HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 11-06 Joint Ada County
Meridian Citv Council Special JointIWorkshop Meetina November 6. 2006
The Meridian City Council Special Joint/Workshop Meeting was called to order at
11 :00 A.M. on Monday, November 6, 2006 at the Ada County Courthouse by
Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle and Joe
Borton.
Members Absent: Charlie Rountree.
Staff Present: Ted Baird, Doug Strong, Pete Friedman and Will Berg.
Ada County Commissioners Present: Fred Tilman, Judy Peavey-Derr and Rick
Yzaguirre.
Others Present: Scott Cook, Gerry Armstrong and Richard Cook.
Item 1.
Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle
o Charlie Rountree
X
X Joe Borton
X Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Item 2.
Adoption of the Agenda:
Item 3.
Negotiation of an Amendment to the Area of City Impact
Agreement to provide for the Collection of Meridian's
Development Impact Fees within the Area of Impact:
Yzaguirre: Thank you all for joining us today. I guess our purpose here today is
to begin a negotiation in the area of impact to allow you to collect impact fees in
Ada County.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman we sent you a letter dated September 5th and -
Yzaguirre: (Inaudible). Okay, Mayor, I am sorry go ahead.
De Weerd: We sent you a letter dated September 5th or I am sorry, the letter was
not dated September 5th, that is what day we passed our own ordinance
requesting consideration of collecting area of impact fees or impact fees for our
area of impact. I am still asleep. We passed it on September 5th and it is
effective on December 1st and I have asked that Ted Baird, our Deputy City
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 2 of 16
Attorney kind of walk you through the process. We did go through a very
vigorous process for our own internal prospects and we appreciate your staff that
raised several questions (inaudible) in the past and so we really wanted to make
sure that this time as we update them that we answer all of those concerns while
we went through our own process. Ted, I will turn it over to you if that is okay?
Baird: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Mayor De Weerd and
Members of the City Council. I have prepared a topic outline that I will pass
around for items for us to discuss today. I just wanted to start with a brief
overview and let you know that we have totally redone our impact fee program in
Meridian. With that October 5th letter, you were sent a copy of our ordinance and
a copy of our consultants' report where they revised the methodology. We
simplified things quite a bit and we were very pleased with the work that our
Impact Fee Committee and our consultants did. We ended up with a schedule in
that and I will hand it out. One of the main goals was that our impact fee statute,
our methodology be fully compliant with state law and we spent a lot of time on
the capital improvements plan and here is just a handout that shows the various
places in the report and the consultant and that we have complied with all state
requirements with our capital improvements plan. The third and last handout that
I will give you is our actual impact fee schedule and what we ended up with. We
increased our parks' impact fee on residential units for a total of $1,138 per
single family residential unit. We instituted new impact fees for fire and police
services. Fire impact fee in the amount of $377 per residential unit and $.25 per
square foot on commercial development and police $85 per residential unit and
$.06 per square foot for non-residential. Total impact fees for residential would
be $1,600 per residential unit and $.31 for non-residential per square foot. That
is sort of the summary of what we ended up with. The report gives the details on
how we got there, so we would like at the end of this meeting have direction from
you for us to work with your staff so they can review our ordinance, review our
methodology and we are pretty confident that when they are done with that
review they will agree with us that we have done our job and that it is acceptable.
So with that what we would like to talk about today (inaudible) related to a
collection agreement. Now, you are all aware of course that you do collect for
Boise for their parks' impact fee. I have reviewed their collection agreement and
what we would like to do is something a little simpler than what Boise did. Boise
talks an awful lot about (inaudible) development standards and things of that
nature and as we go down here we really are not going to be developing parks
likely and the area of impact will be in a property acquisition mode, so most of the
parks would not be developed until they are brought into the area of impact. So,
we are hoping to have a more simplified collection agreement than what you
currently have in place with Boise. So, if you want to refer to the Item No.2 in
my outline. These are some of the issues that we would like to have a
discussion amongst the policy makers today about what issues, topics will be
discussed and negotiated in that agreement. First and probably the most
practical thing is where is the fee collected? One of your county residents goes
to your Building Department for a permit and are you going to collect the fee for
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 3 of 16
the City of Meridian or are you going to require them to take a trip down and get
a receipt to show that they (inaudible) as a check off item. I know that Mayor De
Weerd has some thoughts on that. Maybe this would be a good time to throw
that open for discussion?
