HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 05-17
\)
Meridian City Council Meetina
May 17, 2005.
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M.,
Tuesday, May 17, 2005, by Council President Shaun Wardle.
Members Present: Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle, Charlie Rountree, and Christine Donnell.
Members Absent: Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Brad Watson, John Overton, Ron
Anderson, Joe Silva, Ted Baird, Doug Strong, and Dean Willis.
Item 1:
Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
-X- Shaun Wardle ---2L-Christine Donnell
-X- Charlie Rountree ---2L-Keith Bird
-L Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Wardle: I'd like to welcome everyone to the Tuesday, May 17th, City of Meridian City
Council meeting at 7:00 o'clock and we will begin with roll call attendance.
Item 2:
Pledge of Allegiance:
Wardle: Thank you. Item No.2 is the pledge of allegiance. I would like to welcome
Troop 190 to lead us in the pledge, please.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3:
Community Invocation
Tabernacle:
by
Bud
Henthorn,
Meridian
Gospel
Wardle: Item No.3 is our community invocation by Bud Henthorn with Meridian Gospel
Tabernacle.
Henthorn: Heavenly Father, we are grateful tonight for the incredible blessing of just
being a part of this community. You have blessed us in ways too numerable to mention
tonight, but we thank you for friends and family, we thank you for a neighbors, we thank
you, Lord God, for the people who work so hard and sacrificially to make this community
the great place to live that it is. We thank you, Lord God, for civic servants. We thank
you, Lord God, for those that serve our public schools. We thank you, Lord Jesus, for
the leaders that have gathered here and for the citizens who make their voice heard.
We ask, God, that there would be a special blessing on this meeting tonight and with
that that there would be a special blessing of your presence in each of our hearts and
throughout our community, in Jesus' name, amen.
Meridian City Council
May 17. 2005
Page 2 of 43
Item 4:
Adoption of the Agenda:
Wardle: Thank you, Bud. And I'd like to honor your presence here with us this night
with a small token of our appreciation, our city pin. Thank you very much. Item No.4 is
adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On the -- which we will with the -- Item A on the Consent and Item I on the
Consent, we would like to move to 7-A and 7-1 to do some discussion. Under Item C in
department reports, we would like to move that to Item 19 on the regular agenda and
Item No. 10 on the regular agenda needs to be moved to 5/24 and we will -- Anna will
take care of that when we get to it, so with that, Mr. President, I move that we approve
the revised agenda.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as revised. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5:
Consent Agenda:
A.
B,
C.
Table to from April 26, 2005 Special Meeting - Resolution No, -
: Assignment of Lease and Amended Lease
Agreement for the Golf Course:
Streetliaht Aareement for Sienna Creek Subdivision No.1 by
Sagewood Development Company:
Streetliaht Aareement for Redfeather Estates Subdivision No.
£ by Redfeather Estates Home Owners Association, Inc.:
D.
Streetliaht Aareement for Redfeather Estates Subdivision No.
~ by Redfeather Estates Home Owners Association, Inc.:
E.
Streetliaht Aareement for Redfeather Estates Subdivision No.
~ by Redfeather Estates Home Owners Association, Inc.:
F,
Streetliaht Aareement for Redfeather Estates Subdivision No.
~ by Redfeather Estates Home Owners Association, Inc,:
Meridian City Council
May 17. 2005
Page 3 of 43
G.
License Aareement with Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District
for the Ten Mile Drain Pathway at Waltman Court Subdivision:
H.
Aareement with JUB Enaineers. Inc. for North Black Cat Trunk
and Lift Station Proiect:
I.
Request for Payment for Sage Community Resources for
Grant Administrative Expenses for the ICDBG 04.111-26-ED (LP
Business Expansion Grant):
Wardle: Item No.5 is the Consent Agenda.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On the Consent Agenda I would ask that we move Item A and Item I to 7-A and 7-
I and that we approve the rest of the Consent Agenda as published and for the
president to sign and the clerk to attest on all proper papers.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda with revisions.
Mr. Clerk, will you, please, call role.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6:
Department Reports:
A,
City Council President - Shaun Wardle
1.
Letter concerning the Ada County EMS Levy Election:
Wardle: Thank you. Item No.6 is Department Reports. City Council President. You
have all received a copy of a letter which was drafted -- I believe we directed staff after
our meeting last week to draft a letter, which we would, then, send to the Ada County
commissioners. I believe you all have a copy. Is there any discussion on the letter?
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Has Fire Chief Anderson seen this May 13th one?
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 4 of 43
Anderson: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, yes, I have. After your last meeting I
believe you guys had a discussion on this and, then, this letter was crafted kind of a
joint effort between myself, City Attorney Bill Nary, and Peggy from the Mayor's office
and have read it and agree with the comments in there.
Bird: Thank you, Mr. President.
Nary: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Nary.
Nary: The draft that I handed out tonight is the final version. I do have a clean copy on
letterhead with tonight's date, if the Council is of a mind to approve that, I have
signature lines for all of you, if you like this letter, or if you need more changes, I can
make those as well.
Wardle: Thank you, Mr. Nary.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing nothing more, I'd move that we approve this letter, sign it, and send it on.
Donnell: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve the letter to the Ada County
commissioners and for all the council people to sign. All in favor? All opposed? Motion
passes. Thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
B,
Planning & Zoning Department - Anna Canning
1.
Strategic Focus Areas & City-Wide Initiatives:
Wardle: Item 6-B is Planning and Zoning Department, Anna, and item number one,
strategic focus area and city-wide initiatives.
Canning: Thank you, President Wardle, Councilmember's. About two weeks ago we
had a meeting to discuss the -- a draft of the initiatives and we were given direction,
Mrs. Cushman and I, to make it -- take out mealy mouth words, I believe was the direct
quote, and to make it more pithy and to use active and strong verbs. So, I sent you a
copy of our revisions I believe the next day and I did not receive any comment from
anyone, but I did have a meeting with the Mayor and she had a few additional
suggestions. So, that is what you have before you tonight. It was the -- what I term the
Meridian City Councli
May 17, 2005
Page 5 of 43
clean copy that I sent you about two weeks ago, with some revisions as suggested by
the Mayor, who missed a couple of the items -- that I missed. So, I guess I would like to
know -- you may not have had time to -- did you want to go through them now or did you
just want me to explain them or -- I wasn't clear on what the Council wanted to
accomplish tonight.
Wardle: Council, would you prefer to go through these individually or would you prefer
to get your comments back to Anna directly, so that we can prepare for a resolution to
come forward?
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: My preference would be to get it back to Anna by a date certain and so that she
can have a resolution prepared and we can pass on it next week. I hate to pass on
something that I haven't read.
Wardle: Yes. Is this Friday at 5:00 o'clock enough time for you to prepare -- prepare a
resolution for next Tuesday?
Canning: It wouldn't allow time for that resolution to be in your packet, but it will get --
there will be sufficient time to get the resolution to you, yes.
Wardle: Okay. All right.
Canning: And am I drafting the resolution or is -- thank you.
Nary: We will do it.
Wardle: Okay. Thank you very much. Is that all the direction you need?
Canning: Yes. So you will get me individual comments by Friday at 5:00. Perfect.
Bird: If we don't, you know it's okay.
Donnell: Yeah.
Canning: Okay.
Item 7:
Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
A.
Table to from April 26, 2005 Special Meeting - Resolution No. -
05-472 : Assignment of Lease and Amended Lease
Agreement for the Golf Course:
Meridian City Council
May 17. 2005
Page 6 of 43
Wardle: Thank you. Item C Department Reports, has been moved to Item No. 19 on
the agenda. That takes us to Item 7-A, which is resolution number--
Bird: Oh, I'm sorry. 05-472.
Wardle: -- 05-472 and I will begin discussion of Item 7-A with the city attorney's office.
Nary: Thank you, Mr. President. The resolution before you is -- comes from the
Blueprint for Good Growth committee --
Bird: No. No. We are doing 7-A
Nary: Oh, I'm sorry.
Bird: You want Ted.
Nary: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Mr. Baird is over there. I was ahead of you by one item.
Baird: Thank you. Mr. President, Members of the Council, the resolution before you is
for approval of the final version, the May 17th edition of the golf course lease. It's now
over an inch thick. And just by way of explanation, when we last met to discuss this on
April 26th, I was given direction to address a couple housekeeping items with Attorney
Joann Butler, who represents the Lake View Meridian Investors, LLC. We worked on
that together and arrived at the final agreement, which was included in your packet last
Friday. I submitted that to the Clerk at about 1 :00 o'clock and imagine the surprise at
about 1 :45 when I received a phone call from another attorney who is involved in this
matter who had a couple more items to address. Attorney Bud Yost in Nampa
represents another one of the tenants here, the Boise Ranch Golf, and he had four
minor housekeeping items that included a copy of his fax to me that we received
yesterday and four pages, indicating the minor changes that we made to the agreement
that was posted. So, I can address those individually, if you have any questions, but,
again, they were just minor issues, questions would be raised about who would own
employment records, who would own financial records, what would be public record,
what wouldn't be. So, those were incorporated into the final document that we are
asking for you to approve tonight and I'll stand for any questions.
Wardle: Thank you, Ted. Council, any questions on Mr. Baird's clarification?
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: No. I just thank Ted for taking care of this situation and I take it that both the
lessee is also agreeable and everything has been taken care of?
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 7 of 43
Baird: Mr. Council President and Members of the Council, Council member Bird, I did
speak directly with Bud Yost and he agreed to the way that I addressed his concerns. I
also received an e-mail from Joann Butler, she reviewed those changes. I spoke briefly
before the meeting with Dick Davis, who is here, and everybody seems to be in
agreement.
Wardle: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move, then, we approve Resolution 05-472, the lease for the -- the golf course
lease -- amendments to the golf course lease.
Donnell: Second.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: Thank you. It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No.7-A, which is
Resolution 05-472. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Thank you very much. And thank you, Ted, for your diligence in this effort.
Certainly it's been an issue a long time coming in the City of Meridian and your final
touch has really helped to bring that together. Thank you.
I.
