Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Board of Supervisors - Minutes - 3/31/2009157 Minutes of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors’ Meeting Of March 31, 2009 – 6:00 p.m. Bayfield County Board Room, Courthouse, Washburn, Wisconsin The monthly meeting of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors was called to order by Chairman Kacvinsky at 6:03 p.m. Roll call was taken by Bayfield County Clerk, Scott Fibert as follows: Maki-absent; Kittleson-present; Blahnik-present; Kacvinsky-present; Beeksma-absent; Williams-present; Bichanich-present; Miller-present; Crandall-present; Rondeau-present; Good-present; Gordon-present; Jardine-present. Total: 13, 12 present, 1 absent, a quorum was present to conduct business. The motion carried. Others present were: County Administrator, Mark Abeles-Allison; County Clerk, Scott Fibert; Deputy County Clerk, Dawn M. Bellile; Tom Toepfer, Highway Commissioner; Mary Motiff, Tourism Director; Robert Lobermeier, County Conservationist; Elizabeth Skulan, Human Services Director, and area citizens. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all in attendance. A moment of silence was held in memory of Philip Gordon who was a former member of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, and brother to Supervisor, Thomas J. Gordon. 1. Motion Regarding Minutes of March 4, 2009 Bayfield County Board of Supervisors’ Meeting. A motion was made by Gordon/Rondeau to adopt the minutes of the March 4, 2009 Bayfield County Board of Supervisors’ Meeting. The motion carried. 2. Public Comment: a) David Thomas – Madeline Island. Thomas addressed the Board on Agenda Item #23 as it pertains to selling and/or leasing the Ag Station Property. He stated that he would like to see the Ag Station property kept public, and he reminded the Board at the several public meetings that were held, the public “strongly” supported it being kept public. He urged the Board not to sell the property off to the highest bidder. He urged the Board to follow the desire of the public to give the AERC proposal a chance to get the property back to what its original intent was for, agricultural purposes. Given economic times, give it a chance, if it works, you will see a lot of impact and local support. He doesn’t think you will be disappointed. b) Tom Galazen, Town of Bayfield. Galazen was present to comment on the Ag station issue. He stated he has been attending meetings for many years. A few years back now, there were very heated meetings regarding the University and the land. It was felt by the public that the facility should be run and retained by the University, and if not, it should be given back to the two counties. People involved at that stage, were somewhat instrumental in getting the land back to the counties. Don’t make a mistake by selling the land off. Once it is sold, you can’t get it back. He urged the Board to keep the land public and agricultural. c) Ken Raspotnik, Town of Eileen. He spoke from a proposal submitted by the Agriculture and Energy Resource Center (AERC). He made note of a few points from the proposal: AERC draws public support from its stated purpose of restoring the Ag Station to its original function for the public interest. AERC will maintain casualty and general liability insurance on all of the existing buildings, keep station hall open for public, keep it up, will cooperate with 4-H and other groups to utilize the hall for meetings, etc. (A copy of the proposal is in the County Clerk’s office for review). This is a win/win situation, please keep it in public ownership and support the AERC proposal. Chairman Kacvinsky asked if there was anymore public input and there was none. 158 3. Introduction of Judicial Candidate, Gene Linehan. Mr. Linehan had to cancel this evening due to the fact that a court trial he was in was running late and he would be unable to attend. He expressed his thank you to the Board, however, for allowing him the time to address the Board, and apologized for this inconvenience. 4. Presentation by William Lindsey Regarding Highways 2 & 13 “T Intersection.” Mr. Lindsey telephone earlier that he was unable to attend this evening’s meeting due to illness. A motion was made by Blahnik/Bichanich to receive and place on file the materials submitted by Mr. Lindsey Regarding the T Intersection. The motion carried. 