De Weerd: Weill only had thoughts on it - we had hoped at one time when we
are building our city hall that we would have some kind of (inaudible) Ada County
kiosk or customer service center or counter, so I guess it was just my opportunity
to suggest that we have something within our new facility. I know that you might
have plans at the Pine Street location (inaudible) whenever that happens; we
could offer something within the city hall. But, that was my only point is to say
you know West Ada County is very desirous of a location that is a little closer to
home.
Baird: (Inaudible--) and of course for you and the County is customer service,
not making people driving more than one place.
Yzaguirre: That was the point I was just going to make. (Inaudible) and
encourage a one stop shop. I don't know, Gerry, what are your feelings as far for
information process?
Armstrong: Right now it is a fairly simple, forward process that we just collect
everything here and make it simple, but to have people to drive from that area
clear in here to collect the fees (inaudible) work out some kind of an
arrangement.
(Inaudible discussion)
Yzaguirre: So, we should collect here and then forward the money for them?
Bird: Mr. Chairman. Gerry is there any time they would not be collecting a
permit from the County and be paying their impact fees separate? You would
pay it at the same time, wouldn't you?
Armstrong: That is how we do it.
Bird: I know that is how we do it.
Peavey-Derr: So, in other words it is where you -
Bird: It is wherever you get your permit is where you would have to pay it.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
Yzaguirre: Yes.
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 4 of 16
De Weerd: We know you take customer service very serious and I understand
that. We would hope that at some point they could do their business there as
well and not have to go two places, but again, we still have that offer out there.
Yzaguirre: Well, the need is not going to go away. It is only going to get bigger,
so we need to keep thinking about that.
Peavey-Derr: Well, Mr. Chair if I might ask you - just to go back a little bit.
understand your methodology having gone through ACHD impact fees and it
gave a whole new appreciation for collection and distribution. Are you asking us
to also interpret this as the fees are being paid? In other words is it going to be
our staff explaining to your customers in essence that the impact fees are going
to be spent in their area and so on and so forth?
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioner. We would certainly encourage your staff to
refer any questions to the City of Meridian to our fee administrator and we would
be happy to do that interpretation. It is just our understanding that your staff
would need to be comfortable with what we have done before we enter into this
collection agreement. Part of what Boise has in their collection agreement and
one that we are suggesting is that we include an indemnification provision that if
there is any challenge to the ordinance it is all on us - no liability. We are happy
to take that on. If you are happy to collect it for us, we are happy to take
whatever burdens are associated with that.
Peavey-Derr: The other thing is it going to be allocated for a zone where it is
collected it will be spent?
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioner. This is one of the things that our consultant
did that simplifies it considerably. Our entire city and the area of impact is one
sort of zone. It is a little different from the traffic in that North Meridian residents
benefit and South Meridian Parks - a fire occurs in South Meridian, all of the
rural fire districts are going to go if it is a significant enough event - the same
kind of cross use of our police force with the Ada County Sheriff, so we think the
benefit has been proven to be throughout the entire area of impact and so what
that means to you is for your residents paying that fee, if they are presumed to
benefit from our parks, Meridian parks, Meridian Police and Meridian Fire and
they would also benefit from any increases in the capital improvements
(inaudible) paid for.
Peavey-Derr: All right. Thank you.