Resolution No, 05-473 : Ratifying and Approving the
Creation of Blueprint for Good Growth, Inc.:
Wardle: Item 7-1 is Resolution No. 05-473, Ratifying and approving the creation of
Blueprint for Good Growth. City Attorney's Office, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Now that I'm on the right project, Mr. President, this request has come from the
Blueprint for Good Growth committee. Karen Biladeau is the project manager for that,
as Council is all well aware, that the project has been ongoing with all the different
agencies and municipalities in Ada County as a regional opportunity to work together to
look at our county-wide growth plan. What they have requested in this particular
resolution they forwarded to the Mayor and the Mayor forwarded to us, so we could put
it in the proper form, was for the purposes of establishing a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit
corporation for the Blueprint for Good Growth, so that they could go seek funding for the
project. As the Council is well aware and as has been publicized numerous times, this
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 8 of 43
is a very extensive planning project with Dr. Freilech and the Urban Land Institute and a
number of different players that are involved. The Ada County Highway District even
hired a person, basically, to go and seek funding for this project. This would be a tool to
allow them to form this corporation, showing the support of the different entities. I
believe they have requested the same resolution of all of the players and partners in this
project to date, again, the different cities, as well as -- as well as the Ada County
Highway District, to, again, show that support and form that. So, that's all it is in front of
you. There is no commitment to anything other than the commitment the city has
already made to be a participant. There is no financial commitment that's included in
this resolution. There is no commitment beyond what's already been established by this
Council in the discussions, but that's all the information I have about it and if there is
something else I could answer for you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Nary, this resolution down the road is going to, I'm sure, be met with some
requests for financial donation from the city, am I not right? And, you know, is this a
dues thing or what is it? I mean --
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Council member Bird, this document
doesn't do anything differently than this Council has already done in being a participant.
This doesn't commit the Council or the city to any financial support of the project, other
than what the Council wishes to put aside in a budget process towards the project. I
think last year the city put I think 30,000 dollars -- I think it's 30,000 dollars towards this
project. There has never been a clear definition that I'm aware of -- and Madam Mayor
is the one, I think, that attends primarily, but there has never been a clear definition as
to what the financial participation of each entity is supposed to be. From the outset,
when the project was initiated, it was always on -- on each of the cities to participate at
whatever level they wanted to. They weren't obligated to financially support any of it.
They could certainly participate as best they could. It did take everyone's cooperation,
but this document -- I guess I just have to accept at face value and all the document
commits to is the city's role supporting that this group does exist for a purpose, what the
purpose is, that they are going to form a nonprofit corporation for the purposes of
fundraising. This, basically, gives the city's blessing to that process to occur. But it
doesn't give the city anymore financial commitment than we have participated so far.
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Just a bit more clarification. When this was entered into, the project itself
was never fully funded with cities and/or county entities participation. It's always been
felt that private entities in the community should participate as well. So, this is an
opportunity to create the 501 (3)(c) corporation and allow those individuals in the private
arena that want to contribute to this effort to do so and get the tax advantage.
Meridian City Council
May 17. 2005
Page g of 43
Otherwise, they would have done so and not gotten any tax credit, so I believe that's
what this resolution is all about.
Wardle: Thank you. Mr. Bird, do those address --
Bird: Yeah. No problem. I just wanted to -- I just wanted to discuss stuff, because I --
you know, I know it was for a 501 (c), but, you know, I wanted to -- and reading this
resolution, as Mr. Nary said, you got to take it by what you're reading here and hoping
it's -- and I don't know why it wouldn't, so I have no problem with it.
Wardle: Thank you. And, Mr. Nary, thank you for the clarification and Mr. Rountree and
I'm sure that the city will see some request for funds in the future that are not
necessarily directly tied to this, but to the project itself. With that; I would entertain a
motion to approve Item I.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 7-1, Resolution 05-7473.
Donnell: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No, I. 7-1. Mr. Berg, please
call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 8:
TE 05-002 Request for Approval of a One Year Time Extension to record
the Final Plat of Gallery Subdivision by Engineering Solutions, LLP -
northeast corner of West Belltower Drive and North Ten Mile Road:
Wardle: Item No.8 is TE 05-002, request for a one-year time extension for Gallery
Subdivision. Begin with staff comments.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, I'm doing abbreviated hearings on
the -- or abbreviated reports on the non-hearing items. Staff is recommending approval
of this time extension.
Bird: Mr. President, I move we approve TE 05-002 for a one-year time extension to
May 1 st, 2006.
Rountree: Second,
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 10 of 43
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No.8. Mr. Berg, please call
roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 9:
FP 05-032 Request for Final Plat approval of 52 building lots and 5
common lots on 10.99 acres in a R-4 zone for Silverleaf Subdivision No,
~ by Liberty Development, LLC - 2683 West Chinden Boulevard:
Wardle: Item No.9 is FP 05-032, final plat for Silverleaf Subdivision No.4.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, this final plat is in compliance with
the approved preliminary plat and the applicant has submitted a letter stating they are in
agreement with the conditions of approval.
Wardle: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve FP 05-032, request for final plat --
Rountree: Second.
Bird: -- for Silverleaf Subdivision No.4.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No.9. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10:
FP 05-031 Request for Final Plat of 98 single-family residential building
lots and 26 common area lots on 19 acres for Hacienda Subdivision by
Doug Jayo - south of Chinden Boulevard and east of North Meridian
Road:
Wardle: I believe Item No.1 0 has been asked to be continued to 5/24. Do we need a
motion for that?
Bird: You just made it, didn't you? I second it.
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page110f43
Wardle: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to continue Item 10 to 5/24/05. All in
favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11:
FP 05-030 Request for Final Plat approval for 40 single-family residential
building lots on 10.49 acres in a R-8 zone for Paramount Subdivision
No, 7 by Paramount Development, Inc. - east of North Linder Road and
north of West McMillan Road:
Wardle: Item No. 11, FP 05-030, final plat for Paramount Subdivision No.7.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, this final plat is also in compliance
with the approved preliminary plat and we also have a letter from the applicant stating
they are in agreement with the conditions of approval.
Donnell: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: I move that we approve Item No. 11, FP 05-030, a request for final plat
approval for Paramount Subdivision.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. 11. Mr. Berg, please call
roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12:
Public Hearing: VAR 05-008 Request for a height Variance from the
maximum height of 40 feet to 58 feet for a recreational attraction for
Boondocks Fun Center by Boondocks Fun Center - Meridian, LLC -
1385 South Blue Marlin:
Wardle: Thank you. We now enter the Public Hearing phase of our agenda. Item No.
12, Public Hearing VAR 05-008, request for a height variance for Boonbocks Fun
Center. I will open with staff comments.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, this is located north of Overland
Road and west of Meridian Road, just south of the freeway, and this is an old -- this an
old picture of where -- Roaring Springs is, basically, in this area now, so you know
where Boondocks is. This is an application for a variance. The height variance is to
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 12 of 43
allow the construction of a 55 foot eight inch structure. The height variance would not
apply to any other structure on the property, existing or future. These are the two
elevations I have and, in all honesty, I'm not sure exactly how this structure works, other
than I think it propels human beings through the air in some horrifying contraption. All
right. Sorry. Regarding the findings that the Council needs to make in order to grant
this variance, I'll try and go through them quickly. The first is, generally, that there is
special circumstances on the site and in this case it's not that there is a physical feature
of the site that would limit the construction of this, it's just that it's a unique structure and
it's a unique use to begin with. The entertainment use, in and of itself, is not one that's
well accounted for in our variance. The second finding is with regards that it would not
be an extreme hardship or that it does not -- that it meets the objectives of the code still
or the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff was not able to find that there was a
hardship on the site. However, we do feel that this still meets the objectives of the code
and of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan talks about providing a
range of recreational opportunities -- I'm sorry. And the code allows for structures
similar to this, such as antennas and pole structures and other things. It accepts them
in other cases, it's just this one doesn't quite fit under that category. So, I think that the
intent of the code is not violated and it does further the objectives of the Comprehensive
Plan. The third finding that Council needs to make for the variance is that granting a
specified variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious -- I'm sorry.
This is not a variance for convenience -- I'm really having a hard time maintaining
composure. I'm sorry. It's the nature of the structure and it is unique. And the final one
is the subject variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purpose of
code or the Comprehensive Plan. And, again, we stated before, this does seem to be
something that had the code spoke to this, it probably would. have exempted it from
having to meet height regulations. But, again, it's a very special use, it's a very special
structure, and it does further the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. So, staff is
recommending approval of this variance.
Wardle: Thank you, Anna. Questions for staff?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Not now.
Wardle: Would the applicant like to come forward and -- is the applicant present?
Canning: Apparently not.
Wardle: Is there any further public testimony that we'd like to take?
Rountree: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Seeing no further testimony, I move the hearing close for Item 12.
Meridian City Councii
May 17, 2005
Page 130f43
Bird: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 12. All in
favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: If there is no discussion, I would move that we approve the variance for Item
No. 12, 05-008, recognizing that it is a special entertainment use and there is no
extraordinary hardship to the public. It seems to be consistent with city zoning code and
will not necessarily required alterations of the code.
Bird: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. 12. Mr. Berg, will you,
please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 13:
Public Hearing: RZ 05-006 Request for a Rezone of 4.65 acres from R-4
to L-O zone for Verona Subdivision No, 3 by Primeland Development,
LLP - northeast corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Milano Drive
Wardle: Thank you. I will be interested as to what that ride will be called. I have a little
one that would probably like to ride that. Item No. 13, Public Hearing, RZ 05-006,
rezone for Verona Subdivision No.3. I will open the Public Hearing with staff
comments.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council - there we go. Sorry. This is a --
the site is located east of Ten Mile and it's about a half mile north of McMillan Road.
The subject of the rezone is actually only a small portion that's highlighted here on the
aerial. It's just there at the entrance of the site. The purpose of the rezone of this 4.65
acres is to allow four lots -- or six lots to go from an R-4 designation to an L-O
designation. The applicant is proposing to have the zoning match what has, actually,
been approved on the site through the planned development use exception process.
So, they have done it at actually our -- we required it as a condition of approval for
Verona Subdivision No.3 and so that's why they are coming in with the rezone request.
And, again, it's just so that we can match the use exception with the use -- the zoning
with the uses that are allowed there that helps in financing and construction projects.
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 140f43
P&Z has recommended approval at their April 21st hearing. To our knowledge there
are no outstanding issues before Council.
Wardle: Thank you, Anna. Questions for staff?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none, Mr. President.