5. Bayfield County Tourism Department Annual Report. Mary Motiff, Tourism Director, was present to give here report, which was done by power point presentation. She stated to the Board that an annual report has never been done before by her department. (A paper copy is available for review in the County Clerk’s office). Motiff explained the how and why the decision was made to break away from the current way the Visitor’s Guide was set up with Ashland and Bayfield County to Bayfield County being on its own. With this decision, we have focused on Bayfield County being a “destination point.” Motiff stated that what is new is we have a new identity, marketing plan which we have never had before, a new log/theme, visitor’s guide and a website. She also stated that plans have been made to distribute the Visitor’s Guide to the Twin Cities, the Hwy 29 Corridor, and our own immediate area. It is still self supporting and we have very good advertisement participation. Business owners are excited, and will give people a reason to see why they should stay longer. Motiff showed how the Tourism website interacts with the County’s website. Motiff stated that there is very good communication with everyone. The Board discussed with Motiff making sure our smaller towns are incorporated into the Guide for their “days” that they celebrate in each township. Just in reviewing the Guide, it was noted that they didn’t see anything for the Tri-County Corridor, and could she check on that. The Board complimented Motiff on a fine job she has done with the guide. A motion was made by Jardine/Kittleson to receive and place on file the draft copy of the 2009 Visitor & Recreation Guide. The motion carried. 6. Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-18, Honoring Earl Orner for his many years of Service to the Bayfield County Snowmobile Alliance. Motiff spoke on behalf of the Resolution. Earl passed away about 2 weeks ago after his battle with cancer. When she first came to work for Bayfield County she was told that if she wanted to know anything about the trails in Bayfield County that Earl was the person she should talk to – he knew them like the back of his hand. She stated that Earl was a former engineer with Honeywell. Earl spent thousands of hours on developing the trails in Bayfield County. Our trail system would not be what it is today if it wasn’t for Earl’s efforts. Earl was a private person and kept to himself quite a bit, even the fact of how ill he was. Chairman Kacvinsky read the Resolution, which reads as follows: WHEREAS, Earl Orner, 52220 Witch’s Bay Rd, Barnes, Wisconsin, served the Bayfield County Snowmobile Alliance with dedication and dignity for over twenty years; and WHEREAS, during that time, he served in various positions for the Bayfield County Snowmobile Alliance, the Governor’s Snowmobile Council, the Association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs and the Barnstormers Snowmobile Club; and WHEREAS, Earl’s engineering skills and attention to detail made him a great leader and spokesperson for the sport of snowmobiling. He spent countless hours to promote snowmobiling as a family sport and to preserve it for future generations. Earl was the driving force behind the grooming program that exists today and has been involved in every aspect of snowmobiling from designing bridges, trail development and attending snowmobile 159 related meetings to grooming and maintaining trails. Over his years of service, Earl gave thousands of hours of volunteer time directed to his involvements with the above listed organizations and was well liked and respected by all; and WHEREAS, Earl Orner passed away on March 8, 2009, while still serving as a Bayfield County Snowmobile Alliance Director and Vice-President of the Barnstormers Snowmobile Club; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors assembled this 31st day of March, 2009, hereby honor the memory of Earl Orner, for his twenty-plus years of dedicated service to Bayfield County; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution be sent to his family, and that this Resolution becomes part of the permanent records of Bayfield County. BAYFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS William D. Kacvinsky, John J. Blahnik, David L. Good, Thomas J. Gordon, Kenneth Jardine, Delores Kittleson, Shawn Miller, James Crandall, Wayne H. Williams, James Beeksma, Marco T. Bichanich, Brett T. Rondeau A motion was made by Beeksma/Jardine to adopt Bayfield County Resolution Nol. 2009-14, Honoring Earl Orner for over Twenty Years of Dedicated Service to the Bayfield County Snowmobile Alliance. The motion carried. 7. Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-14, Honoring Janice Blakeley upon her Retirement from the Bayfield County Forestry Department. Chairman Kacvinsky read the Resolution, which reads as follows: WHEREAS, Janice Blakeley has served Bayfield County with distinction, honor and dedication in the Property Lister/Tax Deed Office, County Clerk Office and Forestry Department for 21 years, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors assembled this 31st day of March, 2009, honors Janice Blakeley for her 21 years of public service to Bayfield County and expresses gratitude for her efforts, wishing her well in the years ahead. BAYFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS William D. Kacvinsky, John J. Blahnik, David L. Good, Thomas J. Gordon, Kenneth Jardine, Delores Kittleson, Shawn Miller, James Crandall, Wayne H. Williams, James Beeksma, Marco T. Bichanich, Brett T. Rondeau A motion was made by Gordon/Bichanich to adopt Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-14, Honoring Janice Blakeley upon her Retirement from the Bayfield County Forestry Department. The motion carried. 8. Presentation of Land & Water Conservation Department 2008 Annual Report. Robert Lobermeier, County Conservationist, was present to give his annual report to the Board. (A copy of the report is on file in the County Clerk’s office for review). Lobermeier stated that it has been 1½ years since Bayfield County has had its own Land & Water Conservation Department. He stated that it takes about 2 years to be where the department needs to be with all of the projects, both lined up and presently being worked on. Lobermeier informed the Board that he recently attended a Joint Financial Meeting in Eau Claire. He was able to speak to the Committee voicing his opinion to refund the base funding of $500,000 to the Land Conservation department, with the newest cuts, counties will loose approximately 4.2 million dollars.. We made the case with 150 people testifying and got through two points that we wanted to make. Supervisor Good stated, that this information was also presented at Superior Days, which seems to have fallen on deaf ears. At the Chairs and Mayors Meeting, he 160 had a chance to bring the issue up again, which seemed to interest the Governor. At the Joint Budget Committee Listening Session, held at the Ashland, High School, 91 people testified. There were other organizations that work indirectly with Bayfield County that showed their interest as well. Ash, Iron Bay speaking. Other organizations that also indirectly work with BC that showed their interest. Bayfield County is a leader “statewide” in addressing issues. Abeles-Allison stated that we need participation, and counties have been left out of the process. We would like to be at the table represented and make better ways in making cuts. In the meantime, we are stressing that DATCP needs to put the money back where they took it from, and find a new way in which to do their new programs. A motion was made by Good/Gordon to receive and place on file the Land & Water Conservation Department 2008 Annual Report. The motion carried. The Board thanked Lobermeier for his report. 9. Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-16, Application of Elizabeth J. Seipel for Farmland Preservation Agreement. Lobermeier informed the Board that there were a couple of changes to the Resolution as presented. He stated that 2 parcels should be removed: Section 35, NE¼-SE¼, PIN 028-1038-05, 6.71 acres and Section 35, SE¼-SE¼, PIN 028-1039-02, 7.28 acres. There is also a change to 4th item on list, it should be: Section 35, N½-SW¼-SE¼, PIN 028-1038-09, now 20 acres. The Board dispensed with the reading of the Resolution, which reads as follows: WHEREAS, Elizabeth J. Seipel has applied for a Farmland Preservation Agreement covering the following described parcels of real property located in Bayfield County, Wisconsin, Town of Keystone; more fully described as: Section 35 NE¼ of the SE¼ PIN 028-1038-05 6.71 acres REMOVED Section 35 NW¼ of the SE¼ PIN 028-1038-07 39.36 acres Section 35 SE¼ of the SE¼ PIN 028-1039-02 7.28 acres REMOVED Section 35 N½ SW¼ of the SE¼ PIN 028-1038-09 38.34 acres CHANGE Section 35 NE¼ of NE¼ of the SW¼ Part of PIN 028-1037-08 10 acres Section 35 NE½ of NW¼ of NE¼ the SW¼ Part of PIN 028-1037-08 5 acres WHEREAS, the intent of the Farmland Preservation Program is to: (1) Protect agricultural lands from development pressures; (2) To provide property tax incentives to landowners who keep land in agricultural production; and (3) To reduce soil erosion and improve water quality by requiring conservation plans for all program participants, and; WHEREAS, at the March 13, 2009 meeting of the Bayfield County Land and Water Conservation Committee this application for a Farmland Preservation Agreement was considered and approved, and WHEREAS, at the same meeting of the Bayfield County Land and Water Conservation Committee, they resolved and recommended that the Board of Supervisors of Bayfield County also approve this application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the above described application. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Clerk of Bayfield County is directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to the Bayfield County Conservationist who is, in turn, directed to forward the resolution and all application materials to DATCP and the State Land and Water Conservation Board for its consideration. 161 BAYFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS William D. Kacvinsky, John J. Blahnik, David L. Good, Thomas J. Gordon, Kenneth Jardine, Delores Kittleson, Shawn Miller, James Crandall, Wayne H. Williams, James Beeksma, Marco T. Bichanich, Brett T. Rondeau A motion was made by Good/Bichanich to adopt Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-16, Application of Elizabeth J. Seipel for Farmland Preservation Agreement. Discussion took place regarding the changes. The motion carried. 10. Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-17, Application of Timothy & Melissa Netz for Farmland Preservation Agreement. The Board dispensed with the reading of the Resolution, which reads as follows: WHEREAS, Timothy & Melissa Netz have applied for a Farmland Preservation Agreement covering the following described parcels of real property located in Bayfield County, Wisconsin, Town of Keystone; more fully described as: Section 35 S½ of NE¼ of SW¼ Part of PIN 028-1037-08 20 acres Section 35 S½ of NW¼ of NE¼ of SW¼ Part of PIN 028-1037-08 5 acres Section 35 SE¼ of the SW¼ PIN 028-1038-01 40 acres WHEREAS, the intent of the Farmland Preservation Program is to: (1) Protect agricultural lands from development pressures; (2) To provide property tax incentives to landowners who keep land in agricultural production; and (3) To reduce soil erosion and improve water quality by requiring conservation plans for all program participants, and; WHEREAS, at the March 13, 2009 meeting of the Bayfield County Land and Water Conservation Committee this application for a Farmland Preservation Agreement was considered and approved, and WHEREAS, at the same meeting of the Bayfield County Land and Water Conservation Committee, they resolved and recommended that the Board of Supervisors of Bayfield County also approve this application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors assembled this 31st day of March, 2009, hereby approves the above described application; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Clerk of Bayfield County is directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to the Bayfield County Conservationist who is, in turn, directed to forward the resolution and all application materials to DATCP and the State Land and Water Conservation Board for its consideration. BAYFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS William D. Kacvinsky, John J. Blahnik, David L. Good, Thomas J. Gordon, Kenneth Jardine, Delores Kittleson, Shawn Miller, James Crandall, Wayne H. Williams, James Beeksma, Marco T. Bichanich, Brett T. Rondeau A motion was made by Bichanich/Beeksma to adopt Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-17, Application of Timothy & Melissa Netz for Farmland Preservation Agreement. The motion carried. 11. Presentation by Michael Darrow, Project Manager with Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Regarding Status of Comprehensive Plan Efforts. Due to the weather, Mr. Darrow has had to cancel his appearance this evening. He asked that he be able to speak to the Board at their next meeting on April 21st. A motion was made by Blahnik/Rondeau to postpone Mr. Darrow’s Presentation. The motion carried. 12. Report of the Bayfield County Planning & Zoning Committee Regarding Amendments to Section 13-1-62, “Classification of Uses” and 13-1-64, “Town of Bayfield Overlay District” to the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance. It was explained that this Report was sent back to the Zoning Department for further clarification on what it is amending. The Board dispensed with the reading of the Report, which reads as follows: TO: The County Board of Supervisors of Bayfield County on the hearing of petitions to amend the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Committee of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, having held a public hearing pursuant to Section 59.69(5)(e), Wisconsin Statutes; notice thereof having been given as provided by law; and having been duly informed of the facts pertinent to the following changes; hereby recommends the following action on said petition: Amend the following permissible use in Section 13-1-62: PERMISSIBLE USES R4 R3 R1 R2 RRB C I A1 A2 F1 F2 W Signs – Town of Bayfield (See Town Overlay District 13-1- 64)*subject to 13.1-80 et seq. S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* Add the