Baird: So, the feedback I am hearing, Mr. Chair and Commissioners and Council
is that this agreement should be drafted so there is a single point of collection
here at the Courthouse, when a county permit is pulled and we will work out the
details about how that would be transmitted to the city, any auditing requirements
that we might want to put in there. But, the reality is the trend has been down in
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 5 of 16
permits. We are not talking about a whole lot of permits - just because folks
want our sewer and to get our sewer they would have to annex and I just don't
think we are talking about a huge burden for your staff to collect those fees for
us. So, getting back to the - I think we talked about the parks. I wanted to
discuss a little bit about the police and fire and make sure that the Commission is
comfortable with those new fees. It is new for us. It is probably new for you.
The capital improvements plans are detailed in our report. They scrubbed it
pretty well, both the impact fee committee and the consultants about what is
impact fee eligible and what is not, so that what is in there is only growth related -
- we are comfortable with what we have got is very defensible and if you have
got any questions about that we would be happy to address them, but-
Peavey-Derr: Mr. Chairman there is some objective to paying this because they
say our taxes; their taxes should cover police and fire by simply being annexed
into, how do you justify this in a court?
Baird: Well, Mr. Chair and Commissioner the impact fee statute basically
provides the (inaudible) for us to do that. The operations have certainly paid for
taxes and we are prohibited from collecting any impact fee to pay for those
operations as capital facilities only and we clearly done everything the state
statute tells us we need to do to prove that this is only for growth related capital
improvements and beyond that we basically would be defending our ordinance in
court if we had to do that.
Peavey-Derr: I guess there is a certain expectation that when you come into a
city by annexation, you are going to be paying higher taxes, therefore, that fee is
covered and isn't an impact.
Baird: Okay, Mr. Chair and Commissioner I am sure a consultant would be more
artful in explaining this. I don't profess to be the huge impact fee guru like he is,
but I think what we are saying is that by the time the area of impact residents
would be annexed, they have already taken advantage the benefit of those
capital improvements and they are not going to have to pay more when they get
annexed, certainly for the capital improvements. I do agree with your
presumption that they will probably be paying more taxes on an annexation, but it
is that benefit that they receive through the facilities that are built with our capital
improvements plan that they receive whether they are annexed or not. I think
that is the argument and that is the reason that we are collecting an area of
impact because those residents are receiving the benefits of those services.
Yzaguirre: Go ahead. I don't think you have her convinced yet, but go ahead.
Peavey-Derr: Well, it is not a matter of convincing, I just want to be on solid
ground if we are doing the collecting that there isn't - and indemnification helps,
but I can see somebody contesting this in court one day even though you
followed all of the rules.
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 6 of 16
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioners there certainly is an appeals procedure that
it would go through internally before we would ever get to court and that appeal
procedure is outlined in our ordinance and the fee administrator can make a
determination if somebody did come - and Doug Strong is our fee administrator
and if somebody did come and try and make that case, we would certainly listen
to what they have to say.
Peavey-Derr: I can see on the parks. That is totally understandable in my
opinion. I don't see it on the fire and the police, but that is another matter.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
Yzaguirre: Yes Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess (inaudible) to that and Judy and you have a big thick
package (inaudible--) of our information in that. When they looked at our Capital
Improvement Plan they looked at what it would take to serve the entire area of
impact and most capital improvements that would be necessary to serve that
area and so the capital expenditures that these impact fees cover are really in
anticipation of serving that whole area within that time period. So, as those costs
are incurred, we would pay through the impact fees for the capital improvement
aspect of it, the maintenance is what the taxes covered. So. they are just paying
their proportional share of that growth related cause and effect in the capital
aspect of it. I think the process that we went through really stepped out all of
those different factors and we have the Building Contractor's Association and the
Association of Realtors on our impact fee committee. So, we had all the different
angles to look at and we even got a letter of support from those entities for this
particular fee we are collecting.
Peavey-Derr: I can see this fee then being applied to schools, which is the more
primary example, I would think.
De Weerd: Well, fees can't be charged for schools, but-
Peavey-Derr: Well, I know but there is a direct correlation to new growth and
schools, easily saying. So, the case for impact fees for schools is a real
legitimate case in my feeling.
