SPECIAL MEETING OF THE KOOCHICHING COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Held on Tuesday, January 9, 2001; 10:10 a.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck

MEMBERS ABSENT: None

OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Lehtinen, Raoul Lufbery, Bob Peterson, Doug Grindall, Carl Bowman, Richard Koeneman, Terry Glowack, Ed Oerichbauer, Einar Sundin, Gary Johnson, David Johnson; Reporters Laurel Beager and Roger Jerome

2001/01-15 Motion by McBride, seconded by Pavleck to approve the agenda with additions and deletions. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

2001/01-16 Motion by Lepper, seconded by Chezick to approve the minutes of the January 2, 2001 regular meeting. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

2001/01-17 Motion by Lepper, seconded by McBride to approve payment of the Auditor bills in the amount of $140,646.11 to include $65.00 of non-board expense and to authorize Board Chair’s signature to the Auditor’s December vendor payment listing verifying its review. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

2001/01-18 Motion by Pavleck, seconded by Chezick authorizing a line item adjustment to the 2001 Telephone Budget as follows: Code 01-061.6203 ($14,919), Code 01-061.6411 +$700, Code 01-061.6660 +$14,219. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

000 The Board was presented a contract from Ayres Associates to prepare preliminary and final design plans and specifications for the Jackfish Bay Wastewater Collection Project in the amount of $230,000. The Environmental Service Director stated that the Attorney for the Jackfish Bay Project has reviewed and approved the contract. To date the County has committed $25,000 for a feasibility study and $44,700 for survey and mapping and there is still no guarantee that the project will proceed as they are short $1 million to reach a cost of $50 per household. The Director also informed the Board that there is opposition to the project by some residents, including a group of residents in south Jackfish Bay. The project could still move forward if this area was excluded but sewer could not be extended to properties beyond south Jackfish as originally planned. If the Board approves this contract, they will have committed $299,700 to the project and as before, approval is contingent on the funds being repaid if the project goes through. The Jackfish Sewer Advisory Group has submitted a grant application for a maximum of $500,000 to the Corps of Engineers for federal dollars for infrastructure improvements in northeastern Minnesota and they anticipate an answer by the end of January. With the State dollars approved for the project, cost per household is $85.00. If successful in obtaining the $500,000 grant, cost per household will be between $85.00 and the $50.00 household target. Commissioner Chezick stated that he expected the monies committed by the County to date to provide a better position on the success of the project. He is uncomfortable with committing this large sum without absolutes on cost and residents’ support and asked what the timeline was for the project. Mr. Lufberry stated that the group’s goal is to keep the proposed area intact but if the area in south Jackfish Bay is dropped, they were told the project cost would decrease because of the price of the line and amount of rock in the area. With regards to the timeline, the State grant and loan dollars are guaranteed to December 31, 2001 which means that the project plan needs to be State certified by this date. To meet the State’s certification timeline, the plan needs to be submitted by August or September. Mr. Lufberry also informed the Board that the next meeting of the advisory group is scheduled for January 23, 2001 and welcomed their attendance. Commissioner Pavleck understood the Board’s reluctance to commit this amount of County dollars without a guarantee, however, the County is looking at an opportunity to bring a large area of the County into compliance with regards to wastewater treatment requirements. The $50 household cost is based on what it would cost a household to install the mound system required under current State law. The Board would like letters sent to the affected property owners providing them cost information and requesting their feedback and position on the project. The Board reviewed the proposed contract with Ayres Associates to determine a way to continue support without committing a large sum of dollars until more information is acquired. A motion to table the item until the next Board meeting failed for a lack of a second. The Board discussed the impact of delaying action on the contract. If they delay the work then they run the chance of missing the State’s certification deadline and losing the State dollars. If they move forward, they run the chance of expending County funds and finding at a later date that the project will not move forward. The added agenda item to adjust the 2001 Budget with approval of the Ayres Contract was deferred until a later date.

2001/01-19 Motion by McBride, seconded by Chezick to authorize Ayres Associates to proceed with the preliminary engineering work for the Jackfish Bay Wastewater Collection Project within the amount quoted in their service contract of $85,300 with reimbursement back to the County from project funds should the system be implemented and further, directing the Environmental Service Director to report back to the Board on February 6, 2001 with more information on the project’s cost, funding, support and plan and certification status at which time the Board will consider further authorization of services. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

000 The Board Chair opened a public hearing at 11:10 a.m. (scheduled at 10:30 a.m.) for the purpose of receiving public comment on the County’s intent to vacate portions of old CSAH 5 that are no longer used for highway purposes. The Highway Engineer reviewed the request as initiated by his department. The Board reviewed written comment received by John Desotell requesting ditch improvements. The Highway Engineer stated that the ditch issue was not pertinent to the vacation and that the ditch was always in existence as a natural drain and the Department has worked in the past with Mr. Desotell on ditch improvements. He stated that he would contact Mr. Desotell to see what can be done with his ditch concerns. Other comment received was that Dale Hirt was the adjoining property owner that would greatly benefit from the vacation. The Board Chair opened the hearing to public comment. No oral comment was received from the public or from Board members. The public hearing was closed at 11:16 a.m.

