TO:
FR: Bruce M. Boyce,
RE: Board of
AGENDA
County
(All times approximate)
Persons providing handouts
are asked to bring enough copies for the Board, county staff, the press and the
public. Generally,
15 copies should be
sufficient.
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Agenda
Committee and Meeting
Reports
Correspondence
Discussion of Bills
Department Head Time
- Consent
Agenda:
- Approval of Minutes
- Approval of Bills
- Sheriffs Boat/Water Grant
- Office Support Specialist Hiring
- Financial Worker Hiring
- Deputy Hiring
- Ethanol Property Condemnation
- Availability at Board Meetings
- County Auditor Items-
- CD 44 and Dollar General
Corporation- update
- CD 44 and CD 18 Redetermination
of Benefits
- Coordinator Items
- Draft RFP- Compensation And Classification
- Brattrud Ground Lease Report
- OSA
Mandate Reform Resolution
- NACo
Transport Option
OTHER COUNTY BOARD BUSINESS
Adjournment
Lunch at New
BMB: mlw
WASECA
The Waseca
County Board of
Others
present were
Ruhland moved and Androli
seconded the motion to approve the minutes of
Androli moved and Peterson seconded the motion to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
The commissioners shared information from the meetings and committees attended.
Bidder Name Bid Amount
Crane Creek Asphalt $2,243,673.48
Duininck Brothers, Inc. $2,645,851.60
SMC $1,840,472.93
Ulland Brothers, Inc. $1,940,845.85
Peterson moved and Androli seconded the motion to award the bid to SMC for an amount of $1,840,472.93. The bids came in $170,000 over the engineers estimate so the commissioners discussed sources to cover the overage. The source of the money over budget will be decided at a future meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Androli introduced the following resolution and moved for its adoption. Peterson seconded the motion and it was adopted by the unanimous vote of all members present. AMC supports this resolution for motor vehicle sales tax revenue. The constitutional amendment will appear on the November, 2006 ballot. It will ask the voters to dedicate 100% of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax to transportation and transit.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS, too many Minnesotans are being killed in traffic crashes on dangerous roadways;
WHEREAS,
funding for highway and transit systems in
WHEREAS, local governments throughout the state are struggling to maintain local transportation systems while the state’s gas tax has not been increased since 1988 and transit budgets have been cut in recent years;
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature has repeatedly turned to revenue from the motor vehicle sales tax, which has been viewed as user fee revenue, in order to fund both highway and transit systems including the current dedication of 54% of motor vehicle sales tax for transportation purposes;
WHEREAS, the legislature passed a proposed constitutional amendment during the 2005 Legislative Session that would appear on the ballot November 7, 2006 asking voters if the remaining 46% of motor vehicle sales tax revenue currently used for other purposes should be used for highways and transit systems;
WHEREAS, passage of this amendment would mean an increase in stable revenue for highway and transit systems throughout the state that would rise to approximately $300 million per year once the transfer of revenue is fully phased-in by 2011;
NOW
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Waseca County Board of
Androli moved and Ruhland seconded the motion to authorize the chairperson to sign a contract for cost allocation services for 2005 to MAXIMUS in the amount of $3,724.00/year. Motion carried unanimously.
Ruhland moved and Androli
seconded the motion to authorize the chairperson to sign a contract with
Phoenix Group Homes,
Androli moved and Ruhland
seconded the motion to enter into a purchase of services contract with Waseca
Community Education for a .5 FTE instructor for the Work Ready program from
Marilee
introduced a draft of a
Androli moved and Peterson seconded the motion to approve the concept of the county contributing to the integrated fund of the Waseca County Collaborative for Families. More discussion will take place at the collaborative meeting in March and Marilee will know more about the collaborative future after that date. Motion carried unanimously.