Wardle: Would the applicant like to present testimony? Is there any further public
testimony on Item No. 13?
Donnell: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: Seeing no further testimony, I would make a motion to close the Public
Hearing.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 13. All in
favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Donnell: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: I would make a motion that we approve Item No. 13, RZ 05-006, a request for
rezone from R-4 to L-O and to accept staff's findings.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. 13. Mr. Berg, will you,
please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14:
Public Hearing: AZ 05-010 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.63
acres from RUT to L-O zone for Wyndstone Place Subdivision by
Quasar Development, LLC - 1151 South Wells Street:
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 150f43
Item 15:
Public Hearing: PP 05-012 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8
building lots and 3 common lots on 4.63 acres in a proposed L-O zone for
Wyndstone Place Subdivision by Quasar Development, LLC - 1151
South Wells Street:
Public Hearing: CUP 05-014 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for a professional office complex on 4.63 acres in a
proposed L-O zone for Wyndstone Place Subdivision by Quasar
Development, LLC - 1151 South Wells Street:
Wardle: Thank you. I will open Items No. 14, 15 and 16 for Wyndstone Place
Subdivision and open the public hearings with staff comments.
Item 16:
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, this is called Wynd stone Place
Subdivision. It's located at the southwest corner of Wells Drive and Wells Circle and, as
you can see, it's in Magic View Subdivision, which is just north of the freeway. So, it's a
little triangular shaped. They are coming in with an annexation and zoning, preliminary
plat, and Conditional Use Permit for a planned development. There is an existing home
toward the east end of the property as you can see. This is the. proposed layout and it's
a professional office complex on 4.63 acres and they are proposing an L-O zone. It is
shown as office on the Comprehensive Plan, so it would be consistent with that
designation. They are proposing one 3,000 square foot building, two 4,000 square foot
buildings, four 5,000 square foot buildings, and, then, one 13,600 square foot building.
So, it's a total of 44,600 square feet of office space. Most of the structures -- all of these
would be single story and, then, this is a proposed two story structure. The lots that
these sit on -- I can show you that later. It's difficult to read. They do sit on individual
lots and the lots range in size from 12,000 to a little over an acre in size. They have
requested a planned development approval and that's to reduce the required lot
frontage and setbacks. Normally, the frontage required in the L-O zone is 50 feet. Five
of the eight lots do not have frontage and you can imagine they are back here away
from the two streets. In lieu of frontage, the applicant is proposing to record a cross-
access easement for all the lots. And on setbacks they have requested 20 feet --
instead of a 20-foot rear setback, they are asking for a ten foot rear setback and, then,
instead of a 20-foot side street setback, they are asking .for a ten foot side street
setback. With the planned development they are providing two water amenities. They
are shown here. And the applicant may be able to talk about thöse more. One is in this
location and, then, the other one -- I'm sure the applicant can let you know where that is.
This is the elevation of the two-story structure and that sits in the far corner. And, then,
these are the one-story structures. This, again, is the site plan and this is the plat. As I
said, the plat doesn't provide much information relative to the site, it's really more the
site plan that provides that. So, I will go back to the site plan. It will facilitate the
construction of -- or allow the construction of eight commercial buildings and P&Z has
recommended approval at their April 21st hearing. The key issues of the discussion
were irrigation water supply and delivery and that was the existing property owner
appears to have cutoff supply to some of the neighboring properties and they asked for
a commitment from the developer as to restoring the irrigation water service and the
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 160f43
applicant - the Commission added two conditions of approval and the applicant has
agreed to these and they were to design an irrigation system that can serve all the
adjacent properties and the applicant was also to reinstall the fence at the end of Wells
Circle. Wells Circle is a cul-de-sac at the top of the property and it's largely unimproved
right of way and the owner of the property to the north has some fencing that's actually
installed in the right of way. There is one outstanding issue before Council. There is an
existing sewer line and easement on the west end of the property. The trees that are
shown on the landscape plan cannot be planted within the 20-foot landscape buffer, so
this does require a modification to site specific condition number two and staff has
worked up some language for that. I can read it into the record now and, then, if in your
motion you decide you want to have this be effective, you can reference this -- what I'm
going to read. And that would be the second sentence in the third bullet of site specific
condition number two to read: Said buffer to the north shall contain materials in
accordance with MCC 12-13-12-3 and not include impervious surfaces such as parking
areas. That's in reference to the landscape buffer on the north. And, then, add a third
and fourth sentence to the third bullet of site specific condition number two that reads:
Due to the existing sewer easement to the west, the buffer along the west property line
shall remain free of large trees and contain shrubs, flowers, .and other ground cover
approved by the Meridian Planning Department. With that, I will end staff's
presentation.
Wardle: Thank you, Anna. Questions for staff?
Bird: I have none.
Wardle: Would the applicant please come forward. Please state your name and
address for the record.
Nickel: Thank you, Mr. President. Shawn Nickel, 52 North 2nd Street in Eagle. I'm not
going to rehash what Anna said. She did a good job of explaining the project. Just to
point out that second amenity. Let me find it on here, which is right -- the waterfall there
and those also have some seating area, so it's kind of a passive use, These are office
buildings. I do have one -- we did -- the one main issue at the Planning and Zoning
Commission was that irrigation issue, which we did meet with the neighbors before that
meeting, had everything worked out, we talked about it at the meeting, those conditions
were placed on there. One of the neighbors is here, probably, to update you on the
progress with that, so I'll let him speak. Just for, I guess, a housekeeping matter on
condition number 11, Anna, and I apologize for not running this by you first, but I think
it's a minor -- and it's just in the sentence structure. We'd like it to read: Applicant shall
design a gravity irrigation delivery system sufficient to satisfy all adjacent properties,
because that was the issue with that is that we were trying to get that water delivery to
those surrounding property owners. So, I'll leave it to Anna to address that, if that's
appropriate. Regarding the buffer along the west boundary, we will provide a new
landscape plan prior to final plat. I do want to point out that we are proposing a six foot
solid -- reflecting a vinyl fence along that western boundary to provide additional buffer
for those neighbors and we just believe this is a very nice transition from the residential
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 17 of 43
-- the existing residential to the more intense commercial uses as you get out towards
Eagle Road, so I wanted to point that out. I will stand for any questions.
Wardle: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I don't have a question for Shawn, but I just want to compliment him on the
development that they are putting in there. I think that's a -- I think it's a very nice one, I
hope you are able to stay to the elevations that we have seen, because it is a very -- it
will be a very attractive addition to that area out there. We appreciate it. Thanks.
Nickel: Thank you.
Wardle: Thank you. I have two other individuals signed up to comment on this
application. Elwood Rennison. Would you, please, come forward and state your name
and address, please.
Rennison: My name is Elwood Rennison. I live at 990 Mustang Street, Meridian, Idaho.
I'd like to comment on the development that's going on here. I think it's really a nice
one. I think Shawn and Ross have done a really nice job laying it out and the people in
the neighborhood really appreciate what they have done. I want to offer that comment,
because I think it's really positive for the whole area. And there is one thing that -- there
are three items that I wanted to comment on and if you will allow me to, I would give you
a written document. A letter. Shawn has addressed pretty much some of the irrigation
issues and on the west side -- well, I'll start with the letter here, would be the best thing.
Okay. Item A in the letter is that during the April 21st Planning and Zoning meeting I
presented a letter on the same date. The letter had several exhibits attached to it and
when I went down and I reviewed the staff summary of Planning and Zoning
Commission recommendation to the City Council, dated May 10th, I noted that two of
the drawings that were in the document that I gave to the Planning and Zoning were not
there. Two of the drawings. And they are listed here as E1 and E2. Okay. So, I want
you to take note of that if you will, please. Those should have -- everybody should have
had copies. They were all put together and each one of the Planning and Zoning
individuals were given a copy of the letter with all the attachments, as well as the -- the
City Council -- or Planning members. Okay. That's per comment. Located on the west
side of the proposed development, which is where the vinyl fence is to go, the main
irrigation ditch runs just on the west side of the fence. If you will let me show you. The
main irrigation ditch runs along this side here and up and turns around and, then, of
course, you can see where it comes through right here at this location. What happens
is if the ditch gets over full back in here, it will have a tendency, because it runs on the
high point of the land, okay, it will have a tendency to overflow this way. So, we are
asking that in the development plan that some provision be made to maintain the open
ditch that is there right now. That ditch provides water for the landowner right here,
Meridian City Councli
May 17, 2005
Page 180f43
that's where they get their water from. Normally, they would come in the corner here
and there is a drainage that goes on down to Five Mile Creek and that's in there and
that's been there for years and it's strictly just to get water to one landowner, plus if the
ditch overflows for some reason, we have gophers get in there and we have a lot of
problems with it on the lower side, if the ditch -- just have a small swale or something
maintained in there on the new development. If you will see exhibits one and two
attached to the letter, I sort of made an illustration for you to look at, if a picture is worth
a thousand words, we hope, anyway. So, that will kind of give you an idea of just kind
of how the drainage can kick off over the side of the high point there. The third item that
I have listed here -- and I will try to do this quickly. Mr. Robert Middleton still does not
have water, okay? The land to his place. And this is one of the items of contention with
Planning and Zoning. Ross and Shawn have bent over backwards, doing somersaults
and everything to get the water across and they have gotten, as you will see on
attachment four, which is the last one on the letter, there was a signed fax -- a signed
letter and drawing showing where a temporary ditch can be ran and Shawn and Ross
have worked real hard to make this happen for us and they have asked Mr. Middleton if
he would go ahead and excavate the ditch and let it down and cross through there. And
Mr. Middleton is more than happy to do it, except the current landowner is not the best
person to deal with. We like dealing with Quasar. Okay? What we have is after this
was sent to Bob Middleton, I received a phone call from -- excuse me -- from the -- one
of the landowners and if you will indulge, I would appreciate it.
(Tape played.)
Rennison: Thank you for listening to that. I like to be professional about everything I
do. Sometimes it doesn't become the best thing to stand bay, but I try to do that. I say
Shawn -- they have done everything they can to try to get the water across to Mr.
Fehrman and this was -- this was played -- I put this to the various people listed in here,
okay, and I don't know where we go from here. Quasar has done everything they can.