2001/01-20 Motion by Pavleck, seconded by Lepper that upon receiving no opposition, to approve vacation of portions of the original alignment of CSAH 5 that are no longer used for highway purposes described as follows: Vacation #1: Beginning at a point located approximately 1,100 feet west of the northeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, Section 7, Township 63 North, Range 26 West, Koochiching County, Minnesota on the center line of old CSAH 5; thence southeasterly, along the center line of old CSAH 5, approximately 2,550 feet to the intersection with the right-of-way line lying 75 feet southwesterly of and adjacent to the new CSAH 5 center line and there terminating; Vacation #2: Beginning at a point located approximately 407 feet west of the northeast corner of Section 17, Township 63 North, Range 26 West, Koochiching County, Minnesota at the intersection of the right-of-way line lying 55 feet northerly of and adjacent to the new CSAH 5 center line and the center line of old CSAH 5; thence easterly and southerly, along the center line of old CSAH 5, approximately 650 feet to the intersection with the right-of-way line lying 65 feet northeasterly of and adjacent to the new CSAH 5 center line and there terminating; Vacation #3: Beginning at a point located approximately 506 feet south of the northeast corner of Section 17, Township 63 North, Range 26 West, Koochiching County, Minnesota at the intersection of the right-of-way line lying 55 feet southwesterly of and adjacent to the new CSAH 5 centerline; thence south, along the center line of old CSAH 5, approximately 840 feet to the intersection with the right-of-way line lying 55 feet westerly of and adjacent to the new CSAH 5 center line and there terminating. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

000 The Board Chair opened a public hearing at 11:20 a.m. (scheduled at 11:00 a.m.) to received public comment on the proposed Five-Year CSAH Construction Plan as presented by the Highway Engineer for 2001 through 2005. The Highway Engineer reviewed the proposed plan for the Board and the public. Commissioner Pavleck appreciated the aggressive work plan as laid out by the Engineer but stated his concerns with grouping all the overlay work into large contracts as it entices large contractors from out of the area to bid the work, leaving our local contractors out of competitive bidding. The Highway Engineer stated that the County receives better prices when the contracts are bid this way and that he also has to consider current year funding availability as well as having inspection personnel to cover all the jobs. The Highway Engineer stated that the contracts as proposed in the plan would be combined based on projects within the same area. Commissioner Hanson shared the same concerns of locking out local contractors from bidding the projects and requested that the projects be broke down and spread out. Written comment was received from Boise Cascade requesting that work on the CSAH 29 Ray Bypass Project be expedited as it services their landfill and timber supply and requested bridge improvements for the same reasons. The Board Chair opened the hearing for public comment: Carl Bowman asked if the grading for the Gold Shores Project was planned for 2001 and the paving for 2002? The Highway Engineer stated that this was the proposed plan. Mr. Bowman asked if the Gold Shores Project would be one or two contracts? The Engineer stated that work was just beginning on the project and could not say at this time if it would be let as one or two contracts. Mr. Bowman suggested that the Gold Shores Project be let as one contract. With regards to the other projects, he shares the same concerns as Commissioners Pavleck and Hanson as he employees up to 20 individuals and would like to keep them working. If the County continues to bid large contracts, outside contractors will out bid local contractors and eventually you won’t have local contractors. Also, the proposed plan has no paving work planned for 2001 and has a large amount targeted for 2002. Mr. Bowman asked about the milling projects for 17th and 11th Streets and the Engineer stated that if milling did not need to be done, that portion of the projects would be dropped. Richard Koeneman reiterated the same concerns as a local contractor and requested that the projects be spread out to allow local contractors to compete in the bidding process. Commissioner Pavleck stated that he is a protectionist of local jobs and he wants to see jobs let so local contractors can compete for the work. The Engineer stated that if we spread out the jobs he would be short personnel to cover the work and will need to discuss the issue with the Union. Commissioner Pavleck hoped the plan could be revised without having to contract work out. Commissioner Chezick stated concerns he received on the number of stop signs on 11th Street and that traffic is now funneling down 10th street as a cross-town road. With no further comment, the Board Chair closed the public hearing at 11:55 a.m. The Board agreed to defer action on the proposed plan until the February 6, 2001 meeting to allow the Board and Engineer time to consider the comments received.