Marilee presented her Director’s Report. She talked about the MN Family Investment Program/Children and Community Services Act plan for 2006-07; possible training through Criminal Justice Initiative Program; discussion of transportation project with Region 9 and the Le Sueur County project and discussion of the federal budget reconciliation project.
Bruce discussed the pay equity study. He requested comments from the board in drafting a RFP. He will return at a later meeting with a draft of a RFP.
Peterson
moved and Androli seconded the motion to authorize
the chairperson to sign an agreement with
The board
will approve
Bruce informed the board that the EQB approved the release of the ag preservation covenant on the land for the construction of the ethanol site.
The Winter Warm-up was postponed due to bad weather. The commissioners would like to re-schedule to Thursday, March 9th.
A letter from Nancy Prehn was read to the board.
Androli moved and Ruhland
seconded the motion to approve the Auditor, Commissioner,
Androli moved and Ruhland
seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting at
S/_____________________________________
Waseca
ATTEST:
S/_________________________________
The following bills were audited and allowed:
ACCLAIM BENEFITS 1,045.10
ACE BOILER SERVICE 65.50
AMERICAN SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS 1,761.93
RICHARD ANDROLI 231.84
AP TECHNOLOGY 595.00
AVAYA INC 1,302.40
BOB BARKER COMPANY INC 20.40
BCA-BREATH TEST SECTION 350.00
BELLKATO CORP 670.00
BLACK HILLS AMMUNITION 179.50
BLUE EARTH CO FINANCE DEPT 1,606.06
BLUE EARTH
BOCKS SERVICE INC 382.00
BORLGUMS BODY SHOP 2,072.00
CARLSEN TRACTOR & EQUIPMENT 825.38
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 38.06
CDW GOVERNMENT INC 367.38
CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION INC 124.00
CHARLIES HARDWARE 349.14
CITY DIRECTORY INC 150.00
CONDON FARM SERVICE 57.03
COPIER BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 171.10
DEL-TONE-LUTH GUN CLUB 213.00
DEML FORD INC 1,695.95
DEBORAH DENN 39.69
EXPRESS CARE INC 58.33
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
FREEBORN CO AUDITOR-TREASURER 331.58
FREEBORN
H & L MESABI 2,408.91
HILLYARD INC 38.45
HYVEE FOOD STORES 8,601.73
IMAGETECH SERVICES 530.36
HUNTER JENZEN 90.00
JOHN WILEY & SONS INC 191.70
KATOLIGHT CORP 701.42
KIEFFER COMMUNICATIONS 30.00
KROLL LABORATORY SPECIALISTS I 72.50
LEEF SERVICES INC 284.26
LESUEUR CO TREASURER 6,618.28
LEXIS-NEXIS MATTHEW BENDER 884.28
DON LOKEN EXCAVATING INC 721.08
MACHOVEC 1,676.40
CITY
MN ASSOC OF
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 20.00
MN SUPREME COURT 119.91
NATIONAL 4-H SUPPLY SERVICE 21.40
NEW
OLIVER FARM DRAINAGE 15,105.00
PANTHEON COMPUTER SYSTEMS 584.69
PAMELA PATES 50.00
MICHAEL PENTICO 6.69
RICE
RINKE-NOONAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200.00
SHARE CORPORATION 126.47
SMILEMAKERS INC 58.90
STEELE
SURPLUS SERVICES 50.00
TESCH SERVICE CENTER 677.19
THRIFTY WHITE STORES INC. 61.16
TOTAL TOOL SUPPLY INC 392.08
TRADES OFFICE PRODUCTS 1,094.74
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY APPAREL 284.43
UNITED BUILDING CENTERS 67.76
US RECORDS 1,851.81
VOICE & DATA NETWORKS INC 18.60
WASECA
WASECA GLASS INC 10.00
WASECA RENT & SAVE 39.41
WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR 5,298.31
XEROX CORPORATION 2,227.98
ZEP MANUFACTURING CO 457.49
*******************************************
CONSENT AGENDA BACKGROUND
d.