Following to Section 13-1-64 Town of Bayfield Overlay District (c) (2) Number and Size of Permitted Signs. Class Type Maximum Number Maximum Size (Square Feet) A On premise 2 50 per sign* B Off premise 2 50 per sign** B Multi-tenant 1 16 per sign*** Off premise B Agri-business directional 4 per sign**** Off-premise 2 * Except as provided in (4) ** No off premise signs shall be permitted along State Highway 13 other than those authorized by State law. *** Developments containing multi-businesses (commercial or industrial parks) or parcels with a structure designed for multi-business tenants shall be permitted to erect one (1) multi tenant sign not to exceed 14 feet in height and include a maximum of one (1) panel for each business with an area not to exceed 16 square feet. Each panel included in the multi tenant sign shall count as one 50 square foot on premise or off premise sign depending on sign location. Multi-tenant signs shall be limited to one per development or multi- tenant parcel. A multi-tenant sign may be located on a multi-tenant parcel or at the first common road intersection serving a multi-tenant business parcel or multi-business development site. 162 **** Agri-business signs shall be located at road intersections or points of common road entry to agricultural areas. The first sign placed will be required to obtain a Class B permit designating the location as an “agricultural sign mall”. Only businesses engaged in agricultural production and sales or the sale of processed agricultural products shall be allowed a sign at an “agricultural sign mall” location. Note: For purposes of this Section, two back-to-back faces on one sign structure constitute a single sign. (3) Off Premise Signs Off premise signs visible from the same road and located on the same side thereof, including signs advertising different businesses. products, etc., shall have a minimum separation distance of one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet between them. Multi-tenant signs, if off-premise, described in section 2 are exempt from the distance requirement. Date: December 18, 2008 BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE James Beeksma, Kenneth Jardine, Harold Maki, Shawn Miller, Brett Rondeau A motion was made by Rondeau/Good to receive and place on file the Report of the Bayfield County Planning & Zoning Committee Regarding Amendments to Section 13-1-62, “Classification of Uses” and 13-1- 64, “Town of Bayfield Overlay District” to the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance. The motion carried. 13. Bayfield County Zoning Amendatory Ordinance No. 2009-03, Regarding Amendments to Section 13-1-62, “Classification of Uses” and 13-1-64, “Town of Bayfield Overlay District” to the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance. It was explained that this Amendatory Ordinance was sent back to the Zoning Department for further clarification on what it is amending. The Board dispensed with the reading of the Ordinance, which reads as follows: The Bayfield County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: That the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance, adopted June 1, 1976, be and the same, is hereby amended as follows: Amend the following permissible use in Section 13-1-62: PERMISSIBLE USES R4 R3 R1 R2 RRB C I A1 A2 F1 F2 W Signs – Town of Bayfield (See Town Overlay District 13-1- 64)*subject to 13.1-80 et seq. S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* S-A or SB* Add the Following to Section 13-1-64 Town of Bayfield Overlay District (c) (2) Number and Size of Permitted Signs. Class Type Maximum Number Maximum Size (Square Feet) A On premise 2 50 per sign* B Off premise 2 50 per sign** 163 164 B Multi-tenant 1 16 per sign*** Off premise B Agri-business directional 4 per sign**** Off-premise 2 * Except as provided in (4) ** No off premise signs shall be permitted along State Highway 13 other than those authorized by State law. *** Developments containing multi-businesses (commercial or industrial parks) or parcels with a structure designed for multi-business tenants shall be permitted to erect one (1) multi tenant sign not to exceed 14 feet in height and include a maximum of one (1) panel for each business with an area not to exceed 16 square feet. Each panel included in the multi tenant sign shall count as one 50 square foot on premise or off premise sign depending on sign location. Multi-tenant signs shall be limited to one per development or multi- tenant parcel. A multi-tenant sign may be located on a multi-tenant parcel or at the first common road intersection serving a multi-tenant business parcel or multi-business development site. **** Agri-business signs shall be located at