De Weerd: I totally agree with you. Also, in our Fire Department we have a joint
powers of agreement with the Rural District, so our department serves that little
area anyway. So, it is kind of paying for those capital improvement needs and
serving those different service radiuses.
Baird: Mr. Chair other issues that would need to be addressed in the collection
agreement and again using Boise as the model that has been deemed
acceptable - area of impact needs to have representation on various boards and
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 7 of 16
commissions. We already have an area of impact representative on our
Planning and Zoning Commission. We will check our membership list of our
impact fee committee and if we don't already have area of impact representation
we will have someone appointed. We would be happy to agree to that. The
agreement with Boise requires a Parks Commission member be from the area of
impact and we are questioning whether that is really necessary in this case if all
were in an area of impact was in acquisition mode - I thinks our Parks
Commission has a wide variety of representation and we would be seeking input
from you as to whether that is something that you are going to require and
certainly if it is we would be happy to accommodate that, but we want to have
those issues addressed in that agreement. I will put that issue on the table and
see if there is any discussion.
Yzaguirre: Maybe you could give us a little bit of a background as to who serves
on your Parks Commission right now? Mayor, would you mind?
De Weerd: Right now we have -
Yzaguirre: Are we represented, I guess, would be my question more
specifically?
De Weerd: Right now we just have city residents that are on there. Perhaps you
have some area of impact representation through our youth members. We have
youth council members that are participants and they are not all in Meridian city.
So, they do have an opportunity for a voice, but as Ted has explained much of
the parks development you know we are looking at land acquisition at this point
and not necessarily park development.
Yzaguirre: So, I guess you are suggesting that we would be represented on the
impact (inaudible) committee, but not the parks and that would cover (inaudible)?
De Weerd: Yes, that was his point.
Baird: And with that, Mr. Chair to give you some comfort I think are Parks
Commission, we already have some land that is in our area of impacts and they
are looking at future development of that, whether it happens before annexation
or not is an open question, but they certainly are aware of the benefits of
acquiring land in the area of impact, so even if there is not an area of impact
representative I think those issues would be addressed by the existing makeup of
our Parks Commission. If you are comfortable with that, we would ask that you
direct staff to allow us to draft the agreement with the representation that we've
outlined under subsection 2.C in the outline that I passed out today. So, Mr.
Chair with that what we are really looking for, again, is direction to move forward
to have the staff (inaudible) review of our ordinance and our methodology to
prepare a draft agreement based on the issues that we discussed today and set
a timeline for benchmarks of when those reviews will be completed; when we
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6. 2006
Page 8 of 16
start the public hearing process; individual hearings of course would have to take
place at our respective Planning Commissions and City Councils in order to
amend the area of impact agreement. It is only a text amendment so we don't
have to hold it like you would do with a map every six months so we can
proceed. With that I will open it up for questions, discussion.
Yzaguirre: Any questions?
