schedule is busy, that person will assist at the metal detector. Hoffman said the Sheriff’s Office will arrange the schedule and staffing according to Board instructions.
Sawatzke thought a viable option was to eliminate 1.25 FTEs and allow a staff person to patrol periodically throughout the Government Center. Hoffman emphasized that this scenario precludes having a specific employee assigned to respond to emergency calls. Sawatzke said often there are three or four people standing at the metal detector. Hoffman said sometimes street patrol officers are called in temporarily to substitute or come to the Government Center for another reason. Sawatzke replied that when they are over staffed, two officers could patrol the Government Center. He did not feel assigning an employee to patrol the Courthouse for eight hours per day was a good use of staff time. Hoffman suggested taking the third security staff position and assigning them elsewhere.
Hagerty asked the time frame for the construction of a Courts facility at LEC. Sawatzke said the volume and workload in the Courts area does not signify a need at this time. Hagerty suggested they designate the back lobby entrance as an employee entrance if security personnel are eliminated in that area. He preferred that the metal detector remain at the front of the building. Husom agreed. She said Commissioner Borrell will still object to the metal detector on the grounds that it violates personal freedom. She said nevertheless there are individuals who may try to bring in knives or weapons.
Hagerty said he has received one complaint since the County installed the metal detectors. The majority of the feedback he receives is positive regarding the friendliness of the security personnel. Hagerty said the incidents that have occurred at the Government Center were probably not preplanned but spontaneous. The presence of law enforcement personnel provides a sense of security for employees. Husom agreed. Sawatzke disagreed, saying other Counties do not take similar security measures. Hagerty replied that Wright County has provided law enforcement officers on site for some time. Sawatzke said precedent did not necessarily make a case for continuing the practice.
Hagerty said he informed Buffalo Police Chief Weinzetl that Government Center security may be removed, elevating the responsibilities of the Buffalo Police Department to first responder. Hagerty said if both metal detectors are removed from the Government Center lobby entrances, and one is relocated to Court Administration, there may not be a designated employee available to handle an emergency. Sawatzke asked whether one employee could investigate if there are two employees at the metal detector, and the License Bureau has an irate customer. Hagerty said they may be short one employee if they are sick. The Sheriff’s Office has a finite number of people who work for judges. He said very likely someone will be available.
Sawatzke asked how often there is only one employee at the metal detector. Hoffman said there is no relief factor for security staff. Sometimes the person staffing the metal detector does not carry a gun. He explained that is because they may be drawn from the pool of corrections officers. Hoffman said when there are two employees at the metal detector station, one may be a licensed deputy and the other a corrections officer, a patrol officer or a DARE officer when school is not in session.
Hagerty said he has not received a lot of feedback from County employees. The Sheriff’s Office now has card key access to every individual Department and all exterior doors.
Sawatzke said cameras are good deterrents. Panic buttons in Departments can also enhance security. Hagerty said the security cameras were substantially upgraded and he feels they are sufficient at this time. Hagerty asked whether the Board has made a decision on the position of metal detectors and security staff at the Government Center. Husom said they had not. She liked Hagerty’s idea about closing the back lobby entrance so the whole system would not have to be relocated to Court Administration. Hagerty said the County spent a lot of money on the parking ramp in the back, and it is easier for people with disabilities to access. The Government Center is not that large. The ramp parking could remain there and that would alleviate the need to relocate for the Courts. His goal is to keep the Courts as secure as possible, because he is required to do so. Sawatzke said there is an industry standard to secure the Courts. There is no requirement to secure any County Departments. He said although Wright County chose to implement security measures, the overwhelming majority of counties do not have security for the County Attorney Office, Court Services or other areas.
Hagerty mentioned a county that made the decision not to add security even after an incident. Sawatzke asked whether they have security in their Courts area. Hagerty said not as of a few years ago. Most counties are not as busy as Wright County. Sawatzke said there are other counties with higher populations who do not utilize the type of security measures Wright County has implemented. Hagerty said the Sheriff’s Office will follow the Board’s direction on the matter. Sawatzke said the public will be disappointed if the County continues with the current security measures. He did not see the need for them. He was not complaining about the security staff, but said the public does not like having to empty their pockets for the metal detector. Hoffman said it was a tough decision for the Board. He does not like seeing the staff standing around, but if there is an incident it would be good to have them there. Hagerty said what the County may lose is a deterrent. Husom thought a security person patrolling the Government Center was a deterrent, as well as cameras. Their presence is effective. Hagerty said there are four or five Corrections Officers in the Courts area. They are utilized when the front lobby is short staffed. Hagerty wants security to be visible.