road intersections or points of common road entry to agricultural areas. The first sign placed will be required to obtain a Class B permit designating the location as an “agricultural sign mall”. Only businesses engaged in agricultural production and sales or the sale of processed agricultural products shall be allowed a sign at an “agricultural sign mall” location. Note: For purposes of this Section, two back-to-back faces on one sign structure constitute a single sign. (3) Off Premise Signs Off premise signs visible from the same road and located on the same side thereof, including signs advertising different businesses. products, etc., shall have a minimum separation distance of one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet between them. Multi-tenant signs, if off-premise, described in section 2 are exempt from the distance requirement. Dated: March 31, 2009 By Action of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors Attested to by: Scott S. Fibert, Bayfield County Clerk A motion was made by Gordon/Good to adopt Bayfield County Zoning Amendatory Ordinance No. 2009-03 Regarding Amendments to Section 13-1-62, “Classification of Uses” and 13-1-64, “Town of Bayfield Overlay District” to the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance. The motion carried. 14. Appointment of Bob Lulich to the Comprehensive Planning Committee to Fulfill the Unexpired Term of Dalton Collins. A motion was made by Bichanich/Williams to appoint Bob Lulich to the Comprehensive Planning Committee to fulfill the unexpired term of Dalton Collins. The motion carried. 165 15. Appointment of Bill Bruen to the Northern Waters Library Board of Trustees. It was discussed that he presently serves on the Iron River Library Board. The term on the Northern Waters Library Board will expire in 2011. A motion was made by Jardine/Crandall to appoint Bill Bruen to the Northern Waters Library Board of Trustees. The motion carried. 16. Appointment of Brett Rondeau and Jim Nemec to the Regional Trail Group. Rondeau explained that it is the desire of the group that one County Board or County Employee be in the Group as well as one citizen member “at large.” This Group is newly formed and it will be meeting in Spooner as it is the central place for all members to congregate. A mot on was made by Blahnik/Good to appoint Brett Rondeau and Jim Nemec to the Regional Trail Group. The motion carried. Rondeau stated that he will keep the Board informed as to what transpires at these meetings. i 17. Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-15, Amending the Bayfield County Bridge Aid Policy. Tom Toepfer, Highway Commissioner, was present to speak on the contents of the Resolution and what it would mean in the future for the bidding process. The Board dispensed with the reading of the Resolution, which reads as follows: WHEREAS, in accordance with §82.08 Bayfield County currently provides cost sharing with Towns for culvert replacement, and WHEREAS, current County Policy limits aid to culverts greater than 6’ in diameter, and WHEREAS, it would be of benefit to Towns and the safety of the motoring public to provide aid for culverts from 36” to 6’, and WHEREAS, the anticipated cost of labor, equipment and materials will be less when provided by County Personnel than that which could be expected through the competitive bidding process, and WHEREAS, the County is currently properly staffed and equipped to satisfactorily perform the proposed work; WHEREAS, §66.0301(2) encourages intergovernmental cooperation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors assembled this 31st day of March, 2009, approves the work for the Town culverts between 36” and 72”, at the discretion of the Highway Committee, will qualify for Bridge Aid cost sharing if installed by County Personnel. BAYFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS William D. Kacvinsky, John J. Blahnik, David L. Good, Thomas J. Gordon, Kenneth Jardine, Delores Kittleson, Shawn Miller, James Crandall, Wayne H. Williams, James Beeksma, Marco T. Bichanich, Brett T. Rondeau A motion was made by Blahnik/Bichanich to adopt Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-15, Amending the Bayfield County Bridge Aid Policy. Discussion took place on the wording and the impact it would have on private contractors vs. the highway department. This Resolution is coming to the Board with the Highway Committee’s recommendation for approval. It was noted prior to voting, that Supervisors Blahnik and Kittleson will not be able to vote as the City of Washburn does not have bridge aid. This having been said, Blahnik removed his motion since he felt that he probably could not make the motion either. Bichanich removed his second. 