DECEMBER 16, 1997
The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Russek, Rose, Mattson, Jude, and Sawatzke present.
A correction was made to the minutes of 12-09-97: Page 4, 4th paragraph, 1st sentence, from "July storm" to "Spring flooding" (Mattson). Motion to approve the minutes as corrected was made by Russek, seconded by Jude, carried unanimously.
Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Item For Consideration #5, "Set a Personnel Committee Of The Whole Meeting" (Norman). On a motion by Russek, second by Rose, all voted to approve the Agenda as amended.
On a motion by Rose, second by Russek, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
1. Performance Appraisals: D. Reddemann, Aud./Treas.; A. Hermanson, Ct. Admin.; J. Ahlm, Hwy.; B. Kopff, P&Z; Marilyn Miller, Sher./Corr.
2. Claim, Hay Group, $1,892.80.
3. Claim, Frank Madden & Associates, $473.80.
4. Claim, Briggs and Morgan, $648.77.
5. Authorize Signatures, City of Montrose Contract for Sheriff Services.
1. Approval of Municipal Maintenance Payments for Eight Cities (Annandale, Buffalo, Cokato, Delano, Howard Lake, Maple Lake, Monticello, Montrose).
1. Approve Hire, Joel Hendricks, Automated Mapping Specialist l, Step 3, Eff. 1-5-98.
2. Refer Discussion RE: Contracting For Service To The Negotiation Committee.
Darla Groshens, Auditor/Treasurer, presented her Agenda items. On a motion by Jude, seconded by Rose, all voted to approve a plat, "INDERBERG" as submitted by Inderberg, Inc. (Edward J. & Wendy M. Otto), fee owner, of the following property described in part as: The SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of Sec. 35, Twp. 120, Rge. 26; with all outstanding taxes, including green acre liability, if any, having been satisfied; park dedication fee has been paid; and the Title Opinion letter from George C. McDonald, Attorney at Law, dated November 21, 1997, has been reviewed by Thomas C. Zins, Assistant County Attorney, who finds the plat to be ready for filing and recording.
On a motion by Rose, second by Sawatzke, all voted to approve the U.S. West Contracts for the E911 System. These contracts have been reviewed and discussed as part of the Communication Committee meetings.
The claim listing was reviewed. Mattson referenced page 21, a claim to Weege Construction, $7,216.00, for storm damage to the Waverly Salt Shed. lnsurance will cover all but the $1000 deductible. Mattson referenced another claim on page 21 to Westwood Professional Service, $869.60, for building additions. Groshens said this was for French Lake Wetland Mitigation. Rose made a motion to pay the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit. Motion carried 5-0 on a second by Jude.
A Deferred Compensation Committee meeting was held on 12-9-97:
Request RE: Court Order, David and Cheryl Fundingsland. Recommendation: A financial hardship has been shown. Approve withdrawal of all funds in the deferred compensation account per Court order.
At today's meeting, Rose moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Russek, carried unanimously.
A Ways & Means Committee meeting was held on 12-10-97:
Agricultural Inspector's Contract. The Committee reviewed the current contractual arrangement with Mac's Seed, Feed and Weed Services, lnc. McAlpine, President of the business, was present for the discussion. Norman suggested that the current contract which runs April to April be revised to coincide with the Calendar year. This was agreeable to the other Committee members and McAlpine. The Committee also feels that he should receive the 2.5% increase employees are receiving in 1998. Recommendation: Renew the contract for the period April 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998. The compensation for the nine months shall be $6,542.
Economic Development Abatement Policy. Sawatzke stated that the Association of Minnesota Counties supports elimination of the law. Gruber stated that abatements should be used to correct mistakes; i.e., adjusting the classification and/or value of property. Recommendation: Nelson volunteered to draft a resolution for Board consideration which would state that Wright County will not grant economic development abatements. Also, the Board should write to our legislative delegation stating opposition to the law. At today's meeting, Russek moved to approve the minutes and recommendations, seconded by Sawatzke. Sawatzke requested that Norman remind the Attorney's Office to draft a resolution and directed Norman to compose a letter, signed by the Board Chair, to send to the Legislative delegation. Motion carried 5-0.