Tilman: I just have a couple I guess and I am curious about - I know this is a
new concept of including fire and police in the idea of an area of impact and
impact fee in that area, which the area of impact is the responsibility of the
county to provide service within that area. So, I know that in the past you have
had a precedent of saying the parks was a good connection, but I am just
questioning I guess a little bit and I look forward to having the legal review by our
folks to make sure that we do have the legal authority to do what you are
suggesting. I am not saying I am opposed to it, but it does bring up an
interesting concept that if the city police do not provide service out in the area
that is the responsibility of the county, the sheriff how do you justify an impact fee
for police? I am just throwing these things out. I hope that our attorneys will
come up with a good legal review of these things. Another question that comes
up that I hope we can (inaudible) review this - I understand our collecting fees in
an area of impact and how do we deal with the fact that if we got these fees
collected and another city comes in and annexes that area of impact that you
collect the fees for, how do we deal with that? I mean, the law does allow that as
it can happen, so I am just wondering if we would want to address some of those
kinds of things and would that have to be paid back? Would it have to be paid to
the other city? I don't know. It is just some of the things that run through my
mind. I am curious about, again, if you are talking about the city being all one
zone, I am not sure how that is going to work with - maybe it does, I am just
throwing out some things here, too that if you have got people on the south side
of Meridian that you are charging an impact fee for and you are building parks or
fire stations or whatever on the north side, which you guys are getting pretty
spread out as far as size, I don't know. How do you justify that and maybe there
is and I apologize, I haven't had a chance to read the full study to understand
what you are saying and that your experts maybe have addressed these issues,
but just on the surface that those are some of the things that come to mind. First
of all, I certainly do think we need to move forward and I think we need to work
collectively with the cities, you folks (inaudible--) and find a way to deal with
growth and the idea that growth should pay for itself. I think you will find that we
are in certain agreement with that, but I think we have to make sure that we are
doing this in a thoughtful, legal manner so that we don't get (inaudible) and have
a bigger hassle than we need to have. Again, I guess I would ask our legal staff
to help me understand legally. If we collect - I guess that we would have to craft
an ordinance that we would be the one collecting the ordinance (inaudible) and
we would have an agreement that would simply just turn that over to you, the
city. But, it seems like we the county would have to be the one. We have the
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 9 of 16
authority to collect that impact fee within that area of impact and we would then
give it to you on the basis that it is almost contractually that you agreed to
provide the service in that area at some future date. We are not sure how you
would craft and maybe the Boise City language already addresses that, I am not
sure, but it seems like we would almost have to have - this is going to be the
county's ordinance and we are going to collect the impact fee and what I think I
heard you say is you want us to accept the data on the new research that
supports the collection of the fee as a basis for us to pass the ordinance to
collect the fee and then basically turn it over to the city. Is that essentially right?
Baird: Mr. Chair if I could address the Commissioner's questions in reverse
order? Yes that is what we are asking you to do. We are using the model that
has been established with the City of Boise, where the county and it essentially
adopts the impact fee ordinance and it accepts the methodology that it contained
in the record. It is that methodology that I believe answers the third question
about the lack of the zones. Believe me the questions were asked when we
were going through the process from the Impact Fee Committee because we
have got a lot of representation. We have got a situation now where the South
Meridian area is underserved with parks south of the freeway. But, the
presumptions that were made by our consultant who is an economist - we had
an economist on there. We had financial representation. We had legal
representation. We had a good team put together and they really worked it hard
and by the time that they were done, we were convinced that the South Meridian
residents benefit from the services that are provided north of the freeway and I
have heard our Chief Ron Anderson when he was in the City of Nampa, I heard
him explain when they were going through the same question about impact fees,
about the joint response and how it is a system wide benefit that we are looking
at, not just within city limits, but within the area of impact. So, I think that when
you do have a chance to review the consultant's report, I am hoping that you will
get a better comfort level with that because we think we have done that work and
that it's there. With regard to your second question about should we collect fees
and if that particular residence or zone doesn't end up coming to Meridian, but
would go to Eagle, for example, we could certainly set up a mechanism for a
refund of those fees, probably a direct refund to the permit holder or the resident
rather than a transfer to the other municipalities. The impact fee (inaudible) from
the state also has a refund provision that are incorporated into our ordinance that
if we collect it and don't spend it within the period of time that we said we would
spend it, we are required to give refunds. So, the refunds are the reality for the
fee administrator. I think we have been lucky that we haven't and that we have
been able to spend it. We haven't -I have been with Meridian for two years now
and have no challenges to our current ordinance. But, we are breaking new
ground with the fire and the police. As I just mentioned, Nampa already has fire
and police impact fees in place in addition to their parks and they have their own
Highway Department as well. So, they have got a huge impact fee collection
going on over there. I am not familiar with what they are doing with their county
collection, but there might be something there to look into to report back where
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 10 of 16
Canyon County has comfort with collecting these types of fees in the area of
impact and I would be happy to look into that for you. Then Fred to get to your
first question about a comfort level that area of impact residents benefit from
paying police and fire impact fees. I wish we had our police and fire folks here
today. I think Mayor De Weerd has tried to comment on how they do benefit and
maybe at this point I would just suggest that we allow you an opportunity to read
and digest and see what your position is at that point.