166 ll ll ; A motion was made by Bichanich/Jardine to adopt Bayfield County Resolution No. 2009-15, Amending the Bayfield County Bridge Aid Policy. A ro ca vote was taken as follows: Kittleson-abstained; Blahnik- abstained; Kacvinsky-no; Beeksma-yes; Williams-yes; Bichanich-yes; Miller-no; Crandall-yes Rondeau-yes; Good-no; Gordon-yes; Jardine-yes; Maki-absent. Total: 13; 7 yes, 3 no, 2 abstentions, 1 absent. The motion carried. 18. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Second Chance Act Prisoner Re-Entry Grant Application. Abeles-Allison reported that the Criminal Justice Program is considering and also recommending that Bayfield County apply for this transitional program. A brief discussion took place and a motion was made by Crandall/Gordon to have the Bayfield County Board Chair sign the application for the Second Chance Act Prisoner Re-Entry Grant. The motion carried. 19. Discussion and Possible Action To Approve Accessibility Improvement Project Bid for Elevator Construction. Abeles-Allison explained and went over the bids and options that were received. He is recommending Option #4 to the Board, which would be to: Install new elevator outside the Register of Deed’s office, build a new stairway, renovate downstairs office space, fix up alternate stairway and make improvements to hallway/offices where AD is now. The estimated cost is $225,000 with contingency. The revenue funds where this will be received are: $75,000 Bremer Grant (for accessibility improvement); $125,000 Human Services ADRC allocation from 2008; and $41,000 from capital improvements. The expenditures would be: $198,000 construction; $5,000 signage and furniture; $22,000 contingency; $10,000 engineering; $1,000 permits for a total of $236,000. Elizabeth Skulan, Human Services Director, was also present to answer questions the Board had for her. Discussion took place on using the elevator we now, taking out the lift, reutilizing the space where the lift is, how many people will actually use the new elevator, and elderly walking through the present corridors. A motion was made by Gordon/Crandall to approve Elevator Option #4 as recommended not to exceed $236,000. Discussion took place and a roll call vote was taken as follows: Blahnik-yes; Kacvinsky-yes; Beeksma-yes; Williams-yes; Bichanich-yes; Miller-yes; Crandall-yes; Rondeau-yes; Good-yes; Gordon-yes Jardine-no; Maki-absent; Kittleson-yes; Total: 13; 11 yes, 1 no, 1 absent. The motion carried. ; The Board took a 15 minute recess at 7:45 p.m. and reconvened at 8:00 p.m. 20. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Selling or Leasing Ag Station Property Discussed at Ad-Hoc Meeting on March 11, 2009. The Ad-Committee received 3 proposals for the Ag Station Property and they felt the proposals should go to the County Board for discussion and possible action as the Ad-Hoc Committee does not have the authority to sell or lease the property. Abeles-Allison updated the Board with the how the notification for bids took place, the specific criteria, etc. We received 3 proposals back from: Ashland Development, Brick Ministries and (AERC) Agriculture Energy Resource Center. Discussion on Northwest Regional Planning’s part in this venture. Summary of Northwest Regional Planning was hired to do a study of the parcel. The property in question is zoned both commercial and agriculture. A study is being looked at for an estimated value to furnish to both Ashland and Bayfield Counties. The estimated infrastructure on site which is for water and sewer is approximately 1.1 million dollars. Alternatives were discussed on how to bring in water, if needed, to the site. The infrastructure was discussed further regarding the septic system. Both water and sewer for both homes and conference center have been working. It is a substantial system. There haven’t been any major problems, but there is concern due to its age and a lot more usage. 167 t i . t An environmental assessment was done from Northern Environmental. There were no particular concerns. The reports for these concerns are also in the Boards’ packets. Further discussion on the fact that 50 acres was designated as conservancy, which prohibits any construction but not farming. Discussion then turned toward how much we get for rent for the houses, land and storage buildings versus how much time is spent at the station. It was noted that the renters are keeping everything up for the most part. The counties pay for the heating and electricity and the renters pay in one lump sum. Discussion then took place on what each proposal had in mind for the property. After a lengthy discussion of whether to sell or lease the property or whether Bayfield County should buy Ashland County’s