Office Support
Specialist Hiring
Sheri Dardis
applied to transfer from her Auditor’s Technical Clerk position to a ½ time
Office Support opening in
Ann Staloch
has accepted the position. She was the unanimous
choice of the interview panel and posseses a good
combination of accounting, computer and people skills. Pay range B32, 95% of step A,
14.19/hour, effective
Hunter Janzen
has been promoted to Deputy from his current Disptach
position. He has performed well as
*******************************************
|
Parental
Fee Case Studies |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family Size |
Adults |
Children |
Annual Adj
Gross Income |
Old Fee Schedule |
New Fee Schedule |
Difference |
% of Change |
|
4 |
1 |
3 |
27,710.40 |
355.25 |
152.00 |
203.25 |
57.21 |
|
5 |
2 |
3 |
43,558.80 |
503.57 |
183.00 |
320.57 |
63.66 |
|
3 |
2 |
1 |
68,778.00 |
862.92 |
687.78 |
175.14 |
20.30 |
|
2 |
2 |
0 |
178,520.96 |
2677.14 |
2231.51 |
445.63 |
16.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*******************************************
Case Manager’s
Practice Manual
For
voluntary placement of
Children
with Disabilities
PLACEMENT ISSUES
The case manager who is serving children with disabilities may from time to time find that the most appropriate services for that child (and their family) is out of home placement. The placement of a child with disabilities differs from the placement of children due to child welfare/child protection reasons in a number of respects.
- The child who is placed due to disability frequently has a history of trying other options in the home and community prior to going to placement.
- The parents of the child with a disability may be very vested in their child and may find placement to be a difficult emotional experience.
- The focus of the out of home placement plan is on the needs of the child rather than the parenting contributions of the parents.
- Special services and accommodations may have to be carefully planned before the child goes to out of home placement
- Budget constraints may affect the timing of the placement of a child with disabilities
- The child with disabilities is frequently covered by more than one of the following service plans, including Individual Service Plan, Individual Educational Plan, the Individual Interagency Implementation Plan, the Individual Family Community Support Plan as well as the Out of Home Placement Plan.
- By the time, parents see the Out of Home Placement Plan, they may be so inured with signing plans that they may not be able to comprehend the significant portions of the Out of Home Placement Plans.
- Most placements of children with disabilities start as voluntary placements.
Due to these factors, the tone of Case Management and the
Case Manager’s relationship with the child and family is different from that of
the Child Welfare worker who is working with involuntary families. This manual is an attempt to identify the issues
in the placement of children with disabilities and to assist case managers in
meeting the required timelines of the according to Minnesota Statute and Rules.
Judicial Timelines
for a Child with Disabilities Who is Voluntarily
Placed.
Day 1 Child enters placement and last necessary signature on the voluntary placement
agreement is obtained.
Day 30 By the 30th day, the Out of Home Placement Plan is completed with signatures. Note:
The plan is not complete without the required signatures.
Day 61 The permanency clock starts to run for voluntary placements. The CHIPS petition must
be filed by the 13th month and findings completed by the 14th month (1 year from today)
Day 165 A report to the Court must be filed which includes:
a) the Out of Home Placement plan.
b) a written summary of any administrative reviews
c) other information from the agency, parents, child, guardian ad litem or foster parents. The ISP or IFCSP or IIIP plans and provider reports should be attached.
Day 175 Judicial determination regarding “best interests” is made. No hearing is necessary
unless requested by the parties. This is a critical IV-E eligibility factor.
Day 180 and every six months thereafter unless reviewed in court. Administrative
Review is completed unless there has been a court review.
12 Months and every 12 months thereafter. Renew the Voluntary Placement Agreement.
13 Months A CHIPS petition is filed for review. The Petition shall state:
a) the date of the voluntary placement agreement.
b) the nature of the child’s developmental disability or emotional disturbance
c) the plan for ongoing care
d) the parents’ participation in the plan
e) the responsible social service agency’s efforts to finalize a plan for the
permanent placement of the child.
f) the statutory basis for the petition.