A Building Committee Of The Whole meeting was held on 12-9-97. Jude summarized the minutes at today's meeting. Buetow & Associates representatives provided an architect update on the Pamida and Public Works buildings. Issues discussed relating to the Pamida Building included color schemes, acoustical tile, and an interactive room to be used as a training facility and case consultant area for agencies across the State. The Committee decided that this will not be done at the Pamida building, but may be looked at for the Government Center. There will be a computer training room with 5 ports for computers, a desk, chair, phone and file cabinet. The Committee reviewed highlights and upgrades to the Public Works Building. Mezzanine will not be needed, and rough rock will be used on the face of the building. An Engineering Update and Electrical Update was given on the Pamida Building and the Public Works Building. Marty Campion provided a Civil Engineering Update for the Public Works Building. The Budget was discussed. The Committee added $15,000 for sprinklers for the new Public Works Building. An Asbestos Abatement Review Report will be completed by an outside contractor. A list of six applicants was reviewed for the Owners Representative. The meeting was recessed until 9:00 A.M. on 12-15-97, when interviews were held for four of the applicants: Ralph Bragelman (St. Cloud); Roger Peterson (Buffalo); Rick Scott (Buffalo); and Tom Ernst (Buffalo). Recommendation was to accept the proposal from Scott Builders. Corrections were made to the minutes: Page 2, last paragraph, from "Russek suggested using the Commissioner's Office for the interactive room" to "Russek suggested using the Commissioner's Office for the computer training room."; Page 3, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence, should read "It was agreed to use the Commissioner's Office for the computer training room." Rose moved to accept the minutes with the corrections, seconded by Jude. Sawatzke questioned the necessity of having staff take such detailed minutes. Jude felt that during the early stages of the project, that detail was important for future reference. He said the Board chose to be an integral part of the process. Motion carried 5-0.
Dave Lindberg, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, requested approval of a Waterfowl Production Easement on the Jerald Durst property (216 acres). Lindberg explained that the easement agreement is recorded. lf the property is sold, the new owner must abide by the same rules and regulations as the current owner. On a motion by Sawatzke, second by Jude, all voted to approve the easement as presented.
Kevin Farnam, President of Wright County Soccer, explained that the group's purpose is to provide youth with a competitive traveling soccer league. The group is nonprofit and run by volunteers. Farnam said the Wright County Soccer group would like to apply for $18,500 in grant funds through the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission. In order to request the grant funds, the group must have a political organization to administer the funds. He envisioned the County's role being administrative (paperwork and assuring that funds are spent correctly). He did not foresee any cost to the County. Russek referenced the material which Farnam provided. The information stated that matching funds would be required. Jude made reference to the Economic Development's request recently before the Board to handle funds for their grant, which the Board did not act upon. He said the problem would be that many requests could come to the Board to handle grant funds. Farnam said he is working with the Delano School District already on the portion involving the Delano soccer field. After further discussion, Jude moved to take no action, seconded by Russek, carried unanimously. Farnam was given suggestions on how in-kind services could be used toward matching funds, other governmental bodies to contact, and possibly considering a smaller grant which would require no matching funds.
The 1998 Budget & Certified Levy Subsequent Hearing was held. A Truth In Local Taxation Hearing was held on 12-9-97 to discuss the proposed budget and certified levy for 1998. Rose moved to approve the minutes of the Hearing, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, stated that the County is required by the Department of Revenue to hold the Subsequent Hearing and the County Board can set, by resolution, the budget and certified taxable levy. Sawatzke said it was ironic that the Board turned away the request from the Wright County Soccer sports program because they do not become involved in nonprofit organizations, when the budget reflects $30,000 in funds toward nonprofit organizations. He wondered if the County was being consistent. Rose did not feel Economic Development, which adds tax base to the County, should be compared to other nonprofit groups. Russek said he had a problem with current business helping to finance competition. Jude said this issue could be debated, and that he was not happy with other portions of the budget. Rose moved to adopt Resolution #97-70, seconded by Russek, carried 3-2 on a roll call vote with Jude and Sawatzke casting the nay votes:
BE lT RESOLVED that the Wright County Board of Commissioners hereby establishes the 1998 budgets as follows:
General Revenue - $18,856,099
Road and Bridge - $14,738,683
Human Services - $13,426,800
GRRL - $ 955,712
Debt Service - $ 1,665,316
Lake Pulaski LID - $ 37,000
TOTAL BUDGET - $49,679,610
BE lT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Wright County Board of Commissioners hereby establishes the 1998 Certified Taxable Levy as follows:
General Revenue - $10,297,391
Road and Bridge - $ 2,264,092
Human Services - $ 4,648,000
GRRL - $ 955,712
Debt Service - $ 1,665,316
Lake Pulaski LID - $ 37,000
TOTAL - $19,867,511
Less: Homestead & Agricultural Credit Aid - $ 2,191,017
NET TAXABLE LEVY - $17,676,494
On a motion by Rose, second by Russek, all voted to adopt Resolution #97-71, Charitable Gambling Application, as submitted by the Lions Club of Cokato (Cokato Twp.).