They got the letter. The main thing is if Mr. Middleton goes on the property and digs a
ditch, it goes right through where the driveway is at for the buildings and Mr. Fehrman
does not want the water in the area of the driveway, so he can get in and out. It kind of
has to be where it's at. Mr. Middleton was -- is going to pipe it, but we don't have
anything specifically for him in writing to indemnify him for a third party claim and hold
him harmless in case something goes wrong. And there are utilities in there, too. There
is a telephone line that has to be located and what we would like Quasar to do is to get
a letter for Mr. Middleton and, then, when he does the ditch have somebody out there
with him. We -- Mr. Fehrman is my neighbor from many years. I know him quite well.
Okay? So--
Donnell: And he likes you a lot.
Rennison: Well, he comes over to the house there and argues with me until my wife
has to leave. But, anyway, those are the three items that I wanted to bring up and I
appreciate you listening to me and listening to the tape and we want Quasar
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 19of43
Development to have their facility there and it's very nice, okay? And thank you very
much, Council members and everybody else,
Wardle: Thank you. I have one additional name. Ross Erickson. If you will state your
name and address, please.
Erickson: Ross Erickson. 13318 West Woods pring Court, Boise. Just real quickly, if
you look at the picture, between the property there is that -- we are not too in the loop.
There is the property up to the north that would like to get some irrigation water and I
worked with Mr. Rennison and Mr. Middleton prior to our P&Z Commission hearing to
try to work out an arrangement, as a liaison between the two, between Jim Fehrman
and the property owner to get a temporary ditch built across Jim Fehrman's property, so
that they could get some water to serve Mr. Middleton for this irrigation season and I put
a sketch together and talked it over with Jim, with a little permission statement on it that
authorizes us or our agents to go in there and actually build a temporary ditch to provide
Mr. Middleton some water and it has been signed and so Mr. Middleton is authorized
to go in there and build a ditch. I think there is -- he's still a little bit skeptical about
getting in there, because of the past relationship with the property owner, but we have
been trying to do everything we could, you know, it's really not something that we have
a lot of position to do anything with, because there is history on it and things. But we do
have a signed permission slip here for Mr. Middleton to go ahead and build a temporary
ditch and, then, with our project, when we come in, we will build permanent piped
concrete junction boxes, gravity delivery system, to serve Mr. Middleton, which would
be next year for the following irrigation season. And I just -- one of Mr. Rennison's other
comments was regarding the overflow ditch along the west boundary of the project.
That ditch is actually on -- it's not our property, it's adjacent to our property, so we won't
be impacting that and there is a city sewer easement through there with a -- kind of an
all-weather surface gravel road there for the city access right now and that's where we
will be planting some shrubs and flowers and things and maybe some small trees, so
we won't be impacting that. I guess I'll stand for any questions that you may have.
Wardle: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Erickson: Thanks.
Wardle: Is there anyone else that would like to comment on any of these applications?
Just a quick question for staff, before the applicant returns. Mr. Nickel had some
comments about a specific change. Is staff okay with the --
Canning: Yes. They are good changes. Yes.
Wardle: Okay. Mr. Nickel?
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 20 of 43
Nickel: Again, Shawn Nickel, 52 North 2nd in Eagle. So, hopefully, we are clear on the
comments by Elwood, we are going to do our best -- see, the problem is the property is
under contract by Quasar Development. They are not the owners until -- it's probably
going to be a couple of months before they actually take down the ownership of the
property. In the meantime, we are trying to coordinate with the existing owner and that
was the person that was on the voicemail -- trying to coordinate with him to get
permission to build that temporary ditch and, again, as Ross stated, we do have a
signed letter stating that Mr. Middleton can do that. If there is anything else we need to
do, we will be more than happy to work with Elwood and Mr. Middleton, if we have to go
out there and stand around while he's digging the ditch. We will make sure that it gets
in appropriately and I don't know if I will leave any messages on Mr. Rennison's
machine, but I will definitely keep in touch with him.
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: It's either a question for -- probably for both staff and Bill Nary, but the
permission authorizes Quasar Development and their agents. Would it be appropriate
that Quasar identify Mr. Middleton as their agent in order to validate this agreement with
the property owner or is that above and beyond the call of duty?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, certainly that --
that's not going to hurt them to make that designation. I don't see a problem with that.
But I mean I don't know that they have to, but --
Nickel: We would have no problem doing that.
Wardle: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Is Mr. -- Mr. Fehrman isn't the only owner out there, is he? I see it's BNF
Enterprises.
Nickel: It's an LLC that he's a member of.
Bird: Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I have one question for Brad before we close. The comment about the use
of the current access road on the sewer easement, is that providing necessary access
and -- for inspection and/or troubleshooting?
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 21 of 43
Watson: Mr. President, Councilmember Rountree, as I asked Anna today, I said you're
not planting shrubs in the road -- the access road, right? And she said that I would get
to look at it and approve it before the landscape plan is approved. So, we will make
sure we have access.
Rountree: All right. Thank you.
Wardle: Is there any other further comments before we close up? I would also like to
make a comment that I think that certainly the elevations that we see are very nice and
the site looks nice and I just happen to live right around the corner, so I think it will be a
nice addition to the neighborhood. So, appreciate you working with the neighbors and
the individual property owners. Hearing that and no further public comment, I would
accept a motion to close the public hearings on Items 14, 15 and 16.
Donnell: So moved.
Bird: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearings on items 14, 15
and 16. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Council, we have three items before us.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. President, I move we approve AZ 04-010, Wyndstone Place Subdivision by
Quasar Development, LLC, and to incorporate public testimony, applicant, and staff
comments.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: And just as a clarification, Mr. Bird, is that to include the Findings and the
amendment to the findings?
Bird: Yes, it does.
Wardle: With that, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Councli
May 17, 2005
Page 22 of 43
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve Item No. 15, PP 05-012 for Wynd stone Place Subdivision
by Quasar Development, LLC, and to include staff, applicant, and public testimony and
to approve Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. 15. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Canning: Councilman -- I mean President Wardle, was that -- do you want those
findings to come back to you at a different date or just make the modifications and get it
to you?
Bird: With the modifications.
Wardle: Item 16.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve CUP 05-014, Wyndstone Place Subdivision by Quasar
Development, LLC, incorporate all staff, applicant, and public testimony and approve,
with modifications, the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. 16. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 17:
Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies:
Wardle: Item No. 17 is water, sewer, and trash delinquencies. Scheduled turnoff for
May 18th, 2005. Pursuant to Meridian City Code 9-1-21, delinquent water users shall
have the right to request a pre-termination hearing prior to water service being
disconnected. No water users have requested such pre-termination hearing for May
Meridian City Councli
May 17, 2005
Page 23 of 43
17th, 2005, water service for the attached turnoff list we will be terminated on May 18th,
2005. The total amount of the turnoff list is $32,338.57.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the delinquent turnoff list for May 18th in the amount
of 32,338.57.
Donnell: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to approve the turnoff list. All in favor? Any
opposed? Motion passes. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 18:
Discussion of Black Rock Subdivision by Brad Watson, Public Works
Director:
Wardle: Item No. 18, a discussion of Black Rock Subdivision by Brad Watson.
Watson: Thank you, Mr. President. If I may, I'd like to just pass out a hard copy of this.
It didn't get into your packets last week, so if I can take a minute to do that. Mr.
President, Council members, I think you know the background on this particular project.
Mr. Wood has been before you two times over the last year. Last July -- Council
Member Donnell was not here at that time, but he also on March 1 st talked about this
project. This proposed project has about 220 acres, 50 of which would -- is approved
through Ada County for a non-farm on subdivision with 44 lots, build-able lots. United
Water Idaho at the -- on Mr. Wood's behalf, petitioned the Public Utilities Commission
this spring to extend service -- water service into this area. The subdivision is outside
the area of impact, but within that thing called the referral area. I provided written
comments to the PUC in April asking them to deny the entire request. I think I have --
may not previously given you those comments, but I will. United Water's attorney
provided me five -- testimony on this application. I agree that the area that was within
the City of Meridian area of impact is deleted from United Water's request to expand, as
is indicated, the service area. The final order from the PUC came to me yesterday.
That is included in the back of that packet that I gave you. They do grant the expanded
certificated area to United Water, less the area that is within Meridian's area of impact.
Anna Canning and I met with Mr. Wood earlier this month to discuss options on this
property. The four that we came up with -- Mr. Wood thinks there is only three, but
there are four. One is a city-operated community well. Somehow we would work with
Mr. Wood to get a municipal type well constructed and we could operate a satellite
system. The second option is to extend city water to serve this subdivision. According
to Len Grady's modeling, it looks like we would need -- there would need to be about
8,400 feet of 12-inch line just to get to the site. We didn't talk about who would build it
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 24 of 43
and costs and all of that. The third option -- well, I will give you the fourth option first,
because it's very short, and that's the do nothing option, where no development takes
place until we do have services out there. That's the one that Mr. Wood is, obviously,
not interest in. Number three is the one that probably would have the most discussion
around it and that is releasing that area, in addition to this three square miles you see
on the screen that are shaded in I think light blue from the referral area. The sewer has
been master planned outside of the impact area to the south and does go through this
three miles -- three square mile area in two different spots. The existing city limits are
presently a half-mile north of Amity Road. There are several pending applications that
would bring that to Amity Road, thereby making this application -- or this project a
quarter mile away. Without going into too much detail, there are -- well, you haven't
approved those pending applications, obviously, so we can't presume that those will be
approved at this point in time. We did just a quick analysis on the implications of
releasing that area back to Ada County. Or I guess it's not really ours to release, but no
longer have any -- within our referral area or trying to extend area of impact to include
those three square miles. Based on some information I got from our finance director
and some assumptions on density and home value out in that area, it looked like the
annual property tax revenue lost would be a minimum of about a million dollars a year,
all the way up to three and a half million dollars a year, depending on, of course, density
and home value. The one thing that I do need to point out and make everyone very
aware of, not just for this particular issue, but for many issues that are going to be
coming your way is, is that the sewer capacity in the south is -- is getting chewed up
very very very quickly. With the preliminary plats that Council has approved, there are -
- I have got my numbers backwards. With the pending applications and the ones that
you have approved, there are only about 300 units -- equivalent residential units of
capacity left in that area. The pending applicant, since they do not have an approved
total -- about 870 lots, so what has been approved with -- only what's been approved by
our -- about 1,100, maybe 1,200 units left out there. But, as you know, those are going
pretty quickly in that area. I'm going to let the planning director offer a few comments at
this point.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, I'm sorry, it's just when we
discussed this before, we've had a lot of discussions -- it seems like once a month they
crop up about this whole area here and, in particular, in this area, the furthest extent of
the sewer reach for this line and there seems to be some question as to whether we will
ever get there -- that some of these properties would, really, seem to be able to develop
easier in Boise city or Ada County, actually, than others. And, then, I did just want to
point out some of the very odd parcelization that's gone on down here and we have
seen in these kind of circumstances where it's very difficult to effectively develop and
that's one of the reasons we felt that Council may want to consider whether they should
be in the area of city impact or not. I mean if it was large 40 acre or 80 acre or 120-acre
properties, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion, but aside from the sewer
constraints there, it's a parcelization pattern and that may not lend itself to real easy
development of this area in the future. The fire district boundaries does go to Columbia,
though, correct, Mr. Silva? It goes to Columbia? It goes to Lake Hazel. Which I was
pointing at the right line, just called it the wrong thing. Sorry. So, the fire district
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 25 of 43
boundary does come down to Lake Hazel. So, if those were incorporated in the city of
Boise, there is some potential that the fire district could lose some of their area. Those
were the only additional comments I wanted to make.