14 Months A permanency hearing is held. The Court may find there are compelling reasons to
continue the voluntary arrangement and that said arrangement is in the child’s best interests. The Court may find that the social service agency has made reasonable efforts to finalize a plan for the permanent placement of the child. The Court will continue the matter under the Court’s jurisdiction for the purpose of further review every 12 months as long as the child remains in placement.
26 months In-court review must be held every 12 months as long as the child is in placement.
Special notes on custody: For a child placed solely due to developmental disability or emotional disturbance, neither transfer of custody nor adjudication is legally required at any point in the court process. It is also not required for IV-E reimbursement. The county agency can maintain legal responsibility for the placement through the Voluntary Placement agreement signed by the parent(s) and the agency.
Considerations
surrounding placement
What has been tried already?
Many children with emotional disorders or developmental disabilities have tried other services before their parent/guardians decide on placement. Those services might include:
Respite Care
Parenting Aide or Programs
Family Support Grant
Adapted Recreation
Community Education Programs
Community Advocacy Programs ( ARC, AMI, Advocacy)
Special Olympics
Special Education
Technology Programs (Star, etc.)
Therapy (Mental health, Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, speech/communications therapy, nutritional evaluation/teaching)
In-home services
Special Camps
Day Treatment
Special accommodation by school, including Section 504.
How do families feel?
Families have been the primary care provider since their child was born. Some families have one parent stay home and live on reduced income as a means of providing the level of care and supervision that their child needs. Parents become skilled at interpreting information from medical providers, psychological providers, therapists, teachers, insurers, and other professionals. Parents often have particular expertise in the area(s) that affect their child. Parents often develop a good data set on their child’s medications and their effects and side effects. Because of this parents want to be listened to. They feel they know what is best for their child.
When parent decide to consider placement, it is often for a range of reasons. These may include:
- The child’s need for more programming or specialized services than can be provided in a family setting.
- Exhaustion of the caregiver(s)
- A need for health and/or safety features that cannot be provided in a family setting
- The needs of other children in the home
- Loss of a caregiver due to divorce, disability, military service or death.
- The need for the child to start the transition to emancipation from the parents.
All of these reasons can cause emotions in the parents that the case manager has to be aware of. These emotions may include sorrow, guilt, exhaustion, anger, fear, and relief. All of these emotions (and a caregiver may experience several and at the same time) are normal. The case manager needs to reassure the parent that these emotions are to be expected.
Some parents, in spite of wanting placement and intellectually knowing that placement can be a growth experience for their child, also feel that no one can do things as good as the parent can. They may initially be somewhat critical of the new residential setting. Case managers may have to work with the residential staff to make sure that the parent’s emotional response is understood correctly.
What is the focus of the plan?
The focus of the Out of Home Placement of a child due to his
or her disability is on the needs of the child, rather than on the parenting
skills of the parent. Thus the Out of Home
Placement plan will look more intently at the goals for the child. The parent(s) will have a supportive role of
maintaining contact as a parent and also maintaining and increasing their
knowledge of their child’s condition.
These are roles that the parent(s) would have had if the child had
continued at home. Some parents will be
somewhat puzzled that the OOHP presents these items as goals. Others will be relieved that their role is to
be an interested parent.
What about the money?