Sawatzke said the purpose of this meeting was to discuss whether to move the metal detector back to the Court Administration area. He asked whether the others present were agreeable to that. Husom said the recommendation made at this Committee would be regarding security staffing at the Government Center. Sawatzke said if two employees are assigned to the metal detector, one would be given the flexibility to patrol the Government Center whenever possible. Eliminate the back lobby metal detector security position. That would provide an employee to respond to calls on the third and fourth floors if necessary.
Hagerty said he preferred to keep the metal detector on the main floor in the front lobby area. Sawatzke said he favors moving the metal detector up to the Court Administration area. Hagerty said uniformed law enforcement officers are a visible deterrent. Sawatzke said the Government Center is the third safest facility in the County after the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant and the County Law Enforcement Center. Hagerty said there are members of the public who are unbalanced. The unexpected can happen anywhere. Hoffman said the Sheriff’s Office will work with the Board on this matter. He suggested a possible construction of a glass wall or a door in the Courts area. He would be happy to discuss this with Kelly. Hagerty said they would really prefer to keep the metal detector station on the lower level if possible. Husom agreed, saying it would be a better deterrent. Sawatzke suggested the Sheriff’s Office work with Kelly on construction details and bring their ideas back to the Building Committee.
Hagerty said the Board previously authorized $20,000 for a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) package scanner, which did not work in the space where the front metal detector currently sits. Once the metal detector is moved, there would be room for a TSA scanner. That would eliminate the need for security personnel to go through people’s bags and briefcases. Kelly confirmed that the TSA scanner was recommended at the 2-08-12 Building Committee Meeting. Hoffman said then there would be the metal detector near the Courts area as well as a package scanner. Sawatzke said that was a good idea. He asked Husom whether she agreed with the proposal to move the metal detector on the same level but closer to Court Administration and allow the second security staff person to patrol the Government Center periodically. Hagerty said there will be no set schedule when this person will be able to roam through the facility, but they will maintain law enforcement visibility.
Sawatzke said the Sheriff’s Office should not lay off any current security personnel, but should also not replace the third position if someone leaves. That would reduce one position from the list of authorized staffing from 140 to 139. Sawatzke said this will become effective once the metal detector is moved. Hagerty said locking down the Court Administration area after 4:30 P.M. is ideal.
Recommendations:
1) Move the metal detector by the front lobby door near the Court Administration area on the same level as the front entrance.
2) The Sheriff’s Office will work with Kelly regarding construction details related to moving the metal detector and adding the TSA scanner. The construction proposal will be brought to the Building Committee.
3) No person will be laid off; however, one position will be removed from the list of authorized staffing when a vacancy arises.
III. PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS
A. Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator
Based on four performance reviews submitted, the Committee recommends an overall rating of “Exceptional.”
B. Virgil Hawkins, Highway Engineer
Based on four performance reviews submitted, the Committee recommends an overall rating of “Exceptional.”
(End of 7-17-13 Personnel Committee Minutes).
A Ways And Means Committee Meeting was held 7-31-13. Borrell said the former Agricultural Inspector passed away. The Committee considered replacements and the best way to fill the position. They discussed using a township weed inspector on an interim basis. The Committee also discussed getting help from Meeker or McLeod Counties as needed. They decided to advertise for an independent contractor for the Agricultural Inspector position. Borrell said the County Attorney wrote letters to Ag Enterprises, LLC, requesting documentation of services performed for the County in the months of May, June, and July 2013. There is a possibility someone else at the LLC may have conducted Agricultural Inspections for the County in that time period.
Sawatzke commented on the good work the late Mr. Ken Johnson performed for the County in the capacity of Agricultural Inspector. He worked well with the Townships, was very knowledgeable and did a good job. Borrell said Johnson was faithful about attending Township meetings. Sawatzke extended sympathies to Johnson’s family on behalf of the County.