Watson: Mr. President, I think I was done with my presentation, but certainly be glad to
answer questions.
Wardle: Okay. Council, questions for Brad?
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Brad, I see United Water is willing to get a well out there. What's the county going
to do as far as the sewer? Are they going to allow septic tanks or a community sewer
like we have got at a couple locations here in the county or what?
Watson: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, I believe -- my understanding is from the
applicant that they will be doing a community wastewater system for the non-farm
portion. I don't know what the ultimate proposal would be, other than Boise city bringing
central services to it via a lift station.
Bird: Thank you, Brad.
Wardle: Brad, let me ask for a little clarification here. Are you asking the Council this
evening to choose one of these four options? Is this for information? What would you
like as an outcome?
Watson: Mr. President, I think staff or Planning and Zoning and Public Works, we need
some direction on what we are going to do out in this area. As Anna mentioned, we
have had several discussions at your level and numerous ones at our level, on a
property down here that is or was owned by Bradford and Camille Shaw. We have had
this one here that is owned by the Calvary church. They have been in front of you and I
have met with them numerous times. We have a golf course here that isn't going to
redevelop in residential, so -- but we just -- we are getting these questions out here and
we don't know what direction -- at least I don't know what direction to give them as far
as temporary service, service some day, never -- I feel like we are at -- I.hate to use that
term, because it's getting over used these days, but the tipping point on this property out
here. We either need to -- well, we can't serve it. We can't serve it with sewer. We just
can't right now. I mean we probably could squeeze one -- well, another half mile into
the capacity we have, but we can't until the Black Cat crosses the interstate. That gets
back into that whole Ten Mile interchange transportation issue subject. So, yeah, I
guess I would like some direction on one of these four options and, as I said, number
four is probably not the one that really means anything.
Bird: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 26 of 43
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Brad, I want a recommendation -- I mean if we was to go ahead and get a well out
there and let them put in some kind of a sewer system, do you want to inherit that sewer
system, like you're going to on a couple others?
Watson: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, as you recall, we went down this road with
another project on Linder and Victory area and it turned into a long, long, long process
of back and forth. I'm not saying we can't do it, we could -- we have a lot of skilled
people that could run a system and if we were allowed to review plans, make sure it's
built to our specifications, we can do that. But what that's doing is driving up the
developer's cost to the point where I -- he's already got preliminary plat approval from
Ada County and now he's got approval from United Water. The only thing that may be
lacking -- and Mr. Wood is here if you'd like to question his approval on the community
septic system -- or wastewater system.
Bird: Does your -- what is your department's -- what's your feeling that your department
would like to see happen here, given all the circumstances and the history?
Watson: Councilmember Bird, issuing 300 building permits a month is probably not the
best frame of mind for me to answer this in, but I'm not confident we can get sewer
there anytime in the near future and operating a satellite system -- or we can do it, it's
not another thing that we really want to be burdened with. We are busy enough. If you
do one, I think there will be others that come in, follow right along. I don't want to do a
subdivision where we provide the water and don't have the sewer necessarily.
Bird: I agree with you a hundred percent and, on the same token, the developer isn't --
isn't going to go by your specifications on a sewer system if it's going to cost him -- if it's
going to hurt his penciling out. You and I both know that.
Wardle: Council, would you like to hear from Mr. Wood?
Rountree: Sure.
Bird: Sure.
Wardle: Please.
Wood: My name is Dan Wood. I live at 2025 East Chateau in Meridian here.
Councilmember Bird, we do plan on interiorly, meaning the 44 lots, to develop that
according to the City of Meridian's specifications. But the actual sewer system, the
treatment capacity, we are doing a self-contained system, you know, that's -- that's
been -- what, is under -- there is one being built out in Eagle right now. There is one out
in Kuna right now. There are a number of other places. But, ultimately, it's treated right
there on site and, ultimately, it's clean water and from there we are going to put it on the
Meridian City Council
May 17. 2005
Page 27 of 43
ground that we have, with the plans that when the city did come, that, ultimately, that
would have to be abandoned and homes up - you know, the 44 homes we have, we
would attach, then, or it would be attached. Of course, it creates more problems, then,
too, you know, because those homeowners are -- who knows, they are not going to be
real excited about it, but we also realize that, you know, that's going to be in the CC&Rs
and we are going to disclose all that, that some day the City of Meridian will own this,
but for now that doesn't mean when the city might get there and from what the dates
were thrown around the other day, it could be as far out as 2010. And so who knows
what it might be then, so -- but I want you to know that our plans were to do it the way
the city has it done. JUB submitted the plans to DEQ. Be more than happy to have
Brad or whoever take a look at them. I mean that's -- just to see if that is the case. So,
like was mentioned before, you know, even though politically the city wasn't ready to go
out in this part of town, you can see there is an application that I got notice on that's
going to take, if approve, would front on Amity, which potentially puts it only a quarter
mile away from -- which is only one property owner, so that -- so, I hope that answered
your question.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Yeah. Dan, it does. And I realize that, but the thing -- you know, the thing that I
don't want to see the city have to get into -- we have been very fortunate by putting
some service out to a couple of subdivisions and, then, when they got contiguous, we
brought them in and we didn't have one complaint. We never had one complaint, thank
God. I don't want to get to the point of Boise. Yeah, you can put it in your CC&Rs, you
can do whatever. Are you going to be the only real estate agent there? Okay. I mean
we can be like out here at Crossroads, you know, those people -- there was a big sign
that said commercial coming, but their realtors told them they wasn't going to be there.
We had -- we had resident after resident in here testifying to that. And that's what
happens. And, then, the City of Meridian looks like they are taking ground, you know,
and you think these people are going to put in a sewer system now and, then, be real
happy to pay our 6,000 dollars hookup fee or something?
Wood: I understand.
Bird: And that's something I think as a Council we have got to decide if we want to put
to future -- because this is going to be a future Council. Now, Shaun might be young
enough to be still on it, but --
Donnell: Are you offended Councilman Rountree?
Rountree: No. I'm proud of it.
Bird: I just feel that -- I don't know how -- I'm not sure I want to put us in that kind of a
deal. And I know, Dan, that you would -- you know, what you say we can go to the bank
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 28 of 43
on, but you're not going to build every house and you're not going to sell every house
out there.
Wood: You can put it right in -- you know, the other subdivision that we did out -- that
we got in the county, you know, we put it -- it's like the first item we put on your CC&Rs,
but when the city of Boise annexes, there will be people that said we never knew, but,
yet, it's right on the face of the plat and it's the first thing in our CC&Rs but -- and there
will be confusion -- or there will be misstatements and to agents saying this or that, I
won't disagree. I mean you just do the best you can and try and notice as much as you
can, but, inevitably, you won't satisfy them and that's something that is -- you know, you
keep trying to circle us to try and find a better way to do it, you know, so that we don't
have that issue, and that's why I have been here a couple of times to say, hey, is there
a way we can work it out and I have talked with staff a couple times, but the way the
city's is I understand and so that's why have been going down that route and it just
happens that this piece is so close to United Water and Boise that all of a sudden it's
like, hey, if you're going to do a satellite well, maybe we ought to look at providing, you
know, United Water right to them. Well, they are about just as far away as the City of
Meridian is, so when, you know, United got the objection from the City of Meridian, it's
like, okay, let's go talk to the City of Meridian. We always intended -- and it's not only
me that's involved in this. There is partners involved and I just happen to be the only
guinea pig that comes up here. But, you know, we have always intended it was going to
be a Meridian subdivision. But, like you say, if it's -- you know, politically it sounds like
it's going to be a ways out there with -- you know, and traffic's only getting worse in
northwest Meridian and without that Ten Mile I can see it potentially being awhile, but
sewer is going to be right to this ground here if capacity was there, so --
Bird: Okay. You answered my question.
Wardle: Thank you.
Watson: Mr. President? If I may, just to make one clarification to make sure we all
understand. If you do consider this release from the referral area, what -- what I would
take as direction is that be removed from our sewer master plan area and that we are
not serving that ultimately with sewer. That means this will be generally to lower density
Ada County stuff or the cluster stuff, because United Water, if they are going to come
here, they come out just to do a little subdivision, they will take this whole three square
mile area and, then, we get into the same situation that southwest Boise has and I don't
look forward to that. Thank you.
Wardle: Council, is the decision that you would like to discuss some more, make this
evening, potentially bring back a recommendation?
Rountree: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Councli
May 17,2005
Page 29 of 43
Rountree: I guess I'd like to share some guidance from Mr. Nary in terms of this is in a
referral area, I don't know -- I don't see anything -- official request to extend this area,
but that's something that's being talked about. Is that something that needs to be
brought up in a Public Hearing or can it just be an action from the Council? If we don't
exclude the area, it sounds to me like approval has already been granted to subdivide
and provide water and it's got a package point for the sewer. So, what is our say in this
situation? Refresh my memory. It's been awhile.