Peavey-Derr: Mr. Chairman. Can you tell me if Boise currently has fire and
police? They don't do they?
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioners. Boise City currently only collects for
parks. They have hired our consultant to actually look at fire. I don't know if they
are looking at police. So, they are certainly investigating and this seems to be a
trend. So, the policy that you set here will probably be a precedent for you.
Yzaguirre: Okay. Any other questions?
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
Yzaguirre: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Just on page 14 and 16, you can find a list of some of those capital
improvements. You will see in that list that it is really facilities that are going to
serve that entire area. We have and fire really know they need to serve these
areas because they do have some overlap in the circle radiuses and those are-
I don't think we have a map that clearly delineates that, but certainly as you look
at this and if you have further questions about how some of these future stations
will serve, we can send you that kind of information if you would find that helpful
and the police as well. In the capital improvements, again, we go and look at the
entire area of impact and what it will take to serve the entire area of impact and
that is why we feel that it is justified to look outside our current city boundaries as
that growth occurs so that they are paying a proportional share for the facilities
that are needed to serve them through mutual aid until we get out there, but will
serve them once they are annexed into the city. So, again, I think the report itself
is very comprehensive and should answer a lot of your questions, but we can get
you further information if you do need that.
Peavey-Derr: Mr. Chairman. On page 14 they are including the firing range -
why would that be any different to pay an impact fee for the existing areas? Why
is the firing range a capital improvement that is necessary? It isn't common
standard within your everyday operating budget.
De Weerd: In the past we have been able to send mutual aid for joint facilities,
but (inaudible) is getting to such a size that you can't get any (inaudible) and
again those are the kind of things that we can have and I don't know if that
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 11 of 16
(inaudible) is not already included in this report in front of you. But as you get
through those and you find some of those questions, just let us know and we can
get you back information to substantiate that.
Bair: Mr. Chair and Commissioners. You will notice in the middle of that graph
on the top of page 14 it talks about the growth related portion and the economist
-- a portion of only 31 percent of that facility as being growth related, so -
Peavey-Derr: Well, it is kind of like a cost of doing business, though, if you have
a firing range and all of your police force isn't up to speed with their firing
capabilities or none of them are. So, it is a cost of doing business and you have
to have cars and I notice in here command vehicle - that is the cost of doing
business. So, I don't understand the rationale.
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioners those questions were asked at our Impact
Fee Committee and I took a hard long look at that and one thing that you will
notice is not included with the police are police vehicles because the state statute
requires capital facilities have a five year life span. Our police cars don't last for
five years. We were able to prove to the Committee that the command vehicles
do. We use them and use them up and usually J think it is an 8 to 10 year
lifespan - the same with fire engines. Our fire engines are included because as
we grow new ones are required and they do have a useful life of more than 10
years. So this item, believe me, there was a much longer list when we started
and it was scrapped pretty well by the Committee and I think that question that
you have asked is addressed with a portion of only 31 percent of that cost to
grow. That is acknowledging that, in fact, that is a cost of our current doing
business in verse percentage and would be supported by general tax funds. I
think it is just acknowledging as we grow that facility might need to expand and
that is why it has been proportioned at 31 percent. So, if you take a hard look at
this, particularly the representatives from the (inaudible), they were very critical at
first and by the time that we were finished with the product that is in front of you
we did have consensus.
Wardle: Mr. Chair. One of the things within the study is the level of service
within the City of Meridian (inaudible) what our police and fire was based on a
number of factors and to kind of address your citywide zone. The Fire
Department measures response times to its calls and is improving upon those
response times by adding stations in growth areas. In addition to that, the Police
Department looks at officers per square mile and the need for those growths
obviously as the incorporated area becomes more dense and so we would need
additional officers and facilities and so that is part of the methodology in there
that should hopefully look at more of a system wide function as opposed to
zoning those into north, south or east and west.
