| This Web-based document was archived by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library. |
 |
|
|
 |
Electronic Real Estate Recording Task ForceMEETING MINUTES Minutes: 14 December 2000 As recorded by Bob Horton Present: (Members) David Arbeit, Stephen Baker, Jeanine Barker, Angela Burrs, Jeff Carlson, David Claypool, Michael Cunniff, Larry Dalien, Don Goedken, Marty Henschel, Bob Horton, Charles Hoyum, John L. Jones (via telephone), Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, Paul Kiltinen, Cindy Koosman, Denny Kron, Paul McGinley, Gail Miller, Mark Monacelli, Bill Mori, Leonard Peterson, John Povejsil, J. Bonnie Rehder, Eileen Roberts, Joseph Witt. (Guests) Bert Black, Luci Botzek, Chris Galler, Erland Rood. 1. Call to order Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer called the meeting to order at 9:05 A.M. 2. Minutes of 16 November 2000 meeting The minutes of the 16 November meeting were approved as distributed. 3. Review of revised task force initial report to the legislature Eileen Roberts introduced the revised report. She noted that the sections describing the schedule, budget and pilot projects had been substantially changed. Mark Monacelli raised the issue of funds for travel. This was particularly a burden for the recorders who had to cover mileage and hotel costs in order to attend meetings. He moved and Cindy Koosman seconded that $7500 per year be allocated to the Minnesota County Recorders Association to cover travel costs. Discussion followed on what the statutes allowed for reimbursements and per diems for public and private members. The task force determined that a per diem could be paid to a government employee on the same principle as payment for jury duty; that is, it would be reimbursed to the employer. Bob Horton moved as substitute for the motion that $25,000 for in-state mileage be added to the budget, as well as $60,000 for per diem payments to both public and private members. Charles Hoyum seconded. The motion passed. Bill Mori asked if there were further details on the pilot projects. Cindy Koosman explained how the recorders had developed the concept and how the budget was determined. There were some questions about the relations of the pilot projects to the schedule of the task force as a whole. To reflect the sense of the task force, this revision to the report’s language on p. 20 of 21 was approved: The task force will form a pilot project committee of its member recorders and others to design and implement the pilot projects in consultation with the legal committee and under the supervision of the task force . David Claypool submitted two suggestions for revisions. After some discussion, these were accepted with modifications. On p. 6 of 21, "global positioning satellites (GPS)" was replaced with "contemporary measurement systems." And, on p. 7 of 21, the 2nd bullet point was changed to read:
The task force discussed the proposed budget. As written, the draft legislation does not include a line item description of tasks and costs, so there will be some flexibility in spending. Cindy Koosman, on behalf of the recorders, will provide some further details on the costs of the pilot projects, which will be inserted into the report. Sites for the pilot projects will be chosen on the basis of set criteria. The task force approved this addition, describing the criteria, to p. 20 of 21 of the report:
David Arbeit explained how the project schedule was developed. He noted that the durations of the tasks are the best estimates, but are not firm. There are certain dependencies and contingencies linking activities. These could change; there is room for flexibility. He emphasized that the identification of features and standards during 2001 was only preliminary, with the goal of preparing for the pilots. After the pilots and their evaluation, the final identification of features and standards would follow. The consensus of the task force was that the schedule accurately reflected the project’s needs as currently defined. Michael Cunniff moved for adoption the resolutions prepared by the Secretary of State’s Office, approving the task force report and delegating to the Secretary of State’s Office the responsibility to prepare the report for submission. The resolutions were amended to read:
The motion passed. The task force members then signed a statement recording these resolutions. The task force then discussed the draft legislation prepared for the meeting. Michael Cunniff moved and David Arbeit seconded that the amended language, as follows, be adopted:
Bert Black noted that the Revisor’s Office and, probably, the bill’s authors would further revise the text. He also pointed out that the $15,000 appropriated to the Legislative Coordinating Commission had to be confirmed by the LCC. It could change as well. Mark Monacelli then noted the achievement and progress of the task force over the course of the year. He especially thanked Eileen Roberts for her contributions, which the task force heartily seconded. Secretary Kiffmeyer then thanked Bert Black for his contributions, which the task force also affirmed. 4. Next meeting; scheduling; topics The next meeting was scheduled for 25 January 2001, with time and place to be determined. The topics on the agenda may include: input from organizations on the report; possible consultants; legislative strategies; position description for the project director; and educational opportunities. The task force also agreed that, if it could be arranged, a briefing for the governor’s office would be appropriate. The meeting adjourned at 12 P.M.
|
|
Send
comments regarding this site to: Updated: 08/21/01(jhr) |