06-05-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Corem. Hinutes--June 5, 1990 470 13. Contech Construction Company Item ffl $ 9,912.00 Item ~2 $ 8,510.00 Item #4 $ 9,631.50 North Dakota Concrete Products Company Item ~3 $37,260.10 Fargo Water Equipment Company Item ~1 $14,627.87 Item ~2 $12,813.00 Item #4 $11,186.82 Hancock Concrete Products Item ~3 $54,628.60 Fargo Culvert Company Item ~1 $11,650.00 Item ~2 $10,980.00 Item #4 $ 9,504.80 There were two bids for asphalt products from Swanston Equipment Company and Christianson Asphalt Company; two bids for reinforced concrete box culverts from North Dakota Concrete Products Company and Hancock Concrete Products; one bid for treated timber bridge material from Wheeler Consolidated, Inc.; and two bids for heavy equipment rental from Industrial Builders, Inc. and Strom Construction Company. Mr. Richards requested to receive these bids and act on them in.an hour. IV-D INCENTIVE PROGRAH, Marcellus Hartze Hr. Marcellus Hartze, director of the child support agency for the Department of Human Services, spoke on the IV-D Incentive Program. He said the state is proposing to take over the Regional Child Support Enforcement Unit (IV-D Incentive Program) and it is responsible to the federal government for keeping the program in compliance with federal regulations. The state, however, does not have authority over the program's management at the present time; The state will operate the child support enforcement unit on a regional basis, which appears to be tile most effective method of providing child support in North Dakota. Mr. Hartze said that initially the efficiency of the program will decrease because of federal regulations but in the long run be more efficient. He said the goal is to bring the child support program away from fragmentation and duplication to a single state-wide comprehensive program. Mr. Robert Hoy, States Attorney, said the program is run most efficiently at a local level. He said centralization of this program under the state of North Dakota Department of Human Services wil] create increased costs due to the state government supervising the regional unit and a decrease in the efficiency of child support collections. Mr. Hoy feels the state's reason for taking over the program is due to wanting power and federal incentive money that local entities now receive.