2001/01-21 Motion by Lepper, seconded by McBride authorizing the Highway Engineer to call for bids for a motor grader with bids called on February 5, 2001. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Pavleck; absent for vote: Chezick. Motion carried.

2001/01-22 Motion by McBride, seconded by Lepper authorizing the Highway Engineer to call for bids for a two-year beaver trapping contract with bids called on February 5, 2001. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Pavleck; absent for vote: Chezick. Motion carried.

2001/01-23 Motion by Lepper, seconded by McBride authorizing the Highway Engineer to call for annual fuel bids with bids called on February 5, 2001. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper; absent for vote: Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

2001/01-24 Motion by Lepper, seconded by McBride to add the sale of right-of-way on the Ray North Road (CSAH 3) to the agenda. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper; absent for vote: Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

2001/01-25 Motion by Lepper, seconded by McBride authorizing internet and e-mail hookup in the Highway Department for two workstations. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper; absent for vote: Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

000 The Highway Engineer informed the Board that he received two bids on the sale of the 1.5 acres of right-of-way on the Ray North Road (CSAH 3) and that the property was appraised at $450. The Highway Engineer recommends the high bid of $1,211.00

2001/01-26 Motion by Lepper, seconded by McBride accepting the high bid of $1,211.00 from Ladd Kocinski for the 1.5 acres of right-of-way on the Ray North Road. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick; absent for vote: Pavleck. Motion carried.

000 The Complex Superintendent provided the Board a cost estimate from a consulting engineer (as requested by the Board) to assess an assumed bearing wall to see if it would support a service window for the Court Office. Cost to assess the wall is not to exceed $1,500 and another $3,000 to $5,000 would be needed to draft a design plan for the window. The Complex Superintendent stated that no one knows what to expect if they open the wall. Based on his initial assessment, the drill popped right through the wall and the material crumbled, which gave him the impression that the wall is not stable enough to support a service window. The Board asked the Superintendent to contact the City’s building inspector and any other resources to provide assistance in this matter. The Coordinator was instructed to set another committee meeting with the Board and Judge to further discuss this issue.

000 The Complex Superintendent provided the Board a construction cost estimate from MacDonald & Mack Architects for historical renovation of the third floor courtroom in the amount of $150,000. The construction plan included six recommended work items not included in the price. Commissioners Chezick and Pavleck stated that carpet should be limited to only those places that are not visible and mats should be used to protect the floor in high traffic areas. In addition, they want to wait on adding carpet and curtains to improve acoustics until after the original renovation is completed. The Complex Superintendent recommended that the additional six items also be done, especially the work on the benches. Historical Society Director Ed Oerichbauer stated that this project should be set up in two phases over a two-year period. Commissioner Chezick stated that heating and air exchange for the room has not been addressed. The Complex Superintendent stated that it was determined the room would have to have its own air circulation unit as it could not be connected to the LEC system. With regards to heat, he would need to purchase radiators and have them installed. Historical Director Oerichbauer stated that the State Historical Society’s pre-application deadline for seeking grant funds is January 27, 2001 and that the heating and cooling cost should be acquired and included in the two-year two-phase project. The Board agreed to have the Complex Superintendent and Historical Society Director obtain a cost estimate on heating and cooling systems for the room and work it into the grant application. Per the Historical Director, the pre-application is due by January 27, the actual grant application is due in March and if approved, grant funds would be released sometime after April. It was agreed to place this item on the agenda for the January 16, 2001 meeting for further action as needed.

000 The Board Chair called for public comment at 12:40 p.m. No public comment was presented.

000 Commissioners Chezick and Pavleck, representing the Board in establishing a cooperative agreement with the National Park Service for a joint management council, stated that the group had its first organizational meeting last week and that they had reached impasse on some issues so agreed to bring in a mediator to help the group move forward. St. Louis County representatives did not attend this meeting but were brought up to date.

000 AFSCME Representative Gary Johnson approached the Board requesting his presence in the closed session if the complaints to be discussed were about unit members. The County Attorney advised the Board that if other individuals were going to be allowed in the session, than the meeting remain open to the public.

2001/01-27 Motion by Chezick, seconded by Pavleck to close the meeting at 2:07 p.m. to hear complaints respective to the Community Service Agency. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

2001/01-28 Motion by Pavleck, seconded by Lepper to open the meeting at 4:10 p.m. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.

000 The Board Chair instructed that another closed session to further investigate complaints filed against the KCCS Directorship be scheduled for January 16, 2001.

2001/01-29 Motion by McBride, seconded by Lepper to adjourn the meeting at 4:10 p.m. Voting yes: Hanson, McBride, Lepper, Chezick, Pavleck. Motion carried.