A notice was received from AMC that FEMA is releasing to our State Division of Emergency Management (DEM) a number of travel trailers that were used as temporary housing during the spring floods. DEM has decided to give counties first opportunity to obtain them free of charge except for a small processing fee. Russek moved to deny the free trailers, as he said this was the recommendation from the Human Services Board, seconded by Sawatzke. Sawatzke said the majority of the Board felt this would be another task and another cost, and may be something that would not necessarily benefit the County. Motion carried 4-1 with Rose casting the nay vote.
On a motion by Sawatzke, second by Jude, all voted to set a Personnel Committee Of The Whole meeting for 12-22-97 at 1:30 P.M. The Agenda will be to discuss the Comparable Worth Plan to be submitted to the State of Minnesota based on data as of 12-31-97.
The Board recessed at 9:55 A.M. and reconvened at 10:05 A.M.
The next issue presented to the Board was the review of recommendations from the Feedlot Committee and John Shardlow of DSU, lnc. regarding County Ordinance changes. Wyman Nelson, County Attorney, gave a brief history on the efforts of the Feedlot Committee and Shardlow. The Feedlot Committee has come up with a draft ordinance for Board consideration; whereas, Shardlow has been retained to look at amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as it applies to uses in Wright County agricultural zones.
Shardlow explained he was asked to conduct a comprehensive reevaluation of the Wright County zoning districts. Shardlow read the purpose of the ordinance, "General Agricultural areas are established for the purpose of preserving, promoting, maintaining, and enhancing the use of land for commercial agricultural purposes, to prevent scattered leap-frog non-farm growth, to protect and preserve natural resource areas and to stabilize increases in public expenditures for such public services as roads and road maintenance, police and fire protection, and schools." He said that the Planning Commission and participants of the three issues workshops held throughout the County reaffirmed that this was the basic purpose of the Comprehensive Plan. He said the major goal of the Land Use Plan was "To protect agricultural lands from encroachment by incompatible uses, and provide assurances that such areas will remain agricultural in nature." Shardlow presented information on the Comprehensive Plan, the Community Issues Forums, Findings and Recommendations of the Ag Land Use & Zoning Study, Proposed Changes to the Zoning Ordinance, and New Sections added to the Zoning Ordinance.