For the child who needs specialized care due to physical, emotional or cognitive problems, the issue of money may affect the type of placement, the availability of placement and the timing of placement. The county budget has special funds that pay for the care of children with disabilities. If the child is eligible for a Medical Assistance (MA) waiver such as MR/RC, TBI, CADI or CAC, there may be a waiting list that can take years. If the child needs an expensive treatment facility funded by county dollars, there may be only so many in a year that the county budget can fund. If the budget has been used, other less ideal options may have to be pursued. Sometimes coverage issues through insurance, PMAP, HMOs or CHAMPAS, TriCare have to be dealt with. For children covered under TEFRA or the waivers, the case manager may have to have the child declared disabled by the State Medical Review Team (SMRT) in order to proceed to placement. Also some of the MA waivers require “deeming” forms to be completed. The case manager may work very closely with a financial worker to make sure that the appropriate specialized forms or procedures are completed. Case managers also have to follow agency policy if this is a child who could be IV-E eligible. Generally someone in each county has the responsibility of tracking IV-E children. The case manager needs to work with that person.
One other funding source that is not necessarily hooked to placement, but can be part of placement is Child Welfare-Targeted Case Management. Some of the children with disabilities who are in placement are eligible for CW-TCM. To claim this funding the child must be on MA or MinnesotaCare. The child has to meet the risk criteria of this program. The case manager needs to complete a case plan for the issues that are part of the risk criteria. The case manager then needs to document the actions taken to complete the CW-TCM case plan. The case manager is entitled to one “hit” per month under this program. It is likely that the plan may take more than one contact each month. With some exceptions, the countable “hit” must be face to face. See the program guide published by DHS for information.
Some children will be eligible for MA in the month after the month they were placed. Make sure the financial unit knows of this placement promptly. The case manager needs to make sure that the application paperwork is completed. This may mean providing additional guidance to the parents.
Parents also need to be aware that placement may mean they will have to pay a fee for services. This fee is adjusted according to their income level.
What about Service Plans?
Many children with disabilities, who are placed, already
have some planning documents in their life.
These may include the Individual Service Plan (ISP) for DD children, the
Interagency Individualized Implementation Plan (IIIP) that combines
Things to remember
Most placements of children with special needs start out as voluntary placements and remain voluntary placements. Case managers may have to stop and explain requirements from many perspectives to parents, due to the multiplicity of plans. Underlying the sense of voluntary placement (versus the involuntary placement) is the commitment that the parent(s) have to their child. The task of the case manager is to assist the parent(s) in maintaining their connection with their child, at the same time the case manager is trying to develop the best therapeutic plan possible for the child. When these goals can be meshed the task of case management is easier.
Each county has practices designed to ensure that all options to placement have been evaluated and utilized, if appropriate. These practices may include supervisor conference and approval, disability team review, and/or pre placement screening.
In
Voluntary Placement Agreements
In
The VPA must be signed by both parents or guardian(s) and the agency by the first day of placement. If the signature of one of the parents cannot be obtained, the agency must document why the parent did not sign. Non-custodial parents do not have to sign or agree to the VPA. In addition the agency should secure the agreement of the parent(s) or guardian(s) that they will notify the agency in a written and dated request if they wish to remove the child from placement prior to an agreed upon date in the VPA. The child is to be returned within 24 hours unless the request for return is for a later date.
The VPA is not effective until the last signature is obtained or until the child is placed, whichever is later.
Agency case managers are encouraged to use the VPA form provided by DHS (DHS 1776 or SSIS 64). This sets out the names of the parents and child, the home address, the agreement start and termination dates, agency responsibilities and parent responsibilities.
Duration of the VPA: Most VPAs for children with a disability are for one year. You need to renew these annually as they are the basis for the county retaining legal responsibility for the placement. The VPA is also tied to IV-E funding, so don’t let them lapse even one day.
Service Plans
Services for Children with Disabilities require service planning documents. Some of these may have different completion and review dates. Some case managers have asked the parents, the child (if they understand) and the treatment team if the completion/ review dates could be synchronized. This is particularly true if the child’s special needs require placement in a facility that requires travel or days off from employment for the parents or guardians. Some examples of these planning documents include:
The Individual Services Plan (ISP) for persons with developmental disabilities.
The Individual Education Plan (IEP) for those children who have special education services.