Yzaguirre: Thanks Shaun. Any other discussion, questions?
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 12 of 16
(Speaker unknown): Mr. Chair.
Yzaguirre: Yes, sir.
(Speaker unknown): I wonder if we move forward with this are you still under
contract with the consultants so that there could be some type of neighborhood
meeting or present this information again to answer questions because I see this
being a very somewhat technical discussion and trying to answer questions of
folks?
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioners our consultants, the contract for the work
that they had done has been completed, but we told them from the get go that we
were looking to have this collected with an area of impact and so they have been
aware of it and perusing the report and I am sure with direction from our City
Council that we would certainly be able to engage them. I wish they were here
today, for example.
Peavey-Derr: I don't mean to be - I am just very curious. I spent four years on
impact fees, so I -
Baird: Tom Pippin, the consultant just makes it so simple. It is simple division.
You find out who is coming and you find out what you need to serve them and
you divide the amount by the number of people and there is your fee. But, he is
also able to answer those in depth questions, the policy questions and how did
he arrive at things. So, I think we would be happy to make him available to
answer those questions.
Peavey-Derr: Will they be coming back to town?
Baird: They are in the area. They are doing another project for the City of
Meridian and consulting with Boise and helping Nampa retool theirs - so, yes.
Peavey-Derr: So, it wouldn't be difficult since they are in the area to schedule a
meeting with them?
Baird: Mr. Chair and Commissioner I think we would make that available at your
convenience.
Peavey-Derr: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
Yzaguirre: Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess, too that once you had a chance to read the report it might
answer a lot of these questions and again if it doesn't if you can let us know what
Meridian City Council Special JOintIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 13 of 16
your questions are then we can respond. If you still need to, then we will ask the
consultants to come on in and walk you through our process because of a lot of
these questions. They are very good questions and they are questions that our
Committee has spent a great deal of time on and so we know they have already
been discussed.
Peavey-Derr: I am sure they have. Thank you though.
Yzaguirre: Did you have a question, Mr. Commissioner?
Tilman: I guess just trying to move along here. Do we have any idea (inaudible)
asking for a timeline on when we can have this move forward? How much time
we might need -
Peavey-Derr: December 1 st you said it was going into effect.
De Weerd: Yes, our collection is effective December 1st but that is our own
terms.
Tilman: I was asking if I could ask from our staff, how much time they need to
have to be able to review this information - also our legal staff to be able to
determine how (inaudible) some sense of getting back to this Commission some
of the questions that have been raised to you so that we can move forward?
That is the question that I was trying to ask.
Armstrong: I believe that there is probably some time that the Prosecuting
Attorney's Office is going to need to - well, and this is just off the top of my head
(inaudible) 45 days to review some of this information and during that time we
can try and field some of the questions that the Board has and put that into what
the PA's Office would be looking at.
Yzaguirre: Well, it seems to me that a motion from our side of the table would be
appropriate and (inaudible) for all the services and for legal to review this and
along with that establish a timeline that can be met with a public hearing
schedule to present -
Peavey-Derr: Mr. Chairman just because it is December 1 st doesn't mean it has
to take place -
Yzaguirre: That would be for the city (inaudible). The area of impact would be
(inaudible-- ).
(Speaker unknown): Mr. Chairman, Commissioners I think one of the things that
would be helpful for the cities would be for the city staff to sit down with
(inaudible) agreement with the staff because I know that you are just in the
process of finishing up the work on the Boise impact fees and materials and at
Meridian City Council Special JoinUWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 14 of 16
least we can get a sense of kind of the outline and some of the other data
requirements so if there is anything that we can do to help you move this along
might be valuable for us.
Yzaguirre: Okay.
(Speaker unknown): We will direct staff as soon as we can on that.
Yzaguirre: Having said that, I think a formal motion would be appropriate
directing our staff to do that review.