Nary: Thank you, Council President, Members of the Council, Councilmember
Rountree. I don't think -- and Brad and Anna can correct me if I'm wrong -- I don't think
you have to do any of these actions tonight. I think you're right, I mean the project's
been approved to this point by the county. The issue was is how is the water going to
get there and right now there is an issue -- I think the portion -- if I understand this
correctly, that portion that is -- we discussed in this Black Rock, the one that's outlined
in red on that picture, is wholly outside of our area. The original request by United
Water came, actually, across Amity Road and up to this property, as well as the part
that's yellow and green. So, right now this property is already -- or this development
has already been approved as it is, so Mr. Wood just has to figure out how to get water
there, whether the city is going to provide it through some cost share or something else
or he's going to have to do a well or something -- something different. I guess my belief
is what the staff is asking is that this is not the only piece of property, this just happens
to be a larger one of those and is seeking direction from the Council as to how do we do
this, do we continue this master planning toward this area all the way down to the
southern boundary there at Columbia or do we basically stop the planning area at
Locust Grove, because I think -- Locust Grove all the way down to Columbia allows
these properties, basically, to be out of the referral area and if that's the decision of this
Council, then, you direct the staff simply to begin that process of whatever we need to
do to notify Ada County that we no longer consider that to be part of a referral area or
our future growth area and off the top of my head right now I couldn't tell you specifically
beyond just the letter of notification of the county if we need to do more than that. But I
think that's -- that's the reason we are having this discussion is this area is -- I think, as
Brad said a number of times, it comes up often to the staff as to what to do and this just
happens to be part of the discussion today is how does this water get to this particular
property. Currently United Water is eligible to serve it. It's more of where the area of
impact touches us that we are trying to deal with. Now, did I get it wrong? Am I off
track? Okay. I thought that's what -- that was the reason we are -- if you chose to do
nothing now and think about it, nothing bad is going to happen. You can say I think it's
just that we need to have this discussion at some point and put on -- if you're not -- if
you don't feel comfortable making a decision tonight, I would simply suggest that you
put it back on your agenda within two weeks -- or I guess it would be three weeks if
you're not having a meeting in two weeks.
Rountree: So, the only -- the thing I'm hearing, then, is that at this point, other than this
particular subdivision being in the referral area, it's not in our impact area, unless we
choose to extend the sewer and/or water into the referral area, it's a moot point.
Meridian City Councli
May 17, 2005
Page 30 of 43
Nary: Councilman Rountree, that's correct. And the referral area is simply that,
because it is a future planning area as well, they provide us with that option for input,
but that was the key reason in the order from the PUC that they opted not to grant our
request to deny it, that the only issue becomes is if we are ever going to grow in that
direction, then, we need to have some direction about that. If the Council's desire is not
to go in that direction and simply stop at Locust Grove, that's fine as well.
Donnell: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: Brad, help me understand the map that's included with this packet. Everything
that's there is future on this map?
Watson: Mr. President, Councilmember Donnell, the brown lines are future sewer
trunks and are included in our sewer master plan.
Donnell: Where is our current sewer? How far does it -- where is it? Off the map,
obviously.
Watson: No. It's -- if I can point at the screen. It exists to this point on the southern
boundary of Tuscany Lakes Subdivision.
Donnell: All right. On Locust Grove?
Watson: Just off of Locust Grove.
Donnell: Okay.
Bird: And the other one isn't at all.
Donnell: All right. And, Mr. President, follow up?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: I really would like some time to about this. Being one of those people who
likes to control the world, I don't think that -- that I like the idea of giving up any kind of
control in this part of the world and I understand staff's concern about being able to
provide services and what kind of impact that is on them, but -- so I would like to
suggest that we do give some thought to this and bring this back in a couple of weeks
for possibly a decision at that point.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 31 of 43
Bird: I need one more question out of Brad. Brad, if I remember right, this is JUB's --
off of their sewer deal, wasn't it, that we had done?
Watson: Council member Bird, that is correct.
Bird: And if I remember right, every line they drew was gravity flow and no lift stations;
right?
Watson: Yes.
Bird: Okay. So, this was all gravity flow?
Watson: Yes.
Bird: I think that makes --
Donnell: And would continue to be? I mean that's all the way to that furthest point is all
gravity flow?
Watson: All the way to the upper end is gravity flow.
Bird: All gravity flow.
Donnell: And so, Mr. President, if I might?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell. You bet.
Donnell: Then, as -- if I understood what you were saying here, Brad, then, if Boise
were to provide sewer services, they would have to put a lift station in; is that right?
Wardle: I do not intimately know the master plan, but I believe they would have to pump
over into their Cloverdale trunk once it's in this area.
Donnell: So, they are coming in an opposite direction?
Bird: Same thing they did at Centennial and Bristol Heights and all them. Thanks to our
school district.
Canning: Mr. President, one quick comment if I might. It occurs to me that there is one
basic assumption that staff made that we haven't made clear to you all, so I just wanted
to make sure you were aware of that and that is the assumption that if United Water
includes this in their service area, that that is something that the city does not want to,
eventually, annex -- to have them actually in the city limits. So, that's why this issue is
coming to you now, is because it's -- if you don't want United Water in the eventual city
limits, then, we need to make other arrangements to get water to Mr. Wood. So, that
was the sense of urgency that had not -- I mean it's not urgent urgent, but he needs to
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 32 of 43
know fairly quickly, so that we don't allow United Water to go into what will eventually be
the city limits.
Bird: Mr. President, can I ask a legal question? Clear this up. I think I know the
answer, but if -- if and when we annex that, having our own water system, if United
Water is in there, they still get to stay there, don't they?
Nary: Mr. Bird, yes, they still get to stay there and I appreciate Mrs. Canning pointing
that out. I think that's the only urgency that you have, is that right now United Water has
authority to go serve the Black Rock development. If you don't want that, then, we'd
have to provide it in some fashion in some reasonable time for Mr. Wood, otherwise, he
can ask that United Water do it. So, that is the one urgency, I guess, that I wanted to
make clear, that I don't think Mr. Wood wants you to take too long to make that decision
on what you'd like to do.
Wardle: Mr. Watson, I will just offer my quick opinion for you and if any of the Council
would like to add theirs -- I think we need to have this discussion about the area. I'm not
prepared to make the decision tonight about whether at anytime in the future we should
annex the property or not. Certainly I think that we are not going to be able to serve --
the very very far corner if we are not going to be able to serve that with sewer, even in
the future, then, we need to potentially look at removing that from the referral area. As
far as water service, I know that the city's had a history in the past of holding along our
water system. It appears that United Water is available to serve this piece and while
certainly that's not to mean that we like to as a common sewer thing within the city, at
this point in time I don't think that the City of Meridian is prepared to make other
arrangements for water and so we can -- I hate to say put that on another Council, but it
doesn't appear to me that we have a choice. We will have the choice whether to annex
the property when we become contiguous and that will be, really, the choice that we will
make, Does that spark anything in --
Bird: Mr. President, I just have -- you know, I have a -- I'm like Councilwoman Donnell, I
don't like to give up any area, but I also understand developers have to have something.
And I absolutely do not want United Water coming in our territory. We -- I have a feeling
that we have a problem at one location now that's going to surface. So, I see where
Brad says that it's about 8,400 lineal feet to get our water down there, whether that's the
right way to go, but I'm with you, Mr. President, I think it needs to come back -- what
would it be, June 7th -- and give Mr. Wood an answer, because he certainly deserves
one, and I would be prepared to do that.
Wardle, Okay. June 7th. Do the rest of the Council -- let me clarify that, Mr. Bird. On
the issue of Meridian providing water service to this specific development, we would
answer that question on the 7th?
Bird: I would expect that we should -- you know, that should be part of our answer is
that, and Mr. Wood's taking care of the sewer, so --
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 33 of 43
Wardle: And I believe that's already it the process and still have some approval time.
Okay.
Bird: Because, you know, I'm to the point that if we can't keep the water and sewer, I
don't want our -- I don't want our people being billed by another water company.
Wardle: Okay.
Donnell: And, Mr. President, just to follow up.
Wardle: Okay.
Donnell: I think, if I heard what Brad said -- and perhaps, Anna, you as well, is that staff
really would like to know -- to have some direction as well, not just on the water issue,
but on other issues that come forward in that area; is that right? So, you really want us
to think about more than just whether or not we should provide water or not? Don't
make us think too hard now.
Canning: President Wardle, Councilwoman Donnell, one of the -- clearly the United
Water issue is the only urgent issue. The other issues can certainly wait for some time.
And one of the enhancements I have requested is to study all of the south county areas,
so I think that that issue may come up. It's certainly one that needs to be addressed
within the next couple of years at the latest, so --
Donnell: The next couple of years at the latest?
Wardle: Thank you. Then, Council, if you would agree, I would ask Brad to bring back
June 7 a -- as a department report either a positive or negative answer as to the water
service for Black Rock Subdivision. Okay.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would like to have staff provide us some -- just bullet points, the pros and
cons in this particular area as it relates to its potential for the City of Meridian. I hear the
folks that want to control it not wanting to lose control, but I don't know necessarily fall
on that particular venue, so I think there is probably some advantages to not possibly
having it as part of Meridian as well, so -- other than the sewerability, which, you know,
if it all gravity feeds, that's certainly the most economical thing to do for us and/or the
developers in the future, but are there some other issues as it relates to other
infrastructure, as well as just the community itself that are advantages or disadvantages
and it's not a homework assignment, but if you'd provide some of your thoughts it would
be helpful before the 7th.
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 34 of 43
Wardle: Mr. Rountree, just to clarify one of the issues, you mentioned that -- to have it
not in the City of Meridian. One of the things that I have heard is, really, the decision is
-- is whether to -- is the water issue and -- which certainly doesn't preclude annexation
in the future.
Rountree: No.
Wardle: But would, obviously, have a different water provider. Great. Does that
provide us enough direction, Brad?
Watson: Yes. Thank you.
Item 19:
Department Reports:
C,
Legal Department - Bill Nary
1,
Proposed Policy Changes:
a,
Bereavement Leave:
b,
Education Reimbursement:
c,
Introductory Period of Employment:
d,
Compensation Program:
e,
Clothing Attire and Allowance:
f.
Military Leave:
Director Benefits Program:
g.
h.