Borrell said the Committee also discussed a Ditch Inspector position. Hiivala stated that Kerry Saxton, Office Manager, Wright County Soil and Water Conservation District, has been the County’s de facto Ditch Inspector. The County is required to designate a Ditch Inspector by law. Borrell said the Committee discussed the compensation for a Ditch Inspector. The recommendation is to recess until the 8-21-13 Ways And Means Committee meeting at 9:00 A.M. to allow Hiivala to gather information regarding compensation packages for ditch inspectors and report back. Borrell said some counties have an employee who performs ditch inspections. He added that the Committee is more inclined to an independent contractor designation, similar to the Agricultural Instructor.
Daleiden suggested the County hire one person to perform as both the Agricultural Inspector and Ditch Inspector. Borrell said the Committee discussed that option. Sawatzke did not feel that would create any problems. Borrell said Saxton did not want to function both as an Agricultural Inspector and Ditch Inspector. Saxton felt it could hinder building relationships with land owners regarding cooperation along ditches if he also has to report noxious weeds on their property. Borrell said the Agricultural Inspector tends to encounter more contentious situations than the Ditch Inspector. Sawatzke said the law requires illegal weeds to be reported.
Sawatzke said since Borrell has been working on the Inspector positions, he should serve as the Committee member at the 8-21-13 Ways And Means Committee meeting. Sawatzke said if there are any other Ways And Means issues, the Committee will convene at a separate meeting on the same day with Husom serving as the regular Committee member.
Daleiden moved to approve the 7-31-13 Ways And Means Committee Minutes and recommendations, seconded by Potter. The motion carried 5-0:
I. AG INSPECTOR
A. Asleson stated the County learned the previous Ag Inspector had unfortunately passed away and there was a need to replace him. Asleson sent a letter on 7-26-13 requesting documentation of services that may have been provided by the previous Ag Inspector for the months of May, June or July. He stated that payment had been stopped on July’s check. Borrell questioned if the County could make use of the Township Ag Inspectors for the rest of the year. Sawatzke stated that was an idea but that he would like to think long term. He suggested the County advertise in several newspapers and on the County website. Asleson suggested that the posting state they are looking for an independent contractor and not a Wright County employee. Sawatzke also suggested that the Committee speak with Meeker and McLeod County to see if they have an Ag Inspector that can fill in while the County is advertising for a replacement.
Recommendation: Advertise for an independently contracted Ag Inspector.
II. DITCH INSPECTOR
A. Hiivala stated that Kerry Saxton had been acting as the County’s Ditch Inspector and while he has been doing a good job, the County is by statute required to have a Ditch Inspector formally identified. Since the County is only allowed to use Saxton for up to 100 hours a year without being charged, Hiivala suggested the County advertise for an independently contracted Ditch Inspector. Borrell stated he would like the County to come up with a compensation package instead of a per hour rate plus mileage. Asleson suggested allowing contractors to come in with their own compensation proposal. Hiivala suggested sending out a survey to surrounding counties asking for their Ditch Inspector qualifications and what expenses they view as reimbursable. Sawatzke suggested recessing for a few weeks in order to allow Hiivala time to complete the survey.
Recommendation: Recess until 8-21-13 at 9:00AM to allow time to gather more information.
(End of 7-31-13 Ways And Means Committee Minutes).
Potter moved, seconded by Daleiden, to add 8-19-13 and 8-26-13 at 10:30 A.M. to the Budget Committee Of The Whole Schedule. The motion carried 5-0.
Potter announced that the Human Services Annual Report is now available online at the Human Services web page on the County web site.