Tom Salkowski, Planning & Zoning Administrator, expressed thanks to the Feedlot Committee, Kerry Saxton and Lee Raeth for their efforts since last February on the feedlot ordinance. The copy presented today was the 7th draft of the ordinance. Three important changes were made from the 6th draft, including 1) Change definition of a new feedlot to allow abandonment of existing lot for up to five years before new standards apply; 2) New section 6.006 allows variances and establishes procedures; and 3) Minimum size of operation requiring a feedlot permit raised from 10 to 50 animal units in non-shoreland areas. Salkowski said the draft ordinance was based on PCA regulations and partially on the Carver County ordinance. Regarding the first change, different standards apply to a new feedlot as opposed to the expansion of an existing feedlot. Carver County's ordinance states that once a feedlot is abandoned for one year and starts up again, it is treated as a new feedlot. PCA regulations are after five years. The Feedlot Committee suggests that a feedlot can be abandoned for up to 5 years and still be treated as an existing feedlot. After 5 years, it would be considered a new feedlot. Regarding the 2nd change relating to variances, the Committee recommended placing a variance section in the ordinance which will provide a procedure for the Board to issue variances after review. The 3rd change relates to animal units and the ordinance was changed from 10 animal units to 50 animal units allowed in shoreland areas, which complies with a new State law. Salkowski said the requirements to obtain a feedlot permit is exactly the same as is required by the State now. The primary change would be the permit would be acquired from the County and not the State. He said an issue that has arisen is that many believe that the Committee was formed only to look at the potential problems of factory farms. He felt that large farms in the County were one of the triggers which led to the establishment of the Committee, but the group was directed to look at feedlots in general. ln terms of larger feedlots, any feedlot over 1000 animal units is required by State rules to obtain a permit through the PCA. He said the County could outlaw these farms, but the Committee did not recommend doing so. The other problem the Committee encountered is that they could not come to resolution on the definition of a factory farm. There are several provisions limiting size and location beyond State standards. A CUP is required for anything over 300 animal units, and it is recommended that this be changed in the ag district only to 500 animal units. In the ag residential zone and residential districts, Salkowski said no expansion or new feedlots would be allowed. In land use districts designated ag/residential, a maximum of 300 animal units are allowed even if zoned ag. ln all residential districts, 200 maximum animal units are allowed through the expansion of an existing feedlot. No new feedlots or expansion will be allowed in major growth areas. Feedlots must meet setback requirements. A CUP is required for the expansion or for a new feedlot when it is located within a half mile of any city, with a maximum of 300 animal units for new feedlots. Existing feedlots will be allowed a maximum of 500 animal units within a half mile of any city. St. Michael and Otsego are excluded from this. He said it was not the intent to hassle small operations. No one is required to obtain a permit unless they are required by the State to have one. lf a farm has a State permit and the ordinance is adopted, the County will not require another one. lf they do not have a current State permit and should have, the intent of the Committee is to create a system to allow permitting at the County level rather than the State level.
Shardlow explained that one activity undertaken as part of the reevaluation was the digitizing of the zoning maps, which has not been completed yet. As the digitized maps are not yet available, Shardlow referenced maps which outlined the proposed establishment of a new zoning district. He referenced areas marked for a Waste Handling and Disposal District and provided a legal description of the same. The intent is to have the GIS maps incorporate digitized districts, where existing areas would be zoned. Any new uses would be required to apply for rezoning. The Waste Handling and Disposal District includes the existing Compost Facility, the existing Superior Landfill, and the two landfills in French Lake Township (Lindala and Mumford).
Jude said he was uncomfortable with the way the feedlot issue had progressed. He thought the Committee would be reviewing the large feedlots. He wondered if records would show cases where feedlots have not been cleaned up and should have been. He also questioned if there was a findings of fact document on feedlots. Salkowski responded that he was not aware of such a document. He said the issue was sent to the Feedlot Committee by the Board and the recommendations were being presented today. Committee members discussed State regulations vs. local control. The ordinance would provide the first two years of the program being the registration and inventory process. Jude felt that if the ordinance were implemented, the County is requiring people to come in and report. He felt a survey should be done to find out how much of a problem was out there. Russek stated that if there are less than 50 animal units and the feedlot is not in a shoreland area, registration would not be required. If there are more than 50 animal units, the State requires registration.
Nelson said there would be a number of actions the Board could take, especially in regard to the feedlot ordinance: 1)The matter could be referred to the Planning & Zoning Board (Planning Commission) for a hearing; 2) The Board could determine that further study is needed and could identify specific information to take action on relating to the feedlot ordinance; 3) A public hearing could be scheduled by the County Board; 4) The study could be dropped at this point. If dropping the study was elected, the Board would be required to cancel the moratorium relating to feedlot regulation.
Jude responded that he felt that more studies should be completed and that the Board should meet as a whole to discuss the direction of the issue. Rose said the County would not ask anyone to register a feedlot who is not already required to do so by the State. Jude said the State law has been in effect since 1970 and the State has not cracked down on the issue. The County would be taking over an unfunded mandate. Russek explained that it takes 1-2 years to obtain a permit from the MPCA whereas the County could speed the process up and issue permits in a couple of months. Anything over 1000 animal units must apply to the State. Jude agreed with that portion, but felt that reporting for 10 to 50 animal units was ridiculous. He felt that Metro Dairy triggered the review of this ordinance and now the whole County has become involved. Russek said an ordinance cannot be created for one person. lt has to involve everyone.