Trial Service Period for Promotions or Transfers:
Wardle: Thank you very much. Item No. 19 has been moved from Item 6-C. Legal
Department, proposed policy changes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you. I thought I'd get out of the chair, since I always sit over there. A few
weeks ago I brought a bunch of ordinances that we had been working on and this week
we have a bunch of policies, so I don't want you to think I was just sitting around
drinking coffee like most lawyers do. Most of these policy changes have been directed
by you, some of them haven't, so I want to explain those. Some of them have come up
in application and the way our policy manual is worded, if there is an issue of
interpretation, it's my decision on to how to interpret the policy. What we have done is
try to make sure the policy makes sense and if we need to clean it up to make it clearer
in the future -- most of them are fairly simple. The first one I will just be brief and stop
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 35 of 43
me if you want to discuss any of these in more detail or you have changes you want me
to make. The first one, the bereavement leave, basically, it came up because the issue
has come up in the past. We have always applied bereavement to family members,
whether they were step-family, whether they were half brother or a half sister, we never
-- we never in the past, from what I have understood, ever applied that to somebody
they weren't allowed to take time off because it was a stepchild versus a natural born
child, so we just clarified that in the policy. The question had come up about it. I don't
think it's a huge change. Education reimbursement. We already have this policy
regarding reimbursement for employees to classes that are related to their employment.
They have to be approved by their department director, but there is a thousand dollar
limit and what we discussed at the department director level, that there are occasions
where we thought it would be more appropriate to give the director that discretion within
their training budget, with some other approvals, to allow for reimbursement that might
exceed a thousand dollars. The reason being is is that -- I guess the rational I can think
of as the most simple way to explain it, if you were going to send an employee to a
course that was a week long and that was in another state, it might cost more than a
thousand dollars, but if it was related to their employment and we felt we were going to
get a value out of that, we probably wouldn't blink, we would look how much was in our
budget, we'd make a decision to send the employee or not. If they are going to a class,
instead, at the University of Phoenix or Boise State or NNU or something like that --
and, again, it's related to their work, the city gains a benefit from it, with a cost of 1,200
dollars, instead of a thousand dollars, the employee is out 200 dollars of their own
money. It doesn't seem to make sense to do that. It seems like the director should
have the discretion to decide that it's going to benefit them, maybe that employee who is
attending classes, is not going to go on an out-of-state training, because they are
attending class instead and that's the kind of reimbursement and education that we are
trying to provide for the employee and provide some level of flexibility. It didn't make
sense to turn back 500 dollars out of your training budget and, then, have an employee
suffer a hundred dollar loss on the cost of a book or a course or something like that,
when we could reimburse it. That was the intent behind that. The introductory period of
employment. This was a bit more complicated than I -
Bird: I got a question.
Nary: Uh-huh.
Bird: On item number two in the procedures and related, the department director may
consider reimbursement in excess of a hundred thousand for registering --
Nary: One thousand.
Bird: -- with approval of the Mayor. I would prefer that to say approval of the Council.
Nary: Okay.
Donnell: And, Mr. Nary -- Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
May 17. 2005
Page 36 of 43
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: Just a thought about that. This really puts the onus on your department heads
and runs the risk of them favoring one over another, if they have that kind of discretion
as well. I mean that's just a thought. And I'm sure you have probably all discussed that,
but --
Nary: And, certainly, if we change it from the current, which is a thousand and it just
says if it's in excess of that, then, there needs to be more approval, I can certainly insert
the word Council in there instead. The introductory period of employment, just to give
you a little brief history, one of the things Chief Worley told me when he was the chief
here is that if I ever had the ability to change this policy specifically, to make it not
remind everybody on every other line that they are an at-will employee and we can
terminate them at anytime for any reason, that's what we should do. He found it to be
so onerous for new employees and it sounded so cumbersome on a new employee to
drill that into them so hard. So, I tried to make it clear that we are still an at-will
employer, but not necessarily include it four times in the same policy, because it was
already in there enough. We also wanted to make sure that it was clear we could
extend the introductory period that we sometimes have for employees to 90 days. It
requires the Mayor's approval on every one of those -- the Mayor doesn't need to sign
every one of those things, it doesn't make much sense, as long as the human resources
department is part of that discussion, I think it makes more sense. Legally I think that's
adequate. The other thing we did -- we took out section six, because that's now the one
that's called trial service period. The reason I took it out of this policy is it's two different
concepts in the same policy, it doesn't make much sense from an employee's
standpoint. When you're talking about introductory period for brand new employees, it
doesn't make much sense to mix in something else and so that's why we took it out and
put it in another place. The compensation program -- when we do the budget
presentation, I'm going to be proposing a different method as to how we group our
compensation plan and how we group our different categories, because we have 21 pay
categories for exempt employees -- or for non-exempt employees and eight pay
categories for about 15 -- well, about 20 different jobs for exempt employees. It's real
cumbersome and most everyone I have spoken to since I have been here never could
understand how we came up with these methods. They don't seem to make much
sense to the general employees, so I will be proposing a change, but this policy is more
of a cleanup to remove the cost of living requirement. A year -- or last October we
discovered in our policy that we had actually mandated ourself to require us to give
cost-of-living increases to all employees annually and the Council direction at the time
was that -- that isn't the way we are going to do business. We are trying to move toward
a merit-based system as the direction we'd like to go. All I have done here is remove
the cost of living as a mandatory requirement annually and the only other change to that
policy is that the current policy says if an employee exceeds their pay range, then, they
are entitled to only one more pay increase and, then, all they are entitled to is cost of
living. Well, again, if we eliminate cost of living, then, they have nothing, that doesn't
make much sense. What I have included and if you want me to change it I certainly
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 37 of 43
can, if we are going to move to a merit-based system, what I have included in here is
that once they have exceeded the pay range, they still can be entitled to their merit
increase, but we would give them in a lump sum amount, it wouldn't go to their base, so
that their base would still have to wait until their pay range caught up, but they still could
receive a merit increase. I think that's a better benefit to the employees, it provides
better incentives, we have a number of -- well, a small number, but a number of
employees who are senior, have senior level positions, or are in a position where they
have been here a long period of time, all they have gotten for a number of years is cost-
of-living increases and we are very fortunate that we have such great employees, that it
has not been a disincentive to their performance. They are almost always still the
higher performers in their department, yet they are getting the one, one and a half
percent increases and that's all they receive. Clothing attire. This one has been our
policy, but it seems like it's gone a lot longer than it really should have. It's been held up
a little bit, because there was some discrepancy in the departments on safety clothing
and how to issue that. I tried to clean it up to make it clear. Basically, if we buy into the
-- if we buy them clothes to wear to work, then, that's what you have to wear. If you're
going to get attire in your department, you're going to purchase ones that have city
logos on them or things like that, that you can only have city logos on items that actually
can be worn in the workplace. I don't think it should be a real problem, but I wanted to
make sure that never -- never became an issue. And that, ultimately, the department
directors are responsible for the -- responsible for the people that they supervise. One
of the questions that come up a number of times -- and it's really hard to craft -- and I
have looked at a number of different policies -- it's really hard to craft a policy that fits
everyone. But the department director needs to be responsible for their own folks and
setting that tone and setting that example in that department and making clear what the
expectations are. Honestly, employees that have a tremendous amount of interaction
with the public will have a different standard of attire than those that don't. Those that
work in an office setting will have a different standard than those that work in a more
blue-collar maintenance type of function. I think it makes more sense to let the
department directors deal with that, rather than trying to fit a one size fits all, and, then,
we -- you know, when the Mayor asks me who is supposed to tell this person not to
wear that, I can tell her the policy says you go tell the director, the director can deal with
the person. That makes the most sense to me. The military leave policy is just to catch
up. The Council actually had directed this before and we just hadn't gotten the policy
cleaned up. This simply allows employees who are on active military duty, would allow
their family members to remain on our medical program, as long as they pay the co-
payment each month, like all other employees do and if there was a gap in pay between
what the employee was making and what -- for the city and what they are making in the
military, that the city would make up that gap in pay -- basically paying that out of the
salary savings while we hold the position open for the employee. The director benefits.
This one is real popular with some of our colleagues. The direction I have received both
from Mr. Bird, as our liaison, as well as the Mayor, is that in our policy we don't
distinguish at all between directors singling out employees or general employees when
we hire them or when they begin their employment with the city. One of the things we
have been very fortunate -- that hasn't been a recruiting problem to date. It hasn't been
a retention problem to date, but in a very competitive market that we live in and a very
Meridian City Councii
May 17, 2005
Page 38 of 43
competitive environment we live in, both the Mayor and Mr. Bird felt we needed to
address that in some fashion. I tried to fashion -- and the directors all -- we all
discussed it, trying to fashion -- they necessarily weren't all monetary in nature, although
some of them are, and some of them are, but that would provide some incentives and
here are the reasons for them. One -- the first bullet, obviously, is no introductory
period of employment. All the directors are appointed, so they serve under a different
system anyway, they serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and the Council anyway, so
having them fall under the introductory period of employment where they say in six
months we are going to reevaluate you doesn't make much sense. I deleted that. The
annual leave accrual is increased. Right now directors when they start, start at zero,
like every other employee, they accumulate eight hours a month and they accumulate it
on the -- on the increases as designed for all employees in there. The problem with that
-- for example, Chief Anderson that we just hired, 24 years of experience with the City of
Nampa, he was accumulating vacation at 20 hours a month. He comes here and he
has zero. He starts at eight. It doesn't make much sense. Didn't, obviously, drive Chief
Anderson's decision to come to work here, but it doesn't really make much sense when
you're trying to recruit a senior level person to be a director of your department and,
then, tell them start a zero and -- because you aren't always going to be able to attract
the best candidates if you need to do that. The next one is half of the accrued vacation
leave annually I put it in deferred compensation plan. One of the things the Mayor felt
was very important is that the message that we send to all of our directors is that we not
only care about you working for us today, we want to care about you staying with us for
the long haul and what happens to you when you do leave, when you do retire from the
city's employment. It does allow this type of diversion. You have to do it in what -- you
have to do it in this calendar year for the next calendar year. Rather than cashing it out,
which sometimes does not look very good to the public, we would simply put it towards
the deferred compensation program. We already have a couple of them that exist for
the city, so we can divert -- essentially, there is a monetary impact, of course, to the city
and Stacy was going to workup those -- this -- if we were to implement this policy, we
couldn't actually implement this until 2006, because they'd have to make that election
this year. Again, I don't think from a dollar standpoint -- Stacy would have the final
numbers, but I don't think it's going to be a significant cost for the city. The first year
there may be a lot, because directors have a large accumulation of vacation, maybe,
but after that, after they took half of it out each year, the benefit on the other end is that
if the director left, you would have less of a pool to pay back to them when they
separated, because it puts some of that away each year in deferred compo The city
match was another basically part of that. The city would match a portion of the
director's salary -- two percent is what was proposed here -- up to two percent. If the
director put in less than two percent of their own salary into the deferred compensation
program, then, the city would only match whatever they match. It was another, I guess,
a benefit, really, of trying to entice higher quality folks, senior level folks, when we have
that need, or retaining folks as well. You know, in the private sector that's not an
uncommon type of thing, profit sharing and things like that, in the private sector that
they can offer. This is the only way we can match that to some degree. The bank of
hours is another issue that comes up periodically. Again, when we start as directors like
myself, you start here you have zero sick leave, you have zero vacation, you don't have
Meridian City Councli
May 17, 2005
Page 39 of 43
any time on the books for any -- and for some folks having a little bank to make sure
that they could take off time for a three day weekend to go do something or if they are
sick in the first couple of months and they have to deal with, you know, an illness in their
family or themselves, having a little cushion for them -- most private sector places may
give you even more than that, but we felt that was adequate of two days of annual leave
and, basically, a week's worth of sick leave. Again, it's a soft cost to the city, so it's not
a real significant monetary impact. Next is the life insurance coverage. Currently, all
employees, the city cover a 25,000-dollar life policy. There is not a significant cost to
the city. We can increase that for the directors if we wanted to. Again, the idea was
trying to provide the message that we care about kind of everything that happens in
your life and you being a part of what we are doing. The other thing, just to back up,
one of the things I added in here was to make it clear that directors are accountable to
the Mayor and the City Council and the citizens of Meridian. A few years ago we had
an issue where there wasn't always -- at least to me, when I was sitting up there, it
wasn't always clear to me that the directors always had that message that their
accountability wasn't just to their department, but it was also -- and certainly it was clear
that they had an accountability to the Mayor and the Council, but it wasn't always to me,
at least, clear that we also -- always had a responsibility to the citizens. You know, we
do manage the money with you on how we spend the citizens' dollars, how we manage
the operations of the city, and I just added in here -- as one of the reasons why we have
to even consider these types of benefits differently than we do for general employees.