The Individual Family Community Support Plan (IFCSP) for those children with severe emotional disturbance.
The Individual Interagency Intervention Plan (IIIP) for those children receiving school services and services from other agencies, including MA waiver services.
The Out-of-Home Placement Plan (OOHP) for those children who are in out of home placement.
The Community Alternatives for Disabled Individuals (CADI) plan for those persons who are receiving extended Medical Assistance services through the CADI waiver.
The Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) service plan for those persons who are receiving extended Medical Assistance services through the TBI waiver.
The Community Alternative Care (CAC) service plan for those persons who are receiving extended Medical Assistance services through the CAC waiver.
Case managers need to be somewhat familiar with the various plans even if they are not the primary case manager for that plan. Case managers need to collaborate regarding services when there is more than one plan in action.
IV-E
All children who are placed need to be evaluated for Federal
IV-E eligibility. The term IV-E refers
to the Title IV, Part E in the Federal Social Security Act. This particular section or “title” refers to
Public Law 96-272, known as the Adoption and Child Welfare Act. By being amended into the Social Security
Act, it became Title IV, part E or IV-E.
This insertion of social service legislation into the Federal Social
Security Act as a “title’ is the usual and customary method of categorizing
Social Service legislation. By comparison, Medical Assistance is Title 19. IV-E is administered by the US Dept of
Health and
Eligibility for IV-E is dependent upon the child’s eligibility and the eligibility of the foster home or child care institution. Both must be in place for reimbursement.
At placement, the VPA (DHS 1776) is signed. This gives the
agency “legal responsibility” for the placement. The child is then referred to an eligibility
worker for a determination of AFDC relatedness. Since
Once a child on voluntary placement has been determined to be IV-E eligible, they can remain IV-E eligible for 180 days. By Day 180 the “Best Interest statement” must be obtained. There must be a judicial determination that the placement is in the best interests of the child or that remaining in the home is contrary to the child’s welfare. If this determination is not obtained, the child’s IV-E eligibility ends at Day 181. See the judicial timelines for voluntary placements. It should be noted that a statement regarding reasonable efforts to prevent placement is NOT required. Transfer of custody to the County is NOT required.
REFERENCES
MN Dept of
Minnesota Comprehensive Children’s Mental Health Act, 245.487-245.4887
Social Service Manual –Foster Care for children with disabilities XV-6453
SPECIAL THANKS:
Anne Broskoff, DHS, for her review.
Marilee Reck, Human Services Director, for review and input.
Author:
January, 2006
*******************************************
Request for Proposal
PROJECT:
The current Planning and Zoning Ordinance includes, land use and performance standards, Shoreland Management, Flood Plain Management, Sign Regulations, Feedlot , Subdivision Regulations, Manufactured Homes and Adult Use Ordinance, Agricultural Land Preservation (additions may include, but not be limited to, Wind Tower and Mining Ordinance(s). Originally written in 1983, the current ordinance has been amended numerous times. In some areas, such as signs and home occupations, clear and concise interpretation is difficult to achieve. The selected firm will be given the task to create an ordinance that will achieve orderly development while being “user friendly”.
The County Comprehensive Plan was updated in ___________ of 2006. The firm selected will be responsible to write a plan that reflects goals and objectives of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan.
BACKGROUND
Located in south-central
SCOPE
The following describes the specific components that are in need of attention and should be included in the scope of work. The scope of work will be finalized with the selected firm. The County is open to suggestions for work listed below.
ü The ordinance shall update commonly used definitions
ü The Zoning Ordinance must implement applicable goals and policies of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which may/may not include the transfer of development rights.
ü The Ordinance shall establish zoning districts reflective of the 2006 County Comprehensive Plan.
ü The Ordinance shall clearly identify permitted and conditional land use for each zoning district.
ü The ordinance shall clearly establish criteria for conditional land use consideration/approval.