Bills Approved
Abbott Northwestern Hospital $113.24
Abner Sales 171.92
Age & Associates Inc 300.00
Allina Health System 115.00
Allina Hospitals & Clinics 150.00
Americinn 109.28
Ameripride Services 759.87
Anesthesia Assoc. of St Cloud 1,101.26
Annandale Rock Products 129.59
Annandale/City of 5,215.80
Anoka County Sheriff 36,035.69
Apec Industrial Sales & Serv. 1,073.39
Aqua Green Lawns 224.00
Aramark Services Inc 13,883.03
Barnes Distribution 439.63
Battles/Rick 1,713.50
Bmc Software Inc 1,098.61
Boyer Truck Parts 468.73
BP Amoco 225.29
Brownsworth Inc 2,588.80
Bryan Rock Products 231.44
Buffalo Clinic 137.43
Buffalo Hospital-OTPT Comm. 683.68
Buffalo/City of 5,727.20
CDW Government Inc 5,045.49
Center Point Energy 2,053.74
Centra Sota Coop. - Buffalo 2,757.18
Centracare Clinic 1,121.05
CenturyLink 198.03
Clearwater Township 1,502.70
Climate Air 11,217.47
Cokato Township 269.39
Comm. of Transportation 4,128.79
Consulting Radiologists LTD 130.66
Contech Construction Prod. 10,958.72
Corinna Township 876.00
Country Store/The 213.94
CRA Payment Center 140.07
Croteau Plumbing 932.06
Custom Towing LLC 106.88
Decker/Tom 125.00
Dell Marketing LP 1,212.68
Dental Care Assoc. of Buffalo PA 191.00
Diamond Mowers Inc 884.48
Diers/Carter 750.00
Dotolo/John 1,279.41
Eagle Point 1,317.88
Elk River Municipal Utilities 132.42
Ernst Gen. Construction Inc 16,026.34
Expert Auto. & Towing Inc 216.42
First Choice - St Cloud 107.16
Firstlab 184.90
Fleetpride 106.44
Franklin Township 1,189.80
French Lake Township 488.40
Frontier Precision Inc 260.93
Gabriel/Cathleen 100.00
Glunz Construction Septic Serv. 270.00
Hanover/City of 1,760.50
Hausmann/Chad 123.00
Hillyard Inc - Minneapolis 6,309.85
Huemoeller/Neal 750.00
Integrated Fire & Security 5,565.15
Jeddeloh & Snyder PA 600.00
Junction Towing & Auto Repair 594.22
Karels Towing 171.00
Klatt True Value Electric 135.59
Knife River 2,970,928.55
Kunkel/Stephanie 118.00
Laplant Demo Inc 1,561.36
M & M Express Sales and Serv. 363.14
M-R Sign Company Inc 1,025.31
Maple Lake Lumber Company 174.74
Maple Lake/City of 981.60
Marco Inc 6,309.20
Martin Marietta Materials 438.28
Marysville Township 1,021.95
Menards - Buffalo 624.71
Metro Group Inc/The 18,335.07
Mid-America Business Sys. 128.25
Mid-Minnesota Hot Mix Inc 67,093.62
MN Counties Computer Coop. 14,951.35
MN Dept. of Corrections 29,077.88
Monticello Township 2,128.50
Montrose/City of 1,670.95
Moore Medical Corp 112.50
Morries Parts & Service Group 555.25
North Star Awards & Trophies 106.76
Northern Safety Technology 368.40
Northern States Power Co. 3,331.62
Office Depot 1,596.73
Otsego/City of 101.47
Pavement Resources Inc 365.00
Pederson/David 195.00
Peterson’s Towing & Recovery 156.04
Ramacciotti/Frank 100.00
Reds Auto Electric 117.30
Reds Cafe 641.25
Retrofit Companies Inc 359.38
Rhodes Lock & Glass 140.00
River Bend Industries 226.35
Rockford Township 2,664.40
Rockford/City of 2,822.50
Rogers Radiator Repair 141.38
Royal Tire Inc 2,172.91
Safelite Fulfillment Inc 125.00
Safety Signs 165,114.29
Severson/Brian F 125.00
Sherwin Williams 276.53
SHI International Corp 8,587.41
Silver Creek Township 4,804.90
South Haven/City of 319.20
Southside Township 729.20
Specialists In General Surgery 350.63
Sprint 6,222.90
St Cloud Times #1076 288.03
St Michael/City of 9,670.55
Stoll/Brian 750.00
Sub. Emergency Assoc. PA 260.91
Texas A & M Agrilife Ext. Serv. 109.95
Timekeeping Systems Inc 1,025.00
Tires Plus 645.56
Total Printing 130.82
Towmaster 1,281.39
Uline 156.33
Unique Software Corp. 264.00
Vance Brothers Inc 2,124.78
Voss Lighting 200.93
W D Larson Companies LTD 669.35
Walmart Community GEMB 234.09
Walmart Store 01-1577 771.24
Waste Management-TC West 817.99
Webb/Janelle 299.00
West Payment Center 495.12
Westside Pest Solutions Inc 175.00
Westside Wholesale Tire 1,110.12
Windstream 126.30
Wright Co. Highway Dept 13,099.46
Xcel Energy 874.60
41 Payments less than $100 1,676.26
Final total $3,512,319.66
The meeting adjourned at 10:51 A.M
Published in the Herald Journal Aug. 26, 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