Most general employees don't have that same responsibility. Of course, they do -- it's,
again, as a report to a director. The last one, this is just -- actually, it was Mr. Bird's
impetus for this. There is, hopefully, never going to be this type of occasion -- you
know, most of you are familiar with family medical leave and if you have adequate time
on the books, then, if you have an illness or you have a serious medical condition that
requires some treatment time or something else, then, you have a job security and take
your time off to be able to do that. Well, again, a lot of the directors don't always have
that especially some -- most of our directors are fairly new, they don't have a
tremendous amount of time in the books. We do have a short-term disability plan. The
city already provides that. That's a benefit. What this -- what this proposal is is simply
that if that -- if the director doesn't have adequate time to make up that 21 day waiting
period that's necessary for the -- for some disability to start, that the city would cover
that difference. There, again, may be a fiscal impact to the city again, I hope that this
isn't going to happen very much. I don't know that it's happened really ever, but if it
were to happen, the city would cover that basic difference in the 21 days. That pays
you 60 percent of your salary, so it doesn't pay the entire salary, so -- but, again, we
wouldn't be replacing the director in the interim, so it would be to make up that
difference, sort of the same idea we have with military leave. The director, while they
are off on this leave, weren't going to lose their paycheck or have their pay cut, so they
have to deal with that loss as well, a pay, as well as the time off that they have to take.
The long-term disability, the other portions of this, is the same idea, it's to provide that
gap coverage to make sure you get all the way to your 90 days, if necessary, and, then,
that they would cover that. I only added on an additional 90 days, because at that point
you're at a six month window, 90 for short term, another 90 in long term, at that point,
180 days for the city, I felt, as well as the rest of the directors felt the city is going to be
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 40 of 43
making some decisions at that juncture. That director is going to have to make some
decisions as to whether they can return to work any longer and we probably couldn't go
much longer than that without a director in place and with just an interim person having
to fill that gap. That would at least cover that window for both the director and the city.
We haven't had very many people even get into long-term disability. It's kind of been --
from the information I was able to gather, we've either had people that got us a long-
term disability -- just general employees, not just directors, but they have either got into
it for about two weeks and, then, they were fine, or they got into it and they are on it
forever. I mean it was one or the other. There wasn't a whole lot of people that went
30, 60, or 90 days out and came back, it was usually either a short term, they roll over a
little tiny bit and, then, that was it and they were done or they were seriously disabled
and weren't able to return to work at all. Again, I know it's different, it wasn't -- it wasn't
something we took very lightly. We tried to really put some thought into every one of
these things as to the cost benefit and the retention issues of it, the recruitment issues
that come from it, and whether or not it's fair and reasonable and what we ask all the
directors to do in their positions in the city. I'd just leave that for your consideration.
Implementation of it, we haven't gotten that far yet. If you were to approve it -- as I said,
for example, that the vacation buy back that goes into it couldn't even occur until 2006
so, we are a ways out for that. Some of these other things we'd just have to figure out
how do we implement them if it's acceptable to all of you. Do you have any questions
about any -- do you want me to keep going? There is only one more. The last one
simply we took the trial service period for promotions or transfers. My initial thought
was we already have made it clear to folks that you're already at will. Just because you
move to another position, just because you get promoted, doesn't mean that if you can't
perform that job, that you get to go back to what you used to do. But because it's come
up occasionally from people that didn't always understand, they thought if they got
promoted to a new position or they took a different position in the city and it didn't work
out for them, that they had some automatic right to return to their former position, even if
we had already filled it and whether or not someone else was already working and
maybe working out. So, we wanted to make clear to folks that that's not the reality. If
you get promoted and you don't work out, you may not have a job. Like I said, that was
just the other policy, we just put in a new one to make it clear that it applies just by itself.
And that's all I have. So, if you have any questions or issues or concerns or changes,
besides the one Mr. Bird's already raised?
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Yeah, Bill. Applicability of all these to the fire service.
Nary: All of the -- all of these policies specifically say a number of times in the policy
manual-- I can include them if -- like in the benefits program, that they don't apply if
there is a contract.
Rountree: Okay.
Nary: So--
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 41 of 43
Donnell: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: Let's see, how do I say this? First of all, you do a really good job of clearing
the room. And secondly --
Nary: Thank you.
Donnell: You're welcome. This -- you have made a very rich benefit system even richer
with these changes and while I'm not in disagreement of many of the changes that you
make, I would really like to see, before we -- before I could feel comfortable acting on it,
a cost analysis of what this really will cost the city. When you say soft costs, truly,
regardless of whether they are leave days, vacation days, whatever it is, it is a cost to
the city when those people are not at work and so if there is a way that Stacy could cost
out at least some of these ones where you actually can get numbers to, I would really
appreciate that before I would feel comfortable in acting on these changes.
Nary: Mr. President, just to clarify, Councilmember Donnell, is that just on the benefits
program?
Donnell: Mostly on G. But, actually, I think that there would be a cost on D. I kind of
like that if we pay you wear on the clothing attire allowance. The military leave, I'd like
to see cost on that as well. And, then, of course, the director benefits program. And,
actually -- oh, I'm okay with the education reimbursement, if that's handled with our
approval, so --
Nary: On the compensation program, because there is no cost of living, so you're
talking about just that -- giving merit and a lump sum?
Donnell: Exactly.
Nary: What will that be?
Donnell: Exactly,
Nary: Okay. And, then, on the military leave, because we only have one active military
person at this juncture, the family has remained on our program, but they are paying the
same co-pay as everyone else, so that -- there is no cost difference to the city and he
does -- he gets higher pay --
Donnell: Through the military?
Nary: -- currently than he would have received here, so he receives no reimbursement.
And in no situation, if they are going to active military, like this particular one, where
Meridian City Councii
May 17, 2005
Page 42 of 43
they are actually going overseas, that's almost always going to be the case. The only
ones that get activated that maybe stay in the United States, but they go replace
someone, that could happen. We only have two other people that are currently in the
military that are eligible to do that.
Donnell: We just have to remind ourselves that as Bob McClain said earlier this
evening, our growth is phenomenal and that will also play out with our police and as any
practice and policy that you put in place affects -- affects the city down the road with the
growth of any of those facets as well. So, I'm assuming that this military leave also
includes reserves? Anyone that's --
Bird: That's who it would be.
Nary: Right. Yes. It does include reserves, but the policy part that we are changing is
only if it's a call to active duty.
Donnell: Okay. All right.
Nary: But not for their two weeks off or for that. The only other thing, too, is what we
found commonly and also in other organizations like Nampa and Boise, is that a
majority of your employees that are going to be in the reserves to go in the military
seem to all fall into both fire and police commonly.
Donnell: Sure. Makes sense.
Nary: The reason that there is little to no cost to the city by basically paying them out of
our salary savings, because we have to hold their position, is because we can't fill the
position behind them with a temp. If they were in a different position than police or fire,
then, we might have the ability to at least hire a temp in that, but we can't hire a temp
police officer or a firefighter, so we just generally run short for that period of time.
Donnell: Okay. Thank you.
Wardle: Thank you. Council, further direction? Mr. Nary, would it be your wish after
answering a couple of these questions to, then, bring these back as a resolution on --
Nary: Three weeks.
Wardle: Yeah, we are missing a meeting on the 1 st and so the 7th after some -- some
information back and forth.
Nary: Yeah. What I can do, Council President, is I can prepare a resolution, I will bring
the -- I'll prepare the resolution, so you can act on it if you wish, but we will provide you
a written copy of whatever information we gather on the financial implications, so you
will have it well in advance of that. If there is other questions, you don't have to act on
them on the 7th if you don't want to, we can certainly change it, we can remove that one
Meridian City Council
May 17, 2005
Page 43 of 43
policy if you're not ready to act on that one as well, so --
Donnell: Great. Thank you.
Nary: All right.
Wardle: Thank you. That brings us to the end of our agenda.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we adjourn.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn our meeting at 9:05. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: We are adjourned.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:05 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
~~/ tJ5'
DATE APPROVED