share of the Ag Station. Negotiations need to be reached between person leasing and the 2 Counties as to what would be expected, who is responsible for what, etc., there have to be safeguards. The Ashland County Board will be meeting on April 21st and this same information and proposals will be on their agenda. No matter what is decided, both Counties have to be unanimous in the decision. The Board discussed the possibility of seeing whether or not Ashland County would be interested in selling their half to Bayfield County. This would make the matter of leasing that much easier to have one County the sole proprietor. The property in question is in Bayfield County. It was suggested that it would be beneficial to have both the Ashland and Bayfield County Executive Committees meet to discuss the option of Bayfield County purchasing the property. It was decided that Abeles-Allison would explore this option and get back to the Board. After a more discussion, a motion was made by Good/Williams to communicate to Ashland County that Bayfield County will retain their portion of the property and ownership of the Agricultural S ation, and explore some sort of single or multi-lease agreement, not to exceed five years. A roll call vote was taken as follows: Kacvinsky-yes; Beeksma-yes; Williams-yes; Bichanich-yes; Miller-no; Crandall-yes; Rondeau-yes; Good-yes; Gordon-yes; Jardine-yes; Maki-absent; Kittleson-yes; Blahnik-yes. Total: 13; 11 yes, 1 no, 1 absent. The motion carried. A mot on was made by Good/Miller to move into Executive Session pursuant to §19 85(1),(e), for the purpose of deliberating or negotiating the purchasing of public properties, the investing of public funds, or conducting other specified public business, whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session: A roll vote was taken as follows: Beeksma-yes; Williams-yes; Bichanich-yes; Miller-yes; Crandall- yes; Rondeau-yes; Good-yes; Gordon-yes; Jardine-yes; Maki-absent; Kittleson-yes; Blahnik-yes; Kacvinsky- yes. Total: 13; 12 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. The motion carried. A motion was made by Gordon/Beeksma to move out Executive Session pursuant to §19.85(1),(e), for the purpose of deliberating or negotia ing the purchasing of public properties, the investing of public funds, or conducting other specified public business, whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session: A roll vote was taken as follows: Williams-yes; Bichanich-yes; Miller-yes; Crandall-yes; Rondeau- yes; Good-yes; Gordon-yes; Jardine-yes; Maki-absent; Kittleson-yes; Blahnik-yes; Kacvinsky-yes; Beeksma- yes. Total: 13; 12 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. The motion carried. 21. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Options for Ag Station Property Proposals. Chairman Kacvinsky stated to the public that no decision was made and that there will not be any action this evening. 22. Administrator’s Report: a) Reminder of the April 21st County Board Meeting at 6:00 pm. meeting date, set by State Statute; 168 b) Reminder of the “Special” May 11th County Board Meeting at 4:00 p.m. c) Homeland Security Report: The Sheriff’s Department is working with the Border Patrol as it relates to the 4 counties that border Lake Superior. d) Update on State Budget Hearing: This was reported on earlier by Supervisor Good and Robert Lobermeier, County Conservationist in his report. e) Update on Forest Administrator’s Retirement and Position Replacement. Paul Lundberg has announced that he will be retiring on June 12th. It is our goal to have Forestry Committee to have met and to have made a recommendation for the County Board meeting on May 26th . f) Clean Sweep Program Update: The Governor’s new budget eliminates the clean sweep program. Tim Kane may have testified at one of the hearings. In prior years, we had received $100,000 to have 4 pickups in the county. Without the funding there is some question as to number of pickups we will be able to afford. This program is vital to our area. Discussion also took place on considering a small charge on this program to help offset the costs. Bayfield County contributes approximately $8,500 towards the program. It was discussed that the County Board prepare a resolution to the Governor in support of reinstating the Clean Sweep Program. 23. Supervisors’ Reports: a) Chairman Kacvinsky stated that there was a plaque from the Birkie Foundation thanking the Board for support. There being no further business to come before the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, a motion was made by Gordon/Rondeau to adjourn. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectively submitted, Scott S. Fibert, Bayfield County Clerk