ü The ordinance shall establish clear procedures for zoning related applications
ü The ordinance should establish internal consistency with all current state and federal laws.
ROLE OF SELECTED FIRM
The selected firm will be expected to perform the following:
- Preparation of a draft work program for the project. The work program shall outline the project by establishing dates for the following: document update delivery and review, planning committee meetings, project milestones, County Board/Planning Commission workshop and any public reviews. The County will negotiate a final work program with the selected firm.
- Preparation of Zoning Ordinance.
- Prepare new zoning map. Mapping shall be completed in either AutoCAD or Arc View shape file format and conform to the County base map.
- Facilitate Planning Committee meetings and prepare all necessary correspondence, documents, reports and meeting minutes.
- Presentation
of draft zoning ordinance and map to Planning Commission and
- Submission of hard copy and electronic processing copy (Microsoft Word) of the ordinance at conclusion of project.
SCHEDULE
The selected firm will be expected to commence the project no later than ________ 2006 and present a Planning Commission endorsed document within _____ months.
PROPOSAL INFORMATION
Interested and qualified firms are invited to submit proposals for this project. Proposals shall be submitted with an original eight (8) copies labeled “Waseca County Zoning Ordinance Proposal” to the address below. Proposals should be organized and include the following information:
- Proposed work program.
- Cost estimate: Estimate of cost to be outlined in the work program.
- Project team: Provide resume for personnel that will be assigned to the project.
- Project reference: Reference should include contact name, address, phone number and e-mail address and provide evidence of similar work.
- General information: This section can be used to provide alternatives or additional information the county could use during the review process.
DEADLINE
Interested consultants should submit a brief proposal for
review. After review by the
To be considered, proposals must be received no later than
SUBMITTAL AND
SELECTION PROCESS
Selection of the finalists will be based on firm and project team qualifications and experience, a demonstrated understanding of the project and the County’s needs, the County’s evaluation of the ability to service the County, total and unit costs, and the work plan/schedule submitted.
All information supplied as part of a Proposal is subject to Minnesota Government Data Practices Act contained in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. Such information is classified as public date unless it falls into one of the exceptions under said law.
The County reserves the right to:
a) amend the RFP and to request new proposals if deemed in the best interests of the County; and
b) to waive any irregularity in any Proposal if deemed in the best interest of the County; and
c) to reject any and all Proposals if deemed in the best interest of the County; and
d) to negotiate individually with one or more proposers.
INTERVIEWS
The County will contact select firms to interview on the
afternoon of ______________ 2006.
Interviews will take place at the ______________________________,
QUESTIONS
All questions may be referred to the Planning and Zoning Office by phone at 507-835-0650 or email angie.knish@co.waseca.mn.us
*******************************************
Lincoln
Outdoor Advertising requests extension from deadline of
*******************************************
Pending Planning
Commission recommendation on
a) Roy
& Sally Keyes request final plat for subdivision of 4.24 acres to create
three parcels as Outlots A, B, C to attach to
existing lots of Keyes Addition. Outlots shall not be
used for residential dwelling structures, but may be solely used for open space
and, when permissible, areas allowing accessory structures. All Outlots shall not contain utilities except for
electrical. Janesville Twp, Sec 22, zoned Agricultural with Shoreland Overlay of
Supporting Documents
Letter – 02-17-06
CUP application
CUP criteria
Final plat
*******************************************
b) Roy
& Sally Keyes request preliminary plat to create subdivision of 26.5 acres,
Block 1 with two parcels for development of one single-family dwelling on each
lot and Block 2 with three parcels for development of one single-family dwelling
per lot; with Outlots A and B to be used as
open space only. Janesville Twp, Sec 22, N1/2, zoned Agricultural with Shoreland Overlay of
Supporting Documents
Letter – Prelimplat –
CUP criteria
Plat map Janesville township Sec 22
Preliminary plat 3.2.06
Memo from County Engineer
Email from Public Health Department
*******************************************