Rod McGilvrey, General Manager for FCR Superior Landfill, said he appreciated the concern by the Board for the protection of the environment and that this was their concern. He said they did not have chance to comment on the 2nd draft of the waste district, but comments were provided to Tom Salkowski on the first draft. He said the 1st draft was 30 pages short of the second draft. A copy of the second draft was received last week. He was concerned with duplication of efforts. As he read it, it would require the County to add additional staff to implement the ordinance. He felt the County did not have enough staff to complete the 5-Year Solid Waste Management Plan and if they could not meet those responsibilities, how could they meet additional ones. He also referenced the additional cost to the County. He felt it would add additional employees to oversee something that doesn't need, that amount of oversight. He said their landfill has been in existence since 1965. At one time it was unlined, with nothing being done at that time to protect the environment. Since then, permit requirements of the State have been met and things have been improved with respect to protecting the environment. He said they want to work and cooperate with the County to the greatest extent.
Nelson responded that during the period the amendments to the zoning ordinance were worked on, there was input received from FCR Superior Landfill. He requested that Shardlow comment on this. Nelson said they had access to the process and the ability to make recommendations. He said this was not the proper forum for a debate on the issues, that this should be done at the public hearing.
Shardlow clarified that the ordinance is two pages long and there are also performance standards. He referenced McGilvrey's suggestion that he was able to comment on the first draft and not the second one. Shardlow said McGilvrey's comments were directed to Salkowski and the performance standards were substantially modified to avoid any duplication of State standards. He said the document went to fewer pages as opposed to greater pages. The ordinance itself is two pages long.
Nelson said there are two separate ordinances that are being dealt with. One was an amendment to an existing ordinance. He felt the Board should consider the issues independently as to further handling. lt was the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Office, the Attorney's Office and Shardlow that the ordinance amendments to the existing zoning ordinance, as it applies to ag zones, be referred to the Planning & Zoning Board (Planning Commission) in the manner it was presented and with the legal description that encompasses the existing use.
Sawatzke moved to refer the proposed Wright County Zoning Ordinance changes to the Planning & Zoning Committee (Planning Commission) for the purpose of holding a separate evening public hearing to provide public input and recommendations. Salkowski is directed to come up with a date and to publish proper notice. Motion seconded by Russek. Jude wanted clarification on whether this would include the feedlot ordinance. Sawatzke responded that it would be only for the amendments to the zoning ordinance. There are some portions of the feedlot ordinance which contain zoning ordinance changes. Motion carried 4-1 with Jude casting the nay vote.
Jude moved to set a Committee Of The Whole meeting to discuss the feedlot issue to make recommendations and give further direction to the Feedlot Committee. Motion seconded by Rose. Jude felt the Board needs to send a more clear, defined direction on the issue. He thought this started as an issue relating to large dairy and now is down to 50 ducks. He thought there were a lot of unanswered questions. Rose did not feel the Board was as divided on the feedlot issue as indicated by public comment. She felt the issue should be discussed and laid to rest so the moratorium could be lifted. Sawatzke said he would not vote for the motion due to the efforts already expended by the Committee. He said they had made their recommendation and felt the process needed to be moved along. Jude felt there was not enough time spent on public input, that these meetings were held to fulfill an obligation. Russek said he sat on the Feedlot Committee for more than 20 meetings, and that the ordinance was reviewed very carefully. He was not in favor of sending it back to Committee. Sawatzke said the Attorney General's Office is asking the legislature to put a 1-2 year statewide moratorium on feedlots of 300-500 animal units so research can be done. This reaffirms that the County should be reviewing this issue. Rose said she seconded the motion because of Jude being vocal on the issue and that they were not in agreement on all issues. She did not want this being interpreted that she was unhappy with the work of the Feedlot Committee. Motion failed 1-4 (Rose, Sawatzke, Mattson and Russek voting nay). Russek moved to send the issue to the Committee Of The Whole to review and make recommended changes, and not to send this back to the Feedlot Committee. Motion seconded by Jude. At the request of Nelson, the motion and second were amended to state that the purpose was for further study and recommendation. Motion carried 5-0.