Peavey-Derr: I would so move and also, though too, to include in that motion
that we try and have a meeting scheduled again, an update in 45 days - at least
that period of time.
Yzaguirre: Is that a motion?
Peavey-Derr: Yes.
Tilman: Well, in the motion too, I think what would be nice to do is to review the
impact fee ordinance that has been presented and also to negotiate a collection
agreement or at least review that collection agreement (inaudible) and I think you
presented a copy of that collection agreement. So, that is what we would be
asking our legal staff to review for us. I will second that motion.
Yzaguirre: Everybody clear on the motion? Any discussion? Hearing none, all
those in favor say aye.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
Yzaguirre: Anything else that we can do for you today?
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman so as I understand it we will need to meet again after
the 45 days?
Peavey-Derr: We will have some kind of stuff back to us and we will be able to
make a decision in 45 days - no more than 45 days and in the meantime have
the staffs work together.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. This is an unrelated request, but we came about a
month ago and talked about a North Meridian area of impact (inaudible). Could
we get a timeline on what that process is?
(Inaudible discussion)
S. Cook: That is on the four square mile area of impact?
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 15 of 16
De Weerd: And the area that it is related to. Do you have a timeline on that?
S. Cook: I really don't. It is one of those assignments that I received here not
too long ago and we just have to find (inaUdible) where we can and-
Yzaguirre: Do you have something specific?
S. Cook: Well, Richard and I have talked about it and trying to relieve some of
the workload that I have so that I can concentrate on that (inaudible) any specific
timelines (inaudible) and trying to reshuffle some of the staff within our
department so that they can start picking up some of the workload there.
Yzaguirre: We will let you know. We will get an answer to that and I will follow
up with that and give you some kind of a timeline. Anything else?
De Weerd: Just a quick reminder. You have a flyer on our party we are holding
next week and we would love to have you attend - and we will certainly celebrate
the roots of our past and the Creamery facility, but it will tell you how we are
integrating some of the historical value there into our new facility and into the
present. Also, just a heads up that we will be in front of you possibly within those
45 days too, again for the South Meridian area - just want to give you this as a
heads up and look forward to meeting you again and I appreciate your time.
Yzaguirre: This is the impact area expansion request? Is that what this is?
De Weerd: This is just our study areas.
Friedman: Thank you Mayor, Commissioners the city is currently involved in
doing a specific plan for the South Meridian study area, which is illustrated on
this map and we will be making an application to the city for a comprehensive
plan amendment in December, taking it through our Planning and Zoning
Commission in February or March and then onto the City Council, so once we
get that adopted we will probably be coming back to you with an area of impact
expansion. So, the Mayor wanted me to make sure you are aware of that.
De Weerd: Mr. Chair I guess I would like to know - we would like to keep you as
well informed as possible moving you along through our steps - so just that we
will be getting information and giving it to your staff as well as yourselves just to
keep you in the loop. We have been trying to do that as we study this area
because we know there are some contentious pieces to it.
Peavey-Derr: Thank you very much. We appreciate your cooperation. The city
has been great.
Meridian City Council Special JointIWorkshop Meeting
November 6, 2006
Page 16 of 16
Yzaguirre: Anything else? Thank you all for coming.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:00 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
~
(2- lief 1116
DATE APPROVED
TAMMY 0
ERD MI,\:t'I0R"II/!;'j',
, \\,',..,c;. MEr-V"i/,'>
,,\ -' \.J" ~h /"
,...... ~ ~ --.... ';I:..Jl /..
-2"' a ;(\pf"w0 ,.} ''-;~-
..... ~ ~''''l/~, ~
f 0 ~\
- -' -, ~ &
~ Afrffi. - .4 I
"\ -y~. ,r!i) ~~L1AM G. BERG, JR ,CIT CLERK
-'/ "6 >~r l1f\ '/ x- ..:..'
-'/..../ "f ,~ "'" 't- _:-"
"/ C'ouN ",v ,-"-
// .....""
/// -r'<, \\\
/1 \ \ \
11/1/111111\\\\