Abrahamson, Brian $158.10
Advanced Graphic Systems lnc. $226.34
Airtouch Cellular 830.56
Alliant Foodservice 1,270.96
Ameridata Service 590.49
Ameridata Systems lnc. 817.92
Annandale Advocate 252.45
Annandale Marine 451.00
Annandale, City of 1,263.18
Appert Foods 3,073.06
Arrowwood Radison Resort 306.72
Aspen Equipment Company 4,347.33
Barker Co.. Bob 374.81
Bauerly Brothers Companies 1,770.03
Betmar Languages lnc. 165.30
Bowman Distribution 162.58
Brinkmans Inc. 634.38
BRW Inc. 176.94
Buff 'n Glo lnc 181.20
Buffalo Hospital 343.50
Buffalo, City of 2,583.21
Bureau of Criminal Apprhsn 400.00
Central Tractor Farm & Ctry. lnc. 223.33
Chamberlain Oil Co. 1,404.02
Clemence, David 127.06
Cokato, City of 1,611.28
Computer Systems Products 2,617.25
Computer Training I'ntl lnc. 780.76
Copy Equipment lnc. 318.00
Cragg, H. M., Co. 250.00
Crow River Tools 219.28
Delano, City of 5,933.30
Ellis, Nila 172.05
Emergitek Corporation 1,606.75
Fleet Computing International 675.00
Fox Point Sportswear lnc. 167.53
G&K Services 725.65
Gary's Auto Service 213.00
Gateway 2000 1,274.81
Ge Capital lnfo. Tech Solutions 831.78
Going Under Dive Center 366.16
Granite Electronics 6,183.27
Greenview lnc. 540.80
Gregory's Foods lnc. 167.94
Hamann, Rueben L. 3,003.50
Hardings Towing 117.16
Howard Lake, City of 1,491.29
Hozempa, Donald J. 197.34
lntoximeters lnc. 1,422.84
JLM Telecommunications 366.40
Klatt True Value Electric 128.02
Lakeland Transmission 254.91
LaPlant Demo lnc. 267.35
Loberg Plmbg & Heating Co. 1,266.88
M-R Sign Company lnc. 1,062.00
Machining & Wldng by Olsen lnc. 106.05
Maple Lake Messenger 122.88
Maple Lake City of 1,024.23
Marco Business Products lnc. 411.08
Market Place, The 317.37
Midland Corporate Benefits Svc. 312.00
MN Counties Computer Co-Op 2,744.50
MN County Engineers Assn. 333.33
Monroe Systems 805.15
Monticello City 9,023.54
Monticello Times 578.98
Montrose, City of 572.79
Northern States Power Co 135.65
Northstar Repro. Products lnc. 621.26
Office Depot 629.15
Performance Computer Forms 560.39
Radisson Hotel South 286.52
Ray Allen Mfg. Co. lnc. 264.95
Renu lnternational Corporation 121.02
Rhodes, Marlene 314.88
Risk, Dr. Harold 150.00
Rose, Judie 156.02
Royal Tire (St. Cloud) 4,528.54
Russek, Jack D. 318.89
Schulte, Lawrence A. 827.74
Schulte's Greenhouse & Nrsry 2,467.85
Shade Tree 749.89
St. Cloud State University 464.00
Stratus Computer Inc. 1,770.00
Sweeney Brothers Tractor lnc. 1,198.03
Sysco Food Services of MN 2,408.33
Total Printing 1,794.27
Traffic Marking Service lnc. 100.00
Trueman Welters lnc. 2,237.08
Ultraseal lnternational lnc. 417.58
Uniforms Unlimited lnc. 1,338.48
USWest Communications 1,307.57
Weege Construction lnc. A & L 7,216.00
Westwood Professional Srvs lnc. 869.60
Winsted Publishing lnc. 536.91
Wright County Public Health 2,048.00
Wright-Hennepin Electric 863.00
Ziegler lnc. 40,972.68
50 claims under $100 $2,362.38
The County Board meeting adjourned at 10:25 A.M.
Dick Mattson, Chairperson
Richard